HomeMy WebLinkAbout801190.tiff a
r
BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Date December 16, 1980 Case No. SUP # 452:80:42
APPLICATION OF Weld County Municipal Airport
ADDRESS Colorado
Moved by Bob Ehrlich that the following resolution be introduced
for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission:
Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the •
application for site approval of Extension of Runway covering
the following described property in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit:
Pt. Sec. 3, .T5N, R65W
with Development Standards
be recommended (favorably) ( ak /to the Board of County --
Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that this request
is in compliance with the provisions of Section 3 .3.E. (2) of
the Weld County Zoning Resolution.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the attached
Development Standards will minimize impacts on surrounding uses
and the area to the greatest extent possible and provide adequate
protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants
of the area and the County.
These determinations are based, in part, upon a review of the
information submitted by the applicant , other relevant information
regarding the request and responses of the referral entities which
have reviewed the request.
Motion seconded by Don Billings
Vote:
For Passage Chuck Carlson Against Passage
Betty Kountz Jerry Kiefer
Don Billings Wilbur Wafel
Bob Ehrlich Bob Halleran
Fred Otis
The Chairrnan declared the Resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be
forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioners for
further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
19 Carol Ballew , Recording Secretary of the Weld County Planning
Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution is a true
copy of the Resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado,
adopted on December lfi 1 9Rn and-recorded -in Book No. VII of the
proceedings of the said Planning Commission.
•
Dated the 22nd day of December , 1980 .
Secretary
PA IMO
V
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Weld County Municipal Airport
SUP-452 :80:42
Meeting date: December 16, 198Q
Page 2
The Planning Commission's recommendation for approval is conditional
upon the following:
1. The attached Development Standards being recommended and approved
for the Special Use Permit.
2. No building or electrical permits shall be issued on the Special
Use Permit area until the Development Standards for the Special
Use Permit and amendments to the plat have been placed on the
Special Use Permit plat and said plat has been delivered to the
Office of the Department of- Planning Services.
3. The applicant shall comply with Weld County Flood Hazard
Regulations.
l
F
WELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
- SUP-452:80:42
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. The permitted uses on the hereon described parcel shall be limited to a runway
extension and all uses permitted by right in the Agricultural Zone District
of the Weld County Zoning Resolution.
2. The Special Use Permit area shall be maintained in such a manner so as to pre-
vent soil erosion, fugitive dust, and the growth of noxious weeds.
3. All phases of the operation shall comply with all County and State Health
Standards and Regulations pertaining to air quality, water quality, noise
emission, and sanitary disposal -systems. -
4. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed
by the Development Standards stated above and all applicable Weld County Regula-
tions. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Development Standards as
shown or stated above shall require the approval of an amendment to the Special
Use Permit by the Planning Commission and_ the Board of County Commissioners
before such changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be
permitted. Any other changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall
be filed in the office of the Department of Planning Services.
5. The property owner and/or operator of this operation shall be responsible for
complying with all of the above stated Development Standards. Noncompliance
with any of the above stated Development Standards may be reason for revocation
of the Special Use Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
Planning Commission Minutes
December 16, 1980
Page 5
in a storm of greater magnitude.
There were general questions about the construction of the ditch that
would handle the run-off, and about the amount of water that would
come from adjacent property, and the capacity of the holding pond, also
about where water beyond the capacity of the holding pond would go.
Mr. Drew Scheltinga, County Engineer, was asked to state his views . He
stated that the site was extremely flat and that it would be very
difficult to determine exactly where water would run without expensive
aerial photos . He pointed out that the U. S. G. S. maps indicated that
a considerable area would drain into the proposed site in a heavy rain.
He stated that if there were a way to guarantee that no water from
adjacent property would flow to this site, that the proposed retention
pond would probably hold in a "100 year" storm. ' During a "100 year"
storm only 40% of the water falling on adjacent property would get to
the site. A "100 year" storm would produce about 4.2 inches of rain.
He listed sources of reference material . In a "100 year" storm the
run-off from 90 surrounding acres reaching the site would stand about
12 feet deep on the property. In a "500 year" storm the site would
have 4 to 5 feet of water standing on it. There is no economic way
to drain the site in the event of a large storm. There are no prece-
dents for this particular problem.
The Commission pointed out that Miller, an adjacent property owner,
had changed the natural drainage pattern and, therefore , it was up
to him to take care of any water that fell on his property.
Mr. Scheltinga recommended that the Commission look at the site before
making a decision.
Mr. Scheltinga also recommended preliminary paving of the entire project,
rather than a plan to pave in phases .
Ray Moore made comments in favor of the project as proposed.
MOTION: It was moved by Fred Otis and seconded by Don Billings that the case
be continued to the January 6, 1981 , meeting. Motion carried unanimously
with Kiefer, Wafel , Halleran, Otis , Kountz, Billings, Ehrlich and Carlson
voting for and none against.
Tape 41--Side 1 and Tape 41--Side 2
CASE NUMBER: SUP-452:80:42
APPLICANT: Weld County Municipal Airport
SUBJECT: Extension of runway
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt. Sec. 3, T5N, R65W
Planning Commission Minutes
-=- December 16, 1980
-,_:- Page 6
LOCATION: 12 miles east of Greeley on Highway 263
APPEARANCE: Neil Keddington, Airport Manager
Peter Mueller, design engineer from Isbill Associates , Inc.
Mr. Keddington presented a compromise master plan with emphasis on
land acquisition. _
Mr. Tom Honn pointed out that the work currently being done at the
airport is under a different permit.
'Peter Mueller presented further details .
There were general questions regarding the re-routing of Sand Creek
and what property would be affected, and about whether plans called
for Weld County Airport to become a regional airport for Stapleton .
MOTION: Bob Ehrlich moved and Don Billings seconded that the permit be
recommended for approval with reference to Staff recommendations .
Motion carried unanimously with Kiefer, Wafel , Halleran, Otis , Kountz,
Billings , Ehrlich and Carlson voting for and none against.
r - Meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
•
Respectfully y submitted,
J / ( -
Carol Ballew
Secretary
Date : December 16, 1980
CASE NUMBER: SUP-452:80:42
NAME: Weld County Municipal Airport
REQUEST: Extension of Airport Runway
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of Section 3, T5N, R65W
LOCATION: 12 miles east of Greeley on Highway 263
THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS
REQUEST BE approved FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS :
1. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff that this request
is in compliance with the provisions of Section 3.3.E. (2) of the Weld County
Zoning Resolution.
2. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that the attached
Development Standards will minimize impacts on surrounding uses and the area to
the greatest extent possible and provide adequate protection of the health, safety
and welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the County.
These determinations are based, in part, upon a review of the information submitted
by the applicant, other relevant information regarding the request and responses
of the referral entities which have reviewed the request.
The Department of Planning Services staff recommendation for approval is conditional
upon the following:
1. The attached Development Standards being recommended and approved for the Special
Use Permit.
2. No building or electrical permits shall be issued on the Special Use permit area
until the Development Standards for the Special Use Permit and amendments to the
plat have been placed on the Special Use Permit plat and said plat has been
delivered to the Office of the Department of Planning Services.
4. The applicant shall comply with Weld County Flood Hazard Regulations.
WELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
SUP-452:80:42
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1. The permitted uses on the hereon described parcel shall be limited to a runway
extension and all uses permitted by right in the Agricultural Zone District
of the Weld County Zoning Resolution.
2. The Special Use Permit area shall be maintained in such a manner so as to pre-
vent soil erosion, fugitive dust, and the growth of noxious weeds.
3. All phases of the operation shall comply with all County and State Health
Standards and Regulations pertaining to air quality, water quality, noise
emission, and sanitary disposal systems.
4. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed
by the Development Standards stated above and all applicable Weld County Regula-
tions. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Development Standards as
shown or stated above shall require the approval of an amendment to the Special
Use Permit by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners
before such changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be
permitted. Any other changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall
be filed in the office of the Department of Planning Services.
5. The property owner and/or operator of this operation shall be responsible for
complying with all of the above stated Development Standards. Noncompliance
with any of the above stated Development Standards may be reason for revocation
of the Special Use Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMENTS
To date our office has received one letter of objection to this
request from a surrounding property owner. A copy is included in
the attached packet.
The Colorado Geological Survey has not responded to the referral
sent to them.
VT:vt
,"-" ISBILL ASSOCIATES , INC.
�.-a- STAPLETON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT • DENVER, COLORADO 80207 • (303) 388.2414
December 1, 1980 IAI-849A
Mr. William P. Stanton, P.E.
Senior Water Resource Specialist
Colorado Water Conservation Board
Department of Natural Resources
823 State Centennial Building
1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
•
Subject: Weld County Municipal Airport
ADAP Project No. 5-08-0028-03
Runway and Taxiway Extension, Apron Expansion
Sand Creek Flood Hazard
Dear Mr. Stanton:
Further to our meeting today and in reply to your letter dated November
20, 1980, I am forwarding herewith the following:
- 1": 4,000' map showing the catchment area contributing to the
new culvert;
- 21' X 7'5" aluminum plate arch stage - discharge curve;
- 100 year return period storm hydrograph calculations (DRCOG
method);
- 100 year backwater curve calculations (standard step method •
Open Channel Hydraulics, Chow, 1959).
My replies to your numbered comments are as follows:
1. The enclosed 1": 4,000' map shows that the drainage area is 6.5
square miles. Also the Colorado Department of Highways calcu-
1 lated that the area contributing to flow under State Highway
263, just south of the airport, is 7.1 square miles.
2. We agree that 1,400 c.f.s. is a low estimate for the 25 year flood.
However, this was the design discharge used for the bridge on
State Highway 263, and it was decided to use the same discharge
for designing the culvert since the capacity of the culvert will
effect the situation at the highway.
3. Depth-discharge curves have been enclosed.
AIRPORT CONSULTANTS • ENGINEERS
AN EQUAL OPPUI1TUNITY EMPLOYER
77:!,_\_.,..
Mr. Stanton
December 1, 1980
Page Two
5. The enclosed 100 year backwater curve calculations show that
the backwater effect of the culvert will only extend about 1,200
feet upstream and the maximum water suface elevation will be
4,647.8. All flooding will, therefore, be contained on property
already owned by the airport or to be purchased under this project.
You indicated to me that the above replies fully satisfy your comments, but
if you should require any additional information, please do not h:sitate to
give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Isbill Associates, Inc.
cat j- T latx .
Peter J. Muller
PJM/dty
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Tom Honn, Zoning Administrator
Mr. Neil Keddington, Airport Manager _
. 1 h' SIS,
De
it ��.CL.. 80
li
��'18l Ll a15\:4
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
PHONE (303)356-4000 EXT.404
915 10TH STREET
UGREELEY COLORAD 80631
O November 18, 1980
•
COLORADO
Mr. Neil Keddington
Weld County Municipal Airport
P.O. Box 727
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Request for a special use permit for an extension of an airport runway
on a parcel of land described as Pt. Section 3, T 5 N, R 65 W of the
6th p.m. , Weld County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Keddington:
Your application and related materials for the request described above are
complete and in order at the present time. I have scheduled a meeting with
the Weld County Planning Commission for Tuesday, December 16, 1980, at 1:30
p.m. This meeting will take place in the County Commissioners' Hearing Room,
first floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado.
It is recommended that you and/or a representative be in attendance to answer
any questions the Planning Commission might have with respect to your appli-
cation.
It is the policy of Weld County to refer an application of this nature to
any town or municipality lying within three miles of the property in question
or if the property under consideration is located within the comprehensive
planning area of a town or municipality. Therefore, our office has forwarded
a copy of the submitted materials to the Greeley Planning Commission for their
review and comments. According to our records, the Greeley Planning Commission
is scheduled to review and comment on your application on November 25, 1980.
Please contact Ken McWilliams at 353-6123, extension 242 for further details
regarding the exact date, time and place of the Greeley Planning Commission
Meeting. It is recommended that you and/or a representative be in attendance
at the Greeley Planning Commission Meeting to answer any questions the Com-
mission members may have with respect to your application.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me.
