HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.council.109-25RESOLUTION 4109
(Series of 2025)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN
AND WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS INC AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADOa
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for the
Urban Runoff Management Plan Update, between the City of Aspen and Wright
Water Engineers, Inc., a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "A";
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for
Urban Runoff Management Plan Update, between the City of Aspen and Wright
Water Engineers Inc., a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein,
and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of
the City of Aspen.
RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED FINALLY by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of August 2025.
I, Mike Sear, duly appointed and acting Deputy City Clerk, do certify that
thIL; foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, Augusjj2th 2025.
ilSeaz;"Deputy City Clerk
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&B9CF-4958-911 E-67EFA1 E378E7
CITY OF ASPEN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT made the 4th day of August, 2025.
BETWEEN the City:
The City of Aspen
427 Rio Grande Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: (970) 920-5079
And the Professional:
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
818 Colorado Ave., Ste, 307
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
US
(970) 945-7755
dludwig@wrightwater.com
For the Following Project:
Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
iTY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Contract No.: 2025-223
Contract Amount:
Total: $ 148,999.00
If this Agreement requires the City to pay
an amount of money in excess of
$100,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid
untiI it has been approved by the City
Council of the City of Aspen.
Exhibits appended and made a part of this Agreement:
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Scope of Work.
Fee Schedule.
The City and Professional agree as set forth below.
City Council Approval:
Date: 08/12/2025
Resolution No.: 2025-109
Agreement Professional Services Page 0
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 37592948-B9CF-4958-911E-67EFA1 E378E7
l . Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner, similar
to that of a professional on a like project in a similar region and time, the Scope of Work as set forth
at Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
2. Completion. Professional shall commence Work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice
to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is
consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner.
The parties anticipate that all Work pursuant to this Agreement shall be completed no later than
August 12, 2026. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a
schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the
project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project
engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction
over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be
exceeded by the Professional.
3. Pa.�. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and
expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not
exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit B appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed
to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed the amount set forth
above. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall
review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter
with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill.
4. Non-Assi_n�ility. Both parties recognize that this Agreement is one for personal services
and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other.
Sub -Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or
obligations under this Agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for
the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors' officers, agents and employees, each of
whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent
of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due
which may be due to any sub -contractor.
5. Termination of Procurement. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be
canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole
discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience.
6. Termination of Professional Services. The Professional or the City may terminate the
Professional Services component of this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by
giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination.
No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished
or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or
other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of
the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for
damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and
the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set-off until such time
as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined.
Agreement Professional Services Page 1
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&139CF-495&911 &67EFA1 E378E7
7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties
that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in or be construed as establishing an employment
relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to
id services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or
use his or her best efforts to provide the sa
servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City.
City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of
conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City
to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment
insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional
shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees,
servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify
City against all liability and loss in connection with and shall assume full responsibility for payment
of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment
insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's
employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein.
8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers,
employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on
account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury,
personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind
whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, to the extent and
for an amount represented by the degree or percentage such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole
or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the negligent act, omission, error,
professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the
Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any
subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any
employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The
Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to any such liability, claims or demands, and agrees
to reimburse the City for the reasonable costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such
liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent
jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or
other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the
portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or
employees.
9. Professional's Insurance.
(a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies
of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations
assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition
to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall
not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to
Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its
failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types.
(b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the
Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such
coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City.
Agreement Professional Services Page 2
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&I39CF-495&911 E-67EFA1 E378E7
All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and
other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any
claims -made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be
procured to maintain such continuous coverage.
(i) Worker's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable
laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and
Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS
($1,000,000.00) for each accident, ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
disease - policy limit, and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - each
employee. Evidence of qualified self -insured status may be substituted for the
Worker's Compensation requirements of this paragraph.
(ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single
limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and TWO
MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to
all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad
form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including
coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent
contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall include coverage
for explosion, collapse, and underground hazards. The policy shall contain a
severability of interests provision.
(iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined
single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence with respect to each Professional's
owned, hired and non -owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope
of Work. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the
Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met
by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this
contract.
(iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000)
aggregate.
(c) The General Liability and Auto Liability policies required above shall be endorsed to
include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. The General
Liability and Auto Liability policies required above shall be primary insurance, and any
insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any
insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by
Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain
any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The
Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required
above.
(d) The certificate of insurance provided to the City shall be completed by the Professional's
insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and
Agreement Professional Services Page 3
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&139CF-495&911 E-67EFA1 E378E7
minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City
prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The
certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the
policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days
prior written notice has been given to the City.
(e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the
required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of
contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City
may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay
any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid
by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against
monies due to Professional from City.
(f) .City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any
endorsement thereto.
(g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or
intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently
$350,000.00 per person and $990,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and
protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq.,
C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its
employees.
10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado
Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA
Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Risk
Management Department and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business
hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by
CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or
participation in CIRSA.
11. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire
undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written
representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not
expressly incorporated in this writing.
12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered or mailed by certified
mail return receipt requested to the respective persons and/or addresses listed above.
13. Non -Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status,
affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion
shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional
agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 15.04.570, pertaining to non-
discrimination in employment.
Any business that enters into a contract for goods or services with the City of Aspen or any of its
boards, agencies, or departments shall:
Agreement Professional Services Page 4
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&[39CF-495M11E-67EFA1E378E7
(a) Implement an employment nondiscrimination policy prohibiting discrimination in
hiring, discharging, promoting or demoting, matters of compensation, or any other
employment -related decision or benefit on account of actual or perceived race,
color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, age, military
status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital or
familial status.
(b) Not discriminate in the performance of the contract on account of actual or
perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental
ilitary status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender
disability, age, m
expression, or marital or familial status.
(c) Incorporate the foregoing provisions in all subcontracts hereunder.
14. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate
as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition
of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or
indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant,
or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete
performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to involve
any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence.
15. Execution of Agreement by City. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto
and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary contained herein, this Agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless
July executed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in the City
Manager's absence) and if above $100,000, following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the
City of Aspen authorizing the City Manager (or other duly authorized official in the City Manager's
absence) to execute the same.
16. Warranties Against Continent Fees, Gratuities, Kick
�d Conflicts of Ini
(a) Professional warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained
to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission,
percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide
established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Professional for the purpose
of securing business.
(b) Professional agrees not to give any employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of
employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation,
preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the
content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation,
auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for
ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this
Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefore.
(c) Professional represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the
City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest,
Agreement Professional Services Page 5
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&B9CF4958-911 &67EFA1 E378E7
direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have
been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement.
Cl) In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against
contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right
to:
1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City;
2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a Professional, contractor or
subcontractor under City contracts;
3. ideration, or otherwise recover, the value of
Deduct from the contract price or cons
anything transferred or received by the Professional; and
4. Recover such value from the offending parties.
17. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year
are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made
available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its
obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for
payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
18. General Terms.
(a) It is agreed that neither this Agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions,
representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived,
superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties.
(b) If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or
unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other
provision.
(c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to
this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and
that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing
signed by the parties.
(d) This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time
to time in effect. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado.
19. Electronic Signatures and Electronic Records This Agreement and any amendments
hereto may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and
all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on the Parties, notwithstanding the
possible event that all Parties may not have signed the same counterpart. Furthermore, each Party
consents to the use of electronic signatures by either Party. The Scope of Work, and any other
documents requiring a signature hereunder, may be signed electronically in the manner agreed to
by the Parties. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement
solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation.
The Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic
record, or a paper copy of an electronic documents, or a paper copy of a document bearing an
Agreement Professional Services Page 6
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&l39CF495&911 E-67EFA1 E378E7
electronic signature, on the grounds that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it
is not in its original form or is not an original.
20. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the
benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Professional respectively and their agents,
representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the
Professional shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder
without the written consent of the other party.
21. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon
or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Professional or City may
assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any right to claim
damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Professional
because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or
conditions herein contained.
22. Attorne 's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions
of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's
fees.
23. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual
efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption
shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the
negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement.
24. Certification Re;;ardin� Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion.
Professional certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently
debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from
participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies
that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier
transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that Professional or
any lower tier participant was unable to certify to the statement, an explanation was attached to
the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City.
25. Integration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents
shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written
and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, Professional understands that no City official or
employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has
authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the
City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed
by the parties hereto.
26. The Professional in performing the Services hereunder must comply with all applicable
provisions of Colorado laws for persons with disability, including the provisions of §§24-85-101,
et seq., C.R.S., and the Rules Establishing Technology Accessibility Standards, as established by
the Office Of Information Technology pursuant to Section §24-85- 103(2.5) and found at 8 CCR
1501-11. Services rendered hereunder that use information and communication technology, as the
term is defined in Colorado law, including but not limited to websites, applications, software,
Agreement Professional Services Page 7
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294M9CF495&911 &67EFA1 E378E7
videos, and electronic documents must also comply with the latest version of Level AA of the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), currently version 2.1. To confirm that the information
and communication technology used, created, developed, or procured in connection with the
Services hereunder meets these standards, Professional may be required to demonstrate
compliance. The Professional shall indemnify the CITY pursuant to the Indemnification section
above in relation to the Professional's failure to comply with §§24-85401, et seq., C.R.S., or the
Technology Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability as established by the Office
of Information Technology pursuant to Section §24-85-103(2.5)6
27. Additional Provisions. In addition to those provisions set forth herein and in the Contract
Documents, the parties hereto agree as follows:
[ ] No additional provisions are adopted.
[X] See attached Exhibit A and B.
28. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Professional, as an
inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized
representative of Professional for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has
full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified
herein.
Agreement Professional Services Page 8
Updated 5/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 3759294&139CF-4958-911 E-67EFA1 E378E7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly
authorized officials, this Agreement of which shall be deemed an original on, the date first written
above.
CITY OF l��hT4vCOLORADO:
Lptbt- Sfm&t,r
7753E0500940430.11
[Signature]
By:
Pete Strecker
Title: Interim City Manager
8/18/2025 � 12:38:47 PM MDT
Date:
Approved as to form:
DocuSlgned by:
32737E149ED5457...
City Attorneys Office
By:
PROFESSIONAL:
�DocuSigned by:
[Signature]
Andrew Earles
Title: Vice President of Water Resources
Date: 7/31/2025 � 11:46:35 AM PDT
Agreement Professional Services Page 9
Updated 5/2024
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff
Management Plan Update
2025-223
PREPARED FOR CITY OF ASPEN
June 2025 991-999.056
2490 W. 26th Ave., Ste. 100A
Denver, CO, 80211
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
818 Colorado Ave., Ste. 307, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 │ PO Box 219, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
(970) 945-7755 │ www.wrightwater.com │ dludwig@wrightwater.com
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
June 27, 2025
Via: Upload to www.bidnetdirect.com
Purchasing Department
City of Aspen
427 Rio Grande Place
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update, 2025-223
Dear Purchasing Department:
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (WWE) and subcontractor, DHM Design, are pleased to provide the attached
proposal to work with the City of Aspen to update its Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). We feel
we are the ideal team to conduct this work because:
1. WWE has been involved with stormwater management and drainage criteria in Aspen since 2006,
and was involved in the previous update to the URMP for the City in 2008. WWE also performed
a mud and debris flow analysis for the City in 2016, including development of a FLO-2D model for
the commercial core area that will be useful in the current effort. More recently, WWE developed
the Garmisch Street Stormwater Master Plan in Aspen. WWE has provided “on-call” consulting
for the City on stormwater and floodplain issues, as they have arisen, since 2008.
2. WWE is a regional leader in developing drainage criteria. WWE has helped author many of the
drainage criteria manuals in use throughout Colorado, including those for the Cities of Durango,
Greenwood Village, Commerce City, and Aurora, as well as those for Larimer County and Mesa
County (in progress). WWE has a long history of updating the Mile High Flood District’s Urban
Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (MHFD Manual), which has served as a prototype for many other
manuals and master plans.
3. WWE has recently conducted, or is currently conducting, drainage master plan studies for many
similar communities along Colorado’s Western Slope, such as Glenwood Springs, Winter Park,
Clear Creek County, Silverthorne, East Vail, and Durango.
4. WWE is a national leader in stormwater water quality management. We co-created and are still
involved with the International Stormwater Best Management Practice Database and have on
staff national stormwater quality and monitoring experts like Jane Clary, LEED AP, and Chris Olson,
Ph.D., P.E. WWE is also a leader in green infrastructure and low impact development and we will
use this expertise to make recommendations that can address and improve stormwater quality
throughout the City.
5. DHM will advise on matters related to vegetation and lead the stakeholder interaction for this
project. DHM provides exceptional leadership and support in public engagement and
collaborative design processes. They also are very familiar with the nuances of the Aspen
community and drainage in Aspen from their development of the Aspen Riparian Master Plan,
public outreach and planning for the Aspen Lumberyard Affordable Housing development, and
other local projects.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
City of Aspen Purchasing Department
June 27, 2025
Page 3
The URMP Update will be managed by Drake Ludwig, a licensed professional engineer in Colorado with
more than ten years of drainage master planning and design experience. Andrew Earles, who worked on
Aspen’s previous URMP and led the recent mudflow evaluations, will serve as senior advisor.
Sincerely,
Wright Water Engineers, Inc.
Drake Ludwig, P.E.
Project Manager
Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., PH, CPESC, BC.WRE
Senior Advisor
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 1
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
1. INTRODUCTION
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (WWE) has prepared this proposal in response to the City of Aspen’s (City’s)
Request for Proposals 2025-223 Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) Update. WWE is uniquely
qualified to assist the City with this update due to our role in developing the current URMP, our work
with Aspen on stormwater management projects since 2008 as an on-call consultant, and our work
conducting the 2017 City of Aspen Mud & Debris Flow Assessment. In creating the current version of the
URMP, a major emphasis was on sustainability of stormwater management practices, and the URMP
incorporated many low impact development (LID) and green infrastructure (GI) practices that rely on
vegetation and soils to filter and treat stormwater runoff, while at the same time providing community
benefits by designing stormwater control measures (SCMs) to be a functional part of the urban
landscape.
Since the creation of the current version of the URMP, there have been a number of updates to the Mile
High Flood District’s Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (MHFD Manual) related to rainfall-runoff,
full spectrum detention (FSD), receiving pervious areas (RPAs including buffers, swales, and other
pervious areas that receive runoff from impervious areas), permeable pavements, and other revisions
to facilitate broader implementation of sustainable LID and GI practices. WWE recently led updates to
chapters of the MHFD Manual including Runoff, Calculating the Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
and Volume Reduction, and Treatment SCMs. WWE is currently working on updates to chapters
including Stormwater Management, BMP Selection, and BMP Maintenance. WWE’s role in these
updates to the MHFD Manual provides valuable insight for the update of the URMP since WWE
understands not only the recent updates to MHFD criteria, but also the rationale for why the criteria
and guidance have been updated.
WWE’s goal in this update, working with the City, will be to create an updated URMP that leads to good
stewardship of the City’s environmental and water resources. In addition to the benefits of LID and GI
practices for treating stormwater and managing runoff, these practices also have lower maintenance
and replacement costs than conventional “gray” infrastructure, which contributes to lower lifecycle
costs and greenhouse gas emissions. WWE has conducted work on the potential effects of climate
change on urban stormwater management systems in Colorado that will help us to develop criteria and
guidance that will increase the effectiveness of Aspen’s stormwater management system.
WWE and subcontractor, DHM Design (DHM), are pleased to provide this proposal to work with the City
of Aspen to update its URMP. WWE and DHM are currently working together on multiple design and
planning projects and are collaborating on the update to Mesa County’s drainage criteria manual. The
two firms and their experience are described in Section 1, with detailed information on staff members
and relevant projects provided in Section 2. Section 3 is our approach to this project, Section 4 provides
our references, and Section 5 contains our proposed budget and schedule to perform this work.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 2
1.1 About WWE
WWE is an employee-owned and operated, full-service water resource,
environmental, and civil engineering firm with offices in Glenwood Springs,
Denver, and Durango, Colorado. WWE was incorporated in 1961 and has a
staff of approximately 50 people who work as senior level engineers,
hydrologists, scientists, biologists, chemists, geologists, and hydrogeologists. WWE combines detailed
planning with excellent customer service and project management in the field of water resources
engineering. Areas of service include stormwater and drainage engineering, water rights, water and
wastewater system planning and design, wetlands, and water supply. WWE has approximately 150
current clients, including many municipalities.
