Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application-: GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8'h Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfield-countv.com PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Fred A. Jarman, AICP PROJECT: Final Plat for Phases 8 -lo of Elk Springs Ranch PUD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PUD j Subdivision OWNER: Elk Springs, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Larry Green (Balcomb & Green) PreApp DATE: 8/19010 PARCEL: 2187313 0 0048, 218536400001, 218536311101, 218535100003 ZONING: PUD PRACTICAL LOCATION: Ease of Spring Valley, just above the Thunder River Marketplace off of SH 82 south of Glenwood Springs TYPE OF APPLICATION: Final Plat GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION - Elk Springs Ranch (formerly Los Amigos) proposes to plat the final 3 phases (Filings 8B, 9, and io) of the approved PUD which consists of approximately 68 lots and several parcels of open space. These phases are required (via the approved Development Agreement) to be commenced prior to December 31, 2010. Most, if not all, public improvements (roads, water, sewer, shallow / dry utilities) are completed and will be completed by the time the Final Plat is approved. All proposed construction of roads requires grading permits from the County if proposed prior to Final Plat approval. The Applicant will need to reflect all public improvements in these filings in the engineer's cost estimate and SIA. The Final Plat Application will need to include responses to conditions of approval in Resolutions 98-30, 99-102 and the resolution approving the PUD. Traffic impact fees (as well as Carbondale Fire protection fees) are to be paid for each lot at the time of Final Plat. I'I L/M AARY "'LIN LOS AMIGOS kA, Vcll GARi'7F.,�W! eouAlrr, COLOILanO �•-w-tea.-irc. 411. FIZ Asa' Fes '•/ ` war-- - axe 'h 1 t I. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS: • Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution o Article IV, Application and Review Procedures (Section 4-103) o Article V, Divisions of Land IL PROCESS in summary, the process will be the following (4-101 A and 4-103): 1. Pre -application Meeting (held 8/100) 2, Submittal of complete Subdivision "Final Plat" Application 3_ Review by staff for Technically Complete (TC) Status 4. Notice of TC to applicant with schedule; Applicant submits copies for referral to reviewing agencies 5. Meeting scheduled for BOCC and copies sent to referring agencies and departments 6. Staff report preparation and Board of County Commissioners meeting for Final Plat Submittal and Review with Decision by Board of County Commissioners III. APPLICATLON I: EV EW a. Review by: Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review b. Public Hearing / Meeting: Planning Director Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners Board of Adjustment IV. APP_LICATI_ON_REV1EW,EEES a. Planning Review Fees: $200.00 b. Total Deposit: $zoe.00 (additional hours are billed at hourly rate) General Application Processing Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to referral agencies for comments. Case planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets standards of review. Case planner makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the appropriate hearing body. Discl-aimer The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Pre p...plicat10 ummary Preparecl_by; L ttachrn_entsl Example SIA & Plat Certificates (in digital form) ➢ A digital version of Planning Applications are available on-line at: http:J/www.garfield- county.camjlndex.aspx'pagep1t13 Please refer to the above noted sections of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2oo8 located at: 'dttp.j/www.gar#field-county.comJxndex.aspx?page=578 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Application for Final Plats, Elk Springs Filing 8, Phase 2, 9,10 and 6A 1. Application Form 2. Agreement to Pay form along with Holcomb & Green, P.C.'s check in the amount $200.00 for the application fee 3. Responses to Conditions of Approval 4. Letter authorizing Lawrence R. Green of Balcomb & Green, P.C. to submit and prosecute the within Application 5. Power of Attorney giving Gary L. McElwee the authority to sign on behalf of Thomas E. Neal, Manager for Elk Springs, LLC recorded on November 24, 2010 as Reception No. 794869 6. Statement of Authority for Elk Springs, LLC recorded on November 24, 2010 as Reception No. 794869 7. Vicinity Map 8. Pre -Application Conference form 9. Final Plats for Filings 6A, 8, Phase 2, 9 and 10 10. Engineering Report, together with all appendices thereto 11. Landscape Plan, Open Space Plan and Open Space Management Plan 12. Subdivision Improvements Agreement a. Subdivision Improvements Agreement for Filing 6A b. Subdivision Improvements Agreement for Filing 9 and Filing 8 Phase 2 13. Letters of Intent from Utility Providers 14. Supplemental Declaration for Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development Garfield County, Colorado a. Supplemental Declaration for Filing 8, Phase 2 b. Supplemental Declaration for Filing 9 15. Full size copies of Final Plats attached GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8'" Street Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 www.garfield-county.com 5FP1l-to-l4-C IC) SUBDIVISION APPLICATION (CHECK THE BOX THAT APPLIES) ❑ SKETCH PLAN (optional) ❑ CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION ❑ PRELIMINARY PLAN ❑ PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT ■ FINAL PLATS, ELK SPRINGS FILINGS 8, PHASE 2, 9, 10 & 6 O FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT/CORRECTION PLAT O COMBINED PRELIMINARY PLAN & FINAL PLAT GENERAL INFORMATION (Please print legibly) Name of PrnpertyDwner• ELK SPRINGS, LLC Mailing Address: 2929 County Road 114 Telephone: (970) 945-6399 City: Glenwood Springs State: CO Zip Code: 81601 Cell: ( ) • E-mail address: garym@sopris.net FAX: (970 ) 945-6399 Name of Owner's Representative, if any, (Attorney, Planner, Consultant, etc): • Lawrence R. Green, Esq., Balcornb & Green, P.C. Mailing Address: 818 Colorado Avenue Telephone: (970) 945-6546 City: Glenwood Springs State: CO Zip Code: 81601 Cell: ( ) E-mail address: larry@balcombgreen.com FAX: (970) 945-9769 SEE FOLLOWING PAGES FOR INFORMATION ON EACH FILING. Location of Property: Section Township Range Assessor's Parcel Number: Practical Location / Address of Property: Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): Number of Tracts / Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: Last Revised 12/24/08 FILING 8, PHASE 2 ► Location of Property: Section 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West ■ Assessor's Parcel Number: 218536400001 ■ Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 1 14, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ■ Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 135.65 ► Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 3 lots ■ Proposed Water Source: Wells — central system owned by Elk Springs HOA, operated by Red Canyon Water Company ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: ISDS ► Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114; private roads ► Easements: Utility: Ditch: ■ Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): 1 Residential UnitsfLots Size Acres Parkin , Provided Single Family 3 Each > 35 acres Yes -on lots Duplex None Multi -Family None Mobile Home None Total 3 135.65 FILING 9 ► Location of Property: Sections 35 and 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West 10. Assessor's Parcel Number: 218535100003 and 218731300048 ■ Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 11.4, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ■ Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 492.51 ■ Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 62 lots, 2 Common Area (open space) parcels ■ Proposed Water Source: Wells — central system owned by Elk Springs HOA, operated by Red Canyon Water Company ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: Central — Spring Valley Sanitation District ■ Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114; private roads ► Easements: Utility: Ditch: ■ Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): Floor Area (sq. Ft.) Size (Acres) Parkin Provided (2) Commercial None (3) Industrial None (4) Public/Quasi-Public None (5) Oven Spacer['ummon Area None Total None FILING 9 ► Location of Property: Sections 35 and 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West 10. Assessor's Parcel Number: 218535100003 and 218731300048 ■ Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 11.4, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ■ Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 492.51 ■ Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 62 lots, 2 Common Area (open space) parcels ■ Proposed Water Source: Wells — central system owned by Elk Springs HOA, operated by Red Canyon Water Company ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: Central — Spring Valley Sanitation District ■ Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114; private roads ► Easements: Utility: Ditch: ■ Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (1) Residential Units/Lots SizeAcres Parkin Provided Single Family 62 Varies -between approx. 2.1 and 3.2 acres Yes -on lots Duplex None Multi -Family None Mobile Home None 305.32 Total 62 171.852 FILING 10 ► Location of Property: Section 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West ■ Assessor's Parcel Number: 239306400009 ■ Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 114, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ► Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 11 139 ► Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 1 lot, 1 parcel of Open Space ■ Proposed Water Source: Individual wells ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: ISDS ■ Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114 ■ Easements: Utility: Ditch: ► Total Development Arca (fill in the appropriate boxes below): (1) Residential Floor Area (sa. ft.) Size Acres Parkin Provided (2) Commercial N/A 73.823 Yes -on lot (3) Industrial NIA (4) Public/Quasi-Public N/A (5) Open Space/Common Area 2 Tracts 305.32 Total 2 Tracts 305.32 FILING 10 ► Location of Property: Section 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West ■ Assessor's Parcel Number: 239306400009 ■ Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 114, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ► Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 11 139 ► Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 1 lot, 1 parcel of Open Space ■ Proposed Water Source: Individual wells ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: ISDS ■ Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114 ■ Easements: Utility: Ditch: ► Total Development Arca (fill in the appropriate boxes below): (1) Residential Units/Lots Size (Acres) Parking Provided Single Family 1 73.823 Yes -on lot Duplex None Multi -Family None Mobile Home 1 Tract 37.563 Total 1 73.823 Floor Area (sq. ft.) SizeAcres Parltin Provided (2) Commercial None (3) Industrial None (4) Public/Quasi-Public None (5) ©pen Space/Common Arca 1 Tract 37.563 1'�rtal 1 Tract 37.563 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FILING 6A ► Location of Property: Section 36 Township 6 South Range 89 West ► Assessor's Parcel Number: 239305400008 ► Practical Location/Address of Property: Off of County Road 114, a subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD ► Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 11.859 ■ Number of Tracts/Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 1 commercial lot, subject to resubdivision, 1 parcel of open space ► Proposed Water Source: Wells -- central system owned by Elk Springs HOA, operated by Red Canyon Water Company ► Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: Central — Spring Valley Sanitation District ► Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 114; private roads ► Easements: Utility: Ditch: ■ Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): 1 Residential Floor Area isa. ft.) Units/Lots Size Acres Parkin Provided Single Family 4.958 None 1 (3) Industrial None Duplex None None Multi -Family ) (5) Open Space/Couuni)n :+,tea None 6.900 Mobile Home None Total Floor Area isa. ft.) Size Acres Parkin, Provided (2) Commercial To be determine 4.958 Yes -on lot 1 (3) Industrial None 1 (4) Public/Quasi-Public None ) (5) Open Space/Couuni)n :+,tea 1 Parcel 6.900 Total 11,858 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proposed Water Source: Proposed Method of Sewage Y Proposed Public Access Easements: Utility: Ditch: Total Development Area (fill GENERAL INFORMATION continued... Disposal: VIA: in the appropriate boxes below): - (1) Residential Units / Lots Size (Acres) Parking. Provided Single -Family Duplex Multi -Family Mobile Home Total Floor Area (so. ft) Size (Acres) _parking Provide4 (2) Commercial (3) Industrial (4) Public / Quasi -Public (5) open Space /Common Area Total The following general application materials are required for all types of subdivisions in Garfield County. Application materials that are specific to an individual application type (Conservation Subdivision, Preliminary Plan, etc.) are detailed in Section 5-501 of Article V of the Unified Land Use Resolution (ULUR) of 2008. Submit a completed and signed Application Form, an application fee, and a signed Agreement for Payment form. 2. A narrative explaining the purpose of the application and supporting materials that address the standards and criteria found in Article VII of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008. 3. Copy of the deed showing ownership. Additionally, submit a letter from the property owner(s) if the owner is being represented by another party other than the owner. If the property is owned by a corporate entity (such as an LLC, LLLP, etc.) please submit a copy of recorded " Statement of Authority" demonstrating that the person signing the application has the authority to act in that capacity for the entity. 2 4. Submit a copy of the appropriate portion of a Garfield County Assessor's Map showing the subject property and all public and private landowners adjacent to your property (which should be delineated). In addition, submit a list of all property owners, private and public, and their addresses adjacent to or within 200 ft. of the site. This information can be obtained from the County Assessor's Office. You will also need the names (if applicable) of all mineral interest owners of the subject property, identified in the County Clerk and Recorder's records in accordance with §24-65.5-101, et seq. (That information may be found in your title policy under Exceptions to Title). 5. Vicinity map: An 8 1/2 x 11 vicinity map locating the parcel in the County. The vicinity map shall clearly show the boundaries of the subject property and ail property within a 3 -mile radius of the subject property. The map shall be at a minimum scale of 1"=2000' showing the general topographic and geographic relation of the proposed exemption to the surrounding area for which a copy of U.S.G.S. quadrangle map may be used. 6. A copy of the Pre -Application Conference form. 7. Submit 3 copies of this completed application and all the required submittal materials to the Building and Planning Department. Staff will request additional copies once the application has been deemed technically complete. The following section outlines and describes the subdivision processes for the variety of subdivision actions that are governed by the Board of County Commissioners by the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 (ULUR). Please refer to Article V in the regulations themselves for a higher level of detail. I. THE SKETCH PLAN The sketch plan process (more fully defined in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR) is an optional plan review process intended to review at a conceptual level the feasibility and design characteristics of the proposed division of land. The Yield Plan Review process, set forth in Section 5-309, may be combined with Sketch Plan Review for applications proposing Conservation Subdivision. A. Process: The Sketch Plan Review process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR: 1. Application 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4. Review by Planning Commission B. Application Materials: The Sketch Plan review process is set forth in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR, Sketch Plan Review and requires the following materials. 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Vicinity Map (5-502(C)(2)) 3. Yield Plan (required for Conservation Subdivision) 4. Sketch Plan Map (5-502(C)(2)) 5. Land Suitability Analysis (4-502(D)) 3 II. THE CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION The Conservation Subdivision (as described in Article V, Section 5-308 of the ULUR) is a clustered residential development option that allows reduced lot size and provides density bonuses in exchange for preservation of rural lands through provision of open space. A Conservation Subdivision shall be designed as a Density Neutral Development Plan or an Increased Density Development Plan, The design standards for each development Plan option are set forth in Article VII, Section 7-501 of the ULUR. A. Process: Conservation Subdivision Review process is the same as the general subdivision process with the addition of the Yield -Plan Review. The overall Conservation Subdivision Process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-301 of the ULUR: 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Sketch Plan (optional) 3, Yield Plan Review (Can be reviewed concurrently with Preliminary Plan) 4. Preliminary Plan Review 5. Final Plat Review B. Application Materials: The Conservation Subdivision review requires the following application materials that can found more fully described in Article V, Sections 5-502 and 7-501 of the ULUR: 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Sketch Plan (Optional) (5-501(J)) 3. Yield Plan (5-502(C)(8)) 4. Preliminary Plan (5-501(G)) 5. Final Plat (5-501(E)) 6. Narrative addressing Design Standards (7-501 through 7-503) III. THE PRELIMINARY PLAN The preliminary plan review process will review the feasibility and design characteristics of the proposed subdivision based on the standards set forth in Article VII, Standards. The preliminary plan process will also evaluate preliminary engineering design. The Director may allow the preliminary plan and the final plat process to be combined if the proposed subdivision has seven (7) parcels or less and development of the lots does not require extensive engineering. A. Process: Preliminary Plan Review process shall consist of the following procedures and as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-303(B) of the ULUR: 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4 4. Public Hearing and Recommendation by Planning Commission 5. Public Hearing and Decision by Board of County Commissioners B. Application Materials: The Preliminary Plan review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fees 2. Preliminary Plan Map 3. Yield Plan (Conservation Subdivision only) 4. Open Space Plan, preliminary 5. Open Space Management Plan 6. Landscape Plan (Common Ownership Areas) 7, Impact Analysis 8. Land Suitability Analysis 9. Lighting Plan consistent with standards in 7-305 10. Visual Analysis 11. Preliminary Engineering Reports and Plans a) streets, trails, walkways and bikeways b) engineering design and construction features for any bridges, culverts or other drainage structures to be constructed c) identification and mitigation of geologic hazards d) sewage collection, and water supply and distribution system e) Erosion and Sediment Control Pian f) Water Supply Plan g) Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan 12. Draft Improvements Agreement, Covenants and Restrictions and By-laws IV. THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT Any proposal to change a preliminary plan approved under these Regulations shall require application to the Director for Amendment of an Approved Preliminary Plan. The Director shall review the application to determine whether the proposed change constitutes a substantial modification to the approved plan as more fully described in Article V, Section 5- 304. (A substantial modification is defined as a Substantial Change in Article XVI: Definitions) A. Outline of Process. The review process for a proposed Amendment of an Approved Preliminary Plan shall consist of the following procedures. 1. Pre -Application Conference 2. Application 3. Determination of Completeness 4. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 5. Decision by Director B. Application Materials: The Preliminary Plan Amendment review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-501(H): 5 1. Application Form 2. Written Statement of proposed amendment(s) 3. Supporting documents necessary to evaluate the proposed revision(s) V. THE FINAL PLAT REVIEW Unless otherwise provided by these Regulations, the applicant must receive preliminary plan approval before beginning the final plat process. The final plat review is to formally finalize the actions resultant from the preliminary plan in order to complete the subdivision process. A. Outline of Process. The Final Plat Review process shall consist of the following procedures: 1. Application 2. Determination of Completeness 3. Evaluation by Director/Staff Review 4. Review and Action by Board of County Commissioners 5. Recordation of Plat B. Application Materials: The Final Plat review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fee 2. Final Plat 3. Final Engineering Reports and Plans a) Streets, trails, walkways and bikeways b) Engineering design and construction features for any bridges, culverts or other drainage structures to be constructed c) Mitigation of geologic hazards d) Sewage collection, and water supply and distribution system e) Soil suitability information f) Groundwater drainage g) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (4-602 C. 4.) h) Final cost estimates for public improvements i) The certification listing all mortgages, Iiens judgments, easements, contracts, and agreements of record regarding the land to be platted and the Board of County Commissioners may require, at its discretion, that the holders of such mortgages, Iiens, judgments, easements, contracts or agreements shall be required to join in and approve the application for Final Plat approval before such Final Plat is accepted for review. All other exceptions from title shall be delineated. 4. Landscape Plan (Common Area) (4-602 5.) 5. Open Space Plan (if applicable) 6. Open Space Management Plan (If applicable) 6 7. Improvements Agreement, if applicable [include record drawings in digital format, (4-602 J.)] 8. Letter of Intent for service from all of the utility service providers a) Contract for Service, required prior to Final Plat recordation. 9. Final Declarations of Covenants and Restrictions, HOA articles of incorporation and bylaws 10. Final Fees to be paid (School -Land Dedication / Traffic Impact Fees) VI. THE FINAL PLAT AMENDMENT 1 CORRECTION PLAT REVIEW The purpose of the Final Plat Amendment review is to allow for certain amendments to an approved Final Plat. An amendment may be made to a recorded Final Plat if such amendment does not increase the number of subdivision lots or result in a major relocation of a road or add one or more new roads (pursuant to Section 5-306). A correction can be made to a recorded plat in order to correct an engineering error, mislabeling issue, etc. that does not affect the substance of the plat. A. Outline of Processes. The review processes for amending a Final Plat or an Exemption Plat shall consist of the following regardless of whether the division was initially approved as a subdivision or an Exemption: 1. Four (4) Subdivision Lots: The Administrative Review Process, detailed in Section 4-104 of Article IV, shall be used for review of a request to amend or correct a Final Plat modifying lot lines, building envelopes, easement locations or other interests affecting up to four (4) subdivision lots. An Amended Final Plat or an Amended Exemption Plat which modifies lot lines or easements affecting not more than two (2) adjacent lots or Exemption Lots or a single building envelope shall be subject to the Administrative Review Process set forth in Section 4-104 of Article IV, with the addition of presentation of the Amended Plat to the Board of County Commissioners for signature, prior to recording with the Office of the Clerk and Recorder. 2. More Than Four Lots: The Major Exemption Review Process, detailed in Section 5-403, shall be used to amend a Final Plat or an Exemption Plat modifying lot lines, building envelopes, easement locations or other interests affecting more four (4) subdivision lots or Exemption Lots. An Amended Final Plat which modifies lot lines or easements affecting more than four (4) subdivision lots or rnore than one (1) building envelope shall be subject to the Major Exemption Review Process set forth in Section 5-403. B. Application Materials: The Final Plat Amendment / Corrected Plat review requires the following application materials as more fully described in Article V, Section 5-502: 1. Application Form and Fee 2. Preliminary Plan (5-501(G)) 7 3. Final Plat, Amended Final Plat 4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement, if necessary The Director may allow the Preliminary Plan and the Final Plat process to be combined if the proposed subdivision has seven (7) parcels or less and development of the lots does not require extensive engineering. (Section 5-303) No submittal of a combined application shall be allowed until the Director has made a determination after holding a pre -application conference. hav -re\ad the s ement alcove and have provided the required attached information wh*h is c rrect d accu ate)o the best of my knowledge. ELK SPRINGS, LC C By l^'ti Gary McElwee, Attorney -in -Fact for Thomas E. Neal 8 2-9 2016 Date GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE Garfield County, pursuant to Board of County Commissioners ("Board") Resolution No. 98-09, has established a fee structure ("Base Fee") for the processing of each type of subdivision and land use applications. The Base Fee is an estimate of the average number of hours of staff time devoted to an application, multiplied by an hourly rate for the personnel involved. The Board recognized that the subdivision and land use application processing time will vary and that an applicant should pay for the total cost of the review which may require additional billing. Hourly rates based on the hourly salary, and fringe benefits costs of the respective positions combined with an hourly overhead cost for the office will be used to establish the actual cost of County staff time devoted to the review of a particular project. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the Base Fee. After the Base Fee has been expended, the applicant will be billed based on actual staff hours accrued. Any billing shall be paid in full prior to final consideration of any land use permit, zoning amendment or subdivision plan. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. Checks, including the appropriate Base Fee set forth below, must be submitted with each land use application, and made payable to the Garfield County Treasurer. Applications will not be accepted without the required application fee. Base Fees are non-refundable in full, unless a written request for withdraw from the applicant is submitted prior the initial review of the application materials. Applications must include a Payment Agreement Form ("Agreement") set forth below. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application in order for it to be accepted. The following Base Fees shall be received by the County at the time of submittal of any procedural application to which such fees relate. Such Base Fees shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board for the consideration of any application or additional County staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee, which have not otherwise been paid by the applicant to the County prior to final action upon the application tendered to the County. GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT BASE FEES TYPE OF LAND USE ACTION BASE FEE Vacating Public Roads & Rights -of -Way Sketch Plan $400 $325 $675 + application agency review fees and outside Preliminary Plan / Conservation Subdivision consultant review fees, as authorized pursuant to the Regulations, such as the Colorado Geologic Survey Preliminary Plan Amendment $325 Final Plat $200 Final Plat Amendment / Correction Plat $100 Combined Preliminary Plan and Final Plat $1,075 Minor Exemption / Amendment $300 / $300 Major Exemption / Amendment $400 / $300 Rural Land Development Option Exemption / Amendment $400 / $300 General Administrative Permit $250 Floodplain Development Permit $400 Pipeline Development Plan / Amendment $400 / $300 Small Temporary Employee Housing $50 Minor Temporary Employee Housing $250 Limited Impact Review / Amendment $400 / $300 Major Impact Review / Amendment $525 / $400 Rezoning: Text Amendment $300 Rezoning: Zone District Amendment $450 Planned Unit Development (PUD) / Amendment $500 / $300 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $450 Variance $250 Interpretation $250 Takings Determination NO FEE Planning Staff Hourly Rate • Planning Director $50.50 • Senior Planner $40.50 • Planning Technician $33.75 • Secretary $30.00 County Surveyor Review Fee (includes review of Amended Determined by Surveyor$ Plats, Final Plats, Exemption Plats) Mylar Recording Fee Page 2 $11 — 1 ss page $10 each additional page The following guidelines shall be used for the administration of the fee structure set forth above: 1. All applications shall be submitted with a signed Agreement for Payment form set forth below. 2. County staff shall keep accurate record of actual time required for the processing of each land use application, zoning amendment, or subdivision application. Any additional billing will occur commensurate with the additional costs incurred by the County as a result of having to take more time that that covered by the base fee. 3. Any billings shall be paid prior to final consideration of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision plan. All additional costs shall be paid to the execution of the written resolution confirming action on the application. 4. Final Plats, Amended or Corrected Plats, Exemption Plats or Permits will not be recorded or issued until all fees have been paid. 5. In the event that the Board determines that special expertise is needed to assist them in the review of a land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision application, such costs will be borne by the applicant and paid prior to the final consideration of the application. All additional costs shall be paid prior to the execution of the written resolution confirming action on the application. 6. If an application involves multiple reviews, the Applicant shall be charged the highest Base Fee listed above. 7. Types of "Procedures" not listed in the above chart will be charged at an hourly rate based on the pertinent planning staff rate listed above. 8. The Planning Director shall establish appropriate guidelines for the collection of Additional Billings as required. Page 3 GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT PAYMENT AGREEMENT FORM (Shall be submitted with application) GARFIELD COUNTY (hereinafter COUNTY) and Elk Springs, LLC Property Owner (hereinafter OWNER) agree as follows. 1. OWNER has submitted to COUNTY an application for Final Plats, Elk Springs Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 & 6A (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. OWNER understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 98-09, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each type of subdivision or land use review applications, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. OWNER and COUNTY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. OWNER agrees to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the PROJECT, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to OWNER. OWNER agrees to make additional payments upon notification by the COUNTY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional COUNTY staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, OWNER shall pay additional billings to COUNTY to reimburse the COUNTY for the processing of the PROJECT mentioned above. OWNER acknowledges that all billing shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the COUNTY of any land use permit, zoning amendment, or subdivision plan. PROPERTY O NER EL ► SP4 iNG LLC BY. , ►t Gary c lwee Attorney -in -Fact for Thomas E. Neal Gary McElwee Print Name e,Ad./1 L, (OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE) Mailing Address: 2929 County Road 114 L� of 0 Date Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Page 4 RESPONSE TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following sets forth the Applicant's response to the conditions of approval contained in the PUD and Preliminary Plan Approval. The paragraph numbers stated below correspond to the paragraph numbers of the identified resolution of approval. 1. PUD APPROVAL -- RESOLUTION NO. 96-34 ROAD IMPACTS 1. Complete left turn lane at County Road 114 and Los Amigos Drive. Response: These road improvements were completed as part of the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for Filing 5, Phase I in 1997. 2. Pay Road Impact Fee. Response: Fee has been established at $200.00 per lot. See, Condition #3, Resolution 98-30. Applicant agrees to pay the applicable fees prior to recording of each Final Plat. DEDICATION OF ROADS. 4. All roads shall be dedicated to Homeowners Association at time of Final Plat approval. Response: Applicant agrees, and dedication is made on each applicable Final Plat. In addition, Applicant will sign and record a deed conveying the roads to the Homeowners' Association simultaneously with the recording of each Final Plat. WASTEWATER 5. Not applicable. See Conditions 12 and 13 of Resolution 98-30. WATER SUPPLY 6. Adequacy of water supply. Response: As required by this condition, the Applicant provided evidence of ` the adequacy of the water supply in connection with the Preliminary Plan approved by Resolution 98-30. Much of this information is again being submitted as part of this Application. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Page 1 of 6 7. Convey water rights to Homeowners Association. Response: The water rights were conveyed to the Homeowners' Association by Quit Claim Deed recorded on Maty 11. 1998 as Reception No. 521618. A Bill of Sale conveying the physical facilities of the Water System to the Association was executed and delivered on the same day. UTILITIES 8. Provide information regarding utilities at the time of preliminary plan submittal. Response: All information regarding utilities was provided at the time of the preliminary plan approved in Resolution 98-30. WILDLIFE IMPACTS, OPEN SPACE, AIR QUALITY 9. One dog allowed for each unit. Response: This requirement is set forth as a plat note on each Final Plat and is also contained in the Supplemental Declaration of Covenants for each Filing. 10. Open space dedication at 50:50 ratio. Response: In previous Filings of Elk Springs open space was conveyed to the Homeowners' Association at greater than this ratio. Upon the recording of the within Final Plats and the concomitant conveyance of open space there will ill be approximately 1152 acres of open space within Elk Springs and approximately 794 acres of lot area. This lot area includes the area of the large rural residential lots in Filing 8 Phase 2 and Filing 10. 11. No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces are allowed. Response: This restriction is contained as a plat note on each Final Plat. 12. Natural gas burning fireplaces are allowed, Response: This statement is contained in the Supplemental Declaration of Covenants for each of the Filings. 13. Restrictions on wood -burning stoves. Response: This restriction is contained in the Supplemental Declaration of Covenants for each Filing. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Page 2 of 6 PLAT NOTES 14. Requires certain plat notes to be included on each Final Plat. Response: All required plat notes are contained on each Final Plat. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION AND COVENANTS 15. Recognizes that Homeowners' Association has been created and that Covenants have been recorded. 16. Requires annexation of future filings into Homeowners' Association. Response: Draft Supplemental Declarations of Covenants for Filing 8, Phase 2 and Filing 9 are included within this Application. The Neighborhood Commercial lot within Filing 6A is not going to be made subject to the Covenants nor made a part of the Homeowners' Association as it is specifically exempted therefrom by this Condition of the PUD approval. The Applicant does not intend to make the single Rural Residential lot in Filing 10 subject to the Covenants because of its large size (approximately 74 acres) and the fact that it will not use Association roads for access. It does not seem fair to make this Rural Residential lot subject to Association assessments when it receives no benefits from Association properties. 18. Requires Applicant to convey "Multi -Family Open Space" to the owners of the "Multi -Family" properties. Response: This conveyance was made by Deed recorded on August 10, 1999 at Reception No. 550327. SCHOOL IMPACT 20. Requires dedication of land to RE -1 School District. Response: Applicant conveyed the School Site Parcel to RE -1 School District by Deed recorded on May 15, 2007 as Reception No. 723310. PHASING 21. Sets out the approved phasing plan. Response: The phasing plan set forth in the PUD approval was subsequently amended by Condition No. 9 of Resolution 98-30. All preliminary plans and final plats, including the subject Final Plats, which are required to be submitted by December 31, 2010, have been submitted and completed in accordance with the approved phasing plan. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Page 3 of 6 11, PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL. A. RESOLUTION 98-30 2. Matters regarding HOA documents. Response: All HOA documents were approved by Garfield County in connection with previous Final Plat. Supplemental Declarations for Filings 8A and 9 are included with this Application. The Applicant does not intend to snake the neighborhood commercial parcel in Filing 6A or the rural residential lot in Filing 10 part of the Homeowners' Association. 3. Applicant shall pay a road impact fee of $200.00 per lot prior to approval of the Final Plat. Response: Applicant agrees to pay this fee. 4. Compliance with conditions of Colorado State Forest Service. Response: The Application includes a Supplemental Declaration for Filing 8, Phase 2 and Filing 9. Each of these Supplemental Declarations sets out the requirements for the creation of a defensible space on each lot. This section, together with the location of the building envelopes on the lots as shown on the Final Plat satisfies the recommendations of the Colorado State Forest Service. The requirement for a defensible space on the lot within Filing 10 will be set forth as a plat note on the Final Plat for Filing 10. 5. Not Applicable. See Condition No. 3 of Resolution 99-102. 6. Not Applicable. See Condition No. 3 of Resolution 99-102. 7. Provisions for easements and access to rural residential lots 1 through 3. Response: Rural residential lots 1 through 3 comprise the Final Plat for Filing 8, Phase 2. Easements for water and access, as well as approved building envelopes, are shown on the Final Plat. 8. Required plat notes. Response: All required plat notes are contained on each Final Plat. 9. New phasing plan. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, /0 and 6A Page 4 of.6 Response: Submission of the within Final Plats satisfies the requirements of the phasing plan. 10. Compliance with recommendations of Division of Wildlife. Response: The Application includes a Supplemental Declaration for Filing 8, Phase 2 and Filing 9. Each of these Supplemental Declarations provides the requirements for animal proof trash containers. This section satisfies the recommendations of the Colorado Division of Wildlife. This requirement for an animal proof container will be set fbrth as a plat note on the Final Plat for Filing 10. 12. Method of sewage disposal shall be pressurized central system. Response: All lots except for the rural residential lots in Filing 8, Phase 2 and Filing 10 are within the Spring Valley Sanitation District and will receive sewer service from that District 's central system. 13. Not applicable. See Condition No. 3 of Resolution 99-102. 14. Monitoring and eradication of noxious weeds shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association. Response: This requirement is set forth as a plat note on each Final Plat. B. RESOLUTION 99-102 2. Annexation of all property within Elk Springs into the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District. Response: All property within Elk Springs which was not previously within the municipal boundaries of the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District was included within the District pursuant to its Resolution 00-5, Series of 2000. 3. Rural Residential lots allowed to use individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). Response: In accordance with this Condition, this Application proposes that the three Rural Residential lots in Filing 8, Phase 2 and the single Rural Residential lot in Filing 10 be allowed to use ISDS, 4. Neighborhood Commercial lot may be subdivided further. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Page 5 of 6 Response: By this Application, the Applicant seeks only to subdivide the Neighborhood Commercial lot as a single lot. The Applicant recognizes that if it or any successor owner wishes to further subdivide this lot it may do so, but only subject to meeting the prelinrinaty plan requirements and final plat requirements for subdivision contained in the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations at the time of resubdivision. Response to Conditions of Approval Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Page 6 of 6 1 ELK SPRINGS, LLC 1 1 ELKNGS.IZ.ILC 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Ph: 970 945 6399 November 24, 2010. VIA HAND DELIVERY7 TO: Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 81" Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Application for Final Plats, Elk Springs, Filings 8, Phase 2, 9, 10 and 6A Dear Madam or Sir: Elk Springs, LLC is the owner of the real property which is the subject to the above - referenced Application. Elk Springs, LLC hereby authorizes Lawrence R. Green, and the firm of Balcomb & Green, P.C. to act in all respects as the authorized representatives of Elk Springs, LLC to submit and prosecute the above -referenced Application. Very truly yours, 13 IM r Gary }W1cElwee, Attorney -in -Fact for Thomas E. Neal i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I•l I'M'P Milt fhtJAC 411A,10,,l NI 1'1 Reception##: 794870 11/24/2010 i0:21,18 RM Jean RIberico 1 cf 2 Rec Fee $16 00 Doc Fee -0 00 GARFIELD COUNT' ,co POWER OF ATTORNEY CONFORMED COPY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That, the undersigned, Thomas E. Neal, individually, and as Manager of Elk Springs, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, reposing. special trust and confidence in Gary L. McElwee of the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, has made, constituted and appointed, said Gary L. McElwee his true and lawful Attorney -in -Fact for him in his name, place and stead, for his sole use and benefit, to execute and record all documents related to the following: a. Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement ("SIA") for Elk Springs Filing 8, Phase 2, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, a subdivision of the real property described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in Garfield County, Colorado; b. Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement ("SIA") for Elk Springs Filing 9, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, a subdivision of the real property described on Exhibit 8 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in Garfield County, Colorado; c. Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement (°SIA") for Elk Springs Filing 10, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, a subdivision of the real property described on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in Garfield County, Colorado; and d. Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement ["SIA") for Elk Springs Filing 6A, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, a subdivision of the real property described on Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in Garfield County, Colorado. Said attorney shall have full power, right and authority to make, execute, sign, acknowledge and record all documents related to the above-described Final Plats, including, without limitation, all Subdivision Application forms, Final Plats, Subdivision Improvements Agreements, Supplemental Declarations of Covenants, any deed or deeds conveying to the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc. any Open Space or roads within any of said Final Plats, and all other documents or writings in such forms and of such contents as said attorney shall deem advisable and necessary related to the submission to Garfield County of applications for such Final Plat approvals, the processing of such applications and the recording of the aforementioned Final Plats and SIA's. The purpose and intent of this Power of Attorney is to clothe said appointed attorney with all power and authority in connection with said Final Plats to the same extent and with the same power and authority which the undersigned might exercise, and which power and authority is expressly so conferred; hereby ratifying and confirming each and everything said attorney shall do or purport to do by virtue of these presents. This Power of Attorney shall be effective immediately and shall terminate on December 31, 2011 without further action of the principal. Power of Attorney Elk Springs. LLC Ann r aJirry Anon 4wr.ncc R. Coml. Esc - €iuPcuruU & iron, P C P O t)r.0"v 7911 0k , oud Spriagz. CO 81nr12 OFFICIAL SEAL JOiII4 J MUSSAR Notary PubNc - Stets of I111noh My Commission Expires May 3.2014 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,1 have hereunto set my hand on this 3" day of -November, 2010. Thomas E. Neal, individually and as Manager of Elk Springs, LLC FEIN# (Elk Springs, LLC): 36-3534305 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) ss. COUNTY OF COOK ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this g3ra day of November, 2010, by Thomas E. Neal, individually and as Manager of Elk Springs, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal My commission expires 0,WP 1:0eb LARRY fRf•E .'LOS AMIGOS T OR (FY itNC THOMAS P MEAL TO MAY MCF111e1 SO SUBMIT 0 -IK *IOWA F TUNG I. r-12.10 axx Power of Attorney Elk Springs. LLC 2 111111'i rill.1'41I0'14ir'1011 11,1[l,4Vilni 111 Recept iorii# : 794869 11/24/2010 10 21.18 AM Jean Alberico 1 of 1 Rec Fee -$11.00 Doc Fee 0 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY (C.R.S. §38-30-172) CONFORMED COPY 1. This Statement of Authority relates to an entity named ELK SPRINGS, LLC. 2. The type of entity is a limited liability company. 3. The entity is formed under the laws of the State of Colorado. 4. The mailing address for the entity is 2929 County Road 114, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601, 5. The names and positions of each person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the entity are as follows: Thomas E. Neal, Manager 6. The authority of the foregoing persons to bind the entity is not limited. 7. This Statement of Authority is executed on behalf of the entity pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. §38-30- 17i2. Executed this -23 -day of November, 2010. STATE OF IL+ -L. sex5 COUNTY OF L ' )ss. ELK SPRINGS, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company By: Thomas E. Neal, Manager The above and foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this g3 "- day of November, 2010, by Thomas E. Neal as Manager of Elk Springs, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: Notary�1t'wtuaw-ti.. blit OFFICIAL SEAL JOHN J MOMMAS Motary Pubo - Mew o1 NNnoh My Ccmtnioalotl Nokia May 3. 2014 A14� Rrx,rrdII, /town In [.ax FOIL• R 4;rcan, F.sy [IAIcLomb a G,, ,. P C P ❑ [kern 7a.1 G[nirwY Sprroys. cu x rLAO GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8t Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 970.384.3470 wwwBarfield-county.c0m PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Fred A. Jarrnan, AICP PROJECT: Final Plat for Phases 8-10 of Elk Springs Ranch PUD PreApp DATE: 8/19/10 PARCEL: 218731300048, 218536400001, 218536311101, 218535100003 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PUD j Subdivision ZONING: PUD OWNER: Elk Springs, LLC REPRESENTATIVE Larry Green (Balcomb & Green) PRACTICAL LOCATION: Base of Spring Valley, just above the Thunder River Marketplace off of SH 82 south of Glenwood Springs TYPE OF APPLICATION: Final Plat GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION - Elk Springs Ranch (formerly Los Amigos) proposes to plat the final 3 phases (Filings 8B, 9, and 10) of the approved PUD which consists of approximately 68 lots and several parcels of open space. These phases are required (via the approved Development Agreement) to be commenced prior to December 31, 2010. Most, if not all, public improvements (roads, water, sewer, shallow / dry utilities) are completed and will be completed by the time the Final Plat is approved. All proposed construction of roads requires grading permits from the County if proposed prior to Final Plat approval. The Applicant will need to reflect ali public Improvements in these filings in the engineer's cost estimate and SIA. The Final Plat Application will need to include responses to conditions of approval in Resolutions 98-30, 99-102 and the resolution approving the PUD. Traffic Impact fees (as well as Carbondale Fire protection fees) are to be paid for each lot at the time of Final Plat. r+A•E'LIADM RY PMN cos AMIcds ,wxcrr I. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS: • Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution o Article IV, Application and Review Procedures (Section 4-103) o Article V, Divisions of Land 11. PROCESS In summary, the process will be the following (4-101 A and 4-103): 1. Pre -application Meeting (held 8/19/10) 2. Submittal of complete Subdivision "Final Plat" Application 3. Review by staff for Technically Complete (TC) Status 4. Notice of TC to applicant with schedule; Applicant submits copies for referral to reviewing agencies S. Meeting scheduled for BOCC and copies sent to referring agencies and departments 6. Staff report preparation and Board of County Commissioners meeting for Final Plat Submittal and Review with Decision by Board of County Commissioners 1 [ I. ►°�P�L ATKIN REVIEW a. Review by: Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review b. Public Hearing / Meeting: Planning Director Planning Commission X Board of County Commissioners Board of Adjustment AEP ATTL©N REY ES a. Planning Review Fees: $200.00 b. Total Deposit: $zao.00 (additional hours are billed at hourly rate) Geral A_pplikation Processing Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to referral agencies for comments. Case planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets standards of review. Case planner makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the appropriate hearing body. Disclaimer The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Er p liicatis. 5umroe y_PreRar_ed [: Attachments; Example SIA & Plat Certificates (in digital form) A digital version of Planning Applications are available an -line at: http://www.garfield- county.comilndex.aspx?page=m3 9 Please refer to the above noted sections of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 located at: http:fjwww.garfieid-county.com/lndex.aspx?pageV578 I I NM NM N IN11111 ' M MI = MI I N E = M L•h ir+oceaiu ra w„ n • ri n rn O 0 3. • z o • N r,. © ig�'i oAornc 2 Ry $Asm a N q 0 oxoo (og£0 z Noe [a0 — i F 6.4 J trwoww xnr war ac rK 13 ra r: r ra+, .. 141141 pQ 2 O 0 t aq % oaS A vy cRa? Sq iee ovv�vE.ga t°8 4PnI-.4 e©" 4ti 7 ° k� N 6 $9 Wi$ a q N� RRNe Hx ` 0.40 Zg4 i@3no3E°g ER 3.�EEi�3.ncA.^�e$�§"q '8y$ 11kk.o oN$Qy5c"fibU nc4,$c lt MUM:3'4 iliWail qiiilli fliiwal tky qI 'itig4 141:4 - b$ ,p p° 2. fi5t iso 'v Rni+'1'ulqi l.:ggClg.� RR'24' yerib 3 fitQYo , $,�3.Z_ey�7a< .b 18a '',.1.,,,i4' n •Q8�a hN =W $pS SSS.m 3' a gi t 7:3:1 2.4 4 A n 2 3 R 3a�a�2p�a�2 3Z i2 3a1 $a�2y-°.a 39 33d v .�u33���3 3$3 �' x'Az �22�° iw„2 �' Nq° ,Mu ViS +.tii27'�' +n iq�trn �(�b Yd {+.� rn`41A nn wbn SAq �Ry.`�'qnn °•�q �Yj U�''~QQ S -q. 4iq��yyO�gN�$%ihl "Y'Ci j w YaA $i k,' "''' y�i aoStD�4SoQ2322 � in �9::,%!::4::::1`.! ::;!;ate''!!: "' ^gy- 3: do CA o 4gq • y4n�n.� ar°q� 4Y N A A a'a 41n S C • 17 • A f, ng Aga ,a . + il n;9 A n�rn W 3 ;. w ft 4 •(NY 3uu ail 4 vs4 lz '11 69 Cr) 1 LI v7j 7 VA L ELK SPRINGS/LOS AMIGOS RANCH FINAL PLAT ENGINEERING REPORT FILINGS 6A, 8 -PHASE 2, 9 & 10 For submittal to GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT Per GCULU 5-501 E. 4. November 2010 Prepared by isSCI-sMUESER GORDON MEYER i N O, N F F R S S u R V E• O R 5 1 1 8 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 GLENWOO❑ SPRINGS. CO 8 1 601 970.945. 1004 970.945.5948 FAX ELK SPRINGS/LOS AMIGOS RANCH FINAL PLAT ENGINEERING REPORT FILINGS 6A, 8 -PHASE 2, 9 & 10 For submittal to GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT tJ PREPARED BY DAVID M. Koiz, P.E- SGM Project #1502C-29 DoculENT1 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 TABLE OF CONTENT: 1.0 Executive Summary 1 2.0 Streets, Trails. Walkways and Bikeways 1 3.0 Drainage 2 4.0 Geologic Hazards 2 5.0 Sewage Collection 2 6.0 Water Supply and Distribution 2 7.0 Soils 3 8.0 Groundwater 3 9.0 Erosion and Sediment Control 3 10.0 Public Improvement Cost Estimates 4 LIST OF APPENDUCEF Appendix A Drawings - Elk Springs Filings 8 - 9 Final Plat Submittal Appendix l3 Drawings - Record Drawings Filings 8 and 9 Appendix C Drawings - Kingbird Drive Design Drawings Appendix D Drawings - Filing 6A Neighborhood Commercial Appendix E Engineering Information Appendix F Geologic Hazards Appendix G Soils Appendix H Public Improvements Cost Estimates Elk Springs!Los Amigos Ranc$i Novembea 2010 1.0 Executive Summary This report addresses the engineering requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution, with respect to the Final Plat application for Elk Springs (fka Los Amigos Ranch) Filings 6A, 8 — Phase 2, 9 and 10. Specific submittal requirements are identified in Article V Divisions of Land 5-501 Application Materials for Division of Land Section E. Final Plat 4.a. — h. Elk Springs has completed construction of most of the infrastructure necessary to serve the areas encompassed in these Final Plats. Filing 6A is directly accessed from CR 114. This parcel will undergo the Preliminary/Final Plan process for site specific features and any re- subdivision. As all of the other utilities are in place adjacent to the parcel, a new sanitary sewer is the only proposed construction at this time. All roads, utilities and drainage infrastructure are in place to serve Filing 8, Phase 2 and Filing 9. The Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac, serving lots 79 and 80, is the only exception to this in Filing 9. Filing 10 is a Rural Residential lot with access and utilities from CR 114. The parcel will utilize an individual well and ISDS and no public improvements are proposed. In addition to the respective Final Plats, this application includes the fallowing engineering plan sets: • Elk Springs Filings 8 — 9 Final Plat Submittal — these are the updated Preliminary Plan drawings that Filing 8 and 9 infrastructure was constructed from. (Appendix A) • Record Drawings Filings 8 and 9 - these are surveyed record drawings of the as - constructed utilities with the Filings. (Appendix B) • Kingbird Drive — these sheets are the design drawings for the infrastructure necessary to serve the two new lots in Filing 9. (Appendix C) • Filing 6A Neighborhood Commercial — these sheets show topography and sanitary sewer design necessary to serve this parcel. (Appendix D) The subject filings underwent the Garfield County Preliminary Plan review process in 1998 and Amendment in 1999. This engineering design presented in this Final Plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plan Filings 6 —10 and 1999 Amendment. Applicable reports from those applications are included in the Appendices. 2,0 5treets, Trails Walkways and Bikeways With the exception of Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac, all roads associated with this application have been constructed in accordance with the Preliminary Plan approval and as shown in the plans provided. In general, the Filing 8 and 9 roads are chip sealed wit two 11' lanes and gravel shoulders. Road grades are < 6% and were designed to fit into the natural topography with minimal disturbance. Preliminary Plan Exhibit D described roadway classification and design and is included in its entirety here as Appendix E. Separate trails, walkways and bikeways are not proposed as "hard" construction. However, the Final Plats do provide easements that allow for non -motorized travel and access to open 1 Elk Springs/ Los Anugos Rancn November 2010 space areas. The low density and rural nature of the development allows the roads to be safely used to access these easements. 3.0 Drainage Drainage features on Elks Springs consist primarily of roadside ditches and cross culverts. The low density of the development allowed natural drainage patterns to be maintained. Runoff rates and volumes are comparatively low due to good vegetative cover and predominant Hydrologic Soil Group B soils having high infiltration capacity. Again, all public drainage infra -structure necessary for these final plats is already constructed. Refer to the Filings 8 — 9 drawings for locations, sizes, and details associated with culverts, swales, etc. The Preliminary Plan application included a detailed and comprehensive drainage report. Again, that report is included in Appendix E. 4.0 Geologic Hazards Elk Springs' geology was studied extensively. Applicable reports by Lincoln DeVore, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical Inc. and CTLfThompson Inc. from the Preliminary Plan Exhibit E are included in Appendix F. Of specific concern for this application are the faults and landslide areas in Filing 8, Phase 2. The conclusions reached are that the landslide area is ancient and now stable and the large lot size will allow residential development as contemplated in areas away from the faults. 5.0 Sewage Collection Elk Springs is served by a central wastewater collection and treatment system operated by the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD). A network of existing gravity and low pressure sewer lines collect sewage from individual lots throughout the development and route it to the SVSD treatment facility. Such is the case for Filing 9. A new 8" gravity sanitary sewer will be constructed for Filing 6A. Individual Septic Disposal Systems will serve the Rural Residential lots of Filings 8, Phase 2 and Filing 10, These lots are very large, have suitable soils and ISDS's will provide a safe and practical means of sewage disposal. Garfield County Resolution No. 99-102 specifically approved the use of ISDS on these lots. Appendix E contains extensive discussion on the Sanitary Sewage Disposal Plan. 6.0 Water 'Supply and Distribution With the exception of Filing 16, all lots will be served by the existing central water system owned by the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc. and operated by the Red Canyon 2 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Water Company. That central water system consists of a well field that pumps to a chlorination facility and contact chamber before entering the transmission and distribution network. That network consists of 10", 8" and 6" waterlines linking the 320,000 gallon East Tank and the 150,000 gallon west tank. Fire protection is provided by the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District. The District advised on storage capacity and hydrant layout throughout the development. Appendix E provides full details on the Water Supply Plan. 7.0 Soils Appendix G contains soil information for the project taken from the USDA National Resource Conservation District. This was submitted as Exhibit I with the 1998 Preliminary application, Soils are generally well-suited for development in the areas proposed. Appendix F provides a geotechnical analysis and provides specific recommendations, 8.0 Groundwater Groundwater drainage is not a problematic issue in Elk Springs. No free water was encountered in the 21 test pits ranging from 2' to 8' deep logged in the H -P Geotech Report in Appendix F. Foundation drains are recommended as a precaution against locally perched groundwater. Groundwater was not a significant issue in the construction of public improvements or residences. 9.0 Erosion and Sediment Control This report, in conjunction with the project plans contained in Appendices A — D, addresses the requirements of 4-502 (C)(4). There are no major water bodies with in the development. Existing drainage features consist of roadside ditches, swales, culverts and detention ponds. Refer to Appendices A — D plans for topography, grading and locations and sizes drainage elements. Appendix E contains drainage calculations. Snow storage areas are immediately adjacent to the road within the rights-of-way. The Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac and Filing 6A sewer construction will require clearing and grubbing and stockpiling of soil immediately adjacent to the construction within the rights-of- way. The steepest adjacent grades on Kingbird are about 7 %. The sewer construction is generally on existing grades of about 8 % while a short section will be installed on a 14% grade. There are no steep grades greater than 20 % that will be disturbed. No temporary roads are anticipated. Construction of the Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac and Filing 6A sewer line will occur in the spring, summer or fall of 2011. The construction period for each project is not expected to exceed 30 days start to finish. 3 E k Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 The Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac receives virtually no runoff from adjacent area. No specific erosion measures are proposed other than appropriate, good housekeeping measures, The minimal runoff that could leave the construction area will flow as sheet flow and be filtered across natural vegetated areas. For the Filing 6A sewer construction, erosion control and best management practices will be in place at the start of construction. As some tributary drainage area does exist, erosion logs as shown on the plans will be installed to control any sediment laden runoff. Good housekeeping measures will be expected and additional best management practices as warranted by contractor operations will be utilized. Permanent stabilization will consist of topsoiling, seeding and mulching. The erosion logs and any other controls will be left in place until after vegetation is established. The total cost of erosion control and permanent stabilization is expected to be less than $3000. Refer to cost estimates presented in the next section of this report. Total estimated disturbed area is about 16,850 sf for the Kingbird Drive construction and about 17,000 sf for the Filing 6A sewer project. Adjacent areas at Kingbird are sage with grass. Pinyon/Juniper with grass understory is adjacent to the Filing 6A sewerline while much of the alignment is in the old CR 114 platform. Hydrologic Soil Group "B" soils predominate and have high infiltration capacity resulting in lesser amounts of runoff. These projects will not require a CDPHE Stormwater Management Plan for Construction Activities as the resulting disturbance is well less than 1 acre in each case. As such, separate signature blocks for erosion and sediment control are not provided, 10.0 Public Improvement Cost Estimates Public Improvement cost estimates for the Kingbird Drive cul-de-sac in Filing 9, and the extension of sewer to the Neighborhood Commercial lot in Filing 6A, together with documentation of the actual cost of completed construction in Filings 8 and 9 are included in Appendix H. 4 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix A Drawings Elk Springs Filings 8 — 9 Final Plat Submittal C Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix A C 1 OC Col (•• 4-1 Con4t CD (24 coo FINAL PLAT SUBMITTAL A //ABEAM/ FPEPARED ar- ( Yt7.f:�nFD.+S P4R rQF } a n mR4KR;R ) .1 7: 08: tr •11 • - - • ee §-Z‘ 9 -\\ 2 ki4n. cr.!' nft Cr9/ PY 4,11P(41 41. ; fa! Zdtli.Fit ip•ia d1, NeV.01 ,4'4[65 Don A0drff VeNtl 121 •-•z, • ra s,e 2 6 r 7441 - Mfg 8 • CC 41 c-41,44 SC' - 44, I 1 ' e I .':•• i -i-±-1 1 1 1 ' z '44 .a.1. im -.1114 VIP/ .1 4c or cr. cm arri •61.44.4.41.)41164ZErr. • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T LOS AMIGOS RANCH P. U.I' • -C-‘4016-0 no hr a man j DITCH LINING TABLE iW6Vx ji firtf-r1" IPRAP DISPEI?S10 CULVER?" OUTLET PROTECTOIN c\) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ; • , •1 _ ').• •."4 , ; • . ! / ••.,..4. o 1 \ ' • * * •••••i • . . . .. ..... • ... 1 ......r.manYire'syarr.1 1 4 ; I! —011PD--- -71 • , VP' 1g4 <1 < •,•-• / t la / Z. 1. ,. ..,, ... ,-- z0, -N -,),,,, •,„i LI • ./ r , -• , .& a . 1 \ i . 1--'°9 11:•-' r. i \ .). / .<7 -...... a 8 k 0 ; A / L .ra i 7 d ii. 1 , k h i , T t in' a N ‘,. 1 9 4 a Li ! cav rnit kro a N 444 he33 i11 1 t I 11 fit ,; 1 t ,ito 011 1 i 11 og :_aHJiei II to fly i 1 I r*iA t! i 1111: Wifi� ;1AIII f :ii it P"11 iiix .i k i I lT/iii ff • C 'U:MP S Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix B Drawings Record Drawings Filings 8 and 9 Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix B Ali z Er I!J1I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 cs4 1 r L F'• r \/ di r r I — --1 1 :A L, r--- L ._ — 1 ; •4 , 0 ,,, r . P 4 -- • 7▪ ..›.----. ' ) _________--------- •---- , r _ 1! r L J J 46111.0 +may ti 17 4." l•Pelf rIM-1•—••••1101,..4,14.1 • Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix C Drawings Kingbird Drive —Design Drawings 6Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TYPICAL CROSS S kp it r ti z LP peed, Mrrae r rzor mr aero.. • INA 16x1& to, • Mat ad 'OW i 5049 1!019 A R x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix D Drawings Filing 6A Neighborhood Commercial 6 Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix D A , \ , \ I.... -- ---- ------ ....' \ , \ 1.,.., ''''...., \ ----4--- .:_, -- ------'' \ \ \ \ t 4- T . \ \ \ ------- \ -------,,, 9 '--- -!''' 1.! / \ ,,-- ,,i, ., ,I, .,.. 5 V.-.4 4..1 ,,,,..,,,. .., ---- -, ;L 0: V.,,, ,' \ ,.,-_,,,,: -,,,',,'. ' 'I ..t Fg,,, ,_,. .±,„.4 0, .,. %- N., ., , • / 1; , ', -% / 1 , , . '; ''./ f. .-. it ..7:.... . , , • • LS ,447 ,;?!. FPf riJej ▪ os, r C4t), -F' / 1 ..t:' : ..k. rfatf.-2.t% IJji c\? 