Respectfully,
)iC L 0 -1--c-a-4 L
Vickie Traxler -
Assistant Zoning Administrator
cah
cc: Peter Muller Ken McWilliams
Isbill Assoc. , Inc. City of Greeley Planning Department
Stapleton International Airport Civic Center Complex
Denver, CO 80207 Greeley, CO 80631
u(lO�UL� t,o '8" S,..:.-,CR. C•_. plet_,.•trs,1,2 :„.0,13
.� Acl1 Yocs addre_s in we“ILUI URN TO"space en
G cL 16 V L='is Ir >>w u Ulf �L � G racrse.
NO INSURANCE C^ TRACC Ram/I 1. The f3L�C•r.:^1°en: :c i3 :-�c_ied(�:-_k one.)
NOT F011
I�aiFli ATIDNRi f.;AIL
(See Rev.use) ;. Elio,' .J C: QT-`l 3^d _,.J(-
_ 0 F11-:-..7 to v.-'_7.o-1-1,eat.:e.nd Cd_.Cr,cf de?:ver•,,".. —e
ENTNeil Keddington L r:_a:� 'gin �'E `t
Ra-r gii ty Municipal Airpoz sh_.-.,;, ,,:m ::r::'11 et?: .-- --C
0. Box 727 ❑ :nF :: -‘ Et;i.IL:-<-_-_:tY.
T ND ODE S1i:r, to who_.1,c:-' W_1 aL-1.:_T.f c::'.:-:ery.S-- d
d¢6Flg r 80632
POSTAGE $ (CO\SL'rrTrt .::r^"3T:"':F0R1•`-1=.)
CERTIFIED FEE C 2. ARTICLE ACDRE`.." )3C
w SPECIAL DELIVERY C m Mr• Neil Kedddillgton
"
REST rt
c Weld County Municipal Airpo
RESTRICTED DELIVERY 6 c
c=,
z P.O.Box 727, Greeley, CO 80632
tE c661 c.3 DATE DELIVER:D R' 3. C-'.':CLL._.,_ ... .
w ANDADD E:SO DATE '-‘-.3 26 0262895
"- d' DE,A,FR. SS OF 0 .y
o DE_IfP, __
o ea SHoi4 TO I'.n0' AND DATE I' .,G::`_- 1; = 7 Gf :a.9 C c,?^.t)
ly rx DELIVEHEO:.TH RESTRICTED C ' '';•:
n ec DELIVERY - I+•-,, .e .-1 t ')ed al; a.
SHUW TO,, DATE A";0 El":"L", i sCc ;uia a gent
ADDRESS OF DELIVERY aTH C %n "TL' _it �
RESTP CTED DELIVERY 6i S
a �
TOTAL POSTAGE AND FEES S F �
A. ,Dt PR
n. POSTI:7ARK OR DATE k* 9 �
en 11-19-80 ,ter. :ss.lr , ".:-.2 i (.,' CO i.mi C) , i.,d ' G. L:Sit.3LL"iOCEULE:Se...C.,;.::8E: CI Ea
G
-Fl..,_______ /
*GPO.1979-3CC Z"-.3
/ \- ISBILL ASSOCIATES , INC.
, ____ STAPLETON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT c DENVER, COLORADO 80207
(303) 388-2414
November 5, 1980 IAI-849A
Mr. Tom Honn
Weld County Planning Department
County Administration Building
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Subject: Weld County Municipal Airport
ADAP Project No. 5-08-0028-03
Runway and Taxiway Extension, Apron Expansion
Special Use Permit
Dear Mr. Honn:
Enclosed please find a Special Use Permit Application form and 12 prints
of Exhibit "A" dated November, 1980. Exhibit "A" shows the runway exten-
sion, the parcel of land (and its legal description) for which the special use
permit is being requested and the certificate block for the necessary signa-
tures, all in accordance with your requests.
We have also included 20 copies of the Engineers' Report for the above pro-
ject, as agreed to at our meeting on October 30, 1980.
An Environmental Assessment of the proposed airport development was
prepared in May, 1980 and reviewed by the U. S. Department of the Interior
and the Environmental Protection Agency. A copy of the Federal Aviation
Administration's finding of no significant impact is enclosed.
If you have any question or further requirements, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
Isbill Associates, Inc.
C):e T
Peter J. Muller
PJM/dty
Enclosure
cc: Neil Keddington, Airport Manager
AIRPORT CONSULTANTS ENGINEERS
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ISBILL ASSOCIATES , INC.
-,
, STAPLETON IN'ERNATIONAL AIRPORT o DENVER, COLORADO 80207 0 (303) 388-2414
October 25, 1980 IAI-849A
Mr. Tom Hahn
Weld County Planning Department
County Administration Building
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Subject: Weld County Municipal Airport
ADAP Project No. 5-08-0028-03
Runway and Taxiway Extension, Apron Expansion
Land Acquisition and Drainage Control
Dear Mr. Hahn:
Transmitted herewith is the required information for your processing of a
Special Use Permit for the above cited project. The package includes:
1) a complete set of Plans which has a complete graphic display of the pro-
ject; 2) an Engineer's report which has a complete description of the project
including a soils report, drainage design, and general information; 3) an Exhi-
bit "A" which indicates the present airport property and parcels which are
currently under acquisition.
This project conforms with the FAA adopted "Compromise Master Plan" for
Weld County Municipal Airport, approved by the Greeley City Council, the
Weld County Municipal Airport Authority, and the Board of County Com-
missioners of Weld County on February 11, 1980, by signed Memorandum of
Understanding.
Further, an Environmental Assessment of the proposed airport development
was prepared in May, 1980, and reviewed by the U.S. Department of the
Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency. On August 26, 1980, the
FAA approved a finding of no significant impact. The Environmental Assess-
ment showed no significant impacts associated with noise and aircraft over-
flights and that land surrounding the airport could remain in uses which would
be compatible with airport operations.
AIRPORT CONSULTANTS c- ENGINEERS
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
J ,,11
Mr. Hahn
October 25, 1980
Page Two
We trust we have provided sufficient information for processing of this Special
Use Permit; however, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free
to contact this office.
Very truly yours,
Isbill Associates, Inc.
r
R l`
Peter J. Muller
PJM/dsh
Enc.
cc: Neil Keddington
°
WELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL
• AIRPORT
,„„„„ :r
P. O. =OX 727 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
OCTOBER 30, 1980
TO: WELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MR TOM HAHN
CENTENNIAL CENTER
GREELEY, CO 80631
DEAR MR HAHN
ATTACHED ARE TWO PACKAGES OF MATERIAL PERTAINING TO WELD COUNTY
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. PACKAGE ONE CONCERNS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR
RUNWAY EXTENSION, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND LAND ACQUISITION.
PACKAGE TWO CONCERNS A FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT. PLEASE TAKE WHATEVER ACTION YOU MUST ON THESE TWO PACKAGES
AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE.
AS YOU KNOW THE AIRPORT MODERNIZATION EFFORTS HAVE BEEN VERY SENSITIVE
ISSUES DURING THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND THE LONG RANGE PLANNING EFFORTS
HAVE BEEN WORKED AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. I DO NOT
CONTROL THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ALLOW OR SEEK
INPUT FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS. THAT IS AN INTERNAL PROBLEM AT THE
COUNTY LEVEL AND SHOULD BE HANDLED INTERNALLY.
IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO COMPLY WITH ALL LOCAL
REQUIREMENTS REGARDING AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT. ON THE OTHER HAND IT SHOULD
BE POINTED OUT THAT THE AUTHORITY NEEDS THE FULL SUPPORT OF BOTH CITY
AND COUNTY STAFF AGENCIES. THERE IS A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY THAT MANY
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WILL BE FUNDED FOR AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT OVER THE NEXT
FEW YEARS. PLEASE ASSIST ME AND THE AUTHORITY IN ESTABLISHING A PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT OR OTHER VEHICLE TO ENABLE TIMELY DEVELOPMENT OF
FACILITIES AND BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT FEES FOR THE ATTACHED ACTION PACKAGES WILL
BE WAIVED FOR THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY PER A DECISION BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
IN EARLY SUMMER 1980. I AM READY TO PRESENT ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
REQUIRED IN THIS MATTER TO YOU OR THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION.
SINCERELY,
NEIL H. KEDDIN ON AT CH:
AIRPORT MANAGER 1. SPECIAL USE DOCUMENTS
2. FLOOD HAZARD DOCUMENTS
N OTICE
Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the
Weld County Zoning Resolution, a public hearing will be held
in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th
Street, Greeley, Colorado, at the time specified. All persons
in any manner interested in the Special Use Permit are
requested to attend and may be heard.
BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and maps so certified by the
Weld County Planning Commission may be examined in the office
of the Clerk to the Board -of County Commissioners , located in -
the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor ,
Greeley, Colorado.--
- - - ------ ------ - - • - - APPLICANT - -_ . . . .
DOCKET NO. 81-6 Weld County Municipal Airport- - -
P. O. Box 727
:= _ Greeley, Colorado 80632
•
DATE: February 11, 19 81=-- -- - -
TIME: 2: 00 P.M. -
REQUEST: Special Use Permit - Extension of runway
LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of Section 3 , Township 5 North,
Range 65 West of the 6th P.M. , -Weld County, Colorado.
TF7 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
BY: MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
AND CLERK TO THE BOARD
BY: Keitha .White, Deputy
•
`p/ �.
Dated: January 5, 1981
Published: January 8 and 29 , 1981 in the Johnstown Breeze
_ .- _ _ SUP-452:80:42 = = _ _ : - _ �- _ - December 16, 1980
Weld County Municipal Airport Same
c z O_ Parcel : STaff : -r l o Cc,: 1 _ct
72 Acres Vickie Traxler
_- al r scripT on :
Part of Section 3, T5N, R65W
Location :
11/2 miles east of Greeley on Highway 263
Existing Zoning :
Agriculture
Request :
Amend existing Special Use Permit to add extension or runway.
Possible Issues Summarized from Application Materials:
VT:rg
12-8-80
rT.9\ Siff ET
4
APPLICANT: �.)06 � � ' c)lv.'nic` .\ Rkc CASE # SL% P X452 : o `-z.
REQUEST: „Nsit.,n
-- - LEGAL: ? . Se.C-ciar. � , R W
LOCATION: `y-2 ieanA c�� C c-�2, ZvN .` a lo3
DATE I BY
Application Received l \2 - \f--C
Application Fee - Receipt # 1V \.17
Recording Fee C N1
Application Complete \\--Y2.-SC - V"C
P.C. Hearing Date: _coly T \ o l l- )4--S-0 VT
Letter to Applicant Drafted \\- <r)
•
Referrals Listed - \\- IL\-R0 -" V'T- -
Field Check by D.P.S . Staff
File Assembled I l -11.-
Referrals Mailed 'l� -Fs-to Vl
Chaindexed l"\CA go \rr
Notification of Applicant - 1 -51-0 r .
Surrounding Property Owners Researched G'1ck\
Airphoto/Vicinity Map ,Preapred 'JCS J -,kL)" `
Property Owners Notified by: ' Qc..e.m r \\ - -(1) 8� c°
Agendas Mailed by: -O.ero ' p1- q 1\ 3.0 11.- o d �.
Legal Approved by County Attorney $a 'C,c)
Referrals - Complete (1fce-a'b U�
Preliminary D.P.S. Staff Comments ta."-Q-20VT
Staff Conference ,<� 1IAA('
D.P.S. Comments ---_ _ ® " `•
!
P.C. Hearing Action: 7 ` - •� _( �1�� ��
P.C. Resolution (.' / 2 4 - C
Case Sent to Clerk to Board 12 - - ? UTT
C.C. Hearing tijItt Action : qtt
C.C. Resolution Received 10 01It st `
History Card Complete 0.,ALC0
C.C. Resolution Sent to Drafting « B1
Drafted on Mylar 4eJa 17/ 8(
0.40Lpo
Document Sent to Clerk and Recorder 5 xm
P.C. Minutes
IC
:,1 .1:N 11:G TECHNICIAN DUTIES
Map Making Process 3D,
Assessor ' s Office L ")
-Treasurer ' s Office for Detailed Maps )15.