WWE is committed to providing quality services, on time, and on budget, and to adhere to the paramount
responsibility of all licensed professional engineers – to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The
cornerstones of WWE’s success have been its multifaceted approach to quality work and abiding by strong
business ethics standards.
1.2 WWE Contact Information
Wright Water Engineers – Glenwood Springs
Drake Ludwig, P.E.
818 Colorado Ave., Ste. 307
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(970) 945-7755
dludwig@wrightwater.com
Wright Water Engineers – Denver
Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., PH, CPESC, BC.WRE
2490 W. 26th Ave., Ste. 100A
Denver, CO 80211
(303) 480-1700
aearles@wrightwater.com
1.2.1 Overview of WWE’s Relevant Experience
Over the past six decades, WWE has had the great privilege of being involved in many landmark projects,
such as the creation of MHFD and the development of the first Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
(MHFD Manual), the revitalization of the South Platte River through Denver, and design of infrastructure
for many municipalities in Colorado. WWE has been privileged to receive such awards as the “Colorado
Ethics in Business Award” and the equivalent award presented at a national level by the National Society
of Financial Professionals. WWE continues to apply the management and practice standards that were
instrumental in receiving these awards.
WWE is recognized nationally and internationally for groundbreaking work in stormwater quantity and
quality management. WWE staff have played major roles in the preparation of multiple reference books
and manuals of practice that are used on a routine basis; WWE staff have collectively published hundreds
of papers in this area; WWE has taught continuing engineering education classes; and WWE has frequently
testified around the United States on stormwater management and flood control issues. WWE is also part
of a national team involved in cutting-edge research and tool development related to whole life-cycle cost
analysis of green and gray infrastructure (“CLASIC” project) as part of a $2.5 million effort led by the Water
Environment Research Foundation (WRF), largely funded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 3
WWE’s experience with stormwater management issues across the country provides valuable perspective
on the range of practices that are being successfully (and sometimes unsuccessfully) implemented in
varying climates, and our experience with projects across Colorado puts WWE at the leading edge of the
practice in mountain towns and the semi-arid southwest.
WWE is a regional leader in developing drainage criteria. WWE has helped author many of the drainage
criteria manuals in use throughout Colorado, including those for the Cities of Durango, Greenwood Village,
and Aurora, as well as those for Larimer and Mesa Counties (in progress). WWE has a long history of
updating the MHFD Manual, which has served as a prototype for many other manuals and master plans.
We have provided a summary of WWE’s past 15 years of drainage criteria development experience as
Attachment A, including links to the recent criteria manuals we worked on.
In addition to WWE’s strong background in drainage criteria, WWE has developed or updated drainage
master plans for mountain communities similar to Aspen like Silverthorne, East Vail, Winter Park (in
progress), and Clear Creek County. This experience has provided us with a deep understanding of
mountain-town-specific stormwater management. WWE has also conducted recent drainage master
planning for Durango, Loveland, Denver, Arapahoe County, Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority
(SEMSWA), and other municipalities and districts.
Furthermore, WWE is a national leader in stormwater water quality management. We co-created and
are still involved with the International Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) Database and
have on staff national stormwater quality and monitoring experts like Jane Clary, LEED AP, and Chris
Olson, Ph.D., P.E., WWE is also a leader in GI and LID and we will use this expertise to make
recommendations that can address and improve stormwater quality throughout the City.
WWE was involved in Aspen’s 2008 URMP Update as a subcontractor to AMEC. Andrew Earles was the
WWE project manager for this assignment, and he executed the completion of many parts of this
updated URMP. Following completion of the URMP, the City of Aspen retained WWE as an on-call
consultant to provide advice on drainage and water quality issues as they arose.
WWE is currently developing Wildfire Ready Action Plans (WRAPs) for several mountain communities,
including the Roaring Fork Valley Wildfire Collaborative. WRAPs are guides for best planning practices in
advance of wildfire and also support post-fire mitigation strategies. The modeling and analyses
performed for the Roaring Fork WRAP will give WWE additional insight into drainage matters in Aspen
and the locations of critical infrastructure.
1.2.2 WWE’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Sustainability Practices
WWE supports Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) by providing equal employment opportunities to all
employees, job applicants, and subcontractors. WWE encourages qualified female, minority, veteran,
and disabled candidates to apply for jobs and subcontracts and prohibits discrimination and harassment
of any type without regard to race, color, religion, age, sex, national origin, disability status, genetics,
protected veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or any other characteristic
protected by federal, state, or local laws.
WWE routinely creates accessible documents that are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) for posting on websites. WWE uses Common Look software to certify that documents are ADA
compliant.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 4
WWE is also committed to sustainability. WWE’s Sustainability Policy is provided as Attachment B.
1.3 About DHM
DHM is a landscape architecture firm that designs places to balance human
presence with nature, honoring the enduring spirit of the land. Since
DHM’s founding in Denver in 1975, the employee-owned corporation has
expanded with offices in Carbondale, Durango, and Bozeman. DHM’s roster includes professionals in
landscape architecture, natural resource management, land use planning, graphic design, and
visualization. DHM plans and designs recreational spaces, national parks, residential communities,
resorts and hospitality, cultural landscapes, civic spaces, tribal lands, legacy ranches, high-end
residences, and land trusts. The firm is especially proud that a considerable part of its portfolio has been
work for the National Park Service. This connection has instilled in DHM staff a deep sensitivity to the
necessary balance between protecting nature and revealing how it can be enjoyed.
1.4 DHM Contact Information
DHM Design – Carbondale
Jermy Allinson, PLA
225 Main Street, #201
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
(970) 963-6520
jallinson@dhmdesign.com
1.4.1 Overview of DHM’s Relevant Experience
DHM is uniquely positioned to support the URMP Update as land planners, landscape architects, natural
resource specialists, and public facilitation experts. With a long-standing presence in Colorado and a
dedicated office in Carbondale, DHM’s team brings deep knowledge of Aspen’s environmental context,
community values, and regulatory landscape. Since 1975, DHM has cultivated a reputation for balancing
human presence with nature, designing with a stewardship ethos that aligns perfectly with Aspen’s
sustainability and climate goals. DHM’s mission drives a multidisciplinary approach that blends
landscape architecture with natural resource management and community collaboration. DHM
professionals are seasoned facilitators with a strong track record of engaging stakeholders and
presenting complex information clearly and accessibly. DHM’s experience with Aspen and public sector
projects has honed the firm’s ability to craft plans that are both environmentally responsible and user
friendly.
1.4.2 DHM’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging Practices
Planning and designing the built environment deals not only with enhancing or planning places for
people to live, play, and work – the work must respond to the needs, aspirations, and cultural context
of the community it serves, with the intent to provide active inclusion of everyone in the community. As
a professional services firm, DHM actively pursues projects that strengthen communities, engages with
a diverse group of stakeholders to bring many backgrounds to the decision-making table, and
contributes our time and dollars to meaningful causes in our own backyards through investments in
social, educational, and placemaking programs. DHM strives to remove barriers and burdens in our
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 5
neighborhoods and across the country to empower people to gather and connect, live, and create a
sense of belonging for everyone. DHM’s approach centers on ensuring that its work reflects broad
community needs, including those historically underrepresented in infrastructure planning. Diversity in
all forms makes us better problem-solvers.
Through clear, ADA-compliant documents and inclusive public outreach, DHM will strive to ensure the
URMP is not only technically sound but socially equitable. Inclusivity policies guide DHM’s daily
operations through its long-standing Equal Employment policies, and firm leadership is guided by DHM’s
Culture Compact, which prioritizes excellence, integrity, growth, inclusivity, leadership, and
communication in all internal and practice decision-making. DHM’s Equal Employment policy and the
firm’s Culture Compact aligns with the City of Aspen’s Ordinance 15-2024 and the 2025 Regional, State
and Federal Policy Agenda principles of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging.
2. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
The qualifications and experience of the WWE/DHM team are described below, followed by summaries
of projects we have done that are similar or relevant to the URMP Update. The configuration of the
project team is shown on Figure 1, while resumes for these professionals are provided in Attachment C.
Figure 1. Team Organization Chart
2.1 Team Staff Members
The WWE/DHM project team has unparalleled experience developing and updating stormwater criteria
manuals. WWE’s team is led by project manager Drake Ludwig, P.E., of WWE’s Glenwood Springs office,
with Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., PH, CPESC, BC.WRE, serving as senior advisor. Drake worked with
Andrew on the City of Aurora Criteria Manual Update, is currently working on the update of the Mesa
County Stormwater Management Manual, and is an experienced watershed planner and design
engineer. Andrew has been involved in every major update of the MHFD Manual since the early 2000s
and has managed more than a dozen stormwater criteria manual projects. Drake and Andrew will be
supported by Jonah Howe, P.E., who is based in Grand Junction, is currently revising text for the Mesa
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 6
County Stormwater Management Manual Update and has worked on recent updates to Chapter 4 of
Volume 3 of the MHFD Manual. Jane Clary, LEED AP, CPESC, WWE’s senior regulatory specialist, will
provide expert input on stormwater quality, regulatory compliance, and other topics, as well as technical
editing and QA/QC. Derek Rapp, P.E., an adjunct WWE water resources engineer who is MHFD’s lead
software developer, will be available to customize spreadsheets and workbooks for the City, if desired.
Lily Montesano, CISEC, WWE’s expert on construction-phase stormwater management and MS4
compliance, will contribute to text on construction-site stormwater runoff control. Jeremy Allinson and
Jason Jaynes, PLA, of DHM, experienced with the Aspen Riparian Master Plan and other projects in
Aspen, will provide input on matters related to vegetation and assist with document presentation and
stakeholder involvement. These engineers and scientists will be supported by WWE’s GIS, AutoCAD, and
administrative staff.
The following are key staff who will work on this project:
Drake Ludwig, P.E., is a WWE water resources engineer and project manager with
more than ten years of professional experience in planning, modeling, and design.
Drake will serve as the project manager on this project. In addition to the on-call work
completed for the City of Aspen, Drake has worked on numerous watershed planning
studies and drainage design projects throughout Colorado, including Proactive
Planning for Post-Fire Hazards in Pitkin County, the Mesa County Stormwater
Management Manual, the East Vail Stormwater Master Plan, and the Silverthorne Stormwater Master
Plan. He has extensive experience in permitting, designing, and providing construction-phase services
for drainage projects in rural and urban environments. Drake has a bachelor’s degree in environmental
engineering from Colorado State University. His projected availability for the project duration is an
average of 30% per month, and he has been with WWE for six years.
Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., PH, CPESC, BC.WRE, is the Vice President of Water
Resources and a senior principal at WWE; he will be the senior advisor for this
assignment. Andrew has been with WWE for 25 years since completing his Ph.D. in
civil engineering at the University of Virginia. Andrew specializes in stormwater
management planning and design and has extensive drainage and flood control
experience. Andrew managed the update and/or development of storm drainage
criteria manuals for MHFD, the City of Aurora, Fountain Creek, the City and County of Denver, the City
of Durango, the Town of Aspen, and SEMSWA. He has expertise in specifications and evaluation of NOAA
Atlas 14 rainfall data versus existing criteria and MS4 permit compliance. He is also very familiar with
the design of control measures, state and federal criteria, and Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II requirements. His projected availability for the project duration is
an average of 15% per month.
Jonah Howe, P.E., is a WWE water resources engineer with five years of experience
in stormwater management planning, hydrology, surface water, water rights, and
municipal water supply and infrastructure projects. Jonah provides engineering
design services, including development of design plans, contract documents and
technical specifications, and services during bidding/construction. Jonah has helped
to develop numerous drainage plans and reports for projects ranging in size from
single-lot developments to subdivisions in locations across Colorado. Jonah is based in his hometown of
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 7
Grand Junction and is very familiar with the Aspen area. He has been with WWE for three years and his
projected availability for the likely project duration is an average of 30% per month.
Jane Clary, LEED AP, CPESC, is WWE’s Vice President of Water Policy and Regulations
and Principal Water Resources Scientist. She has 31 years (all with WWE) of broad
experience in state and federal water quality regulations, watershed management,
stormwater management, and water quality data analysis. Jane has been involved in
the development of storm drainage criteria manuals for MHFD, Commerce City,
Greenwood Village, City and County of Denver, and SEMSWA. She has worked with
municipalities and counties in multiple states to develop approaches and guidance for meeting MS4
permit requirements and to address water quality issues, particularly for nutrients and E. coli. Jane
serves as a long-term principal investigator on the International Stormwater BMP Database project. In
2017, Governor Hickenlooper appointed Jane to the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, on
which she served a three-year term. Jane currently serves on the National Academies of Sciences
Engineering and Medicine Committee Consensus Study on Managing Pollutant Loads in Highway
Stormwater Runoff. Jane will advise the team on drainage matters that intersect with water quality and
her availability for this project is 15% per month.
Derek Rapp, P.E., is an adjunct WWE water resources engineer who has worked
extensively on assisting local communities in preparing drainage criteria and
developing associated design software that is customized to match the local criteria.
He has worked with MHFD since 2005 to assist in developing drainage criteria and in
2012 took over as the lead software developer for various programs including the
Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP), UD-Sewer, MHFD-Detention, MHFD-
Inlet, MHFD-Culvert, UD-BMP, UD-Rational, UD-MP Cost, and the CRS-37-92-602(8) Compliance Design
Data Workbook. Derek continues to modify and update the design workbooks for MHFD as criteria are
updated or additional features are desired by the user community. In addition to working with MHFD,
Derek has also worked with several other communities to modify MHFD design spreadsheet software to
better comply with local drainage criteria manuals. Most recently, he has created new design
spreadsheets for the City of Colorado Springs that help in the preliminary and final design of stormwater
permanent control measures (PCMs) and full-spectrum detention for flood control. Other communities
Derek has worked for include Woodland Park, Durango, Springfield, Missouri, and Rogers, Arkansas.
Derek also worked with the Urban Watersheds Research Institute (UWRI) to reprogram the Water
Quality Capture Optimization and Statistics Model (WQ-COSM) that MHFD supports. In addition to
developing the drainage design software, Derek has also prepared associated user manuals, created
instructional videos available online, and has provided hands-on training courses on how to properly use
the software. Derek worked exclusively for WWE for five years and has been a WWE adjunct for 14 years.
His availability over the next year is about 25%.
Lily Montesano, CISEC, is very familiar with codes and standards related to drainage
and stormwater through her work as the project manager for WWE’s municipal
separate storm sewer system (MS4) services for several municipalities. She has
significant experience in environmental project management and technical writing,
including drainage plans. Lily also has ten years of experience conducting inspections
on construction projects in a variety of sectors to ensure compliance with applicable
federal, state, and local regulations. She has worked for WWE for five years and her projected availability
for the likely project duration is an average of 30% per month.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 8
Jeremy Allinson (DHM) is a natural resource programs manager with extensive
experience in environmental project planning; National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) compliance; natural resource investigations; aquatic and hydrological
assessments; impact assessment and analysis; permitting compliance; restoration
design; mitigation planning; and construction administration. His experience involves
managing a wide range of planning and development projects both in the public and
private sectors across the Western U.S. and Alaska. He has worked to find a balance between
environmentally responsible development and protection of natural resources on projects like the
Aspen Riparian Master Plan, the Coffman Ranch Redevelopment, and the Rio Grande Trail Standards
Manual. Jeremy is based in Montrose and his projected availability for the project duration is an average
of 30% per month.
Jason Jaynes, PLA (DHM) is a Professional Landscape Architect (PLA) who boasts a
broadly diverse portfolio of work, including parks and trails planning, single-family and
private ranch planning and design, transportation facility and streetscape design,
affordable housing outreach and design, public process facilitation, and public agency
and land trust projects. Jason has been directly involved in numerous Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certified and sustainably focused projects in
the region, such as Aspen Lumberyard Affordable Housing, Crystal River Restoration, and the Roaring
Fork Transit Authority (RFTA) Rio Grande Trail Corridor Standards Manual. He believes that the
components of environmental stewardship, functionality, and human comfort are inextricable from the
design process and the ultimate, lasting quality of a built project. He is based in Carbondale and has
projected availability for the project duration of about 20% per month.
2.2 Team Experience
Projects conducted by WWE and DHM that demonstrate our ability to update the URMP are described
below.
2.2.1 Chapter 4 of Volume 3 Criteria Manual Update
WWE has been fortunate to work with MHFD,
(formerly known as the Urban Drainage and Flood
Control District) since it was founded in the late 1960s.
WWE founder Kenneth R. Wright, P.E., wrote the
original MHFD Manual for the newly formed
organization in 1969. Since then, WWE has
continuously worked for MHFD on topics related to
hydrology, hydraulics, floodplain management, water
quality, and special projects, including updates to all
three volumes of the MHFD Manual.
