The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20062207.tiff PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LYONS 66 PACIFIC COMMERCE PARK SOUTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSTATE 25 AND STATE HIGWAY 66 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO TERRACON PROJECT NO. 22005203 September 17, 2001 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our design level pavement evaluation and preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park to be located at the southeast corner of Interstate 25 and State Highway 66 in Weld County, Colorado. The site is located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 26, Township 3 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Weld County, Colorado. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: • subsurface soil and bedrock conditions • groundwater conditions • general earthwork considerations • utility construction • foundation construction • below grade construction • floor slab construction • pavement design and construction The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil conditions, structures and our understanding of the proposed project. The preliminary , recommendations presented in this report are intended for planning purposes. A design level geotechnical exploration will be required on each building site in order to design and construct foundations, floor slabs and other site improvements. 1 { 2006-2207 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Based on information provided by a representative of Swift and Associates, the proposed project will include the development of a commercial/industrial park at the subject site. The property includes approximately 35 acres and will be subdivided into 15 individual building lots. The size and type of the buildings is not accurately known at this time. We anticipate that future buildings will probably be single to two-story structures with slab-on-grade floors. Other site improvements will include the construction and paving of a private access road as well as realignment of the I-25 Frontage Road through the property. Underground utilities will �J also be installed below the streets. Final site grading plans were not available prior to preparation of this report, therefore the magnitude of possible fills or cuts is not known at this time. However, considering site topography and other geotechnical issues, we anticipate that some mass earthwork will be required for drainage and other development considerations. We should be contacted to review site grading plans when they become available. SITE EXPLORATION The scope of the services performed for this project included site reconnaissance by a geotechnical engineer, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analysis. Field Exploration: A total of 12 test borings were drilled on November 10, 2000. The borings were drilled to depths of about five (5) to 25 feet at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 1. All borings were advanced with a truck-mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-inch diameter solid stem auger. The borings were located in the field by measurements with a surveying wheel using property boundaries and/or existing site features as a reference. Right angles for locating the borings were estimated. Elevations of borings were not surveyed and logs are drawn to depth. The accuracy of boring locations should only be assumed to the level implied by the method used. Lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by the geotechnical engineer during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by driving California barrel samplers. Penetration resistance measurements were obtained by driving the California barrel into the subsurface materials with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The penetration resistance value is a useful index in estimating the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. In addition, groundwater conditions were recorded in each boring at the time of site exploration, and five (5) days after drilling. 2 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 Laboratory Testing: Samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer, and were visually or manually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Samples of bedrock were classified in accordance with the general notes for Rock Classification. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Boring logs were prepared and are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and are presented in Appendix B. The test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable local standards or other accepted standards. Selected soil and bedrock samples were tested for the following engineering properties: • Water Content • Particle Size Distribution • Dry •Unit Weight Atterberg Limits • Swell-Consolidation Potential • • R-Value • Unconfined Compressive Strength • Water Soluble Sulfate Content SITE CONDITIONS The project site is located at the southeast corner of Interstate 25 and State Highway 66 in Weld County, Colorado. The site is currently vacant and has probably been used for crop production and agricultural purposes in the past. An existing residential structure is located near the southwest corner of the property. The ground surface at the site is approximately 10 to 20 feet lower in elevation than that of the 1-25 Frontage Road and Highway 66 and is relatively uniform with a general slope downward to the southwest. A review of USGS 7.5 minute series topographic maps indicates a maximum difference in elevation of about 20 feet across the site. Surface slopes are estimated to be on the order of one-half (%) to five (5) percent. At the time of our field investigation, most of the site was vegetated with a moderate growth of weeds, grasses and brush. In addition, several concrete-lined ditches were noted crossing the site. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Geology: The project area is located within the Colorado Piedmont section of the Great Plains physiographic province. The Colorado Piedmont, formed during Late Tertiary and 3 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 Early Quaternary time (approximately 2,000,000 years ago), is a broad, erosional trench which separates the Southern Rocky Mountains from the High Plains. Structurally, the site lies along the western flank of the Denver Basin. During the Late Mesozoic and Early Cenozoic Periods (approximately 70,000,000 years ago), intense tectonic activity occurred, causing the uplifting of the Front Range and associated downwarping of the Denver Basin to the east. Relatively flat uplands and broad valleys characterize the present-day topography of the Colorado Piedmont in this region. Surficial soils mapped in the vicinity of the site consist of Eolian (Qe) deposits consisting of windblown clay, silt and sand. Bedrock mapped in the area consists of Pierre Shale. The Pierre Shale in this area is mapped as the Upper unit designated as Kpu. The bedrock was encountered in most of our borings at depths ranging from about three (3) to 8 feet below the ground surface. The project site is not located within mapped areas of the Boulder-Weld coal fields. Accordingly, it does not appear the site is located above underground mines or is located in a subsidence hazard zone. Due to the relatively flat nature of the property, geologic hazards at the site are anticipated to be low. Seismic activity in the area is anticipated to be low; and from a structural standpoint, the property should be relatively stable. With proper site grading around proposed structures, erosional problems at the site should be minor. Mapping completed by the Colorado Geological Survey ('Hart, 1972), indicates the site in an area of "Windblown Sand or Silt". This material has been described as having low swell potential and may be subject to settlement or collapse when water is allowed to saturate the deposits. Bedrock with higher swell potential may be locally less than 10 feet below the ground surface. Site specific swell testing indicates that the site clays are typically non- expansive or have only slight swell potential at their in-place moisture content and density. The siltstone/sandstone bedrock, which is predominant on the site, is generally non- expansive or has only low swell potential when wetted. Soil and Bedrock Conditions: As presented on the Logs of Boring, a thin mantle of soil with vegetation and root growth was encountered at the surface on the majority of the site. In general, the subsurface soils at the site consisted of approximately three (3) to 10 feet or more of lean clays with varying amounts of sand. Siltstone/sandstone bedrock with lenticular beds of claystone was encountered below the overburden clays and these materials 'Hart, Stephen S., 1972, Potentially Swelling Soil and Rock in the Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey, Environmental Geology No. 7. 4 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 extended to the maximum depths explored. Boring 5 encountered claystone/siltstone • bedrock at a depth of approximately 18 feet below the surface and extended to the depths explored. Please refer to the Logs of Boring for more comprehensive strata descriptions. Field and Laboratory Test Results: Field penetration test results and unconfined compressive strength data indicates that the clay soils vary from very soft to stiff in consistency and are considered to have low load bearing capability. Swell-consolidation tests indicate that the site clays are typically non-expansive or have only slight swell potential at their in-place moisture content and density. The clays typically show low to moderate consolidation potential under light loads. Penetration resistance measurements indicate that up to three (3) feet of weathered bedrock was encountered at the contact between the overburden soils and the bedrock; however, the underlying bedrock varies from hard to very hard. Swell-consolidation tests indicate that the siltstone/sandstone bedrock is generally non-expansive or has only low swell potential when wetted. The siltstone/claystone bedrock encountered in Boring 5 is judged to have low to moderate swell potential. The unweathered bedrock is considered to have high load bearing capability. Results of gradation and plasticity tests on selected samples indicate that the clay subgrade soils classified as A-6 and A-7-6 soils according to the AASHTO classification system. AASHTO group indices of these subgrade soils ranged from 4 to 27, although most of the group indices ranged from 20 to 27. Plasticity indices of the clays ranged from 11 to 28. These materials have a "CL" classification in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). A representative subgrade sample was selected for R-value testing. Laboratory test results indicate an R-value of 18 for the A-7-6 subgrade soils. R-value and soil classification test results indicate that the subgrade soils at the site generally have poor to very poor pavement support characteristics. Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was encountered at depths of about five (5) to 18 feet below the ground surface in Test Borings 1, 2, 4 and 6 at the time of field exploration. The other borings remained dry immediately after drilling was completed. When checked five (5) days after drilling, groundwater was measured at depths ranging from about four (4) to 10% feet below the ground surface in Borings 1 through 6 and 10. In particular, shallow groundwater (six (6) feet or less below the ground surface) was encountered in Test Borings 1, 4 and 6. We feel that the shallow groundwater in this area is related, in part, to perched or trapped groundwater on top of the bedrock surface. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater monitoring wells, and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. The possibility of groundwater 5 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 fluctuations should be considered when developing design and construction plans for the project. Based upon review of U.S. Geological Survey Maps (2Hillier, et al, 1983), regional groundwater beneath the project area predominates in colluvial or windblown materials, or in fractured weathered consolidated sedimentary bedrock located at a depth near ground surface. Seasonal variations in groundwater conditions are expected since the aquifer materials may not be perennially saturated. Groundwater is generally encountered at depths ranging from 5 to 20 feet below ground surface; depth to seasonal groundwater is generally 10 feet or less. Zones of perched and/or trapped groundwater, where not already present, may also occur at times in the subsurface soils overlying bedrock, on top of the bedrock surface or within permeable fractures in the bedrock materials. The location and amount of perched water is dependent upon several factors, including hydrologic conditions, type of site development, irrigation demands on or adjacent to the site, fluctuations in water features, and seasonal and weather conditions. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Site Development and Geotechnical Considerations: Based upon the geotechnical conditions encountered in our test borings, the site appears suitable for the proposed construction. We believe that the primary geotechnical conditions which will impact development of the site and foundation, floor slab and pavement construction are the soft e and compressible clays and the shallow groundwater, particularly on western portion of the Ede` site. The soft clays will complicate pavement and foundation construction and other earthwork activities on the site and some subgrade stabilization/improvement should be anticipated, particularly on the western portion of the site. Shallow groundwater will limit the depth of construction at some locations on the site, and in some instances, may preclude the use of below grade construction altogether. The primary methods which can be used to mitigate the impact of shallow groundwater and soft soils on the site Gould include limiting the depth of below grade construction (if any), raising the site with structural fill to increase the depth to groundwater or by installing an underdrain system to provide a means to control, and in some instances, to lower existing water levels. For shallow groundwater/soft soil areas of the site, we recommend limiting cuts to the shallowest z Hillier, Donald E.; Schneider, Paul A., Jr.; and Hutchinson, E. Carter, 1983, Depth to Water Table /7979/ tir the Boulder-Fort Collins-Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States Geological Survey, Map 1-855- 6 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 depths possible in order to reduce stabilization and groundwater impacts on the proposed construction. Other geotechnical conditions which could impact the proposed development include layers of very hard, cemented sandstone which may result in difficult excavation and localized areas of higher swelling bedrock materials. These concerns and other site development considerations are briefly discussed in the following sections. General Site Grading/Earthwork Recommendations: Site grading g plans were not available for our review at the time of this investigation. We should be contacted to review site grading plans when they become available. For shallow groundwater and soft clays areas of the site, we recommend