9., A 1 Thiiilt;t!Et!M ..,-140.f: • f:414' .ces _ACILEP_ _IP11112_, 1.1X fl�Js Nat , NV, • .2C110..,P jQfl 1 Edell 9e Ltd/ 2 P1911 Zi _powes,R '1•111 : SO fi 1 W' C it t. .9 k MI E Q z fr z Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix E Roadway Classification and Design Preliminary Plan Exhibit D 6Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix E EXHIBIT D D. Engineering Information Drainage Water, Sewer and Road Report, Schmueser Gordon Meyer Drainage Calculations Water System Calculations (970) 945-1004 ENOINEER9 SURVEYORS SCNAAUESER • . - - .. 118 West 8th, Suite 200 FAX (970) 945-5948 coRooNMErER Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker, Owner's Representative Los Amigos Ranch Partnership 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 RE: Preliminary Plan Submission Los Amigos Ranch - Filings 6 to 10 Dear Greg: This letter is in support of a Preliminary Plan submission for Filings 6 to 10 of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Specifically, certain portions of Section 4:00 Preliminary Plan of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, as further outlined below, are addressed. This Preliminary Plan will consist of 168 single-family homes located immediately north and west of existing prior filings of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. included will be four Rural Residential lots in excess of 35 acres located generally in the southwest part of the project. 4:80 DRAINACQE PLAN Attached hereto please find Los Amigos Ranch Preliminary Plat Drainage Report. The methodology used is outlined in the attachment. The locations of drainage facilities are shown on the Drainage Master Plan Sheet LAD and the various roadway plan & profile sheets of the Preliminary Plan drawings. There are no existing water courses or lakes on this property. Tributary areas are localized in nature. Because of the large size of the lots, any increase in historic flow rates from these filings will be negligible. Downstream drainage facilities have already been sized as part of previous submittals to account for the drainage from these filings. No adverse impacts from the construction of these filings are anticipated from a drainage standpoint. 4:91 WATER SUPPLY PLAN All of the lots proposed as part of this Preliminary Plan submission will be serviced by the extension and improvements of the existing central water system. In the case of the Rural Residential lots, alternative service with either individual wells or central water system extension is proposed. January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 2 Existing Water System The existing system consists of two drilled wells, identified as Weil No, 5 and Well No. 6, a 320,000 gallon water tank, a control/chlorination building, numerous fire hydrants and a distribution system consisting of 10", 8" and 6" piping which serves all previous filings within Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Two pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations divide the system into two pressure zones. The locations of the existing water system components are on the Preliminary Plan Master Water Plan Sheet LAU-2. Well No. 5 is a 5" steel cased well approximately 170 feet deep. The well has a static water level of 80 feet and has been test pumped in the past to a total of 110 gpm with only a four foot draw down. Estimated potential well capacity is estimated in excess of 300 gpm. Well No. 6 is a 10" steel cased well with a total depth of approximately 260 feet. This well has been test pumped in the past at 400 gpm. Current combined well yield of these two wells is approximately 510 gpm with a total potential yield in excess of 600 gpm. The control/chlorination building contains the operating controls for the system. The required 30 -minute chlorine contact time is provided by 460 feet of 24" water main within the system. The total volume contained within the piping is 10,800 gallons which provides more than 30 minutes of detention at the peak day pumping rate at build -out of the project of 233 gpm. The water system is classified as a public water supply by the Colorado Department of Health. Both the quality and bacteriological content of the water has consistently met all parameters of the State of Colorado Primary Drinking Water System, Water Requirements Table 1 enclosed herein indicates the current water requirements for Los Amigos Ranch PUD and the water requirements for Filings 6 to 10. The water system will provide both in-house domestic use and outside lawn irrigation uses. Average and peak day demands are calculated for both irrigation and non -irrigation seasons. As noted in Table 1, the water system has been sized to include the service of the Residential Rural tots, should they require service. Proposed Water System Components The proposed water system components to accommodate Filings 6-10 are shown on the Preliminary Plan Master Water Plan Sheet LAU-2. New 10", 8" and 6" transmission and distribution lines will be installed along with fire hydrants and 1" or 1 f2" water services for each lot. A new 150,000 gallon steel water tank will be required in the western portion of the SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 3 project once development proceeds into Filing 9. The CYBERNET computer model was used to calculate pressures and determine required line sizes throughout the system. Fire flow demands, rather than peak hour demands, govern the design of the system. Lines were sized with the goal of providing a fire flow of at least 500 gpm at 20 psi. This was achieved in all areas. The fire hydrants were placed where they would benefit the most lots. The hydrant layout shown on LAU-2 has been done consistent with discussions with the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District. Due to the large line sizes used, pressure differences that would occur under static conditions and peak day demands are negligible. Assuming a mid -tank level, a maximum pressure of about 135 psi would be observed in the lowest portion of Filing 8. Some low pressure levels will occur on the Tots in the northeast portion of the project in the vicinity of the water tank. The Water Master Plan Sheet LAU-2 indicates lots which fall above the elevation 7090/40 psi line. The significance is that, depending on where the actual homesite is situated, individual lot owners may wish to install a pump and pressure tank to obtain higher, in-house pressures. One and one-half inch diameter water services are also recommended for these lots to minimize the headloss that would occur from the water main to the house. The attached report entitled, "Los Amigos Ranch Preliminary Plat, Filings 6-10, Water System Calculations" contains a computer model schematic and results of the fire flow analysis. Again, the maximum day pressures listed were virtually the same as the maximums observed under static conditions. Separate fire flow runs are provided for an analysis of the complete system with both tanks on line and "an east tank only" scenario which excludes Filing 9. The existing 320,000 gallon east tank was over -sized to accommodate potential future filings. Considering those areas east of Filing 9 and the water demands referenced in Table 1, the minimum required tank volume can be calculated as follows: EAST TANK Equalization 25% average total demand' 33,673 gallons Fire Flow 15002 gpm x 2 hours 180,000 gallons Emergency 1 average day (domestic) 58,240 gallons Minimum required volume 271,913 gallons 1 Domestic and irrigation 2 Auburn Ridge Apartments only; 500 gpm single family lots. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 4 Considering the incremental storage required to serve Filing 9, the minimum size of the western tank can be calculated as follows; WEST TANK Equalization 25% Average total demand' 8,255 gallons Fire Flow 5007 gprn x 2 hours 60,000 gallons Emergency 1 average day (domestic) 13,770 gallons Minimum required volume 82,025 gallons 1 Domestic and irrigation 2 Single family lots Rural Residential Lots For purposes of sizing the central water system, service to the four (4) Rural Residential lots was assumed to be part of the water system. Because of the size of these lots and their location relative to the remainder of the project and the water system, this plan proposes as an alternative the ability to drill an individual welt on each of these lots. With respect to the history of well development in this area, we have reviewed records available from the District Engineer's Office and have talked to local well drillers familiar with groundwater conditions. Wells have been variable with respect to well depth and well yield. Generally, the wells have been completed in bedrock formations or in the alluvial layers immediately above bedrock interfaces. Well yields are generally less than 10 gprn which would indicate intermediate storage between the well and the residence may be required depending upon total well yield. We anticipate the water would be classified as "hard", but that all Colorado Primary Drinking Water Standards will be met. Depending on the degree of hardness, water softening may or may no be elected by the homeowner. With respect to fire protection for these lots, it is proposed to provide a 2000 gallon cistern with draft pipe for use by firefighting apparatus. This cistern would be located near the residence and would be sited at the time that an architectural site plan is available for the residential building construction. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total use E. C 44,670 gpd C Ir) r I l 0 0 ti II335,420 gpd =233 gpm lrrigation Use' 3. 50,000 sf 0 2.523 A-f/A = 6,300 gpd` 204,000 sf 2 2.523 A-f/A = 26,040 gpd 32,340 gpd _ 504,000 sf 0 2.523 A-f/A = 63.410 gpd m Il 0) V©y qr-1. 11 an M !I 01 Q it •O 1! Aomestic (Non".irrigation Use) 48 units 2 200 gpd = 29.5 E❑Rs = 7,970 gpd I69Subdivision 2, sf units 0 270 gpd = 18,630 gpd Filings 1-5 SUBTOTAL 26,600 gpd 1 a in NN Ca v r(7 v W �rn _ N Average Day = 71,960 gpd F 50 gpm Peak Day = 143,920 gpd = 100 gpm N 4 G/ N i Q1 4-' v x W. sluawlJedy 'L uo!S!mpgns Q 0 as No 46 C _ LL d W O 4 UT SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, bNC. 150 -day application period. 3000 square feet per residential u 30 equivalent residential units. 50,000 sf total acreage.' 1502c19.ppslDWGliee 10,000 sf total acreage. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 5 4:92 SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL PLAN Existing Sanitary Disposal Facilities Previously approved filings within the Los Amigos Ranch PUD are serviced by either individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS) or a central wastewater treatment collection and treatment system operated by the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD). Those portions of the PUD serviced by SVSD are properties which generally lie within the Spring Valley aquifer drainage and can be serviced by gravity collection sewerlines. The approximate boundaries of the Spring Valley aquifer have been established during prior approvals. Lots With Central Sewage System This application does not request Preliminary Plan approved for any residential or commercial lots which are within the SVSD or the western boundary of the Spring Valley aquifer. Residential Lots With ISDS Referencing the geotechnic report prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak included in this application, there have been nine percolation tests conducted throughout the filing. The percolation test results range from 11 minutes per inch to 40 minutes per inch. These percolation rates are indicative of subsurface conditions which are acceptable for ISDS to be constructed. The percolation tests were run at locations and in site soils conditions that are representative of the overall conditions throughout the project. Additionally, there are ten (10) units within the existing Los Amigos Ranch PUD which have installed and are using ISDS for sewage service. To the best of our knowledge, adequate percolation and subsurface conditions were found at all these sites and standard ISDS utilization. Environmental and Health Impacts Analysis Garfield County Sewage Disposal Regulations which, in turn, are based on the "Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems", Colorado Department of Health, set forth the conditions and regulations under which the County and the State of Colorado have determined are appropriate to the construction of ISDS. These regulations are very comprehensive with respect to site characteristics which determine the type and size of the system which can be constructed. Those regulations recognize the ability of a soil matrix to provide the necessary treatment to septic tank effluent such that, once the effluent passes through the soil matrix, the treated effluent does not pose a public health hazard or risk. The regulations further address the potential for cumulative impact of ISDS systems by specifying the minimum lot sizes that should be utilized for 'ISDS systems. ISDS technology recognizes that there are certain instances where there are inherent restraints to the use of ISDS's. These restraints include high groundwater table, underlying bedrock formations, inadequate percolation rate, horizontal separation from wells and water courses, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 6 and excessive percolation rate. Whenever any of these restraints exist, the regulations require that they be identified and that the system installed when restraints occur, be designed under the direction of a registered professional engineer in the State of Colorado. A "standard" ISDS system, typically consists of a septic tank and leach field. In order to use a standard ISDS, the underlying soil matrix should demonstrate percolation rates within acceptable defined limits and there should be identified no restraints to the installation of the system. As stated above, all systems currently installed within the Los Amigos Ranch PUD are standard systems, with acceptable percolation rates existing and no restraints to construction identified. Based upon data now available, it is anticipated that for Filings 6-10, that the majority of 1505 systems that will be installed will be standard systems. In those cases, percolation tests and profile holes will be excavated at the location and depth of the proposed leach field at each individual building site in accordance with Garfield County regulations. The results of those tests will be analyzed and the system design based on percolation rate and size of residence. It is anticipated, that any restraints that may be encountered in the area encompassed by Filings 6-10, they will be associated with shallow bedrock formations. In the event that such conditions are identified at an individual residence location, it will be necessary to construct an engineered system. The regulations require there be a minimum of four feet of soil matrix between the bottom of the leach field and the bedrock restraint. In the event there is. insufficient soil matrix available, then the existing soil matrix will need to be augmented with imported materials such that the minimum four -foot depth exists. This type of construction is typically referred to as a "mound system" and is a construction technique that is standard to the industry and has been used in Garfield County where shallow restraints such as bedrock or groundwater have been encountered. The mound system is designed with the soil materials to be used for its construction as well as the size of the residence taken into account. The resulting installation, consistent with both Garfield County and State regulations, results in a system which provides for treated effluent being discharged through the bottom of the leach field. Although not anticipated, there is the possibility that under the applicable regulations the restraints on a particular building site will preclude the use of a standard or mound system using a percolation process. In these instances, it may be necessary to construct an evapotranspiration (FT) type of system. An ET system does not use percolation as a disposal means but, rather, uses evaporation and transpiration for disposal. These systems are typically lined with an iimpervious liner and size based on the size of the residence and background climatic conditions. Again, these systems are standard to the industry and their design and operation is well documented. It is our opinion that there is strong likelihood that a standard septic tank/leach field system can be utilized as the ISDS for these lots. The most likely restraints to the development of a standard system would be shallow bedrock conditions. In the event any restraint is identified, it is our further opinion that an engineered system, either a mound -type system or an SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 7 evapotranspiration (ET) system could be constructed on the lot and satisfy all applicable regulations. Consistent with standard practices of the Environmental Health Department of Garfield County, percolation tests and a profile hole will be required on each lot at the exact location of the !SDS at the time that a building permit is requested. At that time, a final design for the ISDS will be required. Filings 6-10 comprise a total land area of approximately 75 million square feet or 1725 acres. The filings stretch for approximately 13,000 lineal feet along a line roughly parallel with the Roaring Fork drainage basin located, on average, approximately 900 to 1000 feet in elevation below the site. The overall density of ISDS on the site is approximately one system per 10 acres. This density is over 10 times less than the allowable density of one -acre lots where an ISDS and central water system provide service, as in the case of the Los Amigos Ranch PUD, and over five times less than the allowable density of two acre Tots where individual lots are served with ISDS and an individual drilled well. Both the Garfield County regulations and the State Health Department regulations have been based upon accepted scientific standards of the industry which protect against any possibility of any environmental impacts affecting public safety. In conclusion, it is our opinion that ISDS can be constructed for all the proposed lots within Filings 6-10 of the Los Amigos Ranch PUD that meet applicable Garfield County and Colorado Department of Health standards of construction and design. If these systems are constructed and designed in accordance with these regulations, then there will be no adverse environmental or health impacts from the use of ISDS as proposed. Attached to this letter report is a "Management Plan Far Individual Sewage Disposal Systems", As stated in the Plan, the purpose is to provide for the regular operation and maintenance of ISDS. This Plan has previously been incorporated into the covenants of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. The Plan will be included in the covenants adopted as part of the Preliminary Plan. Also attached to this letter report is a letter from Hepworth-Pawlak dated January 19, 1998, which further summarizes the field investigations performed on this site. As stated in the letter, Hepworth-Pawlak reiterates their conclusion from their original study which indicates that this site is suitable for individual septic systems while recognizing that mounding or other engineered systems may be required where a shallow bedrock restraint might be encountered. ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE Roadways within this project have been sized in accordance with current requirements of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. Estimated service requirements are based on 10 vehicle trips per day {VPD) per individual lot. Typical road sections for the different roadway classifications are contained within the Preliminary Plan drawings. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 8 Roadway infrastructure as part of this filing will be as follows: ROAD Ffb. • 'OF.: ...-LOTS _ - Vehticle ,:.. Tr-.:Ips/Day.:.. . ':.(VPD) . ,7: Ga;rflei.d , .County•; : CltiesrficetiOnr Roadwe Y Capacity :; VPU ROW Width .(tt.) :Lane ._, .:—Width .:7(ft.) _...Minfmum ,Shoulder (ft.) LOS AMIGOS DRIVE Sta 22+00 to Sta 143+15.38 143 1430 Minor Collector 2500 60 12 4 Ste 143+15.38 to END 32 320 Secondary Access 600 60 11 4 WEST ROD Sta 0+00 to Sta 29+73.64 20 200 Secondary Access 600 60 11 4 Sta 29+73.64 to END 10 100 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD B 22 220 Secondary Access 600 60 11 4 ROAD C 12 120 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAO 0 9 90 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD E 10 100 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD F 4 40 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD G 4 40 Rural Access_ 200 50 11 2 ROAO H 3 30 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD I 4 40 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 ROAD J 4 40 Rural Access 200 50 11 2 The cul-de-sacs as shown will have an outside turning radius of 45 feet. K -turns will be 50 feet in length and will have turning radii of 50 feet. All roadway grades are less than 8% and are detailed in the Preliminary Plan drawings. Please note that several of the roadways could be designed at a semi -primitive roadway classification. The Owner has indicated that the Rural Access classification will be used for all those roadways. I trust that the above is adequate to support the Preliminary Plan Application for Filings 6-10 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 19, 1998 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 9 Los Amigos Ranch PUD. 1 will be available to provide further input and respond to any questions of any of the review agencies. 1 also plan to be in attendance at both the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and the Board of County Commissioners hearing to answer any additional questions. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. Dean W. Preside DWG:Iec11502C 19.pps Attachments SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, fNC. _._ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LOS AMIGOS RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS A. Purpose The purpose of this Management Pian is to provide for regular operations and maintenance of the individual sewage disposal systems, The Management Plan provides a mechanism for regular pumping of septic tanks and for funding the cost thereof. This Management Pian is not intended to provide for common ownership of sewage disposal facilities, nor to provide a mechanism for funding for, or the actual construction of, replacement of individual systems. B. Responsibility of Management Plan The Management Plan shall be the responsibility of the Los Amigos Ranch Homeowners Association. The Homeowners Association shall make arrangements with a septic tank pumping company for the pumping of septic tanks on a two-year, rotating basis. C. Funding The Los Amigos Ranch Homeowners Association will collect, as part of the Association dues, sufficient funds to pay for the bi-annual purnping of septic tanks, The amount of funds collected shall be adjusted as necessary to pay for the cost of the Management Pan. D. Individual Homeowners Responsibilities 1. Provide access to the septic tank for purposes of cleaning. 2. Pump septic tank more frequently, if required, based on actual use. 3. Initially install, and subsequently replace, failed leach field systems as required, all in accordance with applicable Garfield County Health Codes, 1 502C S 9.isds-MP/dwg.Iec SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 HEPWORTH—PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. January 19, 1998 Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 5020 Road 154 Glenwood springs, CO 82£01 Fax 970 945.8454 Phone 970 945-79$8 Job No. 196 617 Subject: Individual Septic Systems, Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., County Road 114, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. I3oecker: As requested be Dean Gordon, we are providing clarification of our recommendations regarding individual septic systems for the proposed Los Amigos Ranch F.U.D. We have received a copy of the first 4 pages of preliminary plat review letter by Wright Water Engineers to Garfield County dated January 9, 1998. We performed a preliminary geotechnical study for the project under Job No. 196 617, dated February 14, 1997. Individual Septic Systems: Percolation tests were conducted in January, 1997 to evaluate the feasibility of individual septic systems at the site. The percolation rates varied from 11 to 40 minutes per inch. The average of eleven percolation tests was about 24 minutes per inch. The tests were performed between 3 and 5V2 feet below the ground surface. All the tests were performed in the overburden soils above the basalt flow rock. Partial refusal to digging by the Case 780C rubber -tired backhoe was encountered shallower than 8 feet deep in 15 of21 pits. The average refusal depth was 4V2 feet. Whether the refusal was on intact basalt flow or on basalt boulders within the overlying basalt colluvium soils could not be determined in the relatively small backhoe pits. Based on our experience in the area and the site geology, we expect that the basalt flow is close to the refusal depths encountered in the pits. The development should be suitable for individual septic systems. Mounding or other engineered systems may be required in shallow basalt rock areas. The system designs should be based on site specific soils information. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, JIEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEA ►'' 1 AL, INC. Ae---y,--C....,-- : ti � a r 3 Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. : -s rr0. i 2444 / frr :4,, g A% .:,,‘;,4 fg/.7,a/ot Mill t5:10 ' cc: Schinueser Gordon Meyer - Attn. Dean Gordon DEH/ksm 1 1 1 1 (970) 945-1004 scHmuESEA FAX (970) 945-5948 GORDON MEYER Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS 118 West 6th. Suite 200 February 27, 1998 Mr. Mark Bean Garfield County Planning Department Regulatory Office and. Personnel 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 RE: Los Amigos Ranch Preliminary Plat Pilings 6 through 10, Drainage Dear Mark: This letter transmits additional drainage information as a follow-up to our Tuesday, February 24, 1998 meeting. Recapping, Wright Water Engineers recommended in their January 9, 1998 letter that an analysis of existing conditions be conducted to facilitate an analytical comparison for downstream impacts of the development. This was based on Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, Section 9:43 which states "Where new developments create runoff in excess of historic site levels, the use of detention ditches and ponds may be required to retain up to the 100 -year storm". These calculations were included in our re -submission and showed that the low density of the project resulted in minimal increases in flood flows. Nonetheless, there was still concern expressed at our meeting over the perception of downstream property owners. While Wright Water Engineers generally agreed that the effects of the increased runoff on downstream drainage structures would be minimal, they still thought that it would be in the County's best interest to have an analysis of the structure showing that the effects of the increases were, in fact, minimal. Another option would be to provide detention and release flood flows at less than historic levels. The revised copy of Sheet LAD, the Drainage Master Plan, shows how detention storage could be incorporated into the Los Amigos Preliminary Plan. The four major points of concentration for drainage Leaving the project are identified as Discharge Points 1 through 4. Tributary areas for each of these points have been identified and are shown by thick, dashed lines. Potential detention areas are shown by hatching. A thick dotted line indicates the portion of the basin tributary to the detention ponds. Detailed hydrologic and hydraulic calculations (using the methodology appropriate for larger basins), as welt as a site survey, will need to be performed for each detention pond location. A trial and error procedure will be utilized to determine the optimal outlet configuration and storage volume that results in a 100 -year flow rate that is less than historic at the four discharge points. This detailed level of analysis and design would be performed prior to the Final Plat submission. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 February 27, 1998 Mr. Mark Bean Page 2 in summary, the low density of the development results in minimal flood peak increases that can be easily mitigated by standard engineering practices if the County deems this necessary. Additionally, an analysis of downstream structures could be performed which would show that the effects of these minimal flood peak increases would be unnoticeable. As a last resort,improvements could be made to downstream drainage structures. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require additional clarification on any of the items discussed. Sincerely, SU -UMBER GORDON MEYER, INC. e,)4, David M. Katz, P.E. DMK:iec/1 502014.1 Enclosure cc: Michael Erion (via fax: 945-9210) SCIIMUESER GORTON MEYER, INC._ LOS AMIGOS RANCH PRELIMINARY PLAN, FILINGS 6-10 DRAINAGE REPORT FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMISSION JANUARY 1998 Prepared by: Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 118 West 6th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970/945-1004 cove r115O2C 19. D R N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DRAINAGE NARRATIVE The Drainage Plan for the Preliminary Plan, Filings 6-10 of Los Amigos Ranch Subdivision is rather simplistic. Due to the fact that the project is located near the ridge of a hill, off-site water sheds were a small influence to the overall drainage of the project. The slope of the land from south to north also allows the drainage to be carried by roadside ditches with minor cross culverts at intersections and low points. TR -55 and Rational Method are two means of determining peak flows within a small to medium size basin. The Rational Method was chosen for this analysis due to the fact that, in this area of Colorado, it generally predicts higher flood peaks than those produced by a TR - 55 analysis. The procedure for using the Rational Method is one that utilizes a runoff coefficient, the rainfall intensity corresponding to the time of concentration of the basin, and the overall basin area in acres to calculate the flood peak in cubic feet per second. The runoff coefficients are based on land use, soil type and slope. The Soil Conservation Service Soil Study for Garfield County (Figure 1) shows that soils found within these drainage basins are classified as soil group 6. The runoff coefficient for this project was calculated using a weighted formula for impervious and pervious areas as shown: Weighted C = [40.95 * A;mpervrOlh51 + (0.26 * ApOMOUIOtRi ll/A The overall drainage plan is shown on Drawing LAD of the Preliminary Plan drawings. Many different basins (Figure 2) were identified and used in hydrologic calculations. The areas for basins extending outside the property area were determined by planimetering boundaries on 1" = 2000' USGS quadrangle maps. A 1" = 500' scale AutoCADD map was used to calculate basin areas within the property. In the case of minor basins, areas under two acres, a minimum culvert size of 16" was used, Also, ditch flows were found using a percentage of total basin flows since only parts of the basins are intercepted by roadside ditches. The remainder of this report consists of tables showing the results from hydrologic calculations performed and drainage elements to be used. Followed by spreadsheet information used to calculate times of concentration for each basin. DMK:lec11 502c19.drn SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC SOIL SURVEY MAP FIGURE 1 1 1 1 1 r3r 1 950 000 FEET CATTLE CREEK QUADRANGLE UNITED STATES COLORADO—CARFIEW CO. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTEE 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) GEOLOGICAL SURVEY '06 IO7 5 '075*'"E 1 1 1 9 r 1 1 1 P icy —1-7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Los Amigos Job #1502 Basin Area # Lots Im•ervious Length width Road Total Pervious (Acres) Area (ft"2) (ft) (ft) Area (ft "2) Imp(Ac) Area(Ac) 1 29.74 3 15000.0 760.0 13 9880.0 0.57 29.17 , 2 15.04 4 20000.0 1750.0 15 26250.0 1.06 13.98 3A 12,02 5 25000.0 1500.0 15 22500.0 1.09 10.93 3B 36.47 14 70000.0 3450.0 16 55200.0 2.87 33.60 4 1.84 3 15000.0 1000.0 13 13000.0 0.71 1.13 192.0 16 3072.0 5A 18.19 3 15000.0_ 950.0 15 _ 14250.0 0.67 17.52 58 12.86 5 25000.0 2000.0 13 26000.0 _1.17 11.69 5C 58.64 9 45000.0 1850.0 13 24050.0 2.08 56.56 1360.0 16 21760.0 - - 6 131.66 18 90000.0 406.0 13 5278.0 3.37 128.28 962.0 16 15392.0 1551.0 13 20163.0 1242.0 13 16146.0 7 3.85 0 0.0 1006.0 16 16096.0 0.37 3.48 8 26.91 4 20000.0 1551.0 13 20163.0 1.21 25.70 793.0 16 12688.0 9 7.13 0 0,0 400.0 16 6400.0 0.15 6.99 10 186.18 7 35000.0 600.0 16 9600.0 1.36 184.81 1141.0 13 14833.0 11 14.45 3 15000.0 1141.0 13 14833.0 0.68 13.76 12 38.62 2 10000.0 789.0 16 12624.0 0.52 38.10 13A 23.41 2 10000.0 1000.0 16 16000.0 0.60 22.81 13B 10.19 1 5000.0 819.0 16 13104.0 0.42 9.77 14 400.96 6 30000.0 525.0 16 8400.0 1.21 399.75 1092.0 13 14196.0 15 64.53 10 50000.0 1092.0 13 14196.0 2.50 62.03 583.0 13 7579.0 2309.0 16 36944.0 16A 27.66 5 25000.0 1750.0 15 26250.0 1.18 26.48 16B 46.62 5 25000.0 1850.0 15 27750.0 1.21 45.41 17 24.47 7 35000.0 1134.0 13 14742.0 2.11 22.36 3240.0 13 42120,0 - 18 1.23 0 0.0 600.0 _ 15 9000.0 0.21 1.02 19 20.20 4 20000.0 1000.0 15 15000.0 0.80 19.40 5A+5B 31.05 8 40000.0 2950.0 40250.0 1.84 29.21 5A+5B+5C 89.69 17 85000.0 6160.0 86060.0 3.93 85.77 2+3A+3B 63.53 23 115000.0 6700.0 103950.0 5.03 58.50 1+6 161.40 21 105000.0 4921.0 66859.0 3.95 157.46 15+168 111.15 15 75000.0 5834,0 86469.0 3.71 107.44 10+11 200.63 10 50000.0 2882.0 39266.0 2.05 198.58 50.28 80.85 Los Amigos Job #1502 25 -Yr Flood Peaks Basin Tc Total 125yr (min) (inlhr) 21 236 2 20 3A 20 36 20 4 5A 23 56 20 5C 25 6 3 A (acre Area Imp. Area Per. 025 HI5lane' - (acres) (acres) (cfs) Q25 (cfs) 29.74 0.57 29.17 19.18 18.25 2.42 15 04 1.06 13.98 11.24 9.46 2.42 12.0 2 1.09 10.93 9.38 7.56 2.42 36.47 2.87 33.60 27.75 22.95 0.71 1.13 2.45 1.20 10.64 8.09 2.52 1.84 2.25 18.19 0.67 17.52 11.68 2.42 12.86 1.17 11.69 10.05 2.16 58.64 2.08 56.56 36.04 32.93 3.37 128.2 8 68.7 3 64.3 5 1.88 131.66 7 26 2.12 22 2.34 8 9 10 11 12 19 41 2.47 3.85 26.91 7.13 0.37 1.21 0.15 3.48 2.66 2.12 25.70 18.33 16.37 6.99 4.83 1.55 26 2.08 14.45 28 2 38.62 0.52 38.10 22.81 186.18 1.36 0.68 84.81 76.49 13.76 8.80 13A 25 2.16 23.41 0.60 4.58 75.03 7.81 20.80 20.08 14.04 136 20 2.42 10.19 0.42 9.77 7.11 14 50 400.9 400.96 1.21 399.75 146.06 144.91 15 34 1.74 64.53 2.50 62.03 32.19 29.19 1.18 26.48 17.13 15.39 13.15 6.41 16A 25 2.14 27.66 166 26 2.1 17 20 2.43 18 10 3.26 1.23 0.21 1.02 20 2.42 20.20 0.80 19.40 46.62 24.47 1.21 45.41 27.21 2.11 22.36 19.00 19 5A+56 25 5A+56+5C 30 2.16 1.92 31.05 89.69 1.84 1 51 14.05 25.45 15.46 1.04 12.71 29.21 20.18 3.93 85.77 49.98 2+3A+3B 26 2.08 63.53 1+6 31 15+166 10+11 11 1.88 34 1.74 41 1.55 200.63 2.05 198.58 161.40 111.1 5.03 58.50 41.57 3.95 157.46 84.01 3.71 17.44 4.77 34.36 78.89 07.44 54.73 84.79 * ASSUMES SAME BASIN DELINEATION AND TIME OF CONCENTRATION. Drainage Element Worksheet DRAINAGE ELEMENT BASIN DESCRIPTION 1 1 24" CMP 2 2 24" GMP 3 2.3,38,4 36" CMP 3A 3A 18" CMP 4 4 18"CMP 5 5A,56,5C 36" CMP 5A SA 18" CMP 5B 56 24"CMP 6 1,6 48""" CMP 7 7 18" CMP 8 8 30" CMP 9 9 18" CMP 10 10,11 48" CMP 11 11 24" CMP 12 12 30" CMP 13A 13A 24" CMP 138 136 24" CMP 14 14 54" CMP 15 15,166 42" CMP 16A 16A 24" CMP 166 166 30" CMP 17 17 30" CMP 18 18 18"CMP 19 19 24" CMP " AN culverts were calculated using inlet control with Hwld < 1.5 Pipe is assumed to be Helical Corrugated Metal Pipe, with metal end sections. Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 Executed: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT SUMMARY SHEET FOR Tc or Tt COMPUTATIONS (Solved for Time using TR -55 Methods) LOS AMIGOS Subarea descr. Tc or Tt Time (hrs) Basin 1 Tc 0.35 Basin 2 Tc 0.45 Basin 3 Tc 0.49 Basin 4 Tc 0.31 Basin 5 Tc 0.41 Basin 6 Te 0.52 Basin 7 Tc 0.43 Basin 8 Tc 0.36 Basin 9 Tc 0.31 Basin 10 Tc 0.69 Basin 11 Tc 0.44 Basin 12 Tc 0.47 Basin 13 Tc 0.41 Basin 14 Tc 0.83 Basin 15 Tc 0.57 Basin 16 Tc 0.44 Basin 17 Tc 0.34 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 Executed: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMI1.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 1 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description RANGE Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1330 0.8 .007 * (n*L) hrs 0.26 = 0.26 T = 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 900.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0550 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 3.7839 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T - L / (3600*V) hrs 0.07 - 0.07 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 8.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 16.94 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.472 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0450 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 V = 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 5.8085 ft 541 hrs 0.03 - 0.03 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.35 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 ^xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMI1.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 2 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24-hr'rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1330 0.8 .007 * (n*L) T 0.5 0.4 P2 * s hrs 0.26 = 0.26 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 900.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0440 0 5 Avg.V - Csf * (s) ft/s 3.3844 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID Cross Sectional Flow Area, a Wetted perimeter, Pw Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Channel slope, s Manning's roughness coeff., n hrs 0.07 = 0.07 ditch sq.ft 8.00 ft 16.94 ft 0.472 ft/ft 0.0300 0.0330 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V ft/s 4.7426 n Flow length, L ft 2065 T R L / (3600*V) hrs 0.12 0.12 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.45 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 ^xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 3 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0.8 .007 * (n*L) hrs 0.34 = 0.34 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Flow length, L ft 0.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 0.0000 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.00 = 0.00 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 8.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 16.94 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.472 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0540 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 V 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T e L / (3600*V) ft/s 6.3629 ft 3561 hrs 0.16 = 0.16 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.49 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 -xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: BaAin 4 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1170 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.27 hrs 0.27 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 500.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.1000 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 5.1022 hrs 0.03 = 0.03 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 4.50 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 12.71 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.354 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0387 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V : ft/s 4.4458 n Flow length, L ft 187 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.01 = 0.01 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.31 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1.240545119 'xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 L©SAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS To COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 5 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1000 0.8 .007 * (n*L) hrs 0.29 = 0.29 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 800.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0500 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 3.6078 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.06 = 0..06 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 8.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 19.94 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.401 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0870 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 v 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 6.8301 ft 1500 hrs 0.06 T 0.06 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.41 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 '"xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 6 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) 1 Segment ID Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n ft 0.1300 0 Flow length, L (total < or r 300) 0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0800 0.8 .007 * (n*L) hrs 0.32 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW 2 Segment ID Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1700.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0710 0.5 Avg.v = Csf * (s) where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 4.2992 0.32 hrs 0.11 = 0.11 CHANNEL FLOW Swale Segment ID Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 12.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 24.65 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.487 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0760 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 V = 2/3 1/2 1 49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 7.2629 ft 2500 hrs 0.10 = 0.10 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.52 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 ,mecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 7 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0500 T 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 hrs 0.38 0.38 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 150.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 4.1763 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.01 - 0.01 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 4.50 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 12.71 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.354 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0123 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L, / (3600*V) ft/s 2.5064 ft 350 hrs 0.04 = 0.04 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.43 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 -xecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 8 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1170 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.27 hrs 0.27 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1000.0 Watercourse slope, 5 ft/ft 0.0600 0 5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 3.9521 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.07 = 0.07 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 6.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 15.53 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.386 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V - ft/s 5.8448 n Flow length, L ft 300 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.01 = 0.01 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.36 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 Kecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 9 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1000 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.29 hrs 0.29 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID Surface (paved or unpaved)? Flow length, L ft 0.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 0.0000 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.00 = 0.00 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 2.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 1.92 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 1.042 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0500 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V - ft/s 9.7819 n Flow length, L ft 600 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.02 = 0.02 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.31 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 `h<ecuted: 11:43:58 11-13-1996 LOSAMII.TCT LOS AMIGOS Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 10 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0530 0,8 .007 * (n*L) = 0.37 hrs 0.37 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID Surface (paved or unpaved)? Flow length, L Watercourse slope, s 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 paved Csf = 20.3282 T - L / (3600*V) 2 Unpaved ft 2000.0 ft/ft 0.0500 ft/s 3.6078 hrs 0.15 - 0.15 CHANNEL FLOW Segment TD swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 14.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 20.43 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.685 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0450 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V = ft/s 7.0194 n Flow length, L ft 4200 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.17 = 0.17 TOTAL TIME (hrs ) 0.69 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 Th ecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 11 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 hrs 0.34 0.34 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1600.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0750 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 4.4186 hrs 0.10 0.10 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 0.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 0.00 Hydraulic radius, r - a/Pw ft 0.000 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0000 V = 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 0.0000 ft 0 hrs 0.00 -- 0.00 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.44 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT -xecuted; 11:55:18 Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 12 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0 8 .007 * (n*L) T = 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 hrs 0.34 0.34 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1450.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0550 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 3.7839 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.11 = 0.11 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 6.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 15.53 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.386 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0700 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 V = 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 5.9742 ft 500 hrs 0.02 = 0.02 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.47 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 -xecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 13 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Ianning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.34 hrs 0.34 T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1000.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0600 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 3.9521 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.07 = 0.07 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 0.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 0.00 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.000 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 1anning's roughness coeff., n 0.0000 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s v - __- ft/s 0.0000 n Flow length, L ft 0 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.00 = 0.00 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.41 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 "xecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 14 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0500 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.38 hrs 0.38 T 0.5 0.4 P2 * s SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 1350.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0520 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 3.6792 hrs 0.10 = 0.10 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID swale Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 24.Q0 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 33.09 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.725 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0240 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0350 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V = ft/s 5.3239 Flow length, L ft 6600 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.34 = 0.34 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.83 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 _xecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 15 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0500 0.8 .007 * (n*L) T - hrs 0.38 = 0.38 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID 2 Surface (paved or unpaved)? Unpaved Flow length, L ft 2500.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0680 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 4.2074 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.17 = 0.17 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID SWALE Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 8.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 12.94 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.618 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0400 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 V 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s n Flow length, L T = L / (3600*V) ft/s 6.5520 ft 500 hrs 0.02 = 0.02 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.57 Quick. TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:124054511.9 "xecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 16 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Mannings roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr 24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.0670 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.34 hrs 0.34 - T 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID Surface (paved or unpaved)? Flow length, L ft 0.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 0.0000 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.00 = 0.00 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sq.ft 8.00 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 16.94 Hydraulic radius, r - a/Pw ft 0.472 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0350 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V - ft/s 5.1226 n Flow length, L ft 1797 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.10 0.10 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.44 Quick TR -55 Ver.5.43 S/N:1240545119 ,xecuted: 11:55:18 11-13-1996 LOSAMI2.TCT Tc COMPUTATIONS FOR: Basin 17 SHEET FLOW (Applicable to Tc only) Segment ID 1 Surface description range Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.1300 Flow length, L (total < or = 300) ft 300.0 Two -yr -24 -hr rainfall, P2 in 1.300 Land slope, s ft/ft 0.1330 0.8 .007 * (n*L) 0.26 hrs 0.26 0.5 P2 * s 0.4 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW Segment ID Surface (paved or unpaved)? Flow length, L ft 0.0 Watercourse slope, s ft/ft 0.0000 0.5 Avg.V = Csf * (s) ft/s 0.0000 where: Unpaved Csf = 16.1345 Paved Csf = 20.3282 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.00 - 0.00 CHANNEL FLOW Segment ID ditch Cross Sectional Flow Area, a sg.ft 4.50 Wetted perimeter, Pw ft 12.71 Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw ft 0.354 Channel slope, s ft/ft 0.0420 Manning's roughness coeff., n 0.0330 2/3 1/2 1.49 * r * s V = ft/s 4.6314 n Flow length, L ft 1427 T = L / (3600*V) hrs 0.09 = 0.09 TOTAL TIME (hrs) 0.34 LOS AMIGOS RANCH PRELIMINARY PLAT, FILINGS 6-10 WATER SYSTEM CALCULATIONS JANUARY 1998 Prepared by: Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 118 West 6th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970/945-1004 covert 15020 7 9.cic 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MAXIMUM DIMENSIONS Number of pipes 500 Number of pump 125 Number junction nodes 500 Flow meters 125 Boundary nodes 50 Variable storage tanks 125 Pressure switches 125 Regulating Valves 125 Items for limited output 500 limit for non-consecutive numbering 5135 Cybernet version 2.18. SN: 1132182801-500 Extended Description: UNITS SPECIFIED FLOWRATE = gallons/minute HEAD (HGL) = feet PRESSURE = psig OUTPUT OPTION DATA OUTPUT SELECTION: ALL RESULTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TABULATED OUTPUT SYSTEM CONFIGURATION NUMBER OF PIPES . (p) = 61 NUMBER OF JUNCTION NODES (j) = 51 NUMBER OF PRIMARY LOOPS (1) - 7 NUMBER OF BOUNDARY NODES (f) - 4 NUMBER OF SUPPLY ZONES (z) = 1 ******************** *************** SIMULATION RESULTS ************************************* The results are obtained after 11 trials with an accuracy - 0.00008 The regulating valves required 1 adjustments. M U LAT I O N DESCRIPTION CyberNet Version 2.18. Copyright 1991,92 Haestad Methods Inc. Run Description: Basic Network Drawing: LA9-96 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 720 730 740 -50 50 770 780 790 800 810 820 830 840 -BN 540 560 560 570 560 580 580 590 580 600 600 610 600 620 620 630 620 640 640 650 650 640 650 660 660 0 12.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.01 5.84 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.01 -3.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 6.80 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.01 - 24.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.02 5.84 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.01 -45.41 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.06 4.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 - 61.97 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.10 - 51.76 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.07 21.89 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.06 -90.17 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.58 0.20 - 90.17 0.09. 0.00 0.01 0.58 0.20 J UNC T I O N NODE RESU JUNCTION JUNCTION EXTERNAL NUMBER TITLE DEMAND (gprn) 100-1 110-1 120-1 130-1 140-1 150-1 160-1 170-1 180-1 200-1 210-1 220-1 230-1 240-1 250-1 300-1 320-1 330-1 340-1 350-1 360-1 370-1 380-1 390-1 400-1 410-1 420-1 430-1 440-1 450-1 460-1 470-1 480-1 490-1 500-1 510-1 520-1 530-1 6.20 0.00 0.00 29.16 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20 0.00 6.20 6.20 0.00 6.20 6.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.56 16.52 20.40 7.76 6.80 9.72 0.00 4.88 2.92 4.88 4.88 4.88 8.76 13.60 9.72 6.80 3.88 16.52 11.68 5.84 L T S HYDRAULIC GRADE (ft) JUNCTION ELEVATION (ft) PRESSURE HEAD ( ft) JUNCTION PRESSURE (Psi) 7179.68 7179.89 7179.72 7009.73 7009.63 7009.86 7009.85 7009.39 7009.21 7009.69 7009.63 6785.84 7009.64 7009.63 7179.89 7179.89 6576.93 6785.65 6576.69 6576.58 6576.52 6576.58 6576.54 6576.54 7180.92 7180.83 7180.64 7180.63 7180.63 7180.63 7180.11 7180.04 7180.30 7180.40 7180.40 7180.75 7180.38 7180.75 6908.00 6929.00 6902.00 6892.00 6872.00 6864.00 6810.00 6805.00 6740.00 6804.00 6736.00 6535.00 6738.00 6686.00 6903.00 6902.00 6350.00 6380.00 6325.00 6280.00 6245.00 6260.00 6230.00 6225.00 7176.00 7175.00 7090.00 7080.00 7090.00 7040.00 7040.00 6940.00 6940.00 7005.00 6995.00 7125.00 7073.00 7100.00 271.68 250.89 277.72 117.73 137.63 145.86 199.85 204.39 269.21 205.69 273.63 250.84 271.64 323.63 276.89 277.89 226.93 405.65 251.69 296.58 331.52 316.58 346.54 351.54 4.92 5.83 90.64 100.63 90.63 140.63 140.11 240.04 240.30 175.40 185.40 55.75 107.38 80.75 117.73 108.72 120.34 51.02 59.64 63.21 86.60 88.57 116.66 89.13 118.58 108.70 117.71 140.24 119.99 120.42 98.34 175.78 109.06 128.52 143.66 137.18 150.17 152.33 2.13 2.53 39.28 43.61 39.27 60.94 60.72 104.02 104.13 76.01 80.34 24.16 46.53 34.99 PPELINERESULTS .. _.tTUS CODE: XX -CLOSED PIPE BN -BOUNDARY NODE PL] -PUMP LINE CV -CHECK VALVE RV -REGULATING VALVE TK -STORAGE TANK PIPE NODE NOS. FLOWRATE HEAD PUMP MINOR LINE HL/ NUMBER #1 #2 LOSS HEAD LOSS VELO. 1000 (gpm) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft/s) (ft/ft) 140 120 110 -97.74 0.11 0.00 0.06 0.62 0.23 150 -RV 120 130 97.74 0.26 0.00 0.01 0.62 0.23 160 140 130 -68.58 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.12 170 150 200 45.38 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.51 0.23 180 150 160 6.20 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.01 190 170 140 -41.31 0.23 0.00 0.01 0.47 0.19 200 180 170 -76.76 0.13 0.00 0.04 0.49 0.15 220 140 200 -20.58 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.05 230 200 230 18.60 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.04 240 -RV 100 150 57.78 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.66 0.35 250 -RV 180 220 76.76 0.15 0.00 0.01 0.49 0.15 260 210 230 -6.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.01 270 230 240 6.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.01 310-XXPU 0 250 320-XXPU 0 250 360 110 300 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 370 300 250 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80 140 170 41.65 0.23 0.00 0.01 0.47 0.19 10 -RV 330 320 76.76 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.49 0.15 420 220 330 76.76 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.49 0.15 440 320 340 76.76 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.87 0.60 450 340 350 33.74 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.13 460 350 360 20.40 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.05 470 350 370 -3.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 480 370 340 -27.46 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.09 490 370 380 16.52 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.03 500 380 390 4.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 510 390 380 -4.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 520 -BN 0 400 280.68 0.05 0.00 0.03 1.15 0.55 530 400 410 149.07 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.61 0.17 540 410 420 144.19 0.18 0.00 0.01 0.59 0.16 550 420 430 14.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.01 560 430 440 4.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 570 430 450 4.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 580 420 520 126.63 0.24 0.00 0.02 0.81 0.37 590 460 110 97.74 0.21 0.00 0.01 0.62 0.23 600 460 470 40.86 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.05 610 470 100 63.98 0.28 0.00 0.09 0.73 0.43 620 470 480 -36.73 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.15 630 480 490 -66.16 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.11 640 490 500 3.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 650 490 510 -76.84 0.35 0.00 0.01 0.49 0.15 560 460 520 -147.35 0.25 0.00 0.02 0.94 0.49 70 510 520 32.40 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.12 ..80 510 530 5.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 690 510 400 -131.61 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.54 0.13 700 480 540 19.71 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.01 710 540 550 3.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 540-1 550-1 560-1 570-1 580-1 590-1 600-1 610-1 620-1 630-1 640-1 650-1 660-1 2.92 7180.28 6905.00 275.28 119.29 3.88 7180.28 6900.00 280.28 121.46 10.68 7180.28 6890.00 290.28 125.79 5.84 7180.27 6970.00 210.27 91.12 13.60 7180.28 6890.00 290.28 125.79 6.80 7180.27 6965.00 215.27 93.29 15.56 7180.33 6900.00 280.33 121.48 5.84 7180.33 6975.00 205.33 88.98 11.68 7180.46 6940.00 240.46 104.20 4.88 7180.46 6965.00 215.46 93.37 11.68 7180.63 7010.00 170.63 73.94 16.52 7180.77 7050.00 130.77 56.67 0.00 7180.90 7105.00 75.90 32.89 REGULATING VALVE REPORT VALVE POSITION CONTROLLED VALVE TYPE NODE PIPE SETTING (ft or gpm) VALVE STATUS UPSTREAM GRADE (ft) DOWNSTREAM GRADE (ft) THROUGH FLOW (gpm) PRV-1 100 PRV-1 120 PRV-1 180 PRV-1 330 240 7010.00 150 7010.00 250 6786.00 410 6577.00 THROTTLED THROTTLED THROTTLED THROTTLED MMARY OF INFLOWS AND 7179.68 7179.72 7009.21 6785.65 7009.86 7009.73 6785.84 6576.93 OUTFLOWS INFLOWS INTO THE SYSTEM FROM BOUNDARY NODES OUTFLOWS FROM THE SYSTEM INTO BOUNDARY NODES NET SYSTEM NET SYSTEM NET SYSTEM PIPE NUMBER FLOWRATE (gpm) 520 840 INFLOW OUTFLOW DEMAND = 280.68 90.17 370.84 0.00 370.84 **** CYBERNET SIMULATION COMPLETED **** DATE: 11/25/1997 TIME: 9:29:47 57.78 97.74 76.76 76.76 Cybernet Version: 2.18 SN: 1132182801 25-11-1997 Description: TWO TANKS -- NOVEMBER 1997 r ging: LA9-96 a Flow Sumnmary. JOT Max. Day Max. Day Zone Needed Available @Residual Min. Zone @JCT No. Demand Pressure No. Fire Flow Fire Flow Pressure Pressure No. (gpm) (Psi) (gpm) (gPm) (Psi) (psi) Page 1 420 2.9 39.3 1 502.9 1500.0 31.8 22.6 510 430 4.9 43.6 1 504.9 1500.0 24.7 20.4 440 440 4.9 39.3 1 504.9 1221.6 20.0 23.0 510 450 4.9 60.9 1 504.9 1373.0 20.0 22.8 510 460 8.8 60.7 1 508.8 1500.0 44.0 22.0 510 470 13.6 104.0 1 513.6 1500.0 78.8 21.8 510 480 9.7 104.1 1 509.7 1500.0 86.0 21.1 510 490 6.8 76.0 1 506.8 1500.0 58.7 20.7 510 500 3.9 80.3 1 503.9 1500.0 38.1 20.7 510 510 16.5 24.2 1 516.5 1308.9 20.0 30.8 530 520 11.7 46.5 1 511.7 1500.0 34.9 22.2 510 530 5.8 35.0 1 505.8 1199.3 20.0 20.6 510 540 2.9 119.3 1 502.9 1500.0 91.1 21.6 510 550 3.9 121.5 1 503.9 1500.0 62.2 21.6 510 560 10.7 125.8 1 510.7 1500.0 94.2 21.8 510 570 5.8 91.1 1 505.8 1086.4 20.0 22.8 510 580 13.6 125.8 1 513.6 1500.0 87.8 22.4 510 90 6.8 93.3 1 506.8 1194.5 20.0 22.9 510 00 15.6 121.5 1 515.6 1500.0 84.6 22.8 510 X10 5.8 89.0 1 505.8 1199.9 20.0 23.2 510 620 11.7 104.2 1 511.7 1500.0 74.0 23.2 510 630 4.9 93.4 1 504.9 1500.0 27.6 23.2 510 640 11.7 73.9 1 511.7 1500.0 52.7 23.5 510 650 16.5 56.7 1 516.5 1500.0 43.3 23.7 510 670 0.0 134.5 1 500.0 1500.0 100.3 23.0 510 Cybernet Version: 2.18 SN: 1132182801 25-11-1997 Description: EAST TANK ONLY -- NOVEMBER 1997 r wing: LA9-96 . -e Flaw Summary. Page 1 JCT Max. Day Max. Day Zone Needed Available +@Residual Min. Zone @JCT No. Demand Pressure No. Fire Flow Fire Flow Pressure Pressure No. (gpm) (Psi) (glom) (glom) (psi) (psi) 420 2.9 39.2 1 502.9 1500.0 31.2 22.0 510 430 4.9 43.6 1 504.9 1500.0 24.2 19.8 440 440 4.9 39.2 1 504.9 1206.2 20.0 22.6 510 450 4.9 60.9 1 504.9 1363.8 20.0 22.3 510 460 8.8 60.6 1 508.8 1500.0 42.5 21.1 510 470 13.6 103.9 1 513.6 1500.0 76.0 20.7 510 480 9.7 103.9 1 509.7 1500.0 73.6 19.1 510 490 6.8 75.8 1 506.8 1500.0 49.7 18.9 510 500 3.9 80.2 1 503.9 1500.0 29.2 18.9 510 510 16.5 24.1 1 516.5 1158.2 20.0 30.8 530 520 11.7 46.5 1 511.7 1500.0 33.8 21.4 510 530 5.8 34.9 1 505.8 1164.5 20.0 20.0 510 540 2.9 119.0 1 502.9 1500.0 59.7 19.1 510 550 3.9 121.2 1 503.9 1500.0 30.8 19.1 510 560 10.7 125.5 1 510.7 1500.0 52.6 15.6 610 570 5.8 90.8 1 505.8 923.9 20.0 21.8 510 580 13.6 125.4 1 513.6 1187.2 46.8 10.0 610 90 6.8 92.9 1 506.8 874.2 20.0 22.0 510 00 15.6 121.1 1 515.6 975.0 42.5 10.0 610 610 5.8 88.6 1 505.8 752.9 20.0 22.4 510 670 0.0 134.1 1 500.0 975.0 47.4 10.0 610 9701. 945-1004 PAX (9701945-5948 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS SCHMUESER CORDON err E YER 118 Wes161h. Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker, Owner's Representative Los Amigos Ranch Partnership 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 RE: Application to Amend Preliminary Plan Submission Los Amigos Ranch PUD - Filings 6 thru 10 Dear Greg: This letter is in support of an Application to Amend the Preliminary Plan submission for Filings 6 to 10 of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Specifically, certain portions of Section 4:00 Preliminary Plan of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, as further outlined below, are addressed. This Amended Preliminary Plan will consist of 178 single-family homes and a neighborhood commercial parcel located immediately north and west of existing prior filings of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Included will be four Rural Residential lots in excess of 35 acres located generally in the southwest part of the project. 4:80 DRAINAGE PLAN Attached hereto please find Los Amigos PUD Ranch Preliminary Plat Drainage Report. The methodology used is outlined in the attachment. The locations of drainage facilities are shown on the Drainage Master Plan Sheet LAD and the various roadway plan & profile sheets of the Preliminary Plan drawings. There are no existing water courses or lakes on this property. Tributary areas are localized in nature. Drainage Master Plan Sheet LAD shows the locations of minor on-site drainage basins denoted by Basin 'XX". The locations of major drainage elements required to convey stormwater are denoted by a leader with the label "DE #XX". The Drainage Master Plan also shows information relating to the storrnwater detention concept developed in conjunction with Wright Water Engineers' review of the approved Filings 6 thru 10 Preliminary Plat. The pian shows the locations of the four major discharge points for Los Amigos Ranch PUD denoted by "DP #X". Subareas indicated by heavy dashed lines are labeled "DPX.X" Cross -hatched areas within each drainage basin indicate the locations of proposed detention ponds. These ponds will attenuate the post -development flood peaks for both the 25 -year and 100 -year floods to levels below those that would occur under June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 2 historic undeveloped conditions. An April 1998 report entitled "Los Amigos Ranch PUD Preliminary Plan, Filings 6 thru 10, Stormwater Detention Analysis" presented the lengthy hydrologic and detention routing calculations. Copies or this report are not included in this submission, but will be gladly furnished upon request. 4:91 WATER SUPPLY PLAN All of the lots proposed as part of this Amended Preliminary Plan submission will be serviced by the extension and improvements of the existing central water system. In the case of the Rural Residential lots, alternative service with either individual wells or central water system extension is proposed. EXISTING WATER SYSTEM The existing system consists of two drilled wells, identified as Well No. 5 and Well No. 6, a 320000 gallon water tank, a control/chlorination building, numerous fire hydrants and a distribution system consisting of 10", 8" and 6" piping which serves all previous filings within Los Amigos Ranch PUO. Two pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations divide the system into two pressure zones. The locations of the existing water system components are on the Preliminary Plan Master Water Plan Sheet LAU-2. Well No. 5 is a 5" steel cased well approximately 240 feet deep. The well has a static water level of 80 feet and has been test pumped in the past to a total of 110 gpm with only a four foot draw down. Estimated potential well capacity is estimated in excess of 300 gpm. Well No. 6 is a 10" steel cased well with a total depth of approximately 260 feet. This well has been test pumped in the past at 400 gprn. Current combined well yield of these two wells is approximately 510 gpm with a total potential yield in excess of 600 gpm. The control/chlorination building contains the operating controls for the system. The required 30 -minute chlorine contact time is provided by 460 feet of 24" water main within the system. The total volume contained within the piping is 10,800 gallons which provides more than 30 minutes of detention at the peak day pumping rate at build -out of the project of 251 gpm. The water system is classified as a public water supply by the Colorado Department of Health. Both the quality and bacteriological content of the water has consistently met all parameters of the State of Colorado Primary Drinking Water System. WATER REQUIREMENTS Table 1 enclosed herein indicates the current water requirements for Los Amigos Ranch PUD and the water requirements for Filings 6 to 10. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. - June 22, 1999 Mr, Greg Boecker Page 3 The water system will provide both in-house domestic use and outside lawn irrigation uses. Average and peak day demands are calculated for both irrigation and non -irrigation seasons. As noted in Table 1, the water system has been sized to include the service of the Residential Rural lots, should they require service. PROPOSED WATER TER SYSTEM COMPONENTS The proposed water system components to accommodate Filings 6-10 are shown on the Preliminary Plan Master Water Plan Sheet LAU-2. New 10", 8" and 6" transmission and distribution lines will be installed along with fire hydrants and 1" or 1 Y2" water services for each lot. A new steel water tank will be required in the western portion of the project once development proceeds into Filing 9. The CYBERNET computer model was used to calculate pressures and determine required tine sizes throughout the system. Fire flow demands, rather than peak hour demands, govern the design of the system. Lines were sized with the goal of providing a fire flow of at least 500 gpm at 20 psi. This was achieved in all areas. The fire hydrants were placed where they would benefit the most lots. The hydrant layout shown on LAU-2 has been done consistent with discussions with the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District, Due to the large line sizes used, pressure differences that would occur under static conditions and peak day demands are negligible. Assuming a mid -tank level, a maximum pressure of about 135 psi would be observed in the lowest portion of Filing 8. Some low pressure levels will occur on the lots in the northeast portion of the project in the vicinity of the water tank. The Water Master Plan Sheet LAU-2 indicates Tots which fall above the elevation 7090140 psi line. The significance is that, depending on where the actual homesite is situated, individual lot owners may wish to install a pump and pressure tank to obtain higher, in-house pressures. One and one-half inch diameter water services are also recommended for these lots to minimize the headloss that would occur from the water main to the house. The attached report entitled, "Los Amigos Ranch PUD Preliminary Plat, Filings 6-10, Water System Calculations" contains a computer model schematic and results of the fire flow analysis. Again, the maximum day pressures listed were virtually the same as the maximums observed under static conditions. Separate fire flow runs are provided for an analysis of the complete system with both tanks on line and "an east tank only" scenario which excludes Filing 9. The existing 320,000 gallon east tank was over -sized to accommodate potential future filings. Considering those areas east of Filing 9 (which has 60 lots) and the water demands referenced in Table 1, the minimum required tank volume can be calculated as follows: SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 4 Equalization Fire Flow Emergency EAST TANK 25% average total demand 15002 gpm x 2 hours 35,449 gallons 180,000 gallons 1 average day (domestic) Minimum required volume 63,860 gallons 279,309 gallons 1 Domestic and irrigation 2 Auburn Ridge Apartments only; 500 gpm single family lots. Considering the incremental storage required to serve Filing 9 (60 lots), the minimum size of the western tank can be calculated as follows: WEST TANK Equalization Fire Flow 25% Average total dernandl 5002 gpm x 2 hours Emergency 1 average day (domestic' 9,712 gallons 60,000 gallons 16,200 gallons Minimum required volume 1 Dornestic and irrigation 2 Single family lots RURAL RESIDENTIAL LOTS For purposes of sizing the central water system, service to the four (4) Rural Residential lots was assumed to be part of the water system. Because of the size of these lots and their location relative to the remainder of the project and the water system, this plan proposes as an alternative the ability to drill an individual well on each of these lets. With respect to the history of well development in this area, we have reviewed records available from the District Engineer's Office and have talked to local well drillers familiar with groundwater conditions. Wells have been variable with respect to well depth and well yield. Generally, the wells have been completed in bedrock formations or in the alluvial layers immediately above bedrock interfaces. Well yields are generally less than 10 gpm which would indicate intermediate storage between the well and the residence may be required depending upon total well yield. We anticipate the water would be classified as SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 5 "hard", but that all Colorado Primary Drinking Water Standards will be met. Depending on the degree of hardness, water softening may or may not be elected by the homeowner. With respect to fire protection for these lots, it is proposed to provide a 2000 gallon cistern. with draft pipe for use by firefighting apparatus. This cistern would be located near the residence and would be sited at the time that an architectural site plan is available for the residential building construction. 4:92 SANITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL PLAN EXISTING SANITARY DISPOSAL FACILITIES Previously approved filings within the Los Amigos Ranch PIJD are serviced by either individual sewage disposal systems (lSDSl or a central wastewater treatment collection and treatment system operated by the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD). Those portions of the PUD serviced by SVSD are properties which generally lie within the Spring Valley aquifer drainage and can be serviced by gravity collection sewerlines. The approximate boundaries of the Spring Valley aquifer have been established during prior approvals. CENTRAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM Residential Lots With Central Wastewater Treatment and Collection System Central wastewater treatment and collection services are provided by the Spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD). The existing system consists of a gravity sewer collection system that serves both Los Amigos Ranch PUD and Colorado Mountain College (CMC), and an aerated lagoon wastewater treatment facility utilizing exfiitration basins as a disposal method for effluent. Within the Los Amigos Ranch PUD, the central sewer system presently services Auburn Ridge Apartments and 49 single-family lots. Proposed Sewer Collection Facilities - Filings 6 thru 10 The wastewater collection system will be extended throughout Filings 6 thru 10 to provide collection of wastewater to an additional 174 single-family lots. Because of the variations in the topography over the extent of the project, the vast majority of these lots will be serviced by a low pressure sewer collection system. This system varies significantly from the traditional gravity sewer collection system typically seen in municipal wastewater collection systems. As opposed to having large diameter sewer gravity pipes discharging to central lift stations, a low pressure sewer collection system utilizes pumping units on individual lots which feed a common small diameter pressure sewer force main. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. June 22, 1999 Mr, Greg Boecker Page 6 A number of low pressure collection system alternatives have been investigated by the Owner. The equipment and design methodology as employed a -one sewer systems of Niskayuna, New York, have been used as a reference specification for the system. Attached hereto is a preliminary design for the system directly from e -one and dated May 10, 1999. Sheet LAU-3 of the plans is a plan layout of the entire system. The force mains vary in size from 1 Y2" to 4". The system discharges to the existing gravity collection system of the SVSD. This system is consistent with the recommendations by the County Engineer on the previous submittal for Filings 6 thru 10 and upon which the condition of approval was written requiring a low pressure sewer collection system. It is anticipated that this system will be owned and operated by either the Homeowners Association or SVSD from the point at which the connection is made to the gravity system of the SVSD. Sheet LAU-7 shows a typical pumping system that will be installed by each individual homeowner at the time individual residences are constructed. The homeowner will be required to construct a pumping system that is consistent with the design parameters for the e -one low pressure sewer system, sized in accordance with the wastewater collection requirements of each individual residence. Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities - Spring Valley Sanitation District Centra'i treatment will continue to be provided by SVSD. The existing treatment facility is not sufficient in capacity to handle the treatment requirements of Filings 6 thru 10. SVSD is currently involved in the process of expanding the wastewater treatment facilities. An Amended Service Pian has been completed by the District and submitted to the County for review. That Amended Service Plan has been approved by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. It will serve as a basis for expansion of wastewater treatment facilities, of which Los Amigos Ranch PUD is a portion. The next step in the evaluation process is the submission of a Site Application through Garfield County to the Colorado Department of Public & Environment CDPHE). Currently, CDPHE is undertaking a 208 Regional Water Quality Management Plan for District 11, which encompasses the Roaring Fork River Drainage Basin. This plan has been completed in draft form and will be presented before the Water Quality Control Commission in August, 1999, for final approval. SVSD is anticipating that, within a week after final approval of the 208 Regional Water Quality Management Plan, the Site Application will be completed and submitted to Garfield County for consideration prior to review by the CDPHE. Completion of construction of wastewater treatment facility expansion will be dependent on the length of approvals by the various review agencies. The potential dates for completion range from the end of the construction season of year 2000 to completion by mid -year 2001. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 7 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL. SYSTEMS {ISDS) Residential Lots With ISDS ISDS installations are being proposed for the four (4) Rural Residential lots shown on the Amended Preliminary Plat. Referencing the geotechnic report prepared by Hepworth-Pawlak included in this application, there have been nine percolation tests conducted throughout the filing. The percolation test results range from 11 minutes per inch to 40 minutes per inch. These percolation rates are indicative of subsurface conditions which are acceptable for ISDS to be constructed. The percolation tests were run at locations and in site soils conditions that are representative of the overall conditions throughout the project. Additionally, there are ten 10) units within the existing Los Amigos Ranch PUD which have been installed and are using ISDS far sewage service. To the best of our knowledge, adequate percolation and subsurface conditions were found at all these sites for standard ISDS utilization. Environmental and Health Impacts Analysis Garfield County Sewage Disposal Regulations which, in turn, are based on the "Guidelines on Individual Sewage Disposal Systems", Colorado Department of Health, set forth the conditions and regulations under which the County and the State of Colorado have determined are appropriate to the construction of ISDS. These regulations are very comprehensive with respect to site characteristics which determine the type and size of the system which can be constructed. Those regulations recognize the ability of a soil matrix to provide the necessary treatment to septic tank effluent such that, once the effluent passes through the soil matrix, the treated effluent does not pose a public health hazard or risk. The regulations further address the potential for cumulative impact of ISDS systems by specifying the minimum lot sizes that should be utilized for ISDS systems. ISDS technology recognizes that there are certain instances where there are inherent restraints to the use of ISDS's. These restraints include high groundwater table, underlying bedrock formations, inadequate percolation rate, horizontal separation from wells and water courses, and excessive percolation rate. Whenever any of these restraints exist, the regulations require that they be identified and that the system installed when restraints occur, be designed under the direction of a registered professional engineer in the State of Colorado. A "standard" ISDS system, typically consists of a septic tank and leach field. In order to use a standard ISDS, the underlying soil matrix should demonstrate percolation rates within acceptable defined limits and there should be identified no restraints to the installation of the system. As stated above, all systems currently installed within the Los Amigos Ranch PUD are standard systems, with acceptable percolation rates existing and no restraints to construction identified. Based upon data now available, it is anticipated that for the four Rural SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 8 Residential lots, a standard system will be installed. In each case, percolation tests and profile holes will be excavated at the location and depth of the proposed leach field at each individual building site in accordance with Garfield County regulations. The results of those tests will be analyzed and the system design based on percolation rate and size of residence. Attached to this letter report is a "Management Plan For Individual Sewage Disposal Systems". As stated in the Plan, the purpose is to provide for the regular operation and maintenance of ISDS. This Plan has previously been incorporated into the covenants of Los Amigos Ranch PUD. The Plan will be included in the covenants adopted as part of the Preliminary Plan.. Also attached to this letter report is a letter from Hepworth-Pawlak dated January 19, 1998, which further summarizes the field investigations performed on this site. As stated in the letter, Hepworth-Pawlak reiterates their conclusion from their original study which indicates that this site is suitable for individual septic systems while recognizing that mounding or other engineered systems may be required where a shallow bedrock restraint might be encountered. ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE Roadways within this project have been sized in accordance with current requirements of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. Estimated service requirements are based on 10 vehicle trips per day (VPD) per individual lot. Typical road sections for the different roadway classifications are contained within the Preliminary Plan drawings. Roadway infrastructure as part of this filing will be as follows (next page): SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 9 LOS AMIGOS DRIVE Sta 22+00 to Sta 143+15.38 Sta 143+15.3$ to ENO 150 29 1500 Minor Collector 290 Secondary Access WEST ROAD 2500 600 60 60 12 4 4 11 Sta 0+00 to Sta 23+08.25 Sta 23+OB.25 to END ROAD B 26 11 16 260 Secondary Access 110 Rural Access 160 Secondary Access 600 60 11 4 200 50 11 1 2 600 60 11 4 ROAD C 12 120 Rural. Access 200 ROAD D 9 90 50 11 Rural Access 200 ROAD E 11 110 Rural Access ROAD F 6 60 Rural Access 200 200 50 11 50 50 11 11 2 2 2 ROAD G 5 50 Rural Access 200 ROAD H ROAD 1 ROAD J 5 50 4 40 5 50 Rural Access 200 Rural Access 200 Rural Access 200 50 50 11 11 50 11 50 2 2 2 11 2 The cul-de-sacs as shown will have an outside turning radius of 45 feet. All roadway grades are less than 8% and are detailed in the Preliminary Plan drawings. Please note that several of the roadways could be designed at a semi -primitive roadway classification. The Owner has indicated that the Rural Access classification will be used for ail those roadways. I trust that the above is adequate to support the Preliminary Plan Application for Filings 6-10 Los Amigos Ranch PUD. 1 will be available to provide further input and respond to any questions of any of the review agencies, i also plan to be in attendance at both the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and the Board of County Commissioners hearing to answer any additional questions. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC June 22, 1999 Mr. Greg Boecker Page 10 Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. Dean W. President n, P.E. DW G:lec11502C 19.ppr Attachments SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC CI Z Z ▪ co ❑ [n a CD >- I— aLU (1)h o a 3 m cc E. A P N .psn 1,4 01, !V C7 VY O O I!' N m) i. 09 Y3 V1 N a 0) O 100,782 gpd = O1 6 N 03 sf units 8 27 co E. r rn 0, c U N C ? E oc cn u. 0 N 178 sf units 8 270 gpd = 48,060 gpd 20 EOR 8 270 gpd = 5400 gpd Average Day e? a Filings 6 thru 10 Single-family fC 0 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC 150 -day application period. 3000 square feet per residential u 50,000 sf total acreage. 20 equivalent residential units. 1502c19 ppr1DWG11 10,000 sf total acreage. SEWER SYSTEMS_ Environment One Corporation Pressure Sewer Preliminary Cost and Design Analysis For Los Amigos Ranch Colorado Prepared For: Schmueser Gordon Meyer 118 West 6th, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Tel: 970 945-1004 'ax: 970 945-5948 'repared By: Bruce Richardson May 10, 1999 fn ••••• r. ors as a <75 r4 ("..1 4- 0\ 00 rn 4 00 00 2 .3 8. tri0 G CD - 0 CD CD CD 9 5.9999 irs .41 6 0 0 0 t•-• r4 4 on 8 8 8 0 0 rei 6 sr, NN 8 0 0 ✓ h 00 „ CS 'g CD 0 8 8 o wi CD C7 CD CD CD rn 41 un '.0 'r 0%.4. Chcioa; PRELIMINARY PRESSURE S N 00 0 CD tri un \SO 0 od sr; 00 taw.. 0014 4 10 0 ,r4 Cr. 00 0010D 00 4- oo rsi r - co 0 0 rst r-- tr00s tri 00 0 00 sr.I4l If 0 0 0 0 0 0, Cs G 0 06 rq rn CD CD CD 41 4D 0 CD If; fq Cf. st:D N 00 O 0 CD CD CD 47 Cs O 0 4D CD CD CD eri 6 6 en tr; ✓ 00 00 r- 01 el Ch 0' th .0 .46 .6 rJOK 4 0 Ch 0•0' 0. .4- ▪ 00 cis * NO Isrs • 1.91 M 00 N 0 0 ..0 ..-; N (4 0' r -i 0, 08 8 8. ▪ rer's 4 r4 «,r '0 est esi 0 6 .1- so 00 '0* 8 0 (-: rn 00 e"; J r-tisrs ▪ r •-• 6 it -4 f--4 on. 0% Tj TT. r4 O 0) un 4) . . rn 8 00 9. 4-4"; ss -s 0'. •-• 00 4 tri sr.3 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD sr; 6 es; ori es.; eq Un Ul 4 4 CD CI 0000 O CD CP CD CD 0 tr; 0 rD 0 6 00 N 0' 0' 0'00000000 vn rg5 LAD ro' op CD CD 000 6 .r; Cfs rn Ch CM C. VD VD 47 CD ts.1 CM 0 0 srn est 0 16 ais 8 oes 8 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 toi 8 0 0 0 8 8 gp CD CD CD CD gp 0 0 0 CI CD CD CD CD 0 t.s 00 0 (DI 0 tri ifi trl 0 In srs irs 6 6 ' (I 4 00 0.3 00 (4Q t--- co 0 or ass 0 0 or.or \di' vo-irst rs: N.' ts- P: rl.D.Cs \ Cs LID o O o 8 8 t8 r", 0 ‚0V'.'0 r, eT e4 s -s en rn Tr 41 rn 04; 6 04 fh rsl 0) 52 r4 00 (4 (4 4 001r4 r".. 000'. 0'4 0'. r4 00 Cr. 0*00 %Cs rh 4 '.0 '.0,44-4 tin 00 ol 0' rn e4 DO 41 On '0 en , 00 00 od 0' 45 vi 414,4 '0 1.1 f-4 s -ss tin 8 0% (4 (1 044-4. r4 on 4 on NO, 0 (4 trr 0 s.os en 4 00 00 1-- 4 en sr. rsir-. 00. %0 s.s3 sfs ten on un rn CD unr. on 47 . est CD CA 0 0 11-4 a. ea 44.4 ssn 00 rn 8 8 .8 8 81818 8 0'(-; %0 6 rsi cc; gri vi 0% r, Tr rq CM Tr Tr Tr Tt Tr Lt. Tr r4 ; CM CD Cr. 00 Tr CD Tr 0 4 os4 CD CN 00 esi r4 rn cs 00 4-1 CC szt s -s c-.4 rss 8 L CD CD 10 CD '(40 '(4 CD s -s cos CD 0 0 CP CD CD . . . . 00 fq Cl Tr 00 c4 rn 9. 1,1 9. (4 00 Cf. 00 fq 41 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 8 8 8 8 Q oss 0 00) ! csi 00 sinre., *0 s••• 4h. un rst „.4 8 rsi /-4 9. 0) u^s 0. 8 CD CD CD CD Q. CD CD 0 CD 0 CD 0DID CD CD essi 0. r4 tr; essi rri CA 0. ("4 0'. sr -1 e4 (4 as (-40'. 0 el es CD Cs 0 0 9. 0 err ca C4 8 est CT I 6 I 8 9. CP00I 44-4 e-4 rr. 41.1 6 i 1 8 ) L 44 5' t -A 4 Crs CD r.4 ri 0 C17, 1.1 el 141 0) P. I 0044-4. 0 ton 8 9. 9. q 8 4 0 t6 ; C7' 9 ; 0 0 0 6 6 11-4 '(4 0 44, 11-4 en 0 ,f1 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 0 0 CD o 6 6 6 6 6 ;Len un Un un '(4 4(4 rn rl rn en rn 0 as 000 6 0 6 U1 Un 41-4 rn on rn 0% '0 00 8 et 0 0 00 44-4 0 6 0 c=r•0 6 6 - 4 ers Q 10. 9 0 9 6 Cs .0 0 0 0 ff1 CO. 0 6 en .0 ss -s; •-• 9. 8 8 8 00)0 irsun 4(4 0000 .os CD 0 0 6 6 6 6 sr, irs srs el en rn en (‚4 44-4 ('4'.O' r4 el e4 r4 -4 •;-;; ('4 0' 8 41-4 0 41-5 9. O en 1 1 01 son Cs 46 CD CD CD CD CD CD 0 , . . 00 YD r, 00 CD P. p. 8 8 E 4 .sti 0 0 oci en 4 CD CD CD 0) 0 CD CD 0 CD CD Cs (4 OA (-1(4 ost CD 04 CD 9 CM • CD. (4(4 en so 0 est Co 00 Cs to) 9.00 (_4 N 0 C; 44, 44, o0 00 CD ; CD CR un rq (NI fq fq ers r-- 1 81 el 1 TED RETFNT[ON TIME (HR) ..i Ii t+1 Tt 1.4 a ten N r r_.iN 0 0 R o0 1n 00 00 00 .1 0 '41 r N N 41 0 N (-i N c 0 Tr .-, S ni 00 00. 00 00 0 0 C5 Vi 00 rn i 1 r n N 0 N M Q♦ O J M 0.0 00 T 8 itu 0 N 41 00 CA OS O* 0 — r -- e4 M C' (� N R OS r 0000 m P00 010 Ca 0 41 am 0\ .w T .r OIn CO ..41 0 1-0„, 0 00 N '41 a0i1 M ' n M e p N kn N N. 00 N 0 oa o� n 00 'I'i 00 (• 'i r V9 p01.g1 0 En 'O, 41 1D uIt 'S 00 OS O 0000088 0 0 00- , 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 N YS R co NO -'M 00 r No '/1 '.n 4'1 0 O. r- N N G+ '- 'S? 10 41 M 00 M SC 41 N N N N ,..i -.a --e" N .-. M .-a 00 90 00 R 00 00 00 rn Ca oo'. Q d d' O0 00 an 0 r b . N. c Ari 1 0 -r 8 0 0 0 0 0 M O+ 0 Rt.; 0 W ( 1 0 0 0 SG 00 Ann 0 4i 0 0 r 0 0 -r R aA 0 0 0 00 O Era 0 0 No'1 SC? N "r 00 ktn 0 Tt 00 0 N Tr N ni a/1 QS in t-- 000 0 00 00 00 M 0 '1 0 888 d CT d Ned' OCS on o o 0 0 0to'na0 c-4 Tr N 00 Os 0 d 0 8 00 0 019 0 (1 d` 0 af'1 r-' 0 M O vi N 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0' CT 41 0 0 O 4N1 0 4y 0 0 4r1 art '041 'Gr1 C 1 — r_ Qo00 00 4a of N M M 00 • CA 4-; • 1-.pper fr r C n aA sr -" N t'1 N N -" 00 a 0 o o+ 00 0 a r4 0• gid - R 0 t'1 w ‘0. an 0 VS •'r 0 ' R -1 N 00 N N 0 N R 0▪ 0 O 4'1 0 in t+1 O af1 M 0 vO ..e hcm '41 L� P. 0 ChA 11 .� et an '11 0 0 0 N Tt 00 00 r- -r un 010 00 rw 0 OC N N d' CT aft r N o 0 en © N ',0 p 00. No 6 - C- N N r4 0 et N +n -.4 0 00 an 00 an 0 0 0 O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 00 a/1 es; '+Ci .-' CT Nen N '0 N n R N M rry +IM d' O d' R c-- •Y ov 00 00 0 00 N ..1 00 00 0 N 00 0 '1 .-' 0 0 0 1 o0 Ti 0 0 8 00 >n N 4- 0 0 N 0 11.1 Wel N 0 0 0 0 Ci 0 0 t'• 00 CT 0 iN 'W- t 5 PL c1 LOS AMIGOS RANCH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS A. Purpose The purpose of this Management Plan is to provide for regular operations and maintenance of the individual sewage disposal systems. The Management Plan provides a mechanism for regular pumping of septic tanks and for funding the cost thereof. This Management Plan is not intended to provide for common ownership of sewage disposal facilities, nor to provide a mechanism for funding for, or the actual construction of, replacement of individual systems. $, Responsibility of Management Plan The Management Plan shall be the responsibility of the Los Amigos Ranch Homeowners Association. The Homeowners Association shall make arrangements with a septic tank pumping company for the pumping of septic tanks on a two-year, rotating basis. C. Funding The Los Amigos Ranch Homeowners Association will collect, as part of the Association dues, sufficient funds to pay for the bi-annual pumping of septic tanks. The amount of funds collected shall be adjusted as necessary to pay for the cost of the Management Pan. D. Individual Homeowners Responsibilities 1. Provide access to the septic tank for purposes of cleaning. 2. Pump septic tank more frequently, if required, based on actual use. 3. Initially install, and subsequently replace, failed leach field systems as required, all in accordance with applicable Garfield County Health Codes. 502isds.MPfdwfl.Yec SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. HEI'WORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. January 19. 1998 Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 5020 nnad 154 Glenwood Sprsn¢s, CCD 81801 Fax 970 945-8454 3'hmne 970 945.7988 Job No. 196 617 Subject: Individual Septic Systems. Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D.. County Road 114. Garfield County. Colorado Dear Mr. Boecker: As requested be Dean Gordon. we are providing clarification of our recommendations regarding individual septic systems for the proposed Los Amigos Ranch P.0 D. We have received a copy of the first 4 pages of preliminary plat review letter by Wright Water Engineers to Garfield County dated January 9, 1998. We performed a preliminary geotechnical study for the project under Job No. 196 617. dated February 14. 1997. Individual Septic Systems: Percolation tests were conducted in January. 1997 to evaluate the feasibility of individual septic systems at the site. The percolation rates varied from 11 to 40 minutes per inch. The average of eleven percolation tests was about 24 minutes per inch. The tests were performed between 3 and 5' IA feet below the ground surface. All the tests were performed in the overburden soils above the basalt flow rock. Partial refusal to digging by the Case 780C rubber -tired backhoe was encountered shallower than 8 feet deep in 15 of 21 pits. The average refusal depth was 4'/a feet. Whether the refusal was on intact basalt flow or on basalt boulders within the overlying basalt colluvium soils could not be determined in the relatively small backhoe pits. Based on our experience in the area and the site geology. we expect that the basalt flow is close to the refusal depths encountered in the pits. The development should be suitable for individual septic systems. Mounding or other engineered systems may be required in shallow basalt rock areas. The system designs should be based on site specific soils information. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely. HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GE,047 INC. V ` 1F� E. H POs 43 Daniel E. Hardin. P.E. — • , j r • + f �+ P. i`' fsONA°a'$ cc: Schmueser Gordon Meyer - Attn: Dean Gordon DEH/ksm Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 6 Final Plat rIg nrci if ig .,,_;I t Appendix F Geologic Hazards Preliminary Plan Exhibit E Appendix F EXHIBIT E Geologic Evaluations. El. Preliminary Geologic Hazard Investigations, Lincoln De Vore Testing Lab, Inc. E2. Preliminary Geotechnical Study, Hepworth-Paulak Geotechnical, Inc. E.3 Geologic Hazards Evaluation CTL -Thompson, Inc. E.4 Radiation Survey, CTL -Thompson, Inc. Lincoln DeVore 1000 Wost Fillmore St. Colorado Springs. Colorado 60907 13031632-3593 Home Office Exhibit El Los Amigos Ranch P.O. Box 1506 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 0160:2 ATTN: Malcom Wall February 5, 1982 Re: File No. GS -740 Preliminary Geologic Hazards Investigation for Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Wall: Personnel of Lincoln--DeVore completed a preliminary geologic hazard site inspection on the above referenced property on September 5, 1978, in order to identify and define geologic and soils constraints which may effect the development. A set of three maps were prepared in connection with this report. The set of three maps were based on a regional study done by Lincoln-DeVore for Garfield County in 1975 under the provisions of Colorado House Dill 1041. The House Bill 1041 mapping was amended and added to, to prepare the set of reaps for this site, but the set of three maps which accompany this study must still be considered as preliminary in nature. The three maps are: Plate I - Preliminary Geologic Map: Plate II - Preliminary Soils Hazards Zone Map and; Plate III - Preliminary Slope Hazard, Floodway and Stability Map. The scope of this present work consisted of 1) the tracing of the Preliminary Geologic map to a new topographic base map, and 2) the re -issuance of the original letter (dated September 14, 1978) describing the geology and hazards of the site. No addi- tional site reconnaissance was conducted. Geologically the site could be described as an upland mesa, formed by basalt flows (Tb) (see Plate I) which were extruded during the down cutting of the Roaring Fork Valley. These flows covered the Maroon Formation (PPm) (see Plate I), a thick sequence of red interbedded sandstones, siltstones, and shales which can be seen outcropping along the southwestern edge of the site. The basalt flows also partially covered the Eagle Valley Evaporite (Peer) in the southern portion of the site. The Eagle Valley Evaporite locally consists of white to grey gypsum with widely spaced fine grained sandstones and dark grey shales. erode, Sprinot, Cnlorotto Pubo, C_olarodo Grcnd Junction, Colorad Glenwood Sprintr, Colornd3 FvonsWyoming Los Amigos Ranch February 5, 1962 Page -2- The following discussion of the engineering considerations of these three formations is general in nature. The Eagle Valley Evaporite (Pev) has undergone several types of deformation which has resulted in a typical chaotic internal structure. The contortion and deformation of the incompetent materials of this formation dictates that wherever it is exposed it must be considered as potentially unstable. Other hazards associated with this formation include potential solution, hydro - compaction and the presence of corrosive minerals. The maroon Formation (PPm) is highly fractured and, therefore, easily eroded which provides an excellent source of material for rockfall and debris flow, when exposed on steep slopes. These hazards are only present along the steep valley sides on the west and southwest boundary of the site. Soils derived from the Maroon formation may be susceptible to potential subsidence and hydrocompaction. The basalt flows (Tb), which underlie the majority of the site, are dark grey, highly fractured, vesicular basalts attaining several hunderd feet in thickness. The major hazard associated with the basalt is rockfall which is present on the steeper slo- pes below the cliff -like palisades along the Roaring Fork Valley in the west and southwest edges of the site, and along the outcrops near the eastern boundary. Another large rockfall area is present in the south central portion of the site just north of the Colorado Mountain College access road. Another slope stability problem in the presence of a moderate sized landslide (Qls) was noted at the base of the palisade bet- ween the two major drainage gullies just north of where they intersect. This slide appears fairly old and moderately stable but, without specific analysis, should be considered potentially unstable. The palisades which occur throughout the proposed development area should be considered as potentially unstable and a minimum set- back from the edges for buildings should be established prior to construction. The basalt bedrock appears to outcrop or be present at a shallow depth throughout the majority of the site and wherever it is encountered close to the surface will affect both construction. and excavation and may require blasting for removal. The shallow bedrock is highly fractured and permeable, which will affect the potential for individual septic systems and may necessitate the use of a central septic system. Amigos Ranch February 5, 1982 Page -3- Surficial deposits mapped as colluvium (Qc) have potential hazards which are dependent on the formations from which they are derived and their modes of deposition. Colluvium, derived from the Maroon formation, is mainly gravity transported and will be susceptible to potential subsidence due to hydrocompacti.on only, whereas colluvium derived from the Eagle Valley Evaporite will be susceptible to solution, hydrocompaction and the presence of corrosive minerals. Alluvial deposits mapped as terraces (Qt1_2) consist mainly of well rounded sands and gravels and have no inherent hazards except where they overlie incompetent members of. the Eagle Valley Evaporite, which could cause them to be potentially unstable. Sands and gravels also make up the deposit which surrounds the Roaring Fork River labeled (QAL) . The alluvial deposit mapped as (QAL) in the eastern part of the site, however, consists mainly . of sand, silt and clay deposited by stream action. Expansive clays and/or consolidating silts may be encountered in this eastern alluvial area. Another geologic feature mapped as an alluvial fan (Of) was noted just south of the site but will not affect the proposed developement. Two major gullies and several minor ones were inspected to deter- mine their potential for flooding and debris flows. The evidence indicates that significant stream flow in most of the gullies will exist only during and after torrential rains. The upper part of the drainage basins are fairly flat, cultivated, and cross the highly fractured and permeable basalt flows which tends to reduce runoff to a level far below that which would normally be expected; however, the potential for flooding within the gullies does exist and has been mapped as floodways (fw) (see Plate III). The lower partof the drainages become fairly steep and contain considerable quantities of debris. Close inspection of these gullies revealed no recent debris flow activity, and actually very little potential for debris flows. In all the areas of the proposed development which are located on the uplands, the flood hazard to those areas is almost nonexistent. There is a potential for hazards to exist for any roads and darns placed in the area of the gullies; these must be designed for the relevant peak flows and channel configurations. Site specific studies are recommended in areas of proposed construction which contain geologic hazards, at which time speci- fic mitigation procedures can be outlined. The following legend summarizes the geologic units included on the Preliminary Geologic map. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amigos Ranch February 5, 1982 Pane -4-- Qal Qc ALLUVIUM (Quaternary) Stream deposited material. Sand and gravel along Roaring Fork River; sand, silt, and clay in eastern portion of site. COLLUVIUM (Quaternary) Gravity transported hillside deposits, including coalescing debris fans. (Q'f) Qls LANDSLIDE (Quaternary) Qt1,2 TERRACE GRAVELS (Quaternary, subscripts indicate relative age, 1 is younger) Old stream deposits lying above present day water levels. Tb BASALT FLOWS (Tertiary) Dark grey, olivine basalt, hard, vesicular, columnar jointing in places, commonly fractured, weathered surfaces, brownish. PPrn MAROON FORMATION (Permian - Pennsylvanian) Reddish, arkosic sandstone with siltstone, claystone, and some conglomerate and limestone, current depositional structures common. Pev EAGLE VALLEY EVAPORITE (Pennsylvanian) Gypsum and dark grey shale, and mixtures of silt and salt; chaotic internal structure, yellowish -grey weathered surfaces, susceptible to erosion and solution. This description of the geologic characteristics of the site is still applicable. If there are any questions please contact Lincoln-DeVore at any time. Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORU TESTING LAB., INC. By: John W. fim}nelreic'h,\Jr. Professional Geolog; ibti lit/ By: Mi hael T. Weaver professoinal Geologist JWH/11m A e :it fJAY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1=1 .s,•• -)1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HEPWORTH^PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Exhibit E2 Fax 970 945-8454 Phone 970 945-7988 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOS AMIGOS RANCH P.U.D., COUNTY ROAD 114 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 196 617 FEBRUARY 14, 1997 PREPARED FOR: GREG BOECKER 2929 COUNTY ROAD 114 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Co 81601 February 14, 1997 Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Fax 970 945.8454 Phone 970 945-7988 Job No. 196 617 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Study, Proposed Residential Development, Los Amigos Ranch F.U.D., County Road 1 14, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr Boecker: As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical study for the proposed development. It should be possible to develop the project as proposed without encountering severe constraint or hazards associated with the geology. Building sites are not recommended in the landslide area or near the faults shown on Fig. 1. Dense hard basalt is expected at relatively shallow depths and difficult excavation conditions should be expected. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits excavated in the genera! proposed development area consist of 1 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying nil to 7 feet of clay and silt. About V2 to 3 feet of basalt colluviurn overlying basalt rock was encountered in most of the borings below the clay and silt. The basalt soils were not encountered in Pits 1, 7, 8, 9, 18 and 21 to the maximum depth explored, 9 feet, Groundwater was not encountered in the pits and the soils are slightly moist to moist. Spread footings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 psfto 3,000 psf appear suitable at the building sites. The footings may need to be designed for minimum dead load if expansive clays are encountered. The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us. Sincerely, HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 1 1 1 1 Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. Rev. By: SLP DEHIkw 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 GEOLOGIC SETTING 2 FORMATION ROCK 3 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS 4 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURES 4 FIELD EXPLORATION 5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5 GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT 6 FLOODING 6 LANDSLIDE AREA 6 CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY 7 GYPSUM DEFORMATION AND FAULTS 7 EARTHQUAKES 7 EXACTION DIFFICULTIES 8 PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 8 FOUNDATIONS 8 FLOOR SLABS 9 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 9 SITE GRADING 9 SURFACE DRAINAGE 10 PAVEMENT SUB GRAD E 10 PERCOLATION TESTING 11 LIMITATIONS 11 REFERENCES 13 FIGURE 1 - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURES 2 - 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 4 - LEGEND & NOTES FIGURES 5- 11- SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURES 12- 16 - GRADATION ANALYSES TEST RESULTS TABLE 1 - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE II - PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS a PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the proposed Los Amigos Ranch development to be located east of County Road 114, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to identify the geologic and subsurface conditions and evaluate their impact on the project. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Greg Boecker, dated December 9, 1996. A field exploration program consisting of a reconnaissance and exploratory pits was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsurface conditions. Samples obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine compressibility or swell and other engineering characteristics of the on-site soils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed development. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development will consist of 158 lots with an average size of 31/2 acres as shown on Fig. 1. The development will consist of single family homes. Private driveways will access the building sites. We assume the residences will be typical of the area and be 2 stories, possibly with crawispace, shallow basements and slabs -on -grade. The development will be serviced by a central water and individual septic disposal systems. If development plans change significantly from those described, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ 2 _ SITE CONDITIONS The Los Amigos Ranch PUD is located on the northeast side of the Roaring Fork River valley about miles 5 miles south of Glenwood Springs. The general topography in the area is shown on Fig.]. This study covers 158 single family lots and a 151.9 acre rural residential tract in the western part of the PUD. The Subdivision 2 area in the eastern part of the PUD has already been platted and several residences have been constructed in that area. The proposed home sites and rural residential area covered by this study are located on a rolling upland which lies about 800 feet above the Roaring Fork River valley floor. Slopes on the single family lots usually do not exceed about 10% but steeper slopes are locally present on some lots and in the rural residential tract. The steeper slopes are located along the rim of the upland and along a west trending valley which crosses through the rural residential tract where slopes between 30% and 100% are locally present. Major drainages do not cross through the property The property is drained by several small ephemeral streams with relatively small basins. Vegetation is primarily sagebrush and junipers. GEOLOGIC SETTING The Los Amigos Ranch PUD is located on a roiling plateau to the northeast of the Roaring Fork River valley. The plateau lies about 800 feet above the valley floor and underlain by :Miocene -age basalt flows. The area is on the southwestern edge of the White River Uplift which was formed during the Laramide Orogeny about 40 to 70 million years ago (Tweto and Others, 1978). Local geologic structures are the Cattle Creek Anticline, Glenwood Springs Syncline, and short, small displacement normal faults (Kirkham and Others, 1995). The faults in the area are not considered capable of producing large earthquakes (Kirkham and Rodgers, 1981). Rock formations below the basalt in the area H -P GEOTEcr� 3 are the Maroon Formation, Eagle Valley Formation and Eagle Valley Evaporite. Surficial deposits are predominantly colluvium and a small landslide. FORMATION ROCK Basalt: The basalt below the plateau is made up of multiple flow sheets which are sometimes interbedded with tuffaceous, fluvial siltstone and sandstone, lacustrine claystone, volcanic ash and volcanic breccia. Below the plateau the basalt flow could be as thick as 160 to 200 feet. The basalt is a very hard, dense rock which is usually cut by a complex joint system. Most of the test pits excavated for this study encountered refusal in basalt at depth of less than 6 feet. The basalt in the area is about 22.4 million years old (Kirkham and Others, 1995). Maroon Formation; The Pennsylvanian and Permian -age Maroon Formation is present below the basalt in the western part of the study area. The Maroon is a maroon and grayish -red sandstone, conglomerate, and mudstone. The beds are usually cemented and hard with some non-cemented beds. The rock is usually cut by joints which gives the rock a blocky structure. Eagle Valley Formation and Eagle Valley Evaporate: These two rock units are present below the Maroon Formation in the western part of the study area and may directly underlie the basalt in the eastern part of the study area. Both rock units were deposited in a large evaporite basin during the Pennsylvanian age about 300 million years ago. The Eagle Valley Formation is a transitional unit between the coarse clastic rocks of the Maroon Formation and the mostly evaporitic rocks of the Eagle Valley Evaporite. The Eagle Valley Formation consists of gray and reddish -brown siltstone, shale, sandstone, and carbonate rocks with some local lenses of gypsum, The Eagle Valley Evaporite consists of gray and brown, gypsum, anhydrite, halite and minor potash salts interbedded with fine- grained sandstone, siltstone and claystone, thin beds of carbonate rock and conglomerate. H -P GEOTECH _q The bedding structure in the Eagle Valley Evaporite in most places has been highly deformed because of plastic flow of the gypsum and anhydrite SURFICIAL DEPOSITS Colluvium: In most areas the basalt and underlying sedimentary rocks are covered by colluvium. The test pits indicated that in the proposed building areas the colluvium is shallow and probably does not exceed 10 feet deep. The colluvium in these areas consists of sandy silt and clay with basalt fragments and basalt fragments in a silty sand matrix. Landslide: A small landslide was previously identified by Lincoln DeVore (1978) on the steep hillside in the eastern part of the rural residential tract, see Fig. 1. The landslide appears to be in colluvium. Evidence of recent movement was not apparent, but the area should be considered potentially unstable. GEOLOGIC STRUCTURES Folds: Regional geologic mapping shows that the north trending axis of the Cattle Creek Anticline generally parallels the axis of the Roaring Fork River valley to the south of Glenwood Springs (Kirkham and Others, 1995). The anticline is bordered on the east by the Glenwood Springs Syncline and the axis of the syncline trends through the study area. These two structures are believed to be the result ofevaporite-flow intrusion from the Eagle Valley Evaporite as a result of crustal unloading associated with stream erosion along the river. Some of the deformation appears to have tilted the early Pleistocene river terraces in the area. Faults: Linear escarpments are present in the southwestern part of the study area, see Fig. I , The escarpments appear to be faults which displace the basalt flows. This would H P GEOTECH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 indicate that fault movements are younger than about 22.4 million years. The west trending valley in the rural residential tract appears to be a graben between the two faults. The faults could be associated with evaporite-flow deformation and the formation of the Cattle Creek Anticline and the Glenwood Springs Syncline. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on January 6 and 7, 1997. Twenty-one exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The pits were dug with a Case 780C rubber -tired backhoe. The pits were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with relatively undisturbed and disturbed sampling methods. Depths at which the samples were taken are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Pits, Figs. 2 and 3. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. Percolation testing was performed in shallow pits excavated adjacent to about half of the deeper exploratory pits described above. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figs. 2 and 3. The subsoils consist of about 1 to 3 feet of topsoil overlying nil to 7 feet of sandy silt and clay with basalt fragments. In most of the pits, about '/z to 3 feet of silty sand and gravel with basalt fragments (basalt colluvium) and basalt rock was encountered underlying the silt and clay. The basalt colluvium was not encountered in Pits I, 7,8, 9, 18 and 21. Some of the clay and silt soils were cemented. Digging in the basalt colluvium and basalt rock was difficult due to the material size and hardness and refusal to the backhoe was encountered in the deposit. H -P GEOTECH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _6 Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained from the pits included natural moisture content, density, Atterberg limits and gradation analyses. Results of consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figs. 5 to 11, indicate low to moderate compressibility under conditions of loading and wetting. Minor expansion or collapse potential (settlement under constant load) when the samples were wetted was indicated in most of the tested samples. Results of gradation analyses performed on disturbed bulk samples (minus 5 -inch fraction) of the more granular soils are shown on Figs. 12 to 16. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table I. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavation and the subsoils were slightly moist to moist. GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT It should be possible to develop the project as proposed without encountering severe constraints or hazards associated with the geology. There are, however, some geologic conditions which should be considered in project planning as described below. FLOODING Ephemeral stream channels are present in some of the proposed single family lots and in the rural residential tract. Because of the lot sizes it should be possible to avoid potential flood areas with the building sites. It is recommenced that a hydrologist evaluate the flood potential along the ephemeral drainages. LANDSLIDE AREA The landslide area in the eastern part of the rural residential tract may extend onto parts of three single family home sites which lie to the north, see Fig, 1. It is recommended that building sites not be considered on the landslide. If buildings are planned near the H -P GEOTECH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 landslide, its boundaries should be reviewed in the held to determine appropriate setbacks for buildings. CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY We do not expect potential problems with construction related slope instability in the proposed development areas if the landslide is avoided and construction is not considered on slopes steeper than about 30%. Recommendations for site grading are presented in the Site Grading section of this report. GYPSUM DEFORMATION AND FAULTS The folds and faults in the area may be associated with evaporite-flow deformation in the Eagle Valley Evaporite. It is uncertain if this deformation is still an active geologic process or if deformation has stopped. To our knowledge there has been no problems with gypsum deformation in western Colorado except in areas where the Eagle Valley Evaporite is near the surface and sinkholes have developed. Sinkholes are not considered to be a potential hazard because of the thick basalt and sedimentary rock cover. If broad regional gypsum deformation is still occurring, it is likely that the deformation is at a very slow rate and should not be a potential hazard. Differential fault creep could be localized along the faults. Because of this it is recommended that building sites not be locate in the vicinity of the faults. EARTHQUAKES The project area could experience moderately strong earthquake related ground shaking. Modified Mercalli Intensity VI ground shaking should be expected during a reasonable service life for the development, but the probability for stronger ground shaking is ]ow. Intensity VI ground shaking is felt by most people and causes general alarm, but results in negligible damage to structures of good design and construction. The faults in the study area, in our opinion, do not increase the seismic potential. All occupied H -P GEOTECH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -8 structures in the development should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to collapse under stronger ground shaking. The region is in the Unifof-n Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone 1. Ba sed on our current understanding of the earthquake hazard in this part of Colorado, we see no reason to increase the commonly accepted seismic risk zone for the area. EXACTION DIFFICULTIES Dense, hard basalt is expected to be present at most proposed building sites and along road and utility alignments. Practical backhoe refusal was encountered in most of the exploratory pits at depths of less than 6 feet. Excavations in the basalt in most areas will require ripping and blasting may be needed, PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits, and our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for planning and preliminary design but site specific studies should be conducted for individual lot development. FOUNDATI ONS Bearing conditions will vary depending on the specific location of the building on the property. Based on the nature of the proposed construction spread footings bearing on the natural subsoils should be suitable at the building sites. We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of 1,500 psf to 3,000 psf. Expansive clays encountered in building areas may need to be removed or the footings designed to impose a minimum dead load pressure on the order of 600 to 1,000 psf to limit potential heave. Nested boulders and loose matrix soils may need treatment such as enlarging footings or placing compacted fill or concrete backfill. Foundation walls should be H -P GEOTECH 9 designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls should be protected frons wetting and hydrostatic loading by use of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection. FLOOR SLABS Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils. There could be some post construction slab movement at sites with collapsible matrix or expansive clays. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking, A minimum 4 -inch thick layer of free -draining gravel should underlie basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. UIVDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered in the exploratory pits, it has been our experience in the area that local perched groundwater may develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff An underdrain system should be provided to protect below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawl space and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe surrounded above the invert level with free -draining. granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum I% to a suitable gravity outlet. SITE GRADING The risk of construction induced slope instability at the site appears low provided the buildings are located in the less steep parts of the property as planned and cut and fill depths are limited. Cut depths for the building pads and driveway access should not H -P GEOTECH - 10 - exceed about 10 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep, especially where they encroach steep downhill sloping areas. Structural fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil, The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. The on-site soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embankment fills, Permanent unretained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock riprap or other means, This office should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction. SURFACE DRAINAGE The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runoff from steep uphill slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond which could impact slope stability and foundations. To limit infiltration into the bearing soils next to buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive slope away from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be restricted, PAVEMENT SUBGRADE The predominant subgrade material encountered along the road alignment is slightly sandy to sandy, medium plastic clay. Based on laboratory testing and our experience, we estimate the clay subgrade has a Hveem Stabilometer "R" value of about 10 which is considered a poor subgrade for support of pavement materials. Basalt rock and highly calcareous soils will also be encountered which are considered fair subgrade conditions for pavement support. Based on our findings, the subgrade throughout the project area can be assumed to have a design 'R' value of 10. The subgrade support of predominant rock areas encountered should be evaluated on an individual basis. The soils H -P GEOrECH can be frost susceptible which could increase the risk of post construction movement. The topsoil and any wet subgrade in drainage areas are unstable for pavement support. In general, the topsoil should be removed. In any soft and wet areas, subgrade improvement be partial stripping and placement of a geotextile and reinforcement mat (such as Tensar SS -1 geogrid) and additional sub -base aggregate could be used. The geotextile and reinforcement mat should be placed according to the manufacturer's specifications. The entire subgrade and any sub -base stabilized areas should be proof rolled with a heavily Loaded wheel vehicle and soft deflecting areas stabilized before placing the pavement base materials. PERCOLATION TESTING Percolation tests were conducted on January 7, 8 and 9 to evaluate the feasibility of infiltration septic disposal systems at the site. The results of the percolation tests are shown on Table IL Shallow Percolation holes were dug adjacent to about half of the deeper exploratory pits at locations as shown on Fig. 1 The test holes (nominal 12 inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow backhoe pits and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the percolation holes are similar to those exposed in the adjacent exploratory pits shown on Figs 2 and 3. The percolation test rates varied from 11 to 40 minutes per inch with an overall average rate of 24 minutes per inch. Conventional infiltration septic disposal systems appear feasible for the development. Mounding or other engineered systems may be required in shallow basalt rock areas, LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no other warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this H -P GEOTECH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 12 - report are based upon the data obtained from the field reconnaissance, review of published geologic reports, the exploratory pits located as shown on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning and preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations. Significant design changes rnay require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein, We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the soil engineer. Respectfully Submitted; A% AK GEOTECHNICAL, rNC. Daniel E. Hardin, P.E. and -AZ( 974,-04 Ralph GMock, Engineering Geologist Reviewed By. Steven L. Pawlak, P. DEH/kw cc; Schmueser Gord H -P GEOTECH - 13 - REFERENCES Kirkham, R.M. and Others, 1995, Geologic Map of the Glenwood Springs Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File 95-3. Kirkham, R.M. and Rogers, W.P., 1981, Earthquake Potential in Colorado - A Preliminary Evaluation: Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 43. Lincoln-DeVore, 1978, Preliminary Geologic Hazard Investigation for the Los Amigos Ranch PUD, Garfield County, Colorado: Prepared for Sundesigns, Glenwood Springs, Colorado (File No. GS -740, September 14, 1978). Tweto, and Others, 1978, Geology Map of the Leadville ID X 2° Quadrangle, Northwestern Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Map I-999. Fi-PGEOTECH X 4.4 11: r, ._.,. '... ... itv,.., ,../........._:_—______.. .:, ex..' , .__,4 • , , ..•—?. ,,,,,. , . ,..,.,‘ \,•.1,yr.,,,, ,•, d,.. ...„ ,, ... ..1 .i ,§-,,, •._.., .7.,, f „ •r "i(,:j .1.) \ • , rt, , b . \ 14,17-:- V re r 1 ! 11 11, t '..-----..77t-,••• i!. . ‘tki i' - \\tb 41 1} A . ,,\ • )3 r • • . ,Atili... . i .' . -e.A.. 1 1 ' - k( 1 11 1 9, b, ••• ..... ,, , ,.p , d . • • , ' i S. '-" / :6IT4:Ii/. 1 \i . !. • ,,-: vI• 1 ; , tn • l• I '2‘ Lai 47% -di \UV •t` -•' s .,...ISt'. X ',I` '• ` . II“,••,:f , ,,,...; cN....t.; , '-'1•N - `, • w.A, 41., 4:"Vv 17 '•"` . . „ .. ".:,*.5$ i • ..Y ,- ' :', C'') I., -i sl Eil t4i .,• ;7•42... ., 14 ' c. 1- ) &I-4 cq.q.. C . , I E • : • • ••- 0 )1 . ‘.); = .....," . a \ . , /Pr ' 7' '''-'-‘; ••Ch '... .•' . ' ' : • - 4-41141 ' LOS A 1— Depth - Feet Depth - Feet Lin cn ua CC; II per •= cn o tI�I 04!I II 0C) 3 EE ❑ I I - , 1 I j\171\,\ N I- OD • up II N II 0 tV o 1 ii to 11 0 Cy + 0 w 0 0 0 1-1co -, ui to or ay r.--. �II .4: co 1I Il 0 it j 0 + 1 a I i--1 1 1 Lz z \ \\.\\ ; 7-\:\T _ 0 1 1!) 0 in IM111111 11i1'ILI1 Depth - Feet Depth - Feet c 0 .0 N 0 tri 0 0 v v 71,w 196 617 HEPWORTH -- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2 0 Depth - Feet 111 11111111 0 0. cm 3o In ' 0 If c7 + 1 I-1 I I In 0 Depth - Feet Depth - Feet 0 co LC up 0 Inn ado Cl II 0 N Clk? p N t I`, 30 I I I\N F- - _or 0 N N C1. iii a) N 46 A 1I 0 N co op N r7 .-; rat M c, CD 01 CZ 1111 U U o N M N 3o 3a f �a is on co u7 O [7vl fl Nt li CD r•c� .rcv 0c3V1 n i I 3d k ...jtl.. I-1 I 4 in rII 0 llcsJ + I PH11111111 Dept{ - Feet shown on Fig. Explanation of symbols z 196 617 HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PkTS Fig. 3 1 LEGEND: pTOPSOIL; silt and clay, sandy, organic, loose, slightly moist, dark brown. Top 2 inches frozen. T NOTES: CLAY (CL); silty, sandy, scattered basalt fragments, stiff to very stiff, slightly moist, brown to reddish brown. Silt (ML); sandy, slightly clayey, with basalt fragments, stiff to cemented, slightly moist, light brown to white, calcareous. CLAY AND SILT (CL—ML); sandy with basalt fragments. stiff to cemented, slightly moist, calcareous, light brown to white. GRAVEL (GM --GP); sandy, silty, with basalt cobbles and boulders overlying basalt rock, calcareous, dense, moist, light brown to white. 2" Diameter hand driven liner sample. Disturbed bulk sample. Practical backhoe refusal. Where shown above bottom of log, indicates that multiple attempts were made to advance the pit. 1. Exploratory pits were excavated an January 6 and 7, 1997 with o Case 780C rubber—tired backhoe, 2. Exploratory pits were located approximately in the field as directed by the client. 3. Elevations of the exploratory pits were not measured. Logs of exploratory pits are drawn to depth. 4. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual. S. No free water was encountered in the pits at the time of excavating. Fluctuations in water level may occur with time. 6. Laboratory Testing Results: WC = Water Content ( % ) DD = Dry Density ( pcf ) +4 = Percent retained an No. 4 sieve —200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve LL = Liquid Limit ( % ) PI = Plastic Index ( % ) 196 617 HEPWORTH-.PAWLAK�- GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Compression 0 1 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ks 100 196 617 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Fig. 5 Moisture Content = 14.8percent Dry Unit Weight = 78 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silt From: Pit 1 at 4 Feet III IIIIIL.. Compression 11I upon wetting 1 II 1 u I 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ks 100 196 617 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Fig. 5 0 0 (2 n v 3 4 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 196 617 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Fig. 6 Moisture Content = 11.4 percent Dry Unit Weight = 96 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 4 at 2.5 Feet • u • Expansion upon wetting ' I 1! -� _-.- 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 196 617 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Fig. 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Compression 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Moisture Content = 15.3 percent Dry Unit Weight = 76 pcf Sample of: Sandy Sift From: Pit 4 at 3.5 Feet 0.1 196 617 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE -- ksf HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL -- CONSOLIDATION RESULTS 100 Fig. 7 1 1 1 ti 0 c 0 1 4- 0 0 1 0 1 l,e 2 0 y L7 3 E 8 mom 1 Rim mill11"11, 111 111 1 Expansion_ POr wetting Moisture Content = 11.1 percent Density = 99 pcf Sample of: Sandy Clay From: Pit 5 at 1.5 Feet 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 10.9 percent Dry Density = 94 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Pit 7 at 2 Feet Compression upon wetting 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 196 617 HEPWORTH -- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. INC. SWELL -- CONSOLIDATION RESULTS 100 100 Fig. 8 1 Moisture Content = 10.9 percent Dry #)nrsity pcf 105 Sample ot Sandy Clay From: Pit 11 at 2 Feet Compression -- Expansion X tre c 0 vii 1 a E ti 2 3 1 0 1 2 r Expansion upon wetting 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 18.6 percent Illy Density = 104 pcf -Sample of: Sandy Clay !From: Pit 13 at 1.5 Feet No movement upon wetting 0.1 196 617 1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE ksf HEPWORTH --_- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS 100 100 Fig. 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 2 se 3 4 E a U 5 1 6 7 0 1 tk 2 Compression 3 4 5 6 1 1 1 Moisture Content = 10.6 percent Dry Density = 73 pcf Sample of: Gravelly Sandy Silt From: Pit 17 at 2 Feet 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf Moisture Content = 12.0 percent Dry Density = 93 pcf Sample of: Sandy Silty Clay From: Pit 18 at 6 Feet Compression upon Wetting 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — 1Csf 196 617 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS 100 1 00 Fig. 10 Fig. 11 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 c a 2. a. E 0 3 4 Moisture Content = 8.8 percen' Dry Unit Weight = 105 pcf Sample of: Sandy Cloy and Silt From: Pit 21 at 7 Feet on min miliwounwollmu 4NR- CompressionMIN 111111111111111111ME Pi1111111111 MINImmip1111111mon mon 0.1 196 617 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf HEPWORTH — PAWLAK SWELL — CONSOLIDATION RESULTS GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 100 "ERCENT PASSIM'', H'UROUETER ANALYSIS TIME READINGS 24 HR. 7 HR 46 MMI. 15 WIN. 60 1191.14 MIN. 4 MWL f UN #200 100 40 10 ANALY9 S U.S STANDARD sem QEAR SWARF pPFaGNG5 3 4' 11 3' 6'6' MEI maimit melmimermemit AIM= r��,nrq; ■rr6� 1--=— III in IMININ=1 a•Ne ---1— ....Ir.ZOE ME II .005 .004 .019 .037 .074 .130 .300 .600 1.10 Z36 4.73 9.5115 MO DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 37,5 76 100 52 203 127 CLAY 7q SILT �— t..r 1 iieyili6i jc0AR5E-• N -r'-----° -- WAIL€S GRAVEL 30 % SAND 45 % SILT AND CLAY 25 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand with Basalt Fragments FROM: Pit 1 at 8 Feet MIORO IETTA ANALYSIS TIDE READINGS 24 HR. 46 YMI. _ M. 1 TIMI. poo 100 �—�_�4 — ____ = w 7�.m ^-=Ir�,114 =!//2111 frim V=: ���_' MMI—Ir ilrMEM Mr6tlr w� aE MoimmalliMpilli mE -:.malar =NI�=• � rl�=li maryl arrIME p•'—/a6�A =11==•lei. — =.1=iZri= • - 661,66�1=1=• �� +r•�i�,MM•M ! in• •/ /w rr-aiai�fi—���1���,�a�1�r�= IIIIIMIlini a�aa�,mnlrl� �Il,r,lil�,I, ______ a , .waaraaa�� +�M Iq�M�--rel—rer r#—r_w��r �a► NrrrMrAwIa1 Me aa�rlaaaaaaaaaaaaa� Mi— f; -- MMS -•MI -—MINEPNIair daaa4,l—�M!i161m6 � Mi N EI aaiaiaiaia�l = , aMMf MI _+� r^i.11M�Irl�l61i4 =_af a•! -.—,IrI,,,laaw .;.="7.:••00 �— .1 127�00 xcu 7 HR 15 MH. 50 Yk .19 YPV. 4 611 fLS. STANDARD sp1ts sEEW ANALY9s 1 CLEAR SOUPRE cepaRce 90 !6 006 .009 .019 .037 .074 .150 -300 .600 1.16 236 4.73 lkS1L, DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS MED1W EINE GfirtiCOARe CLAY TO SILT 196 617 GRAVEL 61 % LIQUID LIMIT SAND 33 % SILT AND CLAY 6 % PLASTICITY INDEX 7G `ERCENT RET;. g:Z!]rk_■;a*i_vy� SAMPLE OF: Cemented Silt with Basalt Fragments FROM: Pit 3 at 3.5 Feet thru 4 Feet HEPWORTH -- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 12 RCENT PASS! t RCENT PASSIN e 24 HR. 7 MR 46 4H. 15 4 4H H. 60 694.10 . 4 41111 411. 12(14 00 '00 4, 100 s�q■ ...irarr 3 3 e It Y rle r AMIE al 011 �� �=...�...., i.�r..�"r,..r�..r �w.rr1 illi ===.1M11 IM1111.1.1MMIMMI=ZAMIrM 1° 00 ...,�i�� rr...r �� MI • herr 72 ...Mr = moiI.iim.•��il..' 3a SO !OmaniW`Er L111M11Sa 3a 11111.1111Mmi mi.. .'" •l i +a MIMEIMMIIIMIll H DR0YLZER mA1 T r#JIaI 622 I 41.5. STARDOM] SERIES CLEAR SOUARE OPENIMO,'3 20 0 .001 .002 .046 .009 .019 .037 .074 .330 .300 .944 39 4.75 Ast2.5I ax 37.5 7E2 15220.340 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS I 74 00 sor� go e1.AY TO SILT GRAVEL 26 X LIQUID LIMIT 55 X 127 FTIE _ ,I i EDILAI 'COARSE ARSE' SAND 19 7L SILT AND CLAY 55 X PLASTICITY INDEX 30 i' `CENT RETAIN t SAMPLE OF: Sandy Siity Clay with Basalt Fragments FROM: Pit 8 at 5 Feet thru 6 Feet HYpR04E1FR ANALY$tg I' 9E7 IwAL-.Y-SIs U.S. STA ID RJ SF%F5 } . AR S11 ARE OP01I1403 24 H2. 7 HR 46 4AH. is 9II. 60 021.16 MPI. 4 MUL 1 4H. I1200 - 00.-. 6 •3 3 4' 11 3' 100ri.romilmm1 Nr.�m.iiui 00..r�r.���.1.>r....i.�r.�iI...riVr�rwlrrr> >...=,= .. ar mtip r mss___ i____•�......_� ___. .r~..: 70 .ro.,.. `.� = ` Mi rr�rJ��ri.i 'MM.:a mem ffm min : �Ii■sa�lwe �+`esu am60 ,nums4a immisi mom mr-,.....ISI iii imm =i1,.==i+�1=..wr.i - I`! I s.