Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.01 ExhibitsCrystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Section 15 - Exhibits Exhibit A — Traffic Reports Exhibit B — Water Supply Reports Exhibit C — Geotechnical Report Exhibit D — Management Plans Exhibit E — Engineering Reports Exhibit F —11 "x17" Maps Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Exhibit A- Traffic Reports Traffic Impact Assessment on Adjacent Roads Memo prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Traffic Assessment for Powers Rural Employment Center prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Garfield County Road 103 at SH -82 CDOT Access Permit Application Package prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Traffic Impact Study Lafarge West Cerise Site prepared by Eugene G. Coppola PE, PTOE Crystal Ranch Corp Driveway Access Permit Application prepared by SoprisEngineering, LLC Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 -- Exhibits Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Exhibit A — Traffic Reports Traffic Impact Assessment on Adjacent Roads Memo prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Traffic Assessment for Powers Rural Employment Center prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Garfield County Road 103 at SH -82 CDOT Access Permit Application Package prepared by Turnkey Consulting, LLC Traffic Impact Study Lafarge West Cerise Site prepared by Eugene G. Coppola PE, PTOE Crystal Ranch Corp Driveway Access Permit Application prepared by SoprisEngineering, LLC //TurnCey \._--"Consulting, LLC 2478 Patterson Road, Suite 18 Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 MEMORANDUM TO: Douglas Pratt (The Land Studio), and To Whom It May Concern FROM: Skip Hudson, PE DATE: May 3, 2011 RE: Powers Batch Plant - Traffic Impact Assessment on Adjacent Roads 1. Introduction In 2010, Lafarge West Inc. proposed a land development project on the northeast corner of SH -82 & CR -103 in Garfield County, called the Cerise Site. There were three activities proposed to occur on the Cerise site, including material mining, material processing, and a concrete batch plant. This proposal would have required the relocation of the existing batch plant on Powers site, which is on the west side of CR -103. The traffic impacts and mitigation measures were evaluated in the Traffic Impact Study called" LaFarge West Cerise Site" by Eugene G. Coppola, PE, PTOE (dated 8.4.10). The following sketch shows that all traffic would have traveled between SH -82 and the Cerise site access (east side of CR -103). CERISE MINE CONCEPT PLAN GARFIELD CDUN1Y. COLORADO NOTE: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE RELOCATED ON-SITE WITI I FUTURE PI LASES. Cerise Site Access PERI1rT OCluNDPRY ,Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 1 of 8 The following improvements are recommended at the intersection of CR -103 & SH -82: • Construct a southbound left -turn deceleration lane on CR -103. • Two existing auxiliary lanes on SH -82, to the east of CR -103, should be lengthened to meet current CDOT design standards: o Westbound right turn deceleration lane — extend by 600 -ft (1,100 req'd, 500 existing) o Southbound -to -eastbound left turn acceleration lane — extend by 1,180 -ft (1,680 req'd, 500 existing) • Turning radii should be capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. This will require some median improvements. Given these improvements, the Powers Batch Plant will not have major negative impacts on transportation services or facilities. Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 8 of 8 TurrWey -Consulting ,LLC 2478 Patterson Road, Suite 18 Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 MEMORANDUM TO: Douglas Pratt (The Land Studio), and To Whom It May Concern FROM: Skip Hudson, PE DATE: May 3, 2011 RE: Powers Batch Plant - Traffic Impact Assessment on Adjacent Roads 1. Introduction In 2010, Lafarge West Inc. proposed a land development project on the northeast corner of SH -82 & CR -103 in Garfield County, called the Cerise Site. There were three activities proposed to occur on the Cerise site, including material mining, material processing, and a concrete batch plant. This proposal would have required the relocation of the existing batch plant on Powers site, which is on the west side of CR -103, The traffic impacts and mitigation measures were evaluated in the Traffic Impact Study called" LaFarge West Cerise Site" by Eugene G. Coppola, PE, PTOE (dated 8.4.10). The following sketch shows that all traffic would have traveled between SH -82 and the Cerise site access (east side of CR -103). CERISE MINE CONCEPT PLAN GARFIELD COIJNIY. COLORADO NOTE: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE RELOCATED ON-SITE WITI-I FUTURE PItASES. Cerise Site Access PER MR DOUNaltRr Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 1 of 8 LaFarge and Crystal River Corp (Powers Site) have now entered into a lease agreement to allow the existing concrete batch plant to remain on Crystal Ranch property through the year 2028. Therefore, the Cerise site does not need to include the batch plant. This leads to the following traffic conclusions: • The Project traffic identified in the Coppola Study would now travel to either the Crystal Ranch Site or the Cerise Site, along CR -103 • Some Project traffic that was considered internal trips to the Cerise Site (not identified in the Coppola Study) will now travel back and forth between the Cerise Site and the Crystal Ranch Site • The amount of Project traffic traveling through the intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 would not change from the values shown in the Coppola Study. • The Coppola Study accurately portrays total traffic and is valid for use in CDOT access permitting. The following sketch shows the current site access proposals for both projects. Cerise Mine & Crystal Ranch Site CONCEPT PLAN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Crystal Ranch Site Access NOTE: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE RELOCATED ON-SITE WITH FUTURE PHASES, 1 PERMIT BOUNDARY Superior Project Leadership -- Concept to Community Page 2 of 8 2. CR -103 Intersections Addressed by Coppola Study There would now be three intersections on CR -103 that need to be evaluated for the Powers Batch Plant & Cerise projects. The Coppola Study evaluated two of them, and this evaluation is still valid. Intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 The Coppola study evaluated this intersection in the year 2027 condition and came to the following conclusions: • Current operating conditions are acceptable in the area of the Cerise site. • Cerise will generate 88 morning highway peak hour trips, 63 afternoon highway peak hour trips, and 770 trips per day at full site utilization. This traffic represents peak day, peak season activity with the Cerise site operating at or near capacity. These trips can be easily managed. • On an average annual day, an estimated 45 morning peak hour trips, 30 afternoon peak hour trips, and 400 daily trips are expected. • All warranted auxiliary lanes currently exist at the SH -82 & CR -103 intersection. The lanes to the east of CR -103, however, are substandard based on current Access Code criteria. These lanes should be improved to meet current design standards. The lanes west of CR -103 are acceptable in their current form. (See Coppola Study for more details) • Turning radii at the SH -82 & CR -103 should have radii capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. • With the indicated improvements, acceptable operating levels of service will be achieved and maintained through the long-term for all traffic movements at this intersection. • Lafarge's Cerise site will not adversely impact this intersection. This is verified by the finding that the identified roadway geometry will facilitate safe and efficient operating conditions for the foreseeable future. None of these recommendations would change with regards to the current proposal for Powers Batch Plant. There are not any additional recommendations at this intersection. Intersection of CR -103 & Cerise Site Access The Coppola study evaluated this intersection in the year 2027 condition and came to the following conclusions: • No auxiliary lanes will be warranted at the CR -103 intersection with the Cerise Access. Turning radii at the CR -103 & Cerise access intersections should have radii capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. Truck warning signs should be installed on the CR -103 approaches to the site access with a stop sign installed on the access approach to CR -103. Lafarge's Cerise site access will not adversely impact the area street system. This is verified by the finding that the identified roadway geometry will facilitate safe and efficient operating conditions for the foreseeable future. None of these recommendations would change with regards to the current proposal for Powers Batch Plant. There are not any additional recommendations at this intersection. Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 3 of 8 3. Intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access This section addresses the change in travel patterns on CR -103 due to keeping the Batch Plant on the Powers Site and not relocating it to the Cerise site. Powers Project Trip Generation Page 11 of the Coppola Study provided Cerise Pit trip generation estimates, which are supported by a letter from LaFarge (located in report appendix). The following table shows how the previous trip generation estimate for daily conditions would be split between the Powers and Cerise sites, based on an interview with LaFarge. Type Daily Trip Estimates (one-way) Total From Coppola Study Split now assigned to Cerise Site Split now assigned to Powers Site Aggregate & Asphalt Trucks 500 500 0 Concrete Trucks 150 0 150 Import Trucks 10 4 6 Employees 90 60 30 Miscellaneous 20 14 6 Total 770 578 192 In addition to the traffic shown in the previous table, there would be some Project traffic that was considered internal trips to the Cerise Site (traveled around on-site and did not travel on public roads). As such, this traffic was not identified in the Coppola Study. This is the traffic that would travel on CR -103, back and forth between the Cerise Site and the Powers Site. LaFarge estimates that there would be 12 trucks per day carrying raw material between the two sites. Each truck would make two one-way trips so there would be 24 trips per day. This would equate to one peak -hour round trip between the two sites. This would be the volume of trucks that would make the following turning movements on CR -103 as part of a circuitous route during the peak hour period: • Cerise Site Access Point - Westbound left turn (outbound) -Northbound right turn (inbound) • Powers Site Access Point - Eastbound left turn (outbound) - Southbound right turn (inbound Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 4 of 8 The total peak -hour trip generation for the Powers site is shown on the following table. Peak Period External Trip Ends (vph) In Out Total AM 33 12 45 PM 10 33 43 Total Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes at intersection Total traffic is the sum Project traffic and future background traffic • Project traffic movement volumes were developed by assigning specific traffic to the north and south of the Powers Site Access as follows - To/from north on CR -103 = traffic traveling between Powers and Cerise Sites - To/from south on CR -103 = all other traffic • Background traffic for the Powers Site was the "total traffic" shown in the Coppola Study. This was the sum of the future background traffic growth and the Cerise Project traffic with the following adjustments for to account for traffic flow in and out of the Powers Site Access. -Northbound AM = 53 vph = 85 — 32 -Northbound PM = 96 vph = 105 — 9 -Southbound AM = 109 vph = 120 — 11 -Southbound PM = 53 vph = 85 — 32 The following table shows peak -hour turning movements at the intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access. Period Traffic Source Northbound on CR -103 Eastbound from Powers Access Southbound on CR -103 Left Thru Left Right Thru Right AM Background 53 109 Project (Powers) 32 1 11 1 Total 32 53 1 11 109 1 PM Background 96 53 Project (Powers) 9 1 32 1 Total 9 96 1 32 53 1 Evaluation of Need for Exclusive Turn Lanes at Intersection The traffic volumes shown in the previous section were used to evaluate the need for exclusive turn lanes on CR -103 at the Powers site access point. Since Garfield County does not have specific criteria, the turn lane warrants were based on CDOT Access Code criteria for an N -B roadway at 25 mph. Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 5 of 8 Auxiliary Lane Tota12028 Volumes (vph) Turn Lane Warrants (CDOT) Lane Warranted ? Lane Waivable ? SB Right Turn Deceleration LanePM (inbound) 1 in AM & More than 25 No n/a EB -SB Right Turn Acceleration Lane (outbound) 32 in pm More than 50 vph, if speed is 45 mph or greater No n/a NB Left Turn Deceleration Lane (inbound) 32 in am More than 10 vph Yes No — See note below EB -NB Left Turn Acceleration Lane (outbound) 1 in AM & PM Generally not required if speed is less than 45 mph No n/a Note: CDOT has criteria that would allow waiver of a lane that meets the warrant volumes. This is done in recognition that turn lane considerations should include the turning volume (warrants) and the amount of through traffic that would conflict with the turning volume (waivers). State Highway Access Code Section 3.5 says that the left turn deceleration lane can be waived if the opposing volume is less that 100 vph. In this case, the opposing volume would be 109 vph. In summary, this means that the northbound left turn lane was warranted and should not be waived. The lane would need to be constructed as part of the Powers Site Access improvements. Intersection Operational Analysis The traffic analysis was conducted using the methodologies outlined in the Transportation Research Board's, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition. McTrans' HCS+ computer software model was used to determine traffic operations for the unsignalized intersections. The results of the intersection operational analyses were used to assess the Level of Service (LOS) experienced by the drivers. The LOS describes the quality of traffic operating conditions, ranging from A to F, and is measured as the duration of delay a driver experiences at a given intersection. LOS A represents the most desirable conditions with free-flow movement of traffic and minimal delay to motorists. LOS F generally indicates severely congested conditions with excessive delays to motorists. Intermediate grades of B, C, D, and E reflect incremental increases in congestion. The following table shows the intersection operations results for the year 2028 AM and PM scenarios, including the proposed geometry lane modifications in order to meet the turn lane warrant criteria. Intersection operations are acceptable Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 6 of 8 Minor Movement or Approach Traffic Control New Lane Geometry AM PM LOS Ave. Delay LOS Ave. Delay (sec) Eastbound STOP A 10 sec A 10 sec Northbound 1 left turn & 1 through A 8 sec A 8 sec Southbound A n/a A n/a Recommended Lane Geometry on CR -103 CR -103 would need to be widened to the west (towards Powers Site) to construct the northbound left turn lane. CR -103 should be 3 -lanes wide between SH -82 & the Powers Site Access, with a total width of 40 -ft. This would accommodate two 12 -ft wide through lanes and one 16 -ft wide left turn lane. Based on the Powers Site Access design by Sopris Engineering, there would be 225 -ft between the edge of pavement on SH -82 and the centerline of Powers Site Access. The center lane should be striped to accommodate southbound left turns onto SH -82 (70 -ft of storage) and northbound left turns onto Powers Site Access (50 -ft of storage). There should be a 50 -ft taper between the two left turn pockets. This layout would allow 5 -ft between the SH -82 edge of travel lane and the stop bar for southbound traffic. It would also allow a 50 -ft turning radius for vehicles turning left into the Powers site access. North of the Powers Site Access, the southbound through lane would need a 240 -ft redirect taper to match existing southbound lane alignment. Actual existing pavement width may vary but the taper ratio should be 15:1. Summary of Results and Recommendations The improvements at the intersection of CR -103 & Cerise Site Access would be the responsibility of another party and are not included in this summary. The following improvements are recommended at the intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access: • Construct a northbound left -turn deceleration lane. • Turning radii should be capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. • Truck warning signs should be installed on the CR -103 approaches to the site access with a stop sign installed on the access approach to CR -103. Superior Project Leadership -- Concept to Community Page 7 of 8 The following improvements are recommended at the intersection of CR -103 & SH -82: • Construct a southbound left -turn deceleration lane on CR -103. • Two existing auxiliary lanes on SH -82, to the east of CR -103, should be lengthened to meet current CDOT design standards: o Westbound right turn deceleration lane — extend by 600 -ft (1,100 req'd, 500 existing) o Southbound -to -eastbound left turn acceleration lane — extend by 1,180 -ft (1,680 req'd, 500 existing) • Turning radii should be capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. This will require some median improvements. Given these improvements, the Powers Batch Plant will not have major negative impacts on transportation services or facilities. Superior Project Leadership — Concept to Community Page 8 of 8 1 -. S 4 k a Lr r' Tr -r CQIcJ Q t e we/l s-- -I, 3 j. ,v 9, leAr £o is,d,- Eh9 a.6 , n ./f41/214,i a 0 0 0 L.ak.+, e -re 0 0 0 _Dpi r- 0 l a _ t el. 0 m 0 /14/›-c _ 1 a 1 O id?, on Ce, Is 6 / v 1 3Z- / 11 Td MI PM ¢f p s* O o 0 G' eoc‘-, 1--rr7 a 0 O O 1 t 0 eotv, !. I a Q C Ali s { --- 0 1 O Ta/frobV Ce c T Ii !7 _.. Dere`eJ /t .SD 7A Va 53 ,01 27,300 Crystal Springs N/N 40/30 Site Driveway a to 0 Lt) 0 0 (D CD 35/50 4— 520/1495 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal Daily NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 50/55 -� 1435/890 —► 21 SH 82 Figure 11 LONG-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC z�r Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection CR -103 & Powers Site AccessAgency/Co. Analyst Hudson TurnKey Consulting Jurisdiction Garfield County Date Performed 5/3/2011 Analysis Year 2028 Analysis Time Period AM - Total Traffic Project Description Powers Batch Plant East/West Street: Powers Site Access North/South Street: CR -103 Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh/h) 32 53 _ 109 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 34 57 0 0 118 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh/h) 1 11 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 1 0 11 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 0 75 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service pproach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (veh/h) 34 12 C (m) (veh/h) 1118 741 /c 0.03 0.02 95% queue length 0.09 0.05 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.3 9.9 LOS A A pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 9.9 pproach LOS -- -- A Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\u2k7BA.tmp Generated: 5/3/2011 9:59 AM 3�Y 5/3/2011 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection CR -103 & Powers Site Access Analyst Hudson Agency/Co. Turnkey Consulting Jurisdiction Garfield County Date Performed 5/3/2011 Analysis Year 2028 Analysis Time Period PM - Total Traffic Project Description Powers Batch Plant East/West Street: Powers Site Access North/South Street: CR -103 Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh/h) 9 96 53 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 9 104 0 0 57 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 ' 12 L T R L T R olume (veh/h) 1 32 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 1 0 34 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 75 0 _ 75 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration _ LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service • pproach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (veh/h) 9_ 35 C (m) (veh/h) 1185 825 lc 0.01 0.04 • 5% queue length 0.02 0.13 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.1 9.6 LOS A A • pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 9.6 • pproach LOS -- -- A Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.5 file://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\u2k7BA.tmp Generated: 5/3/2011 10:02 AM 5/3/2011 y�y Traffic Assessment Prepared For: Powers Rural Employment Center NW Corner of SH -82 & CR -103 Garfield County, Colorado May 3, 2011 2478 Patterson Rd, Suite. 18 Grand Junction, CO 81505 970-985-4001 Turn Key Consulting, LLC SUp�Nitiu Pr JJeci CroaT� +�•.. Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site 1 Introduction The Crystal Ranch Corporation is seeking an amendment to the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan to allow a rural employment center (Project) on the Powers Site, which is located on the northwest corner of SH -82 & CR -103. This assessment (Study) will look at a range of possible future land uses by the year 2031. Vicinity Map 2 Existing & Proposed Project Phasing The Project site is currently being used as a gravel pit and concrete batch plant. The property owner is currently going through a County process to allow the batch plant to remain until the year 2028. Therefore this Study will assume that the Project will include continued operates of the existing concrete batch plant through 2028. TurnKey Consulting has prepared a traffic analysis for the batch plant scenario. For long-term site use, the property owner is applying to Garfield County for a comprehensive plan amendment. This Study will be part of the application package. The County approval will be general in nature but will allow for some type of rural employment center. The exact future land uses are unknown but one possible Project site plan concept and land use summary are shown below. The actual uses and construction date of these additional uses is unknown, although there have been preliminary conversations with each of the possible site users. TurnKey Consulting, LLC Page 2of9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site • A RFTA Park -n -Ride Lot, or • A bus maintenance facility for the Roaring Fork School District, and/or • A RFTA vehicle maintenance facility, and/or • A CDOT Maintenance facility Project Site Plan — One Possible Concept RFTA enLL'or Gr00T V•hlcla Maintenance Arae I7 Acro • r R M`• / RPTA Park B Rids / / or RFSO Bus J klalnlinance Ana / e •� 2.25 Aims /t I - -" ara emeriti. Batch •` Plant Aria 4 Aer•a4 L.W.at aW ffl roma, EA a':a7Ga1 •` - .-`�.:.-.-. - ...+` ter'- . ., -- ., fnil�Mewln—i ! h 0 A,Hf1A G1.1..0". art 1 0,501,10 privryel on IKc It ane eo+u*e Fi, 9; aril two kv**Ant YWva.tittlr In. rang Wl trn.1aiYanem,rcry 11 ,i MI40 04 (01(4 ypo Hare, na@Irab0l@ 41,{1.1 3A'c,CX 1 ftvl, H 1.,Glue Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment 24 Acre Rural Employment Center Concept Diagram idln,s tr, --e Rc.nua 3 Level of Traffic Study & Analysis Periods Due to the uncertainties with the possible future land use, it is not possible to accurately predict the amount of Project Trip Generation, Therefore, this will not be a Level III traffic study. The focus of this study is threefold: • Indentify range of likely Project trip generation at buildout • Identify range of impacts to transportation system • Identify thresholds when major roadway system improvements may be necessary. As such, the study will assess the weekday afternoon peak -hour period in the year 2031 (20 -year condition). 4 Project Trip Generation & Distribution Assumptions The Project would have 19.25 acres of usable area for future lane uses. Turnkey Consulting used the ITE Trip Generation document to determine which type of Turn Key Consulting, LLC Page 3 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site employment -based land use would generate the lowest and highest amount of peak hour Project trips, including the following uses: co Industrial Park (lowest) co General Office Building 00 Government Office Complex co Medical -Dental Office Building 00 Government Office Building 00 Park & Ride Lot with Bus Service (highest) There were not any trip reductions for internal capture or pass -by capture. Please see the appendix for detailed trip generation calculations. The following table summarizes the range of Project trip generation estimates. Range of Project Trip Generation Summary Range of Peak hour trips ITE Land Use Peak -Hour Period Peak Hour Trip Ends In Out Total Lowest Industrial Park (LUC 130) AM 137 28 165 PM 36 134 170 Highest Park & Ride Lot with Bus Service (LUC 090) AM 761 178 939 PM 194 649 843 The traffic counts at SH -82 & CR -103 revealed the distribution of existing traffic, as shown on the following table. This information will be used to distribute Project trips throughout the Study area. Overall Project Trip Distribution Assumptions From the Intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 Direction To/From Distribution West on SH -82 48 % East on SH -82 48 North on CR -103 4% 5 Roadway Traffic Volumes 5.1 Existing Traffic Volumes (2010) There is a traffic impact study called" LaFarge West Cerise Site" by Eugene G. Coppola, PE, PTOE (dated 8.4.10). This report included peak hour traffic counts at the intersection of SH -82 & CR -103, which were obtained on 6/23/10. Please see the TurnKey Consulting. LLC Page 4 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site attachments for a copy of the detailed count summary. Assuming an 11% peak -to -daily factor, the daily traffic volume on CR -103 would have been 970 vpd. CDOT traffic counts from 2009 show that SH -82 would have the following daily traffic volumes: co SH -82, west of CR -103 = 17,800 vpd co SH -82, west of CR -103 = 20,200 vpd 5.2 Future Background Traffic Volumes (2031) Existing traffic on the roadway network was adjusted to reflect background traffic in the 20 -year horizon (2031). CDOT estimates that SH -82 traffic will have a 20 -year growth factor of 1.6, which is an annual average growth rate of 2.38%. The 21 -year growth factor would then be 1.64. This factor was applied to the 2010 traffic counts to obtain future background traffic volumes at the intersection of SH -82 & CR -103, as shown in the following table. In addition, the normal background traffic growth, trips from the Cerise gravel pit were added to create the total future background traffic volumes. Summary of Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes at SH -82 & CR -103 Period Traffic Condition Eastbound Westbound Southbound Left Thru Thru Right Left Right AM Existing (2010) 13 945 393 13 32 29 Future Background (2031) 21 1,550 645 21 52 48 Future Background + Cerise (2031) 52 1,550 645 36 72 69 PM Existing (2010) 25 584 982 19 16 28 Future Background (2031) 41 645 1,610 31 26 46 Future Background + Cerise (2031) 56 645 1,610 46 36 68 Future background traffic for through movements at the intersection of CR -103 & Site Access was obtained from the Coppola Traffic study. In the northbound direction, the volumes would be 85 vph and 105 vph (AM & PM). In the southbound direction, the volumes would be 120 vph and 85 vph (AM & PM). 5.3 Total Traffic Volumes (2031) Total traffic is the sum of Project traffic and future background traffic. The appendix includes traffic volume calculations for both the highest and lowest conditions of Project trips. 6 Traffic Operations, Traffic Control, & Lane Geometry Analysis 6.1 Methodology & Assumptions The traffic analysis was conducted using the methodologies outlined in the Transportation Research Board's, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition. McTrans' HCS+ computer software model, which incorporates the HCM methodology, was used to determine traffic operations for the unsignalized intersections. TurnKey Consulting. LLC Page 5 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site The results of the intersection operational analyses were used to assess the Level of Service (LOS) experienced by the drivers. The LOS describes the quality of traffic operating conditions, ranging from A to F, and is measured as the duration of delay a driver experiences at a given intersection. LOS A represents the most desirable conditions with free-flow movement of traffic and minimal delay to motorists. LOS F generally indicates severely congested conditions with excessive delays to motorists. Intermediate grades of B, C, D, and E reflect incremental increases in congestion. The following table provides the delay thresholds for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Intersection Delay Threshold Level of Service (LOS) Signalized Intersections (seconds/vehicle) Unsignalized Intersection (seconds/vehicle) A 0.0-10.0 0.0-10.0 B 10.1-20.0 10.1-15.0 C 20.1 — 35.0 15.1 — 25.0 D 35.1 — 55.0 25.1 — 35.0 E 55.1 — 80.0 35.1 — 50.0 F Greater than 80.0 Greater than 50.0 Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition The operational analysis assumes that the following lane geometry had already been constructed, as recommended by the TurnKey Consulting traffic assessment for the Powers Batch Plant. 00 Northbound left turn lane on CR -103 at Powers Site Access 00 Southbound left turn lane on CR -103 at SH -82 The following table shows the intersection operations results for the year 2031 AM and PM scenarios, including the proposed geometry modifications in order to meet the acceptable LOS. 6.2 Traffic Signal Warrants at SH -82 & CR -103 The Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provides various warrants for the installation of traffic signals at congested intersections. These warrants are typically evaluated in current time, but the Peak Hour Warrant can be used to identify the likely timing of the need for traffic signal installation. MUTCD Figure 4C-4 is the proper tool in this case because the speed limit on SH -82 is greater than 40 mph. Due to the amount of traffic on SH -82, the peak hour signal warrant would be met when more than 100 vehicles per hour would make the southbound left turn from CR -103. Current & Future Background Conditions The intersection does not warrant signalization now and background traffic growth through 2031 will not warrant future signalization. This includes the traffic from the proposed Cerise Pit on CR -103. TurnKey consulting. LLC Page 6 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site Project with Low Trip Generation Assumptions Full build out of the Project by 2012 would not meet signal warrants because the total southbound left turn volume would be 80 vph. However, the future southbound left turn volume would be 100 vph by the year 2031. Therefore, signalization would be required in the future, with actual timing dependent upon the growth of background traffic on CR - 103. It likely would not be warranted for the next 15 years unless a large project occurred on CR -103. Project with High Trip Generation Assumptions Full build out of the Project by 2012 would meet signal warrants because the total southbound left turn volume would be 328 vph. Therefore, signalization would be required immediately if the Project land use mix generated a high number of trips. 6.3 Summary of Operational analysis The following tables show how both intersections would operate in the year 2031, with low and high trip generation assumptions. The intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 would be signalized and the intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access would be stop controlled. Both intersections work well in the condition with low Project trip generation. Intersection Operations Summary for Year 2031 Based on Lowest Project Trip Generation Intersection Approach Traffic Control Lane Geometry AM PM LOS Ave. Delay (sec) LOS Ave. Delay (sec) Intersection #1 — SH -82 & CR -103 Eastbound Signalized 2 thrus, 1 right B 13 A 10 Westbound 1 left, 2 thrus B 14 B 18 Southbound 1 left, 1 right C 30 D 54 Overall Intersection B 14 B 19 Intersection # 2 — CR -103 & Powers Site Access Eastbound Stop 1 left/right A 10 A 10 Northbound 1 left, 1 thru A 8 A 8 Southbound 1 right/thru A 0 A 0 There are some operation concerns for the conditions with the high Project trip generation. x The delay exiting the Powers Site Access to make a left turn would be 44 seconds, which would be LOS E. x The intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 would have an overall LOS of E in the PM condition (62 seconds of average delay). One possible solution is dual eastbound left turn lanes on SH -82. This is typically considered when the total volume of left turning traffic exceeds 300 vph. In this case, the left turning TurnKey Consulting, LLC Page 7 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site volume could be 417 vph in the AM condition. However, this improvement would need to be accompanied by the construction of another northbound lane on CR - 103. The dual left turn lanes on SH -82 would need two receiving lanes on CR - 103. oc Southbound vehicle queues from the signal at SH -82 could spill back past the Powers site access. There would be 225 -ft of space between the intersections. The 95% queues would be 250 -ft in the AM condition and 580 -ft in the PM condition. One possible solution is dual southbound left turn lanes on CR -103. This is typically considered when the total volume of left turning traffic exceeds 300 vph. In this case, the left turning volume could be 348 vph in the PM condition. Intersection Operations Summary for Year 2031 Based on Highest Project Trip Generation Intersection Approach Traffic Control Lane Geometry AM PM LOS Ave. Delay (sec) LOS Ave. Delay (sec) Intersection #1 — SH -82 & CR -103 Eastbound Signalized 2 thrus, 1 right B 13 E 74 Westbound 1 left, 2 thrus C 26 D 49 Southbound 1 left, 1 right E 76 E 79 Overall Intersection C 20 E 62 _ Intersection # 2 — CR -103 & Powers Site Access Eastbound Stop 1 Ieft/right E 44 E 38 Northbound 1 left, 1 thru B 14 _ A 9 Southbound 1 right/thru A 0 A 0 TurnKey Consulting, LLC Page 8 of 9 Traffic Assessment — Powers Rural Employment Site 7 Conclusions & Recommendations This Study indentified the range of likely Project trip generation at buildout, the range of impacts to transportation system, and identified thresholds when major roadway system improvements may be necessary in the future. An industrial park would be an example of land use with low Project trip generation, and a RFTA park -n -ride lot would be an example of land use with high Project trip generation. It is likely that the actual project would be somewhere between these two extremes. Recommendations for Low Traffic Land Use Scenario 1. Intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 a. Construct a southbound left turn lane (if not already constructed as part of Powers Batch Plant Project) b. Two existing auxiliary lanes on SH -82, to the east of CR -103, should be lengthened to meet current CDOT design standards (if not already constructed as part of Powers Batch Plant or Cerise Pit Project): i. Westbound right turn deceleration lane — extend by 600 -ft (1,100 req'd, 500 existing) ii. Southbound -to -eastbound left turn acceleration lane — extend by 1,180 -ft (1,680 req'd, 500 existing) c. Monitor southbound left turn traffic volume and consider signalization when volume exceeds 100 vph. d. Intersection turning radii should be capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. This will require some median improvements. 2. Intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access a. Construct a northbound left turn lane (if not already constructed as part of Powers Batch Plant Project) b. Construct Site Access with two lanes, and accommodate a WB -50 design vehicle. Recommendations for High Traffic Land Use Scenario 1. Intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 a. Same as above b. Install Traffic Signal c. Monitor eastbound left turn traffic volume and consider dual left turn lanes when volume exceeds 300 vph. d. Monitor southbound left turn traffic volume and consider dual left turn lanes when volume exceeds 300 vph. 2. Intersection of CR -103 & Powers Site Access a. Same as above TurnKey Consulting. LLC Page 9 of 9 pro 'e4.77, ribt9 t� G h < %ter' o r1 ( /C./ Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 19.25 Acres of Industrial Park May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 63.11 62.04 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume Saturday Peak Hour Enter Saturday Peak Hour Exit Saturday Peak Hour Total 7.10 0.00 1.45 0.00 8.55 6.14 1.86 0.00 6.98 0.00 8.84 6.95 34.23 41.91 1.51 0.00 3.20 0.00 4.71 2.23 1.00 1215 1.00 /137 1.00fj 28 1.00 165 1.00 36 1.00 134 1.00 170 1.00 659 1.00 29 1.00 62 1.00 91 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Z. aIvc5r Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 200 Th.Sq.Ft. GFA of General Office Building May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 11.01 6.13 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume Saturday Peak Hour Enter Saturday Peak Hour Exit Saturday Peak Hour Total 1.36 0.19 1.55 0.25 1.24 1.49 2.37 0.22 0.19 0.41 0.00 0.00 1.39 0.00 0.00 1.37 2.08 0.00 0.00 0.68 1.00 '2202 1.00 2 7 2 1.00 L38 1.00 310 1.00 50 1.00 L248 f 1.00 298 J 1.00 474 1.00 44 1.00 38 1.00 82 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS 24 Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 200 Th.Sq.Ft. GFA of Government Office Complex May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 27.92 0.00 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume 1.97 0.24 2.21 0.88 1.97 2.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5584 1.00 [ 394 1.00 48 1.00 442 1.00 176 1.00 394 1.00 (570 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Enter 0,00 0.00 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Exit 0.00 0.00 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Total 0.00 0.00 1.00 0 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 200 Th.Sq.Ft. GFA of Medical -Dental Office Building May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 36.13 10.18 1.00 7226 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume Saturday Peak Hour Enter Saturday Peak Hour Exit Saturday Peak Hour Total 1.82 0.00 0.48 0.00 2.30 1.88 0.93 0.00 2.53 0.00 3.46 2.50 8.96 9,17 2.07 0.00 1.56 0.00 3.63 1.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 364 96 460 186 506 692 1.00 1792 1.00 1.00 1.00 414 312 726 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 200 Th.Sq.Ft. GFA of Government Office Building May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 68.93 0.00 7,-9 AM Peak Flour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume 4.94 0.94 5.88 0.38 0.83 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 13786 1.00 (<88 1.00 188 1.00 1176 1.00 76 1.00 166 1.00 242 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Enter 0.00 0.00 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Exit 0.00 0.00 1.00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Total 0.00 0.00 1.00 0 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICR©TRANS 5-4 Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 19.25 Acres of Park and Ride Lot with Bus Service May 04, 2011 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2 -Way Volume 372.32 124.97 1.00 7167 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total Saturday 2 -Way Volume Saturday Peak Hour Enter Saturday Peak Hour Exit Saturday Peak Hour Total, 39.54 0.00 9.27 0.00 48.81 9.41 10.06 0.00 33.69 0.00 43.75 15.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 761 178 194 649 ) 0 0 0 0 Note: A zero indicates no data available. Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS X16 SH08ZA MP Length Description City Hwy Name Comments 0824 7.11 0.704 RD (MIRAND RD) NONE 082A 7.82 0.045 RD NE (CO RD 110 SPRING VALLY RD) NONE 082A 7.87 0.067 RD SE (CR 113 COTTONWOOD PASS RD CATTLE NONE CREEK RD) - BEGIN HPMS SAMPLE (045-2005-116) 0824 7.91 0.072 MAJOR STR (G -07-B) CATTLE CREEK NONE 082A 8.00 0.993 MILEPOST 8 - (0.966 MILE LENGTH) NONE 082A 9.00 0.13 MILEPOST 9 NONE 082A 9.13 0.354 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 0824 9.50 0.484 MINOR STR (082A00950013L) DRAINAGE NONE 082A 10.00 0.26 MILEPOST 10 NONE 082A 10.25 0.181 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 10.42 0.051 RD SW (CO RD 106) NONE 082A 10.47 0.216 MINOR STR (08240104709L) STOCK PASS NONE 082A 10.68 0.201 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 10.87 0.138 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 11.00 0.279 MILEPOST 11 NONE 082A 11.29 0.178 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 11.48 0.102 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 11.59 0.093 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 0824 11.68 0.018 RAMP OFF (TO SH -133A) NONE 082A 11.70 0.029 JCT SH 133 5 (CARBONDALE) - RD N (CO RD 107) - NONE END HPMS SAMPLE (045-2005-116) 082A 11.72 0.256 RAMP ON (FROM SH -133A) 082A 12.00 1 082A 13.00 0.268 082A 13.28 0.256 MILEPOST 12 MILEPOST 13 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE NONE NONE NONE Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 / Scenic Byway Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 COTTONWOOD PASS RD (SE) SATANK RD (SE) 0824 EXIT(11) 1 133A EXIT(68)133A (N) 1 RED HILL RD (N 082A 13.55 0.349 RD NE (CO RD 103 CRYSTAL SPRINGS RD) NONE 082A 13.90 0.099 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 14.00 0.498 MILEPOST 14 NONE 082A 14.50 0.405 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 14.90 0.104 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 15.00 0.311 MILEPOST 15 NONE 082A 15.32 0.214 CHANGE ROADWAY WIDTH NONE 082A 15.54 0.219 RD N AND S (CATHERINE STORE RD) (CR 100 NONE MISSOURI HEIGHTS RD) /Or Page 807 2/10/2011 ----611717.67 §2- CRYSTAL SPRINGS RD (NEj Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 Old Hwy 82 CATHERINE STORE RD (N ) Roule 0&2A Rum 13 Ta 14 Ramps CNerpesa - I - Underpass CLASSIFICATION t3 Access Control NHS Designation SAFETY 1 Maini, NH3 Speed Lint TRAFFIC MDT AAWT Year OHV Pea* trjc* Percentage 65 17700 20200 L 10 Year 23 Factor 32 3 1.8 1.52 ;; 4pr•1ar mal rntnrmabn+; mlV5n r5 1.15:11 the s15alPub itse-d*lrern CR se, re:tate the number at rlelewpage and r-subrmt the reQxst oa EUGENE G. COPPOLA, P.E. P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 Phone: (303) 792-2450 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Intersection: SH 82 & Crystal Springs Date: 6/23/2010 Day: Thursday Observer: GC City: Carbondale, 00 Time Begins Northbound: Southbound: Total northlsouth Eastbound: Westbound: Total eastlwest Total All L S, R r Total L S 4 R Total L S R Total L 5 R Total 07:00_ 5 9 0 6 6 7 13 13 4 231 6 235 404 85 1 86 321 334 07:15 2 _ 0 _ 3 6 6 9 9 5 220 6 225 406 81 2 83 308 317 07:30 6 8 0 9 8 7 16 16 4 229 4 233 410 77 0 77 310 326 07:45 3 3 0 8 5 11 19 19 7 205 7 212 333 89 4 93 305 324 08:00 3 7 0 10 r 6 16 16 1 257 6 258 359 91 3 94 352 368 08:15 1 2 0 7 8 8 15 15 3 236 9 239 419 96 5 101 340 355 08:30 4 5 _ 0 11 5 6 17 17 3 208 5 211 354 108 3 111 322 339 08:45 0 4 9 13 13 6 244 250 98 2 100 350 363 8:00-9:00 0 0 0 0 32 1 0 L 29 61 61 1 13 9451 0 958 0 393 113 406 1364 1425 I PHF 0.9 0.93 0.91 04:00 0 3 6 9 9 5 155 160 227 3 230 390 399 04:15 0 5 9 14 14 6 141 147 251 6 257 404 418 04:30 0 2 5 _ 7 7 6 128 134 _ 266 ~238 6 272 406 413 04:45 0 6 8 14 14 8 160 168 4 242 410 424 05:00 _ 0 3 3 6_ 6 5 122 127 199 7 206 333 339 05:15 0 3 7 10 10 9 131 140 213 6 219 359 369 05:30 0 1 2 3 3 8 147 155 255 9 264 419 422 05:45 0 4 5 9 9 5 115 120 229 5 234 354 363 4:00-5:00 ] 0 0 0 0 16 0 1 28 44 44 25 584 0 609 0 1982 119 1001 1610 1654 PHF L=l,eft turn 0.79 5 = straight 0.91 = right turn 0,92 General Inputs Project Powers Rural Employement Center Trip Generation - Phase 1 Driveways Year AM PM Sat Enter (in) 137 36 INT 5 Exit (out) 28 134 INT7 Off Site intersection (non -driveways) INT 8 AM _ PM Sat Enter (in) INT 11 Exit(out) _...— ,_Exit INT 14 Trip Generation - Phase 2 Driveways AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Off Site intersection (non -driveways) AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Trip Generation - Phase 3 Driveways AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) OH Site Intersection (non -driveways) AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Growth Factors Period Year Facto_ r 1 2013 2 2031 INT 5 3 INT 6 Intersection Names INT 1 SH -82 & CR -103 INT 2 CR -103 & Site Access INT 3 INT 4 INT 5 INT 6 INT7 INT 8 INT 9 INT10 INT 11 INT 12 INT 13 INT 14 INT 15 Study Times Condition 1 AM Condition Condition 2 PM Condition Condition 3 Saturday Condition Version 5/4/2011 Smoothing (yes/no) 1at✓eir /r-ce Ceh N Jt �ifV�� r q ,Pa/k Vo INT 1 SH -62 & CR -103 Powers Rural Employement Center Manual entry Manual entry 24 AM Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0,00% 0.0050 Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0010 0 00% 48.00% 0.00% 5.09% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0.00% Tdp Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 _ 0.00 % 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0.00% 0.0095 48.00% 0.0056 48.00% Driveway Enter "1" Yes, or "0" No Phase 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 2 0 00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0,0096 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0,00% 0..00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 000 % 0 05% 0 00% 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Driveway Enter "1" Yes, or "0" No Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 1 56 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 13 Project Trip Volume TStai- Phasel i3£i `.. 0...... 0- '0 0 66 9.- 0 0 13 8 '13 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :] 0 0 0 Project Tdp Volume outbound- Phase 2 00 - 0 0..-: 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.- 0 0 h D0 0 0 3 0 '0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total' - Phasel Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 9 u 0 011 0 _..0. 00 .0 0 :.0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 Growth Factor Period 1 1 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Growth Factor Period 2 Growth Factor Period 3 Future Background Volume - Period 1 52 1550 0 0 645 36 0 0 0 72 0 69 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Future Background Volume -Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tdp Assignment AM Period 1 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 2 Other Project Trip Assignment AM Period 2 Other Protect Trip Assignment AM Period 3 Total Future Voiume - Period 1 115 00 0 1550 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 645 0 0 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 Total Future Vohume -Period 2 Total Future Volume- Period 3 Manual entry Manual entry 24 PM Condition Ltescnpbon Eastbound Westbound Northbound Soutribound L ' TH R L TH R L TH R L TH i R Existing Volumes Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0,00% 0.0050 0-00% 0,00% 48.00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% 0-00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0-00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0.0090 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 48.00% Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 5.00% 0.00% 0.0046 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.0096 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% _ 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00°! 'Project Trip Volume lrtbound- Phase 1 17 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 9 0 0 -Project Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 64 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 _ 17 0 0 . ; 0 - 0 17 D 0 0 84 - 0 ._. ... BR Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +i 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 LI 0 0 0 0 Protect Trip Volume Total - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 - p. ❑ '0' `0" t1 . 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 00 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 Project rho Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total ..Phase 3 4 - ; 0 :: 0 -� ,0 - - -0 :4 0 0 : 0 0 : : (y 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 2 1,00 1,00 1.30 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 Growth Factor Period 3 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Future Background Volume - Penod 1 50 645 0 0 1610 46 0 0 0 36 0 68 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume -Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume» Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Projed Trip Assignment PM Period 1 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 2 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 2 Other Project TILAssignment Period 3 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 3 Total Future Volume- Penod 1 0 0 0 t} 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 1 73 645 0 0 1610 63 0 0 0 100 0 132 Total Future Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume- Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry 24 Saturday Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % inbound Phase 1 48:00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.00%. 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 000% 0_00% 0,00%, 0.00% 0-00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 4800% Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 e 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phasel 0 0. 0 0'': 0.:.. 0 0 .0 0. _0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound- Phase 2 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 2 0 0 0 0-- 0 0 0 0 - 0 -0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 n 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 0 (3 0- 0 0 0 0 6 -.. _. 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 r.4ti 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Penod 2 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 3 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Future Background Va(ume - Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume -Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 1 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 2 Other Project TILAssignment Period 3 Total Future Volume- Penod 1 0 0 0 t} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume- Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry 24 INT 2 CR -103 $ Site Access Powers Rural Employement Center AM Condition Description _ Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound. L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH R Eaisting Volumes _ R Existing Volumes Existing Volumes i! Tnp Distribution % inbound Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% 96.00% 0.00"5 0.00% 000% 000% 400% Tnp Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 4.00% 000% 96.00%. 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0 00x5 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0054 Driveway Enter "1' Yes, or'0' No Phase 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 Tri • Distribution % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 000% 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0094 000% 0 00% 0 0015 0.00% 000% 000%� Trip oislribo00n % Outbound Phase 2 000% 000% 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0055 0.00% 000% 000% 000% 0 00% 0.00% Driveway Enter "I' Yes, or '0' NO Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prosect Tnp Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 D 132 0 0 0 0 5 Project Top Volume Outbound - Phase 1 1 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 1 0 27 0 0 0 132 0 0 0.: 0 5 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Total - Phase 2 ._. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 33 '' 0 0 Protect Tnp Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Total - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.001 1 O 190 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Grovdh Factor Penod 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Facto Period 3 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Future Background Volume - Penrod 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 0 120 0 Future Background Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 1 5 0 129 0 Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment AM Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 3 0 0 0 0 Other Protect Trip Assignment AM Period 2 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Assignment AM Period 3 Total Future Volume - Period 1 1 0 27 0 0 0 132 05 0 _ 3 120 5 Total Future Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry 34 PM Condition Oescnpbon Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Description L TH R L TH R _ L TH R L TH _ R Existing Volumes Existing Volumes i! [ Tnp Distribution % Inbound P9356 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0 00% 96.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00.5 0.00% 4 00% Trip Distribution %Outbound Phase 1 4.00% 000% 96.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0055 0.00% 0.00% _ 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0094 0.00% Trip Distribution %Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0055 0.00% 000% 0.00% Project Trip Volume inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 0 0 0 0 1 Project Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 1 5 0 129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 - 5 0 129 - 0 - 0 0 35 - 0 0 0 -' . . 0 1 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 2 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, Project Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Tnp Volume Total - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Penod 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00, 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 100 Growth Factor Period 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.001 1.00 GrowOt Factor Period 3 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Future Background Volume - Period 1 ❑ 0 0 0 0 0 __ 0 10.5 0 0 85 0 Future Background Volume -Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume- Period 3 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume • Penod 3 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Penod 1 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 2 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 2 Other Protect Tnp Assignment Period 3 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 3 Total Future Volume - Penod 1 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 1 5 0 129 0 0 0 35 105 0 0 85 1 Total Future Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry 34 Saturday Condition Oescnpbon Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L _. TH R L TH R L TH R L TH R Existing Volumes Trip Oistjbuton % Inbound Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% , 0.00% 0.00% 90.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 4.00% 0.0094 96.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 000% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 _ 0 . 0 _ 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Total - Phase 2 0 0 _ 0 0' _ _@ - 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 Project Try Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound • Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Penod 1 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0011 Growth Factor Period 3 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 190 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Future Background Volume - Period 1 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume- Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment Penod 1 Other Project Trip Assignment Period 2 Other Protect Tnp Assignment Period 3 Total Future Volume - Penod 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry 34 General Inputs Project Powers Rural Emptoyement Center Trip Generation - Phase 1 Driveways _ AM PM Sat Enter (in) 761 194 Exit (out) 178 649 Off Site intersection (non -driveways) _ AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Trip Generation - Phase 2 Driveways AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Off Site intersection (non -driveways) AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Trip Generation - Phase 3 Driveways AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Off Site intersection (non -driveways) AM PM Sat Enter (in) Exit (out) Growth Factors Period Year Factor 1 2013 2 2031. 3 Intersection Names INT 1 SH -82 & CR -103 INT2 CR -103 & Sate Access INT 3 INT 4 INT 5 INT 6 INT 7 INT 8 INT 9 INT 10 INT 11 INT 12 INT 13 INT 14 INT 15 Study Times Condition 1 AM Condition Condition 2 PM Condition Condition 3 Saturday Condition Version 5(4/2011 Smoothing (yes/no) .�- 11674 e INT 1 SH -82 & CR -103 Powers Rural Employement Center Manual entry Manual entry 5/ PM Condition AM Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R 0 TH R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Tnp Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0-00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 46.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% Trip Distribution %Outbound Phase 3 0.00% 0.00% 0030% 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48. D0% D. 00% 4800% Driveway Enter '1" Yes, or "0" No Phase 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0.00% 0-00% 0 00% 0.00% 0,00% 0,00% 0.00 % 000% Trip Distribution %Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.0096 0.00% 0,00% 0.00% Drveway Enter "1" Yes, or "0" No Phase2 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0� 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound- Phase 1 365 0 0 0 0 0 365 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjeCt Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 85 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 -.355 " 0 -' 0 - - 0 `.. 0 ' - 365 .... 0 r 30 6 85 . . '0- : 85: Protect Tdp Volume Inbound -Phase 2 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Period 1 5 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 Project Tdp Volume Total - Phase 2 Project Trip Volume Inbound- Phase 3 0 0 0 0 1 00 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 13 - 0 0 -0 0 . - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 .: .. 0 0 0 0 a 011 . - - 0 :, 0 0 - - 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 Growth Factor Period 1 _ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.02 1.00 1 00 3.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.,00 1 00 1.00 1.60 Growth Factor Period 2 Growth Factor Period 3 Future Background Volume- Period 1 52 1550 0 0 0 645 36 0 0 0 72 0 69 Future Background Volume- Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Ass+gnment Penod 1 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 2 Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tdp Assignment Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment AM Period 1 Project Tnp Assignment Period 3 Total Future Volume - Period 1 149 645 0 0 1610 139 0 Other Project Trip Assignment AM Period 2 Other Project Tnp Assignment AM Period 3 Totak Future Volume - Penod 1 417 0 0 1550 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 645 0 0 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 157 0 0 0 0 0 154 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 2 Total Future Volume - Period 3 Manual entry Manual entry 5/ PM Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L + TH R L TH R L TH ' R Existing Volumes Th R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Tnp Distribution % Outbound Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 46.00% Tnp Disttibutlon % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 2 000% 0.00% 0,00% 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0095 0.00% Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 1 93 0 0 0 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 312 0 312 Protect Trip Volume Total - Phase. 1 93' _ 0 : _. ' 0 0 0 93 0 -0 -' 0 312 0 ' 312 Project Tdp Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 2 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 Project Tdp Volume Total - Phase 2 {3. 0 0 0 0 :. 0 0 0 . 0 0 c 0 .: 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Pnase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 Project Trio Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 0 0.'...'.. 0 0 0'. it 0 0:0 0 - - 0 0-. ' 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1,03 1,60 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 2 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 3 1.03 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 Future Background Volume- Penod 1 56 645 0 0 1610 46 0 0 0 36 0 68 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Ass+gnment Penod 1 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 2 Other Project Tdp Assignment Period 2 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 3 Project Tnp Assignment Period 3 Total Future Volume - Period 1 149 645 0 0 1610 139 0 0 0 348 0 380 Total Future Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry 5/ Saturday Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L Th R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 48.00% 0,00% 0A0% 0.00% 0.00% 46.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0.00% Trip Distribution %n Outbound Phase 1 0.00°/ 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 0.00% 48.00% 0.00% 4800% Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 ❑ _0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Project Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total- Phase 1 0 : - 0 0 0 -0 fl 0 0 0 0 is ... 0 Project Tnp Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0. 0 0 I? 0 0 00 0 ❑ Project Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tdp Volume Total - Phase 2 ' 0 a 0 0...,.., 0: 7 0 - :0 :..0`-0_ Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'' 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0'0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total- Phase 3 0 0 --0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 -. 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1 Du 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 0 3.00 1.00- 1.30 100 1,00 Growth Factor Period 2 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1,03 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 190 1.00 Growth Factor Period 3 100 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 Future Background Volume ..Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Ass+gnment Penod 1 Other Project Tdp Assignment Period 2 Project Tnp Assignment Period 3 _Other Total Future Volume - Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume- Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry 5/ INT 2 CR -103 & Site Access Powers Rural Employement Center Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry '/6 AM Condition 'Oescnpuon Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH R Exiseng Volumes Existing Volumes I Tnp Dsstributioe % Inbound Phase 1 0.00%. 000% 0,00% _ 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 96..00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000 0.00% 4.0096 Tnp Distrlbutwn % Outbound Phase 1 4.00% 000% 96.00% 0 0036 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 0,00% 000% 000% 0.00% Dnveway Enter "1" Yes, or "0" No Phase 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trip Dislr bu00n % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00°6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%. 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 000% 000% 0 00% Driveway Enter'11" Yrs, or "0" No Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Tnp Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 731 0 0 0 0 30 Project Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 1 7 0 171 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 7 d 171 0 0 0 731 0 0 0 0 30 Pr01eet Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Tnp Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OI 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pro ect Tn• Volume Total - Phase 2 Project Tnp Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Top Volume Total - Phase 3 -Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1_.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 100 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 2 Growth Factor Penod 3 Future Background Volume - Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0 0 120 0 Future Background Volume - Pe4Od 2 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Penod 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Assignment AM Period 1 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 2 Other Project Tnp Assignment AM Penod 2 Other Project Tnp Assignment AM Period 3_ Total Future Volume- Penod 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 171 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 731 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 u 30 0 0 Total Future Volume - Penod 2 Total Future Volume - Period 3 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry '/6 PM Condition Descrip9on Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH j R Existing Volumes Existing Volumes I Tnp DistnbutIon % Inbound Phase 1 0.00% 0,00% 000% 0,00% 0.001. 0.00% 96.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4,00% Trip Dtstributlon % Outbound Phase 1 4,00% 0.00% 96.00% 0.00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0016 0,00% 0.00% 3.00% Trip Otstnbutiun % Inbound Phase 2 0.00% 0.00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Trip Distribution % Outbound Phase 2 0.00% 000% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0-00% 0,00% 0.00% 0.00% Prolect Tnp Volume inbound - Phase 10 000%. 0 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 8 Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 26 0 623 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 Protect Tnp Volume Total - Phase 1 26 . 0 623 0 0 0 188 0 0 0 0 8 Project Tnp Volume inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prdjecl_14p Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 Project Trlp Volume Total - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'Project Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.0(1 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 2 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1-00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00. .Growth Factor Period 3 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' 1 00, Fulu••re Background Volume - Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 0 0' 85 0' Future Background Volume- Period 2 0 0 0 _ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Penod 2 0 _ 0': Future Background Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 1 Other Project Trip Assignment PM Period 2 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 2 Other Prolect Trip Assignment PM Period 3 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 3 i Total Future Volume - Period 1 260 623 0 0 0 186 105 0 0 85 8 Total Future Volume -Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry '/6 Saturday Condition Description Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L TH R L TH R L TH R L TH _ R Existing Volumes Trip Distribution % Inbound Phase 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%6 96.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0096 0.30% 4.00% Trip DistrlbutIon % Outbound Phase 1 4.00% 0.00% 96.00% 0,00% 0.00% 0 00% 000%. 0,00% 0.0300 0.00% 0.00% 0,30% Project T11p Volume Inbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Trip Volume Total - Phase 1 'Cr 0 0 _ 0 0 _ 0 _ 0 . 