limiting cuts during final grading operations and setting the building floors as high as practicable to reduce the impact of shallow groundwater and soft soils on the proposed construction. Conventional rubber-tired earthmoving equipment will likely encounter soft soils and/or pumping subgrades due to repeated construction traffic loads, particularly in cut areas and on the western portion of the site. For this reason, the use of light-weight earth-moving equipment may be needed to reduce the potential of "pumping" subgrade soils. Where possible, every effort should be made to minimize construction traffic in shallow groundwater/soft clay areas of the site. Some subgrade stabilization, should be anticipated prior to fill placement or pavement and foundation construction. Stabilization techniques could include the use of import granular materials and/or geogrids or geotextiles. Chemical stabilization could also be considered for subgrade improvement. If chemical stabilization is used, supplemental laboratory evaluation is recommended to determine the effect of chemical stabilization on subgrade soils prior to construction. Where practicable, we recommend the grading plans be designed so that building floors and foundations will be situated well above the level of the groundwater. In addition, grading plans should be designed so that the final street subgrade is at least three (3) feet above the groundwater surface. Final site grading plans should be prepared with due consideration given to the potential constraints and/or potential construction difficulties associated with shallow groundwater and soft soils. In addition, when fills are placed over soft clays, they will compress and settle to some degree. Our experience and the preliminary data from this study suggest that for shallow fills (on the order of 5 feet or less) the resulting settlements will occur within a relatively short time after grading is complete, and should not significantly affect the proposed development or other site improvements. For deeper fills, it is possible that excessive settlements may occur. We should review site grading plans to evaluate whether further investigation and/or analysis is necessary to address this concern. 7 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 The ground surface in the area of proposed fill placement should be stripped of vegetation and organic matter. This material should be wasted from the site or stockpiled and used to revegetate landscape areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. If it is necessary to dispose of organic materials on-site, they should be placed in non-structural areas and in fill sections not exceeding 5 feet in height. For permanent slopes in compacted fill or cut areas we recommend slopes of 3:1 (horizontal to vertical), or less to reduce erosion and maintenance problems. If steeper slopes or slopes over 5 feet in height are required for site development, stability analyses should be completed to design the grading plan. The subgrade beneath proposed fill areas should be scarified, moisture conditioned within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). After site grading has been completed and the street subgrade has been moisture conditioned and compacted, we recommend that the road surface be proof-rolled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer in order to delineate soft or disturbed areas at or near subgrade level. Heavy construction equipment such as a loaded water truck or tandem axle dump truck is recommended for proofrolling. Unsuitable areas should be overexcavated and replaced with approved fill if the soft soils cannot be moisture adjusted and densified in place. The on site soils or approved low swelling import materials can be used for site grading fill. The properties of the fill can affect the performance of foundations, slabs-on-grade and pavements. The fill should be placed in thin, loose lifts and compacted. Spreading and "wind-rowing" of wet soils or moisture addition and uniform mixing of dry soils will be necessary to bring the soils into working moisture ranges and will be important. We recommend that clay fill placed at the site be moisture conditioned within 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum moisture content (unless modified by the geotechnical engineer) and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Sloping areas steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical) which will receive fill should be benched to reduce the potential for slippage between existing slopes and fills. Fill should not contain frozen material and it should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. Placement and compaction of fill should be observed and tested by the geotechnical engineer to verify that the specified moisture and compaction requirements have been achieved. Utility Construction: Excavations into the on-site soils/bedrock will encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations will likely penetrate moist to wet clays and bedrock or groundwater, depending upon final depth of excavation. The materials below groundwater may cave and present problems with trench sidewall stability. We believe that most of the materials can be excavated with either heavy duty trenchers or large backhoes. However, some of our 8 Pavement Thickness Design and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Terracon Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 borings penetrated layers of very hard, cemented sandstones and siltstones. These conditions may require the use of specialized heavy-duty equipment, together with drilling and blasting to advance the excavation. Consideration should be given to obtaining a unit price for difficult excavation in the contract documents for the project. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept to a minimum lateral distance from the crest of the slope equal to no less than the slope height. i'j Groundwater was measured at depths ranging from about four (4) to five (5) feet on the western portion of the site to about nine (9) to 10% feet on the eastern portion of the site. In particular, shallow groundwater (six (6) feet or less below the ground surface) was encountered in Test Borings 1, 4 and 6. Where groundwater is penetrated in excavations, some method of temporary dewatering will be needed for proper construction. Dewatering should continue through the excavation, pipe placement and backfilling operations to ensure proper construction. Where excavations penetrate the groundwater for only a shallow depth, it may be possible to dewater by sloping the excavation to isolated sumps and pumps. If permeable soils are encountered or excavations penetrate the groundwater for a significant depth, more extensive dewatering methods, such as well points, may be needed for effective dewatering. r4 Piping should be adequately bedded for proper load distribution and to prevent damage during compaction operations. Backfill should consist of the on-site soils or existing bedrock. �J Where bedrock is used for backfill, all plus 6-inch material should be removed. Moisture contents of some of the clays indicate that these materials are well over optimum moisture content. Considerable drying and processing of these material will be needed to achieve the required degree of compaction. Utility trench backfill should be moisture conditioned at plus or minus 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). The soils to be penetrated by the proposed excavations may vary significantly across the site. The preliminary soil classifications are based solely on the materials encountered in widely spaced exploratory test borings. The contractor should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the proposed area of excavation. If different subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of construction, we recommend that we be contacted immediately to evaluate the conditions encountered. 