`���===NM IIIMI1 NEM = = 'MM r1 `MI :fir SI Ole =IIMMIINI== OP illn 40 alimmen• galkilMfilMinigmlIMM=IMION .. =11111111•0111 IIM =R IMM IMIIIM• m, ipi 70 20 = __Ir� _ MMEINjm 1.1.11=10•11 MIIIMMEMIZ an Milmag =1111 - ===fir —� imamkitmi MOM IM �.W �,. NM a `LIMBI s ......... .m.I a...... ���•1....I.... �M....r. .001 .aai .006 .000 .ais .037 .074 .150 .300 .900 1.i0 2�.7 175 Ito 31. 79,2 mi62 20r DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS iv TIE READ0022 1 CLAY TV SLT 196 617 GRAVEL 19 % LIQUID LIMIT 4-8 % AEDPA1 e0AREE FINE YEL SAND 27 76 SILT AND CLAY 54 7 PLASTICITY INDEX 23 % I'ERCENT RETAIN i SAMPLE OF: Sandy Clay and Silt with Basalt Fragments FROM: Pit 9 at 6 Feet thru 7 Feet HEPWORTH PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 13 r• ERC NT PASS#N IAS ►tr1 '1'fhfO _ HMDRa1E1111 PI. .Y'is SEWJANALY9S _ -- 171f READU.& STANDARD SfThEs 1 Q.MM =AM OPENNGS 24 HR 7 HR 48 MN. 15 MN. 60 MU MN. 4 MOL 1 MN- r ... CO 100 f im ei.I. �>�„ N,o",a-.. fS0 116 os jI43 1.2^3j4w 11 3" re C. MIIMI=MMIll MI. SAM�aaa� �' g ra =I IM MI 14 moraa�aaa.I.rrrr Ito ftmomm=fi r IMO Alal 1111.1il— Imum WI �,.,.�.OMIMMEMUMINII= 40 1 i.r.Ir� W . 2111111111 r�rr�rrIw� 20 50 IMMUMMis � MI INO I! ==== go eG 30 .- m..Ia..rr" rim rli il 20 1/111111siggasiiiiiii =MMEn .m1 WOMBS =NORIBIII 10 r4�»iRowsimrrr" _ �w11rM 90 smi0.... I.. '1... 100 — I .001 ..002 .005 .409 .019 .037 .074 .150 .500 .600 1.16 236 4.75 6.612,5 16.6 37.5. 76.2 12;52 203 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 70 CLAY iD SILT f GRAVEL 43 % LIQUID LIMIT SAMPLE OF: Silty Sand and Gravel SAND- F1NE 1 MEOIU�I _ LOARSF FlNE COARSE- �. 46 SAND 42 % SILT AND CLAY 15 % PLASTICITY INDEX FROM: Pit 11 at 4- Feet thru 5 Fet HYDROMETER ANAL ME ROAMS 24 NR 7 HR 46 MN. 15 MN. 60 MN: 19 MN. 4 MIN. 1 Inc 100 MINIMININMEIN .. .11aw.aa�l=.i ��aa� �a�aaa�' �1 ��.1= aa��>�O a—afa�agllsmliiMMIIIIIMI`�� ...w.� Emlaaa��- imillini 9f) �I�_�i�= aaaMi��i al �mt ��....�a_aa�i == rrra.I'ar�' ami WAriarrm47:71 rEI 10 aa�a��aaa� �aa���a�aa ea 1. .....m�aaall�.aa�ila.r aaaa....n...I.�� �� I n�_� r�'�i _w� ��� 70 Ia A. aaman. r.I...6. .wwrr�a.r`r rl.�mrrwws.l�.i.rMI6 ��mimrmil rrr.Il�a moi_ ,I�� _=_MiimmoSN- O : =." Mile ....r. � MINI 60 iaa� f i�■>•1�r aaa•�a m i gl•rMMMIIN Iaa.aammo I=VENIIWANN= a� 111 m6i.� �a� fumm-�. lIMII/ �.��1�r Iwl�=-aaa...A�)♦II r— I50 �>-�� ��wrr�.�wsw•� mow` +'aaal�.. �--- .M.a/011 �Itss_ aaa��i��aaa� �'�.tlIlll.aa...�-linm -- aaa�s.I..l�ffli ---�,..... a�„�m1== _ate: ra�aa�1 .r�aaa�aa.rr .w�a 30 .....=-- = .raa� �� NBrr... a�..r�ar.rM.r_ ��.� mimil i�.wl-�,�aa.a�..r. aa..aa.a 20 C= -i -III ---- r~� � sw�. 10 MMUM I= .r1MMliMi M I I1=Wf�IwrNNUMUrl1w�=+ In �r0i11 a�..�yaaa! lN��rr�rr��R��■ IIMM ��-------aa-•a—aaaa.—a -- -- MM�•i ~� 100 3 .0'74 .150 MoD .660 1.16 136 4.75 6.5 9_5 50.0 37.3 76.3 ase 203 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 127 U.S. ST ARC SERIES .Im 6 3 . 1 3 4` 11 ' 3: 5�6' 6' �r.rr aw �� �AWU.Y61S CLEAR SQUARE OP'EN1N135� 20 .10 40 50 60 70 60 .001 .002 .005 .009 .019 .037 CLAY 1O MIT GRAVEL 63 % SANG _ F NE I 1iDHA1 - FINE COARS MIDDLES SILT AND CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX ?; SAMPLE OF: Slightly Silty Sandy Gravel with Basalt Fra meets FROM: Pit 13 at 4 Feet thru 4.5 Feet T RETAFN 10, 'ERCENT RETAIN t 196 617 HEPWORTH -- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • ' NT PA ,e; lidi+lg211•123VI.Cr H 24 NR. 7 1.R 43 141% 144. 60 M94.19 MK MIN. 1 MK /404 X100 6 3 y��� S`6` rq 100 Be • 1 s 1�11111i111�� — 10 so li 20 70 �� I '_isi. >_��_ =i.r.nimm_ =I i� > MIIAI1Irr1___ ammo MI _ imoli == 40 IN iiilligii EIMIMIMIiiiii==== 60 3a MI a ME - lin II I i NV I. i • iM EMM. I . M a W. 83 10 mm,m• 111111 90 0M1 �fMEMM Milftwmco .00P .002 .5 .009 ,018 .037 .074 .150 Q •IOC 1.16 4.76 4.75 9.31x510.0 37.5 76.2 152 103 00 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS Y17 FIMIROYETFR ANALYSIS TK READINGS SIElI ANALYSS 1LS STANDARD CLEAR SCAJ ANC OPENINGS 30 CLAY TO SILTSAJNO FINE YEDIIItf ."0 l_"' J €INE _ g4ARIE —f GRAVEL 24 % SAND 22 X SILT AND CLAY 54 LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Gravelly Sandy Silk 24 14R. 7 1411 46 111F. 15 MN. 100 00 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 RYDRSNEETEN AN#LYS1S TIE READINGS 90 1.111419 LN. 4 YIN.. 1 4N. FROM: Pit 16 at 3 Feet thru 4 Feet 0.60 LLS. STAN0A111) SE1bT5 9 Stx-VE ANALYSIS GEAR %CAPE OPENINGS 3 4' 11/2' r 3 l r .002 .005 .009'. .039 0.17 ,074 .130 ..300 .500 1.49 2.3i 4.75 0.5125 18.0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES 1N MILLIMETERS CLAY 7O SILT FNE 37.5 10 111 30 40 50 6.0 70 ea 90 /00 7L2 14152 203 0 ! va COBBLES [ YFTNWf - now Eine 196 617 GRAVEL 10 % LIQUID LIMIT SAND 41 % SILT AND CLAY 49 z PLASTICITY INDEX SAMPLE OF: Slightly Gravelly Sandy Silt FROM: Pit 17 at 4 Feet thru 5 Feet HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS • `CENT RETAIN 1 'ERCENT RETAIN 1 Fig. 15 1 • RCENT PAS Ik a. r����ya1►E���dl.�1.`}E�Lr 611' AN VMS TIE READINGS 24 HR. 7 HR 46 Illi. 15 Y14. 60 IIk10 MN. 4 14 100 - 10 US. STANDARD WIPES 1 INN. 4200 #+00 OiO pp 11 CLEAR S0LIARE. OPENINGS yrtyrve 11 /2a 3 5.6' 11111111111MNIMMIIIIM 1•110 11110111 -- .4101 -r a'0 10 20 30 40 70 e0 70 a0 00 .005 .009 .ms .037 .074_.. .150 .300.6[43-- 1.15 -2.36 4.75 0.5115 0.0 37.5 75.2 152 203 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 127 CLAY TO SILT - rNE LAI FIRE COARSECOMES GRAVEL 61 % SAND 33 Z SILT AND CLAY 6 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX 7 FROM Pit 20 at 3 Feet thru 4 Feet SAMPLE OF: Slightly Silty Sandy Gravel with Basalt Fragments H1DROYE1ER ANALYSIS TSE READINGS 24 HR. 7HR 46 LIN, 15 YN. CO 100 10 ION9 YN. 4 NHL.. 1 WI. LLS. 5TAN0AR1 SEPSES 430 5 IMial TI51711 Ai millIIMIIIIMmill 17M0= i Millill W=NNMI SEW ANALYSS CLEAR SWAM 0PE74105 { 3 1 3 4' 11,/Y 3 9'6' D"0 awl aNal a•I=1.0liriMIM MOM 1104.110.0111 .005 .009 .010 .0.77 .074 .130 - .600 1.15 2.36 4.75 0.512.5 10.0 DIAMETER OF PARTICLES IN MILLIMETERS 10 20 30 40 50 50 70 00 00 37,5 76.2 152 20100 3 127 04AY TO SLT D 1 4EAl114 I CDAR9E 196 617 FINE , COMM MAW. GRAVEL 3 X SAND 15 Z SILT AND CLAY 82 % LIQUID LIMIT 7 PLASTICITY INDEX is SAMPLE OF: Sandy Clay and Silt FROM: Pit 21 at 4 Feet thru 5 Feet HEPWORTH -- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS RETAIN 1 ` ERCENT RETAI 1 Fig. 16 co C a) E {.N Q.) 10 ._ V) CO N x >. u7 +-. .r c 3 E fn E ›- co LL (Ii LL U [!3 U Ca 0r a >- a "� co N (Ca 43) m CC6 m C C� EL CO (I) K.) co U) (I) (co 1) Sandy Silty Clay 1 1 Z icZ LLI Lu 1 - 0 LLf [c C.9 112 Q ' � Q tea_ M�M d LU 41J 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 v UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE BEDROCK TYPE STRENGTH 2 w w CC C1 1- c U X 0 0 Co U) Lt) 2 2 0 La N kJ a n 2 0 N Q CV C0 CO OD CV LC) 2 0 a a Q s c7 0 u9 C (7 L0 07 (0 r X a ti ] [[ f!7 U ~0 w n R 2 3) 0) (N 0) ao C') CO 0 H Q 0 0 w .a 2 toQ L w 4 CL) ‘71 - Li) 10 CN C? r CV Cr7 r- 1 CO 10 0 z 0 2 1 U Lu 0 J 2 CC O w 0 W CC (1) LU CC W CC 0 CO Q 0 } C: Q 2 11) C ? + *n cn O O G 0 N m > > W 03 > > #-, C C c4'Z1 13 iv C/3 (/) (Yl CCI >.'A > 13 CO Qy al 6"Ic i7 CI) -CT) T �C to 7U] � N r c E 0 `7 W Ip C '.'C'm p} .1 c/ T' 17 co V1 [p 0 C] RS V70 �y ( 4+ -0 a' •-• /_� V / C4 0 }, (.7 C } �. (I) _ N (5 E (0 2 LL ++ 4,41. L w t) S ,7) (a c ro 0 i.5 TS C in �. C C (0 iIIN imICC'4 h tf G 01 d 00 CC I : ( CO II Z cit L a Z r as LC1 Z.3 a g 0 s-- 0 C) Lra 0 Cf? 0 0 OD oa 0 SAMPLE LOCATION I0 0 n CfJ U) (0 co d' r} ur N Cr) 0,3 (i] CO 0 1 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE II Job No. 196 617 Sheet 1 of 4 HOLE NC. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) T LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MCN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE (MIN./INCH) Pit 2 Pit 5 Pit 7 Pit 8 36 42 54 42 15 water added 15 15 15 12 9 9 7'/ 1'/ 12 101/4 10%4 8'/4 714 12 11 10 9`, 8'/4 8'/4 73/4 12 103/4 9'/4 8 7'/4 7'/4 12 10'/4 9 8'/4 7Y 6/ Note: Percolation test holes were dug and soaked on January 6, 1997. were protected from freezing with rigid foam insulation. Tests were performed on January 7, 1997, Holes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 Job No. 196 617 Sheet 2of4 HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) Pit 11 Pit 12 Pit 13 Pit 14 50 42 48 32 water added 15 45 15 15 15 15 15 30 15 15 15 10 15 _I5 12'/: 11 9'/4 8 3/4 8 7'% 13 9'/ 8'/z 7% 12 10'/ 9'1 8% 8'% 734 7% 61 11% 8% 7'/ 9-Y4 83 8 71/4 63/4 8°/ 7% 6 10Y 9' 8 8 %4 7% 7 /4 6'h 6 8' 7' 63/4 DROP IN WATER LEVEL (INCHES) AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE IMIN.1INCH) 6 4 53/4 /4 101/2 9'/ 1 9'/3 8b/a r/e 16 NOTE: Percolation test holes were dug and soaked on January 7, 1997. Tests were performed an January 8, 1997, Holes were protected from freezing with rigid insulation. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE I JOB NO. 196 617 HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIP) WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP IN WATER LEVEL 1 fINCHES} AVERAGE PERCOLATION RATE {MIN./INCH) Pit 16 56 15 12% 11% 1 11' 111/4 'lz 111/4 1014 "/z 10' 10 ' 10 9'/z '/z 9'/z 9 /z 9 8, /4 40 • NOTE: Percolation test holes were dug and soaked on January 7, 1997. Tests were performed on January 8, 1997. Holes were protected from freezing with rigid insulation. 1• HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 11 Job No. 196 617 Sheet 4 of 4 HOLE NO, HOLE DEPTH (INCHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN) Pit 18 Pit 19 66 water added water added water added 24 water added 10 10 10 15 15 15 15 10 10 10 15 15 15 15 WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAL (INCHES) WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL (INCHES) DROP 1N WATER LEVEL (INCHES) 94 8 11/2 8 7 1 81/4 7'/ % 7'/a 61/4 11/4 8% 71/2 11/4 71/4 61/4 1% 7'2 9 6'1 8 1'/ 1 8 7t/ 34 7'1 6% 1/2 9 81/2 !2 8'1 7% 4 7% 7% 7/ 6% z1 AVERAGE PERCOLAT(O N RATE (MIN./INCH) 12 30 NOTE: Peroclation test holes were dug and soakead en January 8, 1997. Tests were performed on January 9, 1997 Holes were protected from freezing with rzgid foam insulation. 1 1 Exhibit E-3 January 21, 1998 Mr. Greg Boeker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: Geologic Hazards Consultation Rural Residential Area, Filing No. 8 Los Amigos Ranch Garfield County, Colorado Job No. GS -2324 Gentlemen: You asked that we review reports prepared by others that address geologic hazards for the subject site and comment on potential hazards associated with a landslide and two faults identified by others. This letter Is based on our review of available published geologic maps and literature, geologic reports prepared by others and our experience. The following paragraphs present our opinions and recommendations concerning the landslide area and the two faults at the subject site. The ranch is located in the southwest part of Spring Valley in Garfield County, Colorado. The Roaring Fork River Valley is below the site to the west. Colorado Mountain College, Spring Valley Campus is to the east. Glenwood Springs is approximately 6 miles to the northwest. Access is from Highway 82 to the Colorado Mountain College Road to Los Amigos Drive. The ranch can be visualized topographically as a gently roiling plateau. An approximately 40 to 60 vertical feet scarp is along the west edge of the plateau that drops down steeper slopes that slope into the Roaring Fork River Valley. Several comparatively broad and shallow drainage basins on the plateau surface converge into narrow drainages at the west edge of the plateau and drain down to the west. The ranch has been used as dry land pasture. Vegetation consists of grasses, weeds and brush with areas of pinion -juniper forest on the plateau. Larger meadows have been cleared of brush and seeded with wheat grass to provide forage. On the steeper slopes to the west, vegetation consists of pinion -juniper forest. Filing No. 8 is in the southwest part of Los Amigos Ranch below and to the CTLITHOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 234 CENTER DRIVE ■ GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 • (970) 945.2609 1 1 1 west of the plateau surface. The Rural Residential Area Is approximately 152 acres. Plans are to construct an access road and divide the area into 3 Tots. Each lot will be developed as a "homestead". Construction on each lot will likely include a single family residence, guest house, barn and associated out buildings. We reviewed a report titled "Preliminary Geotechnical Study, Proposed Residential Development Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., County Road 114, Garfield County, Colorado" prepared by Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, inc., Job No. 196617, dated February 14, 1997, a report titled "General and Engineering Geology and Soils, Los Amigos Ranch Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado" prepared by Lincoln DeVore, Job No. GS -999, 2693, dated April 16, 1979 and several letter reports addressing geologic hazards at the site prepared by Lincoln DeVore. We are In general agreement with the location of the landslide and faults identified in the HP Geotech report. We have approximated the locations of the landslide and faults on the attached Figure 1. In our opinion, the landslide Is an ancient feature that is stable In it's present state. For preliminary planning purposes we believe buildings can be sited on the landslide with the following constraints: 1. Building envelopes should be limited to areas with natural grades no sleeper than approximately 10 percent; 2. Excavations should be limited to a maximum depth of approximately 6 feet; 3. Addition of moisture to the slide mass should be minimized. Surface drainage should be enhanced to facilitate the removal of surface run- off from the slide mass. Drainage channels where surface drainage is concentrated or conveyed across or around the landslide mass should be lined to reduce the amount of infiltration. The approximate locations of the faults is shown on Figure 1. These faults may be active. We recommend that buildings not be sited on the faults. It would be appropriate for roadways to cross the faults, however, movement of the faults could result in a need for some amount of regrading. For preliminary purposes we believe a setback of approximately 100 horizontal feet from the faults for the siting of buildings would be appropriate. We understand that building envelopes are to be sited adjacent the top of the vertical scarp along the south edge of the plateau. We recommend a minimum setback for the building envelopes equal to at least the height of the scarp at a point nearest the building envelope. The recommendations presented herein are preliminary and intended to aid the developer in developing the preliminary plat. We are in progress of completing more detailed studies to develop our final recommendations to be utilized in MIR. GREG 60EKER LOS AMIGOS RANCH CTLT GS -234S { 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 developing the final plat. The recommendations could be different than these presented in this letter. In our opinion there is sufficient area on each lot shown on the preliminary plat we reviewed to allow residential development as proposed. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions, please call at your convenience. Very truly yours, CTL/THOMPSON, INC. Wilson L. "Liv" Bowden, C.P.G. Engineering Geologist Reviewe •h' / � . :/h h Manage 5 copies sent) :JM:cd MA. GREG DOCKER LOS AMIGOS RANCH CTL(T GS -2345 3 ME MO NM M ME MI MM = = M NM = MN M UM r 1 1 1 1 Exhibit E4 1 1 November 21, 1997 Mr. Greg Boeker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Subject: Radiation Survey Los Amigos Ranch Garfield County, Colorado Job No. GS -2324 1 Gentlemen: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 As requested, we performed a preliminary radiation survey at Los Amigos Ranch in Garfield County, Colorado. This letter describes the site and our survey procedure and presents the results of our radiation survey. The site is located in the southwest part of Spring Valley in Garfield County, Colorado. The roaring Fork River Valley is below the site to the west. Colorado Mountain College, Spring Valley Campus is to the east. Glenwood Springs is approximately 6 miles to the northwest. Access is from Highway 82 to the Colorado Mountain College Road to Los Amigos Drive. The site can be visualized topographically as a gently rolling plateau. Several comparatively broad and shallow drainage basins on the plateau surface converge into narrow drainages at the west edge of the plateau and drain down to the west. The site has been used as dry land pasture. Vegetation consists of grasses, weeds and brush with areas of pinion juniper forest on the plateau. Larger meadows have been cleared of brush and seeded with wheat grass to provide forage. On the steeper slopes to the west, vegetation consists of pinion, juniper forest. The area to be developed is located on the plateau surface. Plans are to develop 158 lots with an average size of approximately 3.5 acres for single family residences. Much of the property will be open space. A rural residential parcel of approximately 150 acres will be in the southwest part of the development. On November 17, 1997 our engineering geologist, Mr. "Liv'' Bowden visited the site and performed a radiation survey. Our survey consisted of spot checking radiation measurements at widely spaced locations across areas to be developed on the plateau. The ground surface was covered with approximately 2 to 4 inches of snow which had melted to leave small patches of bare ground. Our radiation measurements were taken at areas of bare ground to avoid the readings being lowered as a result of shielding by snow cover. The radiation measurements were taken with a Ludlum instruments, Inc. Model No. 19 Micro -R -Meter carried at arms length (approximately 2 feet above the ground surface). We observed radiation CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS ' 1.1 I :! P.1 Y 1 13 11,111V1 • l;l f f4VV )4 111 '.1'I \IN1 p.. [ .I. l! (1I AL )4.1 01.0 ! • Iq/n! ?an) County, Colorado" prepared by Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc., Job No. 196617, dated February 14,1997, a report titled "General and Engineering Geology and Soils, Los Amigos Ranch Subdivision, Garfield County, Colorado" prepared by Lincoln DeVore, Job No, GS -999, 2693, dated April 16, 1979 and several letter reports addressing geologic hazards at the site prepared by Lincoln DeVore, We are in general agreement with the location of the landslide identified in the HP Geotech report. In our opinion, the landslide is an ancient feature that is stable in it's present state. Site specific slope stability analyses should be performed to better define the slide and its affects on (residential lot development) development. We observed potential rockfall hazards below a rock outcrop scarp along the west edge of the plateau. We qualitatively rate the degree of rockfall hazard as low to moderate. Most of the development avoids the rockfall hazard by being sited on the plateau above the hazard. A "rural residential area" is below the rock outcrop. We recommend buildings be sited beyond the rockfall Hazard boundary. A site specific rockfall hazard analysis will need to be performed to establish the rocktall hazard boundary. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions, please call at your convenience. Very truly yours, CTLJTHOMPSON, INC. ._.,..,„„ ../ Wilson L/'Liv" Bowden, Profesz nal Geologist r =' h g , P.E. ranch M. ager LB:JM, cd 3 copies sent) MR. GREG BOEKER CTL,T GS -2324 2 1 1 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 1 Appendix G Sails 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Preliminary Plan Exhibit I Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix G EXHIBIT I 1. Site Soil Designations and Descriptions, USDA Soil Conversation Service. Part 1 - Soil Survey of Aspen - Gypsum Area Part 2 - Soil Survey of Rifle Area 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ASPEN -GYPSUM AREA SOIL SURVEY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SHEET NtiMBE7 20 COLC)RADO ICA•" • 1 w - PART 2 EXHIBIT R. 89 W. IR. 88 W IO7 1 VCCY 39' 30.00- 44 . • . • • r .- ,. ,',..i.,,t'l . , -4, 8 `-r.- • %.,.„ I .i.00 000 FE R.89W- R.88W. AdF_, tt P-7 6 S. . 7 S. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NONTECHNICAL SOIL5 DESCRIPTION REPORT Soil Information Hap Symbol Soil name and description Arte-Ansari-Rock Outcrop complex, 12 to 65 percent slopes This complex consists of soils and rock outcrop on mountain sides and sloping alluvial fans. The soils formed in alluvium derived from red -bed shale and sandstone, The Arte soil makes up about 45 percent of the complex, the Ansari soil makes up about 35 percent, and Rock outcrop makes up about 20 percent. The Arle soil is moderately deep and well -drained. The surface layer. is very stony loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil and substratum are very stony loam about 22 inches thick. Soft sandstone and shale are at a depth of 32 inches. Permeability is mode:'att, and available water ,:app ity is 1040. Effe,.tiVe roctini depth is 20 tt 413 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the erosion hazard is higt, to very high. The Ansari soil is shallow and well drained. The surface layer is loam stout 10 inches t`:c.. The substratum is stony loam. Bedrock is hard sandstone. Permeability is moderate, and available water capacity is Iov. Effective rootinm death is 1u to 2" inches. Runoff is rac.id, and the erosion hazard is very high. Rc,k outcrop is m :,rly red sandstone. 4v Mo-val loam., 3 to 12 percent slopes 7hi5 deep, weli-drained soil is on mesas art sides of %a..ey:, This sc_l fo'r d ir reworked alluvium derived fror taseit ar,c sandstone. The surface layer is loam at.Ft 5 iroues thick. The upper pert of the subsoil 1 clay loan abo=ut 12 inches thick, and the _ower part is stony clay ioaa• abet 10 inches thick. 'he substratum is stony loam. Permeability is moderate, and available water capacity is nod=.rate. Effective rooting depth is 50 inches. Runoff is medium', and the erosion hazard is moderate to very Ni,.g"- 67 Torriorthents-Rock Outcrop complex, Steep 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPTION REPORT Soil Information Map Symbol Soil name and description This broadly defined unit consists of exposed sandstone and shale bedraci and stony soils that are shallow to moderately deep over sandstone end shale and stony basaltic alluvium. Torriorthents make uP about 60 Percent of ttis complex, and Rock outcrot. makes up about 25 percent. The Torriorthents are or foothills end Mountainsides below the Rock outcrop, Torriorthents ere very shallow to moderately deer,. They are well to somewhat excessively drained. 'he. generally ere clayey to 1ovy a•,3 contain, veriable amounts of pebbles, cobbles, and stones. Permeability is slow to moderate, e e weer holding caPecity is very lov to lov. Effective rootin; depth is IC to &O R,;rcf'` is vert retid, and erosic+: hazard is very HO. Rock eutrrop is mainly Mesa Verde 5anvstone end Nasatot: 1462 PR i^ CE Ca g?6ITA SERVICE WATER FEATURES Soil Information PO! 1:9 '7I7 Flaodir:g high water tae and ponding Map symbol :hydro Water Na�;rur and soil nay ;1e=:" ' Fr?ruency ; Duration : Months i table i Kind of Months : ?0nd n9 1 poi ng group I I 1 1 • 1 2: Ar.e- C !kon Aneari- L' 'Wont Tock Outcrop----; D :None 6?: Torriorthe co S t eeo f I i depth Warty table r I r F: )6.O 16,2 I I '111.''2`.i7n Barth Ft U.S. DEPARTMENT A,SRI U! TUE NATURAE RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WATER FEAT€lE. Endnote -- WATER FEA'JnE. PACE 2 .. 1:!17/9? This rep^.rt gives estimates of various Soil water features. The estimates are used in land use Planning that involves ergi,eering considerations. Hydrologic soil groups are used tc estimate runoff from precipitation, Soils not protected by vegetation are assigned to one of four grooms. They are grouped according to the infiltration of water whet the soils are thoroughly vet and receive precipitation from long-d,ration storms. The four hydrologic soil groups ere; Group ' A'. Soils F•' :r- a infiltration rate loot r,rnorf oct`.;,tiai' :tits. : Wet, These consist rainlY of deer), well dr=;"•._ .. a7"SSE:x `:p drainee sands or grave::Y "cards.e soils have a high rate of Vater transmission. Grour '3'. Sails having E moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly cf moderate v dee:' or deep, moderetely well drained or well trained soils that h$ve b+d`retei' fine texture t: made"ate_r' coarse .'{ti`.. s•of:s hae a moderate Pate of water tr'5r.srm_iseio . Sc'.:_ having a slow ir`_1tratio. rate 0.er Vet. Tres. c: _:s` ohlefly of soils `e':_r,; .. that _ueW.s the d..o;,auar,, movement of water or soils .--- -- �' ti-'- teit,I"e dr fine tenure. '`:feces _mile ha'.c a rate . its .r3".srissot°. Gra:. 5v.- ? va.r ..,. ins.;.."E.i "ate pato:. M1 runoff '�i....1;°i. kker; tii;!'$ugh, rsES: consist :. f•«-'- - :AY7, `s.`c !".2'1:"i ° n:� 3':Y.'SVe7 L. r•te�:�i'l4 .. _ .r alar.. •...- .12' 4 .�yer at r rear the s:,irfs.,:a, and ;rse,vios rate ?F yatar tr RnCR.iss,rrl have a t_ These soh:s -' a sodl is assigned to two hydrologic grou fn :his report, the first letter is for drainer areas and the second _s 'or J7drainee area's. Flooding, the terVca-! inundation of a' area, is caused i iierf :w«i,j streams, �Y rrQff 'U$ ala @r°. sloes or by tides. i;ater Sta ifiG fc short peri ds atter reirfall or snoLne't is not considered '1: :s wit; s a• r.0ea Z r o't e # s f 's !7a i ., 13,, e4o give the reGUEr:^„y a"d vure_:c". n: flooding and the time of year when flooding is most likely. freG..fr,:}, duration, amd probable dates of occurrence are estirFated. F-eo..: cy is exp.-es:ie':. _. "Ndre', 'Rare', 'Occasio Z`.'. and 'Freouer.t'. 'None' mews that flooding `- ob „+ oracle; 'Fart' that it is U"iiikeiy but possible 'Jaden !hushes. w,a:.- ""r,t ; 'Occasional' that it o:curs, c- the nice less :' 2 Years: and 'recuert' t``.at ftO.i.J""_. sr tre ay.'e._ o:re than once i"' 2 Years. D.,:ra...r. __ f{: `<. 'Ven t,...- :f 4ess t"':a2 days. 'Erle'' _° 2 tc i da?e. .or 7 r rr s'' if ff da/s, art'' '4e'Y' :or'4. - -^re t°'?:. "h? ?"... :; dOes._cr evidens{ _. - . ".acte`r st-ets cf . [3^ -F. , rr'° C:0 de DiC'tate4` :'.' i. ;��.4'�.-- _ .le .... ....-iv l,._.. ..... ... r., a ti-. . f - - ..arer. s,. .. . rill.. .. i. _.. ". ... -.. -.'c•'.v ..,. _ e::1tniLe+6 art,", levels of _o:,ff ?. t'•ra _..r..,r Pec` s c -r t: _-.. . fL. S. DEPART"`ElIT OF A;}RILU.TURE PAC;E 3 OF 3 NATURA_ RESOURCES COkSERVATION SERVICE :1/17/97 1 DATER FEATURES 1 Endnote -- WATER FEATURES --Continued Information on the extent of flooding based on soil data is less specific than that. provided by detailed engineering surveys that delineate flood -Prone areas at specific flood freq-.ency levels, I•! High. water r1 is s. t.� it t Frtri table (seasonal) the highest level of a SetlrBhe., zone in the soil to most years. The d.,r to a Y seasonal high water table apples to undrained soils. The estimates are based mainly or: the evidence of a satJrated zone, namely gray:sw colors or mottles in the soil, Indicated in this report are the depth to the seascnai hig': water table; the kind of water table, that is, 'Apparent', 'Artesian', or 'Perched'; and the months of the year that I the later table commonly is high. A water table that is seasonally high for .less than 1 month is not indicated in this report. An 'Apparent' water tattle is a t''iC zone. of free Vater it t`le soil. It is indicated by the level at which water 1 stands in ar otiose & t;3^e;7Cie after adecua`,e fire is allowed for adjustaer' the SJ""ound:.nQ Soil. An 'Artesian' water tat.'_e exists Under a hydrostatic benaat` en isbermeat,le las'-. When tr:e imoermeable layer has been III Pere` $ Y "' rased borehole, the wain. nice 'he frit! level .'f e ter , the r borehole is t, •tr"_;F ac ,h water r .h cased bc. eh. e. e. 3, a_ d ar erten a,•. water tatle. A -e- . .,atat ie water S`� ng above ai 4r 55,.Er tcu zone. CPla;ea s UCGer, Cr =e^chr„', water e r 111 $i a < "c€ to fr. e !ewe- -s^t Oil} sa`unt'er :o hir deptt,4 about 6 fee` e e ind:'.etee Pond:in-s ._ standing waiter it a closed deoress.c. Tt.e mater is rew:vef, ori :eec .. , v evaporation, or a cotrt.na`.ior of these orocesees Thin report lives the dept` and dwrat:Ur; of ord!' d the time f Pan n^ } Depth, t' bonding :ng a"' C Y_,.. when i�_.,dirr :5 !P`.�. lift ,y. �.., dser�_i^^, 111 and probable dates of occurrence are estimate Dept,n is expressed 3S the depth of s rded water in feet above the soil s^ea:e. 74•etizr et7'assed es•}r ^y brief' if less thar- 2 days, 'Brie`.' if 2 to 7 da?_, '4.'ty' if 7 t: 3. deve, and 'Very ton;' if more than: 3f' days. The information is tasted on tt.e re: of ear. soil hr the ia�O3;ape..historic Pcn 'n and Cr localinformation about the extent and levels of pc -f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SOIL PEATU'R,” Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 2 11Ii7/97 Bedrock Cemented air. Subsidence Risk of corrosion Potential My srmboi� � :frost action; Uncoated 1 and soil name Oeott, ;Hardness; Depth ; Kind ,Initial, Total ; steel : Concrete 14 1 I 1 I Ir, I In i It 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 7, 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 L• 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 l 4 Arle ; 2C -4C ; Soft --- ------;Low ;Moderate ;Lou I 1 1 1 1 Ansari 1 1 1O 2r lla1'd ; --- --- ;Low :High :Low 1 1 1 1 I I 4, Outcrop: X I r I I t Rock Soft --- 1[y1j 1 ..� 1 I 1 i I 1 1 44: 1 4 '4 Ma^Vol , 'r6: 1 --- ... -- !Tolerate iioderets ;Low Torriorthents, ; S;pea-- 4 -TA Hare Rock Outcroc, Steer.---- --_ --- 1 So't I 1 i :LONA 1!f_rh, !Low P I ;i I r , U.S.1 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE Svc' FEATURES PAGE 2 OF 2 11%17/97 Endnote -- SOI! FEATURES This report gives estimates of various soil features. The estimates are used in land use Planning that involves engineering considerations. Death to bedrock is given if bedrock is within a death of 5 feet. The depth is based on many soil borings and on observations during soil napping. The rock is either 'Soft' or 'Hard', If the rock is 'Soft' or fractured, excavations can be made with trenching machines, backhoas, or small rippers. If the rock is 'Hard' or oassive, blasting or special equipment generally is needed for excavation. Cemented pars are cemented or indurated subsurface layers +:ithir, a deatt, of 5 fret, Such pars cause difficulty in excavation. Pans are classified as 'Thin' or 'Thick'. A 'Thin' pan is less than 3 inches thick if contin;,oas?y indurated or less than 1$ inches thick if discontinuous or fractured. Exca4 tire., can be .wade by trehchinc mach nes, backhoe,, o:' sn?: r,pGe"s. A 'T•`ick. par is more than 3 intoe thick if continuously indurated or more thaa lE inches thick if discontinuous or fractured, Such a par is sc thick or massive that blasting or special equipment is needed in excetaa.`icn. Subsidence is the settlement of organic soils or of saturated mineral soils of very Icka density. Subsidence results froa tithe• de isPati n and shrinkage or oxidation of organic material, or both, fp:,uV,ng drainage,S.-silence Fakes p:ai grad,lyr Ove" a Cr:o: 5`se's. Years. 7::: tep^.t shows `}; expn-tarinitial '`=.de"e, W} 't asualty is a result of drainage, and tot subsidence, which usually is a res,It ofoY.di ta iar., Not shoas. ir he rep`.rt ,s subsidence ceased by as imoosed surface b} ttie with,'',"aw'ai of ;round ,:ate' throughout i t ar exter,•t{ area as. 2 ?'eSL'lt of lowering the w?,-•. topic. Potential frost action is the likelihood of «%Sward ca latera: ex:aesion rf the soil caused by the formation of se,^''eaated ice lenses H rest heave and the subSeoutot coils"s ., the and lose of st"'ercth on tnatiing, Frost action occurs when acisture «eves into the freezing zone of the 5o;I emperatu e, `estate, density, perfi'al°i:;tY, content of organic natter, and depth to the Water tabu` ate the most itoortant factors considered in evalrlst.n; the potentia: for frost sa ion. It is assumed that the scii is not insrt_ated by peg-` if; a:iY p Tipp _r," snow and is n.. w"� �i drained, Silty and burly structured clayey soils that have a high water table in winter are the most susceatib:e to frost aotien. Wel! drained, very gravelly, or very sandy soils are the least si.ssecti,t:e. Frost heave and :ow sol: strength during thal.in,g cause damage mainly to 'pavements and other rigid struct.fees, Rist of corrosion certsiis to potential soil -induced electro coital or cheeica: action that dissolves or weakens «•coated steel or concrete, The rate of corrosion of uncoated steel is related to such factors as soil mnistaee, oast cle-siae distribution, acidity, and electrical conductivity' of the soil. The rate of corrosion of concrete is based main:), on the sulfate and sodium content, texture, moisture concert, and acidity of the soil. Special site exasination and design may be needed if the combination of factors creates a severe corrosion environment. The steel installations that intersect SCii boundaries or 54i: layers is more susWeitibie tc corrosion t`'ar. rte:. .n hats:Iatiars that are entirely within one kind of soil or Vitrein one soil layer. For uncoated steel, the risk of corrosion, expressed as 'Lou", "Moderate", 6r 'High', is based on soil drainage class, tate! acidity, electrical resistivity near field caaacit) and electrical conductivity of the saturation extract. For concrete, t`e ik e 4 xo is also expressed as ':4r', 'Modea-te' [,, Trig`' :t is based. textaxe, acidita, and Fkcunt of s.,;l a es ar the satkration ertra:t. 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF APICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATIDN SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 3 11.'17IP7 iThe information in this reoort indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the nee, for onsite investigation) 1 c M8D symtol : Septic tsnk f Seuage lagoor ! Trench Area Daily cover end soil name : absorption areas , sanitary sanitary for landfill , fields , , . , landfill landfill 1 1 2. . Arls ----'Severe: 'Severe: :Severe: : deptt to roci, ' seepage, : derth to rock, : sicps : depth to roc, depth to roc:, : sloPe. : small st:-.es • , ' slope : large stores 3 Arsari :Sexere: : slooe !Sevt-f. :Sev,:rt: :Severe: tpcor. ' dettt. :.: rc:',, : seeriage. 3 decth tt rock, : dent- to ro6, ! dent°. to rock, ! la,” etcres, ° sloPe ' de;tt: tc rct',, 1 c :'; r.:E':t." t: e4:,: , : Otc,t!:. dcrtt t: . . ° eltce ° slco : slo: i:one . , 44: . :,1r4,1 s: - c• : daPtt tc rt:,, : slove : sicop: smell stones, : slope , e . . i : . . . . t Fotr Mcroo, , , Sten, :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: !Severe: :Poor: ' dept17 tc rockt ! de rth to ros;„ : detth ts:. roci„ 1 depth tc rocA, ! depth, t;- nc.cr, : sloPe ! slut ! slcte : sl:oe . : eltce • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES Endnote -- SANITARY FACILITIES FA'E 2 OF 3 11/17/07 This report shows the degree and kind of soil limitations that affect septic tank absorption fields, sewage lagoon:, and saritary landfills. The limitations are considered 'Slight' if soil Properties and site features generally are favorable for the indicated use and limi`_atione are minor and easily overcome; 'Moderate' if soil properties or site features are not favorable for the indicated use ane special p annine, design, or maintenance is needed to overcome or mieimeze the limitations; and 'Severe' if soil propertiess or site features are so unfavorable or so difficult to overcome A that special design, significant increases in construction costs, and possibly increased maintenance are reo+:ired. This report also shows the suitability of the soils for use as daily cover for landfills. A rating of 'Good' indicates ttet 5011 properties and site features are favorable for the use and good performance and low maintenance car' be expected; 'Fair' indicates that soil proeerties _rd site features are moderately favorable for the use( and ore or more soil prgpertiee or site features make tare soil less desirable then the soils aatee 'tided.'; and 'Poor' indicates that one or more so:1 erdoeeties or site featares are unfaveeab,e for the use and overooaing the unfavorable properties requires special de5_gn, extra maintenance, or costly alteration. SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS are areas in whist: effluent from a sectio tank is distributed into the soil through subsurface tiles or perforated r+1pe. Only that part of the !o_: betueer deeth.•s s' 21 to 72 inches ie evaluated. The ratings are beee on soil ,sitefeatures, and obser. pe-ftirm;a'lce of the sells. Fe"meat•ility, a hip pr.,:�er:ies eat�-es ed water tat!!, dept w, to bedrock or to a cemented par,, and flooding a F:. absee tion of t^e . ,..veer. _aree stones and t+edrortor a cementer` pan interfere with installation. Unset sfactory PC^forma'ice of septic tare absorption fields, including exceseiveiy slow absorption of effluent, sjrfacine of effluent, and hi1._`.ee seepage.. ca, affect public hea:tt,. Groundwater ;,an be Polluted if hige:y permeable sane and gravel or fraeteeed bedrock is less than 11 feet bele tae bane of the atsort.tior.field, if slope is ex4ess:ve, or `_f the water tate .s near Um, sur`ace. The -e me:tt be uneate"at=; 5oil material ben-at.the absorptioe field tC ,i.tcr the effluent ef eet=tielY, Mae. kcal ordinances require that tits material be of a certain thickness. SEWAGE LAGOONS are shallow ponds constructed to told seweee while aerobic baete-ie decomocse the solid and liquid wa_tes. Lageees should have a nearly levees flexr surrounded by cu,` slues or embankments of Concocted Soft. Lagoons generally a•'e dasienee to hold the sewage within a dept} cf 2 t` S feet. h'enr'y ie,vervious so''i. Cateria' for the 1ageo", floor and sides is required to mininiie seecage pee eer.teeinatior ;f ground water. This report gives ratioce fpr the nates el ;o..f that mates Up the lagoon floor. 'ee :Le -feet layer and, generally, 1 or 2 feet cs sole material be:ou tate surface layer are eicavated to provide mete._a'_ f.7.r the emb rI '-t a, TRc -ratings are based or sof: r:"ape"ties, site feature!, and observed oeeforme nee t`e soil:. C-neitered in the ratings are slope, oeemeat'1..tf, a high water table, depth to bed. .c or tc a cemented dice stones, r,nte. t er matter. r.: r rE„ •,t?;; Far... f1oG.•: �. large 5 4 _ a^.d t. C °rg- -, f13. ... Excessive seepage due to r8ri1 permeability of the soil CT a ideate" t.a le that is high enough to raise the level of sewage in the lagoon causes a lagoon tc function: unsatisfactorily. Pollution results if seepage is excessive or if floodwater overtooe the lagoon,. A high content of organic natter is detrimental tC• prow' furctipr.ing of the lagoon because it inhibits aerobic activity. Slope, bedrock, and cemented pans Can cause construction problems, and large stones tar: hinder co,`aac.ion .f the lagter• `Icor. SANITARY LANDPIee$ are areas Oere solid waste is disposed of by burying it in soil. There are two types of land°111, trer;ct and a"ea. In a trent'; la"'d`i11, ;he waste is Placed ir a trench, It is spread, Ciir a_ted, and ceveref daile w;'_h a thin layer of 5:1.1 excaystew at the site. Ie ee'`i tae ;e rye `ed successive ee ee the an ares :z ::, ,. w3S:e ._a. d Tw urs. 3:ve ,aye. _.. . surface of he sof:. The waste ee srread, _ eeected. and coveee•_ dpi.' Witt. a t;^1 ;dyer cf sc e a source away t _I f �%9^ p: rrp fro the .7l, .•" trot: of lenc.. _ must _ to bear _ .0 J.cr r ftp. Both t yCec involve a ,s!of Around.Ete' j1'i_:ir:ll'.. of ex.:= .... .. c reveg=.tat1.or nete tc be cersfeer gee The ratings it tis repel a,'e basee U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAE RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES Endnote -- SANITARY FACILITIES --Continued PAS` 3 OF 11/17/97 on soil properties, site features, and observed Performance of the soils. Permeability, depth to bedrock or to a cemented pan, a high water table, slope, and flooding affect both types of landfill. Texture, stones and boulders, highly organic layers, soil reaction, and content of snits and sodium affect trench type !andfiils. Unless otherwise stated, the ratings apply only to that part of the soil within a depth of about 6 feet. For deeper trenches, a limitation rate 'Slight. or 'Moderate. may not be valid. Onsite investigation is needed, DAILY COYER FOR LANDFILL is the soil material that is used to cover compacted solid waste in an area type sanitary landfill. The soil material is obtained offsite, transported to the landfill, and spread over the waste. Soil teiture, wetness, coarse fragments, and scone affect the ease of removing and spreading the material during wet and dry periods, Loamy or silt.., soils that ere free of large stones or Access cravel a"e the best cover for a landfill.. Clayey soils may be sticy or cieddy and are difficult to spreac; sandy soils are subject to soil blowing. After soil material has been removed, the soil material renninin; in ne borrow area mus` be thick enaugt, over bedrock, a ceme,ted pen, or the water table to permit revegetation. The soil material used as final cover for e landfill should be suitable for plants, The surface layer ge^erally has the best workability, Pore organic matter than the rest of the profile, and the best potential for pants. Material from the surface layer sh?,;Id be stockpiled for u:e as t"e f-inal cover, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEFART ENT O* AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BUILD:NG SITE DEVELOPMENT Soil lnfornatior. PAGE a OF 11117,197 [The information in this resort indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite investigation) � Mao symbol Shallow Dwellings Dwellings Small : Local roads ' Lawns and and soil name i excavations o without with ' commercial ; and streets ; larldscaDing • basements basements buildings ; . 2: ' . 1 1 Ar:f :Seven: :Severe: !S,evere, 'Severe: 'Severe: :Severe; slope ; slope ' gloom ; slue : siope ; small stones,. Y I I • : large stones. s1ooe Anssri :Severe: 'Severe: :Severe: :revere' !Seve'e: `Severe: destt: to rocs,' slop':, death to roc}.,: slope, ; depth to roc,'.' sloe, S.G�e . ^e:. .. rJ. ! _..,. ' dere, t: rr:} - s:owe , dei.:. t^ rock ; Rw , Dit:rc• --- 'Se",ere: :Sever. ;Se:e-e: ISeEe-e: ':ert:'t.. :Neve -t: :;mot" to roc.: dobe . derv`_ to rock, $:.c sloe orwur1.t9. a,:'We slope I I slope, " de: -.t. to nc6, 44;T1 Marvel ---- :r.cderete: :Modfir3 ° :Moderate, 't'?I erste: :Mo6e-ate;:' 'v°: le -3e s!.,. e5 : -13rce stove: arse st;";es _.;C•t, . ?,. action, ' la`",_toffs • i3:',- stone= large sto es Torriorte=`s.. , , I , Same: --- - ------ t ;Se. - Ct�,nr•c• �,:c••c 'c_. -...ere: iS`4f"z; .Severe; 'S a depth tc rock.,: slope, ,` ,doth to rock „ slope, ; depth to rock,: slope, 1 sloe i cePtr t. roc; : .SIOPt• : d?Pt to roc.. !loos ' fiePtn to roc} I Stec- 'Severe: ;Severe; .Severe: 'Severe: Se.e• : 'Severe: ' deott, to roti , slow c,FR." to rock,: slo.. ; -:ops , dro.,. .tv : dei'': i• to rs,:, ¢ 1 1 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L,S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAGE 2 OF 2 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 1//17197 BUILDING SITE DEVELOPMENT Endnote -- 8l1ILDING SITE DEVELOPMENT This report shows the degree and kind of soil limitations that affect shallow excavations, dwellings with: and without basements, small commercial buildings, local roads and streets, and lawns and landscaoin9. The limitations are 'Slight', 'Moderate', or 'Severe'. The limitations are considered 'SI_get' if soil properties ar:d site features are generally favorable for the indicated use and limitaions are minor and easily overcame; 'Moderate' :f soil prpperties or site features are not favorable for the indicated use and special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to overcome or minimise the limitations; and 'Severe' if soil properties or site features are so unfavorable or so difficult to overcome that special design, significant irc"eases in construatton costs, and passibly 1nc+'eesed maintenance are required, Special feasibility studies may be required where the soil limitations are leve -e. SHALLGS' EXCAVATIONS are trenches or holes dug to a maximum: depth of 5 or 6 feet for basements, 9 -ave s, utility :'.nes, oper ditches, and other purposes. The ratings are based as s':l properties, site features_. and otserved performance of the soils. The ease of digging, filling, and compacting is affected by the depth to bedrock, a cemented pan, or a vary firm dense %aye"; stone content: soil textuae; and slope. Thf time Cf the year that excavations can be 'lade is affected ty the depth to a seasonal hist; water table and the susceptibility of the soil to flo:oder .. The resistance o` the excavation walls or bands to sloughing or caving is affected by soil texture and the depth the water tatle. ME? L:N. .' !".AL, CO ERCIA' � 41 ' S structures built on shallow foundations' BJ._tJ.!r. are on urn" -s'. _,. sr•:±. The :e3: Hai:- is las saes as teat for Lir'.;:e-`ae .Ydwellircs nc hiPtr tlear th-ee 5.0-".... Rail"'y s. are aec.. ?•)r 5+i_l commercial buildings w f elft Uses:eats. for dwellings it ba'amts, and f`r die-' ,,ae eats, The ratings are posed on 5:,l oroCf.te5, site featu e, ar,d otserved Pe f .ar.:e of t e ,. A high water table, dept.. to bedr.:cr: Cr .. _ !temente!` : ;en. targe stone, s;o•ae, Vand !lope'"%% affe:: the else , elle._.. and :anal -vatic.. + ar, _ and grading that rea.,:re cuts and 'ills of acre thar, t or 6 feet are rat Considered. LOCAL ROA^E A#� ^.+FREE+.. have an ell-weatber surface and carr; aataaotile and ,:,`t truck traffic a.. year, F�'eY have a subgrade 04 cut or fi:_ soil material, a base o' gravel, crushed root, cr statili:ed soil materia:, and a flexible or rigid surface. Cita and fills ere ggenera:iv oraoerties, site features, and otserved performance of the soils Death tc bedrocl c- the cemented can, a high water table, flooding, large s_oael, and slope affect the east of excavating and grading. Soil strength (as :nferrn frog the ear freer. , classificetior Cf the salli, suet,%: -swell potentia:, `rant act:cr: potential, al depth tc ahigh water table affect `ht traffic-s•ucPa-tiav ty. . :tape;,% GNS Alr`1:, -Aftii•SCAPIN+a rewire aoi1s on whicn turf arc car nam entry: trees s�`rabs stay a -e 8`w _ .:8" to established and maintained. -he ratings are base*on sc•i: prgper`ies, site 'estuaes, and observe`rR,,a Ce of the soils. Sail yea^`_ce, a high; water table, decta t. _ ..rnii or to e ce":eatew Nan the ava:latle water caerae`y :r t4s ueoee L" inches, and the content of salts. sodium, and sulfidic materials affect plant growth. Flooding, wetness, slope, stoniness, and the aaojrt of sand, clay, ar organic matter in the surface lays' affect trafficability after vegetati'aa is established. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. 6EPARTNENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 11/1.7197 (The information in this resort indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite investigation) Mao symbol Roadfill Sand and soil name I , Gravel TOPSP.i I . is 1 r , Arle----.------- --;Po^:": :Imarobab!e: IImProbable: "poor: depth to S^:i., ' ex:e ss fines ! excess finee r small stones, a slope ; slope I I p An,sari :P :Irvrotable: ,Ir:^ol'ah:e: Poor: de;•`` t.. rc excess es , excess f_nt ; de"s. rock, sloe , i large stones, , : slue R'ci Cutcrc"v---• cr-. ...... ;lorc�r-:e: :poor: r deott to rack, : etcess f=. -res ; excess fires ' de;`.`- to rock, iMarva' :Fair: ;Improbaii ':D.trot+aLlf: :Poo„: o large Stones : excess fines : excess fines ! Iange stones, ' I area re:la.r. 67: crriorthents, ; r Steep 'Vi.;;r: :Iihprobatle: ri bi death to r ac . : excesi files . excess fires I deot .. `; Tics: slue r shell stones I I , slope Rock Outcrop, I $tee. :Poor: ilf. otat,IF' :I nrob b:e! !Poor: defied'/ to rock, ! excess fines ; excess fines ; depth to rock, slope � ' i Slope 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. ItEPAFTMEAT OF AGR CUJURE R NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVILE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS Endnote -- CONSTRUCTION MATERIA'.S PAGE 2 OF 3 1:/i7iS7 This report gives information about the soils as a source of roadfill, sand, gravel, and topsoil. The soils are rated 'Good', 'Fair', or 'Poor' as a source of roadfill and toasoi;. They are rat as a 'Probable' or 'IRp�vtuatle' source of said and gravel. The ratings are based on soil properties and site features that affect the removal of the soil and its use as construction material, Normal compaction, minor Processing, and other standard construction Practices are assumed. Each soil is evaluated to a depth of 5 or 6 feet. Roadfill is soil material that is excavated in one place and used in road embankments in another place. In this repo-:, the soils are rated as a source of roadfill for low embankments, generailY less than 6 feet high and less exacting in design than higher eaba°•l;cents. The ratings are for the soil materia: below the surface layer to a death of 5 or 6 feet. It is assumed that soi: layers will be mixed during excavating and spreading. Many soils have layers of contrasting suitability within their pr-fi:e. The report entitled Engi,neerir. Index Properties is also ava :rile and it Provides detailed information about each soil layer. This Information gar, de`;rrtine the suitability of eco layer ft'r use as roatfill. The performance of soil aster it is stabilized with lisle or :ere",t is not consideree it the ratings. The ratings ..'E sr. so:i oroperties, Sitie fest..:es. f Obs?"'4e:.rfare!r s the sols. The thickness of SG:tat.:e nate-i:, :r cors-tiara°;o''., The ease f excavation is 'F.:t `1 :''ye stones, a-,:g`^water table and since. '!G►' we:l tt.e soil Performs lase aster it hgs neer: cpm a^ted an: drained :s determined by.its Strength f g`.!1 Rata inferred fro" the a^, Mee"i n^ tilace?a: n• the Sc: a".c, st'rink-swe . went!a:- Soils rate- 'Good' cant a_ segs^: tj'C a'. ». ��?'- .,+ b,.rc material. a low shrir `.: ct .ti » .oto..s ant sto7es, ^r', slopes of Dept!' -- ,he water table ._ rare ttat ' fee. Soils rata' 'air" haws more than 35 pe cent silt- and ;,lay -s ze2r i l es and have i olasti c:tti o`Lss `ha c' They have a moderate shrine -swell Potential, slopes of 15 25 cs e . or ma"y stone;. Depth to the tatle is to 3 fret Soils rated 'Poo-' have a ;,.are'- ty i,-. E, t.= mue. than C. a high shrink. -swell potential, many stones, or slopes Of more than 25 to Per:. They are wet. and tte oef`tr. to the water table is :`esS tar _foot. These soils Ray he%e layers of suitable materia:, but the r.eterial is fess than 3 feet thick. Sand and gravel are natural aggregates suitable for commercial Use r''`_I^ a minimum of processing. Sand and grave: are used in many kinds of construction, Specifications for each use vary widely. :n this rewort only the probability of finding material in suitable ouantfty is evaluated. The fuitatiiity of the material for Sp•r " r pvrposcs is not eve Ja`.ed, nor are factors that affect excavatio-: of the material. The properties used to evaluate the .._L as ., sou'' .`, r,-6 sand or gravel are gradation C gr_.., sizes ia= indicated by the engine. Llrja cl assil icati cn '•, of the soilthen thickness of suitable materia_, and thecontent of rock fragments. Kinds of rock, acidity, and stratification are give" ir, the soil series descriotiors, Gradation of grain sizes i5 giver in the Engineering Index roC,e"`.:e5 report A so:: hate: ., .. ,, �� a :}.e �- a hr- ::aY;.. aa" o - .-. ' - 7 . w.•... sand 3 �,r3� a r.• a alter os 5ary 0, r !! u: v 12 Per.;g sil arcs. This materia! Res` be s` least 3 feet thick and less than r4 .et by weight, large sta..es c,: s^: ys `ir ot h._ s.. ... �P?"f° fragments is s.'t Y edeli s.;o' si"E.E a"d . ... .. ; lira" gr avcl. U.S. DE PAFi'h1.NT OF AGRICULTURE r NATURAL RESO;fFCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS S Endnote -- CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS --Continued PAGE 3 OC 3 11(17/9? topsoil is used to cover an area so that vegetatio!1 can be established and maintained. The Upper 49 inches of a soil is evaluated for use as topsoil. Also evaluated is the reclamation potential of the borrow area. Rant growth is affected by toxic material and by such properties as soil reactio:., available water capacity, and fertility,. The ease of excavating, loading, and spreading is affected by rack fragments, slope, a water table, toil texture, and thickness of 5.:table raterial. Reclamation of the Morrow arta is affect=.' by slope, a water table, rock fragments, bedrock, and toric material. 4 Soils rate 'Good' have friable loamy material to a death of at :teat 6C inches. They art free of sones and cot.bies have little or no gravel, and have slopes of less than 8 percent. They are lo: it cc'tent of soluble salts, are rat rally fertile or "e'sacrd yell to fertilizer, and art not so wet that excavation is difficult. Solis rated 'Fair' are lardy soils, loary soils that have a relatively high content C' Cl?;, s" is hit have tc 0 inches o' suitable material, soils that have an epore.iabie amount of gravel, stones, or soluble salts, or soils that have slopes of t to :5 percent. The soli: are rot so flet that excavation is difficult. Sails rate 'RCC" are Very sandy or clayey, have :es. than. ?m inches of sol"a .e material, have alar;e aRrtr . gr31e , st:.':rs o" Si.l1:l. s? hoax s'to •c sa nt have seasonal vat r table . or mea the ., .acts, S C% of Po" tar "e: -a 3' a. ;;x a � W` r sace. The sur+5:e layer -' most sails fs ge era:ix preferred 'o. I.fsoil ,.e`aast 'c. _ C -tier content. Oraan.c matte greatly increases the ab5_rf_tsor, anc retentionr. o` _.s`.. e a e 61 -farts `C pleat B" Pyr..,. -, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SOILS Soil Information PAGE 1 ;F 1 11/17157 (The classification report does not include recent amendments to soil taxonomy for caticr e•rcf;enr: activity, Particle size modifier, and dual mineralogy for strongly contrasting classes. For more detailed information contact your local USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service field office on stave office. Soil name F or higher taxonomic ci A.^.=_ar1 LITHIC HAPLOB OROLL$, .aArr, r;aFa. Arls ;A;IIII HAFLOECROL15, ARGIBORCLLS, Fi _ ,... , `!TIKE. Torrid thents, Steep ;TDRRIORTMENTS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE RANGELAND PRODUCTIVIIY AND CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUN4ITIES Soil Information PACE 1 OF 2 11%17%47 (Only the soils that support rangeland vegetation suitable for grazing are listed. Ppt means precipitation' Map symbol and soil name 2: Arle Tota: production Range site Characteristic vegetation :Coma - ;Kind of rear ; Orr : ,sition :weight 1 1 1 ;Lblsue, Pct 4 1 :LOAMY SLOPES t 1 , ;Favorable i,20D 'Western wheetgrass 20 Norma. 4CC ; Sluebunch uheatg+•ass 15 ;Unfavorable 500 ;Indian ricegrass 15 ccs Meed:eandthresd 1- 11r4.e countainmahogeny ;!�tafi serviceberry MoAta:r. big sage E 7 5 1 4 Ansari ;'_CA"Y FREAKS 'Favorable e5v ;Irld?an rics,vess gn ;C. 'rt.',°r., whea`Frass--- Unfevo^a.. 500 :Pinyon 15 :Juniper 5 :Needleandthread 5 :Mountain big sage------------- ; 5 :1:t se ..^e:. r 5 Rock Cutcrop----' i4: iorva: :DEEP LCA, ;ravorat.:e ' 1,u2' ,i4est9~' uheatgrass 2C ;Norma? 1,500 'Needeandthread 15 :Unfavorable , 700 ;Basin big sagebrush 10 :61uyebunch whea`.urass - 10 ;Utah serviceberry 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PAGE 2 OF 2 11/17/ 97 j Endnote -- RANGELAND PRODUCTIVITY AND CHRACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES In areas that have similar climate and topography, differences it the kind and amount of vegetation produced on rangeland are closely related to the kind of soil. Effective management is based on the relationship between the soils and vegetation and water. This report shows, for each soil, the range site; the total annual production of vegetation in favorable, normal, and unfavorable years; the characteristic vegetation; and the average percentage of each species. Only those soils that are used as rangeland or are suited to use as rangeland are listed. An explanation of the column headings in this report follows. RANGE SITE is a distinctive kind of rangeland that produces a characteristic natural plant community that 1. differs from natural plant communities on other range sites in kind, amount and proportion of range plants. The reiationshio betweeen soils and vegetation was ascertained curing this survey; thus, range sites generally can be determined directly fror t'xe soil map. Sol: properties that affect noistare surely and plant nutrients have the greatest influence or the productivity of range plants. Soil reactior, salt content, and a seasonal 3 high nater tette are also imocrtant. TOTAL PRODUCTION is the amount of vegetation that can be expected to grow annually on well managed rangeland that is supporting the potential natural plant community. It in,ludes al: vegetation, whether or not it is Palatable to grazing animals. It includes the current year's growth of leaves, twigs, and fruit: of w•aody plants. It does not include the increase in stet diareter of trees and shrubs. It is ex.'•essed in Pounds pe' acre of sir -dry vegetation far favorable, normal, and unfavorable )'ears. In a favaaat:e year, the amount and distribution of precipitation and the tertera`.0-es make grc•+J:n; corditio"s subst=r.t .iy better than average. laa horny) year, rowing conditions are ebcjt average. In ar urfevc"at e yk? C^' ::_^°:s are well balsa average; generally because of low ave ie a sc:i moisture. Dry weight is ttie tctale yield Ger acre of air-dry vegetatior. '!yields ere adjusta to a common De^cent C` M r moist,Jr° content. 7. r€laticrrslr D of green weight to air-dry weight Varies actard_r'= to suet fact:ns as exaos_re. aucant of she_e, re:ert "aids, and unseasonable dry per`_:ds, CIiARACTEPI `-" VE4t`A"IDa The grasses, fobs. anal Shrubs that make Uc mast of,.•er h= ti ' nit t pt a: natural Ola comzon.ity cr each soil is listed ay cocoon nate. Under CD,!pncITION the exPec,a.d peaae"taae of the rota_ e'n`.a: proiu:tion is gi'v'er. for each s:*eoies taking :10 tits Caarazearis._- a.ap•Qa, The 3aaunt that can be ased a: forage :e:ends or the kind. of g'aaing anitails end on the grazing season. S, n arelea at n:: nes ithet ♦ ti a"�. !M1 G..;. e.i, re _ . ., i:nOwlE;ge of ...E i.in.'.s 4t soil and of the "rOien.iai nature: plant Cot;,'....`y. .. also reouires an evaluatior of the [resent range condition. Range condition is. determined by comparing the Pr'ese,t rlant cOaaUni.Y with the potertia.', nat a: plant community on a particular range site. The more clasely the existing community resembles the potential eommanity, the better the range conditian. urge condition is an ecological rating only. The objective in range raanaaement is to control grazing s} that tt:e tarts ro'wir on a site area +t. the are[Ind s:ant s_ the tial natural c- " .r:t� f". p . , b"e s in l and a .� . ` a .e potential :a°; cora .. �r that site. Sulk managetent aene°'a.iy results la the Intim-4 pr;d:lctior of vegeta-tiara, control of undesirable brush species, conservation 0 water. and c.•''t c c` erosio."., ScP.etimes, however, a range condition somew`aat tre:'mow th' o rent a: -seta gra:irg reeds, oravides wildlife habitat, and protects soil and water res Jr-c.es, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 :'.S. DEPARTMENT CF AG R!C'L".L'-FEE PAGE 1 Cr 3 V'A"C•aAL FE3CLFRCE: C't;SE7VA':ON SERVICE 1:4':1ia1 WILDLIFE 1AF;'k7 Soil Information Fotential for habitat eleetnts Potential es habitat for-- %aA sYmk1 R Grain ; i;ild ; ; Coen- flood- Range and soil rums ; and 'Grasses; herbs Bard ; Cor,if-;Shrubs.'Betlarld;Shallow; land ! land !WWetland; land seed , and ceous; wood erous: Plants ; water : wild- ; wild- i wild- ; wild- eroAs ;le9aes! plants' trees ' Plants: areas i life life : life ° life ' I. i n Ar1e ;VERY :VERY ;FAIR -- ;FAIF ;VERY ;VERY :•P4.2'F --- ''VERY 1F4IR cfl.F ! 'CCF ' PQCR POOR 1 POOR I , I 1 . Ansar 'VERY 'VEPTM 'PDP 'POOR :VERY 'jr'ER:VE5' 'V` Y 2): f": e P '7F ! ' POOR P4"f Fire POOR 1. 11 / R':• i':._r,°[--- !VG„Y 'VERY !VEF" 'y+'ER: ;VERY 'DEFY '4r:: 'VE;v Ir;v IVERv:VERY ' MR 1 nr1.. a 0',7 r : +.:` 1 nn 1 0O^F 1 P"R 1 pr.. i °CO° . . �... _ ! F,^;` P��•� FCR ' P •bR P F .S � _F 4. 1 1 1 1 1 9 1 /� ' 44. 1 1 4l Morval !:AIR .V.2 'E^�^1 _ - "1.•: 'C^, ';T."'P !GQ1 !PCS' :r ? o' 1 1 1 r 1 + Stesu 'FOO: !VERY ;FA:F ...- Ipr 6nn :VERY !POOR, ,i,EFY .f+"l„ . 3 rt�Fi C'UtC OD. steep ---- -- -_. 'Ve:° VERY !VERY !VERY VERY '1'E.. 1.1°rF" ' EFY :VERY ;VERY 'VE;Y ;VERY RnF Fg'; wLf R ` - .:r` ! P:«`' F"SCP . =0: F:OF 1 1 1 r Y 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION sfRVICE WILDLIFE HABITAT Endnote WILDLIFE HABITAT PAGE 2 OF 11Ii7197 Soils affect the kind and amount of vegetation that is available to wildlife as food and cover. They alio affect the construction of water impoundments. The kind and abundance of wildlife depend largely on the amour,', and distribution of food, cover, and water. Wildlife habitat can be created or improved by planting appropriate vegetation, by maintaining the existing plant Cover, or by promoting the natural establishment of desirable plants. In this report the soils are rated according to their potential for providing habitat for various kinds of wildlife. This information can be used in manning parks, wildlife refuges, nature stud), areas, and other developments for wild'.-i,fe in selecting Soils that are suitable for establishing, improving, cr maintaining specific eletents of wildlife habitat; and in determining the intensity of management needed for each element of the habitat. The potential of the soil is rated 'Good,' Fair,' 'Poor,' or 'Very poor.' A rating of 'Good' indicates that the element or kind of habitat is easily established, improved, or maintained, Feu or no lisitatir'`1s af`ect management, ant satisfactory results can be esoe;:ted, A rating of `Fair' i di.ates that the element or kind of habitat can be established, improved, or maintained it most places. Moderately intensive management is reouire.d for yetis€actore results. A rating of 'Poor' indicates that limitations are sev'er'e far the designated element or kind of habitat. Habitat can be created, improved, or mairtainet in most Places, but management is difficult and must be intensive. A rating of 'Vern poor` indicates that restrictiv's for the element or kind of habitat are very severe and that unsatisfactory results can be expected, Creating, imr.tving, or maintaining habitat is impractical or imooss_ble. "hr, elements of wildlife habitat are described In the following oaragraohs, GRAIN AN 5F_'`, Ca:•^•3S a'`e domestic grains- and seed-produ:irg herbaceous piar.'s. Skil properties end `eat;. -e_ that e'fect the gro th of grain and seed f^ors are depth of the -0;o` :cre te.ti➢re of the e.arface laver, available :atter Capacity, wetness, sic'e, s::rfa_e stoniness, and flood hazard. Soil tem:peracre and Soil moisture are also considerat.cns. Examples ofira. and see Crops artwheat, data, and ba''Fx GRASSES Ar a'st.', domestic perenriai grasses acv h`rt,aiec» le;Jnts. Soil prose:),ties and features that affe:. the a" depth of hkE .:t zone, `e `..t c' the s}rf ate :aYtr available water CAGB'*'t•<:r,Egc, s;,"ace stoniness, flood hazy"L, and slope. Soil temperate _ and %,;:1,1:"e are a:.. consid,er5tiens, Exam.ies of grasses and legumes are fescue, ioVegrass, brommegrass, elp,.er, and alfalfe. iiEREACEgI.1 PANT' are native or ratjra..'y established grasses and forbs. .-„l.'..r; weeds. Soil properties and features that affect the growth of these Plants are depth of the rse. 2or:e, texture :' the sJ"face layer, a'veilatle rater capac tY, wetness., surface stoniness, and `loot h.aiard, Soil tee:cerature and soil moisture are also corsideratisns. E.arncle. .f i.ilt nerrta.eous [' a"`.s are b:'.iestem, goldenrod, beggarweed, wieatgrass, and gr ,:a. NAM= TFEES and wood' undo^story product nuts or other fruit, buds, catkins, twigs, bark, and foliage. spit orooerties and features that affect the growth of hardwood trees and shrubs are death of the root :one, available water cava^i'y, and wetness. Examples of these plarts are oak, Poplar, cherry, sweetgur, aac•.e, hawthorn, dogwood, hickory, bla:'•terry, and blueberry, Examples of fru,`_-producing shrubs that are suitable for planting on soils rated are Russian -olive, autu5r-.sive, ant crat•aople. CONIF.PrUc PLANTS farnis^ browse and seeds. Sc!iProperties and `eatures that affect the growth of coniferous trees, shrubs. and ground cover are dept, of the roe` zone, available water capacity, and wetness. Examples of coniferous plants art Pine, spruce, fir, cedar, ant juniper. SHRUBS are bushy wc•. y plants that orad;.,:e Trait. buds, twigs. bark, and foliage, Soil Properties and feat}rtes tr,at effect the grout.- of shrubs are de:`?': of the root 2Pnt available .'tater CCp_;:t;, saiirrity, an: s:.i mc.st..rc. Example: of shrug are -; ii a`'oca`y, bitterrt,rLsh,, snowsrerry, and big sa;eb"'uss". U.S. DEPARIPENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WILDLIFE HABITAT Endnote fv1tD_IFE. HA$'TAT--Continued PAGE 3 OF 3 11/:7I 7 WETLAND PLANTS are annual and perennial wild herbaceous plants that grow or moist or vet sites. Submerged or floating aquatic plants are excluded. Soil properties and features affecting wetland plants are texture of t''e surface layer, wetness. reaction, salinity, slate, and surface stoniness. Examples of wetland plants are smartweed, ,gild millet, wildrice, saltgrass, cordgrass, rushes, sedges. and reeds, SHALLOW WATER AREAS have an average depth of less than 5 feet, Scree ere naturally vet areas. Othe^s are created by dais, levees, or other water -control structures. Soil properties and features affecting shallow water areas are death to bedrock, wetness, surface stoniness, slope, and permeability. Examc.les of shallcw nate- areas are marshes, f waterfowl feeding areas, and ponds. The habitat for various kinds of wildlife is described it the following paragraphs, lfAEITAT FOR OFENLANI WILDLIFE consists of croolard, pasture, meadows, and areas that are overgrown with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These arees produce grain and seed crops, grasses ?'': it12,:5, and wild herbaceous s ^cats. y r Wildlife attracted to ta.i aa e -e as include to.;. -ite pheasant, feadc ie field lf7d 5oar rind cottontail, a.,i red f y,AEI7r_ z•F WOODLAND WT: T Tcr cone,:c`.S of arees of deciduous plant= or coniferous plants or bot`: and associated g"3:Sf$, legwr s. and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife ett-acted to these areas include wild turksi, ruffed grme, woodcock, thrushes, 1:oi-dpeokers, sk-irr els, ©iter fos, race::,., da r, and bear. SAE;'A` ;OF xETLAfc:• WILDLY! ccrsists of open. marshy or eve%, shallow :ate" `??5. Some cf the wildlife attracted a..e.y sra du6.s, geese he-cr.:, short ti -ds, Puskrat. m nkr and bearer. ..,_7'1,' F[F 5.: ",::fir':•', III:'O:.Fc c: ,...`.s (}f areas of 5h -Uta ant; ,.Sid he-bacw.a. tient. ii' a att _..._ .. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF TIfE SOILS Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 2 11/17197 I 1 I Iiao symbol ; Depth Clay : Cation- i Soil ; Calcium ; Gypsum ;Salinity Sodium and soil name ; ,exchange ;reaction :carbonate adsorrtion cePa:ity ' � ratio 1 1 1 I 1 In Pct ;me41100s off ; Pct Fct ;raMhoslerr 2: L 1 1 1 1 Arle ; 0-10 15-25;10.0-25,01 6.6-7.8 0-5 ; 0-2 10-32 i0-25; 5.0-:`... 7.4-8.4 ; 5-10 : --- ; 0-2 32-36 - -- -- --- ; - _ I ! 1 1 1 Anson ; 0-1G 1E-25'i2.G-2.. 7.9-6.4 : 0-5 0-2 10-18 16-20:10.0-15.0 7,9-8.4 5-10 ; --- 0-2 i 18-22 Rock. O.tc'op --- 0-60 44: y0rva 0-5 22-:7,'1'"-..0-20.0' 7.4-7.£ 0.-5 5 27-34;10..0-2i.2: 7.4-5.6 1-10 17-27 .