During 2021-2023, WWE worked with MHFD and a
team of consultants to update Chapter 4 of Volume 3 of the MHFD Manual. Chapter 4 is the part of the
manual that provides information for different types of stormwater control measures and is a very
frequently used section of the MHFD Manual. The process for updating Chapter 4 started with listening
to stakeholder input and going through the existing chapters to look for areas where changes were
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 9
needed. Based on this input, Andrew Earles and Jane Clary, along with other consultants including Muller
Engineering Company, Stream, Advanced Water Resources Engineering, Creative Civil, Geosyntec, and
Wheeler & Associates, worked to develop draft content. The draft content was reviewed by stakeholders
and revised by WWE in an iterative process to ensure effective communication of vision and outcomes.
The new Chapter 4 features fact sheets on SCMs including permeable pavements, bioretention, sand
filters, extended detention basins, retention ponds, constructed wetland ponds, and receiving pervious
areas such as buffers and swales.
2.2.2 MHFD Runoff Chapter
WWE recently updated the Runoff Chapter of Volume 1 of the MHFD Manual. The work entailed review
of runoff coefficients and providing input on analysis of the water quality event. WWE developed new
examples for these and other technical topics that are now covered in the chapter. The updated chapter
includes major changes such as criteria to assign a higher imperviousness to pervious areas with
disturbed soils, updated analysis of density and impervious cover for common residential land uses, and
updated criteria for gravel surfaces reflecting differences in compaction for varying uses of gravel
surfaces.
2.2.3 City of Durango Criteria Manual
Between 2016 and 2017, WWE worked with the City of
Durango to update their Storm Drainage Design Criteria
Manual. WWE collaborated with the City of Durango to
revise criteria in all chapters of the manual. Smaller
communities like Durango have somewhat different
drainage criteria needs than larger cities/areas such as
MHFD, Denver, and Colorado Springs. WWE used the
MHFD Manual to provide a large portion of the
Durango Manual content, but we found ways to
simplify criteria, background explanations, submittal
requirements, etc., to create a manual that is tailored
to Durango. Hydrology parameters and selected
supporting spreadsheets consistent with the guidelines in the MHFD Manual were developed specific to
Durango-area hydrology and included in the manual. Another of WWE’s goals was to establish criteria
that would be consistent with the anticipated Durango Master Drainage Plan.
WWE helped facilitate a public review process, including conducting a lunch-and-learn meeting to
provide examples of how to apply some of the tools that were developed for the manual, and to answer
questions from the local engineering and development community. WWE also performed a subsequent
phase of the master plan between 2017 and 2019, which included updating hydrology for watersheds
draining through the City.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 10
2.2.4 City of Greenwood Village Criteria Manual & MS4 Consulting
In 2018 and 2019, WWE worked with MHFD and Greenwood Village to
update the Village’s Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual to
incorporate new guidance from then-recent updates to the MHFD
Manual. Andrew Earles and Jane Clary led the effort for WWE, working
closely with Village staff and Holly Piza of MHFD. One of the technical
aspects of the criteria manual update was addressing a sizing
methodology developed in the 1990s under a different regulatory
regime that was resulting in a plethora of small on-site dry ponds for
redevelopment projects. The new criteria emphasized disconnection of
impervious area and implementation of runoff reduction measures,
especially for relatively small redevelopment projects, as alternatives to
excavating a dry basin. The manual also provided guidance on different
regulatory requirements for different parts of the Village due to the fact
that a portion of the Village is within the Cherry Creek Reservoir watershed and is subject to the reservoir
control regulation requirements. WWE attended City Council work sessions to present and discuss
several topics during the project. The project was completed on time and within budget.
Under a separate contract, WWE also assisted the City’s Planning and Public Works departments during
staff transitions to perform staff duties related to MS4 compliance during the interim while new
employees were being hired and trained. Work involved construction-site stormwater inspections, post-
construction inspections, enforcing maintenance requirements, and similar tasks.
2.2.5 Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards Update
Andrew Earles was the senior advisor on the update of Larimer
County’s Stormwater Design Standards, finalized in 2023. The MHFD
Manual was used as a baseline to create and update standards tailored
to meet the specific needs of Larimer County. Chapters with common
themes were grouped for efficiency, and WWE provided review drafts
to the County at the 30%, 70%, and 90% stages.
WWE developed forms and checklists for key submittals and
procedures. Relevant sections of Larimer County’s Land Use Codes
were also reviewed and revised to allow the codes and design
standards to mesh well. WWE conducted work sessions and
presentations with Larimer County’s Planning Commission, Board of
County Commissioners, and County Staff. We also performed public
outreach for this update, conducting listening sessions and public meetings, and assisted the County
with other types of outreach.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 11
2.2.6 Wildfire Ready Action Plan (WRAP) for the Roaring Fork Valley Wildfire Collaborative
WWE is on a team that was selected to prepare a
WRAP for the Roaring Fork Valley Wildfire
Collaborative. The WWE team is creating an action
plan for pre- and post-fire hazard mitigation strategies
to effectively reduce hazard exposure and overall risk
to critical assets in the study area. WWE’s role includes
data collection and identification of potential values at
risk, housing and maintaining a database of geospatial
data, and evaluating post-fire hydrologic, erosion, and
debris flow hazards. WWE is currently involved in
developing WRAPs for the Boulder Watershed
Collective, The Watershed Center (St. Vrain and Left
Hand Creeks), the Middle Colorado Watershed Council, the Dolores Watershed Collaborative, the
Mancos Conservation District, and the City of Fort Collins.
WWE will also conduct tasks for the Roaring Fork WRAP as part of our work on the Colorado Water
Conservation Board (CWCB) Technical Advisory (TA) Team. The TA Team and the WRAP framework were
created by the CWCB to conduct post-fire hazard modeling and susceptibility analyses. WWE also
reviews and provides feedback on WRAPs prepared by other consulting firms as part of our TA Team
duties.
2.2.7 City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan and On-Call Consulting
In response to advances in GI and LID stormwater treatment methods
and the 2008 State of the Roaring Fork Watershed Report prepared by
the Ruedi Water & Power Authority and the Roaring Fork Conservancy,
the City of Aspen undertook a project to update stormwater
management guidance and criteria and to create the Aspen URMP.
WWE was on a team with Wenk Associates (Wenk), Dr. James Guo of
the University of Colorado–Denver, and prime consultant AMEC,
working closely with City of Aspen stormwater and engineering staff.
WWE and Wenk had primary responsibility for the chapter addressing
stormwater quality and SCMs. WWE drew on our considerable
experience with the criteria in the MHFD Manual as well as our
experiences working on projects in the Colorado high country where
cold climate issues must be considered for effective design of SCMs. WWE worked with Wenk to adapt
SCMs from the MHFD manual to function properly in cold climates. This included design guidance for
management of icing, evaluation of methods for treatment of snowmelt runoff, considerations for heavy
sediment loads, and vegetation suitable for high altitudes and a shorter growing season. WWE and Wenk
also worked to develop SCMs suitable for implementation along Aspen’s streetscapes.
Although WWE’s primary responsibility was for the water quality chapter, WWE also took the lead role
on the mudflow chapter. As the project progressed, the City of Aspen requested additional input from
WWE on chapters related to rainfall, runoff, and detention. WWE prepared text for substantial portions
of these chapters and served as the overall peer reviewer for the team on these topics. The American
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 12
Public Works Association gave the Aspen URMP an APWA 2010 Project Award for the Public Works
Administration Category (Small Community).
The URMP was completed in 2010, but WWE’s involvement with stormwater management in the City of
Aspen continued. WWE was retained by the City of Aspen as an “on-call” consultant to respond to
questions during implementation of the new guidance and criteria. In this role, WWE worked closely
with City of Aspen stormwater staff on a regular basis as questions arose related to implementation
issues.
2.2.8 Pitkin County Pre-event Fire Flood Study
In May 2019, WWE answered Pitkin County’s informal procurement
memorandum calling for an engineering firm to conduct pre-fire debris
flow hazard assessment for select at-risk areas within the County’s
jurisdiction. WWE was awarded the contract and commenced work in
Summer 2020. We conducted a pre-fire evaluation of post-fire mud and
debris flow risks for seven representative watersheds, including
estimation of peak flow rates and volumes for unburned, moderate, and
high-severity burn scenarios for each study area. One dimensional
hydrologic modeling analysis was conducted in HEC-HMS for the 1-
through 100-year design storm events using a Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) curve number approach (bulked to
represent post-fire sediment concentrations in certain scenarios).
To provide information that could be readily transferable to locations
not explicitly modeled in the study, WWE compared model output with peak flow rate and volume
projections from the federal Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program and a United States
Geological Survey (USGS) study conducted in nearby Lake Granby. Further, modeling results were
validated against agency-generated hazard projections that were based on regression equations and
similar modeling approaches for nearby areas. A conceptual pilot study was also conducted on two of
the study areas to evaluate debris flow runout paths. WWE’s work was completed in early 2020.
2.2.9 Aspen Riparian Master Plan
DHM led the team that developed the 2020 Aspen
Riparian Master Plan, which identifies specific,
prioritized projects within the riparian corridor in
Aspen that will reduce impacts from urban pollutants
and stormwater runoff, streambank development,
habitat and ecosystem degradation, and altered
hydrological conditions. This plan evaluates these
elements through the lens of maximizing City efforts,
budget, and implementation strategy.
The riparian corridor and Roaring Fork River are
integral to the identity and aesthetic character of Aspen. Many of the City’s iconic views, parks, trails,
and other amenities can be found along the river corridor. The plan aims to preserve, restore, and create
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 13
important riparian areas that provide valuable ecosystem services, cultural amenities, recreation,
economy, and high quality of life in Aspen.
Based upon stakeholder vision and goals, the document includes recommendations for environmental
and habitat improvements, educational opportunities, incentives, and land planning opportunities with
a specific implementable and measurable plan for the City of Aspen to use over time. DHM
collaboratively worked to create a plan with prioritized projects and efforts that maximizes available
budget, is deeply informed by stakeholder involvement and values, and is based on a high level of data
and analysis. Implementing this forward-looking management plan for the riparian corridor through
Aspen will preserve and enhance the recreation, economy, and quality of life that are valued by the
Aspen community. Furthermore, this plan and the information gathered for its development will serve
as important resources in the URMP Update process.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 14
3. APPROACH TO PROJECT
WWE’s objective for this project is to update the technical content of the URMP in accordance with
updates to MHFD guidance and criteria that have occurred in the past decade since the URMP was
created, while retaining much of the content of the URMP that remains valid. We also seek to improve
the layout, readability, and general useability of the URMP (by technical and non-technical users alike)
by having DHM assist with the final production of the URMP once we have worked through the criteria
updates. At the end of the project, we hope to leave the City with a sustainable URMP that will guide
stormwater management in Aspen for the next decade or more.
In preparation of the project approach, WWE reviewed the request for proposals (RFP), our notes from
the pre-proposal meeting, and addenda to the RFP. In addition, Andrew Earles went through the current
URMP to identify topics that may be worth updating given the changes in the MHFD Manual that he has
helped to implement in the past several years. WWE understands that the City’s primary goals for the
URMP Update include:
1. Provide criteria for stormwater management for capital and private development projects. WWE
understands that the criteria in the URMP are applicable to public and private projects and will be
used by the City and the development community. We believe that the criteria in the MHFD
Manual, as adapted for colder climates like Aspen and Durango, provide practical and effective
criteria for capital projects and private developments in the mountains. Many cold-weather
considerations have been integrated into the current URMP, and as we make updates based on
the latest MHFD criteria, we will have to be cognizant of the climatic challenges in the high
mountains of Colorado.
2. Bring the plan into alignment with state-of-the practice drainage standards and City of Aspen
development standards. In Colorado, the MHFD Manual defines the state of the practice, and in
the past decade there have been several significant updates including the Runoff Chapter and
Treatment SCM Chapter, as discussed above. In addition, full spectrum detention has become
common practice and has supplanted the water quality capture volume + 10- + 100-year
detention approach that was common in the early 2000s. Given WWE’s extensive knowledge of
the MHFD Manual and our work to adapt these criteria to high-altitude environments, we will be
able to provide Aspen with state-of-the-practice criteria and guidance in the URMP Update.
3. Reflect up-to-date Community Development, Land Use, and Building Code requirements. WWE
will coordinate with the City Engineering as well as other departments to obtain and review the
latest Community Development, Land Use, and Building Codes. We will work to incorporate
updated information from these codes into the URMP, and where necessary, we may suggest
modifications to codes if they are inconsistent with the state-of-the practice stormwater criteria
that we develop. We firmly believe that effective stormwater management starts with the
planning process, so integrating the requirements of these codes with the URMP and vice versa
will be an important objective of this project.
4. State policies and methods clearly in a way that laypeople and non-experts will understand. A
major focus of the rewrite of the URMP will be to make the text, tables, graphics, and figures more
understandable. This may include providing text boxes with explanations of key terms or
concepts, avoiding excessive use of acronyms, and defining technical terms using simpler
terminology familiar to a lay audience. We have also found through our experience with writing
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 15
manuals that using the active voice, as opposed to writing in the passive voice, is an effective
tactic for simplifying criteria and being clear on what is required versus recommended.
5. Document programmatic changes in drainage policy. Over the past decade, there have
undoubtedly been some policy changes in how the City regulates and manages stormwater that
we will reflect in the updated URMP. While we expect that many of the drainage principles and
policies will remain unchanged, we will work with the City to understand programmatic changes,
policy changes, and changes in the City’s regulatory process that will need to be reflected in the
URMP. As one example of a policy change, there have been changes (and additional requirements
for reporting) to water rights requirements for SCMs and detention facilities that were not in place
in 2014. These requirements prohibit storing water for longer than 72 hours (without a water
right) and require owners of stormwater facilities to submit design information to the State
Engineer’s Office via an online portal to document compliance. WWE can also help the City look
forward to potential future programmatic changes that could be required if the City is designated
as a MS4. Given our experience working with multiple MS4s, we can identify where updates to
the City’s URMP can help anticipate future MS4 requirements.
6. Provide practical advice to improve stormwater quality and promote the use of GI. This was a
major objective of the recent update to MHFD’s Treatment SCM Chapter and recent re-writes of
other sections of Volume 3 of the MHFD Manual. We have developed new guidance and tools for
quantifying the runoff reduction benefits of LID and GI that can easily be adapted for use in Aspen.
Examples include the updated Receiving Pervious Area Fact Sheet, tools in the MHFD-SCM Design
Workbook to quantify effects of disconnecting impervious area, updated criteria for SCM
selection and outlet structures to reduce the potential for clogging, and others. Through our work
for MHFD, we also have emphasized the importance of community values in stormwater design,
and we can integrate some of the new text that our project team developed for MHFD that
includes advice on how to design SCMs that are integrated with the surrounding landscape and
that provide benefits to surrounding residents.
To achieve these six objectives, WWE proposes to update the overall URMP and produce a new version
with an improved layout that improves its readability and useability. To prepare this RFP, WWE went
through the current URMP and created a table of potential updates by chapter. Table 1 presents
potential updates that the City could consider for each chapter to bring the URMP in line with the current
state-of-the-practice. Please note that the list provided in Table 1 is not an exhaustive list. Instead, it
provides a list of the most significant updates we will recommend based on changes we have helped to
make to the MHFD Manual in the past decade. Table 1 can be viewed as an ala carte menu of potential
updates. Some of these updates have been identified as optional but recommended to help the City
identify the scope that will best fit their needs, as budget allows.
In addition to integrating recent updates from MHFD, we understand that the Mudflow Chapter of the
URMP is a section in need of updates. WWE’s 2016 mudflow analysis provides insights and tools for
evaluating mudflow risks in the City core; however, other areas within the City have not been studied
with this level of detail. To quantify potential mudflow risk in other areas of the City, we will rely on work
that we are doing for the Roaring Fork WRAP to semi-quantitatively assess risk in other areas of the City.
Based on this information, we will work with the City to determine how the risk modeling and analysis
can be translated into pragmatic and practical criteria. We expect that the most challenging aspect of
this task will be translating complex model results into policies that are protective of public safety and
can be practically implemented for development in Aspen.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 16
Table 1. Potential Updates to URMP by Chapter
Chapters Assumed Level of
Effort for Update Potential Updates
Introduction Low Most policies referenced are still valid and do not require significant updates; however, WWE recommends
some updates:
• Revise the approach to detention – MHFD has adopted the full spectrum detention approach, and WWE
recommends integrating this into the URMP to replace the water quality capture volume + 10- and 100-
year detention approach in the current manual. Full spectrum detention has similar volumetric sizing
requirements but simplifies the outlet design and provides attenuation of flows over a broader spectrum
of events instead of just the water quality capture volume, 10- and 100-year events.