9 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 Foundation Construction Considerations: Foundation selection will be dependent upon the type of construction planned, site specific geotechnical conditions and final site grading configurations. Preliminary data from this exploration indicates that the clays encountered in our test borings are non-expansive or have only slight swell potential at their in-place moisture and density, generally have low load bearing capability and will tend to compress and consolidate when loaded. For these conditions, relatively large, low contact pressure spread footings usually perform satisfactorily for lightly loaded structures. Data from this study suggests that footings for lightly loaded structures bearing on the site clays, can be preliminarily designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure in the range of 800 to 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf). However, very soft and compressible clay soils were encountered on the western portion of the site and these conditions will likely require some corrective measures such as removal and replacement, if footings are used. In some instances, the soft clays may preclude the use of spread footing foundations. Penetration resistance measurements indicate that the sandstone/siltstone bedrock has high load bearing capability. Swell-consolidation tests and other physical properties indicate that the sandstone/siltstone bedrock is non-expansive or has only low swell potential. Where low swelling and competent bedrock is encountered at foundation bearing depths, spread footings may be preliminarily designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure in the range of 3,000 to 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Footings bearing on low swelling bedrock may require a minimum dead load pressure in order to resist uplift should the foundation soils become wetted. Where soft and compressible clays are encountered, movement sensitive structures or Qbuildings with moderate to heavy foundation loads will probably require the use of straight shaft piers drilled into the bedrock. If higher swelling bedrock materials are encountered at or near proposed foundation bearing levels, a drilled pier foundation would also be necessary. Based on the subsurface conditions, it appears that pier drilling should be possible with relatively large, conventional drilling equipment on most of the site. However, the very hard sandstone and siltstone layers may require the use of a core barrel and/or rock auger to penetrate these materials. Since groundwater is above the bedrock or within the bedrock and caving soils are possible on the site, temporary steel casing and a concrete pump truck with a tremie will probably be required to adequately dewater, clean and construct drilled piers on most of the site. 10 Pavement Thickness Design and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Terracon Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 A more detailed, site specific geotechnical exploration will be necessary for each building lot in order to develop specific foundation and floor construction recommendations after site grading is complete and final building locations and type of construction have been established. Basement/Below-Grade Construction: Groundwater was measured at depths ranging from about four (4) to five (5) feet on the western portion of the site to about nine (9) to 101/2 feet on the eastern portion of the site. In particular, shallow groundwater (six (6) feet or less below the ground surface) was encountered in Test Borings 1, 4 and 6. Depending upon final site grading, basement/below grade construction will likely be precluded or limited on most of the site. Foundation drains will be necessary around all below grade/basement areas where groundwater or bedrock is encountered within three (3) to five (5) feet of the floor level. Site specific foundation drain details can be provided following supplemental geotechnical exploration. Slab-on-Grade Construction: Subsoils at relatively shallow depths consist primarily of non- expansive to very low swelling clays, or non-expansive to low swelling sandstone/siltstone bedrock. The properties of site grading fill can also affect the performance and design and construction recommendations of slabs-on-grade at the site. The use of slab-on-grade floors where non-expansive or low swelling soils are present is generally considered acceptable provided some movement of floors can be tolerated. For movement sensitive floors or equipment or heavily loaded floors, slab heave/settlement could be excessive in some instances. Based on our preliminary data, it appears that normal slab-on-grade construction is feasible on the site. Swell/settlement potential should be more thoroughly defined on each lot during design level geotechnical investigations. Pavement Design and Construction: Results of gradation and plasticity tests on selected samples likely to support pavements on the site indicate that the subgrade soils classified as A-6 and A-7-6 soils according to the AASHTO classification system. AASHTO group indices of these subgrade soils ranged from 4 to 27, although most of the group indices ranged from 20 to 27. Plasticity indices of the clays ranged from 11 to 28. These materials have a "CL" classification in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). A representative subgrade sample was selected for R-value testing. Laboratory test results indicate an R-value of 18 for the A-7-6 subgrade soils. R-value and soil classification test results indicate that the subgrade soils at the site generally have poor to very poor pavement support characteristics. The clay subgrade soils present at the site and are susceptible to disturbance and loss of strength under repeated wheel loads. This condition will likely lead to "pumping" soils and 11 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 unstable subgrades will develop, particularly on the western portion of the site and for cut areas. The use of low-contact pressure earth moving equipment may be needed to reduce the potential of "pumping" subgrade soils. Where possible, every effort should be made to minimize construction traffic on the site. Some method of subgrade stabilization should be anticipated prior to pavement construction on the site. Stabilization techniques could include the use of import granular materials and/or geogrids or geotextiles. Chemical treatment could also be considered for stabilization. Because of the shallow groundwater levels on the western portion of the site, careful consideration should be given to design subgrade elevations. We recommend grading plans be designed so that the final street subgrade is at least three (3) feet above the groundwater to reduce stabilization impacts. If this is not F1 possible, a properly designed underdrain system should be provided to reduce water infiltration to the pavement soils and associated loss of subgrade support. Design of pavements for the project have been based on the procedures outlined in the 1986 Guideline for Design of Pavement Structures by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The private access road within the project site is considered to have a local commercial/business designation. An 18-kip equivalent daily axle load (ESAL's) of 80 was used for the design of this street. If this assumption is not accurate and/or if a traffic study has been completed for the development, we