0 0 0 0' 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project _ Trip Volume Outbound - Phase 2 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pro eel TO. Volume Total - Phase 2 0 0 0_ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Trip Volume Inbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pro ect Tdp Volume Outbound - Phase 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Trip Volume Total - Phase 3 -0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 Growth Factor Period 1 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 ''Growth Factor Period 2 1.00 1.00 100 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Factor Period 3 _ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1.00 Future Background Volume - Period 1 0 0_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Background Volume - Penod 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Sackgrouad Volume - Period 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 1 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 2 Other Project Tnp Assignment Penod 3 i Total Future Volume - Period 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume - Period 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Future Volume • Penod 3 0 0 0 0' a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manual entry Manual entry Manual entry '/6 2009 Edition — 6- /a3 ,5/ 7m 4,7 �✓ �r / r+� Page 441 Figure 4C-3. t 3, Peak Hour MINOR STR,EET HIGHL VOLUME APPROACH - VPH 0 500 400 300 0 100 & 2 OR MOR r' NES r 4/AL1%, 4//1P 2 0R MORE L` Al 500 600 700 1 LANE 00 1000 1100 1200 1 +► 1400 1500 1•i• 1700 1800 MAJORS EET— ` AL OF BOTH APPROAC' VEHICLES ' HOUR (VPH) �\ 'Note: 0 vph applies as the lower thres` + volume f a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vp . pp ies as the lower threshold volume for a minor street approach with one lane. MINOR STREET HIGHER - VOLUME APPROACH - VPH 4/i - (04-4- = zq/'7 ✓/+ah pn - low - 239/ vr!h A,n _ b'/7b = 3ax3 v/oh p - d`iy b 2 5,0 47, h December 2009 (SQ tr At.s art - /*/ow Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION 0 ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) Ta acc/rn 400 300 200 100 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 100• 75* 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. cH / a'c ti --) v''/`pn Q7 /r,e/t s t eTs vea/4" 0 h ar'r t %f ✓ K z Q 3/ ©W %r;f7 G b oh 0/e" ray Sect. 4C.04 71 fJ J • • Y 11 Short Report (-------- Trl tcietAc cr</<"Grr rah Y/1 sr-, Page 1of1 Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved MCSfTM Version 5.5 file://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\s2kA8F.tmp Generated: 514!2011 1:03 PM 54/2011 �f MiztORT tE PORT General Information Site Information Analyst Hudson Agency or Co. Turnkey Consulting Date Performed 5/4/2011 Time Period AM - Total Traffic Intersection SH -82 & CR -113,D To Area Type areas Jurisdiction Garfield County Analysis Year 2031 Low trip gen Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T 1 T R L R Volume (vph) 118 1550 645 102 85 0 °A) Heavy Vehicles 10 10 10 10 r 10 10 PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pretimed/Actuated (PIA) A A A A P P Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green ' 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 NNONN 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 _0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 0304 SB Only 06 07 08 G= 11.0 G= 37.8 G= 0.0 �G= 0.0 G= 15.2 G= 0.0 4G= 0.0 G= 0,0 Timing iY= 4 Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 0 Y= 0 Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 _Cycle Length C = 80.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LDS Determination _- EB WB NB_ SB Adjusted Flow Rate 128 1685 701 89 92 0 Lane Group Capacity 226 2171 1554 694 312 279 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.78 0.45 0.13 0.29 0.00 Green Ratio 0.14 0.66 0.47 0.47 0.19 0.19 Uniform Delay d1 32.3 9.5 14.1 11.8 27.8 26.2 Delay Factor k 0.16 0.33 0.11 0.11 0.50 0.50 Incremental Delay d2 3.3 1.8 0.2 0.1 2.4 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 35.6 11.3 14.4 11.9 30.2 26.2 Lane Group LOS D B 8 B C C Approach Delay 13.0 14.1 30.2 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Delay 13.9 Intersection LOS B Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved MCSfTM Version 5.5 file://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\s2kA8F.tmp Generated: 514!2011 1:03 PM 54/2011 Back -of -Queue Worksheet Page 1oft BACK -OF -QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center - Low Trip Generation 4,4.1 Average Back of Queue EB WB NB SB LT TH _ RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane Group L T T RL R Initial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow Rate/Lane Group 128 1685 701 89 92 0 SatflowlLane 1641 1727 1727 1468 1641 1468 Capacity/Lane Group 226 2171 1554 694 312 279 Flow Ratio 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.78 0.45 0.13 0.29 0.00 I Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Q1 2.7 13.7 5.5 1.1 1.8 0.0 kB 0.3 0,7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 Q2 0.3 2.2 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.0 Q Average 3.0 15.9 5.9 1.2 1.9 0.0 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) fB% 2.0 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.6 Back of Queue 6.0 27.8 11.5 2.4 4.4 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 Average Queue Storage Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved NCS+TM Version 5.5 Generated 5/4/2011 1.11 PM f le://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp1s2kAC4.tmp 5/4/2011 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Hudson Agency or Co. TurnKey Consulting Date Performed 4 011 Time Period Total Traffic Intersection SH -82 & CR -103 Area Type A o er areas Jurisdiction Garfield Count Analysis Year 2031 Low trip gen Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L R Volume (vph) 73 645 1610 63 100 132 % Heavy Vehicles 10 10 10 10 10 10 PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 _ 0.92 0.92 PretimedfActuated (P/A) A A A A P P Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 NNONN 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 _ 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 7.1 G= 63.1 G= 0.0 G= 0.0G= 13.8 G= 0.0 G= 0.0 G= 0.0 Y=4 Y=6 Y=0 Y=0 +Y=6 Y=0 Y=0 Y=0 Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 _Cycle Length C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 79 701 1750 47 - 109 143 - - Lane Group Capacity 117 2440 2075 926 226 r 203 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.29 0.84 0.05 0.48 0.70 Green Ratio 0.07 0.74 0.63 0.63 0.14 0.14 Uniform Delay di 45.3 4.2 14.6 7.0 39.8 41.2 Delay Factor k 0.25 0.11 0.38 0.11 0.50 0.50 Incremental Delay d2 14.4 0,1 3.4 0.0 7.2 18.5 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1,000 1.000 Control Delay 59.7 4.3 17.9 7.1 47.0 59.7 Lane Group LOS E A 8 A D E Approach Delay 9.9 17.6 54.2 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Delay 18.8 Intersection LOS B Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:\Documents and Settings\S kip\Local Settings\Temp\s2kASF.ttnp Generated: 5/4/2011 1:08 PM 5/4/2011 Back -of -Queue Worksheet Page 1 of 1 BACK -OF -QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center - Low Trip Generation 771/11 Average Back of Queue EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT _ LT TH RT Lane Group L T T R L R Initial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow Rate/Lane Group 79 701 1750 1 47 109 143 Satflow/Lane 1641 1727 1727 1468 --- 1641 1468 Capacity/Lane Group 117 2440 2075 926 226 203 Flow Ratio 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 - 0.1 0.1 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.29 0.84 0.05 0.48 0.70 11 Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio ,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 11.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Qi 2.1 3.4 20.1 0.5 2.8 3.8 kB 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.4 02 0.4 0.3 3.6 0.0 0.4 0.9 Q Average 2.5 3.7 23.7 0.5 3.2 4.7 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) fB% 2.0 2.0 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.0 Back of Queue 5.1 7.3 39.4 1.1 6.8 1 9.3 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average Queue Storage Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio i Copyright 0 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 file://C_ODocurnents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templs2kA82.tmp Generated: 5/4/2011 1:09 P Two -Way Stop Control Page I of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection (CR -103& Powete Access Analyst Hudson Agency/Co. TurnKey Consulting Jurisdiction Garfield County Date Performed 52011 Analysis Year 2031 Analysis Time Period - _ _.. M Total Traffic - Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center Low Trip Generation East/West Street; Powers Site Access orth/South Street: CR -103 _ intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 132 85 - 120 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh/h) 143 92 0 0 130 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 -- -- 0 -- — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 - Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 -- 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 1 - -+ 27 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (vehlh) - - - 1 0 29 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 0 50 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 _ Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service A pproach Northbound Southbound _ Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (veh/h) 143 _ 30 C (m) (veh/h) 1201 765 lc 0.12 0.04 95% queue length 0.40 0.12 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.4 9.9 LOS A _ A pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 9.9 Approach LOS -- -- A Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved NCS+rM Version 5.5 file://C:\Docufnents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templu2kA34.tmp Generated: 51412011 10:54 AM F/6' 5/4/2011 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1of1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ______________ Intersection, CR -103 & Powers Site Access Analyst Hudson Agency/Co. Turnkey Consulting Jurisdiction Gartreld county — Date Performed 5/4 2011 Analysis Year 2031 Analysis Time Period (PAVTotal Traffic - Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center Low Trip Generation _ EastfWest Street: Powers Site Access ',North/South STreet: CR -103 Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street i Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 35 10585 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (vehlh) 38 114 0 0 92 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 -- -- 0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized i, 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0_ 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street_ Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (vehlh) 5 129 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1,00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 5 0 140 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50_ 0 _ 50 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 —_ Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service pproach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (veh/h) 38 145 C (m) (vehlh) 1248 828 Nile 0.03 _ 0.18 95% queue length 0.09 _ 0.63 Control Delay (siveh) 8.0_ 10.3 LOS A B approach Delay (s/veh) -- — 10.3 pproach LOS -- -- B Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, AN Rights Reserved NCS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:\Docurents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templu2kA34.tmp Generated 5/4/2011 10:56 AM 5/412011 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Hudson Agency or Co. Turnkey Consulting Date Performed 5/ /2011 Time Period AM -- Total Traffic Intersection SH -82 & CR-10� Area TypeAl! oiher areas Jurisdiction Garfield unt Analysis Year 2031 High trip ge Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L 1 R Volume (vph) 417 1550 645 401 157 0 % Heavy Vehicles 10 10 10 10 10 10 PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pretimed/Actuated (PIA) A A A A P P Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 NNONN 0 N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 _ 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time _0 3.2 r 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G=22.6 G=23.4 G=0.0 G=0.0 G=8.0 G=0.0 G=0.0 G=0.0 Y= 4 Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 0 Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 0 Y= 0 Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 _ Cycle Length C = 70.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 453 1685 , 701 414 171 0 Lane Group Capacity 530 2349 1099 491 188 168 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.72 0.64 0.84 _ 0.91 0.00 Green Ratio 0.32 0.71 0.33 0.33 0,11 0.11 Uniform Delay d1 22.2 5.9 19.7 21.6 v 30.6 27.5 Delay Factor k 0.39 0.28 0.22 0.38 0.50 0.50 Incremental Delay d2 12.9 1.1 1.2 12.6 45.5 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 35.1 6.9 21.0 34.2 76.1 27.5 Lane Group LOS D A C C E C Approach Delay 12.9 25.9 76.1 Approach LOS B C E Intersection Delay 20.3 Intersection LOS C Copyright O 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved NCS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:ADocuments and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\s2kAD1.tmp Generated: 5/4/2011 1:18 PM L f� 5/412011 Back -of -Queue Worksheet Page 1 of 1 BACK -OF -QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center - High Trip Generation 444 Average Back of Queue EB WB NB - _ _ SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane Group L T T R L R Initial Queue/Lame 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow Rate/Lane Group 453 1685 701 414 171 0 SatflowlLane ,1641 1727 1727 1468 1641 1468 Capacity/Lane Group 530 2349 1099 491 188 168 Flow Ratio 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 vlc Ratio 0.85 0.72 0.64 0.84 0.91 0.00 1 Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 1.00 1.00 ' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Qi 8.2 10.1 6.1 7.5 3.3 ' 0.0 kB 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 02 2.0 1.6 0.7 1.8 1.7 0.0 Q Average 10.2 11.7 6.8 9.2 5.0 0.0 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) EB% 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.6 Back of Queue 18.8 21.2 13.0 17.1 , 9.8 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 Average Queue Storage Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio y Copyright O 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved NGS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:1Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templs2kAC4.trnp Generated: 5/4/2011 1-19 PM 5/4/2011 Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Hudson Agency or Co. TurnKey Consulting Date Performed 5/.• 0 1 Time Period 4.tal Traffic / Intersection 82 & R1-103 Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Garfield ount ' Analysis Year 2031 High trip gen Volume and Timing Input _ EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 _ 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L R , Volume (vph) 149 645 1610 139 348 380 % Heavy Vehicles 10 10 10 10 10 10 ' PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 PretimedlActuated (P/A) A A A A P P Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _ 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 A Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 + N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 1 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 'Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timing G= 6.9 G= 57.6 G= 0.0 G= 0.0 G= 29.5 _ G= 0.0 G= 0.0 G= 0.0 Y=4 Y=6 Y=0 Y=0 Y=6 Y=0 Y=0 Duration of Analysis (hrs) = 0.25 _Y=0 Cycle Length C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 162 701 1750 129 378 413 Lane Group Capacity 103 2048 1722 769 440 394 v/c Ratio 1.57 0.34 1.02 0.17 0.86 1.05 Green Ratio 0.06 0.62 0.52 0.52 0.27 0.27 Uniform Delay d1 51.5 9.9 26.2 13.7 38.3 40.3 Delay Factor k 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 Incremental Delay d2 299.1 0.1 25.8 0.1 19.2 r - 58.5 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 350.7 10.0 52.0 13.8 57.4 98.8 Lane Group LOS F B 0 B E F Approach Delay 74.0 v 49.4 - 79.0 Approach LOS E D E Intersection Delay 62.0 Intersection LOS E Copyright a 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved NGS+TM Version 5.5 file://C:1Docunents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templs2kAD1.tmp Generated: 5/4/2011 1.24 PM 5 /z 514/2011 Back -of -Queue Worksheet Page 1 of 1 BACK -OF -QUEUE WORKSHEET General Information `Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center - High Trip Generation PM Average Back of Queue EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane Group L T T R L R Initial Queue/Lane 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' Flow Rate/Lane Group 162 701 1750 129 1 378 413 Satflow/Lane 1641 1727 1727 1468 1641 1468 Capacity/Lane Group 103 2048 1722 769 440 394 Flow Ratio 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.3 vlc Ratio 1.57 0.34 1.02 0.17 0.86 1.05 I Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PF Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Qi 4.9 5.4 28.1 2.1 11.0 12.6 kB 0.2 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Q2 7.9 0.4 10.2 0.1 3.2 7.2 Q Average 12.8 5.8 38.2 2.2 14.2 19.9 Percentile Back of Queue (95th percentile) fs°ra 1.8 1.9 1.6 2.0 1.7 1.6 Back of Queue 23.0 11.2 60.1 4.5 23.5 32.2 Queue Storage Ratio Queue Spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Queue Storage 0 0 0 00 0 Average Queue Storage Ratio 95% Queue Storage Ratio Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 file.//C:\Documents and Settings\SkiplLocal Settings\Temp1s2kAC4,tmp Generated: 5/4/2011 1 24 PM 5/4/2011 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection CR 103 & Powers Site Access Analyst Hudson Agency/Co. Turnkey Consulting urisdiction Garfield County Date Performed 5r4/2011 nalysis Year 2031 ,Analysis Time Period A7A7M)Total Traffic Project Description Powers Rural Employment Center Hi.h Trip Generation East/West Street: Powers Site Access 1. - • • reet: CR -103 Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R plume (veh/h) 731 - 85 120 30 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 794 92 0 0 130 32 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 -- _ _ -- 0 ---- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11_ 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 7 ', 171 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.921.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 7 0 185 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 0 50 0 _ 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L - LR v (veh/h) 794 192 C (m) (veh/h) 1172 273 v/c 0.68 0.70 95% queue length 5.63_ 4.82 Control Delay (slveh) 14.3- 44.3 'LOS B E pproach Delay (s/veh) -- — 44.3 pproach LOS -- — E Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 tile://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Templu2kA34.tmp Generated: 514/2011 10:58 AM 51412011 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Intersection CR -103 & Powers Site Access Analyst Hudson Agency/Co. TurnKey Consulting Jurisdiction Garfield County Date Performed 5/4/2011nalysis Year 2031 Analysis Time Period (P ota/ Traffic Pro.ect Description Powers Rural Employment Center Hi.h Trip Generation East/West Street: Powers Site Access 1 o ou treet: CR -103 intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 _ 3_ 4 5 6 L T R L T __ R olume (veh/h) 186 _ 105 85 8 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh/h) 202 114 0 0 92 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 -- -- 0 -- _ -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 26 632 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (vehfh) 28 0 686 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 50 0 50 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 3 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service pproach Northbound _ Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L. LR v (veh/h) 202 714 C (m) (veh/h) 1240- - - 780 vlc 0.16 0.92 95% queue length 0.58 12.75 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.5 38.2 'LOS A E pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 38.2 pproach LOS -- -- E Copyright © 2010 University of Florida, Ali Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.5 tile://C:\Documents and Settings\Skip\Local Settings\Temp\u2kA34.tmp Generated: 5/412011 10:59 AM 4. 5/4/2011 Traffic Impact Study LAFARGE WEST CERISE SITE Garfield County, Colorado Eugene G. Coppola PE, PTOE P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 303-792-2450 Traffic Impact Study LAFARGE WEST CERISE SITE Garfield County, Colorado Prepared For: Lafarge West, Inc. 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Westminster, CO 80021 Prepared By: Eugene G. Coppola PE, PTOE P. O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 303-792-2450 August 4, 2010 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. AGENCY DISCUSSIONS 3 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 A. Existing Road Network 4 B. Existing Traffic Conditions 5 C. Surrounding Land Uses 8 IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 9 A. Site Assumptions 9 B. Site Traffic 9 C. Trip Distribution 12 D. Background Traffic 12 E. Future Total Traffic 19 F. Future Roadway System 19 V. TRAFFIC IMPACTS 19 A. Auxiliary Lanes and Traffic Controls 22 B. Future Operating Conditions (with Cerise) 22 VI. DESIGN ISSUES 25 A. Auxiliary Lane Assessment 25 B. Radii 26 C. Crystal Springs Road Approach to SH 82 26 D. Median Improvements 27 E. Signage 27 F. Sight Distance 27 VII. CONCLUSIONS 28 List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2 Current Roadway Geometry 6 Figure 3 Current Traffic 7 Figure 4 Concept Plan 10 Figure 5 Site Traffic Distribution 13 Figure 6 Site Traffic - Vehicles 14 Figure 7 Site Traffic — Passenger Car Equivalents 15 Figure 8 Short -Term BackgroundTraffic 17 Figure 9 Long -Term BackgroundTraffic 18 Figure 10 Short -Term Total Traffic 20 Figure 11 Long -Term Total Traffic 21 Figure 12 Short -Term Roadway Geometry 23 I. INTRODUCTION Lafarge West, Inc. (Lafarge) is proposing a mining and processing operation to re- place its current Powers operation in Garfield County, Colorado. The site will be located in the northeast corner of the State Highway 82 (SH 82) — Crystal Springs Road (CR 103) intersection just east of Carbondale. The new site is referred to as the Cerise site. It will replace the existing Powers site which is in the northwest corner of the same intersection. A vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. The Cerise site will open in 2012 and operate for 15 years. The Powers site will cease operations when the Cerise site becomes operational. This study contains the investigations and analyses typically contained in a full traffic study. Key steps undertaken as part of this study are defined below. • Obtain current traffic and roadway data in the immediate area of the site. • Evaluate current traffic operations to establish baseline conditions. • Determine site generated traffic volumes and distribute this traffic to the nearby street system. • Estimate roadway traffic volumes for future roadway conditions. • Evaluate traffic operations with the proposed operation fully functional un- der future conditions. • Identify areas of potential deficiencies. • Recommend measures to mitigate the impact of site generated traffic as appropriate. 0 2500' 5000' 10000' D TETRA TECH www.tetratech.com LAFARGE WEST, INC. Project No.: 133-23511-10003 1900 S. Sunset St., Suite 1-F Longmont, Co. 80501 PHONE: (303) 772-5282 FAX: (303) 772-7039 CERISE MINE VICINITY MAP Date: JUNE, 2010 Designed By: Copyright: Tetra Tech 1 II. AGENCY DISCUSSIONS Garfield County and CDOT were contacted regarding the contents, assumptions, and methodologies used in this study. Mike Prehm, representing Garfield County, re- quested that investigations at the site access to Crystal Springs Road and the SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersections be conducted. He indicated that no other inves- tigations were needed from the County's perspective. Since the speed limit sign was missing, Mr. Prehm confirmed that the speed limit on Crystal Springs Road is 25 MPH. He also stated that the posted weight limits on Crystal Springs Road would not be problematic for the Cerise operation. Dan Roussin, CDOT Region 3 Permit Manager, was contacted and requested that the methodologies used in the traffic study be submitted for review by CDOT's engineer. Subsequent to this request, a converstation with Alisa Babler followed to determine the appropriate methodologies, assumptions and contents of the traffic study. This conversation was documented in an email dated June 28, 2010 which is included in Appendix A. Key items of agreement are stated below: 1. A Level 3 traffic impact study is appropriate for this use. 2. Define proposed use(s) on the existing Lafarge site (Powers) along the west side of Crystal Springs Road (CR 103) and the future status of existing access points to SH 82. 3. Quantify current traffic at the SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection includ- ing conducting AM and PM peak hour traffic counts at this intersection. 4. Describe future uses and operations on the new Lafarge site (Cerise) located along the east side of CR 103. Direct site access will be provided by a drive- way to CR 103. 5. Cerise site traffic will be based on operator estimates using current activity at the Powers site plus asphalt operations. Asphalt traffic will be based on an es- timated batch plant capacity of 10 loads per hour. 6. Site traffic will be assigned equally to SH 82 in the east and west directions from CR 103. This is consistent with the distribution of site traffic at the Powers 3 site. Only local deliveries are expected to vary from this distribution. As re- quested, the potential for additional site access using other County roads to and from the east will be investigated. If deemed viable, supplemental access routes will be addressed in the traffic study. 7. Site traffic will be stated in vehicles and PCEs. PCEs will be used when eva- luating auxiliary lane warrants and design features. 8. Background traffic growth will based on the CDOT published 20 year growth factor for this section of SH 82. Background traffic growth on Crystal Springs Road will be based on future development expected to use this roadway. 9. If a traffic signal will be warranted in the future, an estimate of when the war- rant will be 80% satisfied will be provided. III. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Existing Road Network The Cerise site is bordered on the west by Crystal Springs Road and on the south by SH 82. These roadways are under Garfield County and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) control, respectively. Crystal Springs Road is a two lane roadway with one lane in each direction and serves a limited role in the north -south roadway system. It has a speed limit of 25 miles per hour with posted weight limits. Weight restrictions from the Cerise site to the south are 54,000 pounds for vehicles with three axles and 80,000 pounds for vehicles with five axles. Lower restrictions are posted north of Blue road. 4 SH 82 is the major east -west roadway serving this area. It has two lanes in each direction with auxiliary lanes at intersections and a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour. The SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection is located at approximately MP 13.5. This intersection functions as a "T" intersection since the south leg is a gated field access. This intersection is skewed to the northeast at an angle of about 105 degrees. All auxiliary lanes are currently available for traffic turning to and from the north with southbound traffic on Crystal Springs Road under stop sign control. There are no significant access points to SH 82 immediately east of Crystal Springs Road. West of Crystal Springs Road two access points exist to serve the Powers site. The first is a one-way northbound entrance located some 710 feet west of Crystal Springs Road with the second being a southbound one way exit located some 1240 feet west of Crystal Springs Road. There are no traffic signals within one mile of the Crystal Springs Road intersection. SH 82 is designated an EX roadway per CDOT's State Highway Access Code. Current roadway geometry and traffic controls are shown on Figure 2. B. Existing Traffic Conditions Traffic counts were collected as part of this study and extracted from other sources and agency publications. The SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection and the existing driveways to the Powers site were counted during the morning highway peak hour (6:30 — 8:30 A.M.) and the afternoon highway peak hour (4:00 — 6:00 P.M.). Recent traffic is shown on Figure 3. The Powers driveways were counted for informa- tion only. Traffic using these driveways was observed to be 60% vehicles with three axles (mostly dump trucks), 15% vehicles with five axles and 25% passenger cars/pickups during the morning peak hour. During the afternoon peak hour, there were 80% passenger cars/pickups, 10% three axle vehicles and 10% five axle ve- hicles. Count sheets and other supporting documents are provided in Appendix B. 5 X w w- al CIS J w LQ 0 0- "41- 4 1 1 1 1 * With acceleration lane on SH 82 NOTE: The southbound Crystal Springs Road approach to SH 82 was observed functioning as a two lane approach. 6 4 Crystal Springs TOP SH 82 Figure 2 CURRENT ROADWAY GEOMETRY CO N CO CO 1— 420/1008 0 0 c 0 L rt+ c w j, W CU WI CU c �O N L d 3 0 0 I'--- 2/2 4— 420/1008 Crystal Springs 13/19 1— 343/982 970/609 —* 18/2 -- 958/609 958/609 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour Daily 7 17,700 13/25 945/584 -* SH 82 Figure 3 CURRENT TRAFFIC I The SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection is considered critical and was eva- luated using highway capacity procedures during morning and afternoon peak hours. For definition purposes, acceptable conditions are defined as overall level of service D'. The individual traffic movements may operate as low as level of service `E/F' for critical side street left turns at stop sign controlled intersections. These levels of service are considered normal along major roadways. Resultant levels of service for current conditions are shown below. CURRENT OPERATING CONDITIONS Intersection Control Movement/ Direction Level of Service AM Pk Hr. PM Pk Hr. Crystals Springs — SH 82 Stop EB L A B SBL B C SBR A B SB Approach B C OVERALL A A As shown, acceptable operations currently exist at the SH 82 - Crystal Springs Road intersection. Capacity worksheets are provided in Appendix C. C. Surrounding Land Uses The site is located just east of Carbondale. In the immediate area of the site, land uses are generally devoted to other mining and processing operations, agriculture and rural residential uses. 8 IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS A. Site Assumptions Cerise will initiate operations in 2012 and will continue to operate for 15 years includ- ing reclamation. For evaluation purposes, short-term and long-term conditions were investigated. These time frames represent the opening year of the Cerise site and the final year of operation some 17 years in the future (2027), respectively. Processed materials will be used on-site at the concrete and/or asphalt batch plants or they will be sold. Routine operations will include the mining, processing, batching, sales, and distribution of materials. A single full movement access point to Crystal Springs Road, some 1,800 feet north of SH 82, will serve all site functions. The driveway location has been chosen based on the alignment of Crystal Springs Road at that location. A concept plan is provided on Figure 4. B. Site Traffic Site generated traffic was estimated using the operating strategies anticipated by Lafarge. The site will operate from 7:00 A.M. — 8:00 P.M., Monday through Saturday during the peak construction season. Heavy equipment will operate from 7:00 A.M. — 6:00 P.M. with emergencies handled whenever they occur. Up to 45 employees will work on-site. During the off-season, shorter operating times and significantly less traffic is expected. All activity revolves around mining, processing, and batching activities. The facility will operate seasonally for 6 — 7 months per year depending upon weather and construction demands. 