• Change the terminology from best management practices (BMPs) to stormwater control measures
(SCMs) throughout the manual.
• Update the references to cite documents from the past 10 years where applicable (e.g., stormwater
quality citations, more recent Roaring Fork data, etc.).
• Consider additional emphasis on runoff reduction practices (such as receiving pervious areas [RPAs]),
especially for areas outside of the commercial core.
Chapter 1.0
Policy and Permit
Requirements
Moderate Most policies referenced are still valid, but WWE recommends considering some changes:
• Review Table 1.1 for thresholds and project types to see if any thresholds or requirements need
adjustment. For small sites, improved receiving pervious area methods include rules of thumb that can be
used for small sites and quantitative methods for larger areas.
• Discuss fee in lieu (FIL) – In which parts of the City is this allowed? Are there parts of the City where this
should not be allowed? How frequently is this used? Have there been any issues (water quality or
flooding) with this approach?
• Consider using simplified detention approaches relying on receiving pervious area for small impervious
area increases (1,000-5,000 square feet, typically, such as patio or driveway additions).
• Clarify “treating water quality capture volume” versus “providing water quality capture volume” – Some
treatment methods rely more on filtration than storage, especially for smaller impervious areas.
• Review Section 1.3 Engineering Review Process and Requirements with City for other City policies and
standards that may need to be referenced or acknowledged.
• Revise Construction Management Plan to include a section on post-construction stormwater controls
(similar to the drainage letter in other manuals).
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 17
Chapters Assumed Level of
Effort for Update Potential Updates
• Update mudflow approach – better define what is meant by “the proposed development will not
adversely affect nearby properties.” Are increases in mud depths that do not affect finished floor
elevations (FFEs) of other structures allowable? Define in which event(s) this applies.
• Clarify Maintenance Agreement – Specify that the Maintenance Agreement applies to detention controls,
inlets, and storm drain systems, as well as BMPs/SCMs.
• Revisit requirements by drainage basin – Have any of these requirements changed or have requirements
for specific basins changed? Are any additional requirements needed?
Chapter 2.0
Rainfall
Low This chapter does not need major changes. Possible minor updates include:
• Reference “latest version of NOAA Atlas” since updated atlas (NOAA 15) will likely be published in next
few years.
• Consider climate change – Does Aspen want to include any guidance for assessing potential variability
due to climate change? NOAA 15 is expected to have guidance on adjustments for future emissions
scenarios. Climate-adjusted rainfall may not be needed for design of much of Aspen's stormwater
infrastructure; however, the City might want to think about evaluating a surrogate (such as depth from
the upper confidence limit on the 100-year rainfall) for design of spillways and/or infrastructure for
critical facilities.
Chapter 3.0
Runoff
Moderate There have been several recent changes to the MHFD Runoff Chapter that the City could consider referencing
or integrating into the chapter:
• Update imperviousness values (higher values for disturbed land; adjustments to single-family homes,
multiple-family homes, commercial, and other land uses based on density; varying criteria for gravel
depending on compaction and use of surface).
• Modify MHFD Runoff spreadsheet for Aspen rainfall – update runoff coefficients/imperviousness using
latest MHFD spreadsheet.
• Update discussion of UIA/DCIA/RPA/SPA based on latest text from MHFD Runoff Chapter and Chapter 3
of Volume 3.
• Review and update CUHP/SWMM text as needed based on changes/updates to models during past 10
years.
Chapter 4.0
Street Drainage
System Design
Low Not a lot has changed with street drainage hydraulics, so much of this chapter is probably fine as it stands. The
City might:
• Coordinate with other departments to review street classifications and allowable spread criteria.
• Consider adapting MHFD-Inlet spreadsheet (recently updated) for Aspen Rainfall and inlet types allowed
in Aspen.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 18
Chapters Assumed Level of
Effort for Update Potential Updates
Chapter 5.0
Detention Basins
High This chapter needs revisions to address the current state of the practice:
• Update to use full spectrum detention.
• Modify MHFD-Detention spreadsheet for Aspen rainfall and Aspen criteria if useful for the
implementation of criteria.
• Use MHFD simplified equations in Storage Chapter for small sites and/or initial sizing – may need to adapt
to Aspen sizing/rainfall. (The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) procedure is no longer
recommended.)
• Update much of the text in this chapter to be consistent with or reference the latest guidance from MHFD
on full spectrum detention.
• Incorporate new pond outlet details developed for extended detention basins as a part of the MHFD
Manual Volume 3 Chapter 4 Update in 2024, including updated guidance on grating, orifices, and other
outlet details.
Chapter 6.0
Floodplains
Low This chapter does not need major changes. Possible minor updates include:
• Review whether there have been any changes in floodplain policies or the City’s floodplain ordinance that
require changes.
• Consider phased Elevation Certificates (based on design plans, once the foundation is constructed, and
once all construction is completed [as-builts]).
• Check and update older references as needed.
Chapter 7.0
Mudflow Analysis
High This chapter needs revisions to address the current state of the practice:
• Integrate mapping and data from Mudflow Analysis report.
• Identify potential mudflow hazards in other portions of City (Colorado Geological Survey alluvial fan
mapping, areas of past problems, other areas identified by City.) WWE does not anticipate conducting
additional detailed modeling, but could perform regression analysis on the potential for debris flows in
other areas of the City.
• Review and revise (as needed) mudflow zones and policies applicable for each zone.
• Establish rationale for mudflow design event. The design event may not be the 100-year event due to the
frequency of smaller debris flows – a 10- or 25-year event might be a better basis given how mudflows
are generated.
• Determine if there are simplified compliance approaches that could be used instead of FLO-2D modeling
for small projects with minor impacts.
• Identify acceptable practices/models to use for analysis in areas not yet analyzed by the City and establish
factors that would trigger such analysis.
• Review policies and methods of avoiding or minimizing impacts on neighboring properties.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 19
Chapters Assumed Level of
Effort for Update Potential Updates
Chapter 8.0
Water Quality
High WWE likes the way the current Chapter 8.0 is organized around land uses. WWE recently assisted MHFD with
updating Chapter 4 of Volume 3 of the MHFD Manual (the chapter with all the SCM design criteria) and
suggests retaining the structure of Chapter 8.0 and relevant information that has not changed, while reflecting
the latest guidance from Chapter 4 of Volume 3, such as:
• Eliminate Modified Directly Connected Impervious Area (MDCIA) adjustment curves (Level 1/Level 2),
which are no longer included in MHFD Manual. (These have been replaced by more explicit methods to
evaluate effects of disconnecting impervious area including the Runoff Reduction Worksheet in the
MHFD-SCM Workbook.)
• Incorporate the latest SCM selection guidance (MHFD no longer uses the decision tree approach).
• Adapt the recently updated MHFD-SCM Workbook. This could incorporate Aspen rainfall characteristics
and design criteria.
• Adopt edits to overall chapter suggested by WWE based on the latest guidance we developed.
• Integrate many new details and renderings from Chapter 4 to update graphics.
• Update guidance on buffers and swales. (The Grass Buffer and Grass Swale Fact Sheets have been
updated to create a new Receiving Pervious Area Fact Sheet that encompasses buffers, swales, and other
pervious areas receiving runoff from impervious surfaces.)
• Update guidance on permeable pavement to make criteria consistent with more recent guidance from
the International Concrete Paving Institute.
• Update the discussion of soil-based media versus engineered media to reflect expanded guidance in the
Bioretention Fact Sheet in Chapter 4.
• Incorporate Chapter 4 updates for filter section design (sand filter, bioretention, permeable pavements).
Partial and full infiltration filter section details have been updated in the MHFD Manual.
• Incorporate new guidance on manufactured treatment devices (flow-through is only allowed for pre-
treatment). MHFD’s criteria for manufactured treatment devices has expanded significantly and now
includes high-rate biofiltration and high-rate media filtration guidance.
• Consider referencing Chapter 4 of Volume 3 for SCM design procedures and fact sheets and in URMP
providing additional criteria or criteria specific to Aspen’s high-altitude environment along with photos of
what these practices look like in the Aspen area.
Construction-
phase Stormwater
Management
(Optional but
Recommended)
Medium The City and WWE should discuss whether a construction stormwater management chapter would be an
appropriate addition to the URMP. This chapter could:
• Reference MHFD standard details (and Colorado Department of Transportation specifications for state
highway projects).
• Outline Aspen stormwater permit requirements, inspections, etc.
• Serve as a valuable resource in the event Aspen is designated an MS4.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 20
Chapters Assumed Level of
Effort for Update Potential Updates
Appendices
Appendix A
Submittal
Checklists
Medium • Update review checklists. How is City currently using checklists? What is useful/what is not? Integrate
feedback from City to enhance usefulness of checklists for developers and reviewers.
Appendix B
Equations and
Examples
Medium
(depends on extent
of changes)
• Update examples to reflect changes to criteria.
Appendix C
Worksheets
(Optional but
Recommended)
Medium to High • Update worksheets to reflect latest MHFD workbooks and latest criteria in manual.
Appendix D
Development
Permit and
Elevation
Certificate
Low • Review and update floodplain permit form based on City’s experience using the form.
• Update Elevation Certificate to reflect latest version from the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) (require that most-recent version of form is used).
• Incorporate latest guidance from FEMA. (The no-rise guidance is from 2004.)
Appendix E
Plant Selection
Guidance
(Optional but
Recommended)
High • Update guidance based on DHM’s review. Currently this appendix is just a list of plants. DHM could
provide some additional guidance on which plants are most suitable for different types of SCMs. For
example, having a bioretention planting palette or a list of vegetation to be used for ponds based on
hydrozones could improve results. Recommendations and references to the Riparian Master Plan can also
be included with this update.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 21
To accomplish the goals and objectives of the URMP Update, WWE will execute the following tasks
outlined in the RFP.
3.1 Project Management
Drake Ludwig is an experienced project manager and looks forward to the opportunity to work with City
staff and lead the team through the manual update. He will manage all correspondence and lead
meetings between the WWE team, the City, and other stakeholders as needed. As a resident of the
Roaring Fork Valley, he will be available for in-person meetings as needed. Drake will coordinate and
supervise discrete tasks to maximize project efficiency. Andrew Earles will assist Drake with task
management and project management duties as needed.
WWE will initiate the project with a kick-off meeting with the City. Prior to the meeting, the Project
Team will look for opportunities to “hit the ground running.” This will include an in-depth review of the
current URMP to ensure the kick-off meeting can be efficient and maximally productive. Coordination
meetings will be held monthly, or more frequently as necessary, throughout the update of the URMP to
review policies, chapter text, and project progress. Drake and Andrew will have an open line of
communication with City staff as needed. During the project, continual coordination and communication
will take place so the City can be kept informed and provide feedback.
Provided the menu of potential updates provided in this proposal, WWE will work with the City to
identify a project scope and budget that best fit their needs prior to contracting. Once contracted, the
budget agreed to by WWE and the City will be adhered to throughout the URMP Update. As the main
point of contact for the URMP update, WWE will provide routine communications related to project
updates, schedule and timeline, project budget and invoicing, and reporting. WWE will assist the City in
scheduling stakeholder and outreach meetings. WWE collaborates frequently with our subcontractor,
DHM, and the team has a positive and productive working relationship. To the extent necessary, WWE
will manage DHM through the update of the URMP.
3.2 Conduct Meetings
WWE proposes having coordination meetings every month, or more frequently as necessary,
throughout the URMP Update process. WWE and DHM have experience facilitating meetings for criteria
manual update projects. These may include meetings with the core project team (key staff from the
consultant and client teams), meetings with project sponsors (including various departments), meetings
with stakeholders, and meetings with the general public. As a rule, any meeting that will cover more
than a single topic should have an agenda to structure the meeting. If a document is to be discussed at
a meeting, it must be provided to attendees far enough in advance to allow for review. On past criteria
manual projects, we have facilitated online and in-person meetings, and we envision the same on this
project. While many routine meetings may be able to be accomplished on a virtual meeting platform,
some meetings, including stakeholder engagement meetings and working meetings to debate final
issues on draft chapters, are generally better when conducted in person. WWE’s presence in Glenwood
Springs will make being there in person relatively easy, and other WWE staff from Denver can travel as
needed to participate.
We propose two public meetings with stakeholders to learn about their specific needs for the URMP
Update. Obtaining stakeholder input is essential, and multi-modal outreach is often needed, as different
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 22
stakeholders have different preferences on how to provide input. WWE and DHM will work with Aspen
to develop an effective and efficient stakeholder outreach approach. On the recent update to Chapter
4 of Volume 3, WWE assisted with a robust stakeholder outreach effort. This included online sessions in
which we helped elicit input on desired updates and engagement with key stakeholders to discuss and
understand their comments on draft criteria. Stakeholders provided more than 1,000 comments on the
update, and we considered all of them.
The Aurora stormwater manual update also involved meeting facilitation to obtain input from multiple
city departments. It was not uncommon for us to have a dozen people on our multi-hour monthly calls
to discuss criteria, and we made sure that all had opportunities to provide input. This level of
communication was extremely valuable for reducing the potential for conflicts in criteria applied
between different city departments and for ensuring a high level of coordination between different
programs. WWE received compliments from MHFD and the City of Aurora on meeting facilitation skills
as a part of this project.
3.3 Evaluation and Analysis of Current Ordinances and Requirements
WWE will review current City ordinances and codes that include requirements or guidance related to
stormwater management to identify any areas where there may be potential conflicts, inconsistencies,
or ambiguity between requirements, and we will identify potential changes to the URMP and codes to
resolve conflicting requirements and align the URMP with other City codes and criteria. To the extent
changes are needed to codes or guidance from other departments, WWE will work with the City staff,
including those from other departments as needed, to identify whether changes are needed in codes,
the URMP, or both. WWE will then implement these changes in the URMP.
Table 1, above, provides an initial list of potential update topics based on comparison of the current
URMP with the MHFD Manual, and we propose to work with this City to go through these potential
updates, and others we identify based on a more thorough review once under contract, to define the
scope of updates to specific chapters. We are aware of several chapters that we think will require major
updates, including the following:
• Chapter 1.0 Policy and Permit Requirements – The objective of updates to this chapter will be
to align the policies and requirements of the URMP with the current state-of-the-practice for
stormwater management in Colorado and to resolve any inconsistencies between the URMP
and other applicable City codes and regulations. Updates to this chapter will seek to better
define requirements for development in FEMA’s Special Hazard Flood Area as well as in areas
affected by the potential for mudflows. This chapter will lay out policies and procedures for
development in these areas, followed by more detailed criteria and guidance in the Floodplain
and Mudflow Analysis chapters. Other potential updates are listed in Table 1.
• Submittals Chapter (currently included as part of Chapter 1.0) – We understand that the City
would like the selected consultant to review development checklists and notes from staff and
incorporate these into the updated URMP, including development triggers, submission
checklists, as-built requirements, and other relevant documents. We think that a standalone
Submittals Chapter could be useful for having a single location that describes the City’s submittal
requirements for development, permitting, and construction. This chapter could include the
development checklists the City envisions and would serve to clarify the development submittal
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 23
requirements for private developments, especially those within hazard zones. Having a
standalone Submittals Chapter would allow users to get straight to the submittal requirements
and procedures without having to first go through the policy sections.
• Chapter 3.0 Runoff – We envision moderate updates to the Runoff Chapter, primarily to update
imperviousness criteria and some of the procedures for how impervious area is determined at
various stages of project design (planning versus final design).
• Chapter 5.0 Detention Basins – There have been significant updates to MHFD’s detention
approach in the past 10 years. Full spectrum detention, which was only starting to be widely
used on the Front Range when the URMP was last updated, is now the standard of practice. Full
spectrum detention has similar detention volume requirements to the current water quality
capture volume + 10- + 100-year detention criteria in the URMP, but due to the outlet design is
able to regulate peak flows over a wide range of return periods. This approach is valuable for
channel stability and control of flooding in events between the 10-year and 100-year event. In
addition, the simplified FAA detention method has been dropped from the MHFD Manual due
to the availability of improved methods and undersizing concerns with the FAA method. For
small sites that rely on simplified approaches for detention, WWE can work to develop simplified
volume equations in line with the approach that MHFD recommends for small sites. Other
potential updates are listed in Table 1. Derek Rapp, P.E., was the creator of MHFD Detention,
and he has helped us customize this spreadsheet for areas outside of MHFD including Durango
and Mesa County (in progress). If the City would like to have an updated detention spreadsheet
customized to Aspen, Derek can assist with this task. Updates to this spreadsheet and others is
an optional but recommended task.