Stewart Title --P,
Clerk & Recorder ' s•for Special Deeds
and Plats
Mailing List - - 1`� ,
Occasional Typing
Plot Plans
Leroying
Soil Research
Map Drafting (location, property owners) `V-)"
Signs - .
Final Inking on Mylars
•
Filing
Return Mail
Other
.
SECRETARIAL DUTIES
Application & Recording Fees S. '
Receipting APP d,r _
•
Assemble File (p U
Xerox Packets for Referral Acencies ( 5
Chaindex 1s
Type Leoal Notice
Type Surrounding Property Owners List
and Envelopes 30
•
Mail Notices r�
Type DPS Recommendation -- 30' ,
Xerox Packets for Planning Commission •
and Board of County Commissioners -).9 .
Attend Nearing - .
Transcribe & Type Minutes
Secord Plat
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Weld County
Department of Planning Services
915 - 10th Street
Greeley , Colorado 80631
PHONE : 356-4000 Ext . 400
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY:
Permit Fee : MA Case Number : S&P
Recording Fee : App. Checked by : \ --r
Receipt No . : N
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROCEDURAL GUIDE REQUIRE-
MENTS : Print or type only , except for necessary signatures .
I , (we ) the undersigned , hereby request a hearing before the Weld County
Planning Commission concerning a proposed Special Use Permit for the
following described unincorporated area of Weld County :
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of contiguous property owned upon which Special Use
Permit is proposed :
Land situated in Section 3, Township 5 north, Range 65 west of the 6th Principal Meridian,
Weld County, Colorado comprising all of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 3 and the major portion of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of the North-
east Quarter of Section 3. All containing 72 acres more or less and described in more detail
on the plan entitled "Exhibit A" dated November, 1980.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT AREA : e� \
o
fVOV
As above. RECEIVED980
V'll� Coun
Fanning C0PDjSSI8
STREET LOCATION : State Highway 263, 2.5 miles Pact of CreelPy ZONE : Agricultural
PROPOSED USE: General Aviation Airport
FEE OWNERS OF AREA PROPOSED FOR SPECIAL USE :
NAME : County of Weld ADDRESS : Colorado TEL :
NAME : City of rrePley ADDRESS : Colorado TEL :NAME : ) ADDRESS : TEL : 356-,114-11
I hereby depose and state under the penalties of perjury that all state-
ments , proposals and/or plans submitted with or contained within this
application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge .
COUNTY OF WELD f' /
,
STATE OF COLORADO )
Signatu e : 0 n or Au rized Agent
Subscribed ans Sworn to before me this )2 day of N8 v . 1910
da,
SEAL Notary Pu • c
My commission expires : a . / I ,/71,3
K
J ,
JDepartment of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
I Finding Of No Significant Impact
Section 16(c)(4) Coordination
II7G Weld County Municipal Airport
Greeley, Colorado .
Approval of Airport Layout Plan
After careful and thorough consideration of the facts contained herein, the
undersigned finds that the proposed federal action is consistent with existing
national environmental policies and objectives as set forth in Section 101(a)
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) , that it will not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise include
and consideration requiring consultation pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of NEPA.
Approved:
V
1 • Disapproved:
1 ‘Lt •
4e,(19-Cecil C. gner
Acting Chief, Planning Woplications Section
Airports Division
Federal Aviation Administration
1 Rocky Mountain Region
l - b—S0 .
Date
•
ENGINEER'S REPORT
WELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
GREELEY, COLORADO
ADAP PROJECT NO. 5-08-0028-03
SCHEDULE I
Grade and Drain Runway and Taxiway Extension
Pave Runway 9/27 Extension (28,400 S.Y.)
Pave Connecting Taxiways "A-2" and "A-6" (7,550 S.Y.)
Install MIRL Lighting System on Runway Extension
Construct Arch Culvert (605 L.F.)
SCHEDULE II
Pave Parallel Taxiway Extension "A" (12,000 S.Y.)
Pave Connecting Taxiway "A-1" (1,690 S.Y.)
Schedule III
Grade, Drain, and Pave Aircraft
Parking Apron (4,875 S.Y.)
SCHEDULE IV
Extend Arch Culvert (1,010 L.F.)
Prepared for:
Weld County Municipal
Airport Authority
FOREWORD
This Engineer's Report has been prepared in conjunction with the Plans, Speci-
fications and Contract Documents for the improvements to the Weld County
Municipal Airport owned by the City of Greeley and Weld County and operated
under the direction of the Weld County Municipal Airport Authority.
Prepared By:
Isbill Associates, Inc.
Airport Consultants • Engineers
Stapleton International Airport
Denver, Colorado 80207
i
INDEX
Part Title Page
FORWARD i
INDEX ii
I. LOCATION AND GENERAL INFORMATION I-1
II. PROJECT SCHEDULE II-1
III. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS III-1
IV. PAVEMENT DESIGN IV-1
V. DRAINAGE DESIGN V-1
VI. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE VI-1
VII. APPENDIX VII-1
Soils Report
ii
I. LOCATION AND GENERAL INFORMATION
The Weld County Municipal Airport is located three miles east of the City of
Greeley on State Highway 263. The airport is in Sections 2 and 3 of Township
5 North, Range 65 West, of the 6th Principal Meridian, and has an elevation of
4,647 feet above mean sea level. The airport reference point lies at latitude
40025'35.1" North, longitude 104°37'49.4" West. Currently comprised of
approximately 380 acres of land in the center of agricultural and commercial
activities, the owners have continually expanded and improved the facilities to
meet the demands of the area.
The airport was established in 1943 and consisted of constructing three gravel
runways; 15/33, 1,400 ft. by 75 ft.; 9/27, 3,000 ft. by 75 ft.; and 3/21, 2,750 ft.
by 80 ft. Navigational aids installed at this time included a wind cone, a rotat-
ing beacon and low intensity lighting for Runway 9/27.
During the 1950's, Runway 9/27 was extended to its present length (5,000 ft. by
75 ft.) and paved. This runway is the primary runway and is situated in an
east/west direction. The other runways are still gravel/turf strips used prin-
cipally by light single engine aircraft under crosswind conditions.
During the latter part of the 1960's, a taxiway parallel to Runway 9/27 was
constructed. The lighting system was upgraded to medium intensity lights, a
terminal building constructed and fuel storage provided.
The buildings located on the airport are an aggregate of public and private
hangars and maintenance facilities. Although all of the buildings are located
on the south side of Runway 9/27, they are separated into three distinct areas.
The most recently completed project was ADAP Project No. 5-08-0028-02,
expanding the eastern aircraft parking apron to accommodate general aviation
aircraft weight up to 12,500 pounds (single wheel gear) and providing 18
additional tiedown positions for the increasing number of aircraft based at the
airport. This project was completed in May of 1979.
I-1 .
The present project will consist of grading, draining, and paving runway and
parallel taxiway extensions to Runway 9/27 along with construction of a new
high speed taxiway. The existing MIRL lighting system will also be extended
to accommodate the runway extension for night operations. Grading, draining,
and paving of additional general aviation parking apron will also be accom-
plished. The runway and taxiway extensions will be constructed on an 18,000
pound (S.W.G.) design, the general aviation parking apron will be constructed
on a 12,500 pound (S.W.G.) design. An arch culvert will also be constructed to
accommodate Sand Creek under the runway extension. Sufficient land will be
purchased under this project to accommodate the runway extension and the
necessary re-routing of Sand Creek. Additional land will be purchased, or
easements obtained in order to permit control of the clear zones and to allow
for future expansion, as funds permit.
I-2
II. PROJECT SCHEDULE
Item Estimated Date
- Advertise for Bids August 28, September 4 and
11, 1980.
Open Bids September 17, 1980
FAA Approval and Grant Offer September, 1980
Begin Construction Fall, 1980
End Construction Summer, 1981
II-1
III. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A concerted effort is being made to improve the facilities at the airport in a
timely and economic manner, based on the requirements of the airport users.
The immediate needs, as shown by the number and type of based aircraft, are
the extension of the runway and the expansion of the aircraft parking apron.
SCHEDULE I
Grade and Drain Runway and Taxiway Extension
Pave Runway 9/27 Extension (28,400 S.Y.)
Pave Connecting Taxiways "A-2" and "A-6" (7,550 S.Y.)
Install MIRL Lighting System on Runway Extension
Construct Arch Culvert (605 L.F.)
This portion of the project will consist of grading and installing necessary
drainage for a 2,202 foot runway extension, a 2,536 foot parallel taxiway
extension, one new high speed connecting taxiway and the new perpendicular
connecting taxiway and holding apron.
The entire area that requires grading will first be stripped of topsoil and the
topsoil will be stockpiled for later use on the project. Grading and compaction
will be done in accordance with the P-152 specification for all of the above
mentioned areas. A portion of the west end of the runway extension (size
undetermined) indicates the existence of moderately expansive clays. These
materials have a low bearing capacity and will be subexcavated to a depth of
24 inches and replaced with a select fill to provide a uniform and stable
subgrade throughout the extension.
During the grading operation, all drainage structures, electrical duct, and the
arch culvert will be constructed in accordance with the job specifications.
The existing runway profile has a noticeable dip at its western end. However,
the general terrain to the west is higher than the runway and, in order to
III-1
minimize earthwork quantities, the new extension should quickly climb to a
level compatible with the surrounding terrain. This type of vertical alignment,
while complying with minimum FAA standards, would look unsightly and could
pose line of sight problems should it ever be required to expand the runway
further west. In order to avoid these problems, a vertical alignment which
requires reconstruction of some 1,300 feet of the existing runway was chosen.
The extra cost of the runway reconstruction will largely be offset by the
savings in earthwork permitted by this higher alignment.
Existing asphalt in the reconstruction area within two feet of the final runway
surface will be removed and broken up, then used on the airport property as rip
rap for erosion control. The remaining asphalt will be scarified and left in
place. A select fill material will then be brought in and watered, compacted,
and graded to specifications.
The threshold of Runway 27 will be relocated 802 feet west of where it pres-
ently exists. It is at this location that the new perpendicular connecting
taxiway and holding apron will be constructed. The existing runway threshold
lights will be replaced with new L-861 fixtures, located as outboard threshold
lights for the new runway end, thus permitting the remainder of the runway to
be used as a paved overrun. The relocation of this threshold will make it
possible to install a new ILS system at sometime in the future.
The new runway extension, reconstructed portion, connecting taxiways, and
holding apron will be paved with five inches of full depth bituminous base
course to match the strength of the existing runway. They will be paved using
asphaltic paving machines with compaction being accomplished by the use of
conventional rubber tired and steel wheel rollers.
After completion of paving shoulder grading, topsoiling, and seeding will be
accomplished. Rock rip rap will be placed at the outlets of newly built
drainage pipes where necessary for erosion control. The runway and subject
taxiways will be painted and striped in accordance with AC 150/5340-10 after
the newly laid asphalt has cured for a minimum of two weeks.
III-2
The runway extension and reconstruction area will receive new L-861 stake
mounted runway lights (medium intensity). However, there will be approxi-
mately eight base mounted lights installed for maintenance purposes. Taxiway
guidance signs will be installed at the runway intersection of the new taxiways.
The runway and taxiway extensions will cover the existing Sand Creek. The
creek will be re-routed and a metal arch culvert will be constructed for it to
pass under the runway and taxiway. This is discussed in detail in Section V.
SCHEDULE II
Pave Parallel Taxiway Extension "A" (12,000 S.Y.)
Pave Connecting Taxiway "A-1" (1,690 S.Y.)
This portion of the project will consist of paving the parallel taxiway exten-
sion, one end connecting taxiway and holding apron. These items will be paved
with five inches of full depth bituminous asphalt. Asphalt for these taxiways
and holding apron will be laid using asphaltic paving machines and compacted
using conventional rubber tired and steel wheeled rollers.
After completion of the paving, shoulder grading will be accomplished in
accordance with the plans. Taxiway guidance signs will be installed at the
runway and connecting taxiway intersection and painting and striping will be
accomplished in accordance with A/C 150/5340-1D.