should be contacted to provide supplemental recommendations. Design criteria for the I-25 Frontage Road was provided by a representative of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). The information provided includes a 20-year design traffic number of 1,485,000 18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESAL's). CDOT requires that new pavements be constructed on at least two (2) feet of select fill (SF) having a minimum R-value of 40. Depending upon design subgrade elevations, over-excavation and replacement with suitable material may be needed to provide the required fill thickness below pavements. Since the R-value of the on-site soils is less than 40, over-excavation and replacement (depending upon final grades) will be required for construction of the I-25 Frontage Road. The R-Value of the material to be used should be confirmed by the geotechnical engineer prior to importation to the site. For flexible pavement design, a terminal serviceability index of 2.5 was utilized along with an inherent reliability of 80 or 90 percent and a design life of 20 years. Using an R-value of 18 (correlated Resilient Modulus MR of 4,630 psi) for the private access road and an R-value of 40 (correlated Resilient Modulus MR of 9,497 psi) for the 1-25 Frontage Road, the ESAL values, environmental criteria and other factors, the structural numbers (SN) of the pavement sections were determined on the basis of the 1986 AASHTO design equation. Our 12 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 design calculations indicate that the appropriate areas can be paved using the following alternatives. Recommended Pavement Thickness(inches) Traffic Area Alternative Asphalt Aggregate. Select Fill Total Concrete Base (SF)with R- Surface Course Value ≥to 40 Private Access A 8 8 F Road I-25 5% 9 14% FRoadI-25 Frontage Rd. A 5 9 24 14 + SF The pavement sections presented herein are based, in part, on design parameters selected by Terracon based on experience with similar projects and soils conditions. Design Iparameters such as design traffic numbers, design life, terminal serviceability index, and inherent reliability may vary with specific project requirements. Variation of these parameters may change the thickness of the pavement sections presented. Terracon is prepared to discuss the details of these parameters and their effects on pavement design and reevaluate pavement design as appropriate. Aggregate base course should consist of a blend of sand and gravel which meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class 5 or 6 specifications is recommended for base course. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding six inches and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). Asphalt concrete should be composed of a mixture of aggregate, filler and additives, if required, and approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix designs stating the Marshall or Hveem properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. Aggregate used in asphalt concrete should meet particular gradations. Material meeting Colorado Department of Transportation Grading S, SG or SX specification (or equivalent) is recommended for hot bituminous'pavements. Mix designs should be submitted prior to construction to verify their adequacy. Asphalt materials should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts. Asphalt pavement within the CDOT right-of-way should be compacted to a density of 92 to 96 percent of the maximum theoretical density, determined in general accordance with ASTM D2041 or Colorado Procedure 51. Pavements for other areas of the site should be compacted in accordance with the above criteria or to the minimum compaction criteria in governing regulations. 13 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is critical to the satisfactory performance of the pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas in order to reduce the potential for wetting of the subgrade soils. The following recommendations should be considered at minimum: • Site grading at a minimum 2% grade away from the pavements; • Compaction of any utility trenches for landscaped areas to the same criteria as the pavement subgrade; • Sealing all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to minimize or prevent moisture migration to subgrade soils; • Placing compacted backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and, N • Placing curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on subgrade soils without the use of base course materials. Corrosion Protection (Concrete): We measured soluble sulfate concentrations for representative samples of the subsoils which will likely be in contact with structural concrete. The sulfate concentrations measured in the samples tested varied from 150 to 3600 ppm. ACI rates the measured concentrations as being a moderate to severe risk of concrete sulfate attack. Based on the preliminary data, ACI recommends the use of Type II cement for moderate sulfate exposure and Type V cement (or equivalent) for severe sulfate exposure for concrete members on and below grade. Maximum water cement ratios ranging from 0.45 to 0.50 should be specified for project concrete. Concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. GENERAL COMMENTS 1 Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide testing and observation during excavation, grading, foundation and other construction phases of the project. The analyses and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations which may occur between borings or across the site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. The preliminary recommendations presented in this report are intended for 14 Pavement Thickness Design and Terracon Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Weld County,Colorado Terracon Project No.22005203 planning purposes. A design level geotechnical exploration will be required on each building site in order to design and construct foundations and floor slabs. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental assessment of the site or identification of contaminated or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, other studies should be undertaken. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. In the event that changes in the nature, design or location of the project are outlined in this report. are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. II 15 1 tyy. VALLEY 66 BUSINESS PARK f ' 11K HWY STORM PUN / STA7E fIGWWAY 66 III _. . .4x35a:_S :4-Mg:._. - TH-12 N'59'42�E 500.31................ . . . � pinLpT_E_155R8 Si - - $ �v\ I I I I T�-2 i )/ ,' / \ LOT 3 LOT / ( ; LOT AL' \ 1.D6 ACRES LOT 2 \�pF I COMMERCIAL f 1// ./..k �\ INDUS �. INDUSTRIAL 1.49 ACRES V'� '/ f\ \� I I RESTAURANT/0 i l l I I j / _ J L - _-,..-_;76,%"4 L-- •, /// LOT 5 \ .// / 7:ltllil�yGPl� PR.PD . .S.. -CC S ROO ' 60 ROW_ / , 1.03 ACRES \ _ _- _I r= ._ — — /I INDUSTRIAL WALK TN,. I' Ste. ii Q/ 0' k \ ` S / I 0 3ill// / /I LOT 13 LITb-3 LOT 15 T6-// ' // 1 1.22 ACRES & 1.71 ACRES II z` LOT 6 , / OFFICE/COMMERCIALI IOFFICE/COMMERCIAL / !"'� //1/Q , 1.02 ACRES / III RESTAURANT OFFICE I'/ jA ' II I _4,• y /I - INDUSTRIAL - J� �/ _I° - 1-. - _ _ - _ -� J1 1 2, A - _ _ _ L I I1 /�27 �- _ - ; /;, 0' UTILDY EASEMENT (PP) , i ,,,-,// LOT 7 fi / III / f k / 2.04 ACRES ,i III LOT 11 /i //In -/, OFFICE/COMMERCIAL Ii / LOT 12 2.87 ACRES / ,/I // // IHOTEL/OFFICE/COMMERCIAL ' if,r I\L32 ACRES ./ . OFFICE/COMMERCIA I 5' UROtt EASEMENT (ttP) /� .�/ wr»-lo • e • • — s / iOpp5 __ -� �5' UT1Utt EASEMENT (ttP) $ p ___,...,=,_ _c LOT i L T0,, •b I '/ i rV�/ - _� � �� \\: 2.63 ACREv. ▪n iiiil I B � \.'r •'ar�" OFFICE/R8D/COMMERCIAL , 4t,\ LOT 9 AM,,. ‘ / \'\ \ 2.88 ACRES -`R'T ATp, a n /��20' 1ANOSCI TP•"4'MENT (TYP) OFFICE/R&D/COMMERCIAL het 4.