• Chapter 7.0 Mudflow Analysis – This is a chapter where we understand significant updates are
needed. The current mudflow zone mapping in the URMP can be revisited based on the results
of the 2016 mudflow study, as well as data on mudflow probability that we are generating as a
part of the Roaring Fork WRAP. As a part of the WRAP, we have developed a method for
assessing post-fire debris flow probability for sub-watersheds throughout the valley. We can
rerun this analysis for the Aspen area assuming unburned conditions (or low intensity burn) to
get a semi-quantitative assessment (high, moderate, low) of mudflow risk in areas outside of
the detailed FLO-2D study. We will use this new analysis and the existing FLO-2D analysis to
define mudflow risks throughout Aspen. Then we will work with the City to develop practical
regulatory requirements for these areas. Table 1 lists some of WWE’s thoughts on updates to
this chapter. We think it would be valuable to revisit what return period events we use for
assessing compliance with mudflow criteria. While a 100-year event is standard for flood
control, mudflows are more complex because they rely not only on having a sufficient amount
of water but also a sufficient amount of sediment. Based on WWE’s experience with mudflows
in the Aspen area for over 25 years, we think that it may be worth considering regulating to a
10- or 25-year event, which are the types of events most likely to produce mudflows with high
sediment content in the Aspen area. Regardless of the design event selected, we understand
that the criteria need to be practical and implementable by the development community, so we
will look for ways to translate complex mudflow analysis into simplified criteria that can be
implemented without an undue burden on developers or the City.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 24
• Chapter 8.0 Water Quality – This chapter will require significant updates given the recent
updates to MHFD’s Treatment SCM Chapter. WWE likes the way the current Aspen URMP
chapter is organized around land uses. WWE proposes to review the chapter in depth and
suggest updates based on the latest guidance from Chapter 4 of Volume 3 of the MHFD Manual,
while still retaining the structure of the chapter and relevant information that has not changed.
Some of the major changes in MHFD’s guidance and criteria since the last publication of the
URMP include expanded guidance on receiving pervious areas, including methods to quantify
runoff reduction using the MHFD SCM Design Spreadsheet rather than having to run a complex
Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). These methods are highly applicable for small sites.
We have also made significant updates to the criteria for permeable pavements and
bioretention, including new filter section details for partial and no-infiltration design
approaches. The update of Chapter 4 also included a significant overhaul of guidance for
manufactured treatment devices (MTDs, including underground SCMs). These changes include
only allowing hydrodynamic separators as a pre-treatment method and new criteria for high-
rate media filtration and high-rate biofiltration, which can provide a good level of stormwater
treatment within a smaller footprint than many conventional SCMs. The update to Chapter 4
included many new and updated design details as well as renderings of SCMs that we can
incorporate into the URMP directly or by reference. In conjunction with the update of Chapter
4, Derek Rapp updated the MHFD SCM Design Workbook to reflect the updated criteria. This is
a spreadsheet that could be tailored to Aspen’s rainfall characteristics and water quality capture
volume.
• Construction-phase Stormwater Management – The current URMP does not have a specific
chapter on construction-phase stormwater management. While the City is not currently a MS4,
if the City is designated as a MS4 in the future, the permit will require the City to administer a
program that addresses construction and post-construction water quality. While it is unknown
if or when the City could be designated as a MS4, creating a construction-phase stormwater
management chapter could be useful for planning for the future. We do not envision this being
a lengthy chapter, but it would state the City’s requirements for construction-site stormwater
management and permitting and then reference control measures from a source such as the
MHFD Manual (or Colorado Department of Transportation criteria for State highway projects).
It would require a moderate level of effort to create such a chapter, but it would help to establish
a consistent set of proven erosion and sediment control measures (and non-structural practices)
for developers to follow and to which the City can regulate stormwater during construction. The
addition of this chapter to the URMP is optional but recommended.
• Appendix E. Plant Selection Guidance – This chapter provides a useful list of plants that are
well-suited for the Aspen area, but it does not provide guidance for selecting appropriate plants
or groups of plants for a specific area or stormwater facility. For example, having a bioretention
planting palette or a list of vegetation to be used for ponds based on hydrozones could provide
improved guidance. In addition, providing more information on the plants included in the list,
including photos, could be helpful for engineers and landscape architects to better understand
the aesthetic implications of their design choices. DHM will lead this task, with input from WWE
based on experience with developing similar criteria on vegetation for other criteria manuals.
DHM is uniquely qualified to include some of the key recommendations from the Aspen Riparian
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 25
Master Plan in the URMP, if desired. The expansion of the currently provided planting guidance
is optional but recommended.
We would like to emphasize that the suggestions provided in the list above and in Table 1 are ideas
based on our comparison of the URMP with recent updates to the MHFD Manual and experience with
other criteria manual updates in the high country. As a first step in the update process (before getting
under contract), WWE would like to sit down with the City to go through this list to define the scope of
what the City would like to update (or not) and incorporate any issues known to the City that may not
be captured in this proposal or Table 1.
3.4 Analyze and Update Best Management Practices
WWE will draw on our experience from the 2024 update of MHFD’s Treatment SCMs Chapter and other
updates that we are currently working on related to SCM selection and maintenance to update BMP
(aka SCM) criteria for the City. We will also draw on our past experiences with criteria in Durango and
other mountain communities to integrate guidance on cold weather considerations and appropriate
vegetation for high-altitude environments. WWE’s ideas for potential updates related to BMPs/SCMs
are outlined in Table 1. As noted above, the 2024 update to MHFD’s Treatment SCMs Chapter included
significant updates to criteria for receiving pervious areas, permeable pavements, manufactured
treatment devices, extended detention basins, and others. The Chapter 4 update for MHFD emphasized
the importance of vegetation and pervious areas for stormwater management, which is a theme we
would also strengthen in the URMP. The Chapter 4 update includes new design procedures, details,
renderings, and spreadsheet tools. We will work with the City to determine how to either reference or
directly incorporate these updates to Chapter 4 of Volume 3. In conjunction with these updates, we also
think it could be beneficial to provide expanded plant selection guidance covering not only information
on hydrophytic species suitable for lower-lying portions of SCMs but also criteria for vegetation that is
appropriate for transitional and upland areas that may provide runoff reduction benefits. Please see the
discussion of Chapter 8.0 Water Quality in Section 3.1 and Table 1 for additional information on potential
updates the City may want to consider.
3.5 Write the Updated URMP
This task includes the time to write the updates to criteria in the URMP based on what we learn from
the tasks listed in Sections 3.3 and 3.4. We typically follow a multi-step process to update chapters:
1. WWE and the City will review the existing chapter and create comments and redlines identifying
potential changes.
2. WWE, DHM, and the City will convene an initial stakeholder meeting consisting of staff from key
City departments as well as the development community and other identified stakeholders. This
will be a facilitated “listening session” to go through each of the chapters and obtain feedback
on what is working well and what can be improved.
3. WWE and the City will meet to discuss the proposed changes to agree on sections to update and
the nature of the updates.
4. WWE will produce a 20% draft of the updated chapters for review by the City..
5. The City will review the chapter, meet with, and provide comments to WWE.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 26
6. WWE will address comments from the City to create a final draft of the chapter (60%).
7. At this point, the chapter can be posted for public review (assuming that will be required).
Chapters are typically posted for 4-6 weeks for stakeholder review, and we will provide a form
for stakeholders to provide comments.
8. After receiving stakeholder comments, and any remaining comments from the City, WWE will
provide a final redline and clean copy of the chapter for final City review and approval (100%).
We typically work on updating several related chapters at the same time and provide the chapters in
batches for stakeholder review. For example, the requirements in the Detention Basins and Water
Quality chapter are related and best reviewed at the same time. The conceptual schedule included as
Table 4 provides an idea of how we propose to group chapters together for updates and review.
We understand that a goal of the URMP Update is to make the URMP more useable and accessible to
an audience that can include residents, developers, landscape architects, and others involved in
development in addition to engineers. To this end, we will work to simplify language, reduce use of
acronyms and jargon where appropriate, provide explanatory text boxes, and provide a visually
appealing product that is engaging for the reader. DHM can enhance the layout and graphics of the
manual, creating a version that is more visually appealing and digestible to non-technical audiences.
While this formatting is an optional task that would be completed prior to finalizing the URMP, we
recommend that it is completed to achieve the City’s goal of creating a document that can be easily
interpreted by all users.
3.6 Expected Final Project Deliverables
The final deliverable will be assembled once all chapters have gone through the process outlined in
Section 3.5. To make it easier to create the final deliverable, we will start by developing an ADA-
compliant template that incorporates the City’s branding guidelines. We have software that can check
text, tables, and figures for ADA compliance, and we will run these checks on drafts posted for public
review, as well as on the final URMP. WWE will create a searchable, indexed pdf of the updated URMP
and we also will provide Microsoft Word files and native files for any graphics or tables that are
incorporated in the updated URMP.
With regard to schedule, we note that the City hopes to accomplish this Update by November 2025.
While we can work with the City to accomplish updates of the highest-priority sections within this
timeframe, we do not think an overall update of the URMP is possible within this timeframe, given the
extent of updates needed and the process (assuming three drafts and time for public review). We think
soliciting public input early in the project through a stakeholder meeting is often valuable; however,
setting up such a meeting with multiple people will take time, as will digesting and determining how to
best incorporate their input. Most of the stormwater manual update projects we have conducted in the
past decade have taken from 12 to 24 months, with 18 months being a typical schedule. We have
provided a 12-month schedule in Table 4 as an example of a practical, if not somewhat aggressive
schedule. If selected, we would be glad to work with Aspen to refine the schedule, number of chapter
drafts and reviews, extent of public involvement and other factors to make the schedule as expedient
as we can. We also would coordinate with the City to make updates to the highest priority areas on a
shorter timeframe, if needed. If we have misunderstood the scope of the desired updates and have
articulated a more complex or comprehensive update than the City intends, we can work with the City
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 27
to limit the scope of the Update to something that is achievable by November 2025. The draft conceptual
schedule that we have included as Table 4 is based on a 12-month schedule, starting in July 2025. The
estimated budget included in Table 3 reflects the assumed 12-month schedule.
4. REFERENCES
The references provided in Table 2 can attest to WWE’s expertise and quality of work.
Table 2. WWE References
5. FEE PROPOSAL AND SCHEDULE
WWE’s proposed fees and schedule for the URMP Update are shown in Table 3 and Table 4. WWE has
prepared the estimated budget presented in Table 3 based on implementing the scope from the RFP,
including the suggested updates outlined in Table 1. We think that most chapters will need to be
updated (with varying degrees of effort), and we recommend that the City consider several new chapters
or sections as noted above. We have identified tasks as optional but recommended to assist the City in
defining a scope that meets objectives for the URMP update. As mentioned earlier, WWE would like to
sit down with the City to go through the updates proposed herein to define the scope of what the City
would like to update. If the scope and budget for this goes beyond what the City was anticipating, we
would be glad to discuss this further at this meeting. As noted above, we are also willing to work with
the City on the schedule.
Project Name Year Work
Completed Reference
Chapter 4 of Volume 3 Criteria
Manual Update
2023 Mile High Flood District
Holly Piza, Research and Development Director
(303) 455-6277
hpiza@mhfd.org
City of Greenwood Village
Criteria Manual & MS4
Consulting
2021 Greenwood Village
Derek Stertz
(303) 486-5783
dstertz@greenwoodvillage.com
Larimer County Stormwater
Design Standards Update
2023 Larimer County
Devin Traff, P.E.
(970) 498-5731
traffdc@co.larimer.co.us
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 28
Table 3. URMP Update Estimated Budget
Tasks
WWE DHM
Total
Hours Cost
Earles Ludwig Howe Clary Montesano Rapp Karashinski Green Jaynes Allison Dewey
Principal
in Charge
Project
Manager
Project
Engineer
Senior
Advisor
Senior
Advisor
Senior
Advisor GIS Admin.
Assistants Principal Associate
Principal
Senior
Designer
$270 $206 $179 $258 $191 $232 $114 $114 $225 $185 $135
General Project Management 16 40 32 18 6 6 118 $23,108
Meetings with Staff 8 20 32 6 8 2 76 $15,496
Evaluation and Analysis of Current
Ordinances and Requirements 4 8 20 4 4 1 4 45 $8,882
Analyze and Update Best Management
Practices 4 8 16 8 4 4 2 46 $9,541
Write the Updated URMP 40 80 200 8 16 12 356 $68,336
Final Project Deliverables 8 12 16 8 40 4 22 20 130 $21,597
Construction-phase Stormwater
Management (Optional/Recommended) 4 8 12 32 $10,988
Spreadsheet Updates
(Optional/Recommended) 4 16 32 86 138 $30,056
Plant Selection Guidance
(Optional/Recommended) 2 4 8 24 40 78 $17,196
Manual Formatting and Graphics
(Optional/Recommended) 2 8 8 2 4 94 118 $19,235
Labor Subtotals (hours) 92 204 376 20 32 86 28 74 47 86 116 1105 ----
Labor Subtotals (cost) $24,840 $42,024 $67,304 $5,160 $6,112 $19,952 $3,192 $8,436 $11,897 $17,899 $17,618 ---- $224,433
Direct Costs (mileage and travel costs for in-person meetings, phone, copies, plots, and other similar costs. $2,563
Total $149,521
Total (with Optional/Recommended Tasks) $226,996
*Note: This fee estimate includes a 12.5% subconsultant fee markup for DHM.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page 29
Table 4. Proposed URMP Update Project Schedule
Tasks and Subtasks Jul 25 Aug 25 Sep 25 Oct 25 Nov 25 Dec 25 Jan 26 Feb 26 Mar 26 Apr 26 May 26 Jun 26 Jul 26 a. General Project Management
Stakeholder Meetings
b. Meetings with Staff
c. Evaluation and Analysis of Current Ordinances and Requirements
d. Analyze and Update Best Management Practices
e. Write the Updated URMP
Ch. 1 Permit Requirements
Ch. 2 Rainfall
Ch. 3 Runoff
Ch. 4 Streets
Ch. 5 Detention
Ch. 6 Floodplains
Ch. 7 Mudflow
Ch. 8 Water Quality
Ch. 9 Construction-phase Stormwater
App. A Submittal Checklists
App. B Equations and Examples
App. C Worksheets
App. D Development Permit and Elevation Certificate
App. E Plant Selection Guidance
f. Final Project Deliverables
Deliverables
Draft chapters for the City’s review at 20%, 60%, and 100% milestones.
Final chapters, sections, and appendices as both Word documents and searchable PDFs.
Standard details in both AutoCAD and PDF formats as individual files.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
ATTACHMENTS
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page A-1
Attachment A: WWE’s Recent Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Experience
Client Summary Year
Mesa County Update Stormwater Management Manual Anticipated
2026
City of Longmont Update Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Anticipated
2026
Mile High Flood
District (MHFD)
Update Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (MHFD Manual) Chapter 1,
Stormwater Management, Chapter 2, BMP Selection, and Chapter 6, BMP
Maintenance, Volume 3
Anticipated
2025
MHFD Update MHFD Chapter 11, Culverts and Bridges, Volume 2 Anticipated
2025
City of Arvada Develop Drainage Criteria Manual Anticipated
2025
City and County of
Denver
Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria Manual
https://denvergov.org/files/assets/public/v/3/doti/documents/standards/
pwes-005.1-storm_drainage_design_and_technical_criteria.pdf
2024
MHFD Update MHFD Chapter 6, Runoff, Volume 1
https://www.mhfd.org/files/11d6efc42/06_Runoff+March+2024.pdf
2024
City of Aurora Update Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:US:3472ce76-2d5e-4a94-9974-
376dc97838b2
2023
Larimer County Update Stormwater Design Standards
www.larimer.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/2024/1_larimer_county_stor
mwater_design_standards_full_manual_appendices_updated_20240105.p
df
2023
City of Pueblo Update Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
https://www.pueblo.us/DocumentCenter/View/34041/April-2023-City-of-
Pueblo-Drainage-Criteria-Manual?bidId=
2023
MHFD Update MHFD Chapter 4, Treatment Stormwater Control Measures,
Volume 3
https://www.mhfd.org/criteria-manual-volume-3
(Select Chapter 4)
2023
Southeast Metro
Stormwater
Authority
Update Stormwater Management Manual (working with team of
consultants and SEMSWA)
https://www.semswa.org/semswa-stormwater-management-manual
2019
MHFD Update Chapter 3, Calculating the WQCV and Volume Reduction, Volume 3
https://www.mhfd.org/criteria-manual-volume-3
(Select Chapter 3)
2019
Commerce City
(for MHFD)
Storm Drainage Design Manual
https://www.c3gov.com/home/showpublisheddocument/18989/6382044
54164170000
2019,
Revised
2023
MHFD Update MHFD Volume 1 and Volume 2 2017
Greenwood Village
(for MHFD)
Update Drainage Criteria Manual 2017
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Appendix A: WWE’s Recent Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Experience
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page A-2
Client Summary Year
Fountain Creek
Watershed
Management
District
(as sub to Matrix)
Update Design Criteria Manual 2016
City of Durango Update Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual
2016
City and County of
Denver (for MHFD)
Update Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria 2016
Town of Woodland
Park
Update Drainage Criteria Manual 2013
MHFD Update MHFD Volume 1 and Volume 2 2011
City of Aspen
(as sub to AMEC)
Update Urban Runoff Plan 2009
Colorado Springs
(as sub to Matrix)
Develop hydrology and water quality criteria for Drainage Criteria Manual 2009
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page B-1
Attachment B: WWE’s Sustainability Policy
WWE is engaged in triple bottom line (TBL) sustainability practices that address economic, social, and
environmental principles through such policies and activities as:
1. WWE participates in multiple national collaborative projects focused on green solutions to water
quality and environmental issues. As a local example, WWE has worked with Colorado State
University (CSU) on the CLEAN Center to work towards innovative approaches to address urban
stormwater, agricultural runoff, and wastewater nutrient challenges. Additionally, WWE and CSU
continue to collaborate on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-funded “CLASIC” project
related to developing tools to compare green and gray infrastructure options, costs, and co-
benefits.