9 G (EOE) H031 V11131 NIVVY 0311*1321.1 NV1d 1d30NO0 3NINI 3S I2130 31,1 ANN 00R10100.2M29 MANS SNI aS3M 3etredvI 1 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO NOTE: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE RELOCATED ON-SITE WITH FUTURE PHASES. l3VHOIW •NOSINOW OAACT Mild 1..0.1101.3VlOdd003N30.11011%3.31133HS10V0\EO0O4-LLSE -OLOZ/LZ/L Peak traffic activity is expected during the morning peak hour. At that time, em- ployees will be arriving at the site in preparation for the first run of the day. Typically, this one hour period represents 10 — 12% of the daily traffic with the balance of site traffic occurring uniformly over the rest of the day. Lafarge has provided an estimate of the maximum site traffic. This estimate assumes a vigorous economy and all site functions operating at or near capacity. Site traffic associated with this level of activity during the peak construction season is shown below. The estimate is based on peak historical activity at the Powers site with the addition of an asphalt batch plant. La- farge's letter documenting this estimate is provided in Appendix D. The following table presents an estimate of one-way trips generated by the Cerise site during the peak summer season with operations at or near capacity. It reflects condi- tions with all employees arriving at the site and all trucks departing the site during the morning peak hour. During the afternoon peak hour all trucks were assumed to return to the site with two-thirds of the employees leaving during the same hour. PEAK SITE TRIPS AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr Daily In Out In Out Aggregate & Asphalt Trucks -- 30 22 -- 500 Concrete Trucks -- 9 7 -- 150 Import Trucks 1 1 1 1 10 Employees 45 -- -- 30 90 Miscellaneous 1 1 1 1 20 TOTAL 47 41 31 32 770 On a peak season day, the site will generate 88 morning peak hour trips, 63 afternoon peak hour trips and 770 daily trips. On an annualized traffic basis, an estimated 45 morning peak hour trips, 30 afternoon peak hour trips and 400 daily trips are expected from the Cerise site. On a passenger car equivalent (PCE) basis, up to 2,090 PCEs could occur on the peak day of the peak season. This estimate is conservative (high) since all trucks 11 were assumed to be 40 feet in length or longer. On an annualized average daily basis, some 1,050 PCEs are expected. The morning site peak hour will likely overlap the morning highway peak time with the afternoon site peak hour occurring at the end of the highway afternoon peak hour or later. C. Trip Distribution Trip distribution is a function of the origin and destination of site users and the availa- ble roadway system. In this case, all traffic except local deliveries will go south on Crystal Springs Road to access SH 82. At SH 82, traffic will turn east or west de- pending on the type and purpose of the trip. Site traffic distributions are shown on Figure 5 with resultant site traffic shown on Figure 6 and passenger car equivalent (PCEs) trips shown on Figure 7. Local deliveries will use the shortest safe and legal route; however, the number of local deliveries is expected to be negligible. Since the County street system is comprised of a number of discontinuous and circuitous gravel roads, Crystal Springs Road south of the site is the only viable access route. The distribution of material from this site is based upon historic trends, anticipated market areas and competing facilities. D. Background Traffic Background traffic was developed for the year 2012 and 2027. This represents the short-term and long-term time frames associated with the opening and closing of the Cerise site. 12 100% truck Neg employees 1a 0 0 E a) 0 0 Crystal Springs Site Driveway LEGEND: Neg = Negligible 50% trucks 50% trucks 67% employees 33% employees 13 SH 82 Figure 5 SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION Crystal Springs 15 cars = 15 vehicles 1 truck + 30 cars = 31 vehicles SH 82 AM LEGEND: Daily truck + 21 cars = 22 vehicles 400 10 cars = 10 vehicles L.. Crystal Springs 15 trucks = 15 vehicles 15 trucks = 15 vehicles —� 14 J 370 SH 82 PM Figure 6 PEAK SITE TRAFFIC (VEHICLES) J i Crystal Springs W W 0 0 CL d 0 CO CDy k--15PCE 33 PCE SH 82 AM Crystal Springs W W 0 0 CL 0 LO r y ili— 45 PCE PCE = Passenger Car Equivalents Daily 45 PCE —ill 15 1/4 J SH 82 PM Figure 7 PEAK SITE TRAFFIC (PCEs) J Growth on Crystal Springs Road was estimated using known potential development as conveyed by Garfield County. In the short-term, the existing Powers site will shut down and be replaced by 40 single family homes. Access to these homes will be provided by the current Powers west access which will be converted to two-way operation. The east Powers access will be closed. This was confirmed in a conver- sation with Turnkey Consultants. This will not increase traffic using Crystal Springs Road. The Blue Gravel Pit plans internal modifications but no increases in site traffic or access changes based on the Traffic Evaluation letter prepared by Kimley-Horn Associates, dated April 6, 2010. Consequently, traffic will be stable on Crystal Springs Road in the short-term. In the long-term, restrictions at the full movement residential access to SH 82 were assumed when a connection to Crystal Springs Road becomes available. For evalua- tion purposes, traffic associated with these homes was assigned to Crystal Springs Road leading to and from SH 82. County staff was not aware of any other develop- ment in this area. Future traffic on SH 82 was estimated using the CDOT published 20 year growth factor of 1.6 for this section of SH 82. This equates to about 21/2% annual growth. Short- and long-term background traffic is shown on Figures 8 and 9, respectively. Applicable documentation is presented in Appendix E. 16 18,585 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal Daily Crystal Springs 15/20 A— 415/1030 NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 15/25 990/615 -+ 17 SH 82 Figure 8 SHORT-TERM BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 26,900 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal Daily Crystal Springs 20/35 1— 520/1495 NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 20/40 _14 1435/890 -* 18 SH 82 Figure 9 LONG-TERM BACKGROUND TRAFFIC E. Future Total Traffic Total traffic is the combination of site traffic and background traffic. It represents conditions with Cerise fully operational during the peak season. Normal highway peak hours were evaluated since these times represent the most severe traffic condi- tions. Site traffic was added to background traffic resulting in the short-term and long- term total traffic shown on Figures 10 and 11, respectively. F. Future Roadway System There are no planned roadway improvements to the roadways serving this area. Consequently, the current roadway geometry is expected to remain constant through the long-term. V. TRAFFIC IMPACTS To assess operating conditions with the Cerise site fully functional, capacity analyses were conducted at the SH 82 - Crystal Springs Road and site access - Crystal Springs Road intersections. Analyses were undertaken using short- and long-term total traffic. At the onset of these undertakings, traffic volumes were reviewed to determine if auxiliary lanes are warranted under CDOT State Highway Access Code criteria. Findings are indicated below. 19 Crystal Springs N/N 40/30 30/35 4— 415/1030 Site Driveway LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 45/40 990/615 -* 20 SH 82 Figure 10 SHORT-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC 27,300 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal Daily Crystal Springs N/N 40/30 O M O O CD CD AJ cl 11— 35/50 1— 520/1495 Site Driveway NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 50/55 1435/890 -* 21 SH 82 Figure 11 LONG-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC A. Auxiliary Lanes and Traffic Controls A review of short-term and long-term total traffic was conducted using CDOT Access Code requirements consistent with an EX access category. Left turn deceleration lanes are warranted at all accesses, except field approaches, where left turns are allowed. Right turn acceleration and deceleration lanes are warranted when there are or will be more than 10 turning vehicles per hour. A left turn acceleration lane may be required to benefit the safety and operation of the highway. Given that this lane currently exists, CDOT previously determined that this lane benefits the highway. It was concluded that all turn lanes are currently warranted and will remain warranted in the future. The design of these lanes will be discussed later in this report. Traffic at the site access intersection with Cerise fully functional was reviewed using CDOT Access Code criteria for a NR -B roadway. Given that total long-term traffic in the northbound lane on Crystal Springs Road will total 75 vehicles per hour or less, the northbound right turn lane at the site access is not needed. This is one-half of the 150 vehicles per hour threshold where the right turn deceleration lane can be dropped. The left turn deceleration lane will not be warranted since only negligible, if any, left turns from Crystal Springs Road into the site are expected. Acceleration lanes will not be warranted given the 25 MPH speed limit on Crystal Springs Road. Consequently, it was determined that auxiliary lanes will not be warranted at the site access to Crystal Springs Road. Short-term roadway geometry is presented on Figure 12. B. Future Operating Conditions (with Cerise) Capacity analyses were conducted using short- and long-term total traffic and the roadway geometry shown on Figure 12. To assess long-term operating conditions, the short-term roadway geometry was used. For definition purposes, acceptable conditions are defined as overall level of service 'D'. Critical traffic movements may 22 operate as low as level of service `E/F' for critical side street left turns at stop sign controlled intersections. Resultant levels -of -service are indicated below. SHORT-TERM OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH CERISE Intersection Control Movement/ Direction Level of Service AM Pk Hr. PM Pk Hr. Crystal Springs — Access Stop SB LT A A WB LR B A OVERALL A A Crystal Springs — SH 82 Stop EB L A B SBL C C SBR B B SB Approach C C OVERALL A A LONG-TERM OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH CERISE Intersection Control Movement/ Direction Level of Service AM Pk Hr. PM Pk Hr. Crystal Springs — Access Stop SB LT A A WB LR B A OVERALL A A Crystal Springs — SH 82 Stop EB L A C SBL D E SBR B C SB Approach C D OVERALL A A As indicated, all intersections will operate acceptably with peak season activity at the Cerise site. This is verified by the finding that level -of -service 'E' or better is expected for all traffic movements at all intersections. As noted earlier, site traffic used in these analyses assumes peak traffic at or near site capacity during the peak season. 24 Furthermore, no adjustments were made to reflect the availability of all auxiliary lanes. Consequently, conditions will likely be better than indicated. It is also important to note that the southbound left turn from Crystal Spring Road to eastbound SH 82 will operate at level of service `E' during the long-term afternoon peak hour even though this traffic movement will not have any site related truck traffic. Consequently, condi- tions will be better than indicated most of the time. Capacity worksheets are pre- sented in Appendix F. VI. DESIGN ISSUES A. Auxiliary Lane Assessment Existing auxiliary lanes at the SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection were re- viewed. This review determined that the existing lanes are built to the following approximate dimensions. LANE Lengths (feet) TAPER LANE* TOTAL WB Right Turn Deceleration 242' 285' 527' WB Right Turn Acceleration (1) (2) 1,220' 1,220' EB Left Turn Deceleration (1) (2) 1,220' 1,220' EB Left Turn Acceleration 174' 538' 712' * Includes storage where required (1) Assumes the east Powers access is closed and the west access serves a future residential development. The lane and taper ex- tend some 900 feet west of the west access. (2) This lane overlaps an adjacent auxiliary lane. Based on future long-term traffic demands, truck usage, and the posted speed limit, current CDOT State Highway Access Code design criteria would require the auxiliary lane designs indicated below: 25 LANE Length (feet) TAPER LANE* TOTAL WB Right Turn Deceleration 300' 800' 1,100' WB Right Turn Acceleration 300' 1,380' 1,680' EB Left Turn Deceleration 300' 900' (1) 1,200' EB Left Turn Acceleration 300' 1,380' 1,680' * Includes storage where required (1) Includes 100 feet of storage to serve 85 PCEs. Based on the above designs, the westbound right turn deceleration lane and the eastbound left turn acceleration lane need lengthening. Both lanes are located east of Crystal Springs Road and are not impacted by other access points. To the west of Crystal Springs Road, the current configuration with the right turn acceleration lane for Crystal Springs Road with the right turn deceleration lane at the future residential access overlapping is reasonable. There appears to be sufficient spacing between the future residential access and Crystal Springs Road to develop an eastbound left turn deceleration lane. With about 1,200 feet of separation, reasonable deceleration and storage can be provided for long-term total traffic. B. Radii Given anticipated truck traffic, it is desirable to provide a WB -67 turning radius for westbound SH 82 traffic turning north on Crystal Springs Road. This radius is also desirable for northbound Crystal Springs Road vehicles turning east into the site. C. Crystal Springs Road Approach to SH 82 Crystal Springs Road intersects SH 82 at about 75 degrees making for a severe right turn for westbound SH 82 traffic turning north onto Crystal Springs Road. With a WB - 67 turning radius, the intersection will become wider. This added width will allow 26 shifting the Crystal Springs Road centerline to the east thereby increasing the ap- proach width for southbound vehicles. This added width can provide sufficient room for two southbound vehicles (one turning left and one turning right) to wait side by side. Since long-term capacity analyses indicate a 95`" percentile vehicle queue of one left turning vehicle, only minimal storage is needed. Accordingly, radius im- provements will improve efficiency at the SH 82 - Crystal Springs Road intersection. D. Median Improvements The center median on SH 82 east of Crystal Springs Road will need minor improve- ments to better serve southbound to eastbound left turning vehicles. The gore of the island should be shifted east to facilitate easier truck turns into the eastbound left turn acceleration lane. E. Signage Truck signs (W8-6) should be placed on Crystal Springs Road in advance of the site access. Additionally, a stop sign (R1-1) should be placed on the site driveway ap- proach to Crystal Springs Road. F. Sight Distance Sight distance was found to be in excess of 1,500 feet in both directions at the Sh 52 — Crystal Springs Road intersection. This is more than adequate for the posted speed. The location of the site access to Crystal Springs Road was chosen to take advantage of the roadway alignment. About 400 feet of sight distance should be available. Sight distances should be field verified during design with the driveway being shifted as needed. If necessary, vegetation can be trimmed to improve sight distance. 27 A transportation site plan showing the above improvements is provided in the pocket following the conclusions. VII. CONCLUSIONS Based on the above documented analyses and investigations, the following can be concluded: • Current operating conditions are acceptable in the area of the Cerise site. • Cerise will generate 88 morning highway peak hour trips, 63 afternoon highway peak hour trips, and 770 trips per day at full site utilization. This traffic represents peak day, peak season activity with the Cerise site operating at or near capacity. These trips can be easily managed. • On an average annual day, an estimated 45 morning peak hour trips, 30 after- noon peak hour trips, and 400 daily trips are expected. • All warranted auxiliary lanes currently exist at the SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection. The lanes to the east of Crystal Springs Road, however, are substandard based on current Access Code criteria. These lanes should be improved to meet current design standards. The lanes west of Crystal Springs Road are acceptable in their current form. • No auxiliary lanes will be warranted at the Crystal Springs Road intersection with the Cerise Access. • Turning radii at the SH 82 - Crystal Springs Road and the Crystal Springs Road — Cerise access intersections should have radii capable of serving a WB -67 design vehicle. • Truck warning signs should be installed on the Crystal Springs Road ap- proaches to the site access with a stop sign installed on the access approach to Crystal Springs Road. 28 • With the indicated improvements, acceptable operating levels of service will be achieved and maintained through the long-term for all traffic movements at all intersections. In summary, Lafarge's Cerise site will not adversely impact the area street system. This is verified by the finding that the identified roadway geometry will facilitate safe and efficient operating conditions for the foreseeable future. 29 APPENDIX A Eugene G. Coppola PE, PTOE Memo To: Alisa Babler From: Gene Coppola CC: Dan Roussin Date: June 28, 2010 Re: Lafarge's Cerise Mine, Northeast Corner of SH 82 & CR 103, Carbondale, CO The following items summarize our telephone discussion on the methodologies and assumptions for the Cerise Mine Traffic Impact Study. 1. A Level 3 traffic impact study is appropriate for this use. 2. Define proposed use(s) on the existing Lafarge site (Powers) along the west side of Crystal Springs Road (CR 103) and the future status of existing access points to SH 82. 3. Quantify current traffic at the SH 82 — Crystal Springs Road intersection including conducting AM and PM peak hour traffic counts at this intersection. 4. Describe future uses and operations on the new Lafarge site (Cerise) located along the east side of CR 103. Direct site access will be provided by a driveway to CR 103. 5. Cerise site traffic will be based on operator estimates using current activity at the Powers site plus asphalt operations. Asphalt traffic will be based on an estimated batch plant capacity of 10 loads per hour. 6. Site traffic will be assigned equally to SH 82 in the east and west directions from CR 103. This is consistent with the distribution of site traffic at the Powers site. Only local deliveries are expected to vary from this distribution. As requested, the potential for additional site access using other County roads to and from the east will be investigated. If deemed viable, supplemental access routes will be addressed in the traffic study. 7. Site traffic will be stated in vehicles and PCEs. PCEs will be used when evaluating auxiliary lane warrants and design features. 8. Background traffic growth will based on the CDOT published 20 year growth factor for this section of SH 82. Background traffic growth on Crystal Springs Road will be based on future development expected to use this roadway. 9. If a traffic signal will be warranted in the future, an estimate of when the warrant will be 80% satisfied will be provided. If your recollection differs from the above, please let me know as soon as possible. Thank you. APPENDIX B EUGENE G. COPPOLA, P.E. P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 Phone: (303) 792-2450 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Intersection: SH 82 & Crystal Springs Date: 6/23/2010 Day: Thursday Observer: GC City: Carbondale, CO Time Begins Northbound: Southbound: Total northlsouth Eastbound: Westbound: Total east/west Total All L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 07:00 5 9 0 6 6 7 13 13 4 231 6 235 404 85 1 86 321 334 07:15 2 5 0 3 6 6 9 9 5 220 6 225 406 81 2 83 308 317 07:30 6 8 0 9 8 7 16 16 4 229 4 233 410 77 0 77 310 326 07:45 3 3 0 8 5 11 19 19 7 205 7 212 333 89 4 93 305 324 08:00 3 7 0 10 9 6 16 16 1 257 6 258 359 91 3 94 352 368 08:15 1 2 0 7 8 8 15 15 3 236 9 239 419 96 5 101 340 355 08:30 4 5 0 11 5 6 17 17 3 208 5 211 354 108 3 111 322 339 08:45 0 4 9 13 13 6 244 250 98 2 100 350 363 8:00-9:00 0 0 0 0 32 1 0 1 29 I 61 61 1 13 1 9451 0 958 0 1 393 1 13 406 1364 1 1425 PHF 0.9 0.93 0.91 04:00 0 3 6 9 9 5 155 160 227 3 230 390 399 04:15 0 5 9 14 14 6 141 147 251 6 257 404 418 04:30 0 2 5 7 7 6 128 134 266 6 272 406 413 04:45 0 6 8 14 14 8 160 168 238 4 242 410 424 05:00 0 3 3 6 6 5 122 127 199 7 206 333 339 05:15 0 3 7 10 10 9 131 140 213 6 219 359 369 05:30 0 1 2 3 3 8 147 155 255 9 264 419 422 05:45 0 4 5 9 9 5 115 120 229 5 234 354 363 4:00-5:00 0 0 0 0 16 1 0 1 28 44 44 1 25 1 5841 0 609 0 1 982 1 19 1001 1610 1 1654 I PHF L = left turn 0.79 S = straight 0.91 R = right turn 0.92 EUGENE G. COPPOLA, P.E. P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 Phone: (303) 792-2450 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Intersection: SH 82 & Lafarge Exit Date: 6/23/2010 Day: Thursday Observer: GC City: Carbondale, CO Time Begins Northbound: Southbound: Total north/south Eastbound: Westbound: Total east/west Total All L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 07:00 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 04:30 0 0 2 07:15 1 1 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 2 04:45 0 0 3 07:30 0 0 0 2 2 4 4 0 0 0 05:00 0 0 4 07:45 1 1 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 2 05:15 0 0 3 08:00 1 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 05:30 0 0 2 08:15 1 1 0 2 1 3 3 0 0 2 05:45 0 0 3 08:30 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 08:45 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 0 3 7:00-8:00 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 PHF 0.75 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:15 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 04:30 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 05:15 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 05:30 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 05:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15-5:15 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 PHF L = left turn 0.63 S = straight R = right turn EUGENE G. COPPOLA, P.E. P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 80163 Phone: (303) 792-2450 TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICLE COUNTS Intersection: SH 82 & Lafarge Entrance Date: 6/23/2010 Day: Thursday Observer: GC City: Carbondale, CO Time Begins Northbound: Southbound: Total north/south Eastbound: Westbound: Total east/west Total All L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total L S R Total 07:00 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 1 1 0 0 3 3 07:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 4 07:30 0 0 1 0 0 4 1 4 2 2 1 1 5 5 07:45 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 5 1 1 0 0 5 5 08:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 1 4 4 08:15 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 6 1 1 0 0 6 6 08:30 0 0 1 0 0 4 1 4 2 2 0 0 4 4 08:45 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 6 6 7:30-8:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 18 0 0 2 PHF 0.75 2 j 20 I 20 0.5 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 04:15 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 04:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:45 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 05:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 05:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 05:45 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 4:00.5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 4 4 PHF L = left turn S = straight 0.5 R = right turn 0.5 Page 1 of Traffic IntorrnauOTI tOr High rzetP,:c.mit 10 TO Retpoint 16, Route Ref Point End Ref Point Start Point Description Annual Average Daily Traffic ----..„ 17,70)2009 AADT Year AADT Derivation Actual AADT Single Trucks 530 AADT Comb. Trucks 300 Percent Trucks 4.70% 20 Year Factor 1.60 DesignDaily Hour Vol (/0 of AADT) 9 Vehicle TraveledMiles 32,037 082A 11.699 13.553 ON SH 82 E/O SH 133, CARBONDALE 8/4/201( APPENDIX C Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period 8/2010 PM PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction Analysis Year Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS ntersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement 13 945 0 0 343 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 945 0 0 343 6 R 13 1.00 13 2 0 Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 0 32 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 32 0 12 R 29 1.00 29 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service • pproach Movement Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS • pproach delay (s/veh) • pproach LOS EB 1 L 13 1199 0.01 0.03 8.0 A WB Northbound Southbound 4 7 8 9 10 11 L 32 420 0.08 0.25 14.3 8 12 R 29 842 0.03 0.11 9.4 A 12.0 8 HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC Agency/Co. _ Date Performed 8/2/2,890 Analysis Time Period AM PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction Analysis Year P Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement 25 584 0 0 982 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 25 584 0 0 982 6 R 19 1.00 19 2 0 Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 0 0 16 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 16 0 12 R 28 1.00 28 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS pproach delay (s/veh) pproach LOS 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 L L 25 16 687 252 0.04 0.06 0.11 0.20 10.4 20.3 B C 12 R 28 523 0.05 0.17 12.3 B 15.2 C HCS2000T M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Gene Coppola P.O. Box 260027 Littleton, CO 80163 303-792-2450 Project: Subject: By: Date: Page: of 0 ve✓'a it L1 -kr se4-4-t o �u 7;4n-1 De-la.y jr- (veit s = Dela/ 'e4(c4 < )o.o sec- = A to - IS See- 13 1 5 - 2-Ssr.= G 25-3Ssec= D 35-5o sec. E '5cse.c= F .6)(1611111 -- 514 72. -'r' i S ✓'r 01$ 12064 Avt4: (13x8+32x14,3 + z9x4.'f_ 83q,2 a,o Se6/ve-4 (13+°145 4.3ci3 +13+3i -1-21) - 1375 (25,x10.4+ 20,3x1G +12.3),- 28) 829.2._ o,S66ie /ve4 g2'2t1'{+- act- lb) - (AD APPENDIX D LAFARGE AGGREGATES & CONCRETE August 2, 2010 Gene Coppola, PE P.O. Box 630027 Littleton, CO 8016.3 This letter is to establish our planned peak demand traffic totals for the Cerise Project, Below is a description of our planned peak demand truck traffic for the various activities planned for the site. These estimates are for our full capacity peak demands which are not expected during the full time of the operation. Lafarge's estimate of peak demand traffic at the Cerise site is provided below. The estimate reflects peak demand at the Powers site plus asphalt. Aggregate and Asphalt Trucks 250 per day Concrete Trucks 75 per day Import Trucks 5 per day Employees up to 45 per day Miscellaneous 10 per day The site will operate Monday _.. Saturday from 7:00 A,M, — 8:00 P.M. with heavy equipment operating from 7:00 AM -- 6:00 PM, Emergencies might occur outside these hours. Site peak hour will typically be 10 —12 % of daily traffic and will normally be the first run of the day. The remaining traffic will typically be spread evenly throughout the balance of the day. Site traffic will generally be evenly split east and west of Crystal Springs Road on SH 82. Local deliveries will follow the shortest legal haul route. Employee traffic is expected to favor the west in a 2/3 —11.3 split. If there are any questions feel free to contact me. Thank you for you consideration, Sincerely, Sean Frisch Land Manager, Lafarge West, Inc. Office: 303-657-4.3.36 Cell: 720-320-2451 LAFARGE WEST, INC. — Aggregate & Concrete 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200, Westminster, Colorado 80021 Telephone: (303) 657-4000 Facsimile: (303) 657-4037 APPENDIX E STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Region 3 Traffic Access/Utilities Permits 222 South 611' Street, Room 100 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 PH 970-683-6284 FAX 970-683-6290 AMENDMENT TO ACCESS PERMIT 307302 April 28, 2010 Crystal Ranch Corp Attn: Kimiko Powers 13114 Hwy 82 Carbondale, CO 81623 Dear Kimiko: RE: ACCESS PERMIT # 307302 1}M1C11.•..1.11 r,,R,1111111,.. Per an email request dated April 5, 2010, Skip Hudson with Turnkey Consultants, requested that Access Permit # 307302 be modified. The first reason for this request is to work with the CDOT Glenwood Residency in providing a Deer. Guardfence and gates' ail -through this area -of Hwy 82. _:The second: =' --- reason is to modify term and condition # 3 to allow both a gravel pit and batch plant. In summary: Permit 307302 shall add a new Term and Condition that shall be worded as such: "As part of the ongoing site use as gravel pit, the Permittee shall construct a CDOT approved deer fence gate at the access point. This gate shall remain closed during non -business hours. If the gate is removed at any point during the life of this permit, Perrnittee shall construct a CDOT approved deer guard at the access point, and shall connect it to the adjacent deer fence to create an enclosed system." Term and Condition #3 will be modified to read: This permit is for a Gravel Pit/Material Processing operation for 600 daily trips (PCE's), The Material Processing Operation (Asphalt Plant) portion is a temporary operation and will only be active for a maximum of 3 years. Once the gravel pit/mineral processing operation ceases and this parcel re -develops, this permit shall allow for 40 single family homes (40 DHV). The subject perrnit(s) is/are hereby amended in accordance with Section 2.4(5) of the State Highway Access Code, which states: "When necessary to amend a permit, and the Permittee is agreeable and waives the right to an administrative hearing on the amendment, a letter detailing the amendment with reasons for the CC: Skip Hudson • Turnkey Consultants Gerald Hartert Alex KararnilStaff Access Page 1 of 2 amendment shall be prepared. The letter of amendment requires the approval of the issuing authority, the Department, and the Permittee." The subject permit(s)s are revised per your request. Please review and if you are in agreement sign below and return this letter of amendment to the Region 3 Access Permits office for final signature. Both parties will then be provided with a fully -executed copy. The undersigned agree to the permit amendment as described above. Permittee waives the right to an administrative hearing on the amendment. Permittee By (Print Name): Kimiko Powers Signature: - Title:- .. -- ---... Date:....._ . Colorado Department of Transportation (Issuing Authority) By (Print Name): Dan Roussin .0 ';,i,,,,,,-:--; "— . Signature: % 1/711/11111 Kimley-Horn 1116.11M I and Associates, Inc. April 6, 2010 ■ Suite 450 990 South Broadway Denver, Colorado Toni Veljic 60209 Garfield County 108 Eigth Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Blue Gravel Pit — Traffic Evaluation SH -82 and Blue Road/CR-103 Dear Mr. Veljic: It is understood that Western Slope Aggregate Inc. has requested a change in location of current excavations for the Blue gravel pit, located along the north side of SH -82 at the Blue Road/CR-103 intersection in Garfield County, Colorado. Although the proposal is to change location, the overall pit excavation area and access will remain the same. Western Slope Aggregate has identified that with the change in excavation location, the existing operations will be maintained. Please see attached letters from Western Slope Aggregate and Lewicki and Associates describing existing operations and proposed excavation areas. Therefore, based on this information and that the excavation area will remain under the CDOT Access Permit identified 110 acres for this same use, we believe that Blue gravel pit will be in compliance with the existing access permit. Based on the operations remaining the same for the existing Blue gravel pit, the amount of existing traffic generated by the gravel pit is not anticipated to change in the future due to the excavation location change. No increase in traffic volumes are anticipated along CR -104, CR -103, or SH -82 due to the Blue gravel pit excavation location change. Therefore, we believe a traffic impact study for a relocation of excavation area should not be needed or required. If you have any questions or need anything further, please feel free to call me at (303) 228-2304. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Curtis D. Rowe, P.E., OE Vice President 1 TEL 303 228 2300 FAX 303 446 8678 Tuesday, April 20, 2.010 4: 45— 45 PM Wedriesdcy. April 21, 2010 7 45- 8 45 Al r co .0 BLUE ROAD NC>PTh 4-15 096193000 ::‘;`.!;•, LT SH -82 LEGEND • Study Area Key Intersection XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes BLUE GRAVEL PIT (EXISTING 2010 TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3(1j <-401(1134) Le -5(20) 10(0)-3 1046(466)—> . 0 (0 l'uscioy, 4.0 20, 2010 430- 530 PM Wednesday. Apr l 21, 2010 7: 30 -8: 30 AM ICrnler-liorn and A6SociOtes. Inc Page 1 of T • fflc :Inforra ion fora Highway 082 From RefPoint 10 To RefPoint 16 Route Ref Point End Ref Point Start Point Description Annual Average Daily Traffic AADT Year AADT Derivation AADT Single Trucks AADT Comb. Trucks Percent Trucks 20 Year Factor Design Hour Vol (/o of AADT) Dail y Vehicle Miles Traveled 082A 11.699 13.553 ON SH 82 E/O SH 133, CARBONDALE 17,700 2009 Actual 530 300 4.70% 1.60 9 32,037 8/4/201( APPENDIX F Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS GC Agency/Co. Analysis Year EX®LT(O Date Performed /2010 Analysis Time Period r4 A4PM PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction Analysis Year EX®LT(O Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement 45 990 0 0 415 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 45 990 0 0 415 6 R 30 1.00 30 5 0 Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 0 0 50 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 50 0 12 R 50 1.00 50 0 0 0 40 0 40 Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach Movement Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS pproach delay (s/veh) pproach LOS EB 1 L 45 1091 0.04 0.13 8.4 A WB Northbound Southbound 4 7 8 9 10 11 L 50 289 0.17 0.61 20.0 C 12 R 50 693 0.07 0.23 10.6 B 15.3 C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC Agency/Co. Date Performed 8/2/2010 Analysis Time Period AMIPA' PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction Analysis Year Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 40 615 0 0 1030 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 40 615 0 0 1030 6 R 35 1.00 35 38 0 Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 0 25 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 25 0 12 R 50 1.00 50 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service • pproach Movement EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS • pproach delay (s/veh) • pproach LOS L L 40 25 474 226 0.08 0.11 0.28 0.37 13.3 22.9 8 C 12 R 50 497 0.10 0.33 13.1 8 16.3 C HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information • nalyst GC • gency/Co. Date Performed /2010 • nalysis Time Period �• ► -M Intersection CRYSTAL SPRINGS - SITE ACCESS Jurisdiction Analysis Year OL TOT Project Description East/West Street: SITE ACCESS North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 30 45 0 60 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 30 45 0 60 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 - 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 40 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 40 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 100 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service • pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 40 C (m) (vph) 1518 695 /c 0.00 0.06 95% queue length 0.00 0.18 Control Delay 7.4 10.5 LOS A B • pproach Delay -- -- 10.5 • pproach LOS -- -- B Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Version 4.1f Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC • gency/Co. Date Performed g/2/2,��p • nalysis Time Period AM(PM) `` �� Intersection CRYSTAL SPRINGS - SITE ACCESS Jurisdiction Analysis Year LT OT Project Description East/West Street: SITE ACCESS North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 45 30 0 45 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 45 30 0 45 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 _ 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 30 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 30 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized . 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service • pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 30 C (m) (vph) 1537 886 v/c 0.00 0.03 95% queue length 0.00 0.11 Control Delay 7.3 _ 9.2 LOS A A • pproach Delay -- -- 9.2 • pproach LOS -- -- A Rights Reserved HCS2000T M Version 4.1f Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Gene Coppola . Project: Date: P.O. Box 260027 Subject: Littleton, CO 80163 303-792-2450 By: Page: of CJvesea. 1( 1144l rsem-4zo �u T4 ( De -14.y /iris - .I Vett ie.te s = Dela./ 1/e4 z )6.o sec = A 10 - l 5 See L 13 15 - 2Ssr= C 25 -35-sec.=. 3S - So sec. E ' So sec = F 5hor4- Tetutt S µ 8 2- Cr j s Sef►ss Rcl. Am: \45,c2.4+- so X20.0 +sok to.0 (45+qqo + 4154-36 +- So t -so) 15go 1403 1, 2 5e6ivii PM . ( 4-0)c13,3 +25x22.9 + 5ox13,1 4101- 4151- 1030 4-35 -t ZS -+- CO) 1759.5 i, o sec/vel ►715 Gr.15W'pPiH 5 goal- Stk. 5 PM Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst GC gency/Co. Date Performed x[2010 A nalysis Time Period j PM Intersection CRYSTAL SPRINGS - SITE ACCESS Jurisdiction Analysis Year ST' 00 Project Description East/West Street: SITE ACCESS North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 30 45 0 60 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 30 45 0 60 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 3 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 40 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 40 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 100 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 40 C (m) (vph) 1518 695 v/c 0.00 0.06 95% queue length 0.00 0.18 Control Delay 7.4 10.5 LOS A B A pproach Delay -- -- 10.5 A pproach LOS -- -- B Rights Reserved HCS2000T M Version 4.1f Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information • nalyst GC • gency/Co. Date Performed 8/2/ . p • nalysis Time Period AM Z. Intersection CRYSTAL SPRINGS - SITE ACCESS Jurisdiction Analysis Year STTOT Project Description East/West Street: SITE ACCESS North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 45 30 0 45 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 45 30 0 45 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 30 0 0 0 0 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 30 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 5 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Hared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR v (vph) 0 30 C (m) (vph) 1537 886 v/c 0.00 0.03 95% queue length 0.00 0.11 Control Delay 7.3 9.2 LOS A A • pproach Delay -- -- 9.2 • pproach LOS -- -- A Rights Reserved HCS2000TM Version 4.If Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4 1 8/2/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC Agency/Co. Date Performed 8/2/2010 Analysis Time Period M PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction Analysis Year IVO .S Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement 50 1435 0 0 495 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 50 1435 0 0 495 6 R 35 1.00 35 5 0 Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 0 0 60 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 60 0 12 R 60 1.00 60 0 0 0 34 0 34 Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach Movement EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS pproach delay (s/veh) pproach LOS L L 50 60 1013 219 0.05 0.27 0.16 1.07 8.7 27.5 A D 12 R 60 663 0.09 0.30 11.0 B 19.2 C HCS2000T M Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/3/201( Page 1 of TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst GC Agency/Co. Date Performed 8/2/210 Analysis Time Period AMIPI I PK HR Intersection SH82 - CRYSTAL SPRINGS Jurisdiction � Analysis Year S • `U Project Description East/West Street: SH82 North/South Street: CRYSTAL SPRINGS Intersection Orientation: East-West ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Eastbound Westbound 2 3 4 5 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PEN 55 890 0 0 1495 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 55 890 0 0 1495 6 R 50 1.00 50 30 0 Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement Two Way Left Turn Lane 0 1 2 0 0 2 L T T 0 1 R 0 0 Northbound Southbound 7 8 9 10 11 L T R L T olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy vehicles, PEN 0 0 0 30 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 30 0 12 R 55 1.00 55 0 0 0 4 0 4 Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 L 0 1 R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service pproach Movement EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 Lane Configuration olume, v (vph) Capacity, cm (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95%) Control Delay (s/veh) LOS pproach delay (s/veh) pproach LOS L L 55 30 312 125 0.18 0.24 0.63 0.88 19.0 42.7 C E 12 R 55 351 0.16 0.55 17.2 C 26.2 0 HCS2000TM Copyright © 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 8/3/201( Gene Coppola P.O. Box 260027 Littleton, CO 80163 303-792-2450 Project: Subject: By: Date: Page: of OVe,✓'a1( �..✓t-tLese -4zo �u L-0 _5 De -14-1 frit Velt i ,es = eta l vel cl i Z. 10.0 Sec = A Io -- l 5 See = i"3 1 S- Z Ssr = 25 -3S-S= 35 - So sec- E > So Sec- = F Lotit i 'T - 4t441 ysh I Sf nal 1204— 5 N S Y 5o )( 7,1 +. 4ox a7.5 4- 66 x11.0) 27+f5 3 Sec./ye-Cr (50+1,135 4.415-r35 -r 6o* o) 2135 pi ( 55xr' t 3ox42.Z +- 5sk i7.a) _ 3272 (554- U o t 149 5 -e- So -+ 55 +- 3 c 2.515 r, 3Sec/ye-4 cr1 Steri 5froe 5 - A-GGf�i7r 1o,5Xgo ¢7o C3o4-4S+4(94-40) 115 P11/1 (3ax I. 2) (4.5 + 30+-451-30) ISO 0 Turnkey Consulting, LLC Superior Project Leadership Date, 2011 Mr. Dan Roussin, Permit Manager CDOT Region 3 Traffic Section 222 South 6th Street, Room 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Re: Garfield County Road 103 at SH -82 CDOT Access Permit Application Package Dear Dan: 2478 Patterson Road, Suite 18 Grand Junction, CO 81505 0: 970-985-4001 F: 970-985-4002 On behalf of Lafarge West, Inc. (Permittee), TurnKey Consulting (Agent for Permittee) is submitting the attached access permit application package. This submittal includes the following information: 00 Signed Application Form 00 Permit Delegation Letter from Garfield County 00 Printed Traffic Impact Study For LaFarge West Cerise Site — by Eugene G Coppola dated 8-4-10(4 copies) 00 Explanation of Site Concept changes since preparation of Traffic Study cc Permit Volume Calculation in PCE's Please review and process this information. Contact me if you would like any additional information or if you have any questions. Thanks for your help. Sincerely, Skip Hudson, P.E. President Copy with attachments: Attachments Sean Frisch, Lafarge West, Inc. Doug Pratt, The Land Studio, Inc. Art Daily, Holland & Hart Eugene G. Coppola, PE, PTOE Explanation of site concept changes since preparation of traffic study Cerise Traffic Study Assumptions The study called "LaFarge West Cerise Site" (Cerise) was completed last year with the assumption that three activities would occur on the Cerise site, which is located on the NE corner of SH -82 & CR -103 in Garfield County. The activities included material mining, material processing, and a concrete batch plant. The following sketch shows that all traffic would travel between SH -82 and the site access (east side of CR -103). CERISE MINE CONCEPT PLAN ::2 -RF !LLD LCUN1 f, COLORADO a 179.711 HCTC: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE HELD A1E.L, rJ-SI1E I1IIFU1uF;L.PILAv.Lc. Cerise Site Access z-PERIII T BOUNDARY The Cerise Study shows the amount of traffic that would travel to/from the site on CR -13 and travel through the intersection at SH -82. Modified Site Configuration Assumptions LaFarge and Crystal River Corp have entered into a lease agreement to allow the existing concrete batch plant to remain on Crystal Ranch property through the year 2028. Therefore, the Cerise site does not need to include the batch plant. This means a few things: 30 The Project traffic identified in the Cerise Study would now travel to either the Crystal Ranch Site or the Cerise Site, along CR -103 00 Some Project traffic that was consi 00 dered internal trips to the Cerise Site (not identified) will now travel back and forth between the Cerise Site and the Crystal Ranch Site 00 The amount of Project traffic traveling through the intersection of SH -82 & CR -103 would not change from the values shown in the Cerise Study. 00 The Cerise Study accurately portrays total traffic and is valid for use in CDOT access permitting. The following sketch shows the current site access proposal. Cerise Mine & Crustal Ranch Site CONCEPT PLAN v.4R1- !ELL) CDUN 1Y, COLORADO 4 Crystal Ranch Site Access NOTE: SITE FACILITIES WILL BE F`EL:" . I Eli :)N -SITE W1111FU1LIRE PILASES. Cerise Site Access PERMIT BOUNCIARY COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION Issuing authority application acceptance date: Instructions: - Contact the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) - Contact the issuing authority to determine what plans and - Complete this form (some questions may not apply to Please print - Submit an application for each access affected. or type - If you have any questions contact the issuing authority. - For additional information see CDOT'sAccess Management or your local government to determine your issuing authority. other documents are required to be submitted with your application. you) and attach all necessary documents and Submit it to the issuing authority. website at http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermitslindex.htm 1) Property owner (Permittee) Lafarge West Inc. — Sean Frisch 2) Agent for permittee (if different from property owner) TurnKey Consulting, Skip Hudson Street address 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Mauling address 2478 Patterson Road, Suite #18 City, state & zip Westminster, CO 80021 Phone# 303-657-4336 City, state & zip Grand Junction, CO 81505 Phone#(required) 970-985-4001 E-mail address Sean.frisch@lafarge-na.com E-mail address if available skiph@turnkeyllc.net 3) Address of property to be served by permit (required) Address TBD — Northeast corner of SH -82 & CR -103 4) Legal description of property: If within jurisdictional limits of Municipality, city and/or County, which one? county subdivision hlcek AN/A lot N/A section 96 �7 township 7 S I range 88 W 5) What State Highway are you requesting access from? SH 82 6) What side of the hi hway? CIN �S E W 7) How many feet is the proposed access from the nearest mile post? MP 13.49 How many feel is the proposed access from the nearest cross street? 0 feet pN I S ■ E ■ W) from: CR -103 0 feet ❑ N ■ S ■ E E W) from: 8) What is the approximate date you intend to begin construction? 2012 9) Check here if you are requesting a: anticipated: ) ❑ improvement to existing access Erelocation of an existing access (provide detail) ■ new access • temporary access (duration Ii change in access use M removal of access 10) Provide existing property use County Road Right of Way 11) Do you have knowledge of any State Highway access permits serving this property, or adjacent properties in which you have a property interest? permit number(s) and provide copies: and/or, permit date: fl no • yes, if yes - what are the 12) Does the property owner own or have any interests in any adjacent property? FA no 1 yes, if yes - please describe: 13) Are there other existing or dedicated public streets, roads, highways or access easements bordering or within the property? on your plans and indicate the proposed and existing access points. EA no • yes, if yes - list them 14) If you are requesting agricultural field access - how many acres will the access serve? N/A 15) If you are requesting commercial or industrial access please indicate the types and number of businesses and provide the floor area square footage of each. business/land use square footage business square footage Multiple uses served by County Road N/A 16) If you are requesting residential developement access, what is the type (single family, apartment, townhouse) and number of units? type number of units type number of units Multiple uses served by County Road N/A 17) Provide the following vehicle count estimates for vehicles that will use the access. Leaving the property then returning is two counts. Indicate if your counts are # of passenger cars and light trucks at peak hour volumes # of multi unit trucks at peak hour volumes Beak hour volumes or • average daily volumes. # of single unit vehicles in excess of 30 ft. # of farm vehicles (field equipment) Total count of all vehicles 289 vph -pre Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Page 1 of 2 CDOT Form #137 12/04 18) Check with the issuing authority to determine which of the following documents are required to complete the review of your application. a) Property map indicating other access, bordering roads and streets. e) Subdivision, zoning, or development plan. b) Highway and driveway plan profile. f) Proposed access design. c) Drainage plan showing impact to the highway right-of-way. g) Parcel and ownership maps including easements. d) Map and letters detailing utility locations before and after h) Traffic studies. development in and along the right-of-way. 1) Proof of ownership. 1- It is the applicant's responsibility to contact appropriate to their activities. Such clearances may include Corps of permits, or ecological, archeological, historical or cultural Information Summary presents contact information for agencies prohibited discharges, and may be obtained from Regional CDOT Planning/Construction-Environmental-Guidance webpage 2- All workers within the State Highway right of way shall procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety limited to the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational - Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Personal protective equipment (e.g. head protection, footwear. respirators, gloves, etc.) shall be worn as appropriate for minimum. all workers in the State Highway right of way, except protective equipment: High visibility apparel as specified accompanying the Notice to Proceed related to this permit protection that complies with the ANSI Z89.1-1997 standard; injury to feet. workers shall comply with OSHA's PPE requirements and 1926.96. If required, such footwear shall meet the requirements Where any of the above -referenced ANSI standards have apply. 3- The Permittee is responsible for complying with the Revised under the American Disabilities Act (ADA). These guidelines use of a defined pattern of truncated domes as detectable can be found on the Design and Construction Project Support shttp:llwww.dot.state.co.uslDesignSupport/> then click agencies and obtain all environmental clearances that apply Engineers 404 Permits or Colorado Discharge Permit System resource clearances. The CDOT Environmental Clearances administering certain clearances, information about CDOT Utility/Special Use Permit offices or accessed via the http:llwww.dot.state.co.uslenvironmental/Forms.asp. comply with their employer's safety and health policies/ and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations - including, but not Safety and Health Standards and 29 CFR Part 1926 high visibility apparel, safety glasses, hearing protection, the work being performed. and as specified in regulation. At a when in their vehicles, shall wear the following personal in the Traffic Control provisions of the documentation (at a minimum, ANSIIISEA 107-1999, class 2); head and at all construction sites or whenever there is danger of for foot protection per 29 CFR 1910.136, 1926.95, of ANSI Z41-1999. been revised, the most recent version of the standard shall Guidelines that have been adopted by the Access Board define traversable slope requirements and prescribe the warnings at street crossings_ The new Standards Plans and web page at: on Design Bulletins. If an access permit is issued to you, it will state the terms and conditions for its use. Any changes in the use of the permitted access not consistent with the terms and conditions listed on the permit may be considered a violation of the permit. The applicant declares under penalty of perjury in the second degree, and any other applicable state or federal laws, that all information provided on this form and submitted attachments are to the best of their knowledge true and complete. I understand receipt of an access permit does not constitute permission to start access construction work. Applicant's signature Print name Date If the applicant is not the owner of the property, we require this application also to be signed by the property owner or their legally authorized representative (or other acceptable written evidence). This signature shall constitute agreement with this application by all owners -of -interest unless stated in writing. If a permit is issued, the property owner, in most cases, will be listed as the permittee. Property owner signature Print name Date Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Page 2 of 2 CDOT Form #137 12/04 Put on County letterhead Insert Date Sean Frisch Lafarge West, Inc. 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Westminster, CO 80021 Reference: Proposed Powers Batch Plant & Cerise Gravel Pit (Garfield County) Delegation of CDOT access permitting responsibility at the CR -103 intersection with SH -82 Dear Mr. Frisch: Per your request, Garfield County is sending this letter to confirm that you will be responsible for CDOT access permitting at the location where CR -103 intersects SH -82. Section 2.3 of the CDOT State Highway Access Code states: (12) Access Requests by Local Authorities (a) Requests by appropriate local authorities for new access or for the reconstruction of existing access to the state highway (such as county roads and municipal streets) shall be administered by the Department as provided in subsection 2.3(6) and (7), or by special written agreement or contract between the Department and the local authority. The local authority shall be considered the applicant. Access to subdivisions and other developments shall be processed in the same manner as a private access and applied for pursuant to subsection 2.3(6) or 2.3(8) until the access is constructed, completed, and accepted as a public access and public way by the appropriate local authority. (b) Where a private development accessing the roadway of an appropriate local authority necessitates access improvements where the local roadway connects to a state highway, the permittee may either be the local jurisdiction, the developer or a combination, at the discretion of the local authority. At the discretion of Garfield County, Lafarge West, Inc. shall act as the permittee for CDOT State Highway Access Permits for the Powers Batch Rant and Cerise Gravel Pit projects at the above referenced intersection. This will obligate Lafarge West, Inc. to all CDOT permit terms and conditions. Please submit this letter of authorization to CDOT with access permit application requests. Sincerely Insert name of authorized city or county rep Insert title Copy: Dan Roussin, CDOT R3 Permit Manager Insert others as necessary tper.ivct'/7c. G'1 Vo I44 9 /C._ CE +.$) Tara ! (AcE) = S1r7'e Q4eky,,-OvyGi -- 231 265 2- c✓7 toc/'MrT to i,,,, NN =285'��,h (P«) o 0 27,300 c. co 0. 0 3. /8a I— 520/1495 5345- -' 189O— /4y35/3 9d LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal Daily 21 SH 82 PCS Figure 11 LONG-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC • i 3 0 rn 0 N W W U U a a 0 (0 (0 Crystal Springs 15 PCE 33 PCE SH 82 AM Crystal Springs 0 CD 0 N 45 PCE PCE = Passenger Car Equivalents Daily 45 PCE -11 15 • SH 82 PM Figure 7 PEAK SITE TRAFFIC (PCEs) 26 26,900 LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N = Nominal I Daily Crystal Springs k— 20/35 4— 520/1495 NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles 20/40 —� 1435/890 —► 18 SH 82 Figure 9 LONG-TERM BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1. Permit Owner : 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Garfield County Road & Bridge 0298 CR 333A1/PO Box 426 Rifle, CO 81650 PIT: 970-625-8601 TAX: 970-625-8627 roadandbridge{ r Barfield-county.coin Driveway Permit Application Cg,STILL ?.1\�c Mailing Address: 1112- 1-\\O( B2- City: L City: Carbondale 81623 New Castle 81647 Parachute 81635 Phone No: County Rd, No: Glenwood Springs 81601 Silt 81652 Other Fax No: Rifle 81650 I b3 Nearest Intersection or address: Distance from Int. or address: Direction frotn Int. or address: 1\id `( 82-+ 103 OFT N 9. Side of road: N 10. Width of driveway: 30 -foot Other: 11. Culvert required: Yes 12. Size of culvert required: 12 -inch Other: 13. Length of culvert required: 30 -foot 14. Asphalt or concrete pad required: E E 40 -foot S 100 -foot 2T No 15 -inch 18 -inch 40 -foot Yes other No 15. Size of pad: 30 -foot wide X 10 -foot long .X 4 inches thick: Yes 1 40 -foot wide X 1.0 -foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes 100 -foot wide X 20 -foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes Other: 16. Gravel portion required: 17. Length of gravel portion: 40 -foot 18. Trees or brush removed for visibility: Yes 50 -foot Yes 19. Distance and direction from driveway to be removed: No 100 -foot No NIA 20. Driveway must be no more than 3 % slope away from County road. 21. Drive must be constructed so no drainage accesses County road from driveway. 22. Certified traffic control required: Yes 23. Work zone signage only required: Yes 24. Stop sign required at entrance to County Rd. Yes No No No 25. Inspection of driveway will required upon completion and must be approved by person issuing permit or representative of person issuing permit. 26. Person Requesting Permit: 27. Person issuing permit: 28. District permit issued in: 29. Date checklist completed: ❑Check Name of Cardholder C.V.'1SVP& COO. GNI() Y.00.0bead6 Mtke YeSHM Nic 2 ,/5111 Payment Information ❑ Visa (Mastercard Card Number: / / / ! I I / / / / I Expiration Date: Vcode: Vcode: (last 3 or 4 numbers on back of card) Signature Required Authorized Credit Card Signature BOARD OF -COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY CERTIFICATION AND AFFIDAVIT REGARDING ILLEGAL ALIENS The Contractor, whose name and signature appears below, certifies and agrees as follows: 1, The Contractor shall comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 8-17.5-101 et seq. The Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work for the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado ("BOCC") or enter into a contract with a subcontractor that -knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien. 2. The Contractor represents, warrants, and agrees that it has verified that it does not employ any illegal aliens; that it has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Employment Verification Program administered by the Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security; and otherwise shall comply with the requirements of C.R.S. 8-17.5-102(2)(b). 3. The Contractor shall comply With all reasonable requests made in the course of an investigation under C.R.S. 8-17.5-102 by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. If the Contractor fails to comply with any requirement of this provision or C.R.S. 8-17.5-101 et seq., the BOCC may terminate work for breach and the Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the State. 4. If the Contractor is a sole proprietor, the undersigned hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Colorado that (check one): I am a United States citizen, or I am a Permanent Resident of the United States, or I am lawfully present in the United States pursuant to Federal law. I understand that this sworn statement is required by law because I am a sole proprietor entering into a contract to perform work for the BOCC. I understand that state law requires me to provide proof that I am lawfully present in the United States prior to starting work for the BOCC. I further acknowledge that 1 will comply with the requirements of C.R.S. 24-76.5-101 et seqand will produce the required form of identification prior to starting Work. I acknowledge that making a false, fictitious', or fraudulent statement or representation in this sworn affidavit is punishable under the criminal laws of Colorado as perjury in the second degree under C.R.S. 1B-8-503. CERTIFIED and AGREED to this CONTRACTOR: day of , 200 (Contractor Full Legal Name) FEIN or Social Security Number By: Signature of Authorized Rep Title Immigration Affidavit (08/06) Final EXHIBIT vlmwe+nW arva ,tso+al mut ,a, .''" = 111113d AYM31IPN1 g g N g 4 e li i Wld ONIOVNJ V 31J8 WM. Mill /11.191.1 OGYa0100'ALNntb17.113UaYJ IN3WON3WVhind dNDODA1d ICUS 3131:13NO3 lid Sa3MOd ..m..... 1 5111V1711SNO3 TIADDI o • STI 'aN17i HION sladS' �' SIMI , WM r w \� M. i J 1 Ali '\�. . l l i; , 1 } 1 4 N 1p �I iI1,1 i1 md�rJ ; . u}L3 r 0 $C / 11 1Y1l\\y1}}. \ 1\1 b621'1a, /"i.l \ I\ �}� ��V 4-i S ( I. !1 m 1E; I a H i, i i; .1 4q I f /1 �.:.. � v`-`t, m�"� iri 1 41 `1 t ry ly g �,\\'\ a'm E is- ,, I I 1 1 7',;',,, , 1 I iv 1 ', 1'!�/, 4 1\ \ .1 \\ \ Vf1lrfl li1111�f1,fllf/( \`°. \ , \ , 1. 1'lli 11! 111i \ \ f t VIII `\ \ , \ ^ ' ilnf 11, 111,11, ,1 '1 1\. ,', \\ ^, `1\ 111IIf1111II � , >, � II Ill � ,. 1 [ 111 I I i \III I III \ V\ � �5, \} \ ` Y1,1 iII IIII \ 4\ i y, Ill blki I 1 V ,•9 , \ \ M1 V ,1,14•:,--_,:,,,,V 11, 1} `., \}1 '1\! \ p' \ fif \v=nvlvv` v},v wv $v.+Avv �, 1} ,...\\1\1� IV11}\\ \\\,\ II7l ,z1//lilll 11 ' l`�,� ,,,,,,1---, /!� 1,11,1 1 v\ i V 141 �`��`� lI7./, �Jllr ll�l 11,'I }\� \\ \� ` ren/ / r I J1 lJ I I � 111 , \\\` \ \ n. 14[111 I 1 l 1f1111 \ \\ ,flf I I f , 1!!11(1 S }+,\�; 1'1111411 V ! 1 If �f!/f if IJ, ,/,.. / /i \�\ `\\<�\i \ 1,1111;! r /ii/ -,.'4%::;----' },�,� \ ��� 111GGG 1 / I / y ! 11, 4 �� .{�-- r / J f ,� �v i/// \ � \ ` o - , 1 1 +,,. 1', ` }\ ', V } i 4 1 I } } ', 4 1, 1 { I I' V 1 1 1 � � I i I + I 1 i 1 1? i I I ' 1 ;(I 1 1 ^ / ./ / 1 / � I !, f 11 / // f/ +'' j 1 /. ? f 1 �` l .! I .. / J _fir / , / / / /f1 ! J1 I�F� itr / �i/ /f, 1A r11 / 11 t \i J if f f1 \r„11, % r ; if !11 ( l l !! 1 �V ' / 1 11 ,__,,,111f jl J ,J r, I\`}\ ,. \ 11'Yi 1\ '.;'9'1,,/1r/ , ' Ill l•-•"--,V/,..... �,', iA ` Iii �� 4-.3V„..:2:-:::',"',/ li,.r � v\ ----,..-..,,':•.' ��� '; \ 11)1,---hili r `,/,-;41;.;;%;:',:;`,,J/,r c 11l � /' I/ �� �\ \ \.\\ \ \\ 111 ,!!,// ,,.....`;;;V.,7,",%,;,,,/ 'r `v� 1'I �r!(r7rr /� �lr�lrf`/!/ l�!/I/i / / � \ � \ -- \ a„\� , -,-..• l 11ri/'/!/„ll/, !!i, 1/„ \ \\ j J/% / _ \ """""4.-.4",`,44 \ ` \�\\} 1}11 V\l }1\\� II III Il /J,/ (/' (,//4 /, 1,1111,1111rflf 11111!!/!1,/4.11JI!!4'/il�i //11/1/,ll -�~\\�---",-'1.-i,``',... \��`�`. J MLI VIII 'l\11 .\\ I 11,11 l� li 8111 11/171/11:(474'4%"11/'/J //1f ' '' ` � ` \ ` `\ `,4...... � ,f%Ji ! \ �\ II IIII !11 1111,17!111/, N/ /!i1/!',� 1,414" ��1 A V ON V` ..III IIIIIII 111111111�!/l1lF/l�liiilfJ/17 //!%!!Ir' �` \'� \ f 5�� . IIII I11,1II1111f1I1111f 1/yq,,ll,/4%j! ! i\ •\ \ / / _\\����/� _1- 1111{n111,11,f IIr 1,1 iI111111i 11111111!1 1x/ 1j All ',,,r%� //1j \ \ -L'''""---"-- \ - i i � \ ` \ 111 IIII Il111�111111'1iI III IIIIVIIII Ir+Ij �fl/lrlllf �ill(Ilr1(11l�rilre 4 / \ ` 4"�----' �� 11,'11,1 V111Ii'Iil li111,, 11,11 1111 l�I�I''111'I' 11,'Iflflffl1111111'i1h ` / . v1 yv�.�, 11,11 11,1'11,4111i111111 II111i 1,111111,11'1,1111I1jV 11,11,i1�III IIII 1,,'I;; III%11141,4 qv - '' \ l� I \1 , 11 , II%I I11,li'1'I11,1Ii'1,1,4111,1,11 11111,111,i'I Ilf 1 IVi 11111 I11,1�I XR' ` a� ` n1e • VI'H1,1111I11141,1141 41i11i 111111ij11' jllli'lllll'I 1ii1i1,4'Vil1,1�1111>I114 �'` ;. t, r'� 111'Ii,1+hill p'61l;l'V��fi'I,;1I 11I;Vi,1;,1 1,41111 �;, 1' lil'Vq'lll,illl,I �(� S.- A l f Pi� 11,'1,1,1 '11,111'�IIIi111,41111I1 IIII Iii 111i1,l If 11IVI 1III� 1111'II IIV UVI 11 Ij} i J V� 11 /r(;', , % 9; ' Il1,11II II 11,1 1,%11, jIIl1,il11,l II Ii1, 11,ji1,1,i III11 111111111,1111 ,.. \t\ \\..,.,-,L.„,,,,,, � j� r/� � ' /111! Bl lfl , lilt , I IIII Ir 11 �' f' 1, , a J/�\ Ir(rr /1811 1inn f111111111'1, 'Ili .,,�.-'` i�vvvpIlrt Jf1i`Ii!!f1(1rl11!!lll�lr11l1f1il711i'1j11111111111iflll 1111,11111111: , f ,\�✓/%!%1 (�!f \i l �1�/%Y f 1,/ R i* '..- fi m � g a P- W } ��. _ 6E � I VV. 2 f/ P. ! .. Jr rY 1 ' ! J/` if ` - j I a1 ' ,� it J / ti` 1r1 /rr 1 _." �.. �1 j.i v ` Th. �,, l�rI11r11,rrp,1� 117 / 1 J 1;1 F1r1r rfr-- 'lll ill , 'Iftif i ( rl l 11111 ', i 1 f1 i } I I I I 111 ( if I ( 1 I I I I ,TI,,,, !! T V 1 ! Il !I i,k-7...--", I 1 i I I J V f , ',„ t I I }{��11! k i Cllr, 1 { l � I 1 i}Il 1 , 1\ I 4, I\ l !I1,11"11 1 V 1111 I111,1II 1 } 1 \ 1 1 \ ill(, 4 , ,' \ It , I' V \ 1 111 4 Al 1 V 1 UII�,II l If I 11 \ l 1111 1 1 , V / l 111 F / 1 III! 1 I 11, III 1 ! I A 111111/1 11//1.,.) ,` 7�, 11,111111 fI III lill'll IIIIl11111,11lIlllil1,li1,jjI111 t I VII1111 I Ilill f l 1!11111 111111 III 111,141111111f(If/!11!%lrlffllr�fl1'I 4(1/ilI,11r11rr�1llllllilfl`Ij1111i1f111II1111'Illrlilllll V'Il1, ilfrilll1r71 11111RilI11ill11fljl Ill! llf(llllf11111111111!11111!111111illlrffilfflirff'111f1�1�11 III Ifr 1111 I11 11 11111111((1111 e� } 1'V 11 'l 11 111 11, i1, 11,. Il 1111 i1, II II VII IIII 1111 1,11111 11,111111,'1 , ,'#. ?11Jf,1f111 f 11f1�('1�Ir lt!`(1111, frl ll lr�llflllll,,,,hi �V VI IIIi111fi1f1h 1I1p 11111 IG l!1lflrlrltll1, 1 II llli111 11 11 (ill Iflll li 1 III I Il 1111111111 I1 111jllflfill ljll1111,i111i 1,11 Ii II fl 111111 II I Illi) III II 11, 1 r111111111II1'llllll IIII II II 11111, l,f1111111111f//f li'l,lill'lllllll'l 'll I r(1, i r r/gr(rr, rl , ill r rl , ,r 1II�11r11j1I r1�/!1f II 1f! VII J! frllll�lll dill f/lA 11111, ff1r„Ir el! f1, 11I1111!l�rfrl'r!!l11lI11 llr11f1fr(If 1 ,I(ll%ll(ill l lfl(rrf11111!l I I tlf,lllf1f r111111+'llllfilfll1r111jl11�I1frlllfifl 1111 lRf11lflillflill,11111111rIVi IIr1l1f1f1f 111 fl 11111!,11f1lff1llfll 111111 f1(11I111f1111 itIII 111j1l1111111111r111f11f1f1 Illi 11 fl1lllll fllliF11j141111111if ,1.111 Ifiilfllllll1111i rlll illy frll 11111 111 !4111 IIYIVilllf g1,( 111,1(11,111 I1111H 11111{ 1``}II �piIV1,1,1,VIIIji11111,111A IV I11illiI \ �1 1 I U, 1 11 111 1V I I I .'411111111,1,V1I11I1II1iIIV,l11111,1I1I111 I V,1IV11V IVIV 1411, I11,111p II 11,1111 I "1111 1111'1,1 IIi1,1Vi,1,111,1111 IVI11,1ll lily ,I1I 1114 III 1,,1 j1)1111111111''V'1111 j1 11,1,4%1,1,1111'11, VI114IjI11,1I l' 1° 11, II 114 ,111 Illlillll 11,111,141111'1, 111'1 j1V 111 11,1 VII 1111i1 IIIc 1111 IIIIII IIII I' fIV1 , 11,1 '111, ,1VIIVI�111IIil 1 11111 II14i it III 11,11,1j11,,I IIVI II II 114 1 III til IIII ,II 111 VII 1 111,4 1 1, II I111f 111 l'',IVIIIll 1111 ,VII 1,4 1,1 I111111111111II ,II11V141,1}11IIVI ilI11V 11;1,11'I IIV Iullll''V ylj li 1j11i' 111,111 ii11f lll''1'11 Iui�\ui I61111 I"111�� 1!111„1i' 1 I( !! ! r lflf111 III I i1111ilill, 1!11 1!1111 Vl I I �. 1111 11 \ 11111111f(1\ti 11fll II1 j111V \ \ 1 AP Id 11111111! IIII Illillll•ilfi1 IIII �� ��,'/II I II III llil IIII III/`1 IIr�-rte`` J(1111i I III, f 111,1, 1f, T I 11111 Illi! 1, I(1, I 111111 1, 1,1,1,II 1,,',1•1,' \> I 4 ,-,111W1, `,1'11,1,11 V1, II 11,11111111, V IIII IIII i 1,11111114: III 111 l II ,(IIII II I 1 1, 1,11(1,1111 f11111,1I ;I ll 11j1R11I� yV1V\ ',1,11,1,11,1,,,,,,.. -. - - _ - \Y AAV4� rll IrL f' , uV, ,1r_, \�. ! f 1 II I iIIIljry' l r/_ fll rl !1`1,111! IL' 11 111%11 ' 1� Ems'! '� b �.Il illl(fill`1 _�/11 1111 1( S`$ r 11111 \ %fP I Ifll ,Ill fil �-«sir~` Vr __ I\\\\\-'��i11/F 14'f VvvvVvvvA a/ /o rplrj t d ` l, '[ Y lie , 1\11 \ f'C' i \� ,' tr ��9~ .ems "W q1\\M>....._'--",(i„ / 11 (' }\I VIy% ,,7117 4. 11• f� } 11 /1r _ _-vs'Ai'"`� \\ % 11, 1'Ij ,^ yl li ' r� , �/ -r lir rlJ lu ` _.._ , 11(l�ll,,lJr, llf !111- ' �iJ rnI rlrrJ ,JI %!11/11 1. _ - - i 111` � � z / l - rl, Jrl ; 1 fJ � N �`\ - %,',..-/ ryl/ dlI 1r Y/, � �' !/ '''',,,,-.-1(., rlr 1°t.v. �1 l _- } Rrlll�fl tri( 1' �ll (,, 1!11( ;.l Hlv 4 fl(1lfr lIrlllr !IIII!!! \ 111111111 !, (� '� i�/ 1,1' 1411 l,lM(r 1 \ , �1 rr 1 r iv- ,�1 \ 1,441111144 Il44 , \ f f(` ! r 7, �� } 111111 ,j, / \ rdF�r 3 �t 1� Vf�l IIII ll( Ill ��1 %1111111+ ' \ Irl}f r /1 -'tel :!::",111.W // ( f III 1, l 1,1 V1, J1Il ' ./ 'i iP , Vlll Y ! !a 1 li (! / 11 1}Ip\\\ 1r f !1/J ! }L\4 l ^l\1 11 l /11 ! 11L\, III 1 I'' 111 Il 1\,//'/ 11 111,11111 1',1,1V','\\1111+4,411`\\\\\\�l*\ `i\\�` _ f _ '�E 111,i11111(,�'! tt I f1�i 1 \ //111r�n I. , ll1 }11 1 1 , \\ �\ \ . _ �, _ _. J 1�r 1 1 1 I l V1 41111- 111}l l \\,1 1 \11 \ ; �.\ 1 , r 1 1 VlV V41i1 1 41 \ll \\ \l\ '' \,l)\ B/7/11 ff V ll 111 `i \\t\ \\ 1141 N/..::, I! ` \ }VIII, % /11 !r' r! f I } t\`111\1\1\ t\'''''''''''',.':,:‘,...1.,'","..,..Y.....,...:',..".,-",.."-:� _ y \ 1l^ �� %.. 