SCHEDULE III
Grade, Drain, and Pave Aircraft
Parking Apron (4,875 S.Y.)
This portion of the project consists of expanding the aircraft parking apron
approximately 4,875 S.Y. in an area west of the airport terminal building.
The entire area will be stripped of topsoil and subexcavated a depth of 24
inches. The material removed will be replaced with select granular fill and
then watered and compacted to assure a stable subgrade.
III-3
. The edges of existing aprons will be saw cut to provide an even neat line for
joining with the new pavement.
The apron will be paved with four inches of bituminous base course and will be
constructed using asphaltic paving machines. Compaction will be done with
the use of rubber tired and steel wheel rollers.
After paving is completed, the north edge will be graded, topsoiled, and seeded
to provide drainage away from the apron.
SCHEDULE IV
Extend Arch Culvert (1,010) L.F.)
After passing around the existing western end of runway 9/27, Sand Creek
flows southwards through the building area on its way to the Cache LaPoudre
River. It thus effectively divides the building area in two and occupies valu-
able building space. The arch culvert constructed under Schedule I to carry
Sand Creek under the runway and taxiway will be extended through the
building area under this schedule.
While this portion of the project is considered very desirable, it is not vital to
the success of the project as a whole and will only be constructed if funds are
available. The culvert is discussed in detail under Section V.
111-4
IV. PAVEMENT DESIGN
A. Runways and Taxiways
The pavement thickness design is based on general aviation aircraft weighing
18,000 pounds (Single Wheel Gear) or less in order to match the strength of the
existing runway.
The soils are characterized by layers of sandy to very sandy clay or gravelly
sand. Based on sieve analysis and Atterberg limit tests, the subsoils are of low
to medium plasticity and have FAA soils classification ranging from E-1
to E-7. The results of the swell-consolidation tests indicate that the subgrade
soils do not possess swell potential, but will compress slightly to moderately
upon loading and wetting.
The soils are generally excellent for runway construction with CBR's as high as
75. However, there is one area where poor soils with a CBR of 2.5 were
encountered. Since this area is limited, it has been decided to subexcavate
that material 24 inches below subgrade and import material with a CBR of 75.
Using this criteria a CBR of 20 has been assigned the subgrade. Based on this
data, the required pavement thickness for the design loading consists of five
inches of full depth bituminous base course (P-401) placed over 24 inches of
select compacted subgrade (P-152).
B. Aircraft Parking Apron
The pavement thickness design is based on general aviation aircraft weighing
12,500 pounds (Single Wheel Gear) or less.
Based on the same criteria used for the runway and taxiway design loads, a
pavement thickness of four inches of full depth bituminous base course (P-401)
placed over 24 inches of selected compacted subgrade (P-152), has been
assigned the general aviation parking apron.
The pavement design forms for both the Runway and Taxiways and the Air-
craft parking Apron are included.
IV-1
AIRPORT PAVEMENT DESIGN
STATE Colorado CITY AIRPORT
Greeley Weld County Municipal
PROJECT NUMBER SPONSOR DESIGN ENGINEER
5-08-0028-03 Weld County Municipal Airport Auth Isbill Associates, Inc.
P IECT DESCRIPTION
Grade, Drain, and Pave Runway and Parallel Taxiway Extension.
Pave Connecting Taxiways
GROSS ALLOW ear U aircraft
ABLE AIRCRAFT WEIGHT (KIPS)
type)
SINGLE WHEEL DUAL WHEEL DUAL TANDEM 6-747 L loll DC-IO-
18,000
DESIGN CRITERIA .
DESIGN A/C EQUIV. DEPARTURES CBR K GROSS A/C WT USG FLEX. STRENGTH Cb F
G.A. 20 ' (Kips)I
0 TYPICAL SECTIONS •
(Show and number eoch course)
NONCRITICAL AREAS CRITICAL AREAS
•
I. O
�T/r- 1/12
����1 -112 7\�� 7/( (7 jYj'ParM'r,� c
p_potL-044-tr,.(fa,Thr
2. / )‘, 2 la\ ° •
--#4161 %AtWiriA/ "'-cA4'
•
•
•
•
•
DESIGN DETAILS
THICKNESS OF PAVEMENT .
NO: COURSE N0NCRITICAL NONCRITICaI_ - SPECIFICATION
RUNWAY RUNWAYTAXIWAY TAXIWAY APRON
1. _Base 5" - 5?? P-401
2. Subgrade 9" 9" P-152
GC fOFtM 5I00.2I (12-79) IV-2
---I..
0
(n w 61 w t
W �( ( .( 1
0 N I
• z: C cc i
ti IU l l i)
�' 0
j hi
0 .
e. l c)
al w -- t j h III. ( > cn U
o C - Q 1--
0"� (n U Q Cf I in c1-
�, w ()
Cr: I ar ....
.112.-:
i �I Cl
W N f— 1-
t,_ n. a <(
Z Q W a a - — --
U.. Z Z
i
u
° C7 a rn
U1 N c S
a, o
OI— T u co - QrJ
2 6 - !
r/n� O o cs o C-
O V! :. w o v, F W LIA
a)
0 U U' ' cn— u -- O O
a. w 7 a ' in
x
Q 0_ In Q v
Q O rn 0 cl) 0J
c N e a o 3 co,.,
ea
N ui
CC U .�
M M (� E u
D D ca
. U7 - - o O
_`-° 3
(f) ,U
,
N
Z
CO CC
pq ay
U U a
Z a1 c)
a a03 1-'►L - Li b ai
w��C v~) M °,-' o
O N 0 3 a E
w ,. (x 2 l' o
w N a) 59
o w zJrn
z o K.t hi S ,
�� IV-3 u 1
1-- Q 0
AIRPORT PAVEMENT DESIGN
STATE TCITY AIRPORT
Colorado Greeley Weld County Municipal
PROJECT NUMBER SPONSOR DESIGN ENGINEER
"8-0028-03 Weld County Municipal Airport Auth. Isbill Associates, Inc.
.
. ...,JECT DESCRIPTION
•
• Grade, Drain, and Pave Aircraft Parking Apron
GROSS ALLOWABLE AIRCRAFT WEIGHT (KIPS) i
(Gear confiqurotion or aircraft type)
SINGLE WHEEL DUAL WHEEL DUAL TANDEM B-747 L lOll p IC IC O-- E
12,500 --- --- --- ---
DESIGN CRITERIA
DESIGN A/C EQUIV. DEPARTURES CBR K GROSS A/C WT USC FLEX. STRENGTFi Cb F
G.A. " --- 20 , • (Kips) �(
7
TYPICAL SECTIONS
i
(Show and number eoch course) i
a
NONCRITICAL AREAS
- CRITICAL AREAS i
a
•
•
. O ,,, _ O
,..,...1,,,„,e,._=,,,,,,,,,„
wiTkiiveu‹1,3=1,- 0 I- fia palY�� o1r� ..i
fliii<*Ag 2.
DESIGN DETAILS
THICKNESS OF PAVEMENT
N0: COURSE NONCRITICAL Noi _ilieA SPECIFICATION
RUNWAY RUNWAY TAXIWAY TAXIWAY APRON
P 1. Base 4" P-401
_..2._.__ Subgrade _ 24" P-152 71:—s - --- IV-4 --- -- ._.
CE rO1nM 5100.21 (12-79) ' '
1 _
U
(f) Id IdW
►-. ll i 4 .( .t z L'— `'---- "--
Z c 0C
w lti
a: t.
on
�j I
..... t'. CD
0 ) CI '`-
j N N
I t'-'> o+ V 41 f'
111 C7 1 t__
7
�n (n " ° int1
0 CO 1O A
T VI o ►I- ..t .t ..t it
111 N . 1— n t._ IL 4 u_ .iZ
Z 0 111 0 o — — —
U. Z .z o Z
U
O LT .2, O
` - — c
w c
O co J..... u, >-
�N I— ›, u m >- al
N
7 c °"
/� O o cY W O C]
V/ Ci n ° in1- W tij
0 N �c F-• > >
v vJ u v O O
4 a.1- u 2 cc 4 cc
0 E--• o Q `n
V) V U) ti_ of NI D a
W
Q in x
Q vr (2 cr • eL
U - p
v ,
J ........ .,,
2 Q La" s
O 0 •
re) \J Z
In - --- ctea
n > 3
3 co
Q
cc - (C U t' a! x
C9 o a) sue. L
r< CU � aocs s
as
N 04.; y
N rn O
z - ° I
p aJ A
-
1'
-J Q..
ll1 .[ 'v
I--�n- • O1- _ }'
cu
wO !-- C) N ID 0 C.
Q cn p 3 cd E
L.1
IL N co V O
J
O W " � � "
a w s w
IV-5 CY_ ..
U1 UJ
F - L U
V. DRAINAGE DESIGN
Sand Creek is located just west of the existing runway 9/27 and any extension
of this runway and its parallel taxiway will require a drainage structure to
accommodate it. Sand Creek traverses the airport property in a general south
east direction starting near the north western corner. After it has passed the
end of the runway is passes under a connecting taxiway (in two 36 inch
diameter pipes which regularly overflow), it then turns easterly and parallels
the runway for a short distance before turning southwards and passing through
the building area. In the building area, it is bridged by a road which links the
two sides of the building area together. This bridge is approximately 25 feet
wide by 10 feet high. The creek then leaves the airport property and passes
under State Highway 263 to join in the Cache LaPoudre River.
Sand Creek drains an area of approximately 6.5 square miles and the potential
for flood runoff is fairly considerable. In order to ascertain the size of flood
which should be designed for in bridging the creek, the consequences of flood
damage were assessed. Runway 9/27 has a general slope to the east and any
excess runoff which could not pass through the structure under the runway
would flow eastwards alongside the runway. This water would eventually be
dammed up by State Highway 263 which only has relatively small diameter
pipe culverts in this area. It is thus apparent that the highway would suffer
flood damage before the airport would. The existing Sand Creek bridge on
State Highway 263 was designed for a 25 year return period flood with a design
discharge of 1400 c.f.s. It was therefore decided to design the structure under
Sand Creek for a.discharge of 1400 c.f.s., thus protecting the highway from a
storm of the same intensity as it is presently designed to withstand.
The location of the drainage structure under the runway and parallel taxiway
(shown on Figure 1) was chosen after considering the following factors:
- The structure should be as short as possible to minimize costs.
V-1
- Sand Creek divides the existing building area in two. The structure
should be capable of being extended through the building area, thus
opening up additional building area and providing one contiguous
building area.
- It is likely that, in the future, the apron will be extended to the
parallel taxiway. The creek will therefore need to be in a structure
from the northern edge of the runway safety area, under the
runway, under the taxiway and under the building area at least as
far as the existing bridge (the area between this bridge and the
highway bridge is being developed as a park).
The alignment chosen for the structure will require that Sand Creek be re-
routed along the northern edge of the future 500 foot runway safety area for a
distance of 1,500 feet. This will require that the airport purchase additional
land, but it is intended that this land be acquired for a future parallel runway
in any event.
The new drainage structure will pass under the existing runway and taxiway.
However, as discussed before, it is intended to reconstruct this portion of the
runway in order to improve the vertical alignment. The taxiway will be
reinstated after construction of the culvert.
In order to ensure that the culvert can be extended through the building area in
the future, it was designed in its ultimate configuration, i.e., extending from
the northern edge of the future 500 foot runway safety area all the way
through to a point just south of the existing bridge (which will be replaced by
the culvert). Since it is considered unlikely that sufficient funds will be
available to construct the entire length of the culvert, the portion south of the
existing parallel taxiway has been placed in a seperate schedule so that it can
be omitted from the project, if necessary.
V-2
Five different types of drainage structures were considered: concrete pipe,
concrete box culvert, metal pipe, metal arch pipe, metal arch with concrete
invert. The metal arch with a concrete invert has the advantage that the
smooth concrete invert improves the hydraulic characteristics. It is expected
that this structure will prove cheaper than any of the others considered as the
concrete footings and invert can be slip-formed and the metal structure will be
readily available from a number of suppliers. The site conditions require a low
structure and a metal arch 21 feet wide and 7 feet 5 inches high with concrete
footings and invert was chosen. Tests performed on the soils and the water of
Sand Creek indicate that corrosion problems will not be experienced with
either aluminium or galvanized steel, and bidders have been given the option of
choosing either metal.