2. WWE is a leader in water conservation in Colorado. In 2008, WWE’s Jane Clary was named
“GreenCO Person of the Year” for her work developing landscape management water
conservation and water quality best management practices (BMPs, aka SCMs) for the landscaping
industry. WWE also frequently assists clients with water efficiency and conservation plans and
non-potable/reuse plans.
3. WWE is a leader in Green Infrastructure (GI)-based approaches to stormwater management in
Colorado. For example, in 2008, WWE worked with the Keep it Clean Partnership in Boulder to
help break down barriers to Low Impact Development. WWE is also involved with cutting-edge
work with Mile High Flood District (MHFD) to encourage a more holistic, watershed-based
approach to development and redevelopment. This has included development of practical tools
to quantify volume reduction benefits of practices that help to reduce the effective impervious
area of a site.
4. WWE’s work with wetlands and riparian corridors is aimed at preservation of the natural
attributes of wetlands and maintenance of riparian corridors to encourage suitable habitat for
wildlife and provision of water quality benefits to streams. Similarly, WWE has concluded that
construction in the floodplain is not advantageous for Colorado’s streams or for the maintenance
of sustainable urban infrastructure. This approach protects the public, minimizes economic
damage, and protects the environment.
5. WWE staff perform pro bono civil engineering research in the field of paleohydrology at such sites
as Mesa Verde National Park, Machu Picchu in Peru, and Pompeii in Italy where we study
sustainability practices of successful ancient civilizations. This research honors the heritage of
indigenous peoples. WWE encourages its staff members to participate in this paleohydrology
research to learn water management techniques as practiced by ancient people where
sustainability was a necessity.
6. By developing the appropriate practices and policies within WWE, the WWE staff works to
minimize carbon footprint for clients and encourages environmental-based planning and
development, which is cost effective and beneficial to both the client and the public. On an office
scale, WWE engages in sustainable activities such as:
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Appendix B: WWE Sustainability Policy
Wright Water Engineers, Inc. │ June 2025 Page B-2
• Using a multi-stream recycling service. WWE recycles paper and cardboard, with recycling
bins placed in each office, throughout the building, and by each photocopier and printer.
WWE also recycles used printer and toner cartridges and old electronics, such as computers.
• Following energy-saving practices such as closing window blinds on weekends and turning off
computers at the end of the day.
• Reducing waste by encouraging employees to bring their own cups and refillable water bottles
to work, as well as providing reusable dishes and silverware in the office. When printing is
required, double-sided printing is encouraged as standard practice. Electronic deliverables for
work products are used and encouraged when appropriate.
• Many of WWE’s employees carpool and ride bikes to work on a regular basis. Additionally,
employees with longer commute times can work remotely. Project manager Drake Ludwig is
locally based in Glenwood Springs; therefore, carbon emissions will be minimized for site visits
and meetings with the City staff. Drake will carpool with other WWE staff who may attend
meetings and will pick up DHM staff in Carbondale, as needed, on the way.
WWE envisions the following TBL opportunities for the City related to this project:
1. Environmental: Environmental benefits are inherent to this project and will be a direct outcome
of the drainage management strategies that will be identified. Aquatic life, habitat, and water
quality are all expected to benefit from this project.
2. Social: The City’s commitment to public access to natural areas benefits the mental and physical
well-being of the City’s residents and visitors, providing access to recreation and quiet natural
space. These social benefits are accessible regardless of economic status and provide both active
and passive recreational opportunities. Additionally, having plans in place in advance of runoff
conditions should have the effect of relieving related anxiety felt by residents.
3. Economic: Preparation for drainage can reduce long-term major rehabilitation projects and costs.
Additionally, the Roaring Fork watershed is an attraction for visitors from surrounding areas,
bringing associated economic return to local businesses.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Attachment C: Resumes
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Drake Ludwig, P.E.
Project Manager
June 2025 Page 1 of 2
Experience Overview
Drake is a project manager and engineer with ten years of professional experience
in planning, modeling, and design. He has worked on numerous watershed and
stormwater planning studies throughout Colorado. Drake specializes in stormwater
improvement and floodplain assessment projects, as well as drainage and stream
design. He has extensive experience permitting, designing, and providing
construction-phase services for a variety of drainage projects. Drake is proficient in
hydrologic as well as 1D and 2D hydraulic and debris flow modeling. He has
extensive experience using EPA SWMM, HEC-HMS, HEC-RAS, ArcGIS, and
AutoCAD Civil 3D to develop complex watershed models and detailed design plans.
Drainage Criteria, Planning, Hydrology & Hydraulics
City of Aspen On-Call Drainage Consulting. Drake has managed
on-call drainage and floodplain modeling assignments for the City of
Aspen over the past several years. This included hydraulic
assessments of existing and proposed storm drain infrastructure,
review and integration of master plan hydrology, floodplain analyses
and support, and more.
Mesa County Stormwater Management Manual. Drake is working
on a complete rewrite of Mesa County’s 2007 Stormwater
Management Manual. One stakeholder meeting has been held so far.
Iterative revisions to sets of chapters are based on County input,
stakeholder input, and advances in the state of the practice. WWE is
supported by DHM on vegetation matters and stakeholder
engagement. WWE has created and hosts a website on the update
process and all deliverables are compliant with Americans with
Disabilities Act accessibility guidelines.
City of Aurora Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria
Update. Working with Mile High Flood District (MHFD), the City of
Aurora (COA), and stakeholders, helped update the Open Channels
chapter of the COA’s Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria.
The COA criteria manual was finalized in November 2023.
East Vail Stormwater Master Plan. Finalized detailed hydrologic
and hydraulic analyses for the assessment of stormwater
infrastructure throughout East Vail. Snowmelt hydrology and the
latest NOAA Atlas 14 precipitation depths and distributions were used
for runoff calculations. This effort included an analysis of the capacity
of over one hundred culverts and roadway crossings, and nearly 28
miles of streams and open channel drainageways. A prioritized list of
stormwater improvement projects was developed from the identified
deficiencies in the Town’s existing stormwater infrastructure,
including opportunities to improve stormwater quality throughout the
community.
Design of Riparian, Floodplain, and Pond Enhancements on the
Vail Golf Course for the Town of Vail. Developing planning
strategies, improvement alternatives and design concepts to
enhance the health and sustainability of Gore Creek through the Vail
Golf Club. Addressing creek hydraulics, hydrology, and
geomorphology of Gore Creek in collaboration with the Town and
course managers.
Relevant
Credentials/Specialties
10 Years of Experience
Watershed Planning and
Stormwater Management
Hydrologic Modeling
1D and 2D Hydraulic
Modeling
Watershed Health
Floodplain and Stream
Corridor Mapping
Water Appurtenance
Design
Natural Channel Design
Stream Restoration and
Stabilization
Construction oversight
Education
•B.S., Environmental
Engineering, 2015,
Colorado State University
Training/Certifications
•Professional Engineer
o CO #56922
o UT #14216285-2202
Membership
•Colorado Association of
Stormwater and Floodplain
Managers
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Drake Ludwig, P.E.
Project Manager
June 2025 Page 2 of 2
Winter Park Stormwater Management Plan. Managing the technical analyses for a stormwater management
plan for the Town of Winter Park. Using quantitative and qualitative criteria to prioritize infrastructure
improvements and utilizing survey and modeling to identify deficiencies in the system through the lens of Town
standards. Multi-benefit solutions will be developed, in many cases, to address multiple concerns using a
standardized approach. Working with the Town to develop a capital improvement plan for their drainage
infrastructure.
Gore Valley Trail Safety Improvements for Town of Vail. Worked with the Town of Vail and Alta Planning
and Design to review the condition of the existing bank of Gore Creek adjacent to an overly steep section of
the Gore Valley Trail with poor visibility. Made recommendations for improvements, including design and
permitting considerations. Provided input on both stream stabilization techniques and considerations for trail
realignment.
Marriott Streamside Bridge Scour Evaluation and Countermeasures Design. Retained by the Town of
Vail to evaluate scour at a bridge to the Marriott Streamside Hotel that is considered scour critical based on
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) review of the bridge abutments. Assisted with the design of
countermeasures and permitting.
Main Gore Drive Scour Evaluation and Countermeasures Design. Retained by the Town of Vail to evaluate
scour at the bridge along Main Gore Drive and design scour countermeasures. The work included hydraulic
modeling and scour calculations to support countermeasure design. Designs were developed to implement
scour protection countermeasures alongside the north and south abutment of the bridge. Work also included
permit support for wetlands, floodplain, and grading.
Silverthorne Stormwater Master Plan. Completed detailed hydrologic and hydraulic evaluations of the
Town’s stormwater infrastructure to identify deficiencies and potential strategies and solutions to address
deficiencies. Evaluation of potential improvements included the quantification of benefits and estimates of the
costs associated with high priority improvements. Work also included updating the Town’s stormwater manual
and design guidelines.
Floyd Hill Stormwater Drainage Evaluation, Clear Creek County. Identified deficiencies and developed
potential improvement alternatives to address drainage issues throughout the Floyd Hill community. In addition
to the evaluation of the existing drainage infrastructure, an assessment of potential erosion and stormwater
quality concerns was completed along with the development of solutions to address the known drainage or
flooding problems. The costs and benefits of potential alternative solutions were evaluated to develop an
actionable plan to address identified deficiencies.
California Post-wildfire Hydrology and Debris Flow Analyses. Studied the post-wildfire risks associated
with the Thomas and Woolsey Wildfires in Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles Counties, California.
Analyzed post-fire debris flows through two-dimensional hydraulic modeling and utilizing GIS mapping to
compare the heightened risk to that of pre-burn conditions. Complimentary to the risk assessment, potential
mitigation measures to minimize debris flow risk to downstream communities were identified.
Chaparral Mudflow Analysis. Developed a watershed model to estimate potential clearwater, mud, and
debris flow rates under current and potential future post-fire watershed conditions. Evaluated potential flow
paths across alluvial fan to inform the development and design of a lot near Aspen, Colorado.
Fernando Property Clearwater and Mudflow Analysis. Conducted evaluation of existing and proposed
clearwater and mudflow conditions for development of a Glenwood Springs, Colorado, property, including
hydrology and hydraulics, inundations extents, depths, elevations, and velocity.
Proactive Planning for Post-fire Hazards in Pitkin County, Colorado. Coordinated with Pitkin County to
understand their needs and concerns regarding debris flow risks throughout the county. Reviewed hydrologic
modeling and methodology for the development of potential, future post-fire watershed conditions. Used debris
flow rates to inform a 2D hydraulic model to assess the approximate extents of a debris flow event for select
watersheds.
Cottonwood Creek Drainage Basin Planning. Analyzed the Cottonwood Creek watershed as a component
of the Drainage Basin Planning Study. Utilized a complex hydrologic model to assess current and future
watershed conditions and understand the effects of development and stormwater improvements throughout
the watershed. Evaluated several improvement scenarios to quantify their function and benefit to the greater
watershed. (Previous Firm).
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., P.H.
Principal-in-Charge
June 2025 Page 1 of 2
Experience Overview
Andrew is WWE’s Vice President of Water Resources and serves as principal-in-
charge, project manager, and lead project engineer for projects that focus on
hydrology, hydraulics, sediment transport/geomorphology, water quality, and
stormwater management. Projects typically involve hydrologic and water quality
data analysis, and larger-scale projects often involve the use of mathematical
models.
Stormwater Criteria/Master Plans
Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan and Ongoing Services.
Project manager for WWE tasks in 2008-2010 development of Aspen
Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP), updating drainage and
water quality criteria for the City of Aspen. Lead author of Water
Quality and Mudflow chapters and significant contributor as reviewer
and editor for chapters related to hydrology. Following completion of
the URMP, the City of Aspen established an on-call contract with
WWE. The on-call services include working closely with Aspen’s
Stormwater manager and staff when questions related to storm
drainage criteria arise or when they require general engineering
support for urban water resources issues. WWE has been providing
these services since 2009.
Ski Industry Stormwater Permitting. Assisted clients in Colorado
high country with stormwater permitting for ski areas, including on-
mountain construction activities and base area development since
1999. Assisted owners and contractors with SWMP preparation,
inspections/audits, sampling and monitoring and related tasks. Work
has included collection and analysis of biological and water quality
data for streams and discharges from construction activities. SWMP,
permitting and sampling/monitoring at resorts including Copper
Mountain, Winter Park Resort, Aspen-Snowmass, Keystone Resort,
Breckenridge Ski Resort, Wolf Creek Ski Area, Durango Mountain
Resort, and Steamboat Ski Resort.
Aspen Mud and Debris Flow Study, Colorado. Project manager
for assignment to perform FLO-2D modeling to characterize mudflow
and mudflood risk for the City of Aspen. Led team of geologists,
environmental scientists, and engineers to perform field work and
model analysis. Study area included Aspen Mountain and the
commercial core of the city.
Pitkin and Garfield County Mudflow Assessments. Peer reviewer
for staff in Glenwood Springs office for multiple projects related to
proposed developments on or near alluvial fans and other flood
hazard areas. Discuss approach with project manager and assist with
interpretation of results and recommendations.
Pitkin County Proactive Fire Hydrology Assessment. Lead
engineer for hydrology and mudflow analysis for seven test
watersheds in Pitkin County, Colorado to proactively identify post-fire
risk before a fire actually occurs. First phase of project included
developing hydrology, hydraulics, and bulking factors for selected
watershed with development at the urban-wildland interface. Future
phases will focus on expanding analysis to other parts of the county
and identifying potential mitigation measures.
Relevant
Credentials/Specialties
Registered Professional
Engineer
26 Years Experience
Stormwater Management
Watershed Hydrology &
Modeling
Water Quality Modeling
Hydrologic & Hydraulic
Modeling
Education
Ph.D. Civil Engineering,
University of Virginia, 1999
M.S., Civil Engineering,
University of Virginia, 1996
B.S., Civil Engineering,
Stanford, 1994
Registrations/Affiliations
Registered Professional
Engineer in Colorado
#37237, Arkansas #12329,
Connecticut #35427, Hawaii
#14235, Illinois #62 97487,
Iowa #21024, Kentucky
#35208, Louisiana #31306,
Nebraska #E-16541, New
Mexico #25426, Ohio
#92306, S. Dakota #13431,
Texas #137085, and
Wyoming #16160
Professional Hydrologist,
American Institute of
Hydrology
Board Certified Water
Resource Engineer
(BC.WRE), American
Academy of Water
Resources Engineers
Certified Professional in
Erosion and Sediment
Control (CPESC)
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Andrew Earles, Ph.D., P.E., P.H.
Principal-in-Charge
June 2025 Page 2 of 2
Pitkin County Mud and Debris Flow. Peer reviewer and advisor for project related to development on
alluvial fan in Pitkin County, Colorado. Evaluated debris flow risk and mitigation measures to protect existing
development on alluvial fan. Prepared multiple expert letter reports and testified in multiple Board of County
Commissioner meetings from 2010-2018.