11 h. i��. l l j \}I}\I}l\`1\ \� 1,f'! \\ ,}\1L1\�1\\` l\\ \ =•_�f •1 ! F. f� Jfl1 \ { /!!14 Ifl I f1,/ 1111hW�1�\\\\ /71¢ J( r 1 \ \ �\ \ \ X f it J ! (1 I} I f ,l `., \ �, i r 1 ii, /1 susv vY+ tiv r->` 11,1/ ,r! 1 ,1 41ir 1, = - -,�;; I it / 4 f l i1 --, r 1 , 1P11 11 .1 f i II r'� 1, 4 1 `- ' ' ` 1 (' , I � � 1 �- � � 1f ; 11 � �-� ;1 ; `� ` rq /F i ,1 I ,' 1. rl I �r i' �f 1 1, 'm /' , L. 1 \ � I 1 1 (1 1 f � �`1 � 1111 ; 1 r , vv ...... .,,,Ip 1 \' I �� Av )J 111111 11%111 l� 1 Yl�1 f� |/§ «ee2 4 a\d\2\)\ SOPRIS ENGNEERING - LLC IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT OF' THE POWERS PROPERTY A PARCEL OF LAND SiTL)ATED IN THE E1/2SE1/4 OF SECTION 22, NE1/4NE1/4 AND LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 AND 13 OF SECTION 26 LOTS 1, 6, 7, 8, AND 9 OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MEPiD1AN COUNTY OF CARFELD, STATE OF COLORADO. SPFFT 2 nF 3 MAW, 0E99307AA'! 1445 PROPER, 150517701+. R} AFAxfft WIL0,09174154m1,1,E12sEIM7r 151v,,0100/451,5PRPLPrn4114S 6r—� $�4 1 fL ]'' A =LT.Pla'u �VF J.r. uanm sarev chr A" s4 09557.0110 AT 0! S0O56AST ARR. OF 4515 0911]21 A 0007019 COLEry 50w102 EOM CAP ul P+A� .7.7.1i °F 17, l0, R,6 474* 701+lry tml[FA40F ICS. 0 4!ou'sclro°PW 27451leul°GP VI PLACE:5¢444 4UIRM13 4LWle 4170 ETSFEF. 591E 004.14 W9925ITMENGE...Hu rtfr ar �IYI'ry DSK ertrolar 's Cal. A 04050 arm PAP Ls 44969E W HAM a fRIY 59170 0044+20 .v PaWEA,'s 51,5E 09559013' 11ALR. ME. E 4755 1mwMl+t4 5 5441 P.M ]..10 Feil m A PiaAS a✓N. N 477113 0 01P.M5 5401+00 551E mat..., Ler s a4Te'mr W ,am FE,510 E5.1775 V 114 OSLO 0502, 50 1,5 RAG 11 43 UTAB NID6W LS 0,313 wc11711..:441131. av Ace rw. ADM. sAw usrwLC I.RE 55.1'59' 43592116 (As 9444417 f)V REEYA/£1 L.*1945n445TM 440]4 PLAT OF PARCEL B, 20400 Auo SFASRRLmv u.sm5, "w P1sm4.034 FEET um NA= Ls posse n Pup '01°1 1 as 5495 .819 AMEP,L`O .70777 RE& 4020&4) LV On[ 530'mw'w 590.37¢7 M APara rN 71¢ 91411 710E 5470 ARO£.rv1r0 0101'0 50 AN ° 1,1E NWc114. Itq IA A ATa 1 Nm 3 L.S. Asses a FAA.; v5 aa• £75.5.5, AEN£EV£Nr R£LY3H'LO 1,5 700 plot.od 5 IIDi�M9nr 00100-v- m.ze FRT, Mr. =MI -Wm BLOM Sam Flo `1r'l v"0"rn16? _ N 'FEEL 501....111.1511007ua+o soli mL lr -uav s r,1ov>•`IP moo Fa-,, wzuv SUE., .417 I£0 .AFC ,P49 AU _ la 1A5R Hr-er-,40 as001. w 59154 E. 604.44115717-OF-�v 5 o7Y15 1kNanl 0,0x.40 ALM, SAO mwT-ar-Eur 4 7259']2' w 7159.54 FEEL MU le Rao PArt-0E-44'00 R °41219., .14 FEET TO A MUT al ME EMILY MIE ,r MwIH ALONG Ix m 4"7174401 5754 54.4127-x4v ry 540'54" W PLalc 911E [As¢Ia.Y WIE a . 0 x059 AFU rva M, IF 4. saw-rm. Pa a FIs m F. As97B elm CAP RE.3 A 0.2 111017 Lor S.5 Ac v w 91204 411 001 Pa, al ERE I1 5 71.01 0* 85170 0.27111017Lor TEL A ROW yT nP Lm Q7m0 w P+Aq nvx[ „ wvP'2Y W.ALaIc sAv rrtrzmwLY u¢ 7059. FELT m A ,551,4 43.4x35400iur�7-env �� er,a�cc°°mrlo lizr`mpmav¢RaLwc SAVIL 412,4954E m{c wo N ,, 15.10 1.575 5 4077559' IR 5445586 ,El: N H972.1 4525 5140021"£ 2C H0' RAR7Yi B sm1CI0,RR!ww4 A1154*T FRAC 554 9.155 0747 ALttWSAlo 1105 WYSBrIg'1' /147.3'E[ci+C L1I MRIiSwTMxAA MIO TRRYFaX713 O Mvm$w r 7M'A Lv MORr-u•-wAr n mete' w Ian7o RET0 4 u mmono., 3sF-w4r Ralulplr Irl FFR¢; Ylrl DPRRw9.c 719+0 E'10 M9Tr.... Px,Hr-oF-Exv s Tr.... IT MICTITE E H IP.eiuu`ui1 e'`ffi7m Dir.+u °Ins+�l wawa ]4,6°0;1 T.,rfEt1 091545,ENlaw'.`W124.059 OF SAO IAP PLOT, 7154,1En (3147.411. w '013IC RE e7 Pn ERE N9xIRFAIv-we w 1754 uRRxIIIwIn 547 e� 0137 ssrr E x590 RE IIP 7,1,1" 115E O' ER:7'.1717IID e A 'TATA' s qA' PF 5070 RES. 54'44 eRftivlREEsr ttm+ry Ar Rom rman 550`,Im Bili 55 a ¢SRO ME4.1.2[11.11E s SAID ur 1 s. ripr e1 MEI aRI AYi01er5 515.0.141 OCR. OFVC 95,1211 is Arlo SLOW1 m, A.AM .9 191 1ow°7 °°113. • ° H� F Irwm1grr1FR`°s`°,m�l"`"nll` ERE fAmnwLT L05 W W5R'vtln IAT L A ,c°Pil� AesrALer�NRr 544,59 ff mo s,c,mV $, al Aunay.A.1 cn MPrvni%irn wM7lsEN.aW 143 x¢1xLV LMF OF >AE nFl/drlsr4 ffWRIr �A =FP La{ 0F CF ]0778 FFFI m 111E E1rz 6RIFFn1x mCJYR. 650» 6FCna5.fAABF � 51 oe 809i°'n' 47 4 IIA PREM( 055 x45000 1150 . AmE'Rw9Tw.i740 5707837 d 1E1I01091 masal . A eLW CAP III ARTm TeRr[ II 547240' E µmc BRE RPR1ROYv MI+E v 9Ro E lµ 9' to Er wrl�P mmm to sUlB acs. smco..55 yO+amv mass [M 5,r ssouuM iIxiFmSERaw..SAID 3,,121123 MP M.. Aassn DCA VI v1A =,...F.,5.715,1,2 544LNG ERE E, ER, LEE a 9API .¢[11911 2R a °tvFn' E Ixx.m FRT ERE EE1 4,x3059,, w1K AIM; RE PP. %TRCoEWRlwv PI uSsnMMFtR a'"MtNI+E s atm n+ 730E rtu ATPAa 5901 PAMAR tpAATT. 145 57y 0421 a 01 ram ss 3010111353 P Lem Rm 1001. ARM IF mm In m� � r9G°Rf1o'aE1°a 1) DATE OF SURYSv. AAVOL - SEPTEMBER, 200.1. APRIL 21 AND Aw71 ACV. .50081 GAP 0791.7 5 02OYLL, £ 8].20 S .09,117.f5.4:.£20}.30` iOTA 59.352 N 503247 T15YyS4,aL0'p S'W,33&31' 20.7 15 0714 417777 9 00 17556:0' 57545054950014543 72504 L- 5 8970'4Y' l' 03157 5 73+1709" W' 006' 1* 9 E u m+l 044.59 .$04' Zf DATE OF PREPARATION: 84545 - SEPTEMBER. 2061 Pk0 APR1L. 2007. 3) 9455 OF 437.111& A BEARING OF 5 -8559'040 E 0£1,45751 THE 111,716CORNER SECTI.01.1 OF 24 te . 0041508 8E511011 26. A FOUND Eno DAwUMNMM DAPI!l1078 BASIS OF 255015. .141 CAP MO T9r, 19-1 ASS 18755557051 FRO* A CPS 450470 CP5ERVAT054 19435 THE 14 810 STATION '4ESHAAR.1 4) 5 SNH157 THE 011OR0E0 P1215 AND BERLIN IOE00FIEP 07 $4337 OF REIN SIRAE5', 191E 1409 GENERAL 15141 GERM PLAT 17F 144710117 7 O 1570, RAN. BB 7555 OF THE 015 P.M., 1445, 1970 AND 1995 RUREA0 OF L9190 61NVA HERE571 1LL41 OF 0EPE1OEWT RESUR457,0M495 5r1RT450 OF PORTIONS CF MANI7 RUL/M. PAH. BB %ESL 13F ME 07)F1 42 DEPARTMENT PROJECT Na w P 0 AND 366-C AND PROJECT , 1 5771E LOT. 9 054500N�AND LD1 0 GOORIJEA MONUMENTS A5 C70MWIISRCR04, GOV5,R1#MERIT 5)) 1115 5000-.457 00VDT 03'4401115 A TOLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS 1011[EFI147. JL5 (1E) TO DETERMINE OPOERSHIP fW EASEME?115 45 RECORD- F9R ALL 1150440110,4 REGARDING EASEMENTS. RIO -1T -OF -WA, AID/Oft 111LE 07 RECORD 513 REJE0 /PON THE THE PROPERTY RIFORM0.1101I BINOEA PREPARED OY W>O TN£ GUARANTEE COMPANY ORDER NA 44250745"1, ELECTIVE DATE .NNE 7, 2E07. 0) THE 750R5IEmrY0ED 0,4,0,7. PR00E00 511247-AFWA1 MAPS VALE 4330, ROTATED 00'4211- [195545£ TO 711E CA4557ENT WITH THIS SURVEY 0A58 OF W ARM 7) TME NORTHERLY LME CF LOT 4 5E4ROl 25 WAS ESTABLISHED FN. THE ex.r_ 25 71-1AT PROPERTY DEED RECORDS AS RECEPTION NO. 641107 OF THE 09214454 OWN,' RECORDS. 5011.1 DEED LOCATI88 15 0411001 114 1MT H AM £754180 MEANDERING WOI171 WIRE FENCE .9,9 EAEMPI1 W As A 11454115 AT INE POE5 TTHE LLIOCA4TIONAOF 1HECLOS RL, LINEI OF 819.1.123.E SPICE 006351RH1 THERE HAS BEEN HEREON M,VSING PAROELAN ABI0 411 VOIDCROR PROPERTY [01111 L4011111, THE �1 LAE 45 PORlitt7 • 5HE PROPERTY DESCRIBED 111 1u50RN41111T RECORDED .1115E 5, 2047 IN 10051 1259 AT PAGE 907 AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 4, 2003 58 0907. 1507 AT PAPE 322 HAS OE£ROTATED COUNTER PROPERTY 0]'59' TO BE OONSSTElJT YAM THE BOUNDARY OF VC MAIN704 PROPERTY L sea 911TAWAVY V539720 AM. MIA 94119.1 MN ALM 009 is ,via! !rP%Nwat'Ii AA1AY�N i^ GRAPHIC STAT TP en an 1e1 0le.4°. .171'ur1.6 9 27t01°m Lw61=ie a. 66 "MI. -17 ur d O L> AfcwwuW CPP 6 '11"."°,r".•a 9491161 519X3 it ,9 J.d a9 FL41,51 1959 919.155. 9.919 F5°tN0 IA, 1 maw cC 00154.% riea�r'eew u"Pia deme ACAP .A.MAW NM J7a4B NO �¢1P1',W mar 44770x5 MEP/ N V11 �� RH5ubt7 1 I I�F n 9.9-07.199 .E A.s2 400300 t0°�AL ...._......1119 eAA3 \\C\ 4-.55110 1,13410' RUR008 1WEAR LEI, AREA 50035 Leawevmal1 LS'CAW A LS r3 t3949191 9269,4 • 9.4, alarss ,91. r rm, Ls p+.yl3 CAR s• ¢* 0frR7RiA b[Pa L5 �uFr) P. SOPRIS EPd2)NEERING — LLC 0VIL CONSULTANTS 552 MAIL) STREET, SUITE 1,3 574540NDALE, COLORADO 7.1823 (970) 7754-0211 L1,31119 EADV 2445270055 ]v.1ipj =w4465 r�..,s psse WO, RAW 1,k NAS. GP 4S RX1A 5,9111/! 450504/ gSeEL971Y1rY 519111.3503 65475 S. DECRIER LS 925545 A ..4 540404 AF WR,eR. .*Fc°av ,,nAn o�P4RRFRr a+A,xwrs 1 g e40. Edg 0 a =gg110 OlifE111!4 AnanEw atm., a� em -v gm� ��� € Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15— Exhibits Exhibit B - Water Supply Reports Crystal Ranch Adequate Water Supply Letter prepared by Balcomb and Green, P.C. Crystal Ranch Physical and Legal Water Supply Letter prepared by Zancanella and Associates EDWARD MULHALL, JR. SCOTT BALCOMB LAWRENCE R. GREEN TIMOTHY A. THULSON DAVID C. HALLFORD CHRISTOPHER L. COYLE t THOMAS J. HARTERT CHRISTOPHER L. GEIGER SARA M. DUNN SCOTT GROSSCUP CHAD J. LEE* LUCAS F. VAN ARSDALE BALCOMB & GREEN, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW P. 0. DRAWER 790 818 COLORADO AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 TELEPHONE: 970.945.6546 FACSIMILE: 970.945.8902 www.balcombgreen.com April 25, 2011 Mr. Fred Jarman, Director Garfield County Building and Planning Department Re: Application Dear Fred: KENNETH BALCOMB (1 920-2005) OF COUNSEL: JOHN A. THULSON tALSO LICENSED IN OKLAHOMA *ALSO LICENSED IN WYOMING This letter provides information necessary to support a finding that the proposed land use change application for the Crystal Ranch Property has an adequate, reliable, physical, long term and legal supply to serve the proposed use. This letter is submitted pursuant to Sections 7- 104 and 105 of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended. Existing Water Supply The property has served as a aggregate extraction pit and concrete batch plant for a number of years. The property receives a legal water supply under the plan for augmentation decreed to the Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel and the Basalt Water Conservancy District in Case No. 92CW304, in February of 1995. The existing industrial operations have been covered by this plan for augmentation since it was decreed sixteen years ago. That decree granted a new water storage right for the James Reservoir Industrial Enlargement, and surface water rights for the Martin Ditch, Kelso Industrial Enlargement and the Powers -Martin Spring and Pipeline Industrial Enlargement. These water rights can be used for irrigation of up to 40 acres and for operations related to the aggregate and concrete batch plant located on the property. Case No. 92CW304 also decreed a plan for augmentation for these water rights that would allow the water rights described above to divert when other more senior water rights may be calling for water. This plan for augmentation uses several sources to replace the out -of - priority depletions that may result from the industrial operations on the property. They include consumptive use credits from dry -up of historically irrigated lands, and a water supply contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. These supplies augment up to 29.76 acre feet of out - of -priority consumptive use per year. Continuation of Concrete Batch Plant Operations. The proposed continuation of the concrete batch plant operations would continue to rely upon the water rights and plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 92CW304. That decree considers industrial diversions of 71.60 acre feet per year and depletions totaling 13.52 acre feet per year. Any out -of -priority depletions will be replaced with consumptive use credits or through a contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District — Contract No. 31 in the amount of 17 acre feet of which 13.52 acre feet is to augment industrial depletions pursuant to the 92CW304 decree. Any additional out -of -priority depletions would either be curtailed by the Division Engineer or replaced with additional supplies from the Basalt District. In addition to those water rights decreed in 92CW304, the property does have other water rights decreed for irrigation use. These include the Kelso Ditch and the Kelly Waste Water Ditch. These rights can continue to be used for irrigation upon the subject property. Rural employment center. The decree entered in 92CW304 provides for irrigation of up to 40 acres on the subject property and limited domestic uses. The property is located within the Basalt Water Conservancy District's Area A. Thus, the property could be included within the Basalt District's umbrella augmentation plan and temporary substitute water supply plan by applying for a new water supply contract to meet anticipated domestic needs. Conclusion The existing water rights and plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 92CW304 are sufficient to provide a reliable and legal water supply for the continuation of the operation of a concrete batch plant on the property. Should out -of -priority industrial depletions exceed 13.52 acre feet per year, then the property owner can either choose to amend its contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District or reduce operations. However, past demands and anticipated production indicates that the water rights and plan for augmentation decreed in 92CW304 provide a reliable and adequate source of supply for the property. Very truly yours, BALCOMB & GREEN, P.C. B Scott Balcomb Scott Grosscup P.O. Box 1908 1011 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Doug Pratte Land Studio P. O. Box 107 Basalt, CO 81621 Re: Crystal Ranch Dear Doug: Z4NC4NELL4 SNI] ASSOCIATES, Inc. ENGINEERING CON5ULT4NT5 April 21, 2011 (970) 945-5700 (970) 945-1253 Fax At your request, we have prepared the outline summary below of how Crystal Ranch Properties will be capable of providing both a physical and "legal" water supply to the LaFarge Concrete Batch Plant and the future domestic needs of the proposed Rural Employment Center. LaFarge Concrete Batch Plant and Rural Employment Center Outline Summary 1. Concrete Batch Plant Processing Supply a. Physical Supply i. Roaring Fork River ii. Kelso Ditch Industrial enlargement iii. James Pond iv. Pump Station 25 HP 4" line to Batch Plant b. Legal Supply i. Augmentation Plan 92CW304 (Exhibit A) ii. Basalt District Contract (Exhibit B) 2. Domestic Supply a. Physical Supply i. Two on site wells; 1 pump test December 2010 50 gpm+ (Exhibit C) ii. Pump to tank in separate 3" hdpe line iii. Chlorination at buried concrete tank 250,000 gallon iv. Distribution to system b. Legal Supply i. Area A TSSP ii. Basalt District Contract (Proposed) 3. Irrigation Supply a. Physical Supply i. Irrigation from the Kelso Ditch up to 40 acres ii. Kelso Ditch iii. James Pond iv. Pump Station 10 HP 8" line to Employment Center v. Kelly WW Ditch up to 40 acres b. Legal Supply i. Kelso Ditch W-3944 (Exhibit D) ii. Kelly WW Ditch CA132 (Exhibit E) The processing needs for the LaFarge Concrete Batch Plant will be provided by the existing diversion system from the Roaring Fork River through the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement into the James Pond and then pumped under Highway 82 to the plant. The legal supply is provided by the existing augmentation plan, 92CW304, which is attached. (Exhibit A). Table 1 shows the potential depletion that LaFarge could consume under 92CW304. Any projections in excess of these amounts could be provided through an Area A Basalt District Contract. The current potential consumptive use would be limited to 13.52 AF diversions. Water Court Case 92CW304 allows for up to 71.6 AF of industrial uses. The plan provides for up to 29.76 AF of depletions. The 92CW304 Augmentation Plan is supported by 9.96 AF of historic consumptive use credits from the Kelly WW Ditch and a 17.3 AF Basalt Water Conservancy District Contract (Exhibit B). Table 1 LaFarge Batch Plant Diversions Under 92CW304 Acre Feet Gallons January 0.29 94,511 February 0.29 94,511 March 1.38 449,742 April 1.40 456,260 May 1.46 475,814 June 1.54 501,886 July 1.59 518,181 August 1.57 511,663 September 1.52 495,368 October 1.44 469,296 November 0.75 244,425 December 0.29 94,511 Total 13.52 4,406,168 Table 2 Diversions and Depletions from 92CW304 Month Industrial Diversions (1) Industrial Depletions (2) Irrigation Application (3) Irrigation Depletions (4) Total Depletion (5) Consumptive Use Credits (6) Augmentation Requirements (7) January 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 February 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 March 7.18 1.38 0.00 0.00 1.38 0.00 1.45 April 7.20 1.40 5.80 2.32 3.72 0.31 3.58 May 7.26 1.46 5.80 2.32 3.78 1.89 0.00 June 7.34 1.54 5.80 2.32 3.86 2.39 0.00 July 7.39 1.59 5.80 2.32 3.91 2.26 1.73 August 7.37 1.57 5.80 2.32 3.89 1.47 2.54 September 7.32 1.52 5.80 2.32 3.84 1.47 2.73 October 7.24 1.44 5.80 2.32 3.76 1.24 3.53 November 3.70 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.79 December 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 Total 71.60 13.52 40.80 16.24 29.76 9.96 17.26 From the outline above future domestic needs of the Rural Employment Center and the Concrete Batch Plant will be provided for by on-site wells. The Crystal Ranch Commercial Well #1 has been drilled and tested and is capable of providing 50 gpm for domestic purposes. The well was tested for quantity and quality in May, 2010. With proper storage, we believe up to 65 EQRs of domestic uses could be served. See attached. (Pump Test Report Exhibit C.) The "legal" supply for the domestic use will be provided by an Area A Basalt Water Conservancy District Contract. The well will qualify under the District's Temporary Substitute Supply Plan (TSSP). Well permits will be applied for under the TSSP. The irrigation needs can be met for the proposed Rural Employment Center and the LaFarge Concrete Batch Plant through diversions from the Roaring Fork River via the Kelso Ditch, James Pond, and pumping across Highway 82 with supplemental water from the Kelly WW Ditch under their own priority. Irrigation is also included in 92CW304 and the 17.3 AF of Basalt District water. Based on the above outlined approach, we believe an adequate water supply can be developed to meet both the physical and "legal" water supply for the LaFarge Batch Plant and the proposed Rural Employment Center. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (970) 945-5700. Very truly yours, Zancanella & Associates, Inc. 7 o'rras {4 l,rea rela Thomas A. Zancanella, P.E. z:\25000\25326 powers development-ranch\2011 commercial development\water supply -crystal ranch.dox EXHIBIT A 92CW304 DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION 5, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 92CW304 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, J NT AND DECREE CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR STORAGE AND SURFACE WATER RIGHTS, ALTERNATE POINTS OF DIVERSION AND APPROVAL FOR PLAN OF AUGMENTATION OF THE BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT AND ROARING FORK SAND AND GRAVEL IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO This matter, coming before the Court upon the Application for Storage and Surface Water Rights, Alternate Points of Diversion and Approval for Plan of Augmentation of Basalt Water Conservancy District and Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel ("Applicants") and the Court, having considered the pleadings and evidence before it, hereby makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and enters the following Judgment and Decree. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Application. Applicants filed their Application for Storage and Surface Water Rights, Alternate Points of Diversion and Approval for Plan of Augmentation on December 23, 1992, in District Court, Water Division 5. Basalt Water Conservancy District hereby stipulates and agrees to the terms contained in paragraph 10 of the above -referenced decree. 2. Jurisdiction. All notices required by law have been duly given and the Water Judge of Water Division 5 has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this proceeding and over all who have standing to appear whether they have appeared or not. 3. Objectors. Timely Statements of Opposition were filed by Wooden Deer Homeowner's Association, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Ranch at Roaring Fork HOA, Inc., Thomas H. Bailey and Snowmass Water and Sanitation District. No further Statements of Opposition have been filed and the time for filing such statements has expired. 4. The above -stated Objectors have agreed to withdraw upon the entry of this decree. 5. Applicant's Water Rights. Applicant, Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel, is the owner of the following described water rights: A. Name of Reservoir: James Reservoir Industrial Enlargement B. Legal description of location of dam embankment: Case No. 92CN304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lav, Judgement and Decree Page 2 (1) The James Reservoir is situate in the Southwest Corner of Lot 11, Section 26, Tp. 7 S., R. 88 W. of the 6th P.M. (2) If off -channel reservoir, name and capacity of ditch or ditches used to fill reservoir, and legal description of each point of diversion: Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement. The capacity, point of diversion and other information concerning this water right are described in paragraph 6 in this decree. Martin Ditch. Capacity 3 cfs. Located in the SW1/4, SE1/4, Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point 1,250 feet from the south line and 2,250 feet from the east line of said Section 26. C. Source: Crystal Springs Creek and Roaring Fork River D. (1) Date of appropriation: June 1, 1965 (2) How appropriation was initiated: Filing and pumping from James Reservoir for washing sand and gravel. (3) Date water applied to beneficial use: June 1, 1965 E. Amount claimed: (1) In acre feet: 8.28, absolute (2) If off -channel reservoir, rate of diversion: 3.0 cfs F. (1) If irrigation, complete the following: (a) Number of acres historically irrigated: 40 (b) Total number of acres proposed to be irrigated: 40 (c) Legal description of acreage irrigated or to be irrigated: Supplemental irrigation for approximately 100 acres in the NEkSWk, SWSE, SENW and the SWNE of Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. (2) If non -irrigation, describe purpose fully: Industrial uses including but not limited to sand Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lav, Judgement and Decree Page 3 and gravel washing, dust control, concrete production and truck washing. G. Surface area of high water line: 1.38 acres (1) Maximum height of dam in feet: 9 feet (2) Length of dam in feet: 100 feet H. Total capacity of reservoir in acre feet: 8.28 af Active capacity: 5. 0 af Dead storage: 3.28 af 6. Claim for Surface Water Rights. A. Name of structures: (1) Martin Ditch (2) Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement (3) Powers -Martin Spring and Pipeline Industrial Enlargement B. Legal description of point of diversion: (1) Martin Ditch. Capacity 3 cfs. Located in the SW1/4, SE1/4, Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point 1,250 feet from the south line and 2,250 feet from the east line of said Section 26. (2) Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement. Capacity 3 cfs. Headgate No. 1 is situated on a branch of the Roaring Fork River (which has also been characterized as the Patterson Jacobson Ditch) located in the SE1I4, SE1/4, Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point which bears South 80°33' West, 451.6 feet from the Witness Corner to the Southwest corner of Section 25, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. Headgate No. 2 diverts from the main channel for the Roaring Fork River is located in the SE1/4, NW1/4, Section 36, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point South 44°36' East, 2,640 feet from the above described Witness Corner. (3) Powers -Martin Spring and Pipeline Industrial Enlargement. Located in the SE1/4, NE1/4 of Section 23, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point whence the west quarter corner of Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. bears South 43°52'22" West, 7,443.61 feet. Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lav, Judgement and Decree Page 4 C. (1) Structure Source Approp. Date Use Amount cfs Martin Crystal 6/1/1965 Industrial 3.0 abs. Ditch Spring 5/1/1981 Irrigation 3.0 abs. Creek Kelso Roaring 6/1/1965 Industrial 3.0 abs. Ditch Fork River 5/1/1981 Irrigation 3.0 abs. Industrial Enl. Powers Spring 11/29/1978 Industrial .25 abs. Martin tributary Domestic Spring and to Crystal Commercial Pipeline Spring Industrial Creek Enl. (2) How appropriation was initiated: By diverting from each structure and application to the beneficial purposes claimed. (3) Date water applied to beneficial use: On the claimed appropriation dates D. (1) If irrigation, complete the following: Number of acres historically irrigated: 40 acres Proposed to be irrigated: 40 acres Legal description of acreage: Part of the South half of Section 26, T. 7 S., R 88 W. 6th P.M. (2) If non -irrigation, describe purpose fully: Sand and gravel washing, dust control, concrete production, truck washing water and domestic. 7. Claim for Alternate Point. A. Decreed name of structure for which changes are sought: Basalt Conduit B. (1) From previous decree: Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 5 (2) Date entered: June 20, 1958 Case No: CA -4613 Court: District Court in and for the County of Garfield (3) Decreed point of diversion: Basalt Conduit: The headgate and point of diversion is located on the left bank of the Frying Pan River at the head of the outlet tube for the Ruedi Reservoir whence the SW corner of Section 7, T. 8 S., R. 84 W. of the 6th P.M. bears N. 79°00' W. at a distance of 2017.1 feet. In addition, the Basalt Conduit has been approved for diversion at approximately 40 wells located in the Roaring Fork Valley, generally. (4) Source: Basalt Conduit: Frying Pan River tributary to the Roaring Fork River (5) Appropriation Date: July 29, 1957 Amount: 450 cfs, conditional with appropriation Priority No. 718 (6) Historic use: Some municipal use has been made of this right. The decreed uses of the Basalt Conduit are generation of electricity, irrigation, domestic, municipal, stockwatering, piscatorial and industrial purposes. C. Proposed change. The applicant requests one alternate point of diversion for 1.33 cfs of the Basalt Conduit as follows: Kelso Ditch Industrial Enl. The diversion is from the main channel for the Roaring Fork River is located in the SE1/4, NW1/4, Section 36, Township 7 South, Range 88 West, 6th P.M. at a point South 44°36' East, 2,640 feet from the above described Witness Corner. 8. Claim for Approval of Plan for Augmentation. A. Name of structures to be augmented: (1) James Reservoir Industrial Enlargement (2) Martin Ditch Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 6 (3) Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement (4) Powers -Martin Spring and Pipeline Industrial Enlargement B. Previous decree for water right to be used for augmentation: (1) Kelly Wastewater Ditch (a) Date entered: 5/11/1889 (b) Case No.: CA -132 (c) Court: District Court (d) Type of water right: Surface (e) Legal description of point of diversion: The headgate is located at the end of said ditch (Basin Ditch) on Sec. 27, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. (f) Source: Waste and Seepage (g) Amount: 1.0 cfs (h) Appropriation: 5/15/1886 (i) Decreed use: Irrigation (j) Total acreage: 5 acres (2) Ruedi Reservoir (a) Date entered: June 20, 1958 (b) Case No: CA -4613 (c) Court: District Court (d) Type of water right: Surface (e) Legal description of point of diversion: Ruedi Reservoir is an on channel reservoir located in the NW1/4NE1/4 of Section 18, T. 8 S., R. 84 W. of the 6th P.M. (f) Source: Frying Pan River and its tributaries (g) Amount: 140,697.3 of (h) Appropriation : July 29, 1957 (i) Decreed use: Hydroelectric power generation, irrigation, municipal, domestic, industrial, piscatorial, and stock watering uses. Ruedi Reservoir was originally decreed for 140,697.3 acre feet in Civil Action No. 4613, Garfield County District Court and the State of Colorado on June 20, 1958, for hydroelectric power generation, irrigation, municipal, domestic, industrial, piscatorial and stockwatering uses. Subsequently, in Case No. W- 789-76, Water Division No. 5, the amount of water decreed to Ruedi Case No. 9201304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 7 Reservoir was reduced from 140,697.3 acre feet to 101,369 acre feet. C. Historic Use: Kelly Wastewater Ditch: Irrigation. See attached map. Ruedi Reservoir: In accordance with congressional directives D. Statement of Plan for Augmentation: The applicant contemplates the need for diversions and to make depletions pursuant to use of the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement, the Martin Ditch, the Powers -Martin Spring and Pipeline Industrial Enlargement, and the potential use of storage in the James Pond at times when said water rights may be out of priority. The diversions at the Martin Ditch and the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement are contemplated to be 3 cfs total from either or both right when the water is available in priority. In order to offset any injury to any water user that may be affecting an administrative call upon said water rights, the applicant contemplates utilizing or providing replacement water to said calling rights by drying up all land historically irrigated by the Kelly Wastewater Ditch and releases from Ruedi Reservoir which releases would be made either to the calling water right or for direct diversion at the headgate of the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement which is described above. The depletions and the releases and augmentation sources are described as follows (values in acre feet): MOWN INDUSTRIAL DIVER:NONS (1) INDUSTRIAL DEPLETIONS (2) IRRIGATION APPLICATION (3) IRRIGATION DEPLETIONS (4) TOTAL DEPLETIONS (5) CONSUMPTIVE USE CREDIT (8) AUGMENTATION REQUIREMENT (7) JAN 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 FEB 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 MAR 7.18 1.38 0.00 0.00 1.38 0.00 1.45 APR 7.20 1.40 5.80 232 3.72 0.31 3.58 MAY 7.26 1.46 5.80 232 3.78 1.89 0.00 JUN 7.34 1.54 5.80 2.32 3.86 239 0.00 JUL 7.39 1.59 5.80 232 3.91 228 1.73 AUG 7.37 1.57 5.80 232 3.89 1.47 2.54 SEP 7.32 1.52 5.80 232 3.84 1.24 2.73 OCT 7.24 1.44 5.80 2.32 3.76 0.40 3.53 NOV 3.70 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.79 Cane No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 8 DEC 3.20 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.30 TOTAL 71.60 13.52 40.80 16.24 O 29.76 9.P6 17.26 (1) FROM TABLE 1, COLUMN 7, RESOURCE ENGINEERING REPORT DATED DECEMBER 23, 1992 (2) FROM TABLE 2, COLUMN 7, RESOURCE REPORT (3) (1)-(2) DURING IRRIGATION SEASON (APR -OCT) (4) (3) x 0.40 (40% IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY) (5) (2) + (4) (6) HISTORIC CONSUMPTIVE USE ASSOCIATED WITH 5 ACRES OF DRY -UP UNDER KELLY WASTEWATER DITCH (7) (5)-(6) EXCEPT IN MAY AND JUNE WHEN NO AUGMENTATION REQUIRED An engineering report further describing the operation of the augmentation plan has been filed with the Water Court in Water Division 5 and is available for inspection. STIPULATIONS 9. The Snowmass Water and Sanitation District has agreed to withdraw its Statement of Opposition upon the entry of this decree. In settlement of the objections of the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District and in consideration for the withdrawal of its Statement of Opposition, the Basalt Water Conservancy District (BWCD), the co -applicant in this matter, agrees that all water service provided by BWCD under the Basalt Conduit water right, conditionally decreed in Case No. 4613, Garfield County District Court on August 3, 1959, as changed herein or as may be made the subject of future water right change proceedings, shall be limited to the amount of water available in priority at the original point of diversion for the subject water right, and BWCD, or those entitled to use the BWCD's decrees, may not call on any greater amount at the new point of diversion. BWCD shall request the State Engineer to estimate any conveyance losses between this original point and any alternate point and such estimate shall be deducted from this amount in each case. BWCD, or those entitled to use its decrees, may call on any additional sources of supply that may be available at an alternate point of diversion, but not at the original point of diversion, only as against water rights which are junior to the date of the application for the given alternate point of diversion. BWCD shall incorporate the limitations of this paragraph into all future water allotment or use contracts. 10. The applicant Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel agrees to accept (in lieu of effecting an upstream call on Crystal Springs Case No. 92CN304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 9 Creek with its Kelly Wastewater Ditch priority) the augmentation sources approved for Objector Wooden Deer Homeowners Association as provided in Case No. 91CW189. 11. Applicant acknowledges that opponent, Ranch at Roaring Fork HOA, Inc., (the "Ranch") is the owner of and user of water rights below or downstream of Applicants' Kelso Ditch headgate on a branch of the Roaring Fork River described above which has also been referred to as the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch and have entered into a Stipulation with the Ranch which is fully incorporated herein. In order to insure no injury results to the Ranch's water uses, Applicants will first fill Applicants' needs as described in this decree from the Martin Ditch hereinabove described if water is available to that priority. If insufficient water is available from the Martin Ditch, Applicants will use its Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement herein decreed. Should Kelso- Ditch Industrial Enlargement diversions at Headgate No. 1 diminish the flows downstream (or downditch) of that point and Ranch desires more water, the Ranch will notify Applicants, and Applicants will make equal simultaneous diversions at the Kelso Industrial Enlargement at Headgate No. 2 to replace the quantities taken at Headgate No. 1. If Applicants divert pursuant to the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement, Applicants will diminish its Kelso Ditch Third Enlargement diversions by the amount of its diversions under the Industrial Enlargement to create space in the Kelso Ditch. All diversions into the Kelso Ditch headgate from the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch shall be limited so that no more than 12.0 cfs in total (for all owners and users of the Kelso Ditch) is diverted into the Kelso Ditch at any time. The Applicant agrees that it will not use the Kelso Ditch headgate diversion point located on the principal channel of the Roaring Fork River as decreed, unless it is unable to obtain 3.0 cfs at the Kelso Ditch headgate located on the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch Channel because of the unavailability of water at that location. However, the 12.0 cfs limitation shall continue to apply, regardless of the actual point of diversion, as the Kelso Ditch diversion point on the principal channel diverts water into the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch upstream of the point of diversion of the Kelso Ditch located on that ditch. Roaring Fork Sand agrees that it shall not access the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch headgate on the Roaring Fork River (the location of which is above described) or the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch located above or below the Kelso Ditch headgate. However, in the event that there is insufficient water in the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch at the Kelso Ditch headgate, Roaring Fork Sand shall have the right to ensure that it Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Page 10 receives its decreed water supply at the Kelso Ditch headgate. Nothing shall prevent the Ranch from performing normal maintenance, repair, and replacement of the headgate or other appurtenant facilities and to curtail diversions at the Patterson Jacobson Ditch headgate for a reasonable period of time to accomplish such. Applicants and the Ranch agree to cooperate in the use and maintenance for the Kelso Ditch and the branch of the Roaring Fork River also characterized as the Patterson Jacobson Extension Ditch. 