`S,�-<�• — — o• '17 LOT 8 \.\` \\ PROPOSED WALKING PATH ,`` 2.90 ACRES \\ 6' WIDE CRUSHptFlNE SURFAGE:1 __ I I OFFICE/R&D/COMMERCIAL \, \ �, / 115' UTILRY EASEMENT (ttP) \ OUTLOT A tgAt �j ,'RELOCATED I-25 DRAINAGE \ IZGCND ' ••—••—••—••—••_•• 589'15'10'W 1325.86.•.:—••—••—•• APPPDXIMArr LOGAroN OF •• I RADEMACHER PROPERTY I S r Dr/LLtD ON 11/10/00 LYONS GG PACIPC,1 LC 4 LYONS CG PAGPIc COMMrtte PARK 5.E.CORNER OF l-z,AND 5TATE t1I6MNAY C3G WELD COUNTY,COLORADO PIGUer h PORING LocAnoN PLAN Project Nam9er� c5w �[[ / �R/ Project No.z2oon2o,. Aeon 9/" r51'� Rr`.-■ E aco Salk! I..-1•00' J Checked Ir r`eW 1242 Ironwood Place °°t.' 11/"t0/0o DIAGRAM f5PORroNIRALLOCArIONONLY,AND l5 RI CF9 5-19-99 Longmont, Colorado 89501 AbrINTr DLDPORCONSTRICTIONPLIPPO5C RO CHS 4-22-98 ZOPrwall or r5W 303-776-3921 Sheet Na, /d/ LOG OF BORING NO. TB-1 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS 8 y� g O O } QTg, z. DESCRIPTION • m < tdi Z E ti F O V a a il lit y U a 2 ` [7.,H a.Q� UFO vo d o Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. n S' z - 14E! o �' t°� ° g g E j0 5 \TOPSOTT / ., /// LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light r brown, very soft, moist to wet. CL CB 2/12 30 90 -0.4/25' y 5 ri / 8.0 N � CB 50/10 16 113 1.0/5�I �� I / 0 CB 50/6 24 97 1200 10 15 SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE,with thin claystone interbeds, tan, gray, rust, L weathered to very hard, moist to very • moist. r^ CB 50/3 i..._ 20 I25.0 CB 50/3 BOTTOM OF BORING 25 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.1rWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 4 5.5'11/10/00 Y 4'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED_ 11-10-00 WL a err acon RIG CME-55 - FOREMAN Dm WL APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 . LOG OF BORING NO. TB-2 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER 1 Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS t� O b a -it Cm -'� DESCRIPTION F W m XHS t� g C Z y, F °2 x m m W3 � (i O z' O � yid a' m h Z y 6 � O z8 DS Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. a Z f a ca a o v H ee e C� 0.5 \TOPSOIL � j LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light ._� brown, red brown, medium stiff to stiff, _CL CB 8/12 15 109 2450 +0.2/50) moist to very moist. 5 8.0 CB 50/8 22 104 3590 = 10 SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE,with thin CB 50/3 claystone interbeds, tan,gray, rust, 15 weathered to very hard,moist. - 4 _ 20.0 - CB 50/4 BOTTOM OF BORING 20 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSrnoN MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 2 1W 11/10/00 Y 10.5'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL n err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN um WL APPROVED ESW JOB a 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-3 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS u c R j 0 Z0 y ZZ DESCRIPTION °1 a `, u? Z h O V I a w y a >. ? ° `o c42 Hdi � U Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. c o Z I- . y - '•_ 0.5 TOPSOIL SANDY LEAN CLAY, slightly silty, 11 / 3.0 brown, light brown, red brown, moist. CL ij _ 1 I ,._ ••CB 50/8 17 109 -0.1/50. f f 'r SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE,with thin CB 50/5 14 74 claystone interbeds,tan, gray, yellow = 10 jbrown, weathered to very hard, moist. r 15.0 CB 50/2 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 t e I I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN—SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 I WL 4 Dry 11/10/00 Y 10'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL e 1 [erracon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DJD WL APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 li LOG OF BORING NO. TB-4 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER 1 Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park _ SAMPLES TESTS O O w Z O w U DESCRIPTION {- F id 2 3 M ii CC? V t' r" sp a z i a m y m w 3 y ° Daz ,uo w so 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. o o zz F a m c 2 n ° # !° M a E . 0.5 TOPSOIL / -, `) j L LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light — brown, red brown, very soft, moist to _CL CB 2/12 28 98 -1.5/25C wet moist. 5 — 4 - N j 8.0 r '! _ CB 50/12 21 105 4240 49 r 10 _ e - . j SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE, with thin CO 50/4 16 �•l claystone interbeds, tan, gray, yellow 15 brown, rust, weathered to very hard, — moist. 7_ 20.0 — CB 50/4 BOTTOM OF BORING 20 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSMON MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 4 6'11/10/00 Y 5.5'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL 4 erracon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN RID WL APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-5 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS U 0 pp O _• m OZ D¢ ow �� O DESCRIPTION (- F ni cn Zen= O U s. c a z " uhf � � n U . i b p > U � U e �4 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. O Z Z F a m o td o v, *4 o ` CC w•I CC C C" D s\TOPSOTT / _ LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light brown, red brown, medium stiff to stiff, _CL CB 8/12 27 94 +0.1/500 1 % moist to very moist. 5 j 8.0 1 — CB 50/10 19 109 +0.1/503 10 i _- SILTSTONE/SANDSTONF, with thin _ claystone interbeds, tan, gray, rust, — CB 50/3 weathered to very hard, moist to very 15 moist. — L 18.0 _ a20 _ CB 50/6 14 114 7040 _ CLAYSTONE/SILTSTON$, with sandstone — interbeds, tan, gray, rust, hard, moist. — 25.0 _ CB 50/6 15 25 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSMON MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 2 Dry 11/10/00 Y 9'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL 4 1 [Err 7con RIG iD WL CNIE-55 FOREMAN D • APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-6 Page 1 of 1 OWNERJCLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park i SAMPLES TESTS cp7 % M �l. O O Y Z DESCRIPTION �y ce P p�p��i y el uZi S O v a >' W C 7 m ra U `L' 4 = h co W t 3 y C 0 ,Z .:um .7 o Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. o 0 Z F a w 2 n °,n k tt° cn c. 05 TOPSOII I . \ / J,F.AN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light brown, red brown, moist to very moist. _CL Fri % 4.0 CB 6/12 25 99 1550 HIGHLY WEATHERED BEDROCK, = 5 II " sandstone/siltstone with claystone —interbeds, moist to very moist. 7.0 — SILTSTONE/SANDSTONF, with thin _ claystone interbeds, tan, gray, yellow 10.0 brown, hard to very hard, moist. CB 50/5 BOTTOM OF BORING 10 I LI THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 4 5'11/10/00 Y 5' 11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL G err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DJD WI. APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-7 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS J Z ° W i DESCRIPTION �` yy lz ti C'i F� C U z K W Vm U o Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. a Z F a m a .. -J °y ce n° we /:CA*0.5 \TOPSOTT / _ — - ,ii LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light brown, red brown, moist to very moist. —CL r / 4.0 — CB 11/12 22 101 1980 J-IIGHLY WEATHERED BEDROCK, 5 I sandstone/siltstone with claystone interbeds, moist to very moist. — 7.0 — I — SILTSTONE/SANDSTONF, with thin _ 2: claystone interbeds,tan, gray, yellow 10.0 brown, hard, moist. CB 50/10 t BOTTOM OF BORING 10 , THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 4 Dry 11/10/00 1 Dry 11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL G err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DJD WL APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-8 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT — Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS .]0 Z0 tst W N m DESCRIPTION a H �W Z Z 'M=cal O V�. S W 6 W W 2 U S g a aW zo — � � °uf� � Wi O Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. o E- a m f o O y 0.5 \TOPSOIL / — LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, dark — / brown, moist to wet. — CL CB 6/12 30 90 820 — 5.0 BOTTOM OF BORING 5 II k C 1 THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL 4 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL G Dry 11/10/00 X Dry 11/15/00 [err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN ND WL APPROVED ESW JOB/, 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-9 Page 1 of I OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT _ Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park _ SAMPLES TESTS - z0 yR y G RI 2 2 ki DESCRIPTION Q C Z z rn x O O F W w zrnx I' L u a r h O ac uop uO wda o Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. G Z F a w R o H. En 0.5 \TOPSOIL / --.I j LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, dark — brown, moist to very moist. _CL J 3.0 ^1 SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE, with claystone CB 50/9 18 103 1940 ,,,z 5.0 interbeds, tan, yellow brown, gray, \ hard, moist. / 5 i BOTTOM OF BORING &I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSn7ON MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL SL Dry 11/10/00 = Dry 11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL a err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN am WL APPROVED Li SW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-10 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS d c7 .o z ul rDi. g * � `� Z g g`u U DESCRIPTION m a a " LL y F m rN o Q �z w u ° r xQ o CCR E,if, w58 °' c o Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. a z t-- a III m f a .. o u ti a .S L n - - 0.5 \TOPSOII — r LEAN CLAY, slightly sandy, brown, light j brown, red brown, moist to wet. _CL CB 8/12 25 96 2060 -0.4/500 5 8.0 SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE, with thin = CB 35/12 10.0 claystone interbeds, tan, gray,yellow brown, weathered to medium hard, ( 10 moist. 1J BOTTOM OF BORING L. ii . J THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WL SZ Dry 11/10/00 = 9.5'11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL n - err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN Dm WL APPROVED , W JOB# 22005203 . LOG OF BORING NO. TB-11 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS O .d Z tR >, C W K 2 O Wy� e ytZ Ctf, DESCRIPTION g j r6v, m m m ti x a z w, y' a 6s 0 � � (i) mg o Da a Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. c z f a. m E O 000 St 4,..1 E ta e AAA 0.5 \TOPSOIL / LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, tan, beige, medium stiff, moist to very moist. CL CB 6/12 22 94 1430 f/ 5.0 5 BOTTOM OF BORING I a j THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 11 WL SZ Dry 11/10/00 = Dry 11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL n erracon RIG Cm-5S FOREMAN Dip WL APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 LOG OF BORING NO. TB-12 Page 1 of 1 OWNER/CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC SITE S.E. Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 PROJECT Weld County, Colorado Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park SAMPLES TESTS .. ,� z cm 8 a DESCRIPTION �y F- h 3 ,n z pc �.1 a W II 2 Y zo. - o �' Zla I7pp I O Approx. Surface Elev.: GRADE ft. o o z r-: a m i 8R E (?),, .I g u, 0.5 TOPSOIL /..: \ / ll _ 1 j - , ..„ : . . _ CL CB 14/12 16 107 3690 SANDY LEAN CLAY, silty,brown, light brown, orange brown, medium stiff to 5 stiff, moist. -- CL CB 8/12 22 1460 — 10.0 10 BOTTOM OF BORING I THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU,THE TRANSnlON MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-10-00 WI. 2 Dry 11/10/00 I Dry 11/15/00 BORING COMPLETED 11-10-00 WL a err acon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DJD WI. APPROVED ESW JOB# 22005203 10 8 ( , • 6 - 4 - 7 2 S 61 w E ti.i L CS O 4 ` D A -6 -8 - 10 - 0.I 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT Specimen Identification I Classification DI) MC% i� TB-1 4.0 Lean Clay (CL) 90 30 PROJECT Lynn 66 Pacific Commercefark -S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 8- - . 6 -- 4 - _ -1 I I 2 . . _ . S ri W E L -- C -2 O N IIS O L I I { I - 1 D A T I O -6 1 N 1 1 Ti 0.1 1 10 100 Li APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT lSpecimen Identification Classification DD MCA • TB 1 9.0 Siltstone/Sandstone; with claystone interbeds 113 16 1 1 / PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park-S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 1 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 - - - -_ 8 _ 6 _ } 4 t1 S r- W I E 6...1 L L `� - . I 1 C -2 r N N S O L I A I D A T I .. 1 N -8 id C ]0 _ 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT i Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% • TB-2 4.0 Lean Clay (CL) 109 15 , I _ PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park- S,E. JOB NO. 22005203 I Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 8 - _ . - 6- _. _ . _ 4 - 2 " , ` - S g"; w L i L C O 2 I N 1 S O L 1 , D 1 A t T I O -6 - 1 N g ICJ I 10 __ 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE Ft I Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% • TB-3 4.0 Silstone/Sandstone;slightly clayey 109 17 I PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park -S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SIJWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 8 6 4 2 S L. E L..� L � 1JIf 1 2 o A O - -8 -lo L1 01 10 100 JJ APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% • TB-4 4.0 Lean Clay (CL) 98 28 _ 1 PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park-S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 • 1 8 - . 6 - . • 4 I 2 FT I C • -2 O -4 A j T O -6 ` N -8 -10 0.1 I 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% •1 TB-5 4.0 Lean Clay (CL) 94 27 PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park - S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST t_ Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 I r 8 _ 6 . - - I 4 .- . _ . 2 . . . S --1{{ W E L a — . L C O -2 . 4 N i S O I 4 D A ! T I IN _8 i . j -10 _ 0.1 1 10 100 L APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT 1 Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% • TB-5 9.0 Siltstone/Sandstone; with claystone interbeds 109 19 PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park -S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado 10 a _ 6 4 - f 2 • w u L O -2 O A A O -6 _g to 0.1 I 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE-KIPS PER SQUARE FT Specimen Identification Classification DD MC% • TB-10 4.0 Lean Clay (CL) 96 25 1 _PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park- S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/30/00 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST Terracon Longmont, Colorado U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 13m 1/2 3 6 810 M16 30 40 50 70 1001 100 I I I I I I Ia 1 1 90 — — :N-- y� �ic .80 ')\E R 70 C E - " - N T 60 - - - - - - F - I _ N E50 .- B ' B Y 40 . ri W E I G 30 H N T - 20 10 - 0 100 10 1 0.l 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS it COBBLES GRAVEL SAND coarse I fine coarse I medium I fine SILT OR CLAY S-,ecimen Identification Classification MC% LL PL PI Cc Cu • TB-10 2.0 Lean Clay CL 46 19 28 CO TB-11 2.0 Lean Clay with Sand CL 41 17 24 ♦ TB-12 2.0 Sandy Lean Clay CL 27 17 11 * TB-6 2.0 Lean Clay CL 37 18 20 O TB-7 2.0 Lean Clay CL 44 17 27 S,ecimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • TB-10 2.0 4.75 0.0 7.5 92.5 I TB-11 2.0 9.50 0.1 15.3 84.6 A TB-12 2.0 9.50 2.6 34.9 62.5 * TB-6 2.0 4.75 0.0 12.8 87.2 O TB-7 2.0 9.50 0.1 10.1 89.8 PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park - JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/16/00 GRADATION CURVES Terracon Longmont, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/2 : 3 6 8101416 30 50 701001402 100 '��5;�� lal!