The total length of the structure will be 1615 feet with 605 feet in Schedule I
and the remainder in Schedule IV. Even if only the portion in Schedule I is
constructed, the hydraulic characteristics are such that flow through the
culvert will be outlet controlled. The head required to produce the design flow
is such that little or no overflow will occur along the runway to the east.
Concrete inlet and outlet structures will be provided in addition to rock rip
rap. The apron of the outlet structure will be provided with energy dissipater
blocks as the flow velocity at this point could be as high as 20 f.p.s. In
addition the first nine feet of rip rap beyond the apron will be placed in
gabions three feet deep. Another 41 feet of rip rap will be provided to reduce
the velocity and spread the flow.
The structural design of the culvert was based on a maximum aircraft weight
of 60,000 pounds with a factor of safety of two. Soils investigations revealed
that the allowable bearing pressure is 5000 pounds per square foot with the
exception of a small portion at the southern end of the culvert where the
allowable bearing pressure is 4000 pounds per square foot. In this area, the
footing size has been increased accordingly.
V-3 '
The smaller drainage structures were designed utilizing the methods of compu-
tation for determining storm runoff, drainage pipe capacities, and rip-rap
dimensions in the Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration Advisory Circular 150/5320-5B "Airport Drainage". Rainfall data for
the five year frequency storm was obtained from the N.O.A.A. Atlas 2, Volume
III for Colorado.
Runoff discharge rates were determined using the Rational Method equation
Q=CIA, in which:
Q = The runoff in cubic feet per second;
C = The runoff coefficient determined by the character of the drainage
area. For this airport, a "C" factor of 0.3 was used.
I = The intensity of rain fall in inches per hour, from the rainfall
intensity-duration-frequency chart (Figure 2);
A =Area of the drainage basin in acres.
Pipe sizes were then determined by using the nomograph for computing the
required size of circular drains with inlet control in the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration's "Hydraulic Charts for
Selection of Culverts".
The inlets and pipe locations are shown on Figure 1, the drainage computations
are shown on Table 1.
V-4 .
H I 1 i
W
-J
Cl) 5, ANN i w
SC
�� U\-E 3; a
W fW
- n I
n.
� N
2
Oa
N uaQ
Q
Q N cc 3 H m o ya
I- W F- Q Q Q
z Za
z
o:
O
W Jz
J
z QO
z F- o W 0 .
ti 4CM _ Q W Q� z 10
, 0 O Z 20 3
z
Q W W W W W 0
z
D W o o oa 0
cc
J o= crmJ _
a a au_ 0
I i
Hi
DRAINAGE LAYOUT
FIGURE I
•
- `
!(
a a a
2a a a
' 2
CC Y z z z
W
W
a >
a W a a
z a: J J -J
W O_ 0 U_
J J J
W w W
2 S 2 �y
0
a
N
T NOIIVA313
CO 1t:I3ANI
W
3dId JO 0
Cr A1I3VdV3 o — — co
3dId L to in an
JO 3d01S I- 0 0 0
3dld z a 'v co
JO 3ZIS N N I
U
II-- NIV IO d0 (f)
A110013A H
0 d1ONna N
ili 031111 W I
W -n mow
o .
W d.ONna U -:
- `r
col-
co „V„V38V Cr, o 0 0
W A8Vlnelal U N N ►�
a
Cr
Z to in CC
Q A11SN31NI Cr). °l 10
0 11VJNIVN z - i+i
.3i 1JO3 o 0 0
ddONna
N011V81 z ,� o
-N33NO3 N M o
AO 3W11
} 3W11 MO1d i
2
D
8 3WI1 131NI z
9
W 1N3W93S F
d0 H19N31 u-
,
Z 1N3W93S
0
3N I1 U ir W
ce�... =Q o
9
131NI a m ₹ 2 �
RAINFALL - TIME - INTENSITY-FREQUENY CURVE
5.0
4.0
2
3.0
co
w
F-
z
2.0
5 YEAR
I.0
0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
TIME—(MINUTES)
i.
FIGURE 2
VI. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
The following cost estimate was made at the completion of the plans and speci-
fications. Total estimated construction cost for Schedules I, II, III and IV is
$1,972,125.75. A summary of the estimated construction costs are as follows:
Item Estimated Unit Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Cost
SCHEDULE I
P-152 Asphalt and Concrete
Removal 15,000 S.Y. $ 1.50 $ 22,500.00
P-140b Asphalt Scarification 5,000 S.Y. 1.50 7,500.00
P-140c Remove Existing Con-
crete Silage Pit L.S. 2,000.00
P-151 Clearing and Grubbing L.S. 15,000.00
P-152 Unclassified Excavation 175,000 C.Y. 2.10 367,500.00
P-217 Soil Sterilization 36,000 S.Y. 0.25 9,000.00
P-401a Bituminous Paving
Course Mix 10,000 Ton 25.00 250,000.00
• P-401b Bituminous Material 650 ton 200.00 130,000.00
P-603 Bituminous Tack Coat 3,600 Gal. 1.00 3,600.00
P-610a Portland Cement Concrete 610 C.Y. 280.00 170,800.00
P-610b Reinforcing Steel 42,000 Lb. 0.65 27,300.00
P-610c 6" x 6" - 6 x 6 Gauge
Welded Wire Fabric 1,350 S.Y. 35.00 47,250.00
P-620 Runway, Taxiway and
Apron Painting 15,000 S.F. 0.45 6,750.00
D-701b Install 18" Pipe 207 L.F. 30.00 6,210.00
D-701c Install 24" Pipe 240 L.F. 32.00 7,680.00
D-701d Install Structural Plate
Aluminum Arch 21' x 7'
- 5", 0.175 Inch Thick 605 L.F. 140.00 84,700.00
D-701e Install 18" Flared
End Section 3 Ea. 350.00 1,050.00
•
VI-1 •
Item Estimated Unit Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Cost
1 -701f Install 24" Flared
End Section 1 Ea. $ 350.00 $ 350.00
D-710a Rock Rip-Rap 500 C.Y. 30.00 15,000.00
D-710b Rock Rip-Rap in Gabions 51 C.Y. 50.00 2,550.00
D-751a Install Inlet Type A 2 Ea. 3000.00 6,000.00
T-901 Seeding 50 Ac. 250.00 12,500.00
L-108a Cable Trench 7,450 L.F. 1.50 11,175.00
L-108b Install Cable, 1/C
#8-5000V, L-824
Type C 8,200 L.F. 1.00 8,200.00
L-109 Install L-854 Radio
Control Equipment 1 Ea. 2500.00 2,500.00
L-110a Install 2-way 3" PVC
Duct (CE) 323 L.F. 15.00 4,845.00
L-110b Install 4-way 3" PVC
Duct (CE) 290 L.F. 25.00 7,250.00
L-125a Remove Existing Runway
Light 36 Ea. 50.00 1,800.00
L-125b Remove Existing Taxi-
way Sign 4 Ea. 150.00 600.00
L-125c Install L-861 Runway
Light, Stake Mount 25 Ea. 275.00 6,875.00
L-125d Install L-861 Runway
Light, Base Mount 6 Ea. 375.00 2,250.00
L-125e Install L-861E Runway
Light, Stake Mount 8 Ea. 300.00 2,400.00
L-125f Install L-861E Runway
Light, Base Mount 4 Ea. 400.00 1,600.00
L-125g Install L-858 Taxiway Sign
One Panel, Two Face 4 Ea. 500.00 2,000.00
L-125h Install L-858 Taxiway Sign
One Panel, Two Face 2 Ea. 600.00 1,200.00
L-125i Install L-858 Taxiway Sign
Two Panel, One Face 1 Ea. 950.00 950.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - SCHEDULE I $1,248,885.00
VI-2
Item Estimated Unit Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Cost
SCHEDULE II
P-401a Bituminous Paving
Course Mix 3,800 Ton $ 25.00 $ 95,000.00
P-401b Bituminous Material 247 Ton 200.00 49,400.00
P-603 Bituminous Tack Coat 1,370 Gal. 1.00 1,370.00
P-620 Runway, Taxiway and
Apron Painting 2,300 S.F. 0.45 $ 1,035.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - SCHEDULE II $ 146,805.00
SCHEDULE III
P-140a Asphalt and Con-
crete Removal 110 S.Y. $ 1.50 $ 165.00
P-152 Unclassified Excavation 3,250 C.Y. 2.10 6,825.00
P-217 Soil Sterilization 4,875 S.Y. 0.25 1,218.75
P-401a Bituminous Paving
Course Mix 1,085 Ton 25.00 27,125.00
P-401b Bituminous Material 71 Ton 200.00 14,200.00
P-603 Bituminous Tack Coat 487 Gal. 1.00 487.00
D-701a Install 15" Pipe 238 L.F. 25.00 5,950.00
D-751a Install Inlet Type A 1 Ea. 3000.00 3,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - SCHEDULE III $ 58,970.75
SCHEDULE IV
P-151 Clearing and Grubbing L.S. $ 10,000.00
P-401a Bituminous Paving
Course Mix 60 Ton $ 25.00 1,500.00
P-401b Bituminous Material 4 ton 200.00 $ 800.00
P-610a Portland Cement Concrete 900 C.Y. 280.00 252,000.00
P-610b Reinforcing Steel 64,500 Lb. 0.65 41,925.00
P-610c 6" x 6" - 6 x 6 Gauge
Welded Fabric 1,800 S.Y. 35.00 63,000.00
VI-3 •
Item Estimated Unit Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Cost
D-701b Install 18" Pipe 20 L.F. $ 30.00 $ 600.00
D-701c Install 24" Pipe 20 L.F. 32.00 640.00
D-701d Install Structural Plate
Arch 21' x 7' - 5",
0.175 Inch Thick 1,010 L.F. 140.00 141,400.00
D-701f Install 24" Flared
End Section 1 Ea. 350.00 350.00
D-751a Install Inlet Type A 1 Ea. 3000.00 3,000.00
T-901 Seeding 9 Ac. 250.00 2,250.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - SCHEDULE IV $ 517,465.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
SCHEDULES I, II, III AND IV $1,972,125.75
IV-4
VII. APPENDIX
Exploratory drilling and testing was conducted at the Weld County Municipal
Airport to determine the subgrade soil conditions within the proposed runway,
taxiway and apron expansion area in May, 1980. Previous subsoil investigations
were conducted in August, 1978 for an apron expansion.
The proposed development area is generally located within fallow agricultural
field adjacent to the existing airport facilities, as shown on Figure 3. Sand
Creek runs diagonally flat; however, there is an elevation difference of ap-
proximately 10 feet between the east and west sides of Sand Creek. Irrigation
ditches are located throughout the development area south of Sand Creek.
Vegetation consisted of corn stocks and grasses.
The subsoil conditions were investigated by drilling thirteen exploratory holes
at the approximate locations shown on Figure 3. Sampling of the soils
consisted of disturbed bulk samples and undisturbed samples for determination
of their engineering properties and soil classification.
The samples obtained during the field investigation were subjected to the fol-
lowing laboratory analyses:
Test Type of Sample No. of Tests Purpose
Sieve Analysis and Representative 18 Classification
Atterberg Limits Subsoils
Consolidation Undisturbed 8 Volume Change
Subsoil Potential
Dry Density and Undisturbed 16 Physical
Moisture Content Subsoil Properties of
Subsoils in Situ
Proctor (ASTM D Representative 2 Compacted Moisture
69878) Methods A&C Subsoils Density Relationship
Bearing Ratio Remolded Subsoil 6 Support Capacity
•
VII-1
Test results are summarized on Table 2. The results of the swell-consolidation
and California Bearing Ratio tests are shown on Figures 6 through 8 and 9
through 10 respectively, and listed on Table 2.
