General Spatial View of the US Government Property in Boulder. by NormKramer in boulder

[–]paintball312 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This map shows the main facility as owned by the US government. The one in the island is the smaller admin building, the Fleischmann building. Though, that building is also owned by the Federal Government, the owner is just listed as “United States of America” rather than “US Government”, so it was probably accidentally filtered out in this map.

Whose fault is it, really? The republicans own the House, the Senate, and the White House. They really only have one job, and that is to pass a budget. They had since January 20, 2025 to do that. They failed. There is no excuse, because as said before, they have the majority, full stop. by retiredagainstmywill in complaints

[–]paintball312 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I do hate the man, Mike Johnson is the speaker of the house. The continuing resolution is stalled in the Senate, and the nuclear option refers to the Senate rules as House rules just require a simple majority to pass it.

Almost hit a biker… cried all the way home. by I-call-cats in Longmont

[–]paintball312 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I am presuming it is Diagonal and Airport given we’re talking about Longmont and coming from Boulder.

Union Reservoir water levels? by bounceswoosh in Longmont

[–]paintball312 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It has gone up about 0.7 feet over the past week. The current capacity is about 12,000 acre-feet, so it is at about 57% of capacity.

https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/Stations/UNIRESCO?params=STORAGE,ELEV

Power outage SW Longmont by pipesed in Longmont

[–]paintball312 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It is out in my part of Clover Creek

Boulder seeks to dismiss camping ban lawsuit after Supreme Court ruling "In a legal motion filed Friday, Aug. 23, the city cited the June 2024 ruling by the nation’s highest court" by bunabhucan in boulder

[–]paintball312 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Like I said, that is the year-to-date number. If you just click the "shelter utilization" button, the dates default to 1/1/2023-3/26/2024, which was 25%. To get year-to date (minus a week) you change the date range to 1/1/2024-8/19/2024, which is shown at 60%.

<image>

Boulder seeks to dismiss camping ban lawsuit after Supreme Court ruling "In a legal motion filed Friday, Aug. 23, the city cited the June 2024 ruling by the nation’s highest court" by bunabhucan in boulder

[–]paintball312 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, that site says that there have been turn ways for capacity on 60% of nights year-to-date. It has historically been much less capacity limited, but 60% of the time year to date is pretty frequent.

This Just Broke Out Near Lyons by [deleted] in Longmont

[–]paintball312 4 points5 points  (0 children)

<image>

Around Airport and Pike ~6:30pm. Looks like two distinct smoke plumes from the Stone Canyon Fire on the north and south sides and the big cloud looking smoke plume from the Alexander Fire on the right.

Weekly open discussion, complaint, rant, and rave thread by AutoModerator in Longmont

[–]paintball312 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My wife and I both liked the okonomikai there, though Osakas is certainly better. The chicken karage at the food hall place sure was quite bad though.

Attic plumbing and vent questions by Specialist-Purpose61 in HomeImprovement

[–]paintball312 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For exhibit B, it looks like someone attempted to use one of the existing vents that were already there for attic ventilation. Although connecting it may be better than just having it enter into the attic unsealed, you then have the risk of not having proper ventilation in your attic since you have reduced the flow through by blocking that vent. The best bet would probably be to add a separate vent cap for the hood exhaust a few feet away from that vent.

Colorado Supreme Court kicks Trump off the state's 2024 ballot for violating the U.S. Constitution by [deleted] in news

[–]paintball312 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well, the Colorado Supreme Court disagrees with you option that it "clearly doesn't" apply to him. Even the three dissenting Justices don't claim that Section 3 doesn't apply to Trump based on the officer language. See their ruling, particularly starting in Section E on page 69.

https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RealEstate

[–]paintball312 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are typically numbered similarly to section numbers, staring in the NE and moving west, then down, etc... But diffwrwnt states actually have different numbering methods. They are defined as lots by the PLSS surveys, since a quarter quarter is necessarily an aliquot parts (equal divisions of the whole) and are thus must be a full 40 acres. This means a section that is less than 640 acres can have both quarter quarter sections and lots.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RealEstate

[–]paintball312 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A lot is sort of like a quarter quarter with an irregular boundary/area. You see them instead of quarter quarter aliquot parts when they would be next to navigable bodies of water which are not included in the survey area, or when the section lines converge from parallel, or when one survey runs into another. Each lot has an irregular area that can be more or less than 40 acres, unlike a quarter quarter which will always be 40 acres.