` 27-3432.0-2: 7.4-5.4 5-1` 3 vC 2C-2'; 5.0-15.2, 7.4-£.4 67: Torric^thents, Steec 0-4 --- --- ' 6.1-5.4 4-30 : 5-35; 5.0-2CI.0'' 6.1-E.4 0-5 3C,-34 Rock Outcrop, S`-eEc ,r, EC 0-2 0-2 C-2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF I SOILS Endnote -- CHEMICAL 'PROPERTIES OF THE SOILS PAGE 2 OF 2 11117/97 This report shows estimates of some characteristic: and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates are given for the major layers of each soil in the survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and similar soils. CLAY as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. In this report, the estimated clay content of each valor sal: layer is given as a percentage, by Weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. The amount and kind of clay greatly affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil. They determine the ability of the soil to adsort cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink -swell potential. Permeability, and plasticity, the ease of sci: dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay in a soil also affect tillage and ea -thea inc operations. CATIOK EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CECT is the total amount of cations he ,n a soil ... such t.ay that they can be remove] 011y by eschar,, ng with another cation i` the natural scii solution. CEC is a measure of the ability cf a soli to retail ;.aliens, scPe of which are p;ant ni;trierts. mails 'with' AoV CS( hold fem cations and may recti re ;wort "recuert applications of fertilizers than stile with high CEC. Soils with high CE( !;aye the potential t to retain cations, thus reducing the .e R4'S9ibll,.it y cf G'nil . ...,.vr `„tiurrd wale'. SOIL REACTION is a measure cf acidity or alkalinity alt is e)Dnessed as a range ir, p!1 f lalues. The range in c' of each !@a;or horiz.i is based or man:' field tests. For ma"Y cr)!. va:,se hsre tee" vel fled by laboratory analyses. Sohl reaction is important it selec : crops and other plaids, in evaluating soil amei:dnents fon 'fie" `t:+y and stat lizat'.;.r,, a' in deterein:rg the r is1: of corrosion,. CALc ur CARSCATE is the pt.-ve'tage by weight cf calcium carbon _. in the fine -earth materia:, les_ than 2 .,,..l:meters :n size. &YPS`J is the per:ert Ye b. 4first of hydratedsulfatesCa:; :J" [. tillitt r.! sra,:er in si e, ir t`e so,,, SA'I% ITY is a measure of soluble scats in the scil at saturation, It __ expressed as the electrical conductivity of the saturation extract, in mi;Bimbos per centimeter at 2. degrees C. Estimates are based on field and laboratory measurements at representative sites of nonirrigated soils. The salinity of irrigated soils is affected by the Quality of the irri.e;ion water and by the freouency of water application. Hence, the Salinity of soils. in individual fields car differ greatly from the value given in the reocrt. Salinity effects the suitability of sG . for crop producti0n, the stability of soil if used as construction material, and the Potential of the sci to Corrode meta, and ,.;n„"ete. soutr AnOR.-TION PATIO (SAF.' expresses the relative activity . . .. excharge ram, .' it the soil. SA is _ measi.re Gf the t e;:rt __d:.. relative 10 calcium and magnesite.. ';r the water extract from saturated soil _ante. r 1' RIFLE AREA SOIL SURVEY SHEET NO. .19 SOIL SURVEY OF ASPEN-GYPSUM AREA, COLORADO. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AG. PAR'N OF EAGLE. GARFIELD. AND P:TKIN "!iLNT!E- SOIL CONSERV ATION ql:. DR.- Nui.E EXHIBIT I •- PART 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOULS Soil Information PACE 1 OF 4 1111707 (Entries under 'Erosion factors --T' apply to the entire profile. Entries under "Wind erodibilitr group" and 'Wind erodability index' poly only to the surface layer) Mar symbol and soil nave Depth i Clay r hoist j bulk density n I 1 Pct al: In/hr 4 f Y r Ar le > 0-10 10-32 32-36 ' I 1 Anssr. - ---- ', C-17 ' I IO -IE r la -27 r I I Rock Outcry ' 0.60 I r 44: Korva: - , 0-5 17-27 ' ' 27-6C 67: Steep Rock Outcroca, Permea- bilitY Erosion factors;Wind ,Wind :Available: Shrink- ;Organic ;erodi-;erodi- eater ; swell ; matter; abilityability 'caraoity ,potential; R ; Kf T ;group ;'Index . r 1 , . InilRr. 15-2` .25-1.40 0 +til -r 4{',c, 10-25:1,2-1.54 0.60-6,00 'O,05-G,04!1.ou 0.00-200 i 1 1 r `nn0..14-0, 17;10. r I l°-2 '1.25-1.40; 16-2:::,25-1.40 I ; C,60-2,00 0.52-6.27 0.00-7.20 22.2` ,1.25- .4 .o!`i.;,C 27-34'1.25-1.4C .2C-6,61' 27-34;1.25-1.40' 2,211+-C.40 20-27;..25-1,40: 0,60-7,00 Pct . r I :2,0-4.0; 0.10! C.24 O.S-1.0' 0.11'• 7,32.` r r r r , , 0.24' 0,24' :1.0-2,C 0.15' 0,25; V r + 1 r i ;0,13-0.;6:1.o>a 'C.16-0,`.S'Moderate •5-1.0• :0.13-0.15,1oder,... ,0•5-..C' 0.10-_.:3;you :0.0-C.fi, r r I 0-4 4-3C ' 5-";'.30-„S0' 2 1'0 ;0.10-7.-1.ro: 30-34 -_ --- ; 0.0^ _.:7 , 0-60 ; I 0,0-0.5 0.32! 0.32; , r I 1 E EL $6 U, S, DEPAPTrEf*T Of AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES Of SOILS Endnote -- PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS PAGE 2 OF d 11/17/97 This report shows estimates of some characteristics and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates are given for the major layers of each soil in the survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and similar soils, CLAY as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. Jr this report, the estimated clay content of each major soil layer is gives: as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than, 2 millimeters in diameter. The amount and kind of clay greatly affect the fertility and Physical condition of the sail. They determine the ability of t''e soil to adsorb cations and t:• retain moisture. They influence shrink -Swell potential, permeability, Pity, the ease of soil dispersion, and other sot: Properties. The amount and rind of Clay in a soil also affect tillage are earthmoving operations, t,U'E. BULK LE'r._TY l? the weigYt of solil fovendrya per Unit. volume. VOiu-".e is meas.jred W>ier i.1,y soil :5 at fieri i ^i::,F"e cariac ty, the moisture portent et 113 bar moisture tension. Weigh! is de'.er,i fined e'tj6."' dryi::Y the s:i: et :Os.degrees C. In tti_nevor t, the estirset:1 s:._t de's.,. of ear` major soil horizon is efp-essed in grams per cubic centimeter of soil materiel !hat is less than 2 xilliieeters in diameter. _. s:ty data art used t: c e to shrink -swell c'rter,isi, ava :atle water cai'acity, L Y We $-Pa:.e, a c, r.ther soil properties. Tne a:•:s t h... , dens: ty of a soil £i is tea the pore spa:.e aJs:ie . e wa:ar er.i roots. k bu'J der it,i of more than 1.6 car: restrict Water Stara ° and root Peretatiot. bya density is irfi:ler,:ed by ture, kind of, ;ler, :rt of i : matter, and sr:__ structure. PERNEAEILITY refer_ tc, the at. of a soil to transmit water or air, The e_;;,,es in•dicat.e the rate :r . ._ i'e- the a is Baty al _. 'hc a -e race_ of ;i aha'acter'=L," abs. .r err:•'tares Trp..=..*, end t?:,. Pt :ca. ...:) core -et.: ir the desi9r, drains;e _ .teas, septic '.aril sts: 'titch fields, en w v: L e'tr,t rote o' ate,- movement under saturate,' r s -...,t5 AVA!LAt'.,. CF?Rr.:Tv refers tc the a a+ltify of water that the s=it is Cared. °t... _"•e 'or use Dian ,_. e:.,w.a. ...: siora0' is ci en in irc`:es cf water ;Ler inch :f soil far each major sail tare''. T, ca -^ "y van::} GL _. i w C :. _... Properties that affect the rsL w.t i an of faro" and the t,p;" of rite nowt z.' -e. The gcst inperc_et V'ocert=__ err t}rt cor.ter't of try= ., malts-. s:ii teft.re, t.,`� de.sit!, and sol: r r _.t .... .. n,_..,.... rte.!' CaGa:..r i. an :6>oi'L`,. `cit: c .i .:arra: P' Cr:ei t: be y"rp:r, a"-' ir thf d%sigri and manager.er"t of lrr' t1 systems. it ter wadi r,., estimate of the .qr emit', „f :1a;,0r. ea. Available water capacity � sr e3 �._. wa`=r actually available to Plants at any given time. S'i:V-S14ELL 'OT„iiwT'A' ,s the r.:}tential `or v..! t^ -':;e ir. a sail wit`. a 105s or lain C` nil t;"e, CFa .curs "a:r;;y t4:3:sf a` :h`e int,erectt:. .iz} F::"tall: with water and varies wit', tree Wer! ar:u type. of Ct minerals ifs the s..il. The size of !ha toad or ,`:e sci: and the m.s.',:ritJle o` tLe cher,_ sci: moist.. corcer infiuerae tt r. t of s;...ellirc of scils ir.C-a:E. at,y..a, clods were 'Fad" for many s;i:s. For others, :welt: :as e<_t_r.ated or. :tie basis of .:,rt of .:as einerals in tht s:i: and or measlremer:t. of _i i:ar _oils. if the shy: :-stir.. ttd t::'etale to very high, shminvi and _:F.__ tar f?:_. dsne7t to .,,._, and other. St.':.., -". 'des,. � __i .Fe""• needed. C'9tf-,; e?x r.ias`e: °-= F„xt ,.. ,.., c. :E.,>:. of p.. ..of a: rcist..' ,tf :it.,._ '-'-,.t7. .. :nars is t._'. cr the isi. _ _ _. Thar. L rif=t.' . diareter, The C:a__.. ,."% r_^,.r. a change o1 less :`!an 3 re"':e"t,; �' --- _.. to i.. uersr r}i. ": than I• Perpent. V. , _ eat:- Cnar. " Ge'.e. , is .. ...!.r: U.S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS Endnote -- PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS --Continues PAaE 3 OF 4 11/17./.7 ORGANIC MATTER is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages of decomposition. In report J. the estimated content of organic matter is expressed as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained or increased by returning crop residue to the soil, Organic matter affects the available water capacity, infiltration rate, and tilth. It is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for crops. EROSION FACTOR K indicates the susceptibility of the whole soil (including rocas and rock fragments? to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of six factors used it the Universal Soil Loss Equation (11SLE) to predict the average annual rate of sail loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. The estimates are based crir;arilr on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter (up to 4 percent) and on soi! structure and permeability. Values of K range frog: 0.05 to 0.69. The higher the value, the rano;•e s.yscectibie the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. EROSION FACTOR Y,f is like EROS:CA FACTOR K but it is for the fine -earth fraction of the soil. Rocks and root fragments are not considered. Enr15I"K cACTOR - is an estimate of t*.e maximum average anr.uai rate of soil erosior by wind or water that ear: occur without affectin; crop prod'.ctir;ty over a sustained period. 7he rale is in tons per acre per year. k'lil4 E53.".:6.:.TY GIMPS are made up of sci:5 t}"as sirila properties affecting their resistance to wird er:.slon in cultivate-' are -c_. The groups indicate the susceptibility of ici: to wind erosion. Soils ere grouped actordir.i to the faIloowinq disci cions: 1. Coarse sands, sands, fine sands, and very fine sends. These soils are generally not suitable for crops. They Bre ext-ere:w e••cii`-le, and vegetatio^ is difficult to esta_iis . 2. Loam.y coarse sue d , 10a15y sans, loamy fine sands, !Dae'; very fine sands, and sapric soil Asteria:. These soils are very highly erodible. Crops can be er if i:.tensiye t measures to control wird erosion are used. 3. Coarse sandy loans, sandy ;oars, fine sandy lams, and very fine sandy loos. These soils are highly erodible. Crops can be grown if intensive measures to control wind erosion are used, 4L. Calcareous loans, silt looms, clay ]paras, and silty clay learrs. These soils are erodible. Crops can be grpwr intensive measures to control wind erosion are used. 4. Cisys, silty clvs, nor,calcareous clay loarrs, and silty czar loac,s that are tore than 3` Percent clay. 'bele sails are moderately erodible. Crops can be grown if measures to control wind erosion are used, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ACRICJLTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS Endnote -- PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS --Continued 5. Noncalcareous loans and silt loam that are less than 20 Percent clay and sandy clay foams; sandy clays, and heroic soil material. These soils art slightly erodible, Crops can be grovn if measures to control wind erosion are used. 6. Noncalcareous 1oais and silt loans that are more than 26 p@rcert clay and no:calcareous clay 'oats that are less than 35 percent clay. These soils are very slightly erodible. Crops can be grown if ordinary aeasI-es to Cartrol in erosion are used. 7. Silts, noncalc reous silly Clay 'oars that art less then 35 percent clay, and fibric soil material. These soils are. very slightly erodible. Crops car be grown if ordinary measures to control vi:, erosion, are used. $. Soils that are not Subject to wind erosion because of coarse fragments or the surface or becat,se of surfa;t wetne s. PACE 4 OF 4 11/17/97 The WINO ERODIBILITv INOEY as used in the wind erosion ec.,at:c,r: index ,number indicates the o` S:.i i3st ir: tons oe" acre p' ye?.. The range of hand eroeitilitl indey numbers is 3 toICC. ar:c•.;nt NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPTION REPORT Soil Informat:c+` 'tap Symbol Soil name and description Almy low 1 to is percent slope_ This Ceep, well-dra'_ned soil is on fans and uplands. It formed in a1luv um derived dominantly from calcareous redbed sandstone and shale. The surface layer is loam 8 inches thick. The upper 3 inches of the subsoil is fire sandy loam. The lower 15 inches is sandy clay loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is fine sa:^dy ker. Permeability is moderate. Available eater capacity is hash. Effective rooting depth is 61:' inches or more. Ri,rrtff is slcn to rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is slight to very higt,. Arte-Ansari-Pc:k Outcrop omit), 12 to Su percent s:caes T}•i5 coned. consists of soils and rock outcroo or: mountain sio'ea and sloping alluvia_ `ars. Tt. soil_ formed „ alluvium pri ,:eti `r,+ red -bed Sha:e and sandstone. The Arie soil makes ue abo„` 65 pace t of the conlel, the Anseri soil at,0;1' 35 yN:- e: and ?built 2_ percent. The kle _si: is zod&rately deeo and weil"drai,ned. The sJ'fne laver is 4a`, stony ioa;. abro..;t If inches thick. c:ostr.s: A are vary 22 inches thick. Soft sandstone and shale ate. at M de;:th of 3..2 inches. Fer®eeulity is moderate, en - available water capaiity is low. Effective rooting dvth is 2: to i0 im0-es Rwnc:f' is natii, a' d the erosion ha:and is hi;h t, very h ine Ansa'i sr1 is sF:;:lov end well drair-r,`. The cv.fac€ i ,cr is los.; abor�` 1v inchos tt.i:1. The su tree. :s _..`:Y iia+, Eedr;ck is her! sa`.;s.:re. Permeability is moderate, and avai11at4e tater capacity is in. Effectilerooting depth, is 10 to 22 inches.. Runoff is rapid, and the erosi4" l'.c.3"_ :t very high. ' Rook o:tcrop is mainly red sandstcy.e. ' Empedradc .:az, 2 to 6 percept slopes NORTE NICAL 50i 5 D ".R,F`ICH REPORT Soil Information Map Symbol Scil name and description This deep, well -drained soil is oa terraces, fans and hills. The surface layer is loam 5 inches thick. The subsoil is clay loam 35 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 64 inches or more is clay loan, Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is high, Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more, Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight to high. 35 Empedrado loam, 6 `c. 12 percent slopes This deep, well -drained soil is on fans and upland hills, It formed in alluvium and aeoliaoraterials. The sur fa:e iaYer is loam about 8 inches thio, The subsoil is clay loam about 55 inches thick. The substratum to a doth of 70 inches or more is clay loan. Permeability is moderate. Available water caaacitY is high. Effective ,.av. ranting depth is 60 inches or mare, nuno' is median to rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is high to very high, 53 GYPSUM. land-Cypsiort}rids coma er, :2 to 65 oeree.rrt slope's This lar. unit i4 or. mountainside slopes, hills, and dissecteuT d. :n_zes, This j"it acGi:c or,els and cary.r: ride sloct_ throi.ghaut the soil surrey area. This unit is 65 percent Gypsum land and 25 pervert fyos or''id. Gypsum land consists mainly sf expp'sed parent materials with a ve'Y higy gypsuv contest No irofile typifies psiorty?:ds, hvt orie comcorly observed is msderately Zeep and well-drair,ed. It forged in residuum and cotluviun derived dominantly from mixed parent materials with a very high gypsum content. The surface layer is fine sandy loam 8 inches thick, The underlying material to a depth of 39 inches is fine sandy loam. Soft gypsiferois shale is below 39 inches. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rec.tina depth is 10 to 40 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of later erosion is very high, if:.rval Ica', c t. 25 percent sines 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NONTECHNICAL SC LS DESCRIPTION REPORT Soil Information Ma; Symbol Soil name and description This deep, well -drained soil is on alluvial fans and mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived ° dominantly from basalt. The surface Layer is loam 7 inches thick. The upper 12 inches of the subsoil is clay loam. The lower 4 inches are loanThe ° substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is loam. Permeability is moderate• Availab!e water capacity is t moderate. Effective rooting depth is 50 inches or more. Runoff is medium to rapid, and the hazard of ° water erosion is high to very high, 9'4 I Sho'r'alter-!'!orva. c4n:.e?., 5 to 15 pe cert =100:; This map unit is on alluvial fans, hili terrace:, and valley sides. This unit is 65 percent Shoda:te,. very s•`_ ^y loam end :5 percent 'Norval ioao. The Showalter soil is deep and 'well -drained. It formed i" a -Tapia* derived domina'•tly frcr. basalt. The _.Tape is covered lift` 10 ueri.rt, stores. si,f face !ager is very Story loaK t inches thick, '? Jv�• "F' 3 inches of the 51+t'SI `., is very i0`Jt+1Y ? ayr.6". The lower 2° 1nc!,e_ s very ..t�t,tly clay. -Fe ' 2.Jtitrator to 8 depth o' 60 , .rhes or !Tore is very co y ,.c, , Pe-4.eability is slow Available water cacacity is moderate. Efft ti rod:i ;- d°ptt', is 6C i!1 p- more, Runoff is rapid, and t`e hazard of water erosion is moderate tr high, The Moral TO.1 is dee: ar.a wel u .t forced alluvi+.;x, derived tor,irertly -or- nasal.. The srfa:e :6i6r :z l e- 7.''^.s thief', The upper 12 inches tnf.l... '� df ere s;bi:il is -lay Ioar• The lower 4 inches art: !can. The sut'stratan to a depth of 64; ins c is 1oa . Permeability is moderate. A,,ailable water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium) to rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is hi;h to very h19r, howalter-Miorvai complex, IS to 25 percent slopes This met unit is on alluvial fans, high terraces, and valley sides. Thl s unit is 45 percent Showalter very ! stir. .sr: and Z5 oerce.t Mos. -a lean. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPT!0& REPORT Soil Information Map =, Symbol Soil game and description The Showalter soil is deep and well -drained. It forced in alluvium deried do-,inantly from basalt, The surface is covered with 10 to 15 percent stones, 5 Percent cobble, and S percent grave!. The surface layer is very stony loam $ inches thIc.k. The upper 3 inches of the subsoil is very cobbly clay loam. The lower 28 inches o` ` subsoil the si7v5.1. i5 very ,:Ok+h;Y C.BY'• ' The sutst'_`i.rt:Cdecticf El inches 4" more : S Vn- r cobb'.y clay loan. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is ' 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosicr is high to very high, The Porn! soil is deer. and wen -drained, Th for—,ed in alluvium derived dominantly fr,e, basal.` 71".1 sur°a;e la'er is loa` , r he! LP:.`r .2 ir;ch4s of •.` the subsoil is clay laar. The lower 6 inches is loan The sut.s.`ratJr, to a 6e7,t- of in Bei .,. 6; G i, . . � ,not• is Mede .etc. Available water ca _:i'.v is ai .. «;ec:i.? roCt, _ de„,th i= •t+C C'• d., sr more. is raci_, and the haavd pf wa;e!' eroi is Yeti: 1C T...rriortherls-Carborth.:di R•^it Oottcr., co r,' y !: Percent E , de'."!,! t1':` .Cr9i.te it err.,y,c a san,fit ad shale bedro•c;:, loose_: ;ns a:,._ �'•" `":c"` B : I : shallew to deer: over sandet:rF a",_ ;tel ;'e+jrn,. story basaltic r. To^ :orti•?:%"'�me . .3kat1 ' 6n' Cr._ :trt(ri}' iEf'° ", i4".;P:.. :4..� s The ?orri ir` ent aret : . 1. •.hr.. Dr, fro.. i. i:5 end >"o:Pr�ta:t;de x;;y IltCr outcrc•:. The mode-ately stee. Cr. :-ids are +. lower tae slopes tnd concave Aper, areas on foothills and mounta:risides. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPTION RErOST Soil Information Map Symbol Soil name and description Torriorthents are very shallow to modereteii deep. They are well to somewhat e):essiveiy drained. They : generally are clayey to loamy and contain variable amounts of pebbles, cobbles, and sones. Permeability is slow to moderate, and water holding capacity is very low to low. Effective rooting depth is 19 tc 60 inches. Runoff is very rapid, and erosion hazard is very high, The Cam5orthids soil is shallow to deep and well -drained. It formed it residuwdr ?.PCS ocli vvium derived dominantly from sandstone same and basalt. The soils have a slight increase is: clay im the .;tscil and ge Ere:. e are f.le} loam or loam:. Ti ,n are nommen:. i!' stone free throughout the profile. Scattered basalt stones, cobbles, and. sandstone rock fragner s cover "+e su,'f,e, Permeability is moderate. Available Ovater r wra, 't- F" y is too to moderate. Effective rooti` _ dept fs :51'aht.. t::rnfs is rapid, and the ._._ e-aifcr ie 5_g`to very high. s. R :,tont, recurs or ver. steec sl:'cas, cans^. sines. ,.iffy, a., .soli' Plata. _-... :r grebe st • sac., per: * -t . ...: y e[trer,e :.. PT.V :t i2 on to «1.e and ?: ur'+tai nsire,e 5i13,tS. T1; ,:r;t is L: docent 'ridell and 7: De cert frcwnsto. 'he ..,enface is scattered with S to :C NONTECHNICAL SOILS ^c :RIFT;Oh" REPORT Soil Inforivatior Mao Symbol Soil name and description The Tridell soil is somewhat excessively drained. :t formed in alluvium and colluvium derived dominentlY from basalt. The upper part of the surface layer is stony sandy loam about 2 inches thick. The lower part is very cobbly fine sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The upper 5 inches of the underlying material is very cobbly fine sandy loan,,. The nest 11 inches are cobbiy sandy log". The next 12 inches are Very starry fire sandy loamy. The lower part to a depth of bE inches is very stony loamy sand. Perteability is moderately rapid- Available rater capacity is lou. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or r<ore. Runoff is medium to retic, an: the hazard of veer erosion is very high. The Erovr;_`.G soil is deep ant veil -drained. It forret in alluviim derived dominantly from coarse textured calcaren:i: _,.ndstcr e ant' t'asv11. The surface sireleyee is steno san;iY loam 11 inches thick. The upper 1Q inches of the underlying material is very gravelly sandy loan, The next ,r inches is very gravelirr 105NY ss?d The lover part tc a depth of 6E irch es is gravelly ec^ Perreati'.ity is moderate. Available water capacity is law, Effective rooting depth is 6= in(he; mr mo -e. 1;Cln}sf is rapid, ark the haza'd of water erosion i= very rig;-•. • ; U.S. t'EFAF-'77:i c'F AGRTCULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERvAT:ON SFRYICE WATER FEATURES Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 4 11/17/97 Flooding Nig?, tatIe ahc' ot)ht'ing tt9r, symbol :Hydro -: . , : kater : , : MaJinum and soil nue :logic l Frequency : Duration : Months : tAble ! Kind of : Kontbs : Pandit9 : Pording grow) : . 1 . : depth !veer table: : dunation f depth . . . 1 r. .: 1 , . .1 . . Ft ., Ft . . 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 I t: ' 1 1 t 1 r 1 1 u P • 1 . 1 E :None , , . , . .. 1 1 . . . 12; • , . . , , . Arle, 4 • '! . . . . . . , . . Ansani ! .°) :No,ht , . , t , ' . . Rock OutcrooF, D :None , , . . . . . ' E. , , t , , . F :N.:T!, ' :.2 Ge•-..si.:-!!".ids1 D :None . P I tiova3 : 8 !None )4.0 : ;,,. • , . . 5.".-..,..f.l1er 1 . , )6.0, 1 1 . . , . , C :1.,ic.,-.• . , , "c• -•;a:6 :or 1C14: To—fo'ttents---f t r; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WATER FEATURES --Continued Soi! Information: PAGE 2 4F 6 11/17/97 r i Mao symbol ;hydra+ and soil name ;logic ; Frequency ;group Flooding ". High water table and Pondir; Tridell Browns:: e :None E :hone 1 Water tl8zimUm Duration Months s tatle ' Kind of : Heaths Ponding ponding depth ;water table; duration depth . , Ft Ft 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WATER FEATURES Endnote -- WATER FEATURES PAGE 3 OF 4 U/1119' This reocrt gives estimates of various soil water features. The estimates are used in land use p riling that involves engineering considerations. Hydrologic soil groups are used to estimate runoff from precipitation. Soils not orotected by vegetation ere assigned to one of four groups, They are grouped according to the infiltration of water when the soils are thoroughly vet and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The fov. hydrclogi:cigroWDS are: Group A. Soils having a high infiitration rate {lei runoff potential thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, vell drained to ercessivelv drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have e high rate of water transrission, Grouo T, Soils havirg a moderate infiltrati-Jr -ste when tt:roughlY vet, These consist cif:y of r.1,2ec, or moderate.ly 4e!: Irained or we:: thet moderatsly fine text..re to modere: teltj-e. Tsss soill have a mon'ats r3te of wster !rs:s,ission. GrOut, .C.. Soiis having a slow infiltration rate whr-. tr,:-.o.gh: wet. These corsist chiefly of sils having a layer that impedes the down‘and hovemt of roderatel, fire te/tre or texture. ''hess hve a rats of 6ats- transmission. Grou: Soils ha,.ing a very slo‘. irfil:ration rate runoff potential) wher thoroug`,10 vet. The.” a:Insist chia=l, :f clays that nave a high shrirk-swell potential, soils tt.et haAs a pernerent high Jate- tele, scils :hat have. e cleyoan or ole) loe- al or neer the surfs:a. and sci,:s that are shallow over. nearly impervious. material. T'ress soils !..ave a vemr sIcA. rate of water transpissien. if 6 Stii is assigned to two hydrolagio. groos ir this report, the first letter is for drained areas and the second urdrained areas. Flooding, the temPorer/ inundation sf a- area, is C!Ai94' oerfiowing sts.ev.s, fron adjace-t slopes, or bY tides. Water Standing for short peniods afte° -sinfal srvaJm?It is not considered flooding, nor is water in sweeps and marshes. This report gives the frequency and duoation of flooding erd the tiue of year when flooding is most ljely, Preoveroy, duration, and Probedates of osourrer:e are estimated. Fre..str:y is expressed as 'k,:.nf.t .0coesionel', end 'Freuert... 'None' memo that flooding is not pro:bele; 'Res' that it is urlikelv but possible under JniisuaI weather conditions; .0:sezi:ra:. ts.et ft ocoars, or) ts.f. average. once cr less in 2 years; and 'Frequent' that it occurs, on the average, more than once in 2 years, o.7reissd as •Ver, brief' if less. t'.3f 2 da, 'Sriee if 2 t: .lorg' if t: 3S days err: he inforpetior is tese't Cr t stfl :-.'lle, Str3tF sard, silt, o- f:00dVattr: .rre;la' ! irforr the erfrt ,S4 ar relation of ea:h $:i: or Iartsar,s to hist:.. -is 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.$. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURA: RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WATER FEATURES Endnote -- WATER FEAT;RI:S-Continued PAGE d OF L 11/17/97 Information on the extent of flooding based on soil data is less specific than that Provided by detailed engineering surveys that delineate flood-arone areas at specific flood freouenfy levels. Nigh water table (seasonal) is the highest level of a saturated zone in the soil in most years. The dept!: to a seasonal high water table applies to und"ained soils. The estimates are based meir1y on the evidence of a saturated zone, namely grayish colors or crottles in the soil. Indicated in this report are the depth to thr seasonal high water table; the kind of water table, that is, 'Apparent., 'Artesian', or 'Perched'; and the months of the year that the water table CCmc:only ;s high. 4 voter table that is seasonally high for less than 1 month is not indicate( in this report. An 'Apparent' water table is a thick zone of free water ir, the soil. It is iqicated by the level et which water stands it an incased borehole after 3deo'late time is al s'.er for ad) .tne::t in the surrounding soil, An 'Artesian' water table exists under a hydrostatic beneath an impermeable layer. When the i:rPeraeable layer has been Penetrated by a cesed boreh le., the welter rises. The final level of the water in the Gases bo"ehGie is characterized as an 5rtesiar water lade. A 'Perched' Wa`er, tet:e is water stelrdi.' [•y r t r ted zone. :ts r', P "t-0,ed*, _ at• e a Ilnae,:l. a 2: j+2 Did, a. LG�i'r, or � ""[ e , Va`.;r table is seder Elea froo a lover one b a drY t`" zones :a:,•. 1p-tr nr 4• feet =} zone. J��. ?7a�f�C .. .E _. k:. _ 3 J. ✓. ,' a. �... .. . indicated,. :rdirg is star:t?rs water it a crowd drsressier.. The sten refov'ed _.:7 ,•y :=p Per,0:!tion!r.".t:. cr.5� evaporation, c" a von ti 3tior of these or: -rose`.. This rervrt live_ t:`+E dept.!' . :'} u:roti :r Gono:in erd.* a .ic'e v? rh=. PCnCi'ui3 most likely. Depth, d!,s .i [r, ars' probable dates of occur+rehoe are est ir<atec. Depth is Expressed es the deott of SC',.;? Pelton reit above the soil sTrace, Duration:s expressed ss 'very brief' if less than 2 days, 'Erie`' .f 2rtc 7 days. 'Lor_' if 7 tc days, and *Very _;.r;' " r,C•:'e _`:s': ..cyst information is bused on the relation of each s•.L on the lardscaoe to l7'istcrfc oondir-g ant on local infc,rbe.`:. atcpt the extent and levels of Prn_1;.g J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAGE 1 OF 3 r NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 11/17/97 SOIL FEAT{JPES Soil Information $edrock Cemented o n ' Subsidence 1 1 Potential 1 Risk of corrosion Map symbol :frost action; Uncoated : and soil name : Depth ;Hardness; Depth : Kind ;Initial; Total : steel Concrete 11 1 1 1 1 I r In ; In : In Ir: 1,1 1 I I 1 t 6:1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Almy 160 : --- .. - :Low ;Higt. ;L!+v 1 1 I 1 12: I I Art? 20 -40 1 SV,': tot xnde+Er- Loa' 1 1 1 r . Ansari i 10-21 i Hard i 'Low :Hi;h .t?,'. { I 1• 1 1 Rock Outcrop----: --- ; Hard ; --_ --- -- :Nene i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 34; ; U,S. DEPARTMEN? OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SOIL FEATURES --Continued Soil Information PAGE 213E 3 11/I7/; Bedrock I Cemented can ; Subsidence ! Risk of corrosion Potential Map symbol o ;frost action! Uncoated and soil name ! Depth ;Hardness; Depth Kind !Initial; Total ! steer Concrete I I ; 1 i ! 1 1 ! 1 1 1 rn ; : In o :':i: 1Y 1 1 1 . 1 1 . 105 icon,):. 1 1 1 Y � 8rovnsto---- --- -! f60 ; --- _-- ! -__ --- : ;Moderate :High ;Lov 1 ' ' 1 ! 1 ! W.S. DERARTrENr OF ACRICUJURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SOL FEATURES Endnote SOIL FEATURES PAGE 3 OF 3 Il/t7/57 This rerort gives estimates of various soil featdres. The estimates are used in land use planning that involves engineering considerations. Deoth to bedroct is given if bedrock is within e depth of 5 feet, The depth is based on many soil borings and on observations during soil mooing. The rock is either 'Soft' or 'Hard'. If the rock is 'Solt' or fractured, excavations can be made with trenching machines, backhots, or small rippers. If the rock is 'Hard' or massive, blastingor sPecia; eouipment generally is needed for. excavation. Cemented pans are cemented or indurated subsurface layers within 8 depth of 5 feet. Sdch or cause dif'iculty in excavation. Pans are classified as 'Thin' or 'Thick'. A 'Thir' par is less than 3 inches thick if continuously indurated or iess then IF inches thiel if discontinuous or frectved. Exteratins can be made ty trenching machines, oackhoes, or stall rieners. A 'Thick" pan is more than 3 inches thick if cortinuously indurated Cr.more the:- l6 inches this/. i' discontin.J.%s sr freotoel. Such a pan is so tt,ick or massive that blasting or special eouippent is needed in excavotior. Subsidence is the settlement of organic soils or of satrate?f. mirera: soils of very lov dersity. Subsidence results from either desiccation and shrinkage or oxidation of orgehic terial, or both, fcltov!ng draintm SOsidence P.lace gradually, usuallY over 3 Perios' of severe.: YWS, Pl!E rt,Wrt Shows the exaected ir:tis: sasitence, whist usually is e result of drainags, a tea! subsidence, vtich usually is a resAt of oxidation. Not shown in the report is s,:tsidsnee Sy sr ir.c:.seo s.,;rfa.:t load cr by the 6ithdra6el of ground uate- threcut er extensive wee as a result of INering the vete- table. Fctertis! "cst ectin is t're up4er-i. c.r. lateral exPensich cf the soil ca,ae; by tx.1. seg':eqstec it lenses (4rcst NeavO an the s'Aseq,..ent cclloose cf. the scil ant loss of strength on thav17,g. Frost ticoc.tuvs uher moistjre moves into the freezing zone of the soil. Temperatoe, te:ture, density, cer!teati:P.4, contert of o'g8r,ir. setter, 8r41 depth to the water tatle are tte facto -s considereS ir evoluatin; Potential for frost action. It is essAed that the soil is not ;nc. by vegetation or snow and is not artificially draired. Silty yrrtwed clay soils that hove a high uater table in vinten are the .ftcs! susceptible to frost action. Welt drained, very gravetiy, or very sold? soils are the least susceotible. Frost hem an -j low soil stren;th tha.ing cayse damage mainly ts cevese-ts arc' ot.!-7' stri:ttures. sf corrosion pertains to potential soil-induceectroeherico: or• 3:t.Z" that disis or wea;.ers uncoated steel or concrete. The rate of co-rosion of uncoated steel is related to such factors as soil moisture, Particle -size distribution, acidity, and electrical conductivity of ti soil. The rate of corrosisn of concrete is boset meirly on the. sulfate ad stir content, textune, moisture content, and acidity of the SPecial site examination and design may be needed if the toTbinatior of factors creates a severe corrosion environment. The steel ilstaliationS that intersect soil boundaries or soil leyt—i is Are sossePtible to co -rosier than steel in irsto;:ations thst 6re entirtli uithin cnein f soil cr witM. one soil layer. 'Cr' uncoated steel, the risk of corrt”ior, expresse.,f 'moder, or 'High', is tase.,!. on stil drainage class, total acidity, electrical resistivity near field caeacitY. and electrical constivitv o' the saturation etract. For concrete, the riik c COr';7siu. is also expressed as ••'Moderate', or "igh.. It is based on soil texture, enj amount of sulfates ir the sat.,;.ratior extract, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S.1 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (The information in this report indi investigation) Map symbol and soil name . Septic tank abstrotion fields PAGE 1 OF 5 11117117 SANITARY FACILITIES Soil Information tes the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite Sewage lagoon arras Trench sanitary landfill Area Daily cover sanitary for landfili landfill r f: r Almy revere: peres slowly e , g e 12: 1 Arle !Severe: dept', t: sloce Ansari :Severe: depth tc rock, Rock t rov__- :Severs i dept` to rock, wipe 34: Emtedr:do 'S?':e^e: r, pends :lowly 3t: Eaosdrado ;Severe: Peres siCL:t t!• f.os,;m Lang d?2th to rock, t4 •. 5:, c ,Severe: seepage :Severe: aeeca;e, depth to rock, slope "Severe: death to rack, s;c�c: !Severe: depth to rctl , slope :Moderate: __,_e Severe: Elope ;Severe: ' depth to rock, i "Severe;!Severe: i depth to rock, , slope slope, large stores :Severe: t a, seepage, alwe 1 depth ta eock, s:cpe ;"overate. " tot clefeY ".Moderate: slope, '. too= Claye' 'Fevre: depth to rock, Pn ' excess sa,t :Seve e: dotto rock, 'Severe: depth to rock,. slooe .' S!: 3''• t :Moderate: slope depth to rock, :Ss vFrF : :Severs: :Poor. depth to rock, East: stones, slope death t: ^c k slope ;Poor: depth to rock, siopj4 ,rair: too ^_layet ;Fair, :0,3 clayey, slope Poor: depth to rock., :.:Poe Poor: dep Fw t: -ock. .$, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES --Continued Soil Information PAGE 2 OF 5 11/17/97 Map symbol Septic tank : 5erage lagoon ' Trench Area : Daily cover and soil naris w absorption areas : Sanitary c sanitary i for landfill fields landfill landfill g$:1 r florval :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Poor: : slope : slope : slope : slope : slope 1 1 1 41■: 1 1 7 1 Sho.ai1er :Severe: :Srrere: :Severe: :Moderate: :Poor: perms slowly, : slope, : top clayey, ', slope : too clayey, large stones : large stones : large stones : : large stones 1 , P 1 Msrya: ----- 'nde:'ate: :Severe: :Moderate: 'Moderate: ;Fair: : Per;; s:ou:y; ' slope : slope : S1^Pe : slope : $.tbr 1 r 1 F: , 1 Showalter :Severe: :Severe; :Severe: :Severe: :Poor: 1. perms slowly. slope, : slope, dope to cleyey, ` slope, : large stores : too claYer, ' large stones, '_.a. le :`.ones : : -e-g, stones , ' s::pe . "LrV5A, !Sept e: ;5eaer'. :Severe: 'Severe: ;Poor: : slope : slope : slope : slate slope 104: : : Torriorthents:Severe: Severe: 'Severe: 'Se,e'e :=ser: : dept": tc rock, : depth to rock, : depth to rock, : slope o depth to Loci:, slope : s.:J^c : slope : : tea.: stone;., : slope , Camborthids Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Poor; : derv+ to rocs', 1 depth t. rock, ' depth to roc;., ' slope : depth to rock, slope : slope : sloe : : slope 1r Rock O tcrop----1Se ere: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Poor; : dept'.': to ro:h, : depth to rock, : depth to rock, ° depth to rock, ° depth to rock, : supe : slope : slope : slope ° slope 1 1 ry : I : 19i: , 1 JG 1 , 'ride:. :Severe, :severe; :Sete e: 'Severe: :Poor: ° poc" filter, : see'age, slope. : slope : seepage, : slope, , slope, large Stones , large s+ ,:tes, : ia-ge st: . large st1,-e: " slice 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES --Continued Soil Information FA1C 3 OF 5 11/17/97 1 Mao symbol Septic tank Sewage lagoon : Trench Area Daly cover and soil name ; absorption areas sanitary sanitary " for landfill fields landfill landfill 1U6 (con.): Brounsto---- ..- severe; poor filter, slope i ,, , a 1 1 , ;Severe: revere: :Severe: :Poor; seepage, ; slope 1 slope ; small stones, slope i i e slope r , , , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE r. NATURAL RESOURCES CDASERYATION SEPV!Cc SANITARY FACILITIES Endnote -- SANITARY FACILITIES PAGE 4 OF r 11;17197 This report shows the degree and kind of soil limitations that affect septic tank absorption fields, sewage lagoons, and sanitary landfills. The limitations are considered 'Slight' if soil properties and site features generally are favorable for the indicated use and limitations are minor and easily overcome; 'Moderate' if soil properties or site features are not favorable for the indicated use and special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to overcome or minimize the limitations; and 'Severe' if soil properties or site features are so unfavorable or so difficult to overcome that special design, significant increases in Gonstructior costs, and Poesitly increased maintenance are required. This report also shows the suitability of the soils for use as daily cover for landfills. A rating of 'Good' indicates that soil properties and site features are favorable for the use and good perfornarce and low maintenance con be expected; 'Fair' indicates that soil properties and site features are moderately favorable for the use and one or more soil properties or site features make the soil less desirable than the soils rated 'Good'; and 'Poor' inaicatts that one or were soil properties or s;'.e features are unfavorable for the use arc overcoming the unfavorable properties reouires special design., extra maintenance, or costly alteration. SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS are areas in which effluent from e septic tank is distributed into the soil through: subsurface tiles or Perforated Dire. Only the Da-' of the soil t+etweer deoths of 24 t; 72 inches. is evaluated. The ratings are base o''. soil P-ooe"t_es, Site f ate; ?s, and observed D£rf mance of the soils. Permeability, a high water table, depth to bed'ock or to a cemented pat:, and flooding affect absorption of the effluent. Large stones and Sayre is i'" e csmt'.ted p?" interfere With installation. Unsatisfactory Performance of seoti. tank absorption fields, incl C°'.�s excessively slow atso'Ptiorof effluent a de .tr g of e` :crt. 15,-;t hillside seepage, can fest health. F. Grow. lute, .c!e to ...lief° ie...o .rea:.C _ gravel „r'ac,ured bedrock is less than 4 feel below the b �P o' the as`. weed,.. field, if slope is ex:essive, or if the 6.atc.' tai:. is ,"e3" the surface. n£••e T nwah be :;resat;rated soil material beneath the a:sv"..;Gr fie:_ .: filter the effluent offactively. ?'a,•.7 local oedinance2 ..,ire that this matE''ia: be of a ce-tale' thickness. 5E,=',k:C.;l'z ars :time 'r�s cc: trl:.iel t: ".old sewage J''...? aerobic b?rt"15 n°'.:"i;:Ss the solid and ilcw.d wastes. Lagcors should ha'cea nearly leve_ floor surrounded by cut Si a; e, or �aboy Rts o compacted 5,::: , Lagoons n: generally art de=igned to hold the sewage .within a depth of 2 to 5 feet. Nearly irl.ervic❑s soil material for the lagoon floor and aides is neo ire•'_ to its"ir'fbe se£:age and CPftaninatio" ` ..." :Afar. This report give'_ rating -1 for net r,atjrai Sof: tat manes ix the 15yi-r, fit}:'. The s.i'•`a:' late- arc` e el: � or 2 feet o. soi.Pate^la: bel,:v the sjrfa:e layer are e,Cavatec to n"?r de material ivy the erbanl;a£nts. The ratings are based or $01: properties, site feat':"e5, and observed perfc.rman«e of the soil... Considered :r ,^e ratings. are slope, permeat ''v A high water table, depth to bedrock or to a cemented pan, flooding, large stores, a"; c:rter.t of orgari: mutter. Excessive seepage due to rapid permeability of the soil or a water tattle that :s high encogt to raise the level of sewage in the lagoon causes a lagoon to function unsatis.`acto-ily• Pollution. results if seepage is e]dessive or if floodwater ove"toos the lagoon. A high content of organic flatter is detrimental to, proper functioning of the lawn because it in"..,kits aerobic activity. Slope, bedrock, and cemented pans car: ca:lse Construction problems, and large stones can hinder comoactio of the lagoon floor. SV:: -.s7 ;04Cc:,1. art a"ess where slid waste ._ disposed of t!r burying it in soil. Tere are tvo types of landfill, tre.lch and a -ea, :r a trenit landfii_ :'`e (.-este i$ '.acad a trek. vprW, cOr:,"scted1 and covered d3::?' with a thin iayeof soil er evated at the Site. In an area landfill, the waste is Placed in successive lase -s Or t°'? 1:"fa .f t, sr.::, The waste SP":'a:'.. colparted% and oo,vereC daily wire a thin layer of 5.:.« fire £ sok;r. a a:a: from. t],e .iFE G.. trYFC, .! 'p..�li,• m. -R F 3°ps tri blear `.ee.y vehicular .dein hit F� .�'� - «d _ - v .. � � lv. J... . . ilii _ .. _ grc'slnd.:ster LC..uiipr.. Ems^ o' °,.:adsti::'. .. revegetatior need tc be ...:tdere t'! rating. in t!..reyn»t are ba3ed U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SANITARY FACILITIES Endnote SANITARY FACILITIES --Continued PAGE 5 O 5 ]l/I7r47 on soil properties, site features, and observed performance of the soils. Permeability, depth to bedrock or to a ce'ented pan, a high water table, slope, and flooding affect bots: types of ler fi1:. Texture, stones and boulders, highly organic layers, soil reaction, and content of salts and sodium affect trench type landfills. Unless otherwise stated, the ratings apply only to that part of the soil within a depth of about 6 feet. For deeper trenches, e limi`etion rate 'Slight' or 'Moderate' may not be valid. Onsite investigation is needed. CAI'_Y COVER FOR LANDFILL is the soil material that is used to cover compacted so:id waste in an area type sanitary landfill. The soil material is obtained offsite, transported to the landfill, and spread over the waste. 1 Soil texture, wetness, coarse fragments, and slope affect the ease of removing and spreading the taterial during wet 4 and dry periods. Low, or silty soils that are fret of large sting or excess gravel are the best cover for a landfill. ClayeY soils RWr be sticky or cicdd, and a e difficult to S rax; sandy soils are sutlect to soil b 'YLi"y. After soil material has been remove,., the soil materia', ,remaining in the borrow area must be thick er out;' over bedrock, a cemented pan, or the water table to permit revegetation. The soil materiel used as final cover for a landfill shout: y'e s;nolle f:'" plants. 1 .� .8., 5. The surface lave" generally ha c ha test 'r.•"iC3,•izlFY, more organic matter than the reit of the p:ro`ile, and the best potential for plants. Mate -lel fryr the surface layer should be stockoi led for use as tre fine' cover, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF A TCULTURE NATURAE RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BOILDIMG SITE DEVELOPMENT Soil Information PACE : OF 4 1111711';7 (The information in this report indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite investigation) dap symbol Shallow ! Dwellings ° Dwellings ; Small Local ,scads ' Lawns and and soil Hare excavatlans without with commercial ; and streets landscaping basements basements ! buildings ! ! ! • ° " r r 1 a: ° A;:,,• Slight 'Slight :Slight !Moderate: !Slight !Slight 1 ! slope • • ° 12: ' r , I ,Wle !Severe: !Seve7.e. ,Setie'e: Se e7e; 'r:' !Severe: e_,c, e Y sloes:.v, Inaloe : small stones, , ;a^'ge stares r slop , Air'sa, i ! Se , :re: :Severe: i:,'r: ,S=cve"e: ;Severe: i depth to rac'r,,! doge, ' de.;1r' to roCR, :'.^'re, depth to oci.,' -boli, alone . Berth r;.r•y, ! ^'f dec... "o.I- s• :log:; dent`: to r,^•:r • Rvs4 OutcmS°u--- !Sege -e: ;.Severe: ',Severe: ,`Severe; 'erC r ev f: SevP"e; , dPp};[.. to "0:'1: S:07, ' de c. .. 'o.i ,. s. .%ns, dF:th tC rC±c')! • oM s, c ' depth to rocs, : sioPe ! C'tD':r. tC rocs: . s_Gie • sl,:.o+°, I 7G: Empesrado • 'SI:. :M..de-ate. !ro-a-ate, :tIoderate' ' ',!`.denate: !~Alar shr';ni.-,w2 . ! 'S circ;.-axe11 ! se'r. ni;--..!:F ' shrink ->;,e: ! supe s !owe strer'.;.`, ; ! ' frost action , ' , ?J: Er.nes'nrdo .7i...-3`d--- :Mcderats: ;rode ate: !Severe: ;tfoderste: iH?$=rate; shrink-SWafi, •` clwOe, i sloe i shrink -swell, i slope slope shrin-swell. ; ; low stye `a " : elope "•"�e: .evt-e. Seve-e.: !^-;eve,e "•Severe: :veve'•'t. ' dent. tC r'O.!'.pr slue ' t.�. DEPARTMENT OF AOPICULTDPE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SUILOINC, SITE OEVEiCPMEN'--Continued Soil informetlorr PAGE 2 OF G 11/17/47 Mac. sy;abol : Shallow Ouellings : Dwellings Small : Local roads ; Lawns and and saki name : excavations : without with : commercial : and streets : 1&ndscapin9 r " " basements : basements bt:ildings r , " , r , a a 55 car ° Glcsi rt ids-- :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: Severe: Severe; :Severe: depth to rock,: slopes ' depth .o roc;":" loot ;slope slop', slope : sloe : G ' death t., rock e':: " r Norval ;Severe: :Severe: :Severe: ;Severe' 'Se.ere: :Severe, : slope : sloe ' SiOf ; Slope r dost : sloe , 41.: S : ;:alto: :Severe"Seve-e Setiere; !Severe: :Severe: :Severe: " targe stores large stores `are stone's : slope, ; low lar f stone; large stones large =tones Marti_; ;Moderate :Moderate: 'M,,', -ate: Severe: :Mc°de~ate !Moderates r. : slope : slope .:cpe : slop? 1r,Da, 5:4'= ' s , ; ' , [.. ost a tion .`.vwalter- --- :Severe: 'Severe. ;Severe: :Severe. ;Severe: e: °w eve^e; " .S. r,. r large stones, : slope, : slope, '. *slope, : low strength, " Iar.v. stones, lope large 5:t ..._ 15p stones large _ "es slope, ; slope r a f large 5t•),-, lorval 'Severe: :Severe: ;Severe: "Severe: :Sever � f: !Severe: slope : slope : slope ' slope ! slope ' sloe . . Tor~:anthems--.;Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: :Severe: : depth t rock : Slone, ° deft}' to rota,' siooe, " depth to rook,' slope: : slope der r'. ' n rack , " r ^t' t slope ;death to rock slope ;dept F: to rock , " Cast.' '_bids•_---:$eve—e: "Sept e. :Severe 'Severe: :Severe! :Severe: .° dep`h t: rock,: Sloe', ' dept, to rock,: Si6Ge, r depth t: rota.,: large stones, : slope : de,..,, tc ro.l. ' :09e : de;'t}: to rock : slope : slope, Y : death to rock , r , Rock Cutcroa----!Seveve: 'Severe' :Severe: :Severe; "Seve-e: !Severe: dept` t:r;-,-,, slo-e � der"` t r . t: � r'�ci:,, slope, .� deet`: .. .,t"' droug`". . ; 3:`.Ce , duet'r• to flick ! slope ' fe th t,, mole ' slcoe r slop. dean t: U, S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BUILDING SITE DEVELOFi1"1;T--Corrtinued Soil Information PAGE 3 OF 4 1017/97 1a} symbol Shallow Dwellings Dwellings Small Local roads : Lawns and and soil name ; excavations ; without ; with corntercial , and streets Iandsceping basements : basements buildings 106: i r r Tridf11 :Severe: :Severe: ;Severn: :Severe' Severe; :Severe.: : cutbar!I:s cave,: slopes : slope, : slope, : slope, : Slope : large stones, : large stone= : large stones , large stories large stone; : r , slope 9 r - Sr ownsto "Severe: 'Severe. cutbanks cave,: slope slope ' I r :Severs: ;Severe: ;;entre: ;Sova e: : s]c,;.e ` slope slope : slope 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NAT1IRA' RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE BCILDINU SITE DEVELOPMENT Endnote -- BUILDING SITE DEVELOPMENT PAGE 4 OF 4 II/17 7 This report shows the degree and kind of soil limitations that affect shallow excavations, dwellings with and without basements, small commercial buildings, local roads and streets, and lawns and landscaping. The limitations are 'Slight', 'Moderate', or 'Severe'. The limitations are consideeed 'Slight' if soil properties and site features are generally favorable for the indicated use and limitaions are minor and easily overcome; 'Moderate' if soil properties or site features are not favorable for the indicated use and special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to overcome or minimize the limitations; and 'Seveee' if soil properties or site features are so unfavorable or so difficult to overcome that special design, significant increase_ it construction costs, and possibly increased maintenance are required. Special feasibility studies may be required where the sail limitations are severe. SHALLOW EXCAVATIONS are trenches or holes dug to a maximums dept! of 5 or b feet for basements, graves, utility lines, open ditches, and other purposes, Tha ratings are based on soil properties, site features, and observed performance of the soils. The ease of digging, filling, and compacting is affected by the dept:: to bedrock, a cemented pan, or a very firm dense layer; stone content; soil texture; and slope. Tha time of the year that excavations can be made is affected by the deet' tm a seasonal high water tar1e and the susceptibility of the soil to flooding. The resistance of the excavation walls or bards to slougt,ine or cavioc :s affected by sail texture and the dept', to the water table.. 01JELIM S AND SMALL COMMERCIA_ E<:`i-,D:NGS are structmres built fir shallot fou dati4•rs on ur,disttrbed soil, The load licit is the sane as that for s:n ie-familY dveilings no highe•- em three stories, Ratings are made for small cod"".2 a br dings ¥ t'cut basere' s for dime:lines mith bay ee_ ts, and for dmellinms mith mt baseTents. The rat:nme are based or soil properties, site features-, and otserved perfo iia:nee of the _mils. A high waver tatter death tC bedrocI cr t: a cemented 9.n, large stoney slope,and flooding affect .he ease c!t. ex eka'i on .and constra: :c. e ards.ec:erg and ;red. : that recmiee cuts -sr_' `:1.- cc r; e them 5 oe b f,kee. eee rmkt. r. Merof LOCAL RDA:.S r;:. STREE`S have an ail -weather seirfeee and carr:•" auttc,rso fie and lir`'+ ,, traffic all Yeer. Tbey have a subgrade of cut cr fill soil msterfal, '„ base of gravel. crmshed race:. or stabilized soil meteriai ar e flex:"_le or rigid surface. Cuts and fills aremenereltY promereits, site features, and ct'erved perforrance 4.f soils. ser`,''. t•^• bedro,.1: or to a cemented man, a himm water table_, flooding, large stones, and slope affect the ease of extaveting arc gr'adifrr, sc-:, strength las ;referred from the eemimeer:ng ciassjficatien of the soil' shri''1-gweli potentlei, frost ``i„ notedeptht rr table .s r } a4, mita:, and c• a high water ai•ad a �ec the trBffiC-SJppOrt'ng capacity. LAWm5 mmM :4'i ";A':K; reoeire Spi:S or which turf end ornaa,er,tsi trees and shrJt_ car be estat^;is`ied and Ipa:r:tairred. The rating; are based on soil properties, site features, and observed perforparee of the soils. Soni reacti;,r, a hunt water table, dept} to bedrock: or to a cemented pan, the available water capacity in the upper C inches, and the content of salts, sctime and smifidie mateelois a'feet mt mrowtM. Flosdinem eittness,ape, stoniness, and the amount of sand, clay, or organic matter in the surface tare- effect traf` cability after aecetatlor is estatlis`ed. r U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL. RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS Soil Information PAGE 1 OF 6 1!/17%97 (The information in this report indicates the dominant soil: condition but does not eliminate the nerd for onsite investigation) Mac symbol and soil name Roadfill Sard Gravel Topsoil 6. 4 Coy ;Good ,Improbable: ;Improbable; ;Fair: I e exfess fines ! excess fines ' stall st"`e 12: A~ie :Poor: :Improbable: ,Improbable: Poor: , death to rbc;, : exte55 fines i excess fiats i v7a:42_ St nei, . slaps ' E: r Ar,:,ari 'P:•, , `SR'. :*wile: ;boobable: :Poor: dr?,F _c rec;; ar.;Pss fir'.ew s1Cxs•_ !;neo f depth t4 rGci, Rock Oatcro --- !Poo.t: :In:•abode ;Taro,stle: dectt tc rock'.. ' $rows fines . ..cese. tiler: ! deoktr to roc. , : slcoe : sine 34: . Emoedrsd_;'a_r: ; ^:arobzt: e: : Ix rottiable: , rai . , shrink -swell, : excess fires ! excess fires : to clever, r low t I 35:, I Emoed^ado,Fair: Ilmarabable:I rch:t:le: 'Fair: shrink-sue`1, ; excess fines excess `inns ; too clayey, lou strength sr;,a11 Stones, slope , , F.F. I I Gypsum Land `Poor: _ ';able, r .I~. c..,-, ;Improbable: ;Poor: de.ot` ,, 'c:.4:, . excess fines : excess fres i do t." is ''.ick, ' sit- . , slope , Gyj!SiCrt`ids- ;Rnp, :;nerd`able: ::n,:rohetle: ,'Poor: :e_, ', w. , '. excess nines , ex,tess 4.nes : de -Y," to rc , rr- ..:.r: .a:. .tebtx: 'I!. :'t'-_.. !tow: a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAGE 2 OF 4 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 1J/17/97 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS—Continued Soil Informatior, Map symbol Roadtill Sand Gravel Topsoil and soil name % . 1 r : 1 . t . t Showalter :Poor: ;Improbable; :Improbable; t ; large stones : ercess fines, : excess fines, fl:Pot:ro:clarey, ; 1 , ! large stones . : large stones i : large stones, : arta reclair: 1 Norval ' :Good p :Improbable: . !Improbable. . :Fair: excess fines ; excess fines ; small stones, slope , . . . . 95; , . . . , . Showalter :Poor: :Improbable; :Imorcbable; :Poor: ! large stex ones : cess fines, : excess fines, toz. dyer, are tore : large stones : large stones, lss : . . , ! area reclaim . ' . . . . . , ;Fair: Morrel !Ipnrobt.:e: °Iitc-oteble! !Poor: ! slOPe ° excess tints ! .,...,S 'Fine•s . ' „ Toroiorrnerts---!Poor. lImorobabie: 'Imnrcbablel ;Poor: ° dePtkl !O fOcA, . eA,.ees ',.r,,,.,1, ercess 4ires : de:'..', tl rx.,, : small stones, P P ' , . . Camto-thids-----1Foor: ;Imurobab:e: °Innrcbr.''t• : dentt tc rocl, ! excess fines ercess fires ' depth to ; SlOoe ° Sart:1 :StCr.e, . 1 SIDe . . r P.....c!... OAcrop--°Poor; :Improbab!e; ;Improbable: :Poor. ; denth to rock. : excess final : excess fines : depth to rock, Slope 4 4 106, t . , . . Tri•ill :Poor: :Improbet.le; :Imcrobal.le.: :F..:.-.: large st)nes, : large stones too sarey, : large stc4-.es, ; stone large str.,nts : area 'eclair', 1 % ; siOtre . . ' slope ' ,:rcesi Iii.el : erc.tiE f!nei ' s.tell st:-1,, . . . : sioDe 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS Endnote -- CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PAGE 3 OF G 1if17/97 This report gives information about the soils as a source of roadfill, sand, gravel, and topsoil. The soils are rated 'Good', 'Fair', or 'Poor' as a source of roadfill and topsoil. They are rated as a 'Probable' or 'Inprobatle' source of sand and gravel. The ratings are based on soil properties and site features that affect the removal of the soil and its use as construction material. Normal compaction, minor processing, and other standard construction practices are assumed. Each soil is evaluated to a depth of 5 or b feet. Roadf ll is soil material that is excavated in one place and used in road embankments in another place. In this report, the soils are rated as a source of roadfill for low embankments, generally less than 6 feet high and less exacting in design: than higher embankments. The ratings art fa- the soil material below the surface layer to a death of 5 or 6 feet. It is assumed that soil layers will be mixed during excavating and spreading. any spins have layer': of contrasting suitability within their profile. The report entitled Ergiree-ins Index Properties is also available and it provides detailed information about each soil layer. This information car, help determine the suitability of each layer for use as roadfill. The performance of soil alta' it is stabilized with lime or cement is not considered in the ratir gs. The ratings are based or soil properties, sit`. features, and etserved performance of the soils. The triekness o` suitable material is a major consideraticr. The ease if excavatier .s affected t') ia`gt stance; a high water tay.e, and slope. Hew well the soil performs in place after it has been compacted and dr^a:res ie determined by its strength (as "fer-ej from the eraineering classificetior tf the soil) aad st'-_6-siell potentis. Soils rated 'Good' contain significant mounts of sand or gave: or bot`,. They have at least 5 feet of suitable a mate -ie.. a lob shrink-sue:l p.tentie., few cottt_es and stege.e and slopes of • '5 percent or less. Depth to the vete- table is acre tar- . feet Sei.s rated 'Fair' have more ttrar. 35 percent silt- and eley-sieee puede ee Bad have, a p.asl city of iess than `C. k They have a moderate shrink -swell potential, slopes of IS tc 25 percent, or man`' stones. Depth tc the water table a to 3 feet. ,rt Sorin rated 'Poor' have c plasticity' index -:f ra"e than IG, a hick; shrint•-swell o.tentia., many stapes, or slopes of more than: 25 eercent. They are wet, and the depth to the water table is less than: l foot, These soils may have layers of suitatle material, but the material is less than 3 feet thick. San -elle and grave; ale natural aggregates suitable for cowmeecia: use with a ainir,r of processin;. nand and gravel are used in many kinds of construction. Soecifications for each use vary widely, In this report only the probability of finding material in suitable ouartitr is evaluated. The s;.itability of the materia: for specific purposes is not evaluated, nor are factors that affect excavation of the material. The properties lased to evaluate the sail as a source of sand or gravel are g ed tion of grain sizes (as indicated by the engineering classifi_ation :'f the soil); tae thickness of suitable mate ial. and the content of rock frageents. Kinds of rock, acidity, and stra`_ifitation are given l'i the soil series desc"ipticns. Gaa'a`.ion of grain sizes ia given in the Engineering index Peeperties report. A soil rated as a 'Probable' source has a layer of clean sand :i -of grave! or 8 nava,. :" sand pr grave' that cortaine UP tc .2 perc' : silty fines. This mate^lel must be at leas' 3 feet thica and less than 5O aercent, by weight, large steres Al: W".`. .._.. ". "aced as are Theeeebatle. sc-roe. Coarse fragm ets of Sof: tatfe,eA, such as shade a°a siltatens, art ,',;t :.ons:dere•; to be sand and aaa,el. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT Of AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESO'J CES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSTRUCTION rA ERIALS Endnote -- CONSTRUCTION YrATERIALS--Corrtinued PAGE c OF 6 111:'197 Topsoil is used to cover an arra so that vegetation can be establi %ed and maintained, The upper 60 inches of a soil is evaluated for use as topsoil. Also evaluated is :he reclamatior potential of the borrow area. Plant grew s affected by toxic material and by such rroPerties as soil reaction, available water capacity, and fertility. The ease of excavating, loading, and spreading is affected by rock fragnerts, s;c,ae, a wate- table, soil texture, and thickness of suitable material. Reclamation of the bcrro+" area is affected by slope, a water table, rock fraga,ents, bedrock, and toxic mater'iei. Sols rate 'Good' hart friable loamy mate''ial to a deco, of at least LO inches.. They are free of stones and cobbles, have lit`le or no gravel, and have slopes of less than 8 percent. They are lo4 it content of sol'b.e salts, are naturally fertile or respord well to fertilizer, and are not sc wet that excavation is r!'. ".i:as:. Sail` rated Fair. art sandy soils, lcamY soils that have a 'elotivelY high content of clay, soils that have only 2t to dC inches of suita`lt material, soils that have an app-eciable ae:ourt of grave!, Stones, or solutio salts, or that have slopes of S to 5 percent. The soils 3''e nt sc. wet tryst eyca%atior is difficult. Sc!ls rate 'Por-' art v l send. c hav les tF a' :" i'_ :f SUi'��: naL er!al. have ? la"ge ai"dJ"t �s gravel, stones, or soluble salts, have slopes of Gt"' the:', ;5 pc -cent, or h . a seasonal Watt' table at or near the surface. The $JrfaCe .ayer cf ;,:qt S.i.: 15 g? Trolly C"eferrer fv" t7"veoil tel: se of it organic mutter content Torpor:.c matte- creatl', in;rea2as the absorption and rete;t or ot i^._.: enO not—ierts for plant growth. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CLASSIFICATION Oc THE SOILS Soil Information FAGS I OF 1 I1/17/97 (The classification report does not include recent amendments to soil taxonomy for cation exchange activity, particle size modifier, and dual aineraiog) for strongly contrasting classes. For tore detailed information fcontact your local USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service field office or state office. Soil nve Family or higher taxonomic dais Almy :BUROLLIC MAPLARGIOy, FI1fE-LOA1Y, MIMEO Ansari :LITIiIC HAPLO&OROLLS, LOA"Y, KI%E7 Arle AP;.^•.Ii #APLOBOROL:S, LOA'!Y-SY.E;ETAL, MI EG $roosto i8CROLLIC CALCIORT?I.D , LOPY-SKELETAL, MIXED Camhorthids :CAMFORTHIDS Emoedrado :TYPIC ARGIFOROLLS, FINE -LOAMY: fikEO Gyps orchids '.GYFSIOR'KID fIQ�val y ' v5. ____..___._____ AF,DIt ARI ISO?OL:S, FINE -100Y, MIXED Shcwalte" :TYPIC ARGIMFOLLS, CLAYEY -SKELETAL, IONTMO=.I'_10NITIC :TORRIORT 7NTS A?IDIC CALCIEORCLLS, _1A1SKS 'AL, ":YE� U.S. DEPAR'PENT OF AGRICULTURE fi NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE RANGELAND PRODUCTIVITY AND CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES Soil Information PAGE 1 OF G 11/17/97 (Only the soils that support rangeland vegetation suitable for grazing are listed. Ppt means precipitation! ;dap sy'mbo: and soil name Range site Total production Characteristic vegetation ;Compc- sK ind of year ; Dry i 1sition 1ueight y i :Lb/acre: 1 Pct t r , kl:a .ROLLING LOA"': ;Favorable I,10O ;E1ueb'inch uheetgrass----------- 15 Norval 9O" 14yaming big sagebrush 10 :Unfavorable , 650 :Sandberg bluegrass 13 r cggr a45 8ottleb%s1 Ar e:taii :2: Ar,sa-1 R:':Y O�tcro� !LOAn' SLO7.0 :Favorable is No ,nesters, ;/;`eatgrass L,... ;Ramal ;37 e?1°Jen;+`ct yhs xyrat4 Ir " , Tasha: eoi , 1"_ .Veeneardttread °.,.,je rrew' tainra},;any----- -----! 7 Alte sE^wifet. rr , 7 :Mountain b:c $a;t ' 5 LOW" SLOP,Ec !Fav••,rat:e yen 'indr a": rice; -a:: zn ke.,raad 74i ;Wester7. uNeatgras 15 °On`avor-at'.e 51.n .'Utah serviceter{'y_..------ ---- ' 5 ,v.ioer 5 1Needleandt ;reef S !Noulfair.• big sage 5 ;Pin).on ! 5 'Favorable :,160L !Western ur,.t•,..ass 2c : 1,2X �.Seti -'eanillsa� lt' a 1`i .; F :Rubber rabbr.k•rus,, •-" F '4.ter pereAr:a. g -asses 5 r i 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT CF AGR1ciuURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 3 j RANGELAND PRODUCTIVITY AND CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES --Continued Soil Information PAGE 2 OF 4 11(17/97 Total production Hao symbol Range site Characteristic veselation !Como - and soil name ;Kind of year ; Dry ; ;sition ;weight Lbi34.re; Pot 35: } Emoedrado ;DEEP LOAM 'Favorable ; 1,600 ;Western wheatgrass ; 25 85: Norval - ,DE. i)A" 94: ;DEEP w3Ar. !Normal ; 1,200 ;Needlear:dthread ; 15 ;Unfavorable ; 900 'Mountain big sage : 10 ;Rubber rabbitbrush 5 ;Other perennial grasses 5 ;Gambel oak 5 :N rr.al ;Unfavorab_z 1,800 ;Needle:^dthread 15 1,541 :Mr;,,tntair slow`e: y 10 900 'Uesterr vheatgrass- 1C :Mountain big sage 5 :MuttCngrass 'Prairie Y:;r,,r;ras ' =avorable 1,200 'Net .eanc.it;road .. ! 1rcr:'Fia. 900 '0 ' T"UE n:rUi^t ainP.ah7yanY F :5 Untavcrab.e 500 ;Antelope bitter:-.:s1 'Sasi.atu:•r serviceber-y. , 1r. ;%untalr big sage IC :Indian r.txares$ 10 :Eluebunch wheaty"aFs 3_ ;Prairie iunegras: : 1C 'Favorable 1,800 ;Needleandthread ; 15 :Normal 1,500 ;Mountain snovberry ; 10 'Unfavorable 900 ;Western wheatgr=ss 1G "Duna:r big sage 5 :Muttongrass ; 5 ;Prairie iunegrass 5 9S: Sho a%ter :L0A:"•'.' f:OcE 'Favorabledi :tk 3,2aC� ;Nee.,.ea^� read 20 ;Normal ; 901 ;True mountainrahegany . 15 ;Unfavoreble 5cc. !Anteiooe bitterbrush 15 !Saskatoon strikerry ' is ;Mo:.^rain big sage ' 10 .� :Indian ri.e;rass 10 '.$`.uebun.h wheattrass 10 !Prairie iureg-e 1+. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURA'w RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE RANGELAND PRODUCTIVITY ARID CHARACTERISTIC PLANT COMMUNITIES --Continued Soil Inforraticn PAGE 3 OF L 11/17%57 Total production Map symbol ; Range site Characteristic vegetation !Compo - and soil name ;Kind of year ! Dry ; ;sition :weight ; jLb/acre; Pct 95 fcor..!: M rva; ;DEEP LOAN ;Favirabl 1,800 ;�feedleandthreao' :S Ni•"Pc3 � l,E:.. �"_,........ Si`4.LvFri Y 1: !Unfavorab e ! 90^ ;este a when`grass :1A),i!Ita: ..q sant. F !Muttongrass i 5 ;Prairie jun?^sass 5 Tride:. C Erowrsto STCAY rO° !'ii,,L$ 'Fav;r at 57. ,i, stRrit uh^3.`'rass___ ..._.___- 2i L'nfavara:o1! 43 !Neec'lea.ad`.rea L:tah. r oe' :Indian rices~a!s k ot`._+'t''..s ? ._ rel.a!1-• U.S. DEPART!4ENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE Endnote -- RANGELAND PRODUCTIVITY AND CHRACTERISTIC PLANT COMP,UNITIES PAGw 4 Or 4 11/17/97 In areas that have similar climate and topography, differences in the kind and amount of vegetation produ,ed on rangeland are closely related to the kind of soil, Effective management is based on the relationship between the soils and vegetation and later. This report shows, for each soil, the range site; the total annual production of vegetation, in favorable, normal, and unfavorable years; the characteristic vegetation; and the average percentage of each species. Only those sails that are used as rangeland or are suited to use as rangeland are listed. An explanation of the column headings in this report follows. RANGE SITE is a distinctive kind of rangeland that produces a characteristic natural plant community that differs from natural plant communities an other range sites in kind, amount and proportion of range plants. The relationship betweeen soils and vegetation was ascertained during this survey; thus, range sites generally car be determined directly from the soil map. Soil properties that affect moisture supply and plant nutrients have the greatest influence or; the productivity of range Plants. Soil reaction, salt content, and a seasonal high water table ere also important. TOTAL PRODUCTION is the amount of vegetation that car be expected to grew annually on well managed range:ar. that is suoportine the potential natural plant community. It includes all vegetation, whether or not it is ceiatable to grazing animals. :t includes the current year's crouth of :eaves, twigs, and fruits of woody Plants. It does not include the increase in stew diameter of trees and shrubs. It it eypressed in pounds per acre of air-dry vegetation for favorable, norx,al, and vnfavcratte years. In g favorable year, the a.muunt and distributicr of precipitation and the te'serati;res mail'sr owing coed tii,ns s.ts`•artial:V tette.` that average. In a normal. Year, groiina conditions are about average. In an unfavorable year, grol:in; conditions are uel1 beim+ average, genera -".y o' illi available soil MO1Stt.;:'e, Dry wti,ht is t"e total anrwa: yield Der acre of air-dry vegetat,^,".. Yie;`+s are 3:?rust e. to a col^.e•nr percent of air-dry moisture cor.`e-:. rlatinoL:2 of veer ue'_ . to aC"s..oed;ng '.` Sura facto :a, - as C` she, re.erl. airs• and .