Graphic logs of the subsoil profiles encountered at the test hole locations are
shown on Figure 4. The subsoil profile is erratic and consists predominantly of
sandy soils with minor proportions of silt and clay. Layers of sandy to very
sandy clay or gravelly sand was also encountered in the test holes. Based on
sieve analyses and Atterberg limit tests, the subsoils are of low to meduim
plasticity and have FAA soil classifications ranging from E-1 through E-7 and a
unified soil classification of CL, ML, SM, SC, SP and SW. Results of swell-
consolidation tests performed on undisturbed samples, presented on Figures 6
through 8, indicate that the subgrade soils do not possess swell potential, but
will compress slightly to moderately upon loading and wetting.
Moisture contents were generally described as being slightly moist to very
moist. In some areas, generally in the area of Sand Creek, the moisture con-
tent increased to near optimum. No free water was encountered in any of the
test holes at the time of drilling.
Excavating and reworking of the upper natural soils should be readily ac-
complished with conventional earth moving equipment. Volume loss of the
upper natural soils due to compaction at 95 percent of standard Proctor
density is estimated to range between 10 percent and 15 percent or an
elevation loss on the order of two to three inches for reworking of the upper
two feet.
VII-2
V
N 43
01.
W
L O J
N
E Ii I S
--x ° II a'
o^ 1 0
acc
J
�' 1 x
I I� c.
II z
II
I I r..
/� Q C J
p Jl a
I =
`a
tri
I 1 O —
�` I 1 1 p
I 1 n
pi I�
77.1
I I
i---- ODD
v
cr.
ro
,— sirs— ,,,c— _
I\
I I__-2- ❑ �
- �Jo
I nH — ,1 G-- *,-
t..
Iw
1 mr _,
Iµ�� O %,.........„...„-:
• 1 ?� I I,----
4.---="--
,LI `,,
f
Lc r I I O G�7
O
XI I
wI I 1 t, / o
II v
rn
C C
II '2 ( —.
I v %
I N o
W
NI w4
�+ -7"- ; �=
/ y, L3O1
I I
N
} co °'
y ,� m
3 :2O
v
z� s
c, m x
V ....) s F
M I
CU
N VI
o
o
________.__________\
r•••
o
s a
•
k.
o
/......
S '
Y
N
d
•
U. m
J
9
c N ko
N
•• Vf
O
v O S
d'- 1 O
N N — _
O c p
` O u S \
a uJ
\.........................„..........„........„.•'''
u
.o g
L N
O L.
a m
O it
a u
Figure 3
113.4 - IIld30 °
11 Hill 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I
-
p IA o IA o
- - N
N
U.,
-.I
C,
I.
O o
N 01 N l A CT I—
O\1 .O O N L•O N(1- a
1- N M M 3 O I
CO
c.
0
x
133.4 - Hid
r I II I I I I I ( J
•OM � b- d M^ a N N N • ,
O N N 0 O1
\ a RO0 II \ \ a O \
U O N _I— CO m 0 N so
—3O I Jo_ 3 I N
h.
H,I : * f,,, P,,,0°M14 \`\`,..\\ 11'x! N co
00 6— N •— 11.C N
\ •—O1.-O,
.o \ n II o II II
M J U C N J—
• —3 o 1 J C.-
h.
N N^ n =
O\ O1•--o
m \ \ \ a n o
IN�G.\"Ti'•°Y'•l."•l'l ''Y'J�•-•�����•S :.;� 6�p a�� M in
O CON...?
= N •O n 111 N
• 4 ^ O N^ N
\ a 0O0 II -
CO 3 O II J L O1 W
CO �P1�I.� 1,�l.Y,, `� �7 O
• M^ 111 111•'l-Y.�t..•^t:•4 •:1.•:_•.:�:i Z
N CV • a CV •O II N 0 O
^O I,-ON-I' O1 =
O U N N U O N J u I,
N 3 I M 3 O I -I d — C
0
= .0 N
N MO d
a N \ O
\(.3 1 CO
[�1� Li-
CT3
Off' - ��°: _ 11I ::�:n_ .. •�\ 1 5
• .-N O O1 Q1�^O0DM N 0 U
\ a O \ -.... n non a \
4-3 II N N 3 0 N J- - W
N N o-n
O
II o
h M U O N
O (�j {{ N 3 O 1
O-5O1 •
4) I(}.° ...•_r, ..:.fiN•:fit•'.\•
N N N N LA 5O Cl b 0
1O N.O =
5 -.^O n no n n
M M to N O O O N J-
^ N N N 3 O 1 J C..
^M
—N—— a?O1 N
/
\ a 0 O u a II 0
•-3O IIJ& M
cn
N N O O 11 N O
N -p x
- 0 ono 0
\ — o u o N a o
O1 N N 3 O 1 Z N
CV
O
O IA —
01 .
- oaoa. IIIIIIIIIII
p n N
133.4 - H1d30
-... m no
...• $=0 N VD
•
r-1 -
•
0 IA O In 0
N
11 I I IL I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1
1334 - H1d30
Figure 4 •
LEGEND:
piTopsoil .
[,1 Clay (CL) , sandy to very sandy, occasionally silty, stiff to very stiff , slightly
�I to very moist, calcareous , light brown (E-5, E-6, E-7) .
•.T Sand (SC), silty, occasional clayey layers, loose to dense, moist , brown.
(E-3, E-4, E-5) .
05,5 Sand (SM) , clayey, medium dense, moist to very moist, tan to brown. (E-3 , E-5, E-7)
Cit
▪ Sand (SP-SW) , poorly to well graded, occasional gravels , loose to medium
• dense, slightly moist to moist, mixed browns. (E-1 ) .
• .� Sand and Gravel (SP-GP) , poorly graded, medium dense to dense, moist , mixed
gm browns (E-1 , E-2) .
h Undisturbed drive sample. The symbol 48/12 indicates 48 blows of a 140-pound
�J hammer falling 30 inches were required to drive the sampler 12 inches.
hBucket Sample.
J
NOTES:
1 . Test holes were drilled on March 31 , and April 8, 1930 with a 4-inch diameter
continuous flight power auger.
2. No free water was encountered in the test holes at the time of drilling.
3. WC = Water Content (q) ;
DD = Dry Density (pcf) ;
-200 = Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve;
LL = Liquid Limit (q) ;
PI = Plasticity Index (%) .
Figure 5 '
LEGEND AND NOTES
Moisture Content 10.5 percent
Dry Unit Weight - 108.1 pcf
Sample of: Very silty sand
From: Hole 2 at depth 14'
Additional compression under constart
pressu-e due :o wet t i nc .
as? 0
c
O 1
In a.v
L
2
O
3
4 -
0 1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
Moisture Content = 1 5.0 percent
Dry Unit Weight = g6. 1 pcf
sampte ot: Very Sandy silt
and Clay
From: Hole 3 at depth 18'
Additional compression under constant
iaA3 0 pressure die to wetting.
° 1
In
a)
L
E 2
O
L.)
3
0.1 1.0 10 100
•
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Figure 6
Moisture Content 7.5 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 104.8 pd
Sample of: S i 1 ty sand
From. Hole 5 at depth 13 '
Additiona compression under constant
pressJre due to wetting.
"1 0
• L
a
0 2
u
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
Moisture Content = 5.0 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 99.7 pcf
Sampled. Silty sand
From: Hole 8 at depth 19'
Aiditional compression urder constant
pressu -e due to wett ng.
0 0
c
O
L
2
3
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Figure 7
Moisture Content 1 7.0 percent
Dry Unit Weight = 1 01 .3 pct
Sample o1. Clayey sand
From: Hole 9 at depth 4'
Addit onal compression under cons :an .
pressure due to wetting.
o• 0
c
O
▪ 1
In
a)
L
a
O 2
L.)
3
N::›No
4
--I ,
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
oxo 0
Moisture Content= 4.8 percent
Dry Unit Weight - 102.3 pcf
O 1 Sample of Sand and clay
In
L From: Hole 12 at depth 3 '
a 2
o Addi'ionAl compression under constant
pressure d.le to wetting.
3
4
5
6
7
8 0
9 0.1 1.0 10
1 a
APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf
SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Figure 8
200 Hole 13 at 0.5 to 4.0 feet
No Seat' ng Corrects ns
#3 CBR-8.2
150
N
a
- 100
a
0
v
#2 CBR®3. 1
50 #1 CBRu2.4
00 0.1 0.2 0.3 0. 0.5
Penetration - In.
TEST NO. 1 2 3 TEST NO. 1 2 3
PENETRATION LOAD LOAD LOAD Dry Density Before Soaking - pcf 100.0 107.7 120.0
In. psi psi psi
0.025 14 " 17 24 ' Compaction - °,6 89.4 96.31O7.3
0.050 18 22 44 Moisture Content Before Compaction -
Moisture Content After Compaction - °,G 15.6 12.2 12.5
0.075 21 27 62 p
0.100 24 31 82 Dry Density After Soaking - pcf 99.3, 107.4 118.8
0.125 27 34 96. Moisture Content After Soaking - %
0. 150 28 36 104 Top 1 Inch 20.2 15.6 16.4
Average 19. 1 16.0 15.0
0.175 30 41 110
Swell - '/„ 0.7 0.3' 1.0
0.200 32 44 ' 115
Surcharge Weight - lb. 20 20 20
0.300 38 51 136
Very Sandy Clay ,
0.400 43 56 155 E-5po55
0.500 49 62 174 LL-15
P1-14 •
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
ASTM D1883-73
Figure 9
•
10
cc 5
m
U
0
0 -
95 100 105 110 115 120 125
Dry Density - pcf
Sample of Very Sandy Clay
from Test Hole //13, 0.5 to 4.0 feet
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST RESULTS
• Figure 10
Hole 13 at 4.0 to 8.0 feet
2000
#2 CBR-71
#3 CBR-80
1500
•N
a
c
0
a
1000 --
c
0
v
0
J
500
• #1 CBRu17
0 0.1 0.2 ' 0.3 0.4 0.5
Penetration - In.
TEST NO. 1 2 3 TEST NO. 1 2 3
PENETRATION LOAD LOAD LOAD Dry Density Before Soaking - pcf 130.8 136.7 137.8
In. psi psi psi
0.025 27 100 62 Compaction - °,6 95. 1 99.3 100. 1
i
0.050 57 265 138 Moisture Content Before Compaction - '/, ..- -- --
0.075 93 385 300, rloisture Content After Compaction - %, 7.3 6.9 6.7
0. 100 130 557 354 Dry Density After Soaking - pcf 131. 1 137.2 142. 1
0. 125 167 712 5,44 Moisture Content After Soaking - %
0. 150 205 874 664 Top 1 Inch 6.4 ! 6.2 6.0
Average 6.61 6.1 5.9
0. 175 244 10S9 836 Swell -
0.2 I 0 0
0.200 287 1252 1032 Surcharge Weight - lb. 20 20 ! 20
0.300 1864 1782
Gravelly Sand
0.400 2394 2491 E-1
•-•200 . 8
0.500 2762 3148
•
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
ASTM 01883-73
Figure 11
100
80
60
a
cc
co
40
20
0130 135 140
Dry Density — pcf
Sample of Gravelly Sand from
Test Hole #13, 4.0 to 8.0 feet
•
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST RESULTS
Figure 12
T_- �-
C m
a .o - a a a a 01 .-a
C N •N C G G C m o
m m a m .0 a m .- VI-0
U
in T T a a N C N a N a C a N U >.u1
- 0. ..I a m C C C C MI C L m
`- T CT T N 3.m .0 N T m N m T a r T.N
O T m m _ N N 0 N C .11.-
0 H •111 VI^ 1• Ol T T 0 N— T
U > >J T T 4.1 T 01 T O T 01 m 0
>> T T > T > w . > T a T
m L L a m m m^ — m m CO C 1. 03 ,0
1
C7 ? J m (.7 U f.7 N 1/1N f.7 VI U to f.7 VI 7 LIE]
• O
d
- O N C 10 In Z S VI
N 10 1
O U n. S -I CL L., 2 S L ma. Z Ur n. U J T 1V
LI an Lei U UI VI N IA IA VI IA 1/1 1A Ul Vl N Li V1 IA
—- O
•( n N LA .O —I .- U -I' U ^ Mr•-• on
l \ 1 — 1.... ^V\al
•C .n^ I I I I 1 II I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1.. 0+ NI W W W W W W W W 41 W W W W W W W W W
— U
U
.0
C- 01
• C O
4 1
ro a
▪ a 1c
41 1....1
�,1
C it J, it
-0�
...O .o r•1 .o —m Moo .13 Lo a% Ul ul .0 0 1` m— m
.N -7U\ .--M M N N M — Cr, ul N N N
0 71
i.4
0I Cl I
0
µ.1-I h
`C 7t
a.� LA O CO in— al Cr,N . .O O . LA^LAN col 0 30I Ul Ul N N.O .O LA. CO t\ M N J(Si-
F.IC C
I La ,
I n
Q !14 U
4J _1! Cl
V IIrJ J
_J La I4 I W Ili w— .- .-
Ol n �'^ LA .t CO 0 — .O CO LO
=1 !I •. C1`c-I N .O n ? .O NUlN
Ill
w 1 4.