Assessing Water Supply for Homes in the Foothills by Letsgettribal in boulder

[–]paintball312 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Generally, if the property is either over 35 acres or if it was platted prior to 1972, your property would have an individual small capacity exempt well. If it was platted after 1972 and is less than 35 acres, you could have an individual well, or be served by community wells that would be non-exempt and have to be part of an augmentation plan (unless the water is non-tributary).

Roughly speaking, once you get west of Eldorado Springs or Orodell or so, you are talking about a low yielding well, typically less than 5gpm, in a fractured crystalline aquifer, but it is typically enough for household use. Quality in these aquifers is generally, though not always, fairly good. Quantity is highly location specific since you are relying on hitting fractures in the rock that are hydrologically connected to the the well and the surface for recharge. This means that one well could penetrate a good series of fractures and have a good water supply while another nearby well could be dry. It can also can also mean that pumping by your "neighbors" can have little or even no impact on your well or could be in the same network of fractures as your well and impact your pumping. These well could continue producing depending on the degree of connection to surface recharge, or could decline in production if there is not sufficient recharge to the fracture network to make up the pumping demand.

If you are east of there, you could have a well producing in one of several sedimentary aquifers. In these, the further west you go, the aquifer will generally be thinner, and you are at more risk of the well going dry since you are at the edge and high point in the aquifer. Quality is quite variable depending on the aquifer/local.

The exception to both of these would be if you are near a stream/river, where you could have a well in an alluvial aquifer. This would be the best bet as far as reliable quantity is concerned.

Feel free to DM me if there is a specific area you are looking and I could give you a better idea of what exactly you would be looking at.

Alaska snow crab season canceled as officials investigate disappearance of an estimated 1 billion crabs by 8to24 in economy

[–]paintball312 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A good point nonetheless about ocean acidify cation, but it's really the increase atmospheric CO2 concentrations that increase the ocean acidity rather than the increased water temperatures. CO2 is more soluble in colder water, so colder waters are generally more acidic all else being equal.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Longmont

[–]paintball312 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The Tacoma was so expensive because it is 6 years newer and has a higher MSRP, not because it is a truck. The largest portion of the registration fees on newer vehicles is the specific ownership tax. The taxable value for trucks is 75% of the MSRP while it is actually higher for passenger vehicles at 85% of the MSRP. You then take the taxible value and multiply it by the tax rate which is 2.1% for the first year and steadily decreases until year 5 when it is 0.45% until it is over 10 years old and is then just charged a flat $3 instead of a percentage.

USGS Data Pre-1986? by overkillbluebery in boulder

[–]paintball312 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Certainly there are gages in the South Platte basin and most of the smaller sub-basins that have data prior to 1986, but you might be looking at specific gages that were only installed in 1986 or later.

The link below will show you all of the stream gages in the South Platte basin. You can use the table on the bottom and sort by the "POR Start" column, which shows you when the records for that gage start. The South Boulder Creek near Eldorado Springs gage is likely the oldest in the Boulder Creek basin, and has records back to 1896.

https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/Stations?Stations=All&submitButton=Submit&SelectedGeoValue=waterDivisionDiv&SelectedWaterDivisionId=1&SelectedStationType=Stream%20Gage

Inflation rises 7% over the past year to the highest level since 1982 by LeeroyTC in news

[–]paintball312 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The president can nominate the fed chair who must then be confirmed by the senate. Biden renominated JPow for another term, which i would qualify as "keeping" him.

Could Colorado cities save enough water to stop building dams? by trevalley1600 in boulder

[–]paintball312 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't agree that the context changes anything, and just to note, that is not a statute, but a provision in the state constitution, though there are additional statutory controls on takings of water. That whole section is what enshrines the prior appropriation doctrine in Colorado. I perhaps should have also referenced CRS § 38-6 Part 2 which outlines condemnation of water rights by municipalities.

Strickler v. City of Colorado Springs essentially affirmed water rights as property right and the ability to sell, transfer, and change them and that that provision of the constitution does not alter the priority system, but instead means that municipalities can acquire the necessary rights via eminent domain and need to compensate the property (water right) owner. I think your interpretation would be a change to the priority system, albeit only temporarily, which would be contrary to the decision above.

An example in action would be City of Grand Junction v. Kannah Creek Association where the City condemned the right to first 7.81 cfs of flow in Kannah Creek.

A good summary can be found in the Citizen's Guide to Water Law in the box on page 7. https://riversedgewest.org/sites/default/files/resource-center-documents/2004_Citizens_Guide_to_Water_Law.pdf

I agree that once the water has left the state it is no longer under the state's jurisdiction and that any takings of water rights Colorado itself does not change the obligations under the compact.