12. Opponent Thomas H. Bailey is the owner of the Foley Ditch adjudicated December 31, 1980, in Case No. 80CW281. Applicants acknowledge that the Foley Ditch is senior to Applicants' Martin Ditch and the Kelso Ditch Industrial Enlargement priorities herein decreed. 13. Applicants acknowledge that the Colorado_ Water Conservation Board ("CWCB") is the owner of an instream flow water right on the Roaring Fork River as decreed in Case No. 85CW639. The parties agree that approval of the decree attached hereto as Exhibit A will cause a de minimus impact to the CWCB's water right in the sense that Applicants' proposed decree and all other existing appropriations have a cumulative impact of less than one (1) percent to the instream flow decreed in Case No. 85CW639. As such, the CWCB agrees to withdraw its objection and consent to entry of the decree attached hereto as Exhibit A. Nothing herein shall obligate the CWCB to consent to any extension of or increase in the de minimus impact agreed to herein. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 14. The foregoing Findings of Fact and Stipulations are fully incorporated herein. 15. The Court has considered the present Application for Storage and Surface Water Rights, Alternate Points of Diversion and Approval for Plan of Augmentation as set forth in paragraphs 5-9 above, concludes as a matter of law that such changes and requests set forth herein will not result in injury to the vested or conditional water rights of others. Casa No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree Pages 11 NT AND DECREE 16. The foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are incorporated herein and made part of the Court's Judgment and Decree. 17. It is hereby Ordered that the Application for Storage and Surface Water Rights, Alternate Points of Diversion and Approval for Plan of Augmentation described above is hereby granted, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. 18. All water service provided by the Basalt Water Conservancy District, under the Basalt Conduit water right as referenced in paragraph 7, shall be limited to the amount of water available in priority at the original point of diversion for the subject water right. BWCD, or those entitled to use the BWCD's decrees, may not call on any greater amount at the new point of diversion. Conveyance losses will be estimated by the State Engineer between this original point and the alternate point of diversion and the loss shall be deducted from this amount. BWCD, or those entitled to use its decrees, may call on any additional sources of supply that may be available at the alternate point of diversion, but not at the original point of diversion, only as against water rights which are junior to the date of the application for the given alternate point of diversion. 19. It is further Ordered that in order to prevent injury to vested water rights, the State Engineer is directed to curtail all out -of -priority diversions, the depletions from which are not so replaced under the plan for augmentation decreed herein. 20. In consideration of the specific Findings and Conclusions made herein and in conformance with C.R.S. SS 37-92-304(a), as amended, the approval of the matters decreed herein shall be subject to reconsideration by the Water Judge on the question of injury to the vested rights of others for a period of five (5) years from the date of this decree. If no petition for reconsideration is filed within five (5) years of the date of this decree, the retention of jurisdiction for this purpose shall automatically expire. 21. It is accordingly Ordered that this Judgment and Decree shall be filed with the Water Clerk and shall be effected upon such filing, subject to judicial review pursuant to C.R.S. 1973 S37-92- 304. It is further Ordered that a copy of the Judgment and Decree shall be filed with the State Engineer and the Division Engineer for Water Division No. 5. Case No. 92CW304 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Lew, Judgement and Decree Page 12 ,Done at the City of/Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this 2_ "day of �� %��� !�,�,v 1993 BY THE COURT: Thomas W. Ossola Water Judge Water Division 5 State of Colorado EXHIBIT B BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT CONTRACT ASSIGNMENT OF ALLOTMENT CONTRACT NO. 31 BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Roaring Fork Sand & Gravel Inc. ("Assignor"), hereby sells, assigns, transfers, and sets over to Western Mobile, Inc. ("Assignee") alI of Assignor's right, title, and interest in and to that certain Water Allotment Contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District dated February 14, 1993, which Contract, as amended, allots 3.0 cubic feet of water per second from the District's direct flow rights and 17.3 acre feet of water per year of storage and/or other augmentation water owned or controlled by the District for use on that real property described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. This Assignment is conditioned upon the consent thereto by the Basalt Water Conservancy District as hereinbelow provided. Assignee hereby assumes and agrees to pay and perform all of the obligations of the Allottee under said Contract. This Assignment shall be effective upon Assignor's conveyance of the above described property to Assignee. Dated this 1 3th day of August , 2001. ROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL INC. (Assignor) John Martin, Pr-. i ' -nt WESTERN MOB B Assignee's Mailing Address: Steve Wood, Vice. Pres. Western Mobile, Inc. P.O. Drawer 369 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Telephone No. (970) 704-4804 E:NVRDccatiN c BWCLAW.fmI MW.4Aui,io.n.- C. (Assignee) - Steve Wood, res. CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT The Basalt Water Conservancy District hereby consents to the foregoing Assignment subject to the terms of and conditions of said Contract and the District's receipt of all charges related thereto. This Assignment is subject to the additional conditions set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto. Dated this 556-64'_ day of June, 2001. By: L;\WP-Dee. k Stene OWCLfWrryn snwau..pn.,. hn ( ATER CONSERV» CY DISTRICT 1Y Lori J.M. Satterfield, Attorney for Bas ' ater Conservancy District / Book 395 Page 20 EXHIBIT "A" Recorded at 4:50 P.J. June 10, 1968 Reception No. 241101 Cha,.S.Keegan,Recorder. parcel No. 1: Lots 1, 7 and 8 in Section 27, the East 1/2 of the SE of Section 23, and the WE4NEj, Lots 1 to 6 and those portions of Lots 11 and 12 North of the Northerly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82 in Section 26, all in Township 7 South, -.7. Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., EXCEPT those portions of said NE'3NEk and Lots 1 and 11 ' described in deed to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County recorded in Book 93 at Page 267, Garfield County Records, and also EXCEPT that portion of Lot 8 in said Section 27 lying within the boundaries of Colorado State Highway No. 82; Parcel No. 2: That portion of Lot 12 in said Section 26 bounded on the Northeast by the Southwesterly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82, on the South by the North boundary line of Lot 13 in said Section 26 and on the West by the East boundary line of Lot 8 in said Section 27; Parcel No. 3: Those portions of Lots 6 and 9 in said Section 27, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the Northerly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82 with the west line of Lot 8 in said Section 27, which point is located 342 feet North of the Southwest Corner of said Lot 8; thence North along said West line and along the West line of Lot 7 in said Section 27, 978 feet to the Northwest Corner of said Lot 7 in said Section and the South line of Lot 1 in said Section; thence West along the South line of said Lot 1, a distance of 600 feet; thence South and paralle to the West lines of said Lots 7 and 8 to a paint on the Northerly boundary line of said highway; thence Northeasterly along said Northerly highway boundary line to the point of beginning; Parcel No. 4: Lot 7 and a portion of Lots 8 to 10 in said Section 26, more particularly' described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of said Lot 8, whence the witness corner to the Southeast Corner of said Section 26 bears South 5°16' East 2686 fee thence South 2°56' West 134.1 feet; thence South 32°30' West 435 feet; thence South 58°22' West 471 feet; thence South 46°49' West 964 feet; thence South 39°Oil' West 245 fet; thence South 20°33' West 620.5 feet to point 9n the Northerly line of the Right of Way (mow -abandoned) of the Colorado Midland Railway Company and 50 feet Northerly at right angles from what vas formerly the center line of the main track of said railway company; thence along said Northerly right 'away line North 72°21'•West 208.8 feet to the West boundary line of said Lot 10; thence North along said West boundary line of said Lot 10 and. along the West boundary line of said Lot 7 a distance of 2120 feet to the Northwest Corner of said Lot'7; thence East along the North boundary line of said Lot 7 and along the North boundary line of said Lot 8 a distance of 1894.2 feet to the point of beginning, EXCEPT that portion of said parcel of land conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County -by deed recorded in Book 93 at page 267, EXHIBIT B TO ASSIGNMENT OF BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT CONTRACT The Assignment to which this Exhibit is attached to and made a part of is approved and made subject to the following conditions: 1. PAYMENT: Assignee shall pay annually for the water service described herein at a price to be fixed annually by the Board of Directors of the District for such service. Payment of the annual fee shall be made, in full, within fifteen (15) days after the date of a notice from the District that the payment is due. Said notice will advise the Assignee, among other things, of the water delivery year to which the payment shall apply and the price which is applicable to that year. If a payment is not made by the due date, a late fee of $50 (or other amount as the Board may set from time to time) will be assessed and final written notice of the delinquent account and late fee assessment will be sent by the District to the Assignee at Assignee's address set forth in the Assignment attached. If payment is not made within thirty (30) days after said final written notice, the District may, at its option, elect to terminate all of the Assignee's right, title, or interest under this Contract, in which event the water right allotted hereunder may be transferred, leased or otherwise disposed of by the District at the discretion of its Board of Directors. 2. WELL PERMIT: If Assignee intends to divert through a well, then Assignee must provide to District a copy of Assignee's valid well permit before the District is obligated to deliver any water hereunder, and it is the Assignee's continuous duty to maintain a valid well permit. Assignee shall also comply with all restrictions and limitations set forth in the well permit obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Assignee must comply with the well -spacing requirements set forth in C.R.S. §37-90-137, as amended, if applicable. Compliance with said statutory well -spacing criteria shall be an express condition of the extension of service hereunder, and the District shall in no way be liable for an Assignee's failure to comply. Granting of this allotment contract does not constitute the District's representation that the Assignee will receive a well permit. 3. MEASURING DEVICE OR METER: Assignee agrees to provide, at its own expense, a totalizing flow meter with remote readout to continuously and accurately measure at all times all water diverted pursuant to the terms of Assignee's water right and the terms of this Contract. Assignee agrees to provide accurate readings from such device or meter to District upon District's request. Assignee acknowledges that failure to comply with this paragraph could result in legal action to terminate Assignee's diversion of water by the State of Colorado Division of Water Resources. By signing this Contract, Assignee hereby specifically allows District, through its authorized agent, to enter upon Assignee's property during ordinary business hours for the purposes of determining Assignee's actual use of water. 4. COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT. Assignee shall comply with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and consult with the Army Corps of Engineers to complete any Section 404 compliance that may be required as a result of the construction of any facilities necessary to use contract water. 5. CONTRACT TERMINATION: A. Termination by District: 1. The District may terminate this Contract for any violation or breach of the terms of this Contract by Assignee. 2. The District may terminate this Contract if, in its discretion, any judicial or administrative proceedings initiated by Assignee threaten the District's authority to contract for delivery or use of the District's water rights, or threaten the District's permits, water rights, or other interests of the District. B. Termination by Assignee: 1. Assignee may terminate this Contract in its entirety for any reason by notifying the District in writing of the termination on or before April 1. Notice by said date will prevent the Assignee's liability for the next annual contract charge. uawrgao<aiuuea NNCOnW.s.r. MfabiMln.411parc4n. AMENDMENT TO WATER ALLOTMENT CONTRACT BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT StMlist=GPOWERSAMWROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL WHEREAS, the Basalt Water Conservancy District (hereinafter the "District") granted a Water Allotment Contract (Contract No. 31) to ElliblaktfIRSIMA ROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL'`thereinafter the "Applicant") for 10.5 acre feet to serve certain property located in Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. in Garfield County, Colorado, pursuant to the District's Order dated July 7, 1983, subject to the conditions therein set forth; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested that its Allotment Contract be amended by increasing the storage water allotted thereunder from 10.5 acre feet to 17.3 acre feet for storage water owned and controlled by the District and 3.0 cubic feet of water per second of time from the District's direct flow rights for commercial and industrial purposes. WHEREFORE, the above -referenced Water Allotment Contract shall be and hereby is amended to provide that the Applicant shall be entitled to receive and apply to beneficial use 17.3 acre feet of storage water owned and controlled by the District and 3.0 cubic feet per second from the District's direct flow rights, which allotted water shall be used for commercial and industrial purposes. This amendment shall be deemed effective upon the Applicant's execution of the District's Water Allotment Contract attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference which contract shall supersede in its entirety the above -referenced Contract approved under Order dated July 7, 1983. Dated this r x day of , 199 OARING FORK SAND 4 GRAVEL /A B C 1 ' By: P -ties The foregoing Amendment to Water AIlotment Contract is approved by the Board of Directors of the Basalt Water Conservancy District on this t. day of /r` 199 : . Basalt Water Conservancy District President-- made within thirty (30) days after said written notice, the District may, at its option, elect to terminate all of the Applicant's right, title, or interest under this Contract, in which event the water right allotted hereunder may be transferred, leased or otherwise disposed of by the District at the discretion of its Board of Directors. In the event water deliveries hereunder are made by or pursuant to agreement with some other person, corporation, quasi -municipal entity, or govemmental entity, and in the event the Applicant fails to make payments as required hereunder, the District may, at its sole option and request, authorize said person or entity to curtail the Applicant's water service pursuant to this Contract, and in such event neither the District nor such persons or entity shall be liable for such curtailment. 5. ,APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS: The Applicant agrees that so long as this Contract is valid and in force, Applicant will budget and appropriate from such sources of revenues as may be legally available to the Applicant the funds necessary to make the annual payments in advance of water delivery pursuant to this Contract. The Applicant will hold harmless the District and any person or entity involved in the delivery of water pursuant to this Contract, for discontinuance in service due to the failure of Applicant to maintain the payments herein required on a current basis. 6. BENEFIT OF CONTRACT: The water right allotted hereunder shall be beneficially used for the purposes and in the manner specified herein and this Contract is for the exclusive benefit of the Applicant and shall not inure to the benefit of any successor, assign, or lessee of said Applicant without the prior written approval of the Board of Directors of the District. In the event the water right allotted hereunder is to be used for the benefit of land which is now or will hereafter be subdivided or otherwise held or owned in separate ownership interest by two (2) or more uses of the water right allotted hereunder, the Applicant may assign the Applicant's rights hereunder only to a homeowners association, water district, water and sanitation district or other special district properly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Colorado and then only if such association or special district establishes to the satisfaction of the Basalt Water Conservancy District that it has the ability and authority to assure its performance of the Applicant's obligations under this Contract. In no event shall the owner of a portion, but less than all, of the Applicant's property to be served under this Contract, have any rights hereunder, except as such rights may exist through a homeowners association or special district as above provided. Any assignment of the Applicant's rights under this Contract shall be subject to and must comply with such requirements as the District may hereafter adopt regarding assignment of Contract rights and the assumption of Contract obligations by assignees and successors, provided that such requirements shall uniformly apply to all allottees receiving District service. The restrictions on assignment as herein contained shall not preclude the District from holding the Applicant, or any successor to the Applicant, responsible for the performance of all or ny part of the Applicant's covenants and agreements herein contained. BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT WATER ALLOTMENT CONTRACT Pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 37-45-131 A ROARING FOR SAND & GRAVEL (hereinafter "Applicant") has applied to the Basalt Water Conservancy District (hereinafter the "District"), a political subdivision of the State of Colorado, organized pursuant to and existing by virtue of Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 37-45-101, et sm., for an allotment Contract for beneficial use of water rights owned, leased, or hereafter acquired by the District. By execution of this Contract, Applicant agrees to the following terms and conditions: 1. OUANTITY: In consideration of the covenants and conditions herein contained, Applicant shall be entitled to receive and apply to beneficial use 3.0 cubic feet of water per second from the District's direct flow rights and 17.3 acre feet per year of storage water owned. or controlled by the District. 2. SOURCE OF ALLOTTED WATER: Water rights allotted pursuant to this Contract shall be from the District's water rights decreed to the Basalt Conduit, Landis Canal, Stockman's Ditch Extension, or other decrees or water rights hereafter acquired by the District, including the District's contractual right to receive storage water from Ruedi Reservoir. The District shall have the right to designate the water right or Decree of the District from which the Applicant's allotted rights shall be obtained. The Applicant's use of any of the District's water rights shall be subject to any and all terms and conditions imposed by the Water Court on the use of the District's said rights. Exchange releases made from the District's storage rights in Ruedi Reservoir or other works and facilities of the District shall be delivered to the Applicant at the outlet works of said storage facility and release of water at such outlet works shall constitute full performance of the District's delivery obligation. Delivery of water from the District's storage rights in Ruedi Reservoir shall be subject to the District's lease Contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation and any rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto. 3. PURPOSE AND LOCATION OF USE: Applicant will use the waters herein granted for beneficial purposes limited to the augmentation of existing and future wells and other water sources, within or through facilities or upon lands owned, operated, or served by Applicant, which lands are described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto; provided that the location and purpose of Applicant's use of said water shall be legally recognized and permitted by the applicable governmental authority having jurisdiction over the property served. Applicant's contemplated usage for the water allotted hereunder is for the following use or uses: Domestic/Municipal X Industrial/Commercial Agricultural Other Applicant acknowledges that usage of the District's water rights as herein contemplated shall be in lieu of or supplemental to Applicant obtaining or adjudicating, on its own, the right to use certain waters. It is acknowledged that certain locations within the District may not be susceptible to service solely by the District's water rights allotted hereunder or the District's said water rights may not satisfy Applicant's needs and purposes. To the extent that service cannot be achieved by use of the District's allotted water rights, or in the event said service is inadequate, Applicant may, utilize such other water rights, by way of supplementing the District's water rights, or otherwise, as is necessary to assure water service sufficiently reliable for Applicant's intended purpose or purposes. All lands, facilities and areas served by water rights allotted hereunder shall be situated within the boundaries of the District. The District reserves the exclusive right to review and approve any conditions which may be attached to judicial approval of Applicant's use of the District's water rights allotted hereunder. Applicant agrees to defray any out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the District in connection with the allot- ment of water rights hereunder, including, but not limited to, reimbursement of legal and engineering costs incurred in connection with any water rights adjudication necessary to allow Applicant's use of such allotted water rights; provided, however, in the event any such adjudication involves more of the District's water rights than are allotted pursuant to this Contract, Applicant shall bear only a pro -rata portion of such expenses. Applicant shall be solely responsible for providing works and facilities, if any, necessary to utilize the District's water rights allotted hereunder for Applicant's beneficial use. Water service provided by the District shall be limited to the amount of water available in priority at the original point of diversion of the District's applicable water right and neither the District, nor those entitled to utilize the District's decrees, may call on any greater amount at new or alternate points of diversion. The District shall request the Colorado State Engineer to estimate any conveyance losses between the original point and any alternate point and such estimate shall be deducted from this amount in each case. The District, or anyone using the District's decrees, may call on any additional sources of supply that may be available at an alternate point of diversion, but not at the original point of diversion, only as against water rights which are junior to the date of application for the alternate point of diversion. In the event the Applicant intends to develop an augmentation plan and institute legal proceedings for the approval of such augmentation plan to allow the Applicant to utilize the water allotted to Applicant hereunder, the Applicant shall give the District written notice of such intent. In the event the Applicant develops and adjudicates an augmentation plan to utilize the water allotted hereunder, Applicant shall not be obligated to bear or defray any Iegal or engineering expense of the District incurred by the District for the purpose of developing and adjudicating a plan of augmentation for the District. In any event, the District shall have the right to approve the Applicant's augmentation plan and the Applicant shall provide the District copies of such plan and of all pleadings and other papers filed with the Water Court in the adjudication thereof. 4. PAYMENT: Applicant shall pay annually for the water service described herein at a price to be fixed annually by the Board of Directors of the District for such service. Payment of the annual fee shall be made, in full, within fifteen (15) days after the date of a notice from the District that the payment is due. Said notice will advise the Applicant, among other things, of the water delivery year to which the payment shall apply and the price which is applicable to that year. If a payment is not made by the due date, written notice thereof will be sent by the District to the Applicant at Applicant's address set forth below. If payment is not -'- 7. OTHER RULES: Applicant's rights under this Contract shall be subject to the Water Service Plan as adopted by the District and amended from time to time; provided that such Water Service Plan shall apply uniformly throughout the District among water users receiving the same service from the District. Applicant shall also be bound by the provisions of the Water Conservancy Act of the State of Colorado, the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Directors of the District, the plumbing advisory, water conservation, and staged curtailment regulations, if any, applicable within the County in which the water allotted hereunder is to be used, together with all amendments of and supplements to any of the foregoing. 8. CURTAILMENT OF USE: The water service provided hereunder is expressly subject to the provisions of that certain Stipulation in Case No. 80 CW 253 on file in the District Court in Water Division 5 of the State of Colorado, which Stipulation provides, in part, for the possible curtailment of out -of -house municipal and domestic water demands upon the occurrence of certain events and upon the District giving notice of such curtailment, all as more fully set forth in said Stipulation. 9. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Applicant shall enter into an "Operation and Maintenance Agreement" with the District if and when the Board of Directors finds and determines that such an agreement is required by reason of additional or special services requested by the Applicant and provided by the District or by reason of the delivery or use of water by the Applicant for more than one of the classes of service which are defined in the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Directors of said District. Said agreement may contain, but not be limited to, provision for water delivery at times or by means not provided within the terms of standard allotment contracts of the District and additional annual monetary consideration for extension of District services and for additional administration, operation and maintenance costs, or for other costs to the District which may arise through services made available to the Applicant. 10. CHANGE OF USE: The District reserves the exclusive right to review and approve or disapprove any proposed change in use of the water right allotted hereunder. Any use other than that set forth herein or any Iease or sale of the water or water rights allotted hereunder without the prior written approval of the District shall be deemed to be a material breach of this Contract. 11. PRIOR RESOLUTION: The water service provided hereunder is expressly subject to that certain Resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the District on September 25, 1979, and all amendments thereto, as the same exists upon the date of this application and allotment Contract. 12. NO FEE TITLE: It is understood and agreed that nothing herein shall give the Applicant any equitable or legal fee title interest or ownership in or to any of the water or water rights of the District, but that Applicant is entitled to the right to use the water right allotted hereunder, subject to the limitations, obligations and conditions of this Contract. 13. CONSERVATION PRACTICES: Applicant shall implement and use commonly accepted conservation practices with respect to the water and water rights allotted hereunder and shall be bound by any conservation plan hereafter adopted by the District, as the same may be amended from time to time. BY: STATE OF COLORADO ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD Subscribed and sworn to before me this APPLICANT: JOICta=lit@WERVAA ROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL /'v c- is P.O. Box 1220 Carbondale, CO 81623 23rd day of by John Martin ,as President & Gravel. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: A ri.Q l 6,9S February , 1994 of Roaring Fork Sand Notary P ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ALLOTMENT CONTRACT JOHNEGOWEIRSAYBA ROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL ))/ Application having been made by or on behalf ofIlEHINOWISR1313BA ROARING FORK SAND & GRAVEL1 rid all parties interested in the foregoing Water Allotment Contract and hearing on said Application having been duly held, it is hereby ordered that said Application be granted and that the foregoing Water Allotment Contract for 3.0 cubic feet of water per second from the District's direct flow rights and 17.3 acre feet of water per year of storage water owned or controlled by the District is hereby approved and executed by and on behalf of the Basalt Water Conservancy District, for the beneficial use of the water allotted in the foregoing Contract, upon the terms, conditions and manner of payment as therein specified and subject to the following specific conditions: under the Contract. 1. By acceptance of this Contract, Applicant acknowledges that within two years of the date hereof or such later date as the District may approve, the Applicant shall file with the Water Court of Water Division No. 5 a water rights plan of augmentation for utilization of water allotted hereunder at the location and for the purposes hereinabove set forth or the Applicant's water allotment as provided in this Contract shall be included in a water rights plan of augmentation to be filed by the District with the expenses thereof to be shared prorata by the Contract holders included in such plan; provided that inclusion of the Applicant's water allotment in the District's plan of augmentation shall be at the District's sole discretion. The District may establish an augmentation plan fee to be paid by the holder of any Contract to be included within a plan of augmentation to be tiled by the District, which fee shall be payable in advance of the inclusion of such Contract in a District plan of augmentation and may be based on the District's good faith estimate of the anticipated expense of such plan of augmentation. If such augmentation plan fee paid by a Contract holder exceeds the Contract holder's prorata portion of the actual expenses incurred by the District in completing said plan of augmentation, the District shall refund such excess to the Contract holder. 2. Any and all conditions imposed upon the release and diversion of water allotted hereunder in any water rights plan of augmentation or other water rights decree of the Water Court for Water Division No. 5 shall be incorporated herein as a condition of approval of this contract. Granting of this allotment contract does not constitute the Districts representation that the applicant will receive a well permit or water rights decree for the land to be benefitted hereby. 