1 n —
1 1
J y
1n
w
~ 1.1
001 0
U I '0 31 ,<; csi
4 N .04
O .LA O 0 .O 0 U LA N N CO
It W 0
.C ) rc
.0el
l I>
J
F,... U U
1 ... Cvl Z Z
3 L3
41
. W ru
W J—.-. CO CO N N -7 LA Cr, .O
I_ ID 1.< N N N N -I' N N N
Y. 1 J
L
0
0
6
LI
J L C N$
E ..,, w" r.-.r...
c -
01- 0 0)
02u
ft
7 m•o
S. t--N J I, ar
L.
—^
— r C G C G
2C Co C
b
T.y.� CO CO CO N. -7 N. Al CA M 03•
V"
CO CO .O .O .S ^ O 01 O N
L M J O O Ol O Ol O O W
I ,ac , >
•C N
L .a... 0 LA O 0 CO M Ul .O -7^ O 0 .- 01 m .O O
•[ C O
L Y„+1 4 0 Ul N N ^n N M N Ul N. O M 4' Ql 41
M G on
• C. C
▪u
0 0 '^
r.. 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . .0 m
.. • a
p y M - CO ?- CO M al Al M CA ? CO ? M I I Ol .J
o ?;
L I
m
w.- - N M4 1A l0 N. CO CIS 0 N M d
W O — — — — .11
1 1.- _
Table 2
REFERRAL LIST .
O AP: CANT Weld County Municipal Airport
1-4
CASE n SUP 452:80:42
•
P.1 REFERRALS SENT OUT ON: November 17, 1980
Cz C REFERRALS TO BE RECEIVED BY: December 5, 1980
[U77 Fa
` '--4 F1
U U O
(T1 H L=7
O 0 CG
O REFERRALS RECEIVED• County Attorney
County Health
X County Engineer _
GreeleySoil Conservation Service
4302 West 9th St. Road
Greeley, CO 80631
State Highway Dept.
1420 Second Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
x Colorado Water Conservation Board
1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Colorado Geological Survey
1313 Sherman St. Room 703
Denver, Colorado 80203
Ken McWilliams
City of Greeley Planning Dept.
Civic Center Complex
Greeley Colorado 80631
Western Hills Fire District
1804 Cherry Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Harold Handke
ARM 615
Federal Aviation Authority
10455 East 25th Avenue
Aurora, Colorado 80010
P.C. Member: Bette Kountz
22708 WCR 52
Greeley, Colorado 80631
DEPARTMENT PLANNING SERVICE!
„Ek ._','� , PHONE (303)356-400D EXT.•4(
r ,� , �;a,,")_,y 1� 91510THSTREE-
��� ( GREELEY,COLORADO 8063'
\_,..j
• �, i D l , . ,n\I 1 (
J a
CASE NUMBER SUP 452:80:47
• ,, ,,f�ogn�edrirl�g (uopartmrn�
COLORADO 7pl,7P577/7R,i
REFERRAL L N O a. O ,. v
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: WELD COUNTY
EnaineerinQ Department
Enclosed is an application from Weld County Municipal Airport
for a extension of an airport runway
The parcel of land is described as Pt. Section 3, T5N, R65W
The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been
• submitted is 12 miles east of Gx ?�e nn u;g . 76 x
This application is submitted to your office for review and recouiuienda-
tions. Any comments or recommendations you consider relevant to this
request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facili-
tate the processing of the proposal and will ensure prompt considera-
tion of your recommendations. If a response from your office is not
received within 21 days of mailing from our office, it may be in-
terpreted to mean approval by your office. If you are unable to
respond within 21 days (but wish to do so at a later date) please
notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed
above. Please reply by Deremher 5 198Q so that we may give
full consideration to your recou►uien ation. Thank you very much for
your help and cooperation in -this matter.
1. We have reviewed the proposal and- find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and w}w�l be
submitted to you prior to
3 . . eas refer to the enclosed letter.
A enc
Signed � g y E�9�nG�r'� �►q I �1�S P�
f�.
`,
I , l
Assistant Zoning Administrator
•
DcrARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
• PHONE (303) 356-4000 EXT •A(
915 10TH STREEE
GREELEY,COLORADO 80631.i'ff-ji •\ -1
� CASE NUMBER SUP 452:80:42
COLORADO
REFERRAL
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed is an application from Weld County Municipal Airport
for a extension of an airport runway
The parcel of land is described as Pt. Section 3, T5N, R65W
The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been
submitted is 1 i miles east of •GreelP �n u ?3- 7�3
This application is submitted to your office for review and recou,uienda-
tions. Any comments or recoinuiendations you consider relevant to this
request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facili-
tate the processing of the proposal and will ensure prompt considera-
tion of your recoiuuiendations. If a response from your office is not
received within 21 days of mailing from our office, it may be in-
terpreted to mean approval by your office. If you are unable to I
respond within 21 days (but wish to do so at a later date) please
notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed
above. Please reply by December 5 98Q so that we may give
full consideration to your recommendation, Thank you very much for
your help and cooperation in -this matter.
1. )( We have reviewed the proposal and- find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be
submitted to you prior to
3 . Please refer to the enclosed letter. ,_�J ,P,��✓E7 07,, _.Y;�
CJ1
Signed ri�,�_ 'Gs�`'`y Agency C 7nf�`'G e0 �435)aIN.1 f�f/U0� gas
ULCy„u,l c o—i.
Assistant Zoning Administrator
•
• DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICE!
. PHONE (303) 356-4000 EXT.•th
915 10TH STREE
GREELEY,COLORADO 8063
qvi, 1 .\-1 W�: � D i .."... a
•
• 0CASE NUMBER SUP 452:80:42
. .
COLORADO e
REFERRAL
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed is an application from Weld County Municipal Airport
for a extension of an airport runway .
The parcel of land is described as Pt. Section 3, T5N, R65W
The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been
submitted is _ 12 miles east of Greeley nn R-izhway 263
This application is submitted to your office for review and recouiienda-
tions . Any comments or recommendations you consider relevant to this
request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facili-
tate the processing of the proposal and will ensure prompt considera-
tion of your recommendations. If a response from your office is not
received within 21 days of mailing from our office, it may be in-
terpreted to mean approval by your office. If you are unable to
respond within 21 days (but wish to do so at a later date) please
notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed
above. Please reply by December 5 98Q so that we may give
full consideration to your recommendation, Thank you very much for
your help and cooperation in -this matter.
1. LWe have reviewed the proposal and find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be
submitted to you prior to
3 . Please refer to the enclosed letter.
Signed pL1Zt . Agency Idje4 1 5 Date /)--r-/Pro
'f1 ',; , _
•
')`C_V-4. lCa.��f ,
Assistant Zoning Administrator
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICE:
• PHONE (303) 3564000 EXT •4t
915 1DTH STREE'
GREELEY,COLORADO 8D63
a . CASE NUMBER SUP 452:80:47
•\:...
.
REFERRAL
-
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN :
Enclosed is an application from Weld County Municipal Airport
for a extension of an airport runway • •
The parcel of land is described as Pt. Section 3, T5N, R65W
The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been
submitted is 11/2 miles east of Greele on Pi ghwny 963
This application is submitted to your office for review and recommenda-
tions. Any comments or recommendations you consider relevant to this
request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facili-
tate the processing of the proposal and will ensure prompt considera-
tion of your recommendations. If a response from your office is not
received within 21 days of mailing from our office, it may be in-
terpreted to mean approval by your office. If you are unable to
respond within 21 days (but wish to do so at a later date) please
notify our office to that effect.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed
above. Please reply by DecemhPr S 1q8() so that we may give
full consideration to your recoummendation. Thank you very much for
your help and cooperation in -this matter.
1. We have reviewed the proposal and find no conflicts with our
interests.
2. A formal recommendation is under consideration and_ will be
submitted to you prior •to ' ' "-y:•,,,,.
3 . - Please refer to the enclosed letter. `'
i\ N0V 1b80 b80 , ,�
Signed / .Rs Agency I'`- DEEOk=Da,te /,friv
Assistant Zoning Administrator
mmilu MIL _,-.r— � y. 'eMe.1't- .y - 'r — -=5=�+iFi4F x -__ _
------______,41- '- - 11' 191 ALtir- • „, ;
2. �-! -�„�-- -� - s 'emu f` 'r'.,+y'` ►� .i + R
�R� + - 1�, tea.,�� ,� 1•r
{f -+7���� +.fit!. ` vl� "✓ ,r «4-?`- t y _ ` -ice 4
GREELEY CIVIC CENTER
GREELEY COLORADO 80631
PHONE t303i 353.6123 December 10, 1980
Vickie Traxler
Assistant Zoning Administrator
Weld County Division of Planning Services
915 10th Street
Greeley , CO 80631
Dear Vickie:
The City of Greeley Planning Commission reviewed the Special
Use Permit application for the extension of the runway at the
Weld County Municipal Airport at its December 9, 1980, meeting.
The Commission recommended no objection to this proposal with
the stipulation that the developer provide a means for adequately
handling 100 year storm drainage flows in addition to the facilities
constructed to handle the 25 year storm flows.
At this meeting, the Commission also considered the proposal
for a change of zone from "C" to "A" , Special Use Permit for a
gasohol plant as an agri-business and Commercial Unit Development
southeast of Lucerne. The Commission recommended no objections
to this proposal provided adequate services are available from
the various service entities.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfully ,
Wai,pt c2)/e771-2,1-14----1/42---- \.\\
,, 213144 ;
Ken McWilliams c,,\ it. �
City Planner �� OC1g8�O �v
�
KM:yip v 1p "G�`�
' ,-',O\a�° -Ss\°�
c—1 �a���t titi
"A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS"
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD
c
Department of Natural Resources �wo� �fop
823 State Centennial Building H� � j�?90
1313 Sherman Street *',2�*
Denver,Colorado 80203 's i8�6{`
Phone: (303)839-3441
Richard D Lamm
Governor
William McDonald
Director
David Walker
Deputy Director
December 19, 1980
Ms. Vickie Traxler
Assistant Zoning Administrator
Weld County Department of Planning Services
915 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Dear Ms. Traxler:
We have reviewed the engineer's report and other supporting
documents for the application to extend the airport runway to the
Weld County Municipal Airport. Our comments made directly to the
engineer by letter dated November 20, 1980 and copied to your office,
have been fully answered by the engineer in a letter dated December 1, 1980
and we have no objections to the proposal.
Sincerely,
—pg—mtvel,„
William P. Stanton, P.E.
Senior Water Resource Specialist
WPS/sd
cc: Peter J. Muller
Isbill Associates, Inc.
Stapleton International Airport
Denver, Colorado 80207
��, .Q
_ ��/
-, '7:7vt ,,
L-
��- `Jiffs,, .ter
\,0 CU.