�. 90 - - 80 - - P - _ E R70 _ C N T 60 F N E50 - - R B Y 40 •1 E G 30 - 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse I fine coarse I medium I fine Specimen Identification Classification MC% LL PL PI Cc Cu • TB-8 2.0 Lean Clay CL 41 17 25 CIE TB-9 2.0 Lean Clay CL 40 18 23 Specimen Identification 13100 1360 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • TB-8 2.0 4.75 0.0 7.9 92.1 I TB-9 2.0 9.50 0.6 10.2 89.2 PROJECT Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park- S.E. JOB NO. 22005203 Corner of SHWY 66 and Interstate 25 DATE 11/16/00 GRADATION CURVES Terracon Longmont, Colorado PHYSICAL PROPERTIES Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Terracon Project No. 22005203 Boring Depth Soil Class. Particle Size Distribution,% Atterberg Limits Moisture-Density Relationship Specific Water Soluble Corrected Remarks (R) Passing by Weight Gravity Matter,(%) R-Value 3" #4 #10 #40 #200 LL PI Dry Optimum Method Salts Sulfates Density Mo(%) re _ _ 6 1-4 A-6(17) CL 87.2 37 20 - 2 7 1-4 A-7-6(25)CL 89.8 44 27 2 8 1-4 A-7-6(23) CL 92.1 41 25 2 9 1-4 A-6(21)CL 89.2 40 23 2 10 1-4 A-7-6(27)CL 92.5 46 28 18 2,11 11 1-4 A-7-6(20)CL 84.6 41 24 2 12 1-4 A-6(4) CL 62.5 27 11 2 REMARKS: Classification/Particle Size Moisture-Density Relationship Specific Permeability R-Value 1. Visual 4. Tested ASTM D698/AASHTO T99 Gravity 8. Constant Head 10. Expansion Pressure_psf 2. Laboratory Tested 5. Tested ASTM D1557/AASHTO T180 6. Minus#4 9. Falling Head 11. Exudation Pressure 300 psi 3. Minus#200 Only 7. Plus#4 Note: NP = nonplastic a lierracon 30sl ierracon P.O.North Howes Street P. Box 503 FORT COLLINS,COLORADO 80521 (970)484-0359 FAX(970)484-0454 RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL ASTM. D-2$44 CLIENT: Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC Y PROJECT: Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park LOCATION: TB-10 @ 1'-4' TERRACON NO. 22005203 CLASSIFICATION: Lean Clay (CL); A-7-6(27) SAMPLE DATA TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 0 20 60 DENSITY (PCF) 99.6 104.1 109.3 MOISTURE CONTENT r/o) 25.2 22.6 19.9 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.00 0.00 1.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 130 120 100 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.52 2.43 2.40 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 218.8 354.0 708.0 CORRECTED R-VALUE 14.7 20.5 33.4 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 14.7 21.1 34.8 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 18 100 90 80 70 w 60 Q 50 CC 40 - 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 EXUDATION PRESSURE -PSI GENERAL NOTES DRILLING&SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon - 1-3/8" I.D., 2"O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger ST: Thin-Walled Tube-2%" I.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger RS: Ring Sampler-2.42" I.D., 3"O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger CB: California Barrel—1.92" I.D., 2.5" O.D. RB: Rock Bit BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS)the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the"Standard Penetration" or"N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of ..., groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short- term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils id have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. 1 CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS Standard Unconfined Penetration or Standard Penetration Compressive N-value(SS) or N-value(SS) Strength, Chi. psf Blows/Ft. Consistency Blows/Ft. Relative Density <500 <2 Very Soft 0—3 Very Loose 1Eli 500 - 1,000 2-3 Soft 4-9 Loose 1,001 - 2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 10-29 Medium Dense 2,001 - 4,000 7-12 Stiff 30-49 Dense 4,001 - 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 50+ 8,000+ 26+ Hard Very Dense RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Termis)of other Percent of Major Component constituents Dry Weight of Sample Particle Size Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15—29 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand #4 to#200 sieve(4.75mm to RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES Silt or Clay 0.075mm) Passing#200 Sieve (0.075mm) Descriptive Term's)of other Percent of PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION constituents Dry Weight Term Plasticity Index Trace <5 Non-plastic 0 With 5—12 Low 1-10 Modifiers > 12 Medium 11-30 High 30+ lierracon - l UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Names Coarse Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu 2 4 and 1≤Cc s 3e GW Well-graded gravel` More than 50% retained More than 50%of coarse Less than 5%fines° Cu<4 and/or 1 >Cc>3e GP Poorly graded gravel` fraction retained on on No.200 sieve No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty graver." than 12%fines° Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel°°" Sands Clean Sands Cu z 6 and 1≤Cc s 3s SW Well-graded sand' 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%fines° Cu<fi and/or 1 >Cc>3s SP Poorly graded sand' fraction passes No.4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand"' More than 12%fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand°" • Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A"lined CL Lean clays(M 50%or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 AL.0 No.200 sieve PI<4 or plots below"A"lined ML Silt organic Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clays " • <0.75 OL Liquid limit-not dried Organic siltKuao 7-1 Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clayALM t Liquid limit 50 or more L PI lots below"A"line MH Elastic SiltA•4N organic Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clayRLMP <0.75 OH Liquid limit-not dried Organic sift LIA° Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-In.(75-mm)sieve "If fines are organic,.add"with organic fines"to group name. ` 1 'If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles or ' If soil contains≥15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. boulders,or both"to group name. 'If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. `Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded Alf soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with • gravel with silt,GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel,"whichever is predominant. gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. L If soil contains≥30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add'sandy" °S ands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand to group name. with sift,SW-SC well-graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded sand mlf soil contains.3 30%plus No.200,predominantly gravel,add with silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay "gravelly'to group name. • N (Dao) PI≥4 and plots on or above"A"line. `Cu=Deo/D,o Cc= y DID x Deo °PI<4 or plots below"A"line. R. `If soil contains≥15%sand,add'with sand"to group name. P PI plots on or above"A"line. �+ °If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM. °PI plots below"A"line. 60. I I For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction °H ne so of coarse-graid ils �� te I — I Equation of"A"-line +J,• +p 0 Horizontal at PL=4 to LL=25.5. X 40