3. If Applicant intends to divert water through a well or wells, Applicant shall provide the District a copy of Applicant's valid well permit for each such well before the District is obligated to allot water for the benefit of Applicant hereunder. 4. The Applicant has acknowledged that the land to be benefitted by the foregoing and attached Contract is described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. -i- Approved this Attest: ! iC day of , 1993. BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT By: " �J�� t ,� k'L L..k - By/K-- Secretary Y(Secretary � Presi Book 395 Page 20 EXHIBIT "A" ' Recorded at 4:50 P.Ii. June 10, 1968 Reception To. 241101 Chas.S.Keegan,Recorder. Parcel No. 1: Lots 1, 7 and 8 in Section 27, the East 1/2 of the SE 't of Section 23, and the NEwNEJ, Lots 1 to 6 and those portions of Lots 11 and 12 North of the Northerly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82 in Section 26, all in Township 7 South,'' Range 88 West of the 6th P.M., EXCEPT those portions of said NE'kNE1 and Lots 1 and 11 ' described in deed to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County recorded in Book 93 at Page 267, Garfield County Records, and also EXCEPT that portion of Lot 8 in said Section 27 lying within the boundaries of Colorado State Highway No. 82; Parcel No. 2: That portion of Lot 12 in said Section 26 bounded on the Northeast by the Southwesterly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82, on the South by the North boundary line of Lot 13 in said Section 26 and on the West by the East boundary line of Lot 8 in said Section 27; Parcel No. 3: Those portions of Lots 6 and 9 in said Section 27, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the Northerly boundary line of Colorado State Highway No. 82 with the west line of Lot 8 in said Section 27, which point is located 342 feet North of the Southwest Corner of said Lot 8; thence North' along said West line and along the West line of Lot 7 in said Section 27, 978 feet to the Northwest Corner of said Lot 7 in Said Section and the South line of Lot 1 in said Section; thence West along the South line of said Lot 1, a distance of 600 feet; thence South and paralle to the West lines of said Lots 7 and 8 to a point on the Northerly boundary line of said bighwap; thence Northeasterly along said Northerly highway boundary line to the point of beginning; Parcel No. 4: Lot 7 and a portion of Lots 8 to 10 in said Section 26, more particularly "'.described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of said Lot 8, whence the witness corner to the Southeast Corner of said Section 26 bears South 5°16' East 2686 fee thence South 2°56' West 134.1 feet; thence South 32°30' West 435 feet; thence South 58°22' West 471 feet; thence South 46°49' West 964 feet; thence South 39°07' West 245 feet; thence South 20°33' West 620.5 feet to point on the Northerly line of the Right of Way (now abandoned) of the Colorado Midland Railway Company and 50 feet Northerly at right angles from what was formerly the center line of the main track of said railway company; thence along said Northerly right of way line North 72'21. -West 208.8 feet to the West boundary line of said Lot 10; thence North along said West boundary line of said Lot 10 and. along the West boundary line of said Lot 7 a distance of 2120 feet to the Northwest Corner of said Lot 7; thence East along the North boundary line of said Lot 7 and along the North boundary line of said Lot 8 a distance of 1894.2 feet to the point of beginning, EXCEPT that portion of said parcel of land conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County -by deed recorded in Book 93 at page 267, :a EXHIBIT C PUMP TEST REPORT P.Ct 6oN 1:900 Mil Cavand AveFgue Oantuood Spings, co 81602 E-7,4tACAlgtE4 42E12 DK, RIEMffERM CM -70,-,740`75u Jerry Harter( Esq. 210 10th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Crystal Ranch Cor Dear Jerry: We C-1 July 30, 2010 mp Test (W) 57 tr9770) 941-5-',325Z This letter summarizes our evaluation of the Crystal Ranch Corp. Well C-1 pump test. The pump test was performed on May 3 - 4, 2010 and monitored by Zancanella & Associates, Inc. The test was performed by Samuelson Pump Company. Test Well Permitting and L•cation The well is situated in the SEY4 of the SW% of Section 26, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of the 6th P.M. The well is approximately 1313 feet from the south section line and 2689 feet from the west section line. Refer to Figure 1 to see the approximate location of the well. A copy of the well permit, No. 282659, is attached. The well permit only allows for a monitoring well, therefore no water rights are associated with this well. The well is located in Area A of the Basalt Water Conservancy District. A District contract and a fee well permit will need to be obtained. Wefl DrMing. The well was completed March 17, 2010 at a total depth of 90 feet by Shelton Drilling Corporation. The well was drilled through cobbles, sand, and gravel material. A 9 inch hole was drilled from the surface to 60 feet. A 6.5 inch hole was drilled from 60 feet to 90 feet. Seven inch steel casing was placed from 1 foot above the surface to 45 feet below the surface. Mill slotted 7 inch steel well casing was set from 45 feet to 60 feet. Mill slotted 5.5 inch steel casing was placed from 58 feet to 90 feet. Cement grout was poured between depths of 10 to 20 feet around the casing as a seal to prevent surface water from entering the well. Refer to the Well Construction Report and Figure 2 for a detailed diagram of the well. Pump Test The static water level prior to the pump test was approximately 30.2 feet below the top of the well casing. For the test a pump was temporarily installed in the well at a depth of 80 feet. The pump test began at 10:33 AM on May 3, 2010 and pumping ended at 10:35 AM on May 4, 2010 to complete the 24 hour pump period. The test was started at a pumping rate of 30 gallons per minute (gpm). After 22 minutes, the pumping rate was increased to 40 gpm and then was increased again to a maximum pumping rate of 50 gpm 50 minutes after the pump test began. The 50 gpm pumping rate was then maintained through the duration of the test. The well was pumped continuously for 1442 minutes (approximately 24 hours). During the pumping period, approximately 71,380 gallons were pumped from the well. Before the test began, a pressure transducer was placed in WeII C-1. The transducer measured the water level in the well every minute for the duration of the test. To ensure that the transducer was operating correctly, the well was tested manually using well sounding equipment to verify the electronic data. A summary of the data is presented in Table 1. After 24 hours of continuous pumping, the drawdown level was 2.3 feet from the initial static water level. The drawdown curve shows that the water level reached a relatively stable drawdown level of 2.3 feet for the last 5 hours of the test, pumping at 50 gpm. Refer to Figure 3. After 24 hours of continuous pumping, the pump was shut off and the well was allowed time to recover. During the recovery period, water levels were monitored by the transducer placed in the well. The recovery is shown in Figure 4. One hour after turning the pump off, the well had recovered to a depth of 30.5 feet. This represents a 99% recovery of the water level in the well. The plots of the recovery data show that the water level returned to near static levels within 24 hours and recovered normally. Water Quality During the pump test, water samples were collected and sent to Accutest Mountain States Laboratory in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. The results of the analyses are attached and summarized in Table 2. None of the parameters tested exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as set by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. One Secondary Standard was exceeded. The lab result for Total Dissolved Solids was 504 milligrams per liter (mg/L) which exceeds the recommended level of 500 mg/L. This means the water is hard. Secondary standards are set for "nuisance chemicals", which are not known to be harmful to health, but may cause cosmetic or aesthetic effects. In the case of Total Dissolved Solids, scale formation on fixtures may result. You may want to consider the use of a water softener to reduce this effect. Summary Crystal Ranch Corp. Well C-1 was pumped at various rates for 24 hours. We believe this well could be developed to serve the needs of Crystal Ranch Corporation. Based on the results of the test, it is believed that the well can be continuously pumped at 50 gpm for extended periods. The results of the water quality testing indicate that the well meets primary drinking water standards. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (970) 945-5700 Very Truly Yours, Zancanella & Associates, Inc. ---Tter)wvokti.) A ct-E..cect oV9, Thomas A. Zancanella, P.E. Attachments: Well Permit Well Construction Report Table 1 — Pump Test Data Figure 1 — Well Location Map Figure 2 — Well Detail Figure 3 — Water Level Pumping Curve Figure 4 — Drawdown vs. Time Figure 5 - Residual Drawdown Recovery Curve Table 2 — Water Quality Results Water Quality Results on CDPHE Forms z:\25000\25326 powers development-ranch\2010\commwelltest\pump test report-bcp.doc R88W -- / / I>) :✓: / _ ._ r� w �` 4s y , ti Y r J � I ::: r {� yr r .�:w nn e f L_, r .. A_ + y .----•-'^---',) ''''...w•a:2__,./ _ -_ u.o '•}. \-��s--�. `---��1 -1:7---1-3•J \---�{reek ,.'Flf Tar`.-- - -. - -- Luso, '" "' r --� r�� C,. '� I . _.� � �� � � . _ , r - Ja -ter _ ! � t r R '. a. $ ± % J-- i1 - -'L"\ . �'�, �' I `t0i t nv '`fir. la. r �l � ��--- 1 ..4 una'Y r ."w..-== Yom{= esi" L �..._e 6-`�Vp4- � J ♦ r r .I U . __ r.,// '' fir14,..-2-1-..-....---', f.i • ", ,,___5:4_ ''`�+ _ ; ' •{ {j r'I,L� `�^ L. II.» r; 3 4 auteok• \�`1 .•r — i R L• r _ • (I/ - . _ ;' 4, d.� b ��`"`sem i 5 0 } l i�'. ' r \ �, , `1.,r «std . _ -u: ♦ * err .-- tin.4.l t y+A 4 l.1 i 'e r 3'4 • . e 'Carbon ' i , �19 %�k klr lF { ., ,wr- „ efts' ..r .. +. �. 70 -, P-- Y 1 fir! I , wary y 36 " r tf•` '•-•... \ T / S ' 7 ♦ •.6'!t, 4�y , j��j77p[[[���... �iE U. tam J r p{y � YL Mulford a J1iy // . t, - l� i \9 {1 \ n ,y�, _ .-+�Y_-\.` 2i./ 1� F•S - 1• 5 mlk :r fir- 1° � ! �a . d - . 41 " - IVA i -�, • F 1 ~ e „ ( �.�, '-/f . !, %' �II -. `l N _ 1 ��.-. I' 'fi /' •'�..R -' , , '� •� 03/./. r, �ir� "' ( �'. /I%± ....i♦5 `:,h '.✓f n 1 ' 1 __..{ ° /- S r e/ x ,� (� i il .._ -,�. - L� „ 1 I ,/ t .,r.} /'2' { J . : C 4, e�s-`v^ , CS 1 liam130110 SCALE IN FEET CRYSTAL RANCH WELL C-1 LOCATION MAP CRYSTAL RANCH CORP, FIGURE NO. ZANCANELLA AND ASSOC/A/NC. M/3 SCALE: r _ 2000' DATE: JULY 22,2010 SHEET: 1 Of 1 ENGINEER/NJc"GWSG/L TAINT OFFICE 00X 1000 - iii. 01131 erao DRAWN BY: CI -MD BY: TAZ APPD BY: TAZ DRAWING: LacTopo.dwg PROJECT: 25236 Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 1095 WELL PERMIT NUMBER 282659 DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD CRYSTAL RANCH CORP C/O ZANCANELLA & ASSOCIATES 1011 GRAND AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601- (970) 945-5700 PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(1) for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. This well is known as Crystal Ranch C-1. 4) This well shall be located on a tract of land of 223.4 acres described as that portion of Sections 23, 26 & 27 Twp. 7 South, Rng. 88 West, 6th P.M., Garfield County, more particularly described on the attached exhibit A. Further identified as 13114 Highway 82, Carbondale, CO 81601 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must be constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. If non-standard construction is anticipated, a variance request must be submitted in accordance with Rule 18 and approved prior to well construction. 10) A Well Construction and Test Report (Form GWS -31), including lithologic log must be submitted by the individual authorized to construct the well. For non-standard construction, the report must include an as -built drawing showing details such as depth, casing, perforated zones, and a description of the grouting type and interval. 11) Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. The ability of this well to be converted to a production well is limited by all governing statutes, rules, regulations, orders, and/or decrees. 12) Pursuant to Rule 6.2.3 of the Water Well Construction Rules, the well construction contractor shall submit the as -built well location on work reports required by Rule 17.3 within 60 days of completion of the well. The measured location must be accurate to 200 feet of the actual location. The location information must include a GPS location (UTM coordinates) pursuant to the Division of Water Resources' guidelines. APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY 1/4 1/4 Section 26 Township 7 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES Ft. from Section Line Ft. from Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) Easting: Northing: NOTE: Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 23-2393-234-00-131 NOTE: Assessor Tax Schedule Number: R111336 (totaling 223.4 acres) APPROVED DMW State Engineer Receipt No. 9503348 0 2.1!6,,172_Orte, By DATE ISSUED 02-16-2010 EXPIRATION DATE 02-16-2012 GROUND SURFACE CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. WELL C-1 SE SW SECTION 26 T7S, R88W, 6TH P.M. COMPLETED 3/17/10 COBBLES, BOULDERS COBBLES, SANDS, GRAVELS CEMENTED COBBLES, GRAVELS 0 10 - 20 - 30 40 - 50 60 - 70 80 90 - CEMENT 10' - 20' O III -1' TO 45' 7" PLAIN STEEL CSG 0.240' WALL THICKNESS STATIC WATER LEVEL 31' • O' TO 60' 9" HOLE DIAMETER ISI III III III I 45' - 60' 7" STEEL PERF CASING 0.240" WALL THICKNESS 58' - 90' 5.5" STEEL PERF CASING 0.240" WALL THICKNESS 60' TO 90' 6.5" HOLE DIAMETER COMPLETION DEPTH 90' CRYSTAL RANCH WELL C-1 DETAIL SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DATE: JUNE 16, 2010 SHEET 1 OF 1 DRAWN BY: JMC CHKD BY: BCP APPD BY: TAZ PLAN NO. SEE FOOTER ^^ CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. ZANCANEL L A AND ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERING CONSUL TANTS 1011 Grand Avenue GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5700 FIGURE NO. PROJECT: 25326 Mar 18 10 08:31a Wayne Shelton 970-927-3801 p2 WELL CONSTRUCTION AND TEST REPORT STATE OF COLORADO, OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER FOR OFFICE USE ONLY • APPROVAL i# OWS3I-91-03 i. WELL PERMIT NUMBER 282659 2 Owner Name(s): Crystal Ranch Corp. Mailing Address: % Zancanella & Associates P.O. Box 1908 City, State, Zip : Glenwood Springs, Co. 81602 Phone # WELL LOCATION AS DRILLED 3 SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec: 26 Twp: 7 S Range: 88 W 6th PM DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES ft. from Sec. line and ft. from Sec. line OR Easting: 3 11 436 Northing: 43 65 001 SUBDIVISION: LOT: BLOCK: FILING (UNIT): STREET ADDRESS AT LOCATION 4 GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary DATE COMPLETED: 3/17/2010 TOTAL DEPTH: 90 DEPTH COMPLETION: 90 5. GEOLOGIC LOG 6. HOLE DIAMETER (in) FROM (ft) TO (ft) Depth Type of Material (Size, Color, and Type) 9.0 0 60 000-032 Cobbles, Boulders 6.5 60 90 032-060 Cobbles, Sand, Gravels 060-095 Clay Matrix or Cemented Cobbles, Gravels 7. PLAIN CASING OD (in) Kind Wall Size From (ft) To (ft) 7.0 Steel 0.240 -1 45 5.5 PERF. CASING : Screen Slot Size 7.0 Steel 0.240 45 0 5.5 Steel 0.188 58 90 Water Located: 35+ Remarks : 8. Filter Pack Material : Size : Interval : 9. Packer Placement Type : Depth : 10. GROUTING RECORD Material Amount Density Interval Placement Cement 6 sks 6 gai/sk 10-20 poured 1 I 1_ DISINFECTION : Type : HTH Amt. Used : 3 oz. 12_ WELL TEST DATA : () Check Box If Test Data Is Submitted On Supplemental TESTING METHOD : Air Compressor Static Level : 31 ft. Date/Time Measured 3/17/2010 Production Rate 20+ gpm Pumping Level : Total ft. Date/Time Measured 3/17/2010 Test Length : 2 hours Test Remarks : 13_ t have road tic statements made herein and know the contents thereof, and that tliey are true to my knowledge. (Pursuant to Section 24-4-1-4 (13)(a) CRS, the making of false statements constitutes perjury in the second degree and is punishable as a class 1 misdemeanor.) CONTRACTOR : Shelton Drilling Corp. Phone : (970) 927-4182 Mailing Address : P.O. Box 1059 Basalt, Co. 81621 Lic. No. 1095 Name / Title (Please Type or Print) Wayne Shelton / President Signature Date 3/18/2010 Job No.: Client: Test By: Analysis By: M.P. = Table 1 Pump Test Data Summary Well ID: Well C-1 25326 Crystal Ranch Corp. Samuelson Josh Currier & Brad Peek Top of Casing Q = 50 gpm r = ft S.W.L. = 30.2 ft b = ft Time/Date on: 5/3/2010 10:33 AM Time/Date off: 5/4/2010 10:35 AM Test Length: 24:02:03 total time TIME Time (minutes) W.L. Measurement (feet) Drawdown (feet) Q (gpm) t' (min) t/t' 5/3/2010 10:33 0.01 30.20 0.00 0 - - 5/3/2010 10:34 1 31.40 1.20 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:35 2 31.20 1.00 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:36 3 31.10 0.90 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:37 4 30.90 0.70 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:38 5 31.00 0.80 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:39 6 31.00 0.80 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:41 8 31.10 0.90 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:43 10 31.20 1.00 30 - - 5/3/2010 10:53 20 31.20 1.00 30 - - 5/3/2010 11:03 30 31.20 1.00 40 - - 5/3/201011:13 40 31.60 1.40 40 - - 5/3/201011:23 50 31.70 1.50 50 - - 5/3/201011:33 60 31.80 1.60 50 - - 5/3/201012:13 100 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 13:53 200 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 15:33 300 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 17:13 400 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 18:53 500 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 20:33 600 32.30 2.10 50 - - 5/3/2010 22:13 700 32.40 2.20 50 - - 5/3/2010 23:53 800 32.40 2.20 50 - - 5/4/2010 1:33 900 32.40 2.20 50 - - 5/4/2010 3:13 1000 32.40 2.20 50 - - 5/4/2010 4:53 1100 32.50 2.30 50 - - 5/4/2010 6:33 1200 32.50 2.30 50 - - 5/4/2010 8:13 1300 32.50 2.30 50 - - 5/4/2010 9:53 1400 32.50 2.30 50 - - 5/4/2010 10:35 1442 32.50 2.30 50 0 5/4/2010 10:36 1443 31.00 0.80 Stopped Pumping 1 1443.0 5/4/2010 10:37 1444 30.80 0.60 0 2 722.0 5/4/2010 10:38 1445 30.80 0.60 0 3 481.7 5/4/2010 10:39 1446 30.70 0.50 0 4 361.5 5/4/2010 10:40 1447 30.70 0.50 0 5 289.4 5/4/201010:41 1448 30.70 0.50 0 6 241.3 5/4/2010 10:43 1450 30.60 0.40 0 8 181.3 5/4/2010 10:45 1452 30.60 0.40 0 10 145.2 5/4/2010 10:55 1462 30.50 0.30 0 20 73.1 5/4/2010 11:05 1472 30.50 0.30 0 30 49.1 5/4/201011:15 1482 30.50 0.30 0 40 37.1 5/4/2010 11:25 1492 30.50 0.30 0 50 29.8 5/4/2010 12:15 1542 30.50 0.30 0 100 15.4 5/4/2010 13:55 1642 30.40 0.20 0 200 8.2 5/4/2010 15:35 1742 30.40 0.20 0 300 5.8 5/4/2010 17:15 1842 30.40 0.20 0 400 4.6 5/4/2010 18:55 1942 30.40 0.20 0 500 3.9 5/4/2010 23:05 2192 30.40 0.20 0 750 2.9 5/5/2010 3:15 2442 30.40 0.20 0 1000 2.4 5/5/2010 7:25 2692 30.40 0.20 0 1250 2.2 5/5/2010 9:42 2829 30.30 0.10 0 1387 2.0 O 0 0 Static Water Level = 30.2 Ft. _ rr__ 0 o 0 0 —I o 1 1 )II C-1 )10 - 5/4/2010 I sAea s I ii__ 1 1 I I 1— sRea Z 1 I �(ea 6 T I O 0 1 o 1 1 - End of Test, Q = 50 gpm _ 1 1 1 cu- E 11 R; ip TI Wat 1 P \ En - 0 O 50 Minutes • linutes, Q = 40 gpm _ f O 0E 1 in a N 0 N 0 CO _ LL - 11 a LL w O V7 a) a V „ 5 C I N CON Q _6 0 N 0 --, L 1 I 1 LL 6 0 H —,- I v- 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 N- 0 0 [}j] 6Uise3 Jo dol woad Iana1 Je;eM U N 0 N y 06 co w co V co N co m LL a_ U 00 0 0 0 7 f0 W 0 N m Ti) E E 0 U 0 'o 0 N N .0 O U M C I- (6 C d) E 0. 0 0 i 0 0 a co N (0M N O O 0 04 N C)i0 I.0VV - -� nnn ,—, 0 0 0 c o u--��---_T -- —1--- -- 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0 5.0 To -a 6.0 .y d 7.0 8.0 9.0 an n ganese ;ury el um lium ride side ride nium )te de :e linity, Bicarbonate linity, Total ium Carbonate Juctivity, 25 °C Iness telier Index perature, Test I Dissolved Solids orms, Total (MPN) ierichia Coli (MPN) ss Alpha Activity ;s Beta Activity um 226 um 228 ium 5 -TP (Silvex) hlor ;arb ;arb sulfone ;arb sulfoxide zine zo[a]pyrene >ofuran rdane pon -ethylhexyl)adipate -ethylhexyl)phthalate Dmochloropropane seb at )thall lene dibromide hosate [achlor [achlor epoxide achlorobenzene achlorocyclopentadiene ane ioxychlor my! (Vydate) :achlorophenol >ram chlorinated biphenyls mine aphene I -Trichloroethane ?-Trichloroethane Dichloroethylene I-Trichlorobenzene )ichloroethane )ichloropropane zene >on tetrachloride ,2 Dichloroethylene loromethane (Methylene ride) !benzene ochlorobenzene .3hlorobenzene r -Dichlorobenzene Metal Metal Metal Metal Metal Metal Metal Nonmetal Nonmetal Nonmetal Nonmetal Nonmetal Oxidized Ammonia Oxidized Ammonia Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Wet Chemistry Bacterium Bacterium Particle Particle Radium Radium Radon Uranium Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Volatile Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Inorganic Microorganism Microorganism Radionuclide Radionuclide Radionuclide Radionuclide Radionuclide Radionuclide Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Organic Orqanic Secondary mg/L No Test Primary mg/L 0.001 Below DL Informal mg/L 0.0041 Below DL Secondary mg/L No Test None mg/L 1 7.7 Primary mg/L 0.00041 Below DL Secondary mg/L No Test Secondary mg/L No Test Primary mg/L as CN- 0 0.008 Primary mg/L 0.2 0.36 Primary mg/L 0.00082 0.00091 Secondary mg/L No Test Primary mg/L as N 0.02 0.57 Primary mg/L as N 0.004 Below DL None mg/L as CaCO3 No Test None mg/L as CaCO3 5.0 215 None mg/L 1.4 272 None pS No Test Informal mg/L as CaCO3 No Test None Standard Units 0.4 Secondary Standard Units 1 7.48 None ° C 20 C Secondary mg/L 10 524 Primary MPN/100mL 0 0 Primary MPN/100mL 0 0 Primary pCi/L 2 6.9 Primary pCi/L 1.9 2.5 Primary pCi/L 0.1 0.1 Primary pCi/L 0.7 0.3 None pCi/L 14 530 Primary mg/L 0.001 0.007 Primary mg/L 0.0002 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0002 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00002 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0002 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0006 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0006 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00004 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0002 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0004 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.009 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.000001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00004 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0001 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.00007 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mg/L 0.0005 Below DL Primary mq/L 0.0005 Below DL 0.050 0.0020 0.10 0.10 N/A 0.0020 5.0 250 0.20 4.0 0.050 250 10.0 (Category Total) 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 300 N/A 6.5<pH<8.5 N/A 500 0 0 15.0 50.0 (Trigger Level) 5.0 (Category Total) 5.0 (Category Total) N/A 0.030 0.050 0.070 0.0020 0.0030 0.0020 0.0040 0.0030 0.00020 0.040 0.0020 0.20 0.40 0.0060 0.00020 0.0070 0.020 0.10 0.0020 0.000050 0.70 0.00040 0.00020 0.0010 0.050 0.00020 0.040 0.20 0.0010 0.50 0.00050 0.0040 0.0030 0.20 0.0050 0.0070 0.070 0.0050 0.0050 0.0050 0.0050 0.070 0.0050 0.70 0.10 0.60 0.0750 No Test Pass Pass No Test N/A Pass No Test No Test Pass Pass Pass No Test Pass Pass No Test N/A N/A No Test No Test N/A Pass N/A Fail******* Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass N/A Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Colorado Department of Public Health andEnvironment Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit REPORTING FORM FOR BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS SAMPLER: FILL OUT ONE FORM - FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL SAMPLING POINT PWSID #: COO NIA COUNTY: Garfield DATE COLLECTED- a / 4 SYSTEM/ESTABLISHMENT NAME' Crystal Ranch Corp. SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS' c/o Zancanella & Associates, Inc., 1011 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 / 2010 Street address/PO Box CONTACT PERSON: Tom Zancanella SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: Collin Robinson CITY STATE PHONE' ( 970 ) 945-5700 TIME COLLECTED' 10:00 wpm. WATER TYPE: RAW (Nochlorineorothertreatment) ❑✓ CHLORINATED ❑ OTHER TREATMENT ZIP SAMPLE POINT (Address) CHLORINE RESIDUAL in mg/L SAMPLE TYPE Hwy 82 N/A Routine ❑_ Repeat D Special Purpose For Laboratory Use Only Below This Line LABORATORY SAMPLE # 11.X)565 0 A CLIENT NAME or ID# j re ics '- LABORATORY NAME' d-ttS+IShio", .1-Gt!Ja1`oo/trl`es, 7l-nr_ DATE RECEIVED IN LABORATORY 5' / 5 / 10 COMMENTS' LAB PHONE # B_q 41 DATE ANALYZED 5 / 5 / / [� PARAMETER RESULT UNITS ANALYSIS DATE LABORATORY METHOD Coliform, TOTAL (Verified) #/100 mL Coliform, FECAL/e. Coli (Verified) #/100 mL Coliform, TOTAL (Absent/Present) ADS/At' Nik 5757/6 St{g223 Coliform, FECAL/e. Coli (Absent/Present) ., en; " 11 4' k LABORATORY: Please call Drinking Water Section with any results other than < 1 or ABSENT. NT = Not Tested for compound TNTC = Too Numerous To Count - Please resample OD = Outdated - Please resample <1 = Safe valid sample Present Coliform / e.Coli /Fecal detected Reviewed & Aroved by 4/100 ml = Number of colonies per 100 ml of sample CG = Confluent Growth - Please resample LA = Lab Accident - Please resample Absent = Coliform / e.Coli /Fecal not detected Title 5i: i/o Date MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM-B2, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80246-1530 J:\FORMS\LABFORMS\Microbiological Contaminants\TCR_Report_Form_030303.doc Page lof1 1 Colorado Department of public Health and P.nvironment SYSTEMS NAME: Crystal Ranch Corp, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Section REPORTING FORM FOR RADIONUCLIDE ANALYSIS PWSI0 COO SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS: c/o Zancanella & Assts.. PO Box 1908 Glenwood Springs CO 81602 SIraalnkidte. TO fioN CI IN ti'L+.rt /II' CONTACT PERSON: Totts Zancanella PHONE: ( 970 ) 945 5700 LABORATORY SAMPLE 1/: E089/10-1 Is this a Composite sample'? 1' ES ❑ NO CI (()ul)' samples eompositi d BY THE t.ABORA t ()R 1 Inas he used for compliance DATE COLLECTED: 05 / 04 / 2010 DATE COLLECTED: / / TIME COLLECTED: 1000 am/pm TIME COLLECTED: am/pm STATE SAMPLING POINT CODE : EP SOURCES) REPRESENTED: Crystal Ranch Well - Well Head • Entry Point to the Distribution System ( Finished Water) Sample 0 • Source Water Sample kJ (Ru„ Water satrapies cannot he used fur compliance:.) LA130R.KiORY NAME: Hazen Research, Inc. LAI3 PHONE # ( 303 ) 279 4501 CLIENT NAME or ID# Accutest Mountain States DATE RECEIVED IN LABORATORY: 05 / 06 / 2010 SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: Collin Robinson COMMENTS: Iiahli¢hied rows are for stale use only PARAMETER RESULT UNITS ' MCL STANDARD METHOD MDL REGULATORY MDL MDL DATE LNALYZED (4000) pCi/L 15 pCi/L Gross Alpha 0uo2) 6.9±3,7 pCi/L SM 711013 2.0 pCi/L 3 p('i-I us : 17 2010 Uranium (4006} ' 7,0 }tg/L 30 µg/L ASTM D2907-97 0.7 µg/L l µg/1. 05 : 1.1 r 2010 Radium 226140201 0.1±0.1 pCi/L, SM 7500 -Ra I3 0.1 pCi/L I pCi/1. 05 / 13 / 2010 Radium 228 (403(1) 0.3±0.7 pCi/L EPA Ra -05 0,6 pCi/L I pCi/I.. 05 / 18 / 2010 (4010) pCi/L 5 pCi/L Gross Beta (mu) 2.5±2,2 pCi/l. 4 mrem/yr SM 7110 B 2.0 pCi/L. 4 pCi/L. 05 / 17 / 2010 Total Dissolved Solids (l4sn) 524 mk/L SMC'I.* = 500 mg/L EPA 160,3 10 mg/L N/A 05 / 11 12010 Radon 530130 pCi/L SM 7500 -Rn B 14 pCi/L. N/A 05 / 06 / 2010 • Second oximum Co nt EMI l,eve,l — Non -enforceable Standard Laboratory Results Reviewed & Approved by Robert Rostad Laboratory Manager Title 05/27/2010 MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE. WQCD-CADM OR FAX: 303-782-0390 ATTN: CADM 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80216-1530 Rad lteplui tomb Version 7 020208 Date Cooloud° part„xr of Public l{ JIM aruti IMirrnment Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit REPORTING FORM FOR NITRATE OR NITRITE AS NITROGEN ANALYSES SAMPLER: FILL OUT ONE FORM FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL SAMPLING POINT Are these results to be used to fulfill compliance monitoring requirements? YES Is this a check or confirmation sample? YES NO Ix� PWSID: D13036 COUNTY: Garfield SYSTEM/ESTABLISHMENT NAME: Crystal Ranch Corp NO U DATE COLLECTED: 5/4/2010 SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS: c/o Zancanella & Associates, 1011 Grand Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Street address/PO Boz City State Zip PHONE: 9709455700 CONTACT PERSON: Tom Zancanella SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: CR ENTRY POINT: (Finished Water) SAMPLE ❑ TIME COLLECTED: 10:00 AM SOURCE WATER SAMPLE X FOR ENTRY POINT SAMPLE PLEASE INDICAT Chlorinated Other Treatment STATE ENTRY POINT CODE: N/A Finished - Not Treated (No Chlorine or other treatment) TIC SOURCE(s) REPRESENTED: Crystal Ranch Well LABORATORY SAMPLE #: D13036-1 For La bora tory Use Only Below This Line CLIENT NAME or ID #: CRYSTAL RANCH LABORATORY NAME: Accutest Mountain States LAB PHONE: (303)425-6021 DATE RECEIVED IN LABORATORY: 5/5/2010 COMMENTS: PARAMETER NITRATE -N Result 0.57 NITRITE -N BDL UNITS mg/1 mg/1 MCL 10.0 1.0 Reviewed & Approved by MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM-B2 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80246-1530 STANDARD MEHOD Lab RL E300 0.01 E300 I 0.004 Lab Director Title DATE ANALYZED 5/5/2010 2:55:00 PM 5/5/2010 2:55:00 PM 5/26/2010 Date FAX: 303-782-0390 31 of 38 D13036 La Lora( of:: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit REPORTING FORM FOR CORROSIVITY ANALYSES SAMPLER: FILL OUT ONE FORM FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL SAMPLING POINT Are these results to be used to fulfill compliance monitoring requirements? YES NO Is this a check or confirmation sample? YES n NO X PWSID: D13036 COUNTY: Garfield SYSTEM/ESTABLISHMENT NAME: Crystal Ranch Corp I DATE COLLECTED: 5/4/2010 SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS: c/o Zancanella & Associates, 1011 Grand Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Street address/PO Box CONTACT PERSON: Tom Zancanella City - State Zip PHONE: 9709455700 SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: CR 'WATER TYPE: RAW (No chlorine or other treatment) I" I SAMPLE POINT: Well Head CHLORINATED TIME COLLECTED: 10:00 AM OTHER TREATMENT LOCATION: Address SOURCE(S)REPRESENTED: Hwy 82 Crystal Ranch Well CORROSIVITY SAMPLES CANNOT BE COMPOSITED For La bora tory Use Only Below This Line LABORATORY SAMPLE #: D13036 -1A CLIENT NAME or ID #: CRYSTAL RANCH LABORATORY NAME: Accutest Mountain States LAB PHONE: (303)425-6021 DATE RECEIVED IN LABORATORY: 5/5/2010 DATE ANALYZED: 5/5/2010 thru 5/18/2010 COMMENTS: PARAMETER Result in mg/L MCL STANDARD MEHOD Lab RDL in mg/L LANGLIER INDEX CALCIUM CARBONATE DISSOLVED SOLIDS pH TOTAL ALKALINITY TEMPERATURE 0.4 272 504 7.48 215 20 *** SM2330 B N/A ........... N/A N/A N/A SM2340B SM2540 C 1.4 10 E150.1 SM2320 B 5 N/A NT = Not Tested for compound mg/L = Milligrams per Liter Lab MDL = Laboratory Method Detection Limit N/A = Not applicable MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level H = Holding Time has been exceeded *** IF LANGLIER INDEX ISA NEGATIVE NUMBER, WATER IS CORROSIVE. IF LANGLIER INDEX ISA ZERO, WATER. IS BALANCED. IF LANGLIER INDEX ISA POSITIVE NUMBER, WATER IS SCALE FORMING. Lab director 5/26/2010 Reviewed & Approved by Title Date MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM-B2, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80246-1530 1111 32 of 38 T D13036 La"bora!-o �c: Colorado Dcpann rnr ud Public. Health and fimimnnwat Colorado Department ofPublic Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit REPORTING FORM FOR INORGANIC ANALYSES SAMPLER: FILL OUT ONE FORM FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL SAMPLING POINT Are these results to be used to fulfill compliance monitoring requirements? YES U NO Is this a check or confirmation sample? YES ri NO PWSID: D13036 COUNTY: Garfield SYSTEM/ESTABLISHMENT NAME: Crystal Ranch Corp Ix' DATE COLLECTED: 5/4/2010 SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS: c/o Zancanella & Associates, 1011 Grand Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Street address/PO Box City Slate Zip CONTACT PERSON: Tom Zancanella PHONE: 9709455700 SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: CR ENTRY POINT: (Finished Water) SAMPLE TIME COLLECTED: 10:00 AM SOURCE WATER SAMPLE FOR ENTRY POINT SAMPLE PLEASE INDICATE: Chlorinated OTHER DESCRIPTION: u Other Treatment Finished - Not Treated (No Chlorine or other treatment) STATE ENTRY POINT CODE: SOURCE(s) REPRESENTED: DO SAMPLES NEED TO BE COMPOSITED BY THE LABORATORY` YES CHECK OR CONFIRMATION SAMPLES CANNOT BE COMPOSITED For La bora tory Use Only Below This Line LABORATORY SAMPLE #: D13036-1 CLIENT NAME or ID #: CRYSTAL RANCH NO LABORATORY NAME: Accutest Mountain States LAB PHONE: (303)425-6021 DATE RECEIVED IN LABORATORY: 5/5/2010 COMMENTS: DATE ANALYZED: 5/7/2010 thru 5/18/2010 PARAMETER Result in mg/L MCL STANDARD MEHOD Lab RDL in mg/L ANTIMONY ARSENIC BDL BDL 0.006 0.05/0.010* 200.8 200.8 0.00082 0.0016 BARIUM 0.041 2.0 200.8 0.0041 BERYLLIUM CADMIUM BDL BDL 0.004 0.005 200.8 200.8 0.00041 0.0002 CHROMIUM CYANIDE 0.006 0.008 0.1 0.2 200.8 SM4500-CN E 0.0041 0.005 FLUORIDE 0.36 4.0 SM4500-F C 0.2 MERCURY BDL 0.002 245.1 0.001 NICKEL BDL ** 200.8 0.0041 SELENIUM SODIUM 0.00091 7.7 0.05 ** 200.8 200.8 0.00082 1 THALLIUM BDL 0.002 200.8 0.00041 BDL = Indicates that the compound was analyzed for, but was below the Lab MDL. H = Holding time has been exceeded. NT = Not Tested For Compound. mg/L = Milligrams per Liter. MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level, * = MCL = 0.010 mg/L is effective January 23, 2006. ** = NOT an MCL, "Monitoring Requirements Only". Lab MDL = Laboratory Method Detection Limit. Lab Director 5/26/2010 Reviewed & Approved by Title Date MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM-B2, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80246-1530 ® 33of38 gjACCLITEST D13036 Lobo rata :es