� - :- ,v t)l<�
COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD, Frederick V. Kroeger, Chairman
Robert A. Jackson, Vice Chairman • John R. Fetcher, Steamboat Springs
C.M. Furneaux, Walden • Floyd L. Getz, Monte Vista • Patrick A. Gormley, Grand Junction
Richard W. Johnston, Montrose • David W. Robbins, Denver • Herbert H. Vandemoer, Sterling
hf O •
of•co /�t G1988
Lti
RICHARDHN D. LAMM * • * t.• ,_
GOVERNOR JO IA ROLD
�arit ,F • Director
1876
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING-1313 SHERMAN STREET
DENVER,COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303)839-2611
December 10, 1980
Ms. Vickie Traxler
Weld County Department of Planning Services
915 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Ms. Traxler: RE: SUP 452:80:42
AIRPORT RUNWAY
EXTENSION
WELD COUNTY
We have reviewed the Weld County Municipal Airport runway extension
special use permit and attendant information. The Engineer's Report
by Isbill Associates, Inc. adequately addresses the effect of soils
and Sand Creek on the project. If their recommendations are followed,
we have no objection to approval of this application.
Sincerely,
Julia E. Turney
Engineering Geologist
JET/gp
cc LUC
a�C'�c fP-173-
/4/4 -
e DEC 1980
"T RECEIVED
zl
;rte 1!;id County zl
1—T;;17 ConDISS to
t `)
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE
cif'C00
t% "P
ir' " 9d COLORADO STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
* _ ;*
* DIVISION OF HIGHWA ^ 23 Weld County
* 1876 iJ c.">$,H 263
December 4, 198 .��,J t) '`�' 6141d d Co. Airport
Ri� nway Extension
t:t ®��tJ II-OH FILE 45100
Ms. Vickie Traxler 8,
•
Department of Planning ,
.. pe•
Weld County `��G�-_ r_
915 Tenth Street f-
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Dear Ms. Traxler:
We have reviewed the Weld County Municipal Airport runway extension proposal ,
and we have the following comments.
It is assumed that the metal arch structure for Sand Creek will convey the 1 ,400
cfs for which the structure under State Highway 263 was designed. However, we note
that this metal arch structure lacks freeboard clearance to allow for the passage
of debris. The structure under S.H. 263 has three feet of freeboard clearance, which
would allow considerably more water to flow under the bridge than the 1 ,400 cfs for
which the structure under the runway is being designed.
The metal arch structure as designed for the runway is a very minimal design
and does not provide for any freeboard for debris. Therefore, it should be noted
that there is a definite possibility there may be times that the arch culvert will
not carry the 1 ,400 cfs due to debris blockage. Also, since the highway structure
will carry considerably more than the 1 ,400 cfs design flow for the 25-year flood,
it can be assumed that there will be times when flood waters will cross S.H. 263 at
the east end of the airport, which would not normally occur under the present
conditions.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
Very truly yours,
DWIGHT M. BOWER
DISTRICT ENGINEER
(• 3_77,
Albert ChoIvacs
Assistant District Engineer
AC:da
da ?�36
cc: D. M. Bower :;S
D. N. Fraser (2)
File: Crier-Jacobson via Rames-Finch-Graham •a ( O
w/encl . REC E®
[''ICJ surly
borzissigo
s J`
P.O. BOX 850 GREELEY, CO 80632 (303) 353-1232
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD
of CO
IJehatUnenl of Natural Resource~ 1.? ..4%,11.3a
/� ?
.( •11✓ib' 'Q
823 Slate Centennial Building biro (DI
1313 Sherman Street # (
Denver. Colorado 80203 )h*1y76.
I'hone• (10 it 8)')-1441
November 20, 1980 RR hard I) Lamin
Governor
J William Mc Donald
Direc tO1
David Walker
Mr. Peter J. Muller Deputy Director
Isbill Associates, Inc.
Stapleton International Airport
Denver, Colorado 80207
Dear Mr. Muller:
As requested in your letter of October 25, 1980, we have completed
our review of the plans and the engineer's report for the proposed
runway and taxiway extension to the Weld County Municipal Airport. Our
particular area of interest is the flood hazard as it relates to Sand
Creek and the proposed culvert under the airport complex.
Our specific comments are listed below:
1. No basin map was included to substantiate the statement
that the size of the drainage area is 6.5 square miles.
2. The report states that the 25-year flood on Sand Creek
is 1400 cfs. However, this figure does not compare well
with a discharge-frequency curve developed from regional
regression equations (TM-1) . Using this method, the
following approximate values were obtained for Sand
Creek based on a basin slope of 20 feet per mile and
an area of 6.5 square miles:
Return Period Discharge, cfs
10-year 1,060
50-year 3,480
100-year 5,500
500-year 12,950.
The figure of 1400 cfs for the 25-year flood falls below
the standard error of estimate using this method.
3. No calculations or depth-discharge curves to illustrate
wthe ere hydraulic
i aea in characteristicsthe report. of the proposed culvert ����1�►�C�`-c3),
3 ,0
Con
a
COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD, Frederick 1,. Kroeger, Chairma `
Robert A. ,Jackson, Vice Chairman • John R. Fetcher, Steamboat Springs "f q,VC,ZP'
C.M. Furneaux, Walden • Floyd L. Getz, Monte Vista • Patrick A. Gormley, Grand Junction
Richard W. Johnston, Montrose • David W. Robbins, Denver • Herbert H. Vandemoer, Sterling
Mr. Peter J. Muller
Page Two
4. The report is silent on the impact of the proposed
culvert on the 100-year or any frequency floodplain
for Sand Creek. Without this information, no realistic
determination of flood damages can be made.
If you have any questions on these comments, or wish to discuss how
our concerns could be mitigated, please do not hesitate to contact our
office.
Sincerely,
OM/Mk �, C+M )).'t
William P. Stanton, P.E.
Senior Water Resource Specialist
WPS:gs
cc: Tom Hahn
Weld County Planning Department
DEPARTMENT OF TR4 iPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
0.p..%. A V/4
�.!_ ,��:
ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION # `:,'c *1
10455 EAST 25TH AVENUE 111
AURORA,COLORADO 80010 9p _ O
�iHIS79.ts
NOV 2 4 1980 (303) 837-5076
Ms. Vickie Trakler
Department of Planning Services
915 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
— Dear Ms. Trakler:
This letter is in reference to the special use permit, case number SUP 452:80:42,
for Weld County Municipal Airport.
The proposal has been reviewed and environmentally approved by the Federal
Aviation Administration.
If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, please contact me at the
above number.
Sincerely,
Harold N. Handke
Airport Planner
Airports Division
257r- :p
,Z
4C\ NOV 1E80 .e°
PG= � �)--. .v
cl-injq;l,fli-"c57 9)
\\\...
'-‘ 1.1,1
f I1 ,
y "�aid ,
- F Th,
{
•� ; I November 20, 1980
LA A
COLORADO
To Whom It May Concern :
You are receiving a copy of this notification because your name appears
as a surrounding property owner owning property within 500 feet of the
proposed use.
The Weld County Planning Commission will review a request from
Weld County Municipal Airport
for a Special Use Permit for extension of airport runway
on property described as follows : Part Section 3, T5N, R65W
The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been
submitted i s : 11/2 miles east of Greeley on Highway 263
If you have any suggestions or objections , will you kindly notify us
in writing before December 1, 1980 . The meeting by the Weld
County Planning Commission is sclhmduled for December 161980
This meeting will take place in the County Commissioners Hearing Room,
first floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley,
Colorado, at 1 : 30 p.m. If you have any questions concerning this matter,
please contact the Department of Planning Services at 356-4000, Ext. 404 .
Assistant Zoning Administrator
Following the hearing before the Planning Commission this request will
be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for their review.
Should you desire additional information concerning the hearing before
the Commissioners, please contact the office of Clerk to the Board,
56- 4000, Ext. 225 .
VT:rg
11-20-80
crYATI9rg
oaogLBY•COLOR4 0.
^ ` g Com)offsinger Manufacturin anP q
P. O. BOX 516 • 500-600 SIXTH AVENUE • GREELEY, COLORADO
November 26, 1980
Vickie Traxler
Department of Planning Services
Weld County, Colorado
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Vickie:
For many reasons previously publicly stated, we wish to
oppose the granting of a Special Use Permit, requested by
the Weld County Municipal Airport, for a runway extension.
As we have noticed for at least a couple of months now,
construction of this runway has been in process at a rapid
pace. We question the timeliness and perhaps even the
necessity of meetings and hearings regarding this matter.
I will be happy to discuss further any specific questions
or comments. You can reach me at 352-0463, or 356-2130.
Best regards,
NOFFSINGER MFG. CO. , INp.
,' f / ✓ (1//7/1X/
//�
Robert W. Noffsinger, Jr.
Manager
MAILING LIST - WELD COUNTY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
SUP-452:80:42 - November 20, 1980
Adolf and J. R. Sitzman
1632 29th Avenue Place
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Noffsinger Manufacturing
P.O. Box 488
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Louise Frei
3544 East 8th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Robert and Elnora Bliss
2109 Glenfair Road
Greeley, Colorado 80631
M. E. and Daisy Davidson
Route 4 Box 174
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Gerald and Cornelia Miniger
Route 1 Box 23
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Duane and Dorothy Zabka
P.O. Box 446
Greeley, Colorado 80631
1st National Bank Turstee
Charles Warren Investment
P.O. Box 555
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
N9��5� U
• 0 .7.1/,
��
��
! 5 k
c
r� A p
t� 5
%
r R(7 \,t.4��
•
aci
t ?
1.4 \
, .1 • Cl) E
5.
G -
/ k c e / O
$1 4
A2PA
§ 2
% \
\ J a)
4: 11, o
/ a n O
;
/ /
C $
\ C/
/ .;.`r •
S .., 3
i1_C)
\
E
±
c
e0
Nc
G .
_ O � �~ ()
^
.
{® l =q08 oa Bmo ',1,37a380— 133E ?age
�� �
`/7zae_.&/-e9_ /
r OC( k_16 Y-3
()LI
-
/'
O,2) 5-/.e/e) 17?q77vZ4(11L-.66Q,z)
-62/2z/, ,
X44 _
YiL)&-oL
�J L- /(79 Ri - --)601 1_/L) Veda
W? !_,' ;/O7L_
) J,YERCL__0 0O/P/261A -/)12-122-2729e-k-;
/ iSzYcL
/000i2C_J aq-Po-stleZe_f
___)6/721_,D/_)
/N -z' `/2c__2_;M
CjAa.1WW (-(1Z/J/27 (0720-64t-.
,676`
'LJ
c
l
t.1 s NESS 41- -- 0.34
weld Cou Cl of &II
1 w UN. . acct 1 - 3 — o3 3
- -99 1067305
ar-loliC d J.R, `a z mar\
432- 2ci ice..
GR1ti
€ ► f\1€.. ccc.el _ '3 --" 035
Z- 2ia.- 74 4(p31105 WO
1 )oc11W,12- Mcunu .-f-Ur2-i.cl
'b "Boy, 4 $8
5 . 5 ,_ cat pi- -3- o 1- 058
I -4- 7a1 174 a5 L/s w c.D ( -5---18 I RO55c9
L c ise. FRei -17--o .t E I nbra.. B 1iss
2 l 8 3b alO9 ≤lenakr
Cry , 6‘2k1 i
- --K.
-4,1)-3_5- %.e.-,ce.; -"Z'-) — („0 — G05
1
S
-c_ a
W 3 c - 2- 0c
pt E_NbJ
kckfu-lqe 12- Mar)
017,
MG s .) Dauid iso\r-
4 - 13 1711
SUJ (%±.05 - 3q ov0-
/ -/c)-Z,7 / z/ 9'ES 8coy w-
Gera 1d CoRnel icu j-lea.
R I oyJ a.`3
Grey
a-2.E
5kP I- la-C 7 ! 4 ` (OL/ LUL)
€-ck,Sv3 r 02y
'1P -60 /6/4' 5/4' kio
Piazu2_, Dora/11 Z ctib k6U
e( YgCo
6 i2,1)-j.-
dzS ,
'V- 2 - /6)q-/Z4'a.3 G,J,O
3 z? - 78 (7 4'8690!,0 1-Z l -8p /63a 6z.3 spwb
b 555
`�-t Co\\ir\s
I 1\ nS�c c i_Y\c
; tk;N'\
A\
Y,2� Oz-C -[ `'�
Hello