Buttermilk Ski Area, Landslide. Expert witness on hydrology and debris flow that originated on Buttermilk
Ski Area. Evaluated hydrology and identified likely causes of debris flow. Prepared expert report and provided
deposition in 2014. Expert for Aspen Skiing Company (defendant).
Mile High Flood District (MHFD) Denver Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (UDSCM) Volume 1,
Runoff Chapter Update. The work entailed review of runoff coefficients and providing input on analysis of
the water quality event. Developed new examples for these and other technical topics that are covered in the
chapter. Updates were completed in 2024.
MHFD Manual Volume 3, Chapter 4 Update. Project manager for update of Chapter 4 of Volume 3, which
provides guidance and criteria for post-construction stormwater control measures (SCMs). Led team of over
a half dozen consultants working on various aspects of the chapter and developed SCM fact sheets for grass
buffers, swales, ponds, sand filters, bioretention, and other SCMs.
MHFD 2011–2015 Update of Volumes 1 and 2 MHFD Manual. Project manager for ongoing update of
Volumes 1 and 2 of the MHFD’s Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, which addresses fundamentals of
drainage, minor and major drainage system design considerations, and criteria and other topics related to the
management of the quantity and quality of urban runoff. Volumes 1 and 2 were previously updated by WWE
in 2001, at which time, Andrew served as the primary author of the major drainage chapter.
Larimer County Stormwater Design Standards Update. Served as project manager in the development of
clear, consistent standards for storm drainage analyses, design, and construction, including water quality
requirements based on the MHFD Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual and Larimer County’s Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4 Permit).
City of Durango Stormwater Criteria Manual and Master Plan. Project manager for first phase of Master
Plan, which involved creating an updated Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual for the City. Criteria Manual
integrated runoff reduction practices for small sites and updated hydrologic, water quality, and detention
criteria.
City of Aurora Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria Update. Worked with MHFD and the City
of Aurora (COA) to update the COA’s Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria, which were last updated
in the early 2000s. Obtained significant input from Aurora Water staff who implement the criteria as well as
from other COA departments involved in stormwater planning, implementation, permit compliance, and
maintenance. WWE also obtained input and review from MHFD and assisted with a stakeholder process to
obtain input from the development community. The COA criteria manual was finalized in November 2023.
Cherry Creek and E. Iliff Avenue Stormwater Quality, Denver, Colorado. Work with the MHFD on several
aspects of stream restoration project from East Iliff Avenue to Quebec Street in Denver, Colorado. Developed
and assisted with designing infiltration benches to provide treatment for roadway improvements. Technical
analysis of the infiltration benches helped to form the basis for developing criteria for quantifying runoff
reduction that was subsequently integrated into the MHFD’s Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. Project
also involved application of Water Environment Research Foundation stream crediting guidance to stream
restoration project to quantify suspended solids and nutrient reductions that will be realized by stabilizing a
highly unstable channel.
Castle Pines MS4, Colorado. Assist with review of drainage reports and plans in Castle Pines related to
features including water quality and detention ponds, channels, outfalls, and other similar features. In addition
to assisting with reviews, provide support for developing guidance and criteria and peer review related to MS4
inspections/reporting.
Southeast Metropolitan Stormwater Authority (SEMSWA) Stormwater Management Manual Update.
WWE project manager for update of SEMSWA Stormwater Management Manual. WWE was responsible for
chapters related to hydrology (rainfall and runoff), streets, inlets, storm drains, floodplain management, and
culverts. WWE provided significant input on the water quality chapter as well.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Jonah Howe, P.E.
Project Engineer
June 2025 Page 1 of 1
Experience Overview
Jonah is a water resources engineer based in Grand Junction with experience in
stormwater management and design, sanitary sewer design, erosion control
design, water modeling, site grading, and other fundamentals related to site
development. Relevant modeling and computer application experience includes
AutoCAD Civil 3D, Bentley StormCAD, Bentley WaterCAD, Bentley FlowMaster,
Mile High Flood District (MHFD) Design Spreadsheets, HEC-RAS, and HEC-HMS.
Stormwater Planning and Design
MHFD Denver Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (UDSCM)
Volume 3 Chapter 4 Update. Project engineer on update of Chapter
4 of Volume 3, which provides guidance and criteria for post-
construction stormwater control measures (SCMs). Assisted with
development of SCM fact sheets for grass buffers, swales, ponds,
sand filters, bioretention, and other SCMs.
Grand Valley Water Users Association Stormwater MS4
Consulting. Evaluated potential stormwater outfalls to the GVWUA
system in the Grand Valley and assisted with interactions with the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment on
applicability of MS4 permitting requirements.
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control
Plans. On behalf of clients such as the Town of Avon, EagleVail
Metro District, and The Nature Conservancy, developed Stormwater
Management Plans and Erosion and Sediment Control Plans for
regulatory compliance. A Stormwater Management Plan outlines how
a construction site will minimize the discharge of stormwater runoff,
while an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is a document that
outlines how erosion and sedimentation will be prevented or reduced
during a construction project. These projects have included ditch
lining, pond expansion, and channel rehabilitation.
Floyd Hill Master Plan. Developed summary document outlining
general details and conceptual improvements that could be applied
on a watershed-wide scale related to a stormwater evaluation of the
Floyd Hill drainage basin. Provided recommendations for
maintenance and improvements based on hydrologic and hydraulic
(H&H) modeling of the area. Summarized data that can be used to
identify and minimize localized drainage concerns, identify floodplain
problems, recommend planning, and prioritize proposed
improvements while integrating water quality best management
practices (BMPs).
South Boulder Creek Infrastructure, City of Boulder. Produced
conceptual design documents and cost estimates for three separate
infrastructure improvement projects near the South Boulder Creek
stream corridor. The projects include improvements to existing
irrigation diversion structures, water delivery pipelines, ditch
hydraulics, and surrounding infrastructure, including a recreational
path adjacent to the stream.
Relevant
Credentials/Specialties
5 years of experience
Stream Restoration and
Stabilization
Construction oversight
Hydrologic Modeling
1D and 2D Hydraulic
Modeling
Watershed Planning and
Stormwater Management
Stormwater Quality and
Detention Modeling and
Design
Floodplain and Stream
Corridor Mapping
Education
B.S., Civil Engineering,
2019, Colorado School of
Mines
Training/Certifications
Registered Colorado P.E.
#63799
10-Hour OSHA Certification
Professional Affiliations
Colorado Water Congress
Professional Outreach,
Networking, and
Development (POND)
Member, January 2022–
Present
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Jane Kees Clary, CPESC, LEED AP
Senior Advisor
June 2025
Experience Overview
Jane is a Principal Water Resources Scientist with broad experience in
watershed management; water resources protection and evaluation; state and
federal Clean Water Act permitting and compliance support; water resources
protection ordinances and regulations; water quality data analysis and statistics;
stormwater quality management; urban and agricultural best management
practices (BMPs); and water conservation and landscape BMPs. She has
comprehensive technical writing experience in each of these subject areas, and
extensive experience in public speaking and large group facilitation for technical
projects.
Criteria and Guidance Manuals
Pitkin County, Colorado Onsite Water Treatment System (OWTS)
Regulation (2007). Worked with team of engineers and scientists in
2007 to update Pitkin County’s OWTS regulation to be consistent with
contemporary standards, EPA guidance and real-world constraints in
mountainous settings.
Mile High Flood District (MHFD) Volume 3, Chapter 4 Update
(2023). Co-authored update of Chapter 4 of Volume 3 of Urban Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual addressing stormwater best management
practices (aka stormwater control measures [SCMs]). Worked with
MHFD staff and multidisciplinary team including other water and civil
engineers, landscape architects, and a geotechnical engineer to
update content related to design of SCMs including receiving pervious
areas such as buffers and swales, permeable pavements, bioretention,
sand filters, extended detention basins, retention ponds, and
constructed wetland ponds. Assisted MHFD with stakeholder outreach
program.
City of Aurora Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria
Manual Update (2023). Contributed to update of City of Aurora’s
Storm Drainage Design and Technical Criteria Manual (Aurora
Manual) with primary focus on stormwater quality requirements.
Worked with representatives from multiple City departments and
MHFD to identify and implement needed updates. Participated in
stakeholder process to obtain input from development community.
Project involved extensive input from various City departments and
stakeholders.
Denver Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (2006 & 2019). Worked with
the City and County of Denver engineering staff to streamline and
update Denver’s Storm Drainage Criteria Manual in 2006. Key
activities include integration of water quality and construction site
requirements, including frequently observed problems at development
sites. Tasks also include comparison of criteria to rules and regulations
with recommendations for updates. Served as project coordinator and
technical editor. Working with Denver to complete an update in 2019,
including an operation and maintenance manual for stormwater
management facilities.
Greenwood Village Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (2017–2018).
Worked with Greenwood Village engineers and planners to update the
city’s storm drainage criteria manual. Significant revisions included
stormwater quality BMP requirements for the overall city, as well as
areas draining to Cherry Creek Reservoir.
Relevant Credentials/
Specialties
31 Years of Experience
Vice President
Regulatory/Water
Quality Practice
Former Colorado Water
Quality Control
Commissioner
CO Water Quality
Regulations
Water Quality Data
Analysis
Urban and Agricultural
Water Quality BMPs
Watershed Manager
Over 100 professional
publications/seminars
Education
• M.S., Environmental
Science, University of
Colorado, 1992
• B.S., Economics,
Vanderbilt University, 1989
Registrations/Activities
• Certified Professional in
Erosion and Sediment
Control, # 3766
• LEED Accredited
Professional
• National Academies of
Sciences Engineering and
Medicine Committee
Consensus Study on
Managing Pollutant Loads
in Highway Stormwater
Runoff (2023)
• Colorado Water Quality
Control Commission (3-year
term, 2017–2019)
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Jane Kees Clary, CPESC, LEED AP
Senior Advisor
June 2025
Commerce City Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (2019). Worked with Commerce City engineers on a
major update to the city’s storm drainage criteria manual.
Southeast Metro Stormwater Management Authority (SEMSWA) Storm Drainage Criteria Manual
(2018-2019). Worked with a consultant team and SEMSWA engineers to update SEMSWA’s storm
drainage criteria manual.
Mile High Flood District Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Volumes 1 and 2 (2001, 2011). Served
as technical editor for the update of the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District’s Urban Storm Drainage
Criteria Manuals, Volumes 1 and 2 in 2001. Assisted with 2011 update, focusing on policy, planning and
revegetation chapters.
Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Best Management Practices, Volume 3 (2010). Co-author for
a major update of the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District’s BMP Manual. Key aspects of the update
include better integration of Low Impact Development strategies and volume reduction practices. Key
contributions included planning and policy, stormwater BMP selection and performance characterization,
general updates to structural BMP fact sheets, major revisions to construction BMP practices and non-
structural BMP practices.
Springfield, Missouri Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. Co-authored several chapters in the Springfield
Drainage Criteria Manual with emphasis on policy, planning, and water quality.
Urban Stormwater Quality
International Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMP) Database (1997–present). Serving as
the Co-principal Investigator and project team coordinator for an international stormwater BMP database
project (www.bmpdatabase.org) funded by a broad coalition of professional organizations headed by the
Water Research Foundation, Federal Highway Administration, Environmental and Water Resources
Institute of ASCE, and the U.S. EPA. The database contains approximately 800 BMP performance studies.
Key recent responsibilities have included co-authoring a comprehensive BMP performance technical
analysis series focused on bacteria, nutrients, metals, solids and volume reduction. Other responsibilities
have included co-authoring a Stormwater BMP Performance Monitoring Manual (2009), development of
database software/user’s guide to track BMP monitoring and evaluation efforts, revision of reporting
protocols to include Green Infrastructure (Low Impact Development), performance data interpretation, and
regular correspondence with interested parties throughout the nation.
City and County of Denver Stormwater BMP Monitoring Program (2019–2023). Worked with Denver
to develop a new stormwater BMP monitoring program for several new green infrastructure installations.
Supported monitoring effort and preparation of technical reports documenting performance. Served as
project manager, then as peer reviewer for annual stormwater monitoring reports.
Colorado E. coli Symposium (2019). Co-organizer of and presenter at a one-day Colorado E. coli
Symposium co-sponsored by Colorado Water Quality Control Division, Urban Drainage and Flood Control
District, Colorado Stormwater Council and Big Dry Creek Watershed Association.
MHFD Topsoil Guidance (2019). Helped develop guidance to manage and evaluate topsoil at construction
sites for Mile High Flood District. Worked with Muller Engineering and MHFD staff.
WRF Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Activity and Cost Reporting (2018). Principal
Investigator on WRF Project with report providing recommendations for standardized O&M activity and cost
tracking protocols for use by local governments and a tool to enable better understanding of types of
maintenance activities and frequencies necessary for various BMP types. Published by WRF, Project 4851.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program BMP Research (2015, 2019). Supported
development of a report regarding transferability of post-construction stormwater quality BMP effectiveness
studies. The objectives of this study were to: (1) determine the conditions under which the results of BMP
performance monitoring studies performed in one location can be applied in other geographic settings, (2)
evaluate and develop a standardized BMP performance monitoring study design as well as standardized
protocols for the collection and reporting of data, and (3) investigate the feasibility of establishing a central
repository for DOT post-construction stormwater quality research studies. In 2019, implemented study
findings to develop a national DOT stormwater portal to the International Stormwater BMP Database.
Worked with Geosyntec Consultants under NCHRP 25-25 (Tasks 119 & 120).
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Derek N. Rapp, P.E., CFM, CPESC
Water Resources Engineer
June 2025 Page 1 of 1
Experience Overview
Derek serves as design engineer and project manager on multiple projects
with a focus on hydrology, hydraulics, technical modeling, floodplain
management, post-fire assessment, debris flow modeling, and stormwater
drainage/quality planning and design.
Spreadsheet Development/
Stormwater and Flood Management
MHFD Design Spreadsheets and Software Development. Project
manager and developer for ongoing updates to MHFD software
including: Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP), MHFD-
Detention, MHFD-Inlet, MHFD-Culvert, SCM-Design, UD-Rational.
Drainage Criteria Manuals. Worked on development of drainage
criteria manuals for Denver; Colorado Springs; Pueblo; Springfield,
Missouri; and Rogers, Arkansas. Chapters include: Rainfall, Runoff,
Detention Storage, Water Quality BMPs, and Open Channels.
Course Instructor for CUHP and SWMM Model Training.
Instructor for multi-day courses to train users on the Colorado Urban
Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP) and the EPA Storm Water
Management Model (SWMM) for the Urban Watersheds Research
Institute (UWRI) and the City of Colorado Springs.
Post-Fire Hydrologic Risk Evaluation. Field assessments in
Colorado, Oregon and California to evaluate post-fire hydrologic
hazards including landslides, debris flows, flooding, erosion, and
water quality degradation. Developed hydrologic models for Wildfire
Ready Action Plans (WRAPs).
CDOT Post Flood Hydrology Study for Big Thompson and St.
Vrain Watersheds. Lead modeling engineer for post-flood
evaluation to calibrate HEC-HMS models to observed data from the
September 2013 flood. Calibrated models were used to develop
revised regulatory peak discharges for use in post-flood
reconstruction projects.
CDOT Climate Change Analysis. Worked with CDOT to quantify
climate change impacts on flood hydrology using Global Climate
Models, the CMIP Climate Data Processing Tool and HEC-17 to
compare results with NOAA Atlas 14 precipitation depths.
FLO-2D Modeling Analysis. Worked on various projects in
Colorado and California using FLO-2D to evaluate flooding impacts
on open channels, bridges, building obstructions, and mud and
debris flows. Projects range from preliminary design evaluation
through post-flood calibration of actual events.
Various Letters of Map Revision. Lead project engineer on
numerous LOMRs including Ralston Creek (Arvada), Little Dry Creek
(ARAPCO), Gay Reservoir Channel (Broomfield), and Westerly
Creek (Denver and Aurora). LOMR studies updated floodplain
mapping based on revised hydrology, new bridge/culvert crossings,
constructed channel stabilization measures and stream restoration.