-..p easc,ratle Uri :eriod.. i,aAF.ACTE".'TIC VEGET4T;01,1 The grasses, forbso and shrubs that ♦,aLe OP host o' the Date"tial natr,ral plant tomi.J-it*' on eec? soil is iisteC by cannon nape. Under COKPOSITTON the expected pert.er:tage r' the total annual o"rrt.o" 15 given for ea: t• SD`••;ei 198::;3y u; the characteristic Vegetation. The amount that car be used as forage deoerds on the kinds of graving animals and or the grazing seas,n. Range managee"t requires a know:edge of the kinds of $0;1 anj of the p;tent:,.l rOCi:?'sl r _ant c,:+.0) -_•v It aisr. .e;, re: an evaluation of the present range condition. Range condition is determined by comparing the oreser:t plant community with the potential natural plant community on a particular range site.. The more close!Y the existing community resembles the potential community, the better the range condition. Range condition is an ecological ratting only. The objective in range management is to control grafting so that the plant: growing or a site are about the sane in kind and amount as the potential natural plart community for :`.et `Il Such management generally results in the optimum productiar of vegetation, control of undesirable t1"lust: Species, conservat on of water, and :?rt c..`, erosion. Somettlles, t,(aerr, g range condtior soR,ed at b•elc� the Potential meets grating needs, provides wildlife habitat, and Crot`.'C;s 5011 and water resources. 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAGE ; Of 4 NATURAL RESOURCES COr#SERVAT^•il' ERV+JCP 1'117147 WJILDLIFE HABITAT Soil Information Potential for ..etitat eleme"'.s Potential as habite tap syml c.I ; Grain ; : Wild i i u Open- i:4Ce^ 1 1 Range- and algeand soil name ; and ;Grasses; herbs-; Hard- ; Conif-;Shrobs;6tietiand;Shailow: land ; land ;Wetland: land ; se ; and cam: wood : emus' ;Plants r water : wild- : wild- ; wild- ; wilt;- ; crroPs :legumes! Plal,ts: trees ; vlar:ts`. ;areas ;life ;life ;life ;life t1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 ' 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ! I ! 1 1 [; I 1 I ; I 1 1 f I I C 1 1 F 1 I 1 Almy ;POOH ;FAIR ;FAIR --- --- ;FAIR ;POUR ;VERY ,'POOR --- ;VERY ;FAIR : z PO?; ' : POP, ' i 1 ! 1 ' 1 1 1 • 1 I i ,2; I' 1 1 1 ; 1 I 1 I I r Arlo ;VEFVVERY !FAIR --- :RAIR ;VERY :VERY ;POOR - ;VERY ;FAIR : POOR '" POOR : ; : POOR " FCO- : POOR : 1 I , i 1I • r I A'iser: - ;VERY `.VER :POOR - _ -__ ;PI( :VERY :VERY 'VERY --- 'VERY `.PJC 1 POOR °O%P : POOR ; POOP : POOR : ; POOR 1 1 1 Roc''but."nG- - ',VEcv :VERY :VERY !VERY VCPY VESY :VERY !V!-, ;VERY :VERY !VERY!VERY I P"^R ; POCF ; PCOF : ROOF ROCS 1 ' rc eM1: ' nu. I Ft•C- ' mr.rp PT:.' _ 12::! r I 1 1 1 ' I I 11 I I mn:ii'.0. Io..... :'o "FA:F 1 --- •''A, ;VERY ;VEV, :=AIR --- 1,1". ti ,FA: . ?COS " FOGS ' FUR. II I 951, 1 1 E ' - 1 Cr "-ad; 'F.. :P::." :FLAIR --- 1 :FAIR ;V_FY�V r' :FAIR , .._' ;V:FY :rA ^ : ; WSPt,n_ PDDR r. 1 1 L I . 1 Gypsum tarl� 'VF :VERY ;VERY :VER`' :VERY :VERY !VELY VE:Y "VERY :VERY :VERY VERY rOC COOS I Pr".R I FO, r. ,SCR a P"_:' a ?COP : a\.. ' ?GU 1 POOR i POOR : POGF 11 1 1 1 1 f ttlz.rthids'YEFv 'VERY :POOR : i '.POOP' :POOR 'VER}' :VERY : --- :VERY :POOR POOR ; POOR ; POOR ' POOR : POOR ' 11 , 1 1 ! 1 1 I I 1 Y 1 r I F r Es. I r 1 ' ! lerva: !POOP ;`AIR ;FAIR , --- ;r,OGI, :VERY VERY :FAIR --- ;VERY :FAIR 1 1 1 1 PDGF POOR : : Pv.,C 1 I I 1 y 1 I 134. I ! 1 I 1 ! 1 d 1 1 , a S'% welte'-------'VE:r 1v .y c.,a --- :FAIR .LAIR :VERY "VERY 'FON "F IVEC3• :FAIT P20'1 , DII ? ' FO:- ! Pr'O " ' FIG' E U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURA. RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WILDLIFE HABITAT --Continued Soil Information PACE 2 OF 4 11/17/97 Potential for habitat elements I Map symbol ! Grain ; ; Wild ! • 1 : Open- : Wood- : 1 Range - and soil name : and 'Grasses; herba-: Hard- Conif-:SFlrubs:Wetland:Shallow: land : land :Wetland! land : seed : and : ceois: wood Brous! ;plants : water : wild- 1 wild- : wild- : wild- : Crops :legumes: plants: trees plants; ; : areas 1 life 1 life : life life I , 1 1 1 1 ! 1- 1 I 1 I 1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 f4t: 1 1 I 1 1 V 1 1 1 ! ]J I 1 I 1 Y 1 1 , Potential as habitat for -- Showalter ;VEPY :VERY !FAIR i --- :FAIR `FAIR :VERY !VERY :POt'E ;FAIR :VERY :FAIR POOR : POOR ' ; ! ; POOR ! POOR ; : ; POOR 1 1 Norval;POOR :FAIR ',FAIR.__ .._ ;GOOD VER�1 !VERY ;FAIR : - VERY :FAIR , I 1 1 ' POOP POOR : : : POOR 1 � , 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 : r I I 1 E I IO6 1 ! 1 I 1 1 1 Torriorthents---:POOR :VERY '.FAIP : --- :POOR :POOR '-VERY :POOR : !VP,' ;FAIR : POOR ; 1 : ` : PCO : : : PGOR : 1 t 1 F ! 1 4 I I : Caat+orthids :POOR :VERY :FAIR : --- .FAIR ;POOR :POOR :VERY ;P3OP, ;POOR :POOR !POOR POOR : : ; PDR 1 1 , 1 1 I P , I 1. Rock OL,tcrop----:VERv :VERY :VERY :VERY ;VERY :VERY :VER'.' :VERY :VERY ;VERY :VWF" ',VERv ' PGOR : POOR : POOR ' POOP ! PO;;h ; P,'OR ! PUR : POOR : POCR : POOR ' PCOR ! POOR Y I ; I ± 1 I 1 ; 1 ; A^ i 1 I Y4'S' • 0 1 ' I 1 : I1 , y 1 1' 1 I Tridell :VE?;' ;VERY :POOR ! :VERY :POOR :VERY :VERY 'VERY :°ON :VERT :POOP ! FOR ! POOR : : : POOR : ; POOR : POOR : POOR : : PO': : : 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEFARTM NT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WILDLIFE RAS:'A` Endnote -- WILDLIFE HABITAT PAG` 3 Or 6 tllt7/g7 Sols affect the kind and amount of vegetation that is available to wildlife as food and cover. They aisc afft:t the construction of water impoundments. The kind and abundance of wildlife depend largely on the amo'.r,t ane distribution of food, cover, and water. Wildlife habitat can be created or improved by planting appropriate ? vegetation, by maintaining the existing plant cover, or by promoting the natural establishment of desirable plants. to in this report the soils are rated according to their potential for providing habitat for various kinds of wildlife. This information can be used in planning parks, wildlife refuges, nature study areas, and other developments 4 for wildlife; in selecting soils that are suitable for establishing, improving, or maintaining specific elements of wildlife habitat; and in determining the intensity of management needed for each element of the habitat, Th: pot:tial of the soil is rated 'Good,' 'Fair,' 'Poor,' or 'Ver. ,• poor,' A rating of 'Good' indicates that the element or kind of habitat is easily established, improved, or maintained. re, or no ?imitations affect rra'la?ement, satisfactory results can be expected, A ratir,9 of 'Fair' indicates that the element or kind of habitat can be e:tato:istel, inprov!f, or iraintained in most places. 'iods-a'ely intensive management is required for sa-i,i5fa't^•'y results. A rah% of 'Poor' indicates that limitations are severe for the desig+'.ated eiellent or kind of habitat. g Habitat can to created, improved, or maintained in most places, but management is difficult and must be in',-er_ive. A rating of 'Ve-y poor' indicates. that restrictions for the element or kind of habitat are very severe and that unsatisfactory results can be expected, Creating, improving, or maintaining habitat is im'ractical or impossible, The elements. of wiidiife habitat are oesr"ribed in the following psra3raphs, GRAIN ,fti SEL:" CROPt7 are donestic grains ar„d seed -producer$ . 'b3cey+..s oi3"t:. Soil properties and features that a`feot the gr'owtt of grain ar:d seer cross art dot,. of the :oat Yore, texture of the sJ.trface lati•er, a allstle i.a"er :ar?city, wr Etre: ..lode, su `ace s`. .-e and hazard. Soil temperature and soil moisture are al;, consideration:. Et:y:les Ofwra; e''�� :e^. ,.i'CC+x ,,,ret 1 C:�r'r', wheel, oats, end ba" ?l. GRAS ES A,l" raJpE$ a -e da F - otrenr,a: grasses and herbaceous legumes, Soil Pr pe tel and reatr es that affett the growth of ;tresses a-.; seg M s ere depth. of the root Zone, texture of the Sid !_+:# say.”, a,sila`.':e r.a`ar Cadal:I`y- wed." -e.;, surface storinesa, flood hazard, and slade. 5C':. to naerature and soil moist0,re are considerations. Exancles of grasses ant' leonei are fescue, lovegress, bramerase, clover, and alfalfa. MILD HERBACEgOS PLANTS ere native naturally established grasses and f r.va, including weeds. Cc_. f":r?r, ... a. e u ,i . affect the grt'et, of ttese pl'nrts are thof ., a .+ ra f rt. cc Sea 4 IL r4V, ...-� G.. b >li. ���. laver, available wet" woodsy, wetness, surface stoniness, and find hazard. S:i: tem'o:+e''atore an�7L5'.:: moisture are also cot15:4eratiors. Era"oles of wi:G' hertactous plants are blGeste ,;elder -rod, beggarwee:, when. roes, ard y`5: NARD037 TREES and woody underst:ry prod:re nuts or other fruit, buds, catkins, twigs, bars, end foliage. Soil properties and features that effect the growth of hardwood trees and shrubs are depth of the root zone, available water gegen ty, and wetness. Examples of these plaits are oak, poplar, ctRe^ry, sreetgur^, apple, hawthorn, dogwood, hickory, t'.a:kterrY, and blueberry. Exar:c•:es of `nidi -producing shrubs that are suitable for planting on soils rate a•'e Russian -olive, 8utJnr•-olive, and crabai7ple. CDNIFERM fJr:s browse and seers. Soil Grooerties and features that affect the growth of coniferous trees, shrubs, geld ground cc,e- are de;.i,t; of the rot`. zone, availat:e water capacity, and wetnesz, Exsrp:e. cf .:;i•:far,hu$ plants art gine, Sprue, fir, Cedar, ar;d juniper, r^Y.:ES are bushy wood!? play,te that procface fru:"_, bide, twigs, bait,, and foliage. Sci: properties and features that eft --t the.. ;.f shrubs a �,: r it i g"?: l:t�; _ _. ? :�tt :+ne, aca.:able wase Sa=3c i`. 1'. salinity, and £::. . c ..: b a":Die: o'G Moil':8:n*ak^yarY, bri:c s' h_. a^•y ora U.S. DEPARTMENT CF AGRICULTURE PALE 4. Or A NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 11f17J47 WILDLIFE HABITAT Endnote -- WILDLIFE HABITAT --Continued WETLAND PLANTS are annual and perennial wild herbaceous plants that grow on moist or wet sites. Submerged or floating aquatic plants are excluded. Soil properties and features affecting wetland plants ere texture of the surface layer, wetness, reaction, salinity, slope, and surface stoniness. Examples of wetland plats are snartweed, wild millet, wildrice, saltgrass, cordg,ess, rushes, sedges, and reeds. SHALLOW WATER AREAS have an average depth of less than 5 feet. Some are naturally vet areas. Others are created by dares, levees, or other water -control structures, Soil properties and features affecting shallow water areas are depth to bedrock, wetness, surface stoniness, slope, and permeability. Examples of shallow water areas are marshes, Ovate,fowl feeding areas, and ponds. The habitat for various kinds of wildlife is described in the following paragraphs. HABITAT FOR OPENLAND WILDLIFE consists of cropland, pasture, meadows, an„ a-eas that are overgrown with gasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas prod& a grain and seed crops, grasses and legumes, and wild he~;A-eoas orar.ts. : Wildlife attracted to these areas include bobwhite Quail, pheasart, meadoolark, field s'errow, cottontail, and 'e for. HABITAT FOR WOCDLAN WILDLIFE consists of areas of deciduous plants or coniferous plants or both and associated grasses, la ores, and wild herbaceous Plants. Wildlife attracted to these areas include Wild turkey, ruffed grouse, woodcock, thrushes, w•,ocoec'r.e-s, sauir~els, gra! for, raccoon., deer, and `r" HAFI"AT t,ETL4 ) w;LDLI'E :o°,_i'sts a` ,Per, marshy or swar:•ar shallow water ar'ess. 5 ne Cf the wildlife a.ttrssed t- suth areas are d'rici , geese, hQ."ti';s, shore birds, mus 8: r ^.':r'• r ='n ieC`.'e", SAF:TAT FOR RAk;•E:_1Nv 1:TLDL:rE consists of areas of shrubs trod wild herbaceous plants "'llife attwg"ley to rangeland incline antelope, deer, sane �;ce, meaicularkt ar lark bunt r; s U.S. OEPARTI1EA` OF AGPICUL TU E NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOILS Soil Information, PAGE ; OF 3 11/17/97 1 1 1 I i Map symbol : Depth : Clay : Cation- : Soil ; Calcium I Gypsum :Salinity: Sodium and soil nam+ I :exchange ;reaction, :carbonate: :adsorption ;capacity : : : : ratio tl f I1 1 i 1 1 : In Pct Ineq/1009: pH I' Pct Pct :mthas/cel; f f I I 1 I I I 1 1 i 1 t 1 6. ! I I 1 1 1 I I 1 f i 1 Almy : 0-8 : 20-25;10.0-20.0; 7.4-8.4 : --- : : 8-26 : 15-20: 5.0-15.0; 7.4-8.4 _-_ _r. ; 126-60 : 20-35"10.0-20.01 7.4-9.0 : 1 I 1 1 r 12. : 4 4 d A 1 Y 4 Arle : 0-10 15-25110.0-25.0: 6.6-7.8 : 0-5 _-_ ; 0-2 : 10-30: 10-25."• 5,0-15.0: 7.4-3.4 : 5^1.0 : : 0-2 30-34 ; ._- : _.- : --- : -- 1 : --- Ir I 9 1 1 1 e I 1 Ansari___.__ : 0-8 : 1.8-25:10.0-25.0: 7,9-8.4 ; 0-5 : 0-2 8-14 : 16-20;10.+-11.0! 7.w-8.4 : 1-1^ : --- : 0-2 : 14-18: --- ; -»- ___ Rock Outcrto----! 0-60 34: : Skiedrade : 0-5 ; 1i-27;10.0-25.0: 6.6-7,3 ; 5-14 ! 27-33;15.0-37.0! 6,6-7.3 : 14.4: 27 :i .0 2.... 6.6-7.5 4 : 40-60 : 27-35;10.0-20,0: 7.9.8.4: 5-10 : - --- 1 D 1 ! I ! I 35: I I ! • t Emped^aur 1 0-5 : 18-27:10.0-25.0; 6.6-7.3 ! 5-14 : 27-35:15.0-30.0!! 6.6-7.3 ; : ^ : :4-40 ! 27-35;10.0-25.0: 6.6-7.8 ! : 40-60 : 27-35:10.0-20.0; 7.9-8.4 ` 5-10 --- I 1 I 1 I • C 1 I 1 Gypsut Land 0-60 : : 8-32 I 1 I yosiorthid;----1 0-8 ' 10-2C: 5.0-15.0: 7.4-8.4 : 0-10 2-5 : 2-8 : 8-23 : 10-20: 4.0-15.0; 7.4-8.4 ! 0-10 5-10 : 4-8 ! 23-39 ; 10-20! 4,0-15.0: 7.4-6.4 11 0-10 7-12 : 4-8 A I I 1 A 1 I 81: 1 I 1 1 f Mcrval- ----- 0-7 . 11-27'10.0-20.0; 7.4-1.4 . r 1. 7-19 . 27-35:10.0-25.0: 7.4-8.4 : {1 4 : 19-60 ; 20-27 5.0-15.C: 7.4-8.44: ir-25 --- : 0-4 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE HA`iiRAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CHEMICAL PROPEP'IES OF THE SOILS --Continued Snit Information PAGE 2 OF 3 11/17/97 Map symbol Depth ; Clay Cation- ; Steil ; Calcium ; Gypsum ;Salinity; Sodium and Skil !late i ;exchange :reaction :carbonates :adsorption II , ':capacity i , i : ; ratio 1 � 1 1 1 in ; Pct :meg/160q ` PH Fct Pct ;rt!mtos/cm; I I I I 94: 1 1 1 1 I ! I I I ShoJalter a 0-8 ° 20-25;10,0-20.Di 6.6-7.8 ; --- ; E-39 r 35-45120.0-4C.2, 6.6-7.8 1 --- : 39-60 '• 27-351-.10.0-24.11 7.4'E.4 ; 5-10 ; 1 , 1 1 4 . Hoy- a1 „ C-7 15-27;10.0-20.0: 7.6_S.4 , --- 7-19 ' 27-35:10.D-25.0' 7.4-5.4 '--- --- -._ C�-6 1 19-65 27: 5.0-15.01 7.4-E.4 ; 15-25 : --- I 0-6 1 1 1 1 1 1 5. 95h va:tr" ` 0-f 20-2`'IC.0-2c.c: 6.E-7.8 E-39 . 35 -4S'23.0 -42.C' 6,6_7,8 . 39-60 27-35'12.0-22.2! �.6-C•.6 , , D-7 15-27!:G.7-20.0' 7,4•• .4 ' --- --- 7-:9 . 27-35110.0-25.0' 7,4-8.4 --- 1 r-4 ---! 0-6 -- - ! 6.1-E.4 . C 1 -- : C-2 ' 4-3r : 5-3= $.3-2C•I' 6.1-5.4 1 0- --- L-2 1 32, 1 •.'v. .,4 -'- . 1 1 1 1 I . 1 0-4 1 15-32: S C -2C,0! 6. -E.0 -y � : : n_2 • L i I ) 1 L d. . L_ 7$' 5.0-22.2' 6.a 4Z.6 1 5-14 0-4 --2 1 I 1 R ck 0latcrcp--- ' 0-6C -- _ { I 1 101: T„` ...--- --_ 0-2 ; 10-15! 5.2-15.0' 7.4-£.6 Vi -2! - :5-22; 5.0-1514: 7.9_S,4 25.37 117.15' 3.0-1C."1 7.9-9,C 37-62 ' 5-!C' 1.0-5.0 7.56-9.0 1 w.._._ ---- r-. ' 15 5.C-15.2' 7.4_5.4 . -5-23G. 5.0-_2. 7.9-5.4 5-12 1.2-1.C ' 7.9- 5-15 1 15-15 1 1 5-15 - ! 10-20 ` 0-2 5-1: --- 15-732 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPAFTMENI OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOILS Endnote -- CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SOILS PAGE 3 OF 3 11117/97 This report shows estimates of some characteristics and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates are given for the major layers of each soil in the survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and similar soils. CLAY as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002 A millimeter in diameter. In this report, the estimated clay content of each major sci: layer O., O., is given as a Percentage, by weight, of the soil mel eria: that is less than, 2 millimeters in diameter. The amount and kind of clay greatly affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil. They determine the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrtnk-dwell ootentia1. permeability, and elasticity, the ease of soli dispertior, and other soil properties. The apoul1 an,: kin,f. of 1,' -lax in a soil also a fec.` tillage and ear't`;s,cving operators. CAC: EKCEAN,H CAPACITY (GEC) is the total amount of cat ior held in a son: ir such a way that they can be renoved only by exchanging with another cation fr the nate^a: soft GCC is a measure n' the ability of a soil to reta,r c3ticns, sou. of which are pram nutrients. Soils with low %E; 'cold few catl:'rrs a".'C r'cw mov,! f7e3uer:t c.:.-:e`::ns of fertilize",- than " r" 4. Cyr 5�..s with t,.,,r. GE." have the potert:a: to retain cations, thus reL'd..f, the pc sii;iiity of pollution of groL d water. REA,':o 's a =as,are ;f acidity alk •t; r?d i= es n s e :� a:ln: a e3ur. s 'U a w•• values. The range ir. pH of each ma;o" horizon :s based :r. r o' 1 fief:.' test.:. YF:r' ?,a s; val6e5 have beer. 1'c':i:e:i by labcratrr, analyses. sQ:i reacti,. is imeorta t in seeting cops and other r1rrts, in evaluating soil a'endhentc fe- f, ..11ty anf 3r' in deter•'iniia the niSie of corrosion. CALCIUM CARBONAT= is the percentage by weigt.t o' calciurr carbolate in the fire -e Materiel, less t'ar 2 r!i:li!"et€r: in size. ' GYPSUM is the pe-certage by weight of hydhated ca.sium su!fotes 2k' tillimete''s _r smaller in site, in the 56ii• RI:l;:,'; is a measure of scloble salts .n the soil at saturation. It is eYprec.sed as the electrical conductivity of the saturation eytract, irr rri iinhos per centimeter et. 215 degrees C. Estimates are based on field end laboratory !'easure,rent5 at representative sites of non rrigated soils. The salinity of irrigated .oils is affected by the quality of the irrigates'- water a'"'": dy the freooerc( c water ao;iicatior. hers., the salinity c` _. ._ :r individual fields .S` dif"sr greatly front the value given iri the repor`. 5a:ini`= affe,ts th_ slier:..t+ of a soil for crop production, the stabi:it> of soil if used as construction material, arc, the r,ctential of the soil tc corrode meta: and concrete. 4^s "aTIDl1 RAT:C . eft -,asses the relative actj.it 'ur• c sod_r..t :. elchare ro3.:t.C3rs in the s:ii SA s .s aYoeasure of the am,.t w $0diur re!atfve tr. cc.:ia a±}, nag'+c__i=r it =.-. ware' ertra... s..:I'. 52tti"?tec s'•:1 paste. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF A0PICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF Sall: Soil In€orsatior `,Ertries under 'Erosion factors --T. apply to the entire profile. Entries under 'Wind erodiliility 'Wind erodabiiity index' apply only to the sur Fate layer) PAGE 1 OF 6 11/17/?7 group' and : I 1 1 0 !F.rosion factors:wird :Wind Map symbol : Depth : Clay : Moist : Perinea- :Available: Shrink- :organic: :Prrdl-:erOL;- and 5011 naie i . r bulk : b111iy , water : swell i matter:: Iblllit lyl+111ty i : density 1 :capacity :potential: : EI 1 Kf : T :group !index : I I i to : Pct : 9/Cc : In!h.r , inlir! I : Pfit : : 1 ! ! 1 i d 1 I 6: ! r Almy : 0-8 : 20-25:1.25-1,40:0.60.2,00 :0,13-0.16:Lc, :1,0-2.0: 0.2E1 0.28! 5 6 : 48 : 5-26 : 15-20:1.35-1,50: 0.60-6.03 :0.12-0.14:Lo+: 1.5-3,0: 0,28: 0.28: ' 25-60 120-35' ,25-1,4C C.20-2.00 :0.1-0.16:Lok :0.0-C',5' 0.24: 0.24' 1 1 ! I 'I I 1 12: 1 1 I 1 � ; I ' Arle ' 0-10 : 15-25:1.25-1.49! 0.6, s 0C + 0 _ 10.0_7_. a 191 Lcw 12 D -4,D;1 9.1@' 0.24: 3 : 8 : : 10-30 : 19-25;1.25-1.50' 0.6C -f.00 :0.05-0 0©:Loi •'0,E-1,0' 0,10° 0.321 30-36 • --_ CC r I fI I p I • y iser_---.------ 0-8 1a-25.:25- a7 C. -2.0C 'J.Ir 17; 12 O! a 4: 8-14 : 16-20•..25-„40p n` i?'4 11 nl ! I i ; Roc;,. u:.:t:roA----'. 9-60 ! •__ ___ ! I r I ' ' I e 3t: Enoedrado-« -----: 0-5 : 13-21:1.25-1.40: 0.600-2.C2 '0.16-0,18:Low :2.9-4.0' 0.26' 0,24' 5 i f. : 48 : 5-14 : 27-35:1,25-1,40: 0,20-0,.60 :0,17-9.21:Moderate :2,0-4,C! 0.17' x.1711 : 14-47 'I 27-35:1.25-1,40,! 0.20-0.60 :C.17-9.21:Moderete :0.5-1.0: 0.26.1. 0.24' ' : 40-60 : 27-35:1.25-1.4„ 9.20-0.60 '0.17-G.2'_:Mod'orate :10.0 5: 0, 2r I . -• . D. 24: 35: I . 1 : ' 1 1 Er..oed�•5do----- --: 0-5 : 1E-2?'1,25-1.4C: 0,60-2.00 :0.16-0,18:Low 1 � : X2,0-4, 0. 0.24: 0,26: 5 ; 6 : 4E : 5.14: 27-35:1,25-',40: 0,29-00.60 :0,17-0.21:Moderate :2,0-4,4: 0.17: 0,17: 1 : 14-40 : 27-3::1.25-1.4fi: 0,20-0.60 '0.17-� ° .= I .?1 "rderate :C.5-1.2: 0.20. 0.26: : 40_60 " 27.35:1.25-1.60: 0.29-0.60 '0.17-0.21:Moderate :?,Li -9,5: 0.2..! 0.26' 1 I p 1 55: I 1 � p 1 f vc+i.t,• Land : 0-60 : - : --- ' 1 1 I + 1 I -1 Gynsiorthide----: o-8 : 10-2C':.35• :.5o: 0.60-6,93:0.13-0.15:.n. :0 F-1.0' ,23: 0.28' ? 3 5-23 : 19-2,:1.25-1.50: 13.6.:-6.L1:0:5.12-:.16;Lai :0,0-^.`' 0.!7:. 0,37: 23-3; . 1C -C.7 -0.4f.-1.59: 0.60-6.9, 'C.12-0.!6.'i,N :C 0-0.5: 0.37 37: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGR:_CULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PNY5:0!. PROPERTIES OF SOILS --Continued Sail Information PAGE 2 OF 6 (1/17/997 1 f � Map . bc1 Death : Clay and soil name I : I Y I , r I I 1 ;Erosion t eL0. 4 r]Ix1nV:W._nd Moist : Perinea- :Available, Shrink- :Organic: :erodi-:erodi- bulk : bility : water : swei ; matter: :bilitr:b;litY density : :caPaci`^Y :Potential: : K : Kf : T igrouP :index 11 , 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1.„T -..a 1 1 �- r Irl Fct f 9/cc In1hr Ir;; :w. Pe: : : 1 + { 11 1 1 1 ! e 1 i I 1 1 1 1 1 85:1 1 1 r 1 ' I 1 I I t1GrVa: : 0-7 : 15-27:1,25-1.40; 0.60-6.00 :0.11-0.16:Low :1.3-2.0: 0.28; 0.28: 5 : 6 : 48 7-19 27-3E:1.21-1.40: 0,27-0^60 :0.16-0,19;1,0w :i.5-.,0: 0.44' 3.24' r I 19-60 : 20.27;1.25-1.40: 0.60-2.00 :0.13-0.16:Low :::::5-1.0: C.37: 0.37: 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t . I I 1 1 1 . 94: 1 1 : ' ' r 1 St. waiter - ! 0-€ : 20-25:1,2. _.GC; 0.60-2.110 :C.07-0.09:1%, :2.0-3.0 0.10: 10,251 3 : 8 ' I [ 3; , :1 . r.Y 0 L 20 , . I :o : 0 4 Y ! f;- 3."45tf.. 1±' .. 4. G•D:- .GL 11?.^ _..i '1�Jderdtr 151.5-1.4, 11.1",! D, 24, . y 39-`0. 27-35:1.25-1.40: 0.n-0.60 10.0 0...:L w '0•,-_ _.TC1 0.24. Y 1 1 1 1 ' ` �1 �r 1 n M rv3' ». C•-7 1 :5-27:..25-1.421 C.5'!-.0;+ :0.13-...16:icw -2.': 0.28: 0.25" 5 : . 48 -:q : 27-a5:1. e`-1.4=9 ..23-0.63, .15-c.. l;r :".5-1."' ...:' ..24: '• .9-60 . 20-27;1.25-1.40: 0.60-2.00 10.13-0.11Low 'C.. -1,C: _. 7' 0.371 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I Sta71ra.lttr ' n-8 ; 20-25'1.2:-1..40: 0.50-2.00 :0.07-0 04'_.. '2 _ ..o: O.::. 0,2.8' 2.8' 3 8 1 V 1 i_1C vc_4r1 _.1^Y 0 nit -_-_ _ C" ....'mode-sie '0.5-1.C' _.101 C.24: 39-6: 27 35'..x` :.441 C..., a... '0.09-..11'Ltw 0.5-:.c: C.24' I Mory ' 2-7 ' 15-27:1,25-1.40' 0.60_6.00 .,...`3-'.16 LN 0- 0! 0.28' 21: 5 + 127-31..-01 ' 1e-6..' ?3_37:1.2` ..W2! _.611-2.,_ ! .13-0. ?."Low :C.5 -1.0 C ,": 3.37: 104: + { I Torrior theists ---I 0-4 . --- t I :C.5-1,0: _ 4-30 : 5.15;1.3C -1.8C; 0.60.2.0D 10.10-O.1S,Law _.5' 12 0.32' 30-54 '. - C.00-0.20 : I t 1 I tarberthids : 0-4 : 15-3011.20-1.3 G. .,G1 :11.08-0.131 Low :0.5-1.0! 0.15' 0.28: 2 : 8 : : 4-30 : 20-35:1.40-1.50; '31.12-0.16:Mode.se :0.11-C.5: 0.2 0.28' ! Y Pock 3.Jicro. 1 2-64' F (j Y 1 • . 106: 1 Y 1 Tridet: 0-2 , 13-i51i.35-1.50'1 2,00-8..00 :t,07-0,10'..cV : C-4. `•: C.24' ' ' 2-14 : 10-1.5'1.35-1.50: 2.03-6.05 i{'i.51?-C... Lev '1.0-2.2: 0.17: C.24• a 14-25 .. C'. .'S ..50:. (.8' ,."3 :13.37-2.10ILew 13 5.1.0; ...2 0.28' a 25.17 .. .. 311.'.,so! 2. CL 8. '3.c7 n 1.s :1110-0.5: 0.1C. I.T2I 7_6r : cr:'1.45-:.5 603-23.02T'0.33-3.17,4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS --Continued Soil Information PAGE 3 OF 6 11/17/97 ;Erosion factors:Wind ;Wind Map symbol Depth Clay :' ]Moist ; Perinea- ;Available; Shrink- ,Organic; ;erodi-:erodi- and soil name bulk bility ; water ` swell : matter; ;bility,bilitY density ; :eaQacitY :potential; + v• K , Yf , T ,group index I I f 1 1 i T"•1 I I 1 In ; Pet g/cc In/hr In/in ; Pct ; 1 1 1 106 (con.): Brownstc 0-11 15.20;1.35-1.50: 0.60-6.00 ;0,07-0.10:Low :1.0-2.0: 0.15; 0.24; 3 3 ; 86 11-30 '. 15-20:1.35-1.50; 0.60-6.00 :0.05-0.07:+ow :0.5-1.0:: 0.10' 0.28; 30-42 ; 5-W1.45-1,65: 6.00-20.00;3,03-0,04RLow ,0.0-C.5: 0.10: 0.24: 42-60 13-220;1.35-1.50: 0.60-6.03 :0.07.0.10;Lor ,`0.0-0.51. 0.17; 0.32: • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 = U.S. DEPARTMENT OF A6R14t1'TURF NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATI."•]d SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS Endnote -- PHY ICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS PAGE 4 OF 6 11/17J9at This report shows estimates of some characteristics and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates are giver, for the major layers of each soil in the survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and similar soils. CLAY a$ a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. In this report, the estimated clan content of each major soil later is giver, as a percentage, by weight, of the soil materia: that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. The amount and kind of clay greatly affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil. They determine the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink -swell potential, permeability, plasticity, the ease of soil dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay ;r, a SCiI also affect tillage and earthraving operations.. POTS' SULK DEN1S:TY is the weight of soil (ovendry', per unit volume. Volume is measured when the soil is at field moisture ca"acity, the moisture content at 113 bar moisture tension. Weigh` is deterlf:ired after drying the sit at 105 degrees C. in this report, the estimated moist t+".Fi4 density of eat horizon is ex?resse,: ir grams ;ler cubic centimeter of soli material that is less Char. 2 millimeters in dial".•etet, Bs& dei:'; data are mese: lc tor -mote shrr;rl.-s.ell potential, avai:a`ie malar cacao t', total Pore spate, and other sol properties. The orris`, toil: density of _ soil ireisates the pate spa:e available `i' water and rot_ A boll density cif more than :.F can restrict water storax arc,' root oenetratioto flGist bul'K dersity is inf'suended by texts; e, 3,i:id of clay, content of organic lea,.er, and soil st uctt"c. PERI!A!lLITY refers to the ability of a soil tc t.'ar nit ater o- air. roe estimates indicate the rate of downward movement of water wher the soil is saturated They 8r' based on soil chata`tetist_;,_ Observed in the field, peed.«.....y sr;. -e, c: csity, and text. 'el'". :ti:.:� :onside:'e :n the design .f soil d'aioa.ie systc,:s! <e,ot1( tack• at•sorpticr fields, e'ld r.' rllci.Y . thn rate of :ate' noveloett under saturated corditiors affects behavior, AVA:LASLE VA'.ER CAFt :TY r'e'e-s to the quantic of water that the soil is capable of st:. .r; for use by clang . The ce ac:ty for orate- storage is giver, in inches of water per Inch of soil for each major <_oii i5rfr. The capacity varies; deaendin; on s:-1 properties that affect the retention of tate' a",d the depth of the root tore. The most :Important properties are the cor.tent cf organic mattet, sill te)t:.re. b . density, a".:: so•:. stouct:+re. Available water capacity is an important factor in the choice of plants or crops to te growl; and ir the design and management of err;ga:iori systems. Available Water capacity is not an estimate of the quantity of gat. a:toa'-lY available to plants at ary giver time, ` ^'•",°:-SUELL POTENTIA, is the pcter.t;al far volome change in a soil with a loss or gain of moist'+re, Volume dance o:'cirs ra`-rly be arse of the interaction of clay minerals with water a1^_ varies with the ahs r`. and tr: Df clay minerals it the soil. The size of the load on the soil and the magnitude of t'' charge ir soil moist.r"e corter.t influence the amount of swelling of soils in place. Laboratory neasurerents cf swelling of undistorted vied: were Rail for man,' sal.-. For others, swelling w estimated or the as'of t of � -a � Es e_.:lea',e h basis f:' kir � t" cror4.ri ale, rineoels io the soil and on measurements of -:niter c•` , If the shrink swell ooten`ia.:s rated noderate to otry high, shrinii1: ant soelliro oar cause daragc t7 b::{_Ji ei, r JG.3, and other 5. ":; `J"Es. ,...at design i; often needed Shrink-sErel! ''Pr•t' asses are ,+ he _ t th ..f:.. _ pOt. iia: Ll -.s... base. in .e+`rt 4,. a"• ... s ?'; :,h_ r=_ moisLoe eortert is in: _'sed from lir-dry to a ePer, The '_'haoge _ e .c.r: soil frail:'' less than 2 millimeters ir v:« .., Tht classes a 'Lcc,T a ha :e of less +`_ : pert.. .6c,te^as ,r a. raer_en - - •u ' .r_ thao f pence",.. 'VE " greatf' that: C . .. ...,:e:. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS 4 Endnote- -- PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS --Continued PAIGE S OF 6 11/11/47 ORGANIC BATTER is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages of decomposition. In report a, the estimated content of organic matter is expressed as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter, The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained or increased by returning crop residue to the soil. Organic matter affects the available water capacity, infiltration, rate, and tilt). It is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for crops. EROSION FACTOR K indicates the susceptiility of the whole soil (including rocks and rock fragments) to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of sir factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) to predict the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and riii erosion in tors per acre per year. The estimates are based prioaarii). on percentage of silt, sand, are Crgarii, matter (up to 4 percent°and or soil structure and Permeability. li ty V'.•;ile. of K .'ars . nor n 5 t c t l a t t ibl i .Q 6.�`�.+ Th higher he l't'.A., `fie 16,:.,_ d;.i^e:5ie e the soil is to see: ar,d rill erosici by water. EROSION FACTOR Yf is ii e ERCS:o' FA" nF K it `h s r� ,t• of �•; � � but is o.� the fine -ea t, enol i;+r the soil, Folks and rock fragments bre not conside^ed. EM:c:N FAC7OF 7 8 ea:i"'atf of the raiinu' averags annual rsts ofrc t, :,l by w.r<G Gr .a, s- khat ten occur without affecting crop productivity over a sustained period. The rate is in tors aef acre pE- yee;. erk malt ui- .` .S'. have c:r,... 7w•';.crti.tac a`rE:?Ing their resistance. to wino' 3'(33,. The grolll.s indicate the susceptibility of soil to wand e-o._:on. Soi;s are 9rouoed-: di"stirttio 1. ,:C3 sand:r, sands, fir. son. , aro vF-y fine serfs. These s,Y.I a-enerelly no: suitable for crc:_° Thef a" fit 'd .tit: f e: ,�'E'1 •it. E',• � •�.^', E vk3-. .r r. "' is dif•i:i:i; .. establish, c. -.:only coarse sands, ;r:z*y sands, loopy =rte sends, roe, very fire sand= and sapric Sohl material. Ttese sy:is are v?r! highly eecoi:;e, . tops car, :}e gr`.w i` intensi,e measures lc. contr.:.. .in,''i encs'.^;'. are Jse.:1. 3, Coarse sandy loans, sandy Ear's, tine sandy roams, and very fine sandy loans. These soils are hig}+y erodible, Crops can be grown if intensive measures to control wind erosion are used. Celcar'ec.,s luaus, silt loans, clay looms, and siity clay oa!ns. Tf'iess soils are erodible. Cross can be pros if intensive measures to control wind eroslnr, are used. 4, Clays, silt\ clan., r.:,'Celca"e'.:s :ia; learn, and silty clay jf:r._ that art than 35 ;,e'`..•! °:La !'. Tt=ss soils a~e m":' ate.Y erofitl. Crops Car be growl; if mea:. -e5 to nc_tre,, l ' _ eresii,v ' ^ ..:.,.. U.S. DEPARTMENT DF AGRIULT1'I<E NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OT SOILS Endnote -- PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOLS --Continued 5. foricalcaredus loans and silt loams that are less than 20 percent clay and sandy clay loans, sandy clays, and her;ic soil material. These soils are slightly erodible, Crops can be grown if measures to control kind erosion are used. 6. Roncalcareaus ions and silt lows that are more than 20 Percent clay and noncaicareous clay loams that ane less than 15 percent clay, These soils are very slightly e-cdit•le. Crops can be grown if ordinary measures to control Wind erosion are used. 7. Silts, "''ori;al:e Taus silty clay Ions that are less t`.s.: 35 pe'cent clays and fib`•ic soil mater al. These soils are very sligt11 7 erodible. Crops can be grown if ordinary measr- s to control wind erosion are used. $. Stfls ttirt are not subje:t to wi^.li erosion tieca.:se of coarse fragner.ts on the surface or because of sur`ett T+et :eco, FA 6 OF E 11/17/97 The VAT ;RCAF LITS' INDEX is used in the wind erosion eoua`ion The :rise$ rinbe" sndicatts tht amcunt of coil los! tonE per acre Per year, The range of yiT. si��r� h�1.ty rcr i r• i y.,. � i. !t�i$i_e. s x5 i to i.. { Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch November 2010 Appendix H Public Improvements Cost Estimate + Final Plat Engineering Report Appendix H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER ENGINEERS I S U R V E Y O R S November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 r 18 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81801 970.945.1 004 970.945.5948 FAX Via E -Mail: larry©balcombgreen.com RE: Filings 6A, EIk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimates/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit engineering cost estimates for future public improvements associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 6A This is the 5 -acre "Neighborhood Commercial" lot located north of CR 114 between the Elk Springs main entrance and Auburn Ridge Road. This parcel is being Final Platted now to facilitate sale but will again have to go thru the Garfield County Preliminary/Final Plat process prior to development or re -subdivision. Our obligation now is to provide access and utility service to the parcel. Access is facilitated by CR 114. An 8" sanitary sewer line will be constructed in the old CR 114 ROW north of the current road. A 2" steel gas line, 3-phase electric line and telephone lines are located in the Auburn Ridge Road ROW at the intersection w. CR 114 just east of the Parcel. An existing water service from the 8" line in Auburn Ridge Road is stubbed into the parcel as shown. Refer to the attached Filing 6A SIA Cost Estimate. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 6A, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. 1 1 1 David M. Kotz, P.E. 1:\1981\015021C1291Nov2O1 OGarCoSubmsttall,App H-11 a-ElkSprirtgsF6almp.doc 1 03 WEST TOMICHI AVE, SUITE A GUNNISON. CO 81 230 970.641 .5355 970.641 .5358 FAx I01 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT 102 PO Box 2155 ASPEN, CO 61611 970.925.6727 970.925.41 57 Fax 2768 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE 102 GRAND JUNCTION. CO 81 505 970.245.2571 970.245.2871 FAx 320 THIRD STREET MEEKER, CO 8104 I 970 878,5180 970.576.4181 FAX 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch Filing 6A Subdivision Improvements Agreement Engineering Cost Estimate Filing 6A - Sanitary Sewer No. Descri • tion lit . Unit Price / Unit Estimate 1 Moblization 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 2 Clearing & Grubbing 0.4 AC $ 2,500.00 $ 1,000.00 2 Topsoil strip, stockpile & replace 1890 SY $ 3.00 $ 5,670.00 3 Erosion Logs (Install and maintain) 10 ea $ 200.00 $ 2,000,00 4 Class 6 Aggregate (full depth under pavement) 68 TN $ 35.00 $ 2,380.00 5 Asphalt Patching 14 TN $ 130.00 $ 1,820.00 6 8" PVC Sewer Main 846 LF $ 50.00 $ 42,300.00 7 Sewer Manholes 5 EA $ 4,000.00 $ 20,000.00 8 Sewer Drop Manhole _ _ 1 EA $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 9 Revegetation 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 10 Traffic Control 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub -Total $ 10 9 contingency $ 92,670.00 9,267.00 Total $ 101,937.00 Note: This cost estimate is based on the engineer's interpretation of estimated bid quantities and prices that will be received far this project. As with any estimate, actual costs may vary due to unforeseen circumstances and market conditions. 1b-EikSpringsF6a-SIA,xls By: David M. Katz, P E. 11/24/10 Schmueser Gordon Meyer 6 SCHMUESER : GORDON ; MEYER ENGINEERS 1 S U R V E Y O R S November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 1 1 8 WEST SIXTH STREET. SUITE 20O GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 970 945.1 004 970.945.5948 FAX Via E -Mail: tarry@balcombgreen.com RE: Filing 8 — Phase 2, Elk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimate/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit engineering cost estimates for future public improvements and provide documentation for the completed infrastructure associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 8- Phase 2 These are the three 35+ acre Rural Residential lots south of Filing 8 accessed by Juniper Drive. Utility construction was completed by Dow Construction as documented in the attachments to the July 25, 2007 Dean Gordon, P.E letter to you (attached). Juniper Drive was reconstructed this past summer and fall as documented by the attached invoices from GMCO and GNPeters that indicate over $200k was spent improving the road. H -P Geotech did construction testing and oversaw the work. Refer to their summary letter also attached. These lots will be served by Individual Septic Disposal Systems (ISDS) as approved by Garfield County Resolution 99-102. All other infrastructure is in place and no costs are necessary for SIA security purposes. Filing 8- Phase 2 - SIR Cost Estimate = $0 (all work completed). I have reviewed the status of previously -constructed public improvements for this project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Elk Springs, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with this application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs. Attached hereto are letters from Dean Gordon, P.E., Dow Construction, the contractor of record; H -P Geotech, referencing compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is I:119811015021C1291Nov2o1oGarCosubmittal\App HI-12a-ElkspringsFBblmp.doc 103 WEST TOMICHI AVE, SCUTE A GUNNISON. CO 81 230 970.64 1 .5355 970 541.5358 FAX 101 FOUNDERS PLACE. UNIT IO2 PO Box 2155 ASPEN, CO 8161 970 925.6727 970.925.4157 FAX 2788 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE 102 GRANO JUNCTION. CO 81505 970.245.2571 970,245.2871 FAX 320 THIRD STREET MEEKER. CO 6 164 1 970.878.5180 970.878.4181 FAX 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER ENGINEER SISURVEYORS a spreadsheet entitled "Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself and Mr. McElwee, to the best of my knowledge, the previously -constructed utility and roadway infrastructure improvements within Filing 8 — Phase 2 appear to be constructed and installed in compliance with applicable construction documents. 1 trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 8 — Phase 2, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. David M. Kotz, P.E. I:\1981 \O 15024C4294Nov2010GarCoSu brnittallApp H-42a-E'lkSpringsF8bl m p.doc 6 SCHMUESER GORDON ' MEYER ENQINEERSISURVEYOR S November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 18 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8160 f 970.945. 1004 970 945 5948 FAx Via E -Mail; larry@balcombgreen.com RE: Filing 9, Elk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimate/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit an engineering cost estimate for future public improvements and provide documentation for the completed infrastructure associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 9 This filing consists of the western most lots in Elk Springs. Again, the bulk of this construction was previously completed as documented in the attachments to Dean Gordon's July 25, 2007 letter to you. The exception is that two additional Tots (79 & 80) have been added at the top of Kingbird Drive. Necessary future construction consists of widening a portion of the existing drive, extending the drive, constructing a cul-de-sac and installing utility services to the existing mains as shown on the plans. Refer to the attached Filing 9 - Kingbird Drive SIA Cost Estimate, I have reviewed the status of previously -constructed public improvements for this project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Elk Springs, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with this application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs. Attached hereto are letters from Dean Gordon, P.E., Dow Construction, the contractor of record; H -P Geotech, referencing compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is a spreadsheet entitled "Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself and Mr. McElwee, to the best of my knowledge, the previously -constructed utility and roadway 1:119811115021C1291Nov2010GarCoSubmittaIv pp H-136-ElkSpringsF9Imp.doc 103 WEST TOMICHI AVE, SUITE A GUNNISON. CO 61230 970.641 .5355 970.641 .5358 FAX 1 0 1 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT 102 PO Box 2155 ASPEN, CO 8 1 6 1 1 970.925.6727 970 925.4 ! 57 FAX 2768 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE 102 320 THIRD STREET GRAND JUNCTION, CO8 1505 MEEKER, CO 8 1 64 1 970.245,2571 970.675.5 180 970.245.2871 FAx 970.878.4181 FAx 6 SCHMUESER GORDON 1 MEYER i E 1 NOINEER$ 'SURVEYORS infrastructure improvements within Filing 9 appear to be constructed with applicable construction documents. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the Filing 9, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. David M Kotz, P.E. I:11981\01502\C1291Nov2o1oGarCoSubrnittal\App H-13a-ElkSpringsF9Imp.doc and installed in compliance necessary infrastructure for Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch Filing 9 Subdivision Improvements Agreement Engineering Cost Estimate Filing 9 - Kingbird Drive Cul-de-sac No. 1 Moblization 2 Clearing & Grubbing Description 1 11rAl Price 1 Unit LS $ 3,500.00 Estimate $ 3,500.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Topsoil strip, stockpile & replace/dispose Subgrade Prep Class 6 Aggregate (inc. trench full depth under pavement) Chip Seal LP Sewer Service Water Service Revegetation Miscellaneous Utilities 0.42 2030 2030 830 1330 2 2 1 1 AC SY SY TN SY EA EA LS LS $ 2,000.00 2.00 $ 1.00 $ 32.00 $ 7.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 500.00 $ 5,000.00 840.00 $ 4,060.00- $ _ 2,030.00 $ 26,560.00 $ 9,310.00- 2,000,00 $ 2,400.00 500.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub -Total $ 10 % contingency $ 56,200.00 5,620.00 Total $ 61,820.00 Note: This cost estimate is based on the engineer's interpretation of estimated bid quantities and prices that will be received for this project. As with any estimate, actual costs may vary due to unforeseen circumstances and market conditions. 3b-ElkSpringsF9-SIA,xIS By: (]avid M. Kotz, P.E. Schmueser Gordon Meyer 11(24110 6 SCHMUESER ; GORDON 1 MEYER ENGINEERSIS November 23, 2010 URVEYORS Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.G. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Filing 10, Eik Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimate Dear Larry: 1 18 WEST SIXTH STREET. SUITE 200 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 8 1 601 970.945.1 004 970.945.5948 FA% Via E -Mail: larry@balcombgreen.com This letter serves to transmit an engineering cost estimate for public improvements associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 10 This is the large 70+ acre Rural Residential lot in the lower and southern portion of Elk Springs. Access is provided via CR 114. This lot will utilize an individual well and ISDS. Miscellaneous utilities will be extended from the CR 114 ROW to the chosen building site at time of construction. No costs are necessary for SIA security purposes. Filing 10 - SIA Cost Estimate = $0. (No Public Infrastructure.) I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 10, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. David M. Kotz, P.E. 1:119811015 321C1291Nov2p1OGarCoSubmittallApp H-\4a-ElkSpringsf 1 OImp.doc 1 03 WEST TOMICHI AVE, SUITE A GUNNISON, CO 81230 970.64 1 .5355 970.64 1 .5358 FAX 101 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT 102 P0 Box 2 1 5 5 ASPEN. CO 81 61 1 970.925.6727 970.925.41 57 rAX 2768 COMPASS ORPVE, SUITE 102 GRANO JUNCTION. CO 51505 970.245.257 1 970.245.2871 FAX 320 THIRD STREET MEEKER. CO 51641 970,878.5180 970.878.4161 FAX SCFtMUES}ER GORDON M1=1'ER ■I!I t`bF'� ��,r�i'I,L T, I�' I� fl ��l� 'ii�t4�l �� 11111 Recept.ion#: 734933 10/10/2007 01:26.12 PM lean Alberico 10 of 17 Rec Fee:$85 ©4 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT i3 July 25, 2007 Larry Green, Esq, Ba[comb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.G. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Filing 8, Elk Springs Subdivision Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: Via E -Mail: tarry@balcombgreen.com At your request, I have reviewed the status of required public improvements for the above -referenced project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Filing 8, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with the application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs Filing No. 8. Attached hereto are letters from Dow Construction, the contractor of record; H -P Geotech, referencing. compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is a spreadsheet entitled '"Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself, to the best of my knowledge, all required utility and roadway infrastructure improvements have been completed within Filing 8 and appear to be constructed and installed in compliance with applicable construction documents. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the completion of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 8. Respectfully submitted, Dean Princip 111981\01502\C\29\20070725 tetter to LRG from Dean Gordon filing 8.doc 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11111i'1117,10 ',1SII w l i1N!,14 fl 11 CIA11111`If 11111 Reception#: 734933 10/10/2007 01:26:12 P11 Jean Alberioo 11 of 17 Rec Fee:$86.06 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIEL© COUNTY CO DOW CONSTRUCTION', UCTION, C O. INC r lr Sl r.'y ii 97C-944-33 1;5 $/24(04 Dean Gordon Schmueser, Gordon & Meyer 318 W. 6° Street Ste. 200 Glenwood Springs CO 81617 Project: Elk Springs Subdivision RE: Constnctiorr Procedures for Utility Trenches and Road Construction in Filings 5,6,7,8 & 9. After a right ofway has been flagged, we begin by the clearing of trees and brush. Then topsoil is stockpiled or placed at the side of the roadway. After clearing and grubbing a road surface was established by cutting and filling as required. Equipment utilized: Bulldozers. Excavators, Loaders, sheep foot and smooth drum rollers, water trucks, dump trucks, etc. Fills were placed in approximately 1 foot loose lifts and compacted to at least 95 % standard proctor density. The firm ofH-P Geo -tech was hired to establish water vonteaat and compactive effort needed to achieve this. Due to the rocky environment borrow pits were established_ This was necessary to produce fines. Fines were used t4 establish a satisfactory road bed. The borrow pits were then used as a bairn area for clearing debris and a bury pit for oversize boulders. The pits were then covered with sail and revegitated, After a roadbed had been established, utility consul:Won began. Utility trench locations were established. A bulldozer with a 42" ripper followed the aligunent making a trench that was thea filled with water The water truck was equipped with a special nozzle fabricated to eject water directly into the trench, This procedure greatly enhanced the mixing of earth and water for the backfilling procedure. After er the pipe and fittings were placed, the pipe was bedded in a special material free of rocks greater than 34" in size. A 1 foot layer of this bedding was placed and compacted. Compaction procedures were f equenily tvslcd try geo-techs to assure moisture content and soil density. After the bedding procedure was completed additional utilities were then placed and the above mentioned bedding technique was repeated. After all utilities were installed, the remainder of the trench was backfilled using the same method. When the utilities have been constructed, tested, and approved by the proper experts, the road 1 -'n-1 1 CI r r. , r* fA T 1 .ti r�\I 1 +ri l 1-9 r. .., p. .r - I'> APO 'Ie RI 11 ITT Reception#: 734933 12 of 1©/Zee Fee $85POO DocRFee:0,Q4 GARFIELD COUNTY CO bed was reestablished. This is achieved by scarifying, watering, and rolling. Ail top wiling and dean up effort occur at this time. Before gravel placement begins, a proof roll test is performed in the presence ofa geo-tech or engineer. This is accomplished by ubservics the road surfer under the wheels of a fully loaded dap truck or watertruck_ If any movement is noted the area is marked and reworked until the failure is remedied. After the proof roll is approved, the gravel placement will begin A filter fabric was placed between the sub -grade and gravel, It is placed between the sub -grade and the road base to prevent integration. The filter fabric is rolled out in front of the trucks dumping gravel. The fabric is held in place by grade snakes. The grade stakes provide alignment and elevation location. The gravel is manipulated into place by a motor grader, toilers and waxer trucks. The goal i; to achieve 5moothnese, grade, slope, drainage and density to make an all weather surface. Again a geo-tech is used to assure moisture content and density. Be assured that every effort was made to assure a quality and safe product to the best of 01.11" ability. Sincerely Dow Rippy President, Dow Construction CO. Inc. Joe Lundeen Supervisor, Dow Construe ion CO. Inc. 11irli'IittitAthAirdmi`6grNTIr!KLIdill Reception#: 734933 13/o( 1770Reclree:$86.0 Doc 26:12 PM ryFee:0.00oGRFZFIELD COUNTY CO Gtech HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL September 9, 2004 Elk Springs, LLC Atten: Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970.945-7988 Fax: 970.945-8454 hppeo a?honeotech.com Job No. 196 617-I Subject: Final Testing and Observation Results, Filings 7, 8, and 9, Elk Springs Subdivision, County Road 114, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Greg: As requested, HP Geotech visited the site and performed in-place density testing and observed the roadways at base course grade on June 11, 2004. Six density tests were performed and all tests met the Project minimum density of 95% standard Proctor density. The base course was then dug up at the test locations to expose subgrade soil and the depth measured. Again, all locations met or exceeded the minimum required base course depth of 8 inches. During our visit the gravel roadway surface was observed for signs of instability such as rutting, and cracking. No signs of instability were noted. HP Geotech also performed compaction testing and observation during infrastructure construction. These reports have been previously submitted. Based on our test results and observations, it appears that the roadway construction should perform as intended. If you have any questions, please call this office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNXCAL, INC. Michael Evans S.E.T. Reviewed by: SLP cc: SGM, Dean Gordon Dow Construction, Dow Rippy AUG -17-2004 15:36 1111 't WWI ISiT«lilVIAINVIA# IN I rk 11 111 P Recepiicn#: 734933 r Road 1554 /0/ 10)2007 01,26:12 PM Jean ee:0Alberico gfir+GS, Colorado 81657 Geotech 14 of f7 Rao Fee:$116.09 Doe Fee:f9.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO 945.7988 r -aa, yA v -a45-8454 P.01/01 H PWORTH-PAWLAKGCOTECHNICAL hpgeo hpgeotec1i Cam Earthwork Observation and Testing Report Client: Los Amigos Ranch Partnership Attn: Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. 196 617-1 Date: 6-11-04 Report No. Page: 1 of 1 Project: Filing 7, Elk Springs Subdivision, CMC Road, Garfield County, Colorado Test No. Nuclear Gau•e MoisturefDensi Test Results Location Los Amigos at intersection with Little Wood Larne, right of centerline 100' north of hiking trail right of centerline 400' north of Primrose Point [eft of centerline Depth or Elev. finished grade finished grade finished rade 100' north of Primrose Point finished Het of centerline at intersection with Gossamer finished Read left of centerline _rade _grade at intersection with Vista Pace Proctor Sample Reference Method finished grade Field Dry Density PCF 130.3 130.9 132.0 132.1 130.5 131,6 Fled! Moisture Content 1.5 2.0 1.7 2.0 1.6 1.7 Percent Comp. 96 96 97 97 96 NATURE SAYER"' FAX MEMO 91618 Oare' Ku1 i- k. � � ulgec pi.T. c.,,,„ From vin vl{`.l Co. Vf„ CoiCtefx- Pone ✓` pnOne I 1 9. .....s._. Fax f 9si Set Y2 Fax r 1JG�4r i tJ JI r ASTM D-696 '/." aggregate base course 1 NE NUCLEAR cJEN50MCTDR METHOD OF TESTING WAS USED JN SUDS I A{4TLAL ACC0RDANCF WITH ASTM 02972 ANC OM/ 7_ Min. % Comp. Req. 95 95 96 95 95 97 95 Lab No.f Depth assumed/ 8"+ assumed/ 8" assumed/ 817+ assumed! 8" assumed/ 8"+ assumed/ Er+ oveyn Jry i .pf — ---1 Dens 136.0 Moist 7.0 Progress Report: Ali' roadway base appeared to be well compacted. No signs of instability were evident. .v Construction - Dow Rippy Michael Evans Field Observer Reviewed By Tflrni n r). 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1I 161F'I Mrr~',taiI,1V,Iii;h1,1 l'fr#li:Ii1141.11N 11111 Reception#: 734933 1011012007 01.26:12 PM lean Alherico 15 of 17 Ree Fee:$86.00 Doc Fee:@.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO ,lul\ ?. '007 1.=1rr1 (Green. 1 sq. Ilale lnTh c (irec'i. P.C. ,Itic}rneys at 1,aw P.0. !)rink r 790 (filen good Springs. CO 8 602 RI?: Filing 8, Phase. I, Elk Springs Suhdivi..ion Public Infrastructure Improvements Dear I.arry: In my capacity as a member of the :Architectural Review Committee and the Ranch Manager for Los Aniigos Ranch LLC`. l was involved and Duni aware of the construction of public infrastructure improvements for Filing 8, Phase 1. The contractor for the improvements was DOW Construction Company, Inc. This is to certify that the public utility systems and roadway infrastructure Facilities were installed in their entirety and were installed in compliance with approved construction documents. All systems have been tested and are ready for their intended use. Sincerely. Gary 1. IVIcElwee Project Manager ■iii k f170 ,111tNTAlli' h inti iii+xli'i 1111 Peceptianf: 734933 16110/2007 01:26:12 PM Jean Albertco 16 of 7 Rec Fee:$e6.ea Doc Fee:O 00 GARFCELD COUNTY CO PAGE 0 2 .1 14 ! a c. o C.7 C7 ct} C)D 00 ca « C3 0 Q rt ' �-- CD C m ti lri D pi r' al re (4 $250,000.00 $45,000.00 C3 C7 © C D „7r .,- (H CD C7 u7 (1) 47 CY O [] to C3 -t" r3) Q<3 v a) a) r U3 [+1 r U 0 p 8 (V N St pO N r- p4 Q COp 4$ ,I'] O C3 (R Q g 1• 0 Qf' o 45 (v1 CD Kl t) O C7 CD el C G C) it 0 [7 4 a l oil W CD C3 C'l Q, i-. N Fi3' CS g (o "T CC'3 C] u7 r- } C3 ID 07 fA 1 CD O u] t.) 1• til 6R CD q7 O (. [`y 14 — i■ •gyp' 8 o 8 8 c7 a) O rrg b v aJ 69 Q p CM 4!y p o 1 Cal r M �y C1 Ca CJ. j Q7 p ID d rc, co Ca ro 07 Y1 1 44040 0 a +/S $188.00 A a to 44 C? cs S<+a� 67 CD 6 ND 6Cy 4 CD CD ED co .a4 G LID eve 6469 A r. Oa 47 47 ui Ci ;X O ad Oa 3 C] Q CID Ey ul C7 4 C7 o o ei tr 44 C3 G7 147 C3 CD <3 - * ' + M .F ~ a 0 ci es 69, $20,000.00 $41`103.00 CD G� CLl 1- � YL C5 O ^ (4 '. Et O C? O ca 40 - CS CI b U4 a c') Q O CP 4 d 4% - CP C? 6+ W eN CD O IG a CS ca H/ I Ce 4 7A, 11111 00'0$ p p d1 O ba Q IA - • • re - qq K7 41) S7 {B r A �i 11 v 06 t-7:811111111111111111 0* ZA; 1 - $1,000.001 011111111 $35,334.00 $125,010.001 Q :i_ 67 a [7 ED C7 N •• G a a 04 .6E1 4�a q D 8 Er- t.7 ca d .v 11111 C) o r3 0 II 1I! '111111111 Ili s 1 rLS $14,75-0.00 4S67ILI= $9,000.00 20000©N 45000 SY f!!Iflg C7 uz J D o c. as 4 Vs .., 'Q CLEARING & GRUBBING 32' ROADWAY PLATFORM 30` ROADWAY PLATFORM 26' ROADWAY PLATFORM CLASS 8 AGGRAGATE BAS FABR1C1M1RAFI 500X P, 4 . Z5 Er 1 uO T ,r to N '18`' METAL END SECTIONS . u) L3 tr 30" METAL END SECTIONS 42" METAL END SECTIONS 20220 54" METAL END SECTIONS 'C(JLVERT OUTLET PROTEC S" DIP WATERLINE '0" DIP WATERLINE 8" VALVE 0" VALVE LL _ Un Q l- _ WATER SERVICE, CORP SI 4rIVATER SERVICE, 1" COPPI WATER STORAGE TANK 202011 N Cr) O 4 AN CV cs CS (y Ly' "E 0 CA 0 ry u7' o N CD Cy Cp C7 N N C3 N N ID N CD (V 202111 202121 a Cu N '7 N cV 11) N co Q7 r` N N A £V eo as ipV iV CV CIS N EN C") EN N Ly V' EN N EN +f7 (V N CEI iD N N (QV. 1- N 04 CI N ca (V CM N W N Cu v c7 N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L 1JJ r r i i NJ 5 L:� H 1--';-:,(51-7. I 0 ca ! '1f2 1 �4} ya C1 0 (0 CV 0 (0 0 C3 0 CM Y" 143 Q C7 U 4.0 VI CD 0 f'� '4- ar} 0 C? sr t+3 C7 117 () r- C 1 69* 0 C7 0 to b 0 0 d]' 'C (F} CS CI 3 W03 '4I f!} $14,820.001 0 C? T (4 Q LC1 �' r Gni' 0 CD iV CV U {ism !� OD T (4 0 CDD K[? r� ( 0 C3 0 iii 69 C] C; q co IV' (0 69 4) y f} 61 el N [A 0 n (V O 0 a 6 CO N e4 0 o C7 IN el 69 C) 6 47 co c‘l 619 t3 v 03 co Co cr 16 6% C3 c) 0 4) co C3 C3-4•. w r_ , CJ 0 40 d3 03 (Ji r-.-- r vi T" V3 4t +r r- co v' r- tH .,- ,-- C} Vi 0 47 u7 Nt 0 W7r- 2 Ci 7 4 C9 C3 4A30, ► 0 C e5 (a! C7 0 e5 I4 4 C] 6:5 69 0 CS to 63 Ca C3 4 03 O CD C 69 07 O 0 to O C7 0 0 co 0 C1 C3 .t 14 +rr (4 Cs CO C4 03 �., 6 CT 0 C3 44 CT N 4D . 1-+ 0 C3 CD 03 G 0 0 69'ia C3 C3 0 i tl 4D ti el C1 P C? 0 4 tV C4 QCS 0 .red 69� C) CISA CD C4 0 m 43.r., C 4�D m ( CI (*3 Ca (f1 22 CD C3 T3 U (0 $279,151.87 om]. C 3 1Q to *T- fil IN N.09, 4 0 c) V ri as y 41 R 61 lit nt 14 CD CS nt 04 V} __T- (1, 'tr 09 01 u7 69 ^ 43 9. Cp 1i1 01 rel (} L. -I Q W d 6 MD Q —I J _J ,..J 'iii �-1' [RS Ur) M r CO I— DD 7Q ...1 CD C7 r t<1 CD C3 um s. nt CO N7 1(3 `- - (*3 CC3 to t4 0 :- 130001 R1d. V7 T 0 0 OD CD CD 03 '7 0 Y V ;ESSLJRE SEWER 1 dkRV/F-USHING TERMINAL1. kRV/FLUSHING SiDEROAD ARV/FLUSHING HIGH FOIN' 4-- U_ in .....1 U it (J) E5 SEW@R SERVICE, ' 1I41 1 CONNECT TO EXIST SYS_ SET TRANS VAULT SET SPLICE VAULT cONDUrr W 0 z tE Ei 1.__1 co IPROVFDE TRENCH TELE PROVIDE COMP TRENCH [PROVIDE SERV TRENCH 4 co Z 0 hoc REMOVAL •V' [9 01 0 C4 kr7 [*7 N 0 CV eC C'1 C4 C' N 1 F 20237 GO C7 CV O 01 Co r] SV C7 N C) sr CY Ci C4 • sr CV 0 t4 (y Co wi Sr 04 N 0 C3 01 C4 1 202441ELECT oil ''V 94 G ('1 W (1] N Ca 01 r- ,rt (V Ca (V �_ v? -- of 0 C4 20249; 0 4i t4 'C1 01 *1) cV U (Y 11111 Receptiantl: 734933 10/1012007 01.26,.12 PM Jreal Riborico 17 of 17 Rec Fee:$86 BO Doc Fee:O 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO G&rth HEPWORTH - PAW LAK GEOTECHNICAL November 18, 2010 Elk Springs LLC Attn: Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 I I. Project No. 110 200A Subject: Summary of Construction Observations and Materials Testing, Juniper Drive Roadway Reconstruction, Filing 8, Phase 2, Elk Springs, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. McElwee: Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. (HP Geotech) provided observation and materials testing services for subgrade and aggregate base course during construction of the above - referenced project. Our field services for the construction began on September 1, 2010 and continued on an as -requested basis through to completion of aggregate base course placement on September 21, 2010. Our services were performed under the direction of the undersigned licensed engineer registered in the State of Colorado. During construction, applicable testing and observation reports were prepared and have been distributed under separate cover. We previously performed an evaluation of the roadway subgrade and presented our findings and recommendations in a report dated July 22, 2010, under our Job Number 110200A. At the time °four September 1 site visit, the existing aggregate base course had been removed and stockpiled. The subgrade soils had reportedly been scarified about one foot deep and then re -compacted using a vibratory pad foot roller. We observed proof rolling of the subgrade using a loaded dump truck. Areas that deflected excessively were marked for repair. We recommended that the marked areas be sub -excavated at least one foot and replaced with compacted granular import or suitably conditioned and compacted on site material as necessary to provide a stable subgrade. On September 7 we observed that the marked areas had been sub -excavated as reconunended, and on September 8 we observed placement of 3 inch minus aggregate base course in progress in some of the sub -excavated areas. On September 13 we observed that the previously sub -excavated areas had been backfilled and compacted. About six additional areas that reportedly exhibited excessive deflection under truck traffic had also been sub -excavated. One sample of the subgrade and one sample of the stockpiled Class 6 aggregate base course were obtained and tested for laboratory Proctor compaction. grain size distribution, and plasticity index. Laboratory test results indicated the aggregate base course was in compliance with CDOT Class 6 Elk Springs, LLC November 18, 2010 Page 2 aggregate base course specifications for the tests performed. Field compaction testing was performed on the subgrade on September 14 which indicated that the subgrade was compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698), in compliance with our recommendations.- No areas of apparent excessive deflection were observed and we judged the subgrade to be suitable for placement of geogrid and aggregate base course as recommended in our previous report. On September 21, we performed field compaction testing at aggregate base course grade which indicated that the aggregate base course was compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor density, in compliance with our recommendations. Based on our observations during the construction and results of our testing, the subgrade and aggregate base course as constructed for the project were in substantial compliance with our recommendations and applicable Garfield County specifications. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Thomas 1. Westhoff, C.E.T. Reviewed by: Steven L. Pawlak, P cc: Schmueser Gordon Balcomb & Green - Larry Green TJW/ksw GMCO LLC of Colorado P.O. Box 1480 Rifle, CO 81650 - Phone. (970) 625-9100 Fax: (970) 625-9101 E -Mail. gmco@gmcocorp.corn To: Elk Springs Subdivision Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601- 09/30/2010 invoice No. Page: 1 2454 7Th For Job: 10104 Elk Springs A Purchase Order. Quantity Price Unit Amount i". i / i Juniper Chip Seal / 1.0000 43,215.0000 LS 43,215.00 / See Attached / Tax: 0.00 \,... . Invoice Totals Gross 43,215.00 Retention 0.00 Tax 0.00 TOTAL DUE 43,215.00 Limited Liability Coinpany of Colorado P.O. Box 1480 Rifle, CO 8.I650 (970) 625-9100 FAX (970) 625-9101 Elk Springs ATTN:: Gary IVieEiwee FAX: 945-6399 9130120.10 Elk Springs LLC ,iluniper Chip Sea1 Apply a 3/4" Chip Seal with a prime coat of A.EP., to approximately 7,234 SY 7,234 SY 55.00/SY $36,170.00 Apply a second layer of 'VI" Chip Seal to hill. 1,409 SY @ $5.00/SY Invoice total $ 7.045.00 $43,215.00 F1',L'"i PETERS DOLJER SACRED GROUND GNPeters Cimst.CcJ LC alba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 5351 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX NO. :97096363899 Sep. 29 2131@ 1.2:49Prl P] Bill To Elk Springs Snhdivision Glenwood Spgs.Cnlonaclo 970-945-6399 CFD Wiry Mci:ilwcc Quantity 8,340 3,250 2 3M 3,300 1.,150 1,(150 3 2 Description mobilization- Ci piec:us Itcmuve Rnadbase and Scarily- :stockpile {a; 3 locations Remove fabric to landfill on site, Cornpactitrn of Soli -base Creogrid as per Specs. Reinstall roadhasc per Specs.- 60% reused assuming 40%VIew Invoice Date 9/7912010 lnvoiCe # 26 Square footage Option 1 (below) Exercised curring Phase 1 Squire footage Option 2 (below) Exercised during Phase 1 Tntck1oath boulders- &!tested, removed, hand and machine loaded, infill material at nesting, trucked to burn -pit Additional tonnage of 3/4 " rnadbasc ro make up for higher than expected kiss: Part of this was wider and deeper roadway than bid, Phase TT Sgwsc fotnabw- severe pumping at upper gate, 1(1" ecpott/import w/class 2 in 2 lifts and compacted Phase II Square footage- prepared same as Option 1 Phase 11 Square footage- prepared same 9!s Option 2 11rsJD50- Berra firs. Cat 416- ac:uns5 rd. Kendall Page 1 Rate Project Amount 1,250.00 9,654.00 1,700.01) 2.846.00 51,854.00 42.944.00 2.90 3.20 1,980.00 18.53 4.06 4.00 3.20 110.00 100.00 1,250.00 9,654.00 1.700.00 2.846.00 51,854.00 42,944.00 24,186,00 10,400.00 3,960.00 7,189.64 13,200.00 4,!600.00 3..360.110 330.00 200.00 Total FROM :PETERS DOVER Sf1CRED 5ROUND FAX NO. :9709630899 Faep. 29 2810 12: 49PM P2 GN Peters C`. on st. Co. LLC dba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 5351 courtly Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Bill To till Springs Subdivision Ciicnwnorl SI3gs.C'.olokado 970-914-63 ).9 CYO Gary McElwee Quantity Description Inclusions: Windrow and removel0 3 stockpiles. Remove fabric and dispose at landfill on Site. Scarily 5(1h -base 12" per spcvs. and Hw:tii inspection. Compact to ttpcc. and proof roll. Inspect. Install Tenaar TX -160 tri -axial Gcotrid. Reinstall ralvageahie roaaiha.9e and compact with moisture to spec. install new roadbase to spac:. Adding moisture if riCceSSary and final grade. Clean up mid de-tnnbilimx. Water provided on site by owner. Exclusions: Tustin, inspeCli0n Optiunl: (revised 0/21111) Lower Road- $340 sq.ft. Itvznovc and export on site top 12" subgr'ade, inspection. If suitable add l2" lift of Class 2. wer and compact with sbeepsfoot compactor 1 pass vibration and 1 pass regular. S 2.110(gi1 11pperRuad- 3250 sq. ft. Pothole and locate nearby utilities. Work under supervision of gas company cmph/yec..Rcinnvc and windrow to dry top 12" subgrade. Scarify next. 12" to dry. Add optimal water and compact scarified. Add optimal water and bring to grade final 12' in 3- coinpactcd '1 lilts with sheepsftut esHnpxtor. I pass vibrate and 1 pass regular. `C 3.20/sgl1 T&M rates apply. (tock Clause omitted from original estimate. however the first I la truckloads export... Ht? CHARGE Page 2 Invoice Date Invoice # 9/29/20 r 0 Zai Terms Rate Project Amount Total FhRON :PETERS DOVER SACRED GROUND GNPeters ConstCo.I,LC dba Carbon 8 Constructors 9711-379-6212 5351 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX NO. :9709630899 Sep. 29 201012:50PNN P3 Elk Springs Subdivision Glenwood Spgs,Cnlorndo 970-945-6399 (1() Clary Mcl.'.1wcc Quantity Description Invoice Date Invoice # 9/2912010 xa F.D. No. Terms Project Rate Amount Engineer estimate of 6-8" roadbase existing was incorrect. Actual was E - 1(r. However, contractor suspects that mare than 60% ormatcrial was salvaged. In this case theta: will he no charge !or the excess material encountered. if 60% or less has been salvaged thea) T&M rates apply for the extra material and labor/rnacftine time. i:nntractor Warrants that areas proof tolled and compaction tested comply with desired engineering specifcatinus. As our reconstntctinn was cundatcied during September of 2010 under almost optimal conditions we feel that. reasonable guarantees about the road integrity cim be passed on. However, contractor specifically excludca possible future hydraulic pumping in arras not repaired and pttmpiug specific to grades deeper than this coimactnr has repaired during the wettest months (March -hoe). A comprehensive snap delineating areae repaired and the type of repairs made wilt he included with final Invoice. Less: (Deposit hilted nut and paid (invoice k 25) Page 3 -50,000.1)0 Total -50,000.tJO $127.673 64 PR&I. :pETERs Bill To DOVER SACRED GROUND GNPeters Const.Co,LLC dba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 5351 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Elk Springs Subdivision Oicowood Spgs.CoIorado D70-945-6399 C/O (iaiy lidt.Elvoz FAX NO. 9709630899 Sep. 29 2010 12: 50Phl P4 Quantity P0. No. Invoice Date Invoice it R/27/21)10 25 DesGription Ade on !toad Rebuild job Elk Spvings Subdivision, Glotwood Spg.. Colo- As of ,1 8/26, 20 [0 j& approx. 40% coronfolo. 50.000.00 50.000 00 S50_000.00 LANDSCAPE PLAN, OPEN SPACE PLAN AND OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN As it's Landscape Plan for the subject Final Plats, Applicant states that no landscaping or trees of 6 inch caliper or greater will be removed or added as a result of the approval of the within Final Plats. This is due primarily to the fact that virtually all of the subdivision improvements, except for the short extension of Kingbird Drive in Filing 9 and the installation of the sewer line in Filing 6A, have already been completed, and secondarily to the fact that the size and design of the Elk Springs project provides for minimal impact to existing vegetation. Removal or addition of trees and other vegetation on individual lots, as well as the maintenance thereof, is considered by the Architectural Control Committee at the time a residence is proposed for construction. Subject to the requirement to create a defensible space around each home, the location of the building envelopes on each lot and architectural guidelines of Elk Springs strongly encourage that all existing vegetation on a lot be retained to the greatest extent practicable. Upon approval of the within Final Plats, and the concurrent dedication of the open space within those Filings, there will be over 1,150 acres of open space within Elk Springs. This open space consists Iargely of broad areas of naturally occurring forest lands or open grassland. These open space areas are kept in their natural condition and no improvements are made, except for the designation of soft surface biking and hiking system within the open space in Filings 1 through 8 will be extended ttothein�open sking paaced�king containedtra in Filing 8, Phase 2, Filing 9 and Filing 10. p To the extent maintenance is required in these natural, open areas, the Elk Springs Homeowners' Association is responsible for such maintenance. There is currently a program in place for the annual treatment of all open space areas for weed control. This program will be extended to the open space areas that are being dedicated to the Homeowners' Association within the subject Final Flats. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ELK SPRINGS, FILING GA SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT THIS ELK SPRINGS, FILING 6A SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT ("SIA") is made and entered into this day of , 20, by and between ELK SPRINGS, LLC ("Owner") and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, acting for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, as a body politic and corporate, directly or through its authorized representatives and agents ("BOCC"). Recitals 1. Owner is the owner and developer of certain real property located within Garfield County, Colorado, known as Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., as approved by the BOCC and more particularly described in County Resolution No. 96-34, recorded as Reception No. 494584 of the Garfield County real estate records (the "PUD Approval"). 2. Preliminary plan approval was issued by the BOCC for that portion of the Los Amigos P.U.D. designated as Elk Springs Filing 6A, under the tenns and conditions set forth in County Resolution No. 98-30 recorded at Reception No. 525809 in the Garfield County real estate records, as amended by Resolution 99-102, recorded at Reception No. 553278 in the Garfield County real estate records (collectively, the "Preliminary Plan Approval"), 3 Both the PUD approval and the Preliminary Plan approval contemplated development of the Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. in phases. 4. Owner has submitted to the County for its approval, the Final Plat for Elk Springs Filing 6A, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., ("Final Plat" or "Final Plat of the Subdivision") for that portion of the property lying within the Los Amigos F.U.D. more particularly described in said Final Plat. 1 1 5 As a condition precedent to the approval of the Final Plat submitted to the BOCC as required by the laws of the State of Colorado and by the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, Owner wishes to enter into this SIA with the BOCC. 111 6. Owner has agreed to execute and deliver a letter of credit or other security in a foram 1 satisfactory to the BOCC to secure and guarantee Owner's performance under this Agreement and under the ' Preliminary Plan Approval and has agreed to certain restrictions and conditions regarding the sale of properties and issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy within the subdivision, all as more 1 fully set forth below. 1 7. Owner represents that at the time of recording this SIA all taxes and assessments upon all parcels of real estate described in this SIA are paid in full. ' NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the BOCC and Owner ("Parties") agree as follows: Agreement 1. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. The BOCC hereby acceptsapproves and a roves the Final Plat of the 1 Subdivision, on the date set forth above, subject to the terms and conditions of this SIA, the PUD Approval, the Preliminary Plan Approval, and the requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 and any other governmental or quasi -governmental regulations applicable to the Subdivision ("Final Plat Approval"). Recording of the Final Plat in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder shall be in accordance with this SIA and at the time prescribed herein. 2. OWNER'S PERFORMANCE AS TO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. 1 a. Completion Date/Substantial Compliance. Owner has constructed and 1 installed certain and shall cause to be constructed and installed other subdivision improvements, identified in the Exhibits defined in subparagraph 2.a.i, below ("Subdivision Improvements") at 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Owner's expense, including payment of fees required by Garfield County and/or other governmental and quasi -governmental entities with regulatory jurisdiction over the Subdivision. The Subdivision Improvements except for revegetation, shall be completed on or before the end of the first full year following execution of this SIA ("Completion Date"), in substantial compliance with the following: i. Plans marked "Approved for Construction" for all Subdivision Improvements prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer and submitted to the BOCC on 20, such plans being summarized in the list of drawings attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit "A"; the estimate of cost of completion, certified by and bearing the stamp of Owner's professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado ("Owner's Engineer"), attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit "B", which estimate shall include an additional ten(I0) percent of the total for contingencies; and all other documentation required to be submitted along with the Final Plat under pertinent sections of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 ("Final Plat Documents"). ii. All requirements of the PUD Approval and the Preliminary Plan Approval. iii. All laws, regulations, orders, resolutions and requirements of Garfield County and all special districts and any other governmental entity or quasi -governmental authority (ies) with jurisdiction. iv. The provisions of this SIA. b. Satisfaction of Subdivision Im rovements Provisions. The BOCC agrees that if all Subdivision Improvements are constructed and installed in accordance with this paragraph 2; the record drawings have been submitted upon completion of the Subdivision Improvements, as detailed 3 in paragraph 3(c), below; all other requirements of this SIA have been met; and all requirements of the PUD Approval and Preliminary Plan Approval are satisfied, then the Owner shall be deemed to have satisfied all terms and conditions of the PUD Approval, the Preliminary Plan Approval, the Final Plat Documents and the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, with respect to the installation of Subdivision Improvements. 3. SECURITY FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS (EXCEPT RE - VEGETATION). a. Completed Subdivision Improvements. Exhibit B contains a certification that natural gas, 3-phase electric, telephone and water lines are already in place to the Property line or within public right of way directly adjacent to the Property. No security is required for these already existing subdivision improvements. b. Subdivision Improvements Letter of Credit for Incomplete Subdivision Improvements. As security for Owner's obligation to complete the Subdivision Improvements other than revegetation, Owner shall deliver to the BOCC, on or before the date of recording of the Final Plat of the Subdivision, a Letter of Credit in the form agreed to be acceptable to the BOCC, attached to and incorporated in this SIA by reference as Exhibit "C" ("LOC") or in a form consistent with the Uniform Commercial Code, C.R.S. § 4-1-101, et seq. and approved by the BOCC. The LOC shall be in the amount of S101,937.00, representing the full estimated cost of completing the Subdivision Improvements, which includes a 10% contingency to cover cost changes, unforeseen costs and other variables as set forth and certified by Owner's Engineer on Exhibit 13, to guarantee completion of the Subdivision. Improvements. The LOC shall be valid for a minimum of six (6) months beyond the Completion Date for the Subdivision Improvements set forth in Paragraph 2.a., above. The BOCC, at its sole option, may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a 4 form acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of the Subdivision Improvements subject of this Paragraph 3.b. c. LOC Requirements and Plat Recording. The LOC required by this SIA shall be issued by a state or national banking institution acceptable to the BOCC. If the institution issuing the LOC is not licensed in the State of Colorado and transacting business within the State of Colorado, the LOC shall be "confirmed" within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code, Letters of Credit, §4-5-101, et seq., C.R.S., as amended, by a bank that is licensed to do business in the State of Colorado, doing business in Colorado, and acceptable to the BOCC. The LOC shall state that presentation of drafts drawn under the LOC shall be at an office of the issuer or confirmer located in the State of Colorado. The Final Plat of the Subdivision shall not be recorded until the security, described in this paragraph 3 and the security for revegetation described in paragraph 4, below has been received and approved by the BOCC. d. Extension of LOC Expiration Date. If the Completion Date, identified in. paragraph 2.a., above, is extended by a written amendment to this SIA, the time period for the validity of the LOC shall be similarly extended by the Owner. For each six (6) month extension, at the sole option of the BOCC, the face amount of the LOC shall be subject to re-certification by Owner's Engineer of the cost of completion and review by the BOCC. e. Unenforceable LOC. Should the LOC expire or become void or unenforceable for any reason, including bankruptcy of the Owner or the financial institution issuing or confirming the LOC, prior to the BOCC's approval of Owner's Engineer's certification of completion of the Subdivision Improvements, this SIA shall become void and of no force and effect and the Final Plat shall be vacated pursuant to the terms of this SIA. 5 f. Partial Releases of Security. Owner may request partial releases of the LOC, and shall do so by means of submission to the Building and Planning Department of a "Written Request for Partial Release of LOC", in the form attached to and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit D, accompanied by the Owner's Engineer's stamped certificate of partial completion of improvements. The Owner's Engineer's seal shall certify that the Subdivision Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this. SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Preliminary Plan Approval. Owner may also request release for a portion of the security upon proof that 1) Owner has a valid contract with a public utility company regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission obligating such company to install certain utility lines; and 2) Owner has paid to the utility company the cost of installation as required by the contract. The BOCC shall authorize successive releases of portions of the face amount of the LOC as portions of the Subdivision Improvements, dealt with in this Paragraph 3, are certified as complete to the BOCC by the Owner's Engineer, requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been met, and both the certification and satisfaction of the Preliminary Plan Approval requirements have been approved by the BOCC. BOCC's Investigation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon submission of the Owner's Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, along with Owner's Engineer's certificate of partial completion of improvements, the BOCC may review the certification and the Preliminary Plan Approval, and may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete to determine whether or not they have been constructed in compliance with relevant specifications, as follows: i. If no letter of potential deficiency is furnished to Owner by the BOCC within fifteen (15) business days of submission of Owner's Written Request for Partial 6 Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner's Engineer's certificate of partial completion of improvements, all Subdivision Improvements certified as complete shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shall authorize release of the appropriate amount of security, provided that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied. ii. If the BOCC chooses to inspect and determines that all or a portion of the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete are not in compliance with the relevant. specifications or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been met, the BOCC shall furnish a letter of potential deficiency to the Owner, within fifteen (15) business days of submission of Owner's Written Request for Partial Release of LOC. iii. If a letter of potential deficiency is issued identifying a portion of the certified Subdivision Improvements as potentially deficient and there are no outstanding requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, then all Subdivision Improvements not identified as potentially deficient shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shall authorize release of the amount of security related to the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete and not identified as potentially deficient. iv. With respect to Subdivision Improvements identified as potentially deficient in a letter of potential deficiency or requirements ofthe Preliminary Plan Approval that have not been met, the BOCC shall have thirty (30) days from the date of the letter to complete the initial investigation, begun under subparagraph 3.f.ii., above, and provide written confirmation of the deficiency(ies) to the Owner. v. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in compliance with the relevant specifications and that all requirements ofthe Preliminary Plan 7 Approval have been met, then the appropriate amount of security shall be authorized for release within ten (10) business days after completion of such investigation. h. BOCC Completion of Improvements and Other Remedies. If the BOCC finds, within the thirty (30) day period of time, defined in subparagraph 3.f.iv. above, that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot construct any or all of the Subdivision Improvements, whether or not Owner has submitted a written request for release of LOC, or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been met, the BOCC may withdraw and employ from the LOC such funds as may be necessary to construct the Subdivision Improvements in accordance with the specifications or to satisfy the Preliminary Plan Approval requirements, up to the face amount or remaining face amount of the LOC. In such event, the BOCC shall make a written finding regarding Owner's failure to comply with this SIA or requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval prior to requesting payment from the LOC, in accordance with the provisions of Article XIII of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner's failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA regarding Subdivision Improvements and satisfaction of requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency(ies) prior to requesting payment from the LOC or filing a civil action. 8 i. Final Release of Security. Upon completion of all Subdivision Improvements and Preliminary Plan Approval requirements, other than revegetation, Owner shall submit to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department: 1) record drawings bearing the stamp of Owner's Engineer certifying that all Subdivision Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Preliminary Plan Approval, in hard copy and digital format acceptable to the BOCC; 2) copies of instruments conveying real property and other interests which Owner is obligated to convey to the Homeowner's Association of the Subdivision or any statutory special district or other entity at the time ofFinal Plat Approval; and 3) a Written Request for Final Release of LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit E, along with Owner's Engineer's stamp and certificate of final completion of improvements. i. The BOCC shall authorize a final release of the LOC after the Subdivision Improvements are certified as final to the BOCC by the Owner's Engineer and said final certification is approved by the BOCC. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been met, the BOCC shall authorize release of the final amount of security, within ten (10) business days following submission of the Owner's Written Request for Final Release of LOC accompanied by the other documents required by this paragraph 3.h. ii. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon Owner's Written Request for Final Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner's Engineer's certificate of final completion of improvements, the BOCC may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete. If the BOCC does so review and inspect, the process contained in paragraph 3.f., above, shall be followed. 9 iii. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Inmprovements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied, the BOCC shall authorize final release of security within ten (10) days after completion of such investigation. iv. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and/or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been satisfied, the BOCC may complete remaining Subdivision Improvements and satisfy requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, or institute court action in accordance with the process outlined in paragraph 3.g., above. 4. SECURITY FOR REVEGETATION, a. Revegetation LOC and Substitute Collateral. $1,000.00 of the face amount of the LOC, specified in Paragraph 3a above, shall be allocated to revegetation of disturbed areas within the Subdivision ("Revegetation LOC"), the cost for which is detailed as a subdivision improvement in Exhibit 13. The Revegetation LOC shall be valid for a minimum of two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. The BOCC, at its sole option may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a foam acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of revegetation. b. Revegetation LOC General Provisions. The provisions of paragraphs 3.b., 3.c. and 3.d., above, dealing with Letter of Credit requirements, extension of expiration dates, increase in face amounts, and plat recording shall apply to the Revegetation LOC. c. Revegetation Review and Notice of Deficiency. Upon establishment of revegetation, the Owner shall request review of the revegetation work by the Garfield. County Vegetation Management Department, by telephone or in writing. Such review shall be for the 10 purpose of verification of success of revegetation and reclamation in accordance with the Garfield County Weed Management Plan 2000, adopted by Resolution No. 2002-94 and recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 580572, as amended, and the revegetationireclamation plan titled and dated for the Subdivision submitted. If the Vegetation Management Department refuses approval and provides written notice ofdeficiency(ies), the Owner shall cure such deficiency(ies) by further revegetation efforts, approved by the Vegetation Management Department, as such efforts may be instituted within the two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. d. Single Request for Release of Revegetation LOC. Following receipt of written approval of the Vegetation Management Department, the Owner may request release of the Revegetation LOC and shall do so by means of submission to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department, of a Written Request for Release of Revegetation LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit F, along with certification of completion by the Owner, or Owner's agent with knowledge, and a copy of the written approval of the Vegetation Management Department. It is specifically understood by the parties that the Revegetation LOC is not subject to successive partial releases, as authorized in paragraph 3.e., above. Further, the Revegetation LOC and the BOCC's associated rights to withdraw funds and bring a court action may survive final release of the LOC securing other Subdivision Improvements, defined in paragraph 3.a., above. e. BOCC's Completion of Revegetation and Other Remedies. If Owner's revegetation efforts are deemed by the BOCC to be unsuccessful, in the sole opinion of the BOCC upon the recommendation of the Vegetation Management Department, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot complete revegetation, the BOCC, in its discretion, may withdraw 11 and employ from the Revegetation LOC such funds as may be necessary to carry out the revegetation work, up to the face amount of the Revegetation LOC. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the Revegetation LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner's failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA related to revegetation. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency prior to requesting payment from the Revegetation LOC or filing a civil action. 5. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER COLLECTION. Owner certifies that Owner has heretofore installed and connected a water distribution system for potable water and fire protection. Owner shall install a wastewater collection line to the boundary of the Property in accordance with approved plans and specifications. All easements and rights of way necessary for installation, operation, service and maintenance of such water supply and distribution system and wastewater collection system shall be established as shown on the Final Plat of Elk Springs Filing 6A. Said water supply and distribution system shall be conveyed in its entirety to the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc., simultaneously with the recording ofthe Final Plat. Said wastewater collection line shall be conveyed in its entirety to Spring Valley Sanitation District simultaneously with the recording of the Final Plat. 6. PRIVATE ROADS. All roads within the Subdivision shall be set apart and conveyed as private road rights-of-way to the Elk Springs Homeowners' Association, subject to public easements for ingress and egress by emergency service providers. The Homeowners' Association of the Subdivision shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said private rights-of-way, including the traveled surface of the roadways and areas outside of the traveled surface. The BOCC shall not be obligated to maintain road rights-of-way within the Subdivision. Existence of private roads shall be noted on the Final Plat and deeds of conveyance of 12 the rights-of-way to the Homeowners' Association of the Subdivision shall be recorded at the time of recording the Final Plat. All offsite road improvements for the Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. have previously been satisfied. 7. PUBLIC UTILITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY. Whether or not utility easements exist elsewhere in the Subdivision, all road rights-of-way within the Subdivision shall contain easements for installation and maintenance of utilities. Public utility easements shall be depicted on the face of the Final Plat and deeded by recorded instrument to the HOA for the benefit of public utility providers. The Homeowner's Association of the Subdivision shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said public utility easements, unless otherwise agreed to with the public utility company(ies), The BOCC shall not be obligated for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of any utility easement within the Subdivision. In the event a utility company, whether publicly or privately owned, requires conveyance of the easements depicted on the Final Plat by separate document, Owner shall execute and record the required conveyance documents. 8. CONVEYANCE OF OPEN SPACE AND ROADS. The common open space parcels and roads identified on the Final Plat of the Subdivision shall be conveyed by Owner to the Homeowner's Association at the time of Final Plat Approval. Owner shall deposit with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder executed originals of the instruments of conveyance for recordation following recording of the Final Plat and this SIA. 9. INDEMNITY. The Owner shall indemnify and hold the BOCC harrnless and defend the BOCC from all claims which may arise as a result of the Owner's installation of the Subdivision Improvements including revegetation and any other agreement or obligation of Owner, related to development of the Subdivision, required pursuant to this SIA. The Owner, however, does not indemnify the BOCC for claims made asserting that the standards imposed by the BOCC are 13 improper or are the cause of the injury asserted, or from claims which may arise from the negligent acts or omissions of the BOCC or its employees. The BOCC shall notify the Owner of receipt by the BOCC of a notice of claim or a notice of intent to sue, and the BOCC shall afford the Owner the option of defending any such claim or action. Failure to notify and provide such written option to the Owner shall extinguish the BOCC's rights under this paragraph. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to constitute a waiver of governmental immunity granted to the BOCC by Colorado statutes and case law. 10. ROAD IMPACT FEE. Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of Garfield County Resolution 98- 30, the Preliminary Plan Approval, the BOCC has established a Road Impact fee of Two Hundred and No/100ths Dollars ($200.00) for each lot within the Subdivision. There is 1 lot within the Final Plat. Therefore, Owner shall pay Two Hundred and No/100ths Dollars (S200.00) to the Garfield County Treasurer at or prior to the time of recording of the Final Plat. 11 FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION OF SCHOOL LAND. Condition 20 of the PUD Approval required Owner to convey an identified School Site Parcel to the RE -i School District in full satisfaction of all obligations for dedication of land or payment of fees in lieu thereof for the Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Owner conveyed the School Site Parcel to the RE -1 School District by Special Warranty Deed dated May 9, 2007, recorded on May 15, 2006, at Reception No. 723310 of the Garfield County real estate records. Thus, Owner and BOCC agree that Owner has fully satisfied its obligations to the RE -1 School District and no fee is due from Owner for this Final Plat. All property within Elk Springs which was not previously within the municipal boundaries of the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District was included within the District pursuant to its Resolution No. 005, Series of 2000. The Owner shall comply with all requirements of said 14 Resolution No. 005, Series of 2000 which include the obligation to pay applicable impact fees for commercial property within the Fire District. 12. SALE OF LOTS. No lots, tracts, or parcels within the Subdivision may be separately conveyed prior to recording of the Final Plat in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. 13. BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. As one remedy for breach of this SIA, including failure to satisfy requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, the BOCC may withhold issuance ofbuilding permits for any residence or other habitable structure to be constructed within the Subdivision. No certificates of occupancy shall issue for any habitable building or structure, including residences, within the Subdivision until all Subdivision Improvements, except revegetation, have been completed and are operational and all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied as required by this SIA. 14. CONSENT TO VACATE PLAT. In the event the Owner fails to comply with the terms of this SIA, the BOCC shall have the ability to vacate the Final Plat as it pertains to any lots for which building permits have not been issued. As to lots for which building permits have been issued, the Plat shall not be vacated and shall remain valid. In such event, the Owner shall provide the BOCC a plat, suitable for recording, showing the location by surveyed legal description of any portion of the Final Plat so vacated by action of the BOCC. If such a Plat is not signed by the BOCC and recorded, or if such Plat is not provided by the Owner, the BOCC may vacate the Final Plat, or portions thereof, by resolution. 15. ENFORCEMENT. In addition to any rights provided by Colorado statute, the withholding of building permits and certificates of occupancy, provided for in paragraph 13, above, the provisions for release of security, detailed in paragraph 3, above, and the provisions for plat 15 vacation, detailed in paragraph 14, above, it is mutually agreed by the BOCC and the Owner, that the BOCC, without making an election of remedies, and any purchaser of any lot within the Subdivision shall have the authority to bring an action in the Garfield County District Court to compel enforcement ofthis SIA. Nothing in this SIA, however, shall be interpreted to require the BOCC to bring an action for enforcement or to withhold permits or certificates or to withdraw unused security or to vacate the Final Plat or a portion thereof, nor shall this paragraph or any other provision ofthis SIA be interpreted to permit the purchaser of a lot to file an action against the BOCC. In addition, the BOCC may, but shall not be required to, pursue any of its enforcement remedies as applicable, pursuant to Article XII of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended. 16. NOTICE BY RECORDATION. This SIA shall be recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder and shall be a covenant running with title to all lots, tracts and parcels within the Subdivision. Such recording shall constitute notice to prospective purchasers and other interested persons as to the terms and provisions ofthis SIA. 17. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The obligations and rights contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit ofthe successors and assigns of the Owner and the BOCC. 18. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND NOTICE PROVISIONS, The representatives of the Owner and the BOCC, identified below, are authorized as contract administrators and notice recipients. Notices required or permitted by this SIA shall be in writing and shall be effective upon the date of delivery, or attempted delivery if delivery is refused. Delivery shall be made in person, by certified return receipt requested U.S. Mail, receipted delivery service, or facsimile transmission, addressed to the authorized representatives ofthe BOCC and the Owner at the address or facsimile number set forth below: 16 Owner: BOCC: Elk Springs, LLC ATTN: Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 1 14 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Facsimile: (970) 945-6399 wlcopy to: Balcomb & Green, P.C. ATTN: Lawrence R. Green, Esq. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Facsimile: (970) 945-9769 Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado c/o Building & Planning Dir, 108 811' Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970) 384-3470 19, AMENDMENT AND SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITY. This SIA may be modified, but only in writing signed by the parties hereto, as their interests then appear. Any such amendment, including, by way of example, extension of the Completion Date, substitution of the form of security, or approval of a change in the identity of the security provider/issuer, shall be considered by the BOCC at a scheduled public meeting. Before any extension of Completion Date is considered, Owner shall certify that all taxes and assessments on the real property subject to the SIA are paid in full. If such an amendment includes a change in the identity of the provider/issuer of security, due to a conveyance of the Subdivision by the Owner to a successor in interest, Owner shall provide a copy of the recorded assignment document(s) to the BOCC, along with the original security instrument. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may change the identification of notice recipients and contract administrators and the contact information provided in paragraph 18, 17 above, in accordance with the provisions of that paragraph and without formal amendment of this SIA and without consideration at a BOCC meeting. 20. COUNTERPARTS. This SIA may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall be deemed one and the same instrument. 21. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. Venue and jurisdiction for any cause arising out of or related to this SIA shall lie with the District Court of Garfield County, Colorado, and this SIA shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Colorado. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this SIA to be effective upon the date of Final Plat Approval for the Subdivision. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Clerk to the Board STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) By: Chairman Date: OWNER ELK SPRINGS, LLC By: Gary McElwee Date: Subscribed and sworn to before me by Gary McElwee, an authorized representative of Elk Springs, LLC, Owner of the Subdivision, this day of , 2010. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public 18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER ENGINEERS'SURVEYORS November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 f 18 WESTSIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 GL.ENW000 SPRINGS, CO 81601 970.945. 1 004 970.945.5948 FAx Via E -Mail: tarry@balcombgreen,com RE: Filings 6A, Elk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimates/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit engineering cost estimates for future public improvements associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 6A This is the 5 -acre "Neighborhood Commercial" lot located north of CR 114 between the Elk Springs main entrance and Auburn Ridge Road. This parcel is being Final Platted now to facilitate sale but will again have to go thru the Garfield County Preliminary/Final Plat process prior to development or re -subdivision. Our obligation now is to provide access and utility service to the parcel. Access is facilitated by CR 114. An 8" sanitary sewer line will be constructed in the old CR 114 ROW north of the current road. A 2" steel gas line, 3-phase electric line and telephone lines are located in the Auburn Ridge Road ROW at the intersection w. CR 114 just east of the Parcel. An existing water service from the 8" line in Auburn Ridge Road is stubbed into the parcel as shown. Refer to the attached Filing 6A SIA Cost Estimate. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 6A, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC, David M. Kotz, P.E. 1:119811015021C1291Nov2010GarCoSubmittal\App H -l1 a-ElkSpringsF6a Imp,doc 103 WEST TOMIC&11 AVE. SUITE A GUNNISON. CO 8 i 230 970.64 1 .5355 970.641 .5358 FAx I 0 I FOUNDERS PLACE. UNIT 1 02 PO Box 2 155 ASPEN. CO 8 1 61 1 970.925.6727 970.925.41 57 Fax 2788 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE IO2 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 8 1505 970.245.2571 970.245.2871 Fat 320 TNIRD STREET MEEKER. 00 8 1 641 970.878.51 80 970.878.4181 Fax 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch Filing 6A Subdivision Improvements Agreement Engineering Cost Estimate Filing 6A - Sanitary Sewer No. Description Q Unit Price 1 Unit Estimate 1 Moblization 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 2 Clearing & Grubbing _ 0.4 AC $ 2,500.00 $ 1,000.00 2 Topsoil strip, stockpile & replace 1890 SY $ 3.00 $ 5,670.00 3 Erosion Logs (Install and maintain) _ _ 10 ea $ 200.00 $ 2,000.00 4 Class 6 Aggregate (full depth under pavement) 68 TN $ 35,00 $ 2,380.00 5 Asphalt Patching 14 TN $ 130.00 $ 1,820.00 6 8" PVC Sewer Main 846 LF $ 50.00 $ 42,300.00 7 Sewer Manholes 5 EA $ 4,000.00 r $ 20,000.00 8 Sewer Drop Manhole 1 EA $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00 9 Revegetation 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000,00 10 Traffic Control 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub -Total $ 10 % contingency $ Total $ 101,937.00 92,670.00 9,267.00 Note: This cost estimate is based on the engineer's interpretation of estimated bid quantities and prices that will be received for this project. As with any estimate, actual costs may vary due to unforeseen circumstances and market conditions. 1b-ElkSpringsF6a-SIA.xIs By: David M. Kotz, P.E. 11124/10 Schmueser Gordon Meyer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ELK SPRINGS, FILING 9 AND FILING 8 PHASE 2 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT THIS ELK SPRINGS, FILING 9 AND FILING 8 PHASE 2 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT ("SIA") is made and entered into this day of , 20, by and between ELK SPRINGS, LLC ("Owner") and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, acting for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, as a body politic and corporate, directly or through its authorized representatives and agents ("BOCC"). Recitals 1. Owner is the owner and developer of certain real property Iocated within Garfield County, Colorado, known as Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., as approved by the BOCC and more particularly described in County Resolution No. 96-34, recorded as Reception No. 494584 of the Garfield County real estate records (the "PUD Approval"). 2. Preliminary plan approval was issued by the BOCC for that portion of the Los Amigos P.U.D. designated as Elk Springs Filing 9 and Filing 8 Phase 2, under the terms and conditions set forth in County Resolution No. 98-30 recorded at Reception No. 525809 in the Garfield County real estate records, as amended by Resolution 99-102, recorded at Reception No. 553278 in the Garfield County real estate records (collectively, the "Preliminary Plan Approval"). 3. Both the PUD approval and the Preliminary Plan approval contemplated development of the Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. in phases. 4. Owner has submitted to the County for its approval, the Final Plat for Elk Springs Filing 9 and Filing 8 Phase 2, Subdivisions of Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D., (collectively the "Final Plats" or "Final PIats of the Subdivision") for that portion of the property lying within the Los Amigos P.U.D. more particularly described in said Final Plats. I 5. As a condition precedent to the approval of the Final Plats submitted to the BOCC as required by the laws of the State of Colorado and by the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, Owner wishes to enter into this SIA with the BOCC. 6. Owner has agreed to execute and deliver a letter of credit or other security in a form satisfactory to the BOCC to secure and guarantee Owner's performance under this Agreement and under the Preliminary Plan Approval and has agreed to certain restrictions and conditions regarding the sale of properties and issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy within the subdivision, all as more fully set forth below. 7. Owner represents that at the time of recording this SIA all taxes and assessments upon all parcels of real estate described in this SIA are paid in full. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the BOCC and Owner ("Parties") agree as follows: Agreement 1. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. The BOCC hereby accepts and approves the Final Plats of the Subdivision, on the date set forth above, subject to the terms and conditions of this SIA, the PUD Approval, the Preliminary Plan Approval, and the requirements of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 and any other governmental or quasi -governmental regulations applicable to the Subdivision ("Final Plat Approval"). Recording of the Final Plats in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder shall be in accordance with this SIA and at the time prescribed herein. 2. OWNER'S PERFORMANCE AS TO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. a. Completion Date/Substantial Compliance. Owner has constructed and installed certain and shall cause to be constructed and installed other subdivision improvements, identified in the Exhibits defined in subparagraph 2.a.i, below ("Subdivision Improvements") at 2 Owner's expense, including payment of fees required by Garfield County and/or other governmental and quasi -governmental entities with regulatory jurisdiction over the Subdivision. The Subdivision Improvements except for revegetation, shall be completed on or before the end of the first full year following execution ofthis SIA ("Completion Date"), in substantial compliance with the following: i. Plans marked "Approved for Construction" for all Subdivision Improvements prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer and submitted to the BOCC on , 20 , such plans being summarized in the list of drawings attached to and made a part ofthis SIA by reference as Exhibit "A"; the estimate of cost of completion, certified by and bearing the stamp of Owner's professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado ("Owner's Engineer"), attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit "B", which estimate shall include an additional ten(10) percent of the total for contingencies; and all other documentation required to be submitted along with the Final Plats under pertinent sections of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 ("Final Plat Documents"). ii. All requirements of the PUD Approval and the Preliminary Plan Approval. All laws, regulations, orders, resolutions and requirements of Garfield County and all special districts and any other governmental entity or quasi -governmental authority (ies) with jurisdiction. iv. The provisions of this SIA. b. Satisfaction of Subdivision Improvements Provisions. The BOCC agrees that if all Subdivision Improvements are constructed and installed in accordance with this paragraph 2; the record drawings have been submitted upon completion of the Subdivision Improvements, as detailed 3 in paragraph 3(c), below; all other requirements of this SIA have been niet; and all requirements of the PUD Approval and Preliminary Plan Approval are satisfied, then the Owner shall be deemed to have satisfied all terms and conditions of the PUD Approval, the Preliminary Plan Approval, the Final Plat Documents and the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of2008, with respect to the installation of Subdivision Improvements. 3. SECURITY FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS (EXCEPT RE - VEGETATION). a. Completed Subdivision Improvements. Exhibit B contains a Certification that the significant majority ofthe subdivision improvements for Elk Springs Filing 9 and all subdivision improvements for Elk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2, have been completed. The total cost to complete the subdivision improvements for Elk Springs Filing 9, and Elk Springs Filing 8, Phase 1 and Phase 2 was $1,528,845.00 plus an additional $220,888.00 to reconstruct Juniper Drive within Filing 8 Phase 2. No security for the completed subdivision improvements in Elk Springs Filing 9 and Filing 8 Phase 2 is required. b. Subdivision Improvements Letter of Credit for Incomplete Subdivision Improvements. As security for Owner's obligation to complete the Subdivision Improvements other than revegetation, Owner shall deliver to the BOCC, on or before the date of recording of the Final Plat ofthe Subdivision, a Letter of Credit in the form agreed to be acceptable to the BOCC, attached to and incorporated in this SIA by reference as Exhibit "C" ("LOC") or in a form consistent with the Uniform Commercial. Code, C.R.S. § 4-1-101, et seq. and approved by the BOCC. The LOC shall be in the amount of $61,820.00, representing the full estimated cost of completing the Subdivision Improvements, which includes a 10% contingency to cover cost changes, unforeseen costs and other variables as set forth and certified by Owner's Engineer on Exhibit B, to guarantee completion of the 4 Subdivision Improvements. The LOC shall be valid for a minimum of six (6) months beyond the Completion Date for the Subdivision Improvements set forth in Paragraph 2.a., above. The BOCC, at its sole option, may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of the Subdivision Improvements subject of this Paragraph 3.b. c. LOC Requirements and Plat Recording. The LOC required by this SIA shall be issued by a state or national banking institution acceptable to the BOCC. If the institution issuing the LOC is not licensed in the State of Colorado and transacting business within the State of Colorado, the LOC shall be "confirmed" within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code, Letters of Credit, §4-5-101, et seq., C.R.S., as amended, by a bank that is licensed to do business in the State of Colorado, doing business in Colorado, and acceptable to the BOCC. The LOC shall state that presentation of drafts drawn under the LOC shall be at an office of the issuer or confi neer located in the State of Colorado. The Final Plat of the Subdivision shall not be recorded until the security, described in this paragraph 3 and the security for revegetation described in paragraph 4, below has been received and approved by the BOCC. d. Extension of LOC Expiration Date. If the Completion Date, identified in paragraph 2.a., above, is extended by a written amendment to this SIA, the time period for the validity ofthe LOC shall be similarly extended by the Owner. For each six (6) month extension, at the sole option of the BOCC, the face amount of the LOC shall be subject to re-certification by Owner's Engineer of the cost of completion and review by the BOCC. e. Unenforceable LOC. Should the LOC expire or become void or unenforceable for any reason, including bankruptcy ofthe Owner or the financial institution issuing or confirming the LOC, prior to the BOCCs approval of Owner's Engineer's certification of 5 completion of the Subdivision Improvements, this SIA shall become void and ofno force and effect and the Final Plat shall be vacated pursuant to the terms of this SIA. f. Partial Releases of Security. Owner may request partial releases of the LOC, and shall do so by means of submission to the Building and Planning Department of a "Written Request for Partial Release of LOC", in the form attached to and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit D, accompanied by the Owner's Engineer's stamped certificate of partial completion of improvements. The Owner's Engineer's seal shall certify that the Subdivision Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Preliminary Plan Approval. Owner may also request release For a portion of the security upon proof that 1) Owner has a valid contract with a public utility company regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission obligating such company to install certain utility lines; and 2) Owner has paid to the utility company the cost of installation as required by the contract. The BOCC shall authorize successive releases of portions of the face amount of the LOC as portions of the Subdivision Improvements, dealt with in this Paragraph 3, are certified as complete to the BOCC by the Owner's Engineer, requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been met, and both the certification and satisfaction of the Preliminary Plan Approval requirements have been approved by the BOCC. g. BOCC's Investigation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon submission of the Owner's Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, along with Owner's Engineer's certificate of partial completion of improvements, the BOCC may review the certification and the Preliminary Plan Approval, and may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete to determine whether or not they have been constructed in compliance with relevant specifications, as follows: 6 If no Letter ofpotential deficiency is furnished to Owner by the BOCC within fifteen (15) business days of submission of Owner's Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner's Engineer's certificate of partial completion of improvements, all Subdivision Improvements certified as complete shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shah authorize release of the appropriate amount of security, provided that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied. ii. If the BOCC chooses to inspect and determines that all or a portion of the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete are not in compliance with the relevant specifications or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been met,the pp BOCC shall furnish a letter ofpotential deficiency to the Owner, within fifteen (I5) business days of submission of Owner's Written Request for Partial Release of LOC. iii. If a letter ofpotential deficiency is issued identifying a portion of the certified Subdivision Improvements as potentially deficient and there are no outstanding requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, then all Subdivision Improvements not identified as potentially deficient shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shall authorize release of the amount of security related to the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete and not identified as potentially deficient. iv. With respect to Subdivision Improvements identified as potentially deficient in a Letter of potential deficiency or requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval that have not been met, the BOCC shall have thirty (30) days from the date of the letter to complete the initial investigation, begun under subparagraph 3.f.ii., above, and provide written confirmation of the deficiency(ies) to the Owner. 7 v. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in compliance with the relevant specifications and that all requirernents of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been met, then the appropriate amount of security shall be authorized for release within ten (10) business days after completion of such investigation. g. BOCC Completion of Improvements and Other Remedies. If the BOCC finds, within the thirty (30) day period of time, defined in subparagraph 3.f iv. above, that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot. construct any or all ofthe Subdivision Improvements, whether or not Owner has submitted a written request for release of LOC, or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been met, the SOCC may withdraw and employ from the LOC such funds as may be necessary to construct the Subdivision Improvements in accordance with the specifications or to satisfy the Preliminary Plan Approval requirements, up to the face amount or remaining face amount of the LOC. In such event, the BOCC shall make a written finding regarding Owner's failure to comply with this SIA or requirements ofthe Preliminary Plan Approval prior to requesting payment from the LOC, in accordance with the provisions of Article XIII of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner's failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA regarding Subdivision Improvements and satisfaction of requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency(ies) prior to requesting payment from the LOC or filing a civil action. h. Final Release of Security. Upon completion of all Subdivision Improvements and Preliminary Plan Approval requirements, other than revegetation, Owner shall submit to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department: 1) record drawings bearing the stamp of Owner's 8 Engineer certifying that all Subdivision. Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Preliminary Plan Approval, in hard copy and digital format acceptable to the BOCC; 2) copies of instruments conveying real property and other interests which Owner is obligated to convey to the Homeowner's Association of the Subdivision or any statutory special district or other entity at the time of Final Plat Approval; and 3) a Written Request for Final Release of LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit E, along with Owner's Engineer's stamp and certificate of final completion of improvements. i. The BOCC shall authorize a final release of the LOC after the Subdivision Improvements are certified as final to the BOCC by the Owner's Engineer and said final certification is approved by the BOCC. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been met, the BOCC shall authorize release of the final amount of security, within ten (10) business days following submission of the Owner's Written Request for Final Release of LOC accompanied by the other documents required by this paragraph 3.h. ii. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon Owner's Written Request for Final Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner's Engineer's certificate of final completion of improvements, the BOCC may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete. If the BOCC does so review and inspect, the process contained in paragraph 3.E, above, shall be followed. 9 iii. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and that all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied, the BOCC shall authorize final release of security within ten (10) days after completion of such investigation. iv. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, and/or that requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have not been satisfied, the BOCC may complete remaining Subdivision Improvements and satisfy requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, or institute court action in accordance with the process outlined in paragraph 3.g., above. 4. SECURITY FOR REVEGETATION. a. Revegetation LOC and Substitute Collateral. $500.00 of the face amount of the LOC, specified in Paragraph 3a above, shall be allocated to revegetation of disturbed areas within the Subdivision ("Revegetation LOC"), the cost for which is detailed as a subdivision improvement in Exhibit B. The Revegetation LOC shall be valid for a minimum of two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. The BOCC, at its sole option may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of revegetation. b. Revegetation LOC General Provisions. The provisions of paragraphs 3.b., 3.c. and 3.d., above, dealing with Letter of Credit requirements, extension of expiration dates, increase in face amounts, and plat recording shall apply to the Revegetation LOC. c. Revegetation Review and Notice of Deficiency. Upon establishment of revegetation, the Owner shall request review of the revegetation work by the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, by telephone or in writing. Such review shall be for the 10 purpose of verification of success of revegetation and reclamation in accordance with the Garfield County Weed Management Plan 2000, adopted by Resolution No. 2002-94 and recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 580572, as amended, and the revegetation/reclamation plan titled and dated for the Subdivision submitted. If the Vegetation Management Department refuses approval and provides written notice of deficiency(ies), the Owner shall cure such deficiency(ies) by further revegetation efforts, approved by the Vegetation Management Department, as such efforts may be instituted within the two (2) years following recording of the Final Plat. d. Single Request for Release of Revegetation LOC. Following receipt of written approval of the Vegetation Management Department, the Owner may request release of the Revegetation LOC and shall do so by means of submission to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department, ofa Written Request for Release of Revegetation LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit. F, along with certification of completion by the Owner, or Owner's agent with knowledge, and a copy of the written approval of the Vegetation Management Department. It is specifically understood by the parties that the Revegetation LOC is not subject to successive partial releases, as authorized in paragraph 3.e., above. Further, the Revegetation LOC and the BOCC's associated rights to withdraw funds and bring a court action may survive final release of the LOC securing other Subdivision Improvements, defined in paragraph 3.a., above. e. BOCC's Completion of Revegetation and Other Remedies. If Owner's revegetation efforts are deemed by the BOCC to be unsuccessful, in the sole opinion of the BOCC upon the recommendation of the Vegetation Management Department, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot complete revegetation, the BOCC, in its discretion, may withdraw 11 and employ from the Revegetation LOC such funds as may be necessary to carry out the revegetation work, up to the face amount of the Revegetation LOC. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the Revegetation LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner's failure to adhere to the provisions of this STA related to revegetation. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency prior to requesting payment from the Revegetation LOC or filing a civil action. 5. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER COLLECTION. Owner certifies that Owner has heretofore installed and connected a water distribution system for potable water and fire protection and a wastewater collection system in accordance with approved plans and specifications. All easements and rights of way necessary for installation, operation, service and maintenance of such water supply and distribution system and wastewater collection system shall be established as shown on the Final Plats of the Subdivisions. Said water supply and distribution system shall be conveyed in its entirety to the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc., simultaneously with the recording of the Final Plat. Said wastewater collection system shall be conveyed in its entirety to Spring Valley Sanitation District simultaneously with the recording of the Final Plats. It is specifically agreed that the three lots within Elk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2 may utilize individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). fa. PRIVATE ROADS. All roads within the Subdivision shall be set apart and conveyed as private road rights-of-way to the Elk Springs Homeowners' Association, subject to public easements for ingress and egress by emergency service providers. The Homeowners' Association of the Subdivision shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said private rights-of-way, including the traveled surface of the roadways and areas outside of the traveled surface. The BOCC shall not be obligated to maintain road rights-of-way within the 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Subdivision. Existence of private roads shall be noted on the Final Plats and deeds of conveyance of the rights-of-way to the Homeowners` Association of the Subdivision shall be recorded at the time of recording the Final Plats. All offsite road improvements for the Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. have previously been satisfied. 7. PUBLIC UTILITY RIGHTS -OE -WAY. Whether or not utility easements exist elsewhere in the Subdivision, all road rights-of-way within the Subdivision shall contain easements for installation and maintenance of utilities. Public utility easements shall be depicted on the face of the Final Plat and deeded by recorded instrument to the HOA for the benefit of public utility providers. The Homeowner's Association of the Subdivision shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said public utility easements, unless otherwise agreed to with the public utility company(ies). The BOCC shall not be obligated for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of any utility easement within the Subdivision. In the event a utility company, whether publicly or privately owned, requires conveyance of the easements depicted on the Final Plat by separate document, Owner shall execute and record the required conveyance documents. 8. CONVEYANCE OF OPEN SPACE AND ROADS. The common open space parcels and roads identified on the Final Plats of the Subdivision shall be conveyed by Owner to the Homeowner's Association at the time of Final Plat Approval. Owner shall deposit with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder executed originals of the instruments of conveyance for recordation following recording of the Final Plat and this SIA. 9. INDEMNITY. The Owner shall indemnify and hold the BOCC harmless and defend the BOCC from all claims which may arise as a result of the Owner's installation of the Subdivision Improvements including revegetation and any other agreement or obligation of Owner, related to development of the Subdivision, required pursuant to this SIA. The Owner, however, does not 13 indemnify the BOCC for claims made asserting that the standards imposed by the BOCC are improper or are the cause of the injury asserted, or from claims which may arise from the negligent acts or omissions of the BOCC or its employees. The BOCC shall notify the Owner of receipt by the BOCC of a notice of claim or a notice of intent to sue, and the BOCC shall afford the Owner the option of defending any such claim or action. Failure to notify and provide such written option to the Owner shall extinguish the BOCC's rights under this paragraph. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to constitute a waiver of governmental immunity granted to the BOCC by Colorado statutes and case law. 10. ROAD IMPACT FEE. Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of Garfield County Resolution 98- 30, the Preliminary Plan Approval, the BOCC has established a Road Impact fee of Two Hundred and No/100ths Dollars (8200.00) for each residential lot within the Subdivision. There are 62 lots within Filing 9 and 3 lots within Filing 8 Phase 2. Therefore, Owner shall pay Thirteen Thousand and Noll 00ths Dollars (S13,000.00) to the Garfield County Treasurer at or prior to the time of recording of the Final Plats. 11. FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION OF SCHOOL LAND. Condition 20 of the PUD Approval required Owner to convey an identified School Site Parcel to the RE-1 School District in full satisfaction of all obligations for dedication of land or payment of fees in lieu thereof for the Los Amigos Ranch PUD. Owner conveyed the School Site Parcel to the RE-1 School District by Special Warranty Deed dated May 9, 2007, recorded on May 15, 2006, at Reception No. 723310 of the Garfield County real estate records. Thus, Owner and BOCC agree that Owner has fully satisfied its obligations to the RE-1 School District and no fee is due from Owner for these Final Plats. 14 All property within Elk Springs which was not previously within the municipal boundaries of the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District was included within the District pursuant to its Resolution No. 005, Series of 2000. The Owner shall comply with all requirements of said Resolution No. 005, Series of 2000 which include the obligation to pay an impact fee of per lot for each ofthe 62 lots within the Final. Plat for a total Fire District impact fee of $ prior to the recording of the Final Plat. P. SALE OF LOTS. No lots, tracts, or parcels within the Subdivision may be separately conveyed prior to recording of the Final Plat in the records ofthe Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. 13. BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. As one remedy for breach of this SIA, including failure to satisfy requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval, the BOCC may withhold issuance of building permits for any residence or other habitable structure to be constructed within the Subdivision. No certificates of occupancy shall issue for any habitable building or structure, including residences, within the Subdivision until all Subdivision Improvements, except revegetation, have been completed and are operational and all requirements of the Preliminary Plan Approval have been satisfied as required by this SIA. 14. CONSENT TO VACATE PLAT. In the event the Owner fails to comply with the terms of this SIA, the BOCC shall have the ability to vacate the Final Plat as it pertains to any lots for which building permits have not been issued. As to lots for which building permits have been issued, the Plat shall not be vacated and shall remain valid. In such event, the Owner shall provide the BOCC a plat, suitable for recording, showing the location by surveyed legal description of any portion of the Final Plats so vacated by action of the BOCC. If such a Plat is not signed by the 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BOCC and recorded, or if such Plat is not provided by the Owner, the BOCC may vacate the Final Plat, or portions thereof, by resolution. 15. ENFORCEMENT. In addition to any rights provided by Colorado statute, the withholding of building permits and certificates of occupancy, provided for in paragraph 13, above, the provisions for release of security, detailed in paragraph 3, above, and the provisions for plat vacation, detailed in paragraph 14, above, it is mutually agreed by the BOCC and the Owner, that the BOCC, without making an election of remedies, and any purchaser of any lot within the Subdivision shall have the authority to bring an action in the Garfield County District Court to compel enforcement of this SIA. Nothing in this SIA, however, shall be interpreted to require the BOCC to bring an action for enforcement or to withhold permits or certificates or to withdraw unused security or to vacate the Final Plat or a portion thereof, nor shall this paragraph or any other provision of this SIA be interpreted to permit the purchaser ofa lot to file an action against the BOCC. In addition, the BOCC may, but shall not be required to, pursue any of its enforcement remedies as applicable, pursuant to Article XI1 of the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended. 16. NOTICE BY RECORDATION. This SIA shall be recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder and shall be a covenant running with title to all lots, tracts and parcels within the Subdivision. Such recording shall constitute notice to prospective purchasers and other interested persons as to the terms and provisions of this SIA. 17. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The obligations and rights contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Owner and the BOCC. 18. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND NOTICE PROVISIONS. The representatives of the Owner and the BOCC, identified below, are authorized as contract administrators and notice recipients. Notices required or permitted by this SIA shall be in writing I6 and shall be effective upon the date of delivery, or attempted delivery if delivery is refused. Delivery shall be made in person, by certified return receipt requested U.S. Mail, receipted delivery service, or facsimile transmission, addressed to the authorized representatives ofthe BOCC and the Owner at the address or facsimile number set forth below: Owner: BOCC: Elk Springs, LLC ATTN: Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Facsimile: (970) 945-6399 w/copy to: Balcomb & Green, P.C. ATTN: Lawrence R. Green, Esq. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Facsimile: (970) 945-9769 Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado c/o Building & Planning Dir. 108 8`t' Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970) 384-3470 19. AMENDMENT AND SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITY. This SIA may be modified, but only in writing signed by the parties hereto, as their interests then appear. Any such amendment, including, by way of example, extension of the Completion Date, substitution of the form of security, or approval of a change in the identity of the security provider/issuer, shall be considered by the BOCC at a scheduled public meeting. Before any extension of Completion Date is considered, Owner shall certify that all taxes and assessments on the real property subject to the SIA are paid in full. If such an amendment includes a change in the identity ofthe provider/issuer of security, due to a conveyance of the Subdivision by the Owner to a successor in interest, Owner shall provide a copy of the recorded assignment document(s) to the BOCC, along with the original security instrument. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may change the identification of notice recipients and contract administrators and the contact information provided in paragraph 1 8, above, in accordance with the provisions of that paragraph and without formal amendment of this SIA and without consideration at a BOCC meeting. 20. COUNTERPARTS. This SIA may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall be deemed one and the same instrument. 21. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. Venue and jurisdiction for any cause arising out of or related to this SIA shall lie with the District Court of Garfield County, Colorado, and this SIA shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Colorado. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this SIA to be effective upon the date of Final Plat Approval for the Subdivision. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Clerk to the Board By: Chairman Date: OWNER ELK SPRINGS, LLC By: Gary McElwee Date: 18 STATE OF COLORADO )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD Subscribed and sworn to before me by Gary McElwee, an authorized representative of Elk Springs, LLC, Owner of the Subdivision, this day of , 2010. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public 19 SCHMUESER GORDON i MEYER ENGINEERS!SURVEYORSS November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.O. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 1 1 8 WEST SIXTH STREET, SURE 200 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81501 970.945.1 004 970.945.5948 FAx Via E -Mail: larry@balcombgreen.com RE: Filing 9, Elk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimate/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit an engineering cost estimate for future public improvements and provide documentation for the completed infrastructure associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 9 This filing consists of the western most lots in Elk Springs. Again, the bulk of this construction was previously completed as documented in the attachments to Dean Gordon's July 25, 2007 letter to you. The exception is that two additional lots (79 & 80) have been added at the top of Kingbird Drive. Necessary future construction consists of widening a portion of the existing drive, extending the drive, constructing a cul-de-sac and installing utility services to the existing mains as shown on the plans. Refer to the attached Filing 9 - Kingbird Drive SIA Cost Estimate. I have reviewed the status of previously -constructed public improvements for this project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Elk Springs, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with this application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs. Attached hereto are letters from Dean Gordon, P.E., Dow Construction, the contractor of record; H -P Geotech, referencing compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is a spreadsheet entitled "Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself and Mr. McElwee, to the best of my knowledge, the previously -constructed utility and roadway 1:\19811p15Q21C1291Nov241QGarCoSubmbttal\App H-\3a-ElkSpringsF9lmp.doc 103 WEST TOMICHI AVE, SUITE A 101 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNR 102 GUNNI54N. CO 81 230 P0 BOX 2155 970.641 5355 ASPEN, CO 81611 970.641 .5358 FAX 970925.6727 970.925.4157 FAx 2768 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE IO2 GRAND JUNCTPON, CO 81505 970.245.2571 970.245.2871 FAX 320 THIRD STREET MEEKER, CO 81 641 970.878.5180 970.878.4181 FAX SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER ENGINEERS ISURVEYORS infrastructure improvements within Filing 9 appear to be constructed with applicable construction documents. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the Filing 9, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. David M. Kotz, P.E. I:119811015421c1291Nov201OGarcoSubmittaliApp H-13a-ElkSpringsF9Vmp.doc and installed in compliance necessary infrastructure for Elk Springs/Los Amigos Ranch Filing 9 Subdivision Improvements Agreement Engineering Cost Estimate Filing 9 - Kingbird Drive Cul-de-sac No. Description at Unit Price f Unit Estimate 1 Moblization 1 LS $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 1 2 Clearing & Grubbing 0.42 AC $ 2,000.00 $ 840.00 2 Topsoil strip, stockpile & repiaceldispose 2030 SY $ 2.00 $ 4,060.00 3 Subgrade Prep 2030 SY $ 1.00 $ 2.030.00 4 Class 6 Aggregate (inc. trench full depth under pavement) 830 TN $ 32.00 $ 26,560.00 5 Chip Seal 1330 SY $ 7.00 $ 9,310.00 6 LP Sewer Service 2 EA $ 1,000.00 $ 2,000.00 7 Water Service 2 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 2,400.00 8 Revegetation 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 9 Miscellaneous Utilities 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Sub -Total $ 10 % contingency $ 56,200.00 5,620.00 Total $ Note: This cost estimate is based on the engineer's interpretation of estimated bid quantities and prices that will be received for this project. As with any estimate, actual costs may vary due to unforeseen circumstances and market conditions. 61,820.00 3b-ElkSpringsF9-SIA.xls By: David M. Katz, F.E. 11124110 Schmueser Gordon Meyer SCH MUESER GORDON MEYER VI [ im } ` 1111:4T uCIVAire inKt+41111 Reception#: 734933 10/10/2067 01:26:12 PFl .jean Alberico 10 of 17 Rec Fee:$86.00 Doc Fee:0 ea GARFIELD COUNTY CO EXHIBIT B July 25, 2007 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.0. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 RE: Filing 8, Elk Springs Subdivision Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: ' , . i' ., . ,.. Via E -Mail: tarry@balcombgreen.com At your request, I have reviewed the status of required public improvements for the above -referenced project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Filing 8, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with the application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs Filing No. 8. Attached hereto are letters from Dow Construction, the contractor of record, H -P Geatech, referencing. compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is a spreadsheet entitled "Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself, to the best of my knowledge, all required utility and roadway infrastructure improvements have been completed within Filing 8 and appear to be constructed and installed in compliance with applicable construction documents. I trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the completion of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 8. Respectfully submitted, Dean Princip 1'11981 \01502',C\29\20070725 Letter to LRG from Dean Gordon flung 8.doc 1111111'In7YAN,111,11RikeNiliNriligitwiTLV,Iiii 1 ll l Reception#: 734933 10/10/2007 01:26:12 PM Jean Alberico 11 of 17 Rec Fee:$06.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO DOW CONSTRUCTION, . !NC. 8/24/04 Dean Gordon Schmueser, Gordon & Meyer 118 W. 6`" Street Ste. 200 Glenwood Springs CO 81617 Project: Elk Springs Subdivision RE: Construction Procedures for Utility Trenches and Road Construction in Filings 5,6,7, 8 & 9. After a right ofway las been flagged, we begin hy the clearing of -trees and brush. Then topsoil is stockpiled or placed at the side of the roadway, After clearing and grubbing a road surface was established by cutting and filling as required. Equipment utilized: Bulldozers. Excavators, Loaders, sheep foot and smooth drum ratters, water trucks, dump trucks, etc. Fills were placed in approximately 1 foot loose lifts and i. umpacted to at bast 95 % standard proctor density. The £irm of 14-P Geo -tech was hired to establish water content and compactive effort needed to achieve this. Due to the mcicy environment borrow pits were established. This was necessary to produce fines. Fines were used to establish a satisfactory road bed_ The borrow pits were then used as a burn area for clearing debris and abury pit for oversize boulders. The pits were then covered with soil and revegitated. After a roadbed had been established, utility consta utiou began. Utility trench locations were established, A bulldozer with a 42" ripper followed the alignment making a trench that was then filled with water The water truck was equipped with a special nozzle fabricated to eject water directly into the trench, This procedure greatly enhanced the mixing of earth and water for the backfilling procedure. After the pipe and fittings were placed, the pipe was bedded in a. special material free of rocks greater than Y/." in size. A 1 foot layer of this bedding was placed and compacted. Compaction procedures were ft eyuently tosEca by gea-techs to assure moisture content and soil density. After the bedding procedure was completed additional utilities were then placed and the above mentioned bedding technique was repeated. After all utilities were installed the remainder oldie trench was backfilled using the same method. When the utilities have been constructed, tested, and approved by the proper experts, the road { r.f,-* Yt Fr, e+ t'. 1 r. 11, T 1 .m.,,1 1 !`1J I-1, T fl .-r 1 4 Eli FA E17,14111 ilitrli17141,11iNSVIAT Oil I, Reception#; 734933 101107200'7 01:26:12 PM Jean AlberiCo 12 of 17 Reo Fee:$86.00 Doc Fee 0.03 GARFIELD COUNTY CO bed was reestablished. This is achieved by scarifying, watering, and Tolima. Ail top soiling and clean up effort occur at this time. Before ,gravel placement begins, a proof roll test is performed in the presence of a geo-tech or engineer. This is accomplished by observing the read surface under the wheels of a fully loaded damp truck or water truck- If ruckIf any movement is noted the area is marked and reworked until tate failure is remedied. .mer the proof roll is approved, the gravel placement will begin. A filter fabric was paced between the sub -grade and gravel. Itis placed between the sub -grade and the road base to prevent integration. The filter fabric is rolled out in front of the trucks dumping gravel. The fabric is held in place by grade stakes. The grade stakes provide alignment and elevation location. The gravel is manipulated into place by a motor grader, rollers and water trucks. The goal is to achieve smoothness, grade, slops, drainage and density to make an all weather surface, .Again a geo-tech is used to assure moisture content and density, Be assured that every effort was made to assure a quality and safe product to the best of our ability. Sincerely .Dow Rippy President, Dow Construction CO. Inc. 1ne Lundeen Supervisor, Dow Construction CO. inc. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Eli WA Win AutriwyeAnwilierod f 'J t 11! Reception#: 734933 /o 13 of 17t Albeico Re007 cFee:$66P00 Doc 2 M �Fee:0r00 GRRF1tLD COUNTY CO G-IStech HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL September 9, 2004 Elk Springs, LLC Atten: Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 8160I Subject: Dear Greg: 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: 970.945.7988 Fax: 970.945-8454 Iipgeoah pgeotech.com Job No. 196 617-1 Final Testing and Observation Results, Filings 7, 8, and 9, EIk Springs Subdivision, County Road 114, GarfieId County, Colorado As requested, HP Geotech visited the site and performed in-place density testing and observed the roadways at base course grade on June 11, 2004. Six density tests were performed and ail tests met the Project minimum density of 95% standard Proctor density. The base course was then dug up at the test locations to expose subgrade soil and the depth measured. Again, all locations met or exceeded the minimum required base course depth of 8 inches. During our visit the gravel roadway surface was observed for signs of instability such as rutting, and cracking. No signs of instability were noted. HP Geotech also performed compaction testing and observation during infrastructure construction. These reports have been previously submitted. Based on our test results and observations, it appears that the roadway construction should perform as intended. If you have any questions, please call this office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Michael Evans S.E.T. Reviewed by: SLP cc: SGM, Dean Gordon Dow Construction, Dow Rippy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RiJ5-17-2004 16 : 36 Gtech HEPWCRTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. rill Pik I ilielHillti,IADEEK114ii 111! I Reception#: 74933 1€711012007 01.26:12 PM Jean Alberico 14 of 17 Rec Fee $86.00 Doc Fes :0.00 GARFIELD P.01/01 r Rodd 154 GDUNTY CO pins, Colorado 81650 945.7m r4A. a, v-45-8454 hogeo(hpgeotech.Cam Earthwork Observation and Testing Report Client: Los Amigos Ranch Partnership Attn: Greg Boecker 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. 196 617-1 Date: 6-11-04 Report No. Page: 1 of 1 Project: Filing 7, Elk Springs Subdivision, CMC Road, Garfield County, Colorado Test No. Nuclear Gau•e Moisture/Dens& Test Results Location Los Amigos at intersection with Little Wood Lane, right of centerline 100' north of hiking trail ri. ht of centerline 400' north of Primrose Point left of centerline 100' north of Primrose Point right_ of centerline Depth or Elev. finished grade finished grade finished rade finished rade at intersection with Gossamer finished Road left of centerline rade at intersection with Vista Place finished _...grade 1 �1 s 1 1 1 1 Proctor Sample Reference: Lab No. Method assumed Field Dry Density PCF 130.3 130.9 132.0 130.5 131.6 Field Moisture Content 1.5 2.0 1.7 2.0 1.6 1.7 Percent Comp. 96 96 97 97 96 Miff. % Comp. Req. 95 95 95 97 95 Lab No./ Depth assumed/ 8"+ assumed/ 8>� assumed/ 8p'+ assumed/ assumed/ 8"+ assumed/ 8"-r NAT1JRESAVER'" FAX MEMO 01616 nate 1 } x1 Wye,__ I rT_o W_ -M lit Ftam , . , i� CPIDe;N. r, Co. P.. Nona f . Friona, 0J + 1.. 1 pc) 311) Fax kt;c Q 72 '! Fax 1J'GW,0 I JUV1 W' aggregate base course rw CIA Jry Dens 136.0 THE NUCLEAR DEN$oMCTtrrx 7HOD OF TESTING WAS USED IN SU$S I ANTIAL ACCOIWANGF WITH ASTM 02022 AND 03Q17. Opt Moist 7.0 Progress Report: Ali roadway base appeared to be well compacted. No signs of instability were evident. M Con5trUCtiOn - Dow Rippy Michael Evans Field Observer ]n Reviewed By Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Ph: 970 945 6399 November 24, 2010 VIA HAND DELIVERY TO: Lawrence R. Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Filing 9, Elk Springs Subdivision Public Infrastructure Improvements Dear Larry: In my capacity as a member of the Architectural Review Committee and the Ranch Manager for Los Amigos Ranch LLC, I was involved and am aware of the construction of public infrastructure improvements for Filing 9. The contractor for the improvements was DOW Construction Company, Inc. This is to certify that except for the extension of Kingbird Drive and related utility services to provide access and utility service to lots 79 and 80, the public utility systems and roadway infrastructure facilities were installed in their entirety and were installed in compliance with approved construction documents. All systems have been tested and are ready for their intended use. }ey truly yore, Gary Mc1 Rree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 T T ■ill i' . '1 ��iL�'t�' "P, i�,# 'E {t Pi f1��� 11 h�� kill 1111 Recept i arrff : 734933 f0110,2007 01126:12 PM Jean Alberieo 16 of 17 Rec Fee:$86.00 Doc Fee:0.06 GARFIELD COUNTY CO CD C3 CD 0 c5 6 C7 co coCi C4 0.V 0 0 3 8 8888 cd uo c1a ry- • a% ag try ( a1, 4 01 471 Q 10.•PF Qco CO CO CO CA 60 CI O Q b) C% 43 WF s I0 44 H U 0 C] CA CA o C3 v as O U C3 CD WO m coi ua C3 0 41=6303 03 4 0 ti 1 C» a U 0 U 0 01 U g s0101� 000101 ff7 • 03 C7 4 C+) 40 �[) } i 44Tfr Yl 4A tt�) 441 v4 C,aa CT O C3 Ci Q Q C7 [740 054 14) 443 a Gro` a 1. C? P 0 e7 00000 61') 4• W 49 N 41_,K7.3 t: `x,,1;4 PAGE E12 8 8 4, 07 C7 C7 01 G 4, ca p i Ca 0 C1 v a C7 C7 Ci 888'48 o n 0 C7 CI CR 40 44NV DI a C, a ►q a) 01 O O C3 L) +o vl V? 01 01 Q 0 C3 C7 ci Jai VA CA co o 01 c_a n 01 4, 0 Q C} 0 w N 0 (0 07 g O W 6A s M f3 C] 04 43 01 U m 0 01 8 88 SIA 44 19 ca a a a , a a a a a (rf 4 O 6 CL) r 0 0 •.—, c) '4 41 O 44 ad 4A 88885 r CA +e 4*". 44. 64 a* C:! c7 01 01 4to el CI C7 NV0 LV,- Z; .^ V3 8 8 n 4, 02 C4 r3 1.7, 6 44 4P$ CD C7 CT (7 O C3 '0•CI u] Chi C7 63 N M b3 x13 C) U 0 Cd a 0 0 0 CS v IR Ca. Ci `TO 01 X444 C3 C7 01— CS U 0 01 q CV 64 r7 (4 V3 C7 v 0 v) cv 8 (73 Q 117 0c• 00 vu02 40(4 V) 01 8 8 6 u Vt 64 8 4 q W 44 0 0 v ✓ s" R 01 47 Kr 2 0 .1= A O 7 2 o>-6_6 11- CV NV 0 v+ 1 CO CV CI co ffi cp ,- p uy t4 C'4 `V ix LC Oa o0w 1- I EL EL 45-0 vd -L.-1 Li ZD 9,2 (4,9 Q o o 01 0 t07 0 CY (V (V CY Kr ▪ co CO CI r4 P. m r, c0 6 N LL VA (]D a 2 Z Z Z Z Z h 000000 0 C] U 0 U a W W W '61"43 W (>7 w riJ 11! 2 ill zzzz W W tIJ UJ O -1 -J _J ..J _1 4I, ¢ d ¢ }�[ / d w 1 i W i�la kl r lam!!! ee "cr CC (4 �. 44 (( uh 0 co V, 03 Ch U w N CV CA fq CV 04 04 Ngp f3 CT C3 C3 CV CV (V CEJ rA '4- N N la D3 N CV 01 e 0 It 03 oo CD CA oh w z 7 o > > u_ 0) co 4 CA cv Cv N 43 C N N cV N w 0) Q Erw Cq 4 Ctrl cxi a r7 0101 N CA 1 -- co U>SC 3' 2 cov agl- U1 OE C7 c- Ci 07 0 (G4 Cy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a s a• 0 a a a a a C o 0 a o a Q g a itn a 0 Qa a I7 '0 LiN fl cQV� 0 t't cV' C9 0 Q% C. Ot0 CI t CC ct4 4_ +n r X g iA (0 c1- (9 CID •c7 401.: JO 0 7 cs 69 GF1 tO f0 G9 a Ci Lla r i d+i1t..4_1 ;a NM IA FInTift 1 III Receptionti' 734933 1Of1O/20O7 01:26--12 PM Jean fllberico 4 c9 A ID Q 17 of 17 Rec Fee:$O6 OO Doc Fee:O 00 GPRFIELD COUNTY CO 8 8 u, CO [s. 0 CO I'..: 05 - a CV Cl C7 _N a 0 r. a ai 6 f4 co trp O (f 0 0 (9 vi G07, p 4 6 49 64 0 af! a a C? CV C� L? as I0 06 co • tri' .4,v to co co 1l 1 0 oI e:31.' > ey a 0 t7 t? • 40 40 6 0 iA V d' r- e-• r CO L0 40 t-- ' (3S 7 (9 O 0 0 C! N 0 0 (9 Iti !9 O a 0141 O 0 0 143 40 ci t3 0 Cv 164 t+. C+i Ott 40 0 a ct Y Wc Ceil 49 i9 42 0 00 Ed 10 CI '1" fa $143,233.041 $278,151.87 r, a C7 u3 0 cn r- in qd h- 0 CV td- 4-4- C0 0rt-til• 19 (9 T 0 O 10 t Y cn 1.1 a x. a LL 0 Gr LJ. 6 043. U4 UJ u_i � I! I---. 0r c(9 W r 6 a 0 0 IN 10 0 CO e 0 Cot +r r 1) 11 v 0 CY 417 0 N N a N Ca 0 Q CC Din v]2 1 0) LI- IL Et IX 4C, Q N C▪ (Y CP 0 N CV r CJ F- i1! 0 U 1 t- N 0 IJJ 41 W 0 0 0 0 Q Q Lt IX CC ii. a. a. LO g:t N N CSV N iy CV z w im ur an a FY C Cv S' 1 zd- Z U7 0 3 OCK REMOVAL -d 10 its Q444 CNI 0 0 CY N 01 6 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER E N G I N E ERS S LJ R V E Y O R S November 23, 2010 Larry Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. Attorneys at Law P.Q. Drawer 790 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 1 8 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 200 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 8 1601 970-945. 1 004 970 945 5948 FAX Via E -Mail: larry@balcombgreen.com RE: Filing 8 — Phase 2, Elk Springs Subdivision SIA Cost Estimate/Certification of Public Improvements Dear Larry: This letter serves to transmit engineering cost estimates for future public improvements and provide documentation for the completed infrastructure associated with this Final Plat application. Filing 8- Phase 2 These are the three 35+ acre Rural Residential lots south of Filing 8 accessed by Juniper Drive. Utility construction was completed by Dow Construction as documented in the attachments to the July 25, 2007 Dean Gordon, P.E letter to you (attached). Juniper Drive was reconstructed this past summer and fall as documented by the attached invoices from GMCO and GNPeters that indicate over $200k was spent improving the road. H -P Geotech did construction testing and oversaw the work. Refer to their summary letter also attached. These lots will be served by Individual Septic Disposal Systems (ISDS) as approved by Garfield County Resolution 99-102. All other infrastructure is in place and no costs are necessary for SIA security purposes. Filing 8- Phase 2 - SIA Cost Estimate = $0 (all work completed). I have reviewed the status of previously -constructed public improvements for this project. Those improvements would generally consist of the construction of utilities and roadway improvements within Elk Springs, consistent with prior Preliminary Plan approvals and the Record Maps for water and sewer and the Preliminary Plan for roads submitted with this application for Final Plat approval for Elk Springs. Attached hereto are letters from Dean Gordon, P.E., Dow Construction, the contractor of record; H -P Geotech, referencing compaction testing and site observation; and Mr. Gary McElwee, owner's representative, who provided project management during construction. Also attached is 1:1198110150210'29\Nov2919GarCoSubmittallApp H-12a-EikSpringsF8blmp.doc 103 WEST TOMICHI AVE. SUITE A GUNNISON, CO 81 230 970.64 1 .5355 970.641 .5356 FAX I01 FOUNDERS PLACE, UNIT 102 PO Box 2155 ASPEN, CO 8 1 61 1 970.925,6727 970,925.4157 FAX 2768 COMPASS DRIVE, SUITE 102 320 THIRD STREET GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 MEEKER, CO 61641 970.245.2571 970.876.51 80 970.245.2871 FAX 970.676.4161 FAx 6 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER E N G I N E E R S I S U R Y E Y O R 5 a spreadsheet entitled "Elk Springs Production", which identifies the materials used to install the improvements. Based on the attached documents and a visual site inspection conducted by myself and Mr. McElwee, to the best of my knowledge, the previously -constructed utility and roadway infrastructure improvements within Filing 8 — Phase 2 appear to be constructed and installed in compliance with applicable construction documents. trust this is sufficient for your needs to document the status of the necessary infrastructure for Filing 8 — Phase 2, Elk Springs Subdivision. Respectfully submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. David M. Kotz, P.E. 1.119811015021C129\Nov2010GarCoSubmittal'App H-12a-EfkSpringsF8blmp.doc Gtech HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL November 18, 2010 Elk Springs LLC Attn: Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Project No. 110 200A Subject: Summary of Construction Observations and Materials Testing. Juniper Drive Roadway Reconstruction, Filing 8, Phase 2, Elk Springs, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. McElwee: Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical. Inc. (HP Geotech) provided observation and materials testing services for subgrade and aggregate base course during construction of the above - referenced project. Our field services for the construction began on September 1, 2010 and continued on an as -requested basis through to completion of aggregate base course placement on September 21, 2010. Our services were performed under the direction of the undersigned licensed engineer registered in the State of Colorado. During construction, applicable testing and observation reports were prepared and have been distributed under separate cover. We previously performed an evaluation of the roadway subgrade and presented our findings and recommendations in a report dated July 22, 2010, under our Job Number 110200A. At the time ofour September 1 site visit, the existing aggregate base course had been removed and stockpiled. The subgrade soils had reportedly been scarified about one foot deep and then re -compacted using a vibratory pad foot roller. We observed proof rolling of the subgrade using a loaded dump truck. Areas that deflected excessively were marked for repair. We recommended that the marked areas be sub -excavated at least one tbot and replaced with compacted granular import or suitably conditioned and compacted on site material as necessary to provide a stable subgrade. On September 7 we observed that the marked areas had been sub -excavated as recommended, and on September 8 we observed placement of 3 inch minus aggregate base course in progress in some of the sub -excavated areas. On September 13 we observed that the previously sub -excavated areas had been backfilled and compacted. About six additional areas that reportedly exhibited excessive deflection under truck traffic had also been sub -excavated. One sample of the subgrade and one sample of the stockpiled Class 6 aggregate base course were obtained and tested for laboratory Proctor compaction. grain size distribution, and plasticity index. Laboratory test results indicated the aggregate base course was in compliance with CDOT Class 6 Elk Springs, LLC November 18, 2010 Page 2 aggregate base course specifications for the tests performed_ Field compaction testing was performed on the subgrade on September 14 which indicated that the subgrade was compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor density (ASTM D 698), in compliance with our recommendations. No areas of apparent excessive deflection were observed and we judged the subgrade to be suitable for placement of gee}grid and aggregate base course as recommended in our previous report. On September 21, we performed field compaction testing at aggregate base course grade which indicated that the aggregate base course was compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor density, in compliance with our recommendations. Based on our observations during the construction and results of our testing, the subgrade and aggregate base course as constructed for the project were in substantial compliance with our recommendations and applicable Garfield County specifications. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAW LAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. '.1 1/J Thomas J. Westhoff, C.E.T. Reviewed by: Steven L. Pawlak, P cc: Schmueser Gordon Balcomb & Green - Lary Green TJWiksw GMCO LLC of Colorado P.D. lox 1480 Rifle, CO 81650 - phone (970) 625-9100 Fax: {970) 625-9101 f, E -Mail: gmco@gmcocarp,com / To: Elk Springs Subdivision Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 - Juniper Chip Seal i See Attached 09/30/2010 invoice No. Page: 1 2454 For Job: 10104 Elk Springs Purchase Order: Quantity Price Unit Amount 1.0000 43,215, 0000 LS 43,215.00 Tax: 0.00 Invoice Totals Gross 43,215.00 Retention 0.00 Tax 0.00 TOTAL DUE 43,215.00 L piled _Liability Company of Colorado P.O. Box 1480 Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 625-9100 FAX (970) 625-9101 Elk Springs ATTN:: Gary McElwee FAX: 945-6399 9/30/2010 Elk Springs LLC Juniper Chip Seal Apply a 3`4" Chip Seal with a prime coat of 11.x..1'., to approximately 7,234 SY 7,234 SY 55.00/SY 536,170.00 Apply a Second layer of %" Chip Seal to hill. 1,409 SY @ 5.00. SY Invoice total 7.045.00 543,215.00 FROM :PETERS COUER SRCRED GROUND FAX NO. :9709630899 GNPeters Const.Co.r,LC Sidra Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 5351 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 Bill To Elk Springs Silbdivisinn Glenwood Spgs.Colnnido 970-945-6399 C{4 Ciaty Mcrlwce Quantity Sep. 29 2010 12:49PM P1 Terms invoice Date W29/20 ! 11 Invoice # 26 Project Description Rate 8,340 3,250 2 :188 3,300 1,150 1,050 3 2 mobilization- 6 picccs itesnove Rnadbase and Scarily- stockpile (6:4 :9 locations Remove fabric to landfill on site, Compaction of Sub -base C,eogiti as per Specs. Reinsmil it rnailhase per Specs.- 60% eased asstltning 40% new Square footage Options I (below) Exercised during Phase! Square footage Option 2 (below) Exercised during Please 1 Truckloads boulders- collected, removed, hand and machine loaded, infill material at nesting, trucked to burn -pit Adclitiional tonnage of 314" roacihasc to male up Lor higher than expected loss: Pact of , this was wider and deeper roadway theft bid. Phase 11 Square facthijc:. scvcrc pumping at upper gate, I 6" exporoimport wklas' 2 in 2 lifts and i m acted Phase 11 Square footage- pr pan;d same as Option 1 Phase 11 Square footage- prepared sank as Option 2 l Irs..1D50' Berm firs. Cult 416 -access rel. Keating Amount 1,250.00 9,654.00 1,700.011 2.846.00 51,854.00 42.944.00 2.90 3.20 1,980,00 18.53 4.00 4.00 3.20 110_00 100.00 1,250.00 9,654.00 1.700.00 2.1146.00 51,854.00 42.944.00 24,186.00 10,400.90 3,96000 7,189.64 13,200.00 4,600.00 3.360.00 330 00 200.00 page 1 Total FRC1' : PETERS DOVER SACRED GROUND FAX NO. : 9709630999 Sep. 29 2011 12; 49PM P2 ONPeters Const.Co.LLC dba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 535.1 County Read 100 Carhond&e, CO 81.623 Bill To 1x1k Springs Subdivision Glenwood Sltgs.C:ni(ra(io 97(045-6399 CYO Gary McElwee Invoice Date Invoice W2!)/20 26 Terms Project Quantity Description Inclusions: Windrow and remove 1p 3 stockpiles. Remove fabric and dispose at landfill on Site. `scarify sub -base 12" per specs. and await inspection. Compact to spec. and proof roll. Inspect. Install Tenser TX -I40 tri•rtatial Gcogtid. Reinstall salvageable roadhn c and compact with moisture to spec. Install rim roadbase lo spec, adding moisture iCneeesSary and frnai grade. Clean up and de-imohilim. Water provided on site by owner. 1!xclusions: Testing. inspection Opt ion (revised 9/21119 Lowix Road-- 8340 sq.fi. Rumovc and export on site top 12" subgrauie. inspection, If suitable add i2`" 1i11 of Class 2, wer and compact with sheepsforrt compactor 1 pn.ss vibration and 1 MSS Regular. S 2.80/$0 Tlpper Ruud- 3250 sq. ft. Pothole arntl locate nearby utilities. Work under supervision of gas company cmployce..Removc and windrow to My top 12" subgrade. Scarily oral t2" to dry. Add optimal water nil compact scarified, Add optimal wafer and bring to grade final 12" in 3- compacted n" lifts with chccpsfuut compactor. 1 pass vibrate and 1 pass regniar. S 3.2O/ qfl Teav rates apply. Rock Clause oinirted from original estimate. however file first 1 112 titickloads exported NO (:1 /ALWE Page 2 Rate Amount Total FR[1M :PETERS DOWER SACRED GROUND GNPeters C'onslC:a,LLC dba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 5351 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX NO. :9799630$99 Sep. 29 2011 12: 50Pil P3 Bill To E;lk Springs Subdivision Glenwood Spgs.C.o1orru10 970-945-6399 C7[] Gary McElwee Invoice Date 9/29/2010 invoice # 26 P.O. No. 'Terms Project Quantity Description Rate Amount Engineer estimttic or 6-8" roadbasc existing vas incoreect. ACtuai was 8-I0". However, cesntraelor suspects that more than 60% ofmatcrial wase salvaged. In this cost there will be no charge for the excess material encountered. 1f 60% o, less has beat salvaged then T&M tatter, apply for the extra material and labor/machine time. contractor Warrants that areas pont' rolled arab compaction tcsied comply with desired engineering speeil codons. As our retconstr cation was cunducied during September of 2010 under almost optimal conditions we feel that reasonable guarantees about the road integrity can be passed on, However, euniimnor..spcci&aly excludcs possible future hydriatic pumping in antes not repaired rind pumping specific to grades deeper than this contructnr has repaired during the wettcar months (March-krue). A comprehensive map delineating areas repaired sterol the type: ofrepairs made will he included wills final invoice. tress: Deposit billed nut and Paid (Invoice 4 25) Page 3 -50,000.1} 1 Total •S0,000.00 S 127.67;.64 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FRRt) :PETERS DOVER SfCRED GROUND GNPetea°s Const.CL.LLC Ciba Carbon 8 Constructors 970-379-6212 535 County Road 100 Carbondale, CO 81623 FAX NO. : 971396313899 Sep. 29 :010 1P: 5OPli P4 Bill To Elk Springs Subdivision Uk-nwnod Spgi.{'olnraeik 770-945-6399 CIO Ciaiy McElwee P.D. No. Invoice Date Invoice # R127/2U10 25 Terms Project Quantity Description Rate Amount Advau ce on Road Rebuild job Elk Springs Subdivision, Glenwood Spgs. Colo- A. of 50.000.00 50,000.00 8/26, 20 t0 ;Oh approx. 40% complete, Total $50.111111.00 Gary McElwee 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Ph: 970 945 6399 November 24, 2010 VIA HAND DELIVERY TO: Lawrence R. Green, Esq. Balcomb & Green, P.C. 818 Colorado Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Filing 8, Phase 2, Elk Springs Subdivision Public Infrastructure Improvements Dear Larry: In my capacity as a member of the Architectural Review Committee and the Ranch Manager for Los Amigos Ranch LLC, I was involved and am aware of the construction of public infrastructure improvements for Filing 8, Phase 2. The contractor for the improvements was DOW Construction Company, Inc. This is to certify that the public utility systems and roadway infrastructure facilities were installed in their entirety and were installed in compliance with approved construction documents. All systems have been tested and are ready for their intended use. truly ycitits, Gary Mc twee 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LETTERS FROM UTILITY PROVIDERS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Red Canyon Water Company 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-6399 09/01110 Fred A. Jarman Planning Director Garfield County 108 811' St. Ste. 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman, The Red Canyon Water Company, owned by the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, can and will provide water to each of the single family lots in Los Amigos Ranch (EIk Springs) Subdivision, Filing 8, Phase 11 and Filing 9 pursuant to the written water delivery agreement with each lot owner. Red Canyon Water Company has storage capacities in place to supply water to the entire subdivision at build -out. All water rights are secured and all water allotment contracts are in place through the Basalt Water Conservancy District. egaras, Gary McEI ee c Secretary/Red Canyon Water Company Red Canyon Water Company Water Facilities Inventory — as of September 1, 2010 Item 1. Well 45 - 40 hp/3 please pump 2. Well #6 - 40 hp/3 phase pump 3. Pump house - liquid chlorination system - electrical controls - pressure regulated pump controls. 4, 2 Water Tanks- 320,000 gallon capacity and 312,000 gallon capacity 5. Five Pressure Reduction Stations, each consisting of: - one high lrolume 6" PRV - one low flow 2" PRV 6. '," Static Water Line from Water "rank to Pump house (-4300 ft) 7. 24" Chlorine Contact Line behind Pump house (-400 ft) 8. 10" Transmission Lines (-1800 ft) 9. 8" Transmission Lines (-7725 f) 10. 6" Transmission Lines (-8800 ft) 11. 97 Fire Hydrants 12. 4 Frost -free Yard Hydrants 13. Curb Stops on Service Lines 14. 1" Service Lines to Single Family Curb Stops 15. Service Lines to Multi -Family Curb Stops 16. Pressure Gauges on Pump house and Pressure Reduction Stations 17. Various 10", 8" and 6" valves Red Canyon Water Company 2929 County Road 114 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-6399 11/19110 Fred A. Jarman, AICP Assistant Planning Director Garfield County 108 8th St. Ste 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Jarman, The Red Canyon Water Company, owned by the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, can and will provide water to Filing 6A, in Elk Springs Subdivision (Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development). Red Canyon Water Company has storage capacities in place to supply water to the entire subdivision at build -out. All water rights are secured and alI water allotment contracts are in place through the Basalt Water Conservancy District. Regards, y j/////2 iai y Mc`wee Secretary/Red Canyon Water Company Karp.Neu.HanlYom September 8, 2010 David Kotz, P.E. Schmueser Gordon & Meyer, Inc. 118 W. 6th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Sander N. Karp James S. Neu Karl J. Hanlon Michael J. Sawyer James F. Fosnaught Anna S. Itenberg Cassia R. Furman Jennifer M. Smith T. Damien Zumbrennen Jeffrey J. Conklin Suzan M. Pritchett* •%icensed is NY and LA 201 14th Street, Suite 200 P. O. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 www. mountainiawfrn'n.corn James S. Neu jst@mountainlawtrrn. com Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District/Elk Springs PUD (fka Los Amigos Ranch PUD) Filing 9 Dear David: We represent Spring Valley Sanitation District (the "District"). It is my understanding that your client is preparing to develop Filing 9 of Elk Springs PUD which is to be developed with 60 single family lots (the "Property"). The District and the owner of the Property entered into that certain Pre -Inclusion and Wastewater Treatment Plant Development Agreement dated December 15, 1999 and recorded with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 587475 (the "PDA") which commits capacity in the District's wastewater treatment plant for the development of the Property. The PDA also sets forth terms and conditions of the Districts provision of wastewater treatment service to the Property. It is also my understanding that all sewer facilities to serve Filing 9 have been constructed and accepted by the District. Therefore, the District has the capacity in its wastewater treatment plant and can and will serve the Property with wastewater treatment service, subject to the following conditions: 1. If any additional sewer facilities need to be constructed, a complete set of sewer construction plans must be provided to the District for its review and approval prior to construction of such facilities to be dedicated to the District; 2. The approval by the District of all required Line Extension Agreements or Line Connection Agreements as required by the District's Rules and Regulations and/or the PDA; . The Applicant complies with all of the terms and conditions of the PDA and the District's Rules and Regulations; and 4. Pursuant to the District's Rules and Regulations and the PDA, the Applicant shall reimburse the District for all costs incurred by the District regarding this project, including, but not limited to legal and engineering review. KARP NEU HANLON, P.C. Page 2 Please let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, KARP NEU HANLON, P.C. 1 J s S. Neu JSN: cc: Denise Diers, SVSD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Karp_Neu_HanI9n1 October 13, 2010 David Katz, P.E. Schmueser Gordon & Meyer, Inc. 118 W. 6th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Sander N. Karp James S. Neu Karl J. Hanlon Michael J. Sawyer James F. Fosnaught Anna S. Itenberg Cassia R. Furman Jennifer M Smith T. Damien Zumbrennen Jeffrey 2, Conklin Suzan M. Pritchett" •Licensed in NY and 1A 201 14th Street, Suite 200 P. Q. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81642 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 wArw.mountainlawfirm. coin James S. Neu isn(an ountainlawfirm.com Via E -Mail Re: Spring Valley Sanitation DistrictlElk Springs PUD (fka Los Amigos Ranch PUD) Filing 6 Neighborhood Commercial Parcel Dear David: We represent Spring Valley Sanitation District (the "District"). It is my understanding that your client is preparing to amend the Final Plat for Filing 6 of Elk Springs PUD with a Neighborhood Commercial parcel (the "Property„). The District and the owner of the Property entered into that certain Pre -Inclusion and Wastewater Treatment Plant Development Agreement dated December 15, 1999 and recorded with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 587475 (the "PDA") which commits capacity in the District's wastewater treatment plant for the development of the Property. The PDA also sets forth terms and conditions of the Districts provision of wastewater treatment service to the Property. Therefore, the District has the capacity in its wastewater treatment plant and can and will serve the Property with wastewater treatment service, subject to the following conditions: 1. A complete set of sewer construction plans are provided to the District for its review and approval prior to construction of any facilities to be dedicated to the District; 2. The approval by the District of all required Line Extension Agreements or Line Connection Agreements as required by the District's Rules and Regulations and/or the PDA; 3. The Applicant complies with all of the terms and conditions of the PDA and the District's Rules and Regulations; and 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 KARP NEU HANLON, P.C. Page 2 4. Pursuant to the District's Rules and Regulations and the PDA, the Applicant shall reimburse the District for all costs incurred by the District regarding this project, including, but not limited to legal and engineering review. Please let me know if you have any questions. JSN: cc: Denise Diers, SVSD Very truly yours, KARP NEU HANLON, P.C. 6,1 aures S. Neu 1 c oSS F 3799 IRA-MAY 82 • P a 000 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 1 a v (970j 945.5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081 �+�� 550`] 1 September 1, 2010 RECEIVED SEP 03 2010 Mr. David Katz tx 1 1 8 West 6t'' Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 1 RE: Elk Springs, Filing 10 Dear Mr. Kotz: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of Holy Cross ' Energy. Holy Cross Energy has adequate power supply to provide electric power to the development, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system 1 for this project. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERGY 1 1 Bob Saathoff, Engineering Department bsaathoff@holycross.com (970) 947-5401 B5: vw v\Saathoff\Kotx Service Letter 2 A Tux:ltsrnne Energy` Cbupera Livc t 4�a Q, gz4 0,4 #! 11 litl,tlt !I! 1,,}111x1# lily# 1:111 !rt j�iFi;1 t id>;Jl li 1 111; r1111111111111111 ippinmInldm IiIJI ouliIIIIII iiilli ! Will Rif 1'1`rf 1 •1' ; ii},11x1 aril , i• t r•r It ' S' I a 1' !jt 14rr ! II ',! rlrllllllr'Y''#11'11111 p'1r1,i il.lx f 111. 111,1 1 1 C. 1 r i:apla, 1l a r." 1x11# r it ;;, irrrrrr,+: x1,1 rl a,r s11x�a'r IR 11.1 "i Fi t ; t 1 i i• fa: ,x I l i , ,, 1��, llrll xlr i# 1a fl; `i is#xri;l+;! 1;1111.x1 , IRI a��rl�� �# 1r + r rl9 r,a,�;�111! If11R11•, i ','r-li`"I"�'"1'1;111 ti iH i"e I 11 ili'J;llli� . ;ti *{111 ,�fr 11f111jj11 f 11fti11' sIr.a3 11 # "41„HiR1,11p,II'i filibilll1 '; Iiw1 11 Y 1llx� It qx I,#"'Ita1;I' I1 i wlil l 1 lxrrl' !•1.111 a1 i x!11111!'1 a�11:1s 1rr'ii 1i 1111a+,a�1 la•1 , 1, i 1,1 IRIJ lrxlta lr' d{ 11111:trrrrrrli !'firi'1 1st lti��algal .ia� �,II4l4i,1,11I 1 1* °tS 1 +`1 Ia•t }g r 1 t 1 +r 'I +" + 4 0 1 1•' a li 1, 3 li ' l.. rilitll 111'1 i I ! t a1! i 111 i 11 1lilir` #rp1a� 1 =11a i 1 !r#11,11<g r' iillt;l.IJl1Iiliill 1! + r1 �ail1},,1f l 11 '+, � l' �' 11xey[�111:arij1111�'1'1 R"aTMa• 1 ' 1; 1Il 4li.1111.0 llu .Y1i11.i4#1 [ ?11 ,i11k�11 1iJrt'ri r111i1111311xI11ll I;�IiI GR©Ss ssQ� 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • P.O. BOX 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491. FAX (970) 945-4081 October 12, 2010 Mr. David Kotz 118 West 6`n Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Elk Springs, Filing 86 and 9 Dear Mr. Kotz: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of Holy Cross Energy. Holy Cross Energy has existing power facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. These existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide electric power to the development, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system for this project. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERGY Bob Saathoff, Engineering Department bsaathoff@holycross.com (970) 947-S4O1 BS:vw SaatJpfN\Kotz A Touchstone Energy' Cooperative,t! 1 October 12, 2010 Mr. David Katz 118 West 6th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • P.O. BOX 2150 GI FNWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491 FAX (970) 945-4081 RE: Elk Springs, Filing 6 and Filing 9 (Lots 79 & 80) Dear Mr. Kotz: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of Holy Cross Energy. Holy Cross Energy has existing power facilities Located on or near the above mentioned project. These existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide electric power to the development, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system for this project. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERGY Bob Saathoff, Engineering Department bsaathoff@holyCloss.com (970) 947-5401 BS:vw Saathoff\Kotz 2 A Touchstone Energy' Cooperaeive 1wtwnoe 3 S eaC - /�q ,o ]@ U'IJ 1111\ 11 1 ' ¥ \ 5 11 |1 11 11 11 of \ \ ( ELK 7RRwa 2 PRINGS, Cpl_ORAQm HOLY CROSS . •ENERGY COLORADO 34 EAGLE GRAPHICS DEPARTMENT DW NAME CHECKED HY DRAWN BY x x 21; DISE'. [� -J b PC .n to V Source Gas August 30, 2010 From: Carla Westerman SourceGas 0096 County lid. 160 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-928-0407 To: David M Kotz 118 W Sixth Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-1004 RE: Elk Springs Filings 8B, 9, 10 Dear David: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of SourceGas. SourceGas has existing natural gas facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. At this time it appears that these existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide natural gas service to your project, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any upgrading of our facilities necessary to deliver adequate service to and within the development will be undertaken by SourceGas upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please contact us with any questions regarding this project, Sincerely, Carla Westerman Field Coordinator CO 40 t. /..- t,' -x i, i ' • t-,-",ftl'a -04' ‘-, , '.,;, •.si I -'4 \ '7_ \ — )46. ....,,„ ,---- - ! CO co i..0 3 It.* CO (5) 6r('et'''•-•--k-t_L--- L14 \ LO 7t. Source Gas 10-11-10 From: Carla Westerman SourceGas 0096 County Rd. 160 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-928-0407 To: David M. Kotz, P.E. 118W6th Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-945-1004 RE: Filing 6 Neighborhood Commercial Dear David: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of SourceGas. SourceGas has existing natural gas facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. At this time it appears that these existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide natural gas service to your project, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any upgrading of our facilities necessary to deliver adequate service to and within the development will be undertaken by SourceGas upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please contact us with any questions regarding this project. Sincerely, Carla Westerman Field Coordinator 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r i AP 4,213•." • ORIGINAL RI 0) COUPLING • Qwest. Spirit of Service 11/19/2010 Attn: David M. Kotz, P.E. Schmueser, Gordon & Meyer 118 West 6th St, suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601 Re: Elk Springs Filing 6A 8B, 9 & 10 Qwest Communications will provide telephone facilities to Elk Springs Filings 6A, 8B, 9 & 10 as defined by the current PUC Tariffs. Jason Sharpe Senior Field Engineer 970-384-0238 SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION FOR LOS AMIGOS RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO THIS SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION FOR LOS AMIGOS RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO (Supplemental Declaration) is made and declared this day of , 2010, by ELK SPRINGS, LLC a Colorado limited liability company (Declarant). RECITALS A. Declarant is the owner of certain real property situate in Garfield County, Colorado, and more particularly described in the Final Plat for Elk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, ("Final Plat"), filed for public record in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder, Garfield County, Colorado as Reception No. B. Declarant has previously recorded that certain Amended and Restated Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, Garfield County, Colorado (Amended and Restated Declaration) on February 15, 1991 in Book 799, Page 48 of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorders' records as Reception No., 421306. C. Declarant desires to annex all those properties contained within the Final Plat pursuant to this Supplemental Declaration and thereby subject said annexed properties (hereinafter "Additional Properties") to the Amended and Restated Declaration and the additional covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby makes the following declaration of annexation of the Additional Properties and declarations of additional covenants and restrictions applicable thereof: ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY 1.1 The Additional Properties contained within Elk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, as more particularly described on "Exhibit A" attached hereto, are hereby annexed pursuant to Article IV of the Amended and Restated Declaration. 1.2 The Additional Properties are hereby made subject to all provisions set forth in the Amended and Restated Declaration. 1.3 The Additional Properties are hereby made subject to the additional covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth in this Supplemental Declaration. ADDITIONAL COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 2.1 Minimum Size of Dwellings Every residential dwelling unit constructed on a single family lot shall have a minimum foundation footprint of 2,000 square feet, exclusive of garages, porches and patios. 2.2 Irrigation Single family lots shall not irrigate more than 3,000 square feet of land. 2,3 Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. All single family lots in Elk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, are allowed to utilize individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS) after obtaining a site specific percolation test to determine whether a standard septic system is acceptable or an engineered system is appropriate or required. Each ISDS shall be designed to minimize tree removal and changes to the natural contours of the land. 2.4 Central Water System All water rights and water facilities which comprise the domestic water delivery system for EIk Springs Filing 8 Phase 2 are owned by the Elk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc. The Association shall have the power to own, operate, maintain, repair and replace the water delivery system and to levy reasonable charges therefor pursuant to Section 4.8 of the Amended and Restated Declaration, and shall have the further power and authority to levy assessments in connection with the ownership, operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement of the domestic water delivery system in accordance with Article V of the Amended and Restated Declaration. 2.5 Pet Control All pets must be kept under strict owner control at all times. No more that one adult dog and no more than an aggregate of three cats and dogs may be kept on a single family lot. The Board of Elk Springs Homeowner's Association has promulgated rules and regulations regarding pet ownership and control, and may levy pet assessments for violations of said rules and regulations. By way of example, owners may be assessed for pets found roaming free of owner control, or disturbing neighbors or wildlife. Said pet assessments are enforceable as set forth in Article V., Paragraph 5.5 of the Amended and Restated Declaration. Nothing contained herein or in said rules and regulations shall limit the right of the Board to modify said rules and regulations, determine a pet is a nuisance and require it's removal from Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. Properties, nor limit the right of Elk Springs, LLC or any owner of Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. property to enforce their property rights. 2.6 Fire Protection The Additional Properties are forested with mature pinion and juniper trees. In order to reduce the danger to homes from lightning induced crown fires, all Homeowners shall create a defensible space by thinning trees within 30 feet of their homes so that the crowns of trees are at least 10 feet apart. This defensible space shall be increased as the slope of the Lot increases. For example, homes on 10% slopes should have a minimum defensible space of 35 feet uphill and to the sides and 37 feet downhill. Homes on 20% slopes need a minimum defensible space of 40 feet uphill and to the sides and 47 feet downhill. In addition, lower branches of trees within the defensible space should be pruned to eliminate ladder fuels which allow a fire to burn from ground level to lower tree branches. Dead branches, limbs, trees and debris shall be removed from the defensible space area. All dead wood within one hundred feet (100') of structures shall be removed. Roofs shall be constructed of noncombustible materials. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 le family dwelling unit shall be Natural gas fiances in each sing 2.7 Fire laces Woodburning Pp limited to one Colorado Certified woodstove. appliances may be used�th�n freely. s All trash and trash containers �sh or alts l be stored it all 2.8n Animal Proof Trash on the same day it is set out for pick-up, prevent excep nd an enclosed building ors that have been designed of the containers. d o bash shall her animals fromy gaining access to the contents,day bears and WHEREOF, Declarant sets its hand and seal this 1N WlTh1ESS: , 2010. of STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF GAR ELK SPRINGS, LLC A Colorado limited liability company By ) Gary L McElwee, Attorney -In -Fact for Thomas E. Neat } ss FIELD meat was acknowledged before me this for The above and foregoing document Gary L. McElwee as Attorney -In -Fact ,201C],bY day lk Springs, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Df Cr for E. r Thomas E. Neal as Manager Witness my hand and official My commission expires.. My address is; Notary Public i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 EXHIBIT A LA8-PH2.TXT A tract of land situate in Section 36, Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the 6th Principal Meridian and Section 6, Township 7 south, Range 88 west of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the SE corner of said Section 36; Thence, 5 87°20'32" w, 392.66 feet along the south line of said Section 36 to a point on the boundary of Elk Springs Filing 8, Phase 1, County of Garfield, State of Colorado; thence along said boundary the following courses: Thence, 5 87°20'32" w, 373.12 feet to a point; Thence, N 59°02'18" w, 1435.19 feet to a point; Thence, N 79°50'44" w, 460.96 feet to a point; Thence, N 79°50'44" w, 739.04 feet to a point; Thence, N 55°57'31" W, 1333.19 feet to a point; Thence, N 08°00'00" E, 655.52 feet to a point; Thence, N 89°59'23" E, 968.49 feet to a point; Thence, S 72°23'31" E, 462.28 feet to a point; Thence, 5 57°29'41" E, 50.04 feet to a point; Thence, 5 30°20'55" W, 17.34 feet to a point; thence 27.96 feet along the arc of a 254.79 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 6°17'16" and subtending a chord bearing 5 27°12'16" W 27.95 feet; thence 49.82 feet along the arc of a 202.18 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 14°07'03" and subtending a chord bearing 5 17°00'08" w 49.69 feet; thence 39.05 feet along the arc of a 202.18 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 11°04'03" and subtending a chord bearing 5 04°24'35" W 38.99 feet; Thence, 5 01°07'27" E, 22.39 feet to a point; thence 76.77 feet along the arc of a 90.06 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 48°50'31" and subtending a chord bearing s 25°32'42" E 74.47 feet; Thence, 5 49°57'58" E, 96.97 feet to a point; thence 278.68 feet along the arc of a 624.84 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 25°33'15" and subtending a chord bearing 5 62'44'35" E 276.38 feet; Thence, 5 75'31'12" E, 137.85 feet to a point; thence 276.00 feet along the arc of a 3612.81 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 4°22'37" and subtending a chord bearing 5 77°42'31" E 275.93 feet; Thence, 5 79°53'50" E, 648.83 feet to a point; Thence, S 79°20'22" E, 184.61 feet to a point; Thence, 5 75°00'17" E, 222.89 feet to a point; Thence, S 05°53'40" W, 10.57 feet to a point; Thence, S 80"41'15" E, 432.85 feet to a point; Thence, N 27°32'37" E, 218.40 feet to a point; Thence, 5 55°23'14" E, 442.68 feet to a point; Thence, $ 63°03'42" E, 655.17 feet to a paint on the boundary of Elk Springs, Filing 7, County of Garfield, State of Colorado; thence along the boundary of Elk springs, Filing 7 the following courses: Thence, S 64°48'39" E, 309.70 feet to a point; Thence, $ 00°00'00" w, 759.31 feet to a point; Thence, 5 52°17'00" w, 973.14 feet to a point; Thence, N 00°08'04" E, 481.91 feet to a point; to the point of beginning, containing 5,908,933 sq. ft. or 135.65 acres more or less. Page 1 SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION FOR LOS AMIGOS RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO THIS SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION FOR LOS AMIGOS RANCH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO (Supplemental Declaration) is made and declared this day of , 2010, by ELK SPRINGS, LLC a Colorado limited liability company (Declarant). RECITALS A. Declarant is the owner of certain real property situate in Garfield County, Colorado, and more particularly described in the Final Plat for Elk Springs Filing 9, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, ("Final Plat"), filed for public record in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder, Garfield County, Colorado as Reception No. B. Declarant has previously recorded that certain Amended and Restated Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Los Amigos Ranch Planned Unit Development, Garfield County, Colorado (Amended and Restated Declaration) on February 15, 1991 in Book 799, Page 48 of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorders' records as Reception No., 421306. C. Declarant desires to annex all those properties contained within the Final Plat pursuant to this Supplemental Declaration and thereby subject said annexed properties (hereinafter "Additional Properties") to the Amended and Restated Declaration and the additional covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby makes the following declaration of annexation of the Additional Properties and declarations of additional covenants and restrictions applicable thereof: ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY 1.1 The Additional Properties contained within Elk Springs Filing 9, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, as more particularly described on "Exhibit A" attached hereto, are hereby annexed pursuant to Article IV of the Amended and Restated Declaration. 1.2 The Additional Properties are hereby made subject to all provisions set forth in the Amended and Restated Declaration. 1.3 The Additional Properties are hereby made subject to the additional covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth in this Supplemental Declaration. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ADDITIONAL COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 2.1 Minimum Size of Dwellings Every residential dwelling unit constructed on a single family lot shall have a minimum foundation footprint of 2,000 square feet, exclusive of garages, porches and patios. 2.2 Irrigation Single family lots shall not irrigate more than 3,000 square feet of land. 2.3 Central Sewer Systems All single family lots in Elk Springs Filing 9, a Subdivision of Los Amigos Ranch PUD, are within the Spring Valley Sanitation District boundaries and must connect to its central sewage treatment system for sewage treatment services. No individual sewage disposal systems are allowed. 2.4 Central Water System All water rights and water facilities which comprise the domestic water delivery system for Elk Springs Filing 9 are owned by the EIk Springs Homeowners Association, Inc. The Association shall have the power to own, operate, maintain, repair and replace the water delivery system and to levy reasonable charges therefor pursuant to Section 4.8 of the Amended and Restated Declaration, and shall have the further power and authority to levy assessments in connection with the ownership, operation, maintenance, repair, and replacement of the domestic water delivery system in accordance with Article V of the Amended and Restated Declaration, 2.5 Pet Control All pets must be kept under strict owner control at all times. No more that one adult dog and no more than an aggregate of three cats and dogs may be kept on a single family lot. The Board of EIk Springs Homeowner's Association has promulgated rules and regulations regarding pet ownership and control, and may levy pet assessments for violations of said rules and regulations. By way of example, owners may be assessed for pets found roaming free of owner control, or disturbing neighbors or wildlife. Said pet assessments are enforceable as set forth in Article V., Paragraph 5.5 of the Amended and Restated Declaration. Nothing contained herein or in said rules and regulations shall limit the right of the Board to modify said rules and regulations, determine a pet is a nuisance and require it's removal from Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. Properties, nor limit the right of Elk Springs, LLC or any owner of Los Amigos Ranch P.U.D. property to enforce their property rights. 2.6 Fire Protection The Additional Properties are forested with mature pinion and juniper trees. In order to reduce the danger to homes from lightning induced crown fires, all Homeowners shall create a defensible space by thinning trees within 30 feet of their homes so that the crowns of trees are at least 10 feet apart. This defensible space shall be increased as the slope of the Lot increases. For example, homes on 10% slopes should have a minimum defensible space of 35 feet uphill and to the sides and 37 feet downhill. Homes on 20% slopes need a minimum defensible space of 40 feet uphill and to the sides and 47 feet downhill. In addition, lower branches of trees within the defensible space should be pruned to eliminate ladder fuels which allow a fire to burn from ground level to lower tree branches. Dead branches, limbs, trees and debris shall be removed from the defensible space area. All dead wood within one hundred feet (100') of structures shall be removed. Roofs shall be constructed of noncombustible materials. 2.7 Fireplaces Woodburning appliances in each single family dwelling unit shall be limited to one Colorado Certified woodstove. Natural gas appliances may be used freely. 2.8 Animal Proof Trash Containers All trash and trash containers shall be stored within an enclosed building except on the same day it is set out for pick-up, or alternatively, all trash shall be stored in containers that have been designed and constructed to prevent bears and other animals from gaining access to the contents of the containers. IN WITNESS: WHEREOF, Declarant sets its hand and seal this , day of , 2010. STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) ss ELK SPRINGS, LLC A Colorado limited liability company By Thomas E. Neal, Manager By Gary L. McElwee, Attorney -In -Fact The above and foregoing document was acknowledged before me this day of , 2010, by Gary L. McElwee as Attorney -In -Fact for Thomas E. Neal as Manager for Elk Springs, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Witness my hand and official Notary Public My commission expires: My address is: FILING9.TXT EXHIBIT A A tract of land situate in Sections 35 and 36, Township 6 south, Range 89 west, Section 31, Township 6 south, Range 88 west and Section 6, Township 7 South, Range 88 west all of the 6th Principal meridian, Garfield County, Colorado being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the north 1/4 corner of said Section 35; Thence, s 87'34'13" E, 2428.84 feet along, the north line of said section 35 to the northwest corner of said Section 36; Thence, 5 86°11'12" E, 2455.55 feet along the north line of section 36 to the north 1/4 corner of Section 36; Thence, 5 86'05'35" E, 2457.50 feet along the north lien of section 36 to the northeast corner of Section 36; Thence, 5 00°53'05" w, 939.73 feet along the east line of said Section 36 to the west 1/4 corner of said Section 31; Thence, N 89°31'34" E, 537.49 feet along the east -west centerline of said Sectiion 31 to the northwest corner of Elk springs Filing 7, county of Garfield, State of colorado; Thence, s 00'00'00" w, 2418.00 feet along th west line of said Elk Springs Filing 7; Thence, S 07'20'58" E, 324.69 feet along the west line of said Elk Springs Filing 7; thence 75.16 feet along the arc of a 395.00 feet radius non tangent curve to the right, having a central angle of 10'54'09" and subtending a chord bearing 5 79'51'17" w 75.05 feet; Thence, 5 85°18'21" w, 11.09 feet to a point; thence 203.17 feet along the arc of a 319.81 feet radius curve to the right, having a central angle of 36'23'55" and subtending a chord bearing N 76°29'41" W 199.77 feet; Thence, N 58'17'44" W, 94.36 feet to a point; thence 56.95 feet along the arc of a 181.65 feet radius curve to the right, having a central angle of 17'57'49" and subtending a chord bearing N 49°18'49" w 56.72 feet; Thence, N 40'19'55" w, 9.82 feet to a point; Thence, N 35'39'20" E, 395.71 feet to a point; Thence, N 53°42'41" w, 1155.68 feet to a point; Thence, S 62°35'23" w, 256.70 feet to a point; thence 378.89 feet along the arc of a 505.00 feet radius non tangent curve to the left, having a central angle of 42°59'17" and subtending a chord bearing N 54°03'17' w 370.07 feet; Thence, N 75'32'55" w, 59.42 feet to a point; thence 76.84 feet along the arc of a 215.00 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 20°28'34" and subtending a chord bearing N 85'47'12" w 76.43 feet; Thence, N 11°19'05" w, 30.58 feet to a point; thence 31.32 feet along the arc of a 375.00 feet radius curve to the right, having a central angle of 4°47'05" and subtending a chord bearing N 08'55'32" w 31.31 feet; Thence, N 06'32'00" w, 53.28 feet to a point; Thence, N 80'14'45" w, 52.09 feet to a point; Thence, 5 06°32'00" E, 67.89 feet to a point; thence 35.49 feet along the arc of a 425.00 feet radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 4°47'05" and subtending a chord bearing 5 08°55'32" E 35.48 feet; Thence, S 11°19'05" E, 31.79 feet to a point; thence 83.18 feet along the arc of a 215.00 feet radius non tangent curve to the left, having a central angle of 22°09'59" and subtending a chord bearing 5 59°32'00" w 82.66 feet; Thence, 5 48°27'01" W, 209.55 feet to a point; thence 339.06 feet along the arc of a 630.64 feet radius curve to the right, having a central angle of 30°48'17" and subtending a chord bearing 5 63°51'09" w 334.99 feet; Page 1 1 Thence, Thence, Thence, Thence, 35; Thence, Section 35; Thence, N 00°08'00" w, 178.14 feet northeast corner of said Lot 19; Thence, N 88°07'00" W, 187.41 feet west line of said section 35; Thence, N 08°02'48" E, 2619.93 feet to the point of beginn more or less 7 FILING9.TXT S 79°15'18" W, 108.16 feet to a point; N 13°29'44" E, 339.22 feet to a point; S 88°34'01'" w, 835.67 feet to a point; N 86`50'26"' w, 2435.84 feet to the east 1/4 corner of said Section S 89°53'27" w, 2428.94 feet along the east -west centerline of said 35 to a point on the east line of government Lot 19 of said Section along the east line f said Lot 19 to the along the north line of Lot 19 to the along the west line of said Section 35 in 9, wining 21,453,731 sq. ft. or 492.51 acres cont Page 2