Relevant
Credentials/Specialties
Registered Professional
Engineer
20 Years Consulting
Experience
Technical Modeling and
Software Development
Floodplain Management
and Mapping
Master Planning
Flood Mitigation Planning
and Design
Emergency Preparedness
and Response
Stormwater Drainage and
Water Quality Criteria,
Planning and Design
Low Impact Development
Erosion and Sediment
Control
Education
• M.S., Civil Engineering,
University of Colorado, 2004
• B.S., Civil Engineering, West
Virginia University, 2001
•
Registrations/Affiliations
• Registered Professional
Engineer
o Colorado #42209
o Iowa #19761
• Certified Floodplain
Manager (CFM) #09-04169
• Certified Professional in
Erosion and Sediment
Control (CPESC) #4381
• CDOT Transportation
Erosion Control Supervisor
(TECS) #13881
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Lily Montesano, CISEC
Project Engineer
June 2025 Page 1 of 1
Experience Overview
Lily Montesano is a Water Resources Specialist focused on environmental
permitting and regulations for water quality projects. Her experience includes
permitting for construction stormwater discharges under the Colorado Discharge
Permit System (CDPS) and municipal erosion and sediment control regulations,
groundwater dewatering, and floodplain development. Lily has significant
experience in environmental project management and technical writing, including
the preparation of stormwater management plans and floodplain development
permit applications. Lily also has ten years of experience conducting inspections
on construction projects in a variety of sectors to ensure compliance with
applicable federal, state, and local regulations.
Stormwater Management, Erosion and Sediment
Control
Municipal MS4 Permit Compliance Assistance. Perform
inspections on and document compliance status of construction sites
and post-construction stormwater control measures within the City of
Arvada. Perform inspections on and document compliance status of
construction sites within Boulder County and the City of Greenwood
Village.
Arvada Qualifying Local Program. Develop program documents
compliant with CDPS General Permit COR400000 covering
stormwater discharges from construction sites to support the City of
Arvada in becoming a Qualifying Local Program under the Water
Quality Control Division.
Boulder County Stormwater Management Plan Reviews. Review
stormwater management plan narratives and site maps for
compliance with Boulder County MS4 program requirements and
provide comments to applicants identifying deficiencies and required
remedies.
Construction Stormwater Compliance Inspections. Performed
routine and post-runoff inspections on commercial, single- and multi-
family residential, and utility construction projects subject to CDPS
and/or municipal stormwater regulations to ensure compliance with
applicable regulations. Reported deficiencies to project managers
and provided recommendations for corrective actions with an eye to
project constraints and site-specific conditions.
Xcel Energy Stormwater Compliance Training for Contractors.
Delivered a training covering stormwater regulations and contractor
obligations with respect to relevant regulations for small utility
projects to contractors for Xcel Energy.
Xcel Energy Environmental Permitting. Assist a large utility
company with construction stormwater, construction dewatering, and
floodplain permitting including navigating federal, state, and local
municipality requirements, field visits, and the preparation of
floodplain development permit application materials, SWMPs, and
control measure site plans. Conduct preconstruction meetings to
explain environmental requirements to project stakeholders and
respond to questions regarding applicable regulations.
Relevant
Credentials/Specialties
Regulatory Compliance
Ten Years Consulting
Experience
Construction Discharge
Compliance
Stormwater Management
Plans (SWMPs,
SWPPPs, GESCs)
Water Quality
Stormwater Management
Practices (CMs)/Control
Practices
Training
Education
• B.S., Environmental
Science, 2014
University of Denver
• B.A., Economics, 2014
University of Denver
Certifications/Training
• Certified Inspector of
Sediment and Erosion
Control (CISEC), 2018
• Colorado Department of
Transportation:
Transportation Erosion
Control Supervisor (TECS)
• Altitude Training Associates:
Best Management Practices
for Working in Waterways
• Altitude Training Associates:
Dewatering Operations
Training Course
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
DHM Design
ABOUT
EDUCATION
B. of Science in Land Use - Environmental
Resources, Metropolitan State University,
Denver, 2009
REGISTRATIONS
Safeland USA/PEC
Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies
Certified Technical Service Provider
Army Corps of Engineers and 62-340 FAC
Wetland Delineation Certification
AWARDS
CCASLA Merit Award for Design 2017 - Basalt
River Restoration
CASFM Honor Award for Outstanding
Achievement 2015 - Basalt River Restoration
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Stream Habitat Assessments & Restoration
Environmental Permitting & Planning
Clean Water Act Section 404 Permitting
Fisheries & Natural Resource Management
Project Siting & Resource Avoidance
Mitigation & Restoration Planning
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Biological Resource Investigations
Site Planning & Resource Avoidance
Environmental Compliance Monitoring
Wetland Delineation & Restoration
Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species
(T&E ) Surveys
ORGANIZATIONS
Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership River
Advisory Board
JEREMY ALLINSON
Associate Principal | Senior Natural Resource Planner
Jeremy has extensive experience in environmental project
planning; NEPA compliance; natural resource investigations;
aquatic and hydrological assessments; Impact assessment and
analysis; permitting compliance; restoration design; mitigation
planning and construction administration. His experience involves
managing a wide range of planning and development projects
both in the public and private sectors across the Western US and
Alaska. A native to Colorado, Jeremy gets his inspiration from
being outdoors, hunting and fishing. Professionally, he works to
find a balance between environmentally responsible development
and protection of natural resources.
NOTABLE WORK
Aspen Riparian Master Plan | Aspen, CO
The riparian corridor and Roaring Fork River are integral to the identity and
aesthetic character of Aspen. This plan identified specific, prioritized projects
within the riparian corridor that reduced impacts from urban pollutants
and storm water runoff, stream bank development, habitat and ecosystem
degradation, and altered hydrological conditions while maximizing city
efforts, budget and implementation strategy. Based upon stakeholder vision
and goals, the document included recommendations for environmental and
habitat improvements, educational opportunities, incentives and land planning
opportunities with a specific implementable and measurable plan for the City
of Aspen to use over time. DHM collaboratively worked to create a plan with
prioritized projects and efforts that maximized available budget, based on a high
level of data and analysis, and deeply informed by stakeholder involvement and
values. Implementing this forward looking management plan for the riparian
corridor through Aspen preserved and enhanced the recreation, economy, and
quality of life that is valued by the community.
Coffman Ranch | Aspen, CO
DHM worked closely with Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT) to preserve and
transform the historic Coffman Ranch. Future plans include maintenance of
existing ranching operations, habitat protection and enhancement along
approximately a mile of gold medal waters of the Roaring Fork River, community
access to the river, and a place for outdoor education. DHM Design developed
a master plan and renderings that demonstrated how the site could be used
for active and passive use, while protecting the important habitat. The ranch,
and especially the unique riparian areas, are some of the most important
undeveloped lands along the lower Roaring Fork River. Conserving Coffman
Ranch provided unique opportunities for the entire community to learn about
and engage directly with conservation, habitat restoration, and agriculture.
RFTA Rio Grande Trail Corridor Standards Manual | Aspen, CO
The Rio Grande Trail stretches 42 miles from Glenwood Springs to Aspen. This
manual applies to the reach of the trail from Glenwood Springs to Emma. DHM
and their consultant team were hired to develop a Trails Corridor Standards
document to establish a benchmark for quality, character, and materials
along the RFTA-owned and managed reaches of the Rio Grande trail. The
team developed the manual by using original details, excerpts from relevant
public trails manuals, and project details as provided by RFTA staff. The team
created details intending to illustrate intent, character, materials, and standard
dimensions, or are representations of nationally accepted standards. The
document was completed and adopted in 2019.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
DHM Design
ABOUT
EDUCATION
B. of Science in Landscape Architecture
Kansas State University, 2000
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Landscape Architect
CO (240)
SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
Downtown Colorado, Inc. Challenge Studio
Eagle, Colorado, 2019
Montana Housing Partnership Conference, 2021
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Stream and Restoration Design
Public Process
Ranch Planning
Affordable Housing
Land Use Entitlements
Property Due Diligence
Residential Design
Community Planning and Design
Trails and Greenways
Civic and Municipal
Project Management
ORGANIZATIONS
Redstone Historic Preservation Commission
Member, 2010-Present; Chair, 2020
JASON JAYNES
Principal | Studio Manager | PLA
Jason leads projects with a passion for building community
and crafting designs that honor the cultural and environmental
context of the place. He believes that environmental stewardship,
functionality, and human comfort are essential elements of the
design process, contributing to the lasting quality of any built
project. His approach is rooted in a deep respect for the land and
for the people of the communities DHM serves. A lifelong learner
and problem-solver by nature, his curiosity and skill in organizing
expert teams and tackling complex challenges has resulted in
deep experience across a surprising breadth of project types.
NOTABLE WORK
Aspen Lumberyard Affordable Housing | Aspen, CO
A thriving workforce that lives in the community is a fundamental cornerstone
of the year-round Aspen-area. DHM led the preliminary phase of this project that
included robust community outreach and planning to address housing needs,
neighborhood/contextual analysis, opportunities/constraints, land planning/
zoning analysis, master planning alternatives, and technical studies. The team
worked closely with the City and hosted multiple in person and virtual events to
better understand community priorities and preferences. DHM also implemented
a Virtual Public Outreach program using a robust website with animations,
videos, surveys, and updates, which attracted over 2,000 visitors and 700 survey
responses. Social media and multilingual tools broadened engagement, and
public input was analyzed and shared back with the community to inform and
shape the project direction.
Crystal River Restoration | Garfield County, CO
The Crystal River runs through Pitkin and Garfield Counties and was recently
named America’s 8th “Most Endangered River” by the American Rivers
organization due to water diversions, water storage projects, degradation, and
loss of aquatic and riparian habitats. Aspen Valley Land Trust, along with the Town
of Carbondale, hired DHM Design as part of a team to complete comprehensive
river restoration for a 1.5 mile stretch of river. DHM Design helped acquire grant
funding for the project to be implemented. The project will restore the ecological
integrity of the riparian zone by reconnecting the floodplain and reestablishing
native vegetation and instream habitat; develop a long term, self-sustaining
solution to improve river channel stability and habitat; create a self-sustaining
diversion and head gate structure for the Weaver Ditch to improve delivery,
function and efficiencies and finally; enhance passive user experiences of
Riverfront Park through interpretive signs, trails, gathering spaces, universal access
and educational programs. Concurrently, DHM is working to finalize construction
documentation, and acquire necessary permits from local and federal agencies.
RFTA Rio Grande Trail Corridor Standards Manual | Aspen, CO
The Rio Grande Trail stretches 42 miles from Glenwood Springs to Aspen. This
manual applies to the reach of the trail from Glenwood Springs to Emma. DHM
and their consultant team were hired to develop a Trails Corridor Standards
document to establish a benchmark for quality, character, and materials
along the RFTA-owned and managed reaches of the Rio Grande trail. The
team developed the manual by using original details, excerpts from relevant
public trails manuals, and project details as provided by RFTA staff. The team
created details intending to illustrate intent, character, materials, and standard
dimensions, or are representations of nationally accepted standards. The
document was completed and adopted in 2019.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Relevant Projects in Aspen:
Aspen Riparian Master Plan; Aspen, CO
Aspen Lumberyard Affordable Housing; Aspen, CO
Pitkin County Rio Grande Trail Node Plan; Pitkin County, CO
Lift One Lodge; Aspen, CO
Aspen Valley Hospital Master Plan; Aspen, CO
Burlingame Ranch Affordable Housing Master Plan; Aspen, CO
Mill Street Complete Street; Aspen, CO
Designing for Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion:
Planning and designing the built environment deals not only with enhancing or planning places for people to live, play, and work - it
must respond to the needs, aspirations, and cultural context of the community it serves, with the intent to provide active inclusion
of everyone in the community. As a professional services firm, DHM actively pursues projects that strengthen our communities,
engages with a diverse group of stakeholders to bring many backgrounds to the decision-making table, and contributes our time
and dollars to meaningful causes in our own backyards through investments in social, educational, and placemaking programs. We
strive to remove barriers and burdens in our neighborhoods and across the country to empower people to gather and connect, live,
and create a sense of belonging for everyone. Our approach centers on ensuring that our work reflects broad community needs,
including those historically underrepresented in infrastructure planning. Diversity in all forms makes us better problem-solvers.
Through clear, ADA-compliant documents and inclusive public outreach, we strive to ensure the URMP is not only technically sound
but socially equitable.
Inclusivity policies guide DHM Design’s daily operations through our long-standing Equal Employment policies, and our
firm leadership is guided by our Culture Compact, which prioritizes Excellence, Integrity, Growth, Inclusivity, Leadership and
Communication in all internal and practice decision-making. DHM’s Equal Employment policy and our Culture Compact aligns with
the City of Aspen’s Ordinance 15-2024 and the 2025 Regional, State And Federal Policy Agenda principles of DEIB.
Why DHM?
DHM Design is uniquely positioned to support the Urban Runoff Management Plan Update as land planners, landscape architects,
natural resource specialists, and public facilitation experts. With a deep-rooted presence in Colorado and a dedicated office in
Carbondale, our team brings intimate knowledge of Aspen’s environmental context, community values, and regulatory landscape.
Since 1975, DHM has cultivated a reputation for balancing human presence with nature, designing with a stewardship ethos that
aligns perfectly with Aspen’s sustainability and climate goals. Our mission drives a multidisciplinary approach that blends landscape
architecture with natural resource management and community collaboration. We are seasoned facilitators with a strong track
record of engaging stakeholders and presenting complex information clearly and accessibly. Our experience with Aspen and public
sector projects has honed our ability to craft plans that are both environmentally responsible and user friendly.
Winter Park Parks, Open Space, Trails, and Campgrounds Master Plan Public Outreach
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
Proposal to Perform Urban Runoff Management Plan Update
2025-223
PREPARED FOR
CITY OF ASPEN
June 2025 991-999.056
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
DENVER CARBONDALE DURANGO BOZEMAN MISSOULA WWW.DHMDESIGN.COM
225 Main Street, Suite 201, Carbondale, CO 81623 p: 970.963.6520 f: 303.892.4984
FEE STRUCTURE
DHM Design Corporation
Effective January 1, 2025
Hourly Rates
Principal $225.00
Assoc Principal $185.00
Senior Associate $160.00
Natural Resource Program Manager $160.00
Senior Ecologist $150.00
Senior Environmental Planner $150.00
Visualization/3D $145.00
Associate $145.00
Senior Designer/Planner $135.00
Natural Resource Coordinator $130.00
Ecologist $130.00
Designer $125.00
Graphic Designer $115.00
Clerical/Word Processing $ 90.00
Reimbursable Expenses
Xerox Copies $ 0.12 per copy
Color Copies $ 1.50 per copy
In-House Computer Plots
- Mylar $ 3.50 per square foot
- Vellum $ 2.30 per square foot
- Bond $ 0.45 per square foot
Color Computer Plots $ 2.80 per square foot
Auto Mileage Mileage billed at the federal standard rate
Standardized field equipment $80/day
- GNSS receiver, GPS, iPad
Specialized field equipment $120/day
- RTK survey grade equipment, GNSS receiver
iPad (cellular connection), Drone
All outside reimbursable expenses such as printing, copying, postage and deliveries are billed at our direct
costs.
Bills are rendered and due payable monthly. Terms: Due and payable within 30 days upon receipt of
statements. 1.5% per month interest charged on all past due accounts.
Proposal price quotes shall remain in effect for a period of six months with renegotiation of hourly rates
and reimbursable expenses at that time.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5
WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC.
2025 SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES
SCHEDULE A
PERSONNEL RATE PER HOUR
SENIOR PRINCIPAL/CONSULTANT
PRINCIPAL/CONSULTANT
$270
$258
SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEER/CONSULTANT $232
SENIOR ENGINEER/SCIENTIST CONSULTANT $206
ENGINEERING/SCIENTIST PROFESSIONAL I $191
ENGINEERING SPECIALIST/CONSULTANT $179
ENGINEERING/SCIENTIST PROFESSIONAL II $162
ENGINEERING DESIGNER/PROFESSIONAL III $149
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN I $132
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN II $114
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN III $110
♦ Automobile use at the current IRS standard mileage rate per mile
Twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) will be added to all reimbursable expenses to
cover administration for special consultants, independent laboratory tests, direct
printing costs, supplies, airfare, lodging, meals and incidentals, automobile mileage,
and postage.
TERMS OF PAYMENT: WWE will submit invoices to the client monthly. Payment is due upon
receipt and is past due 30 days from the invoice date. Client agrees to pay a late fee of one- and
one-half percent 1 ½% per month (18% per year) on past due accounts greater than 90 days and
interest will be calculated on the unpaid balance beginning 30 days after the date of the original
unpaid invoice. WWE may in its sole discretion immediately cease performing services for client
without liability or claim, if client fails to pay an invoice within 90 days of the date of the invoice.
The liability of Wright Water Engineers, Inc. for losses or damages arising out of the errors,
omissions, or negligence of Wright Water Engineers, Inc., while providing professional services
shall be limited to the total fee due to Wright Water Engineers, Inc. pursuant to this agreement.
Docusign Envelope ID: DF933A89-DEB2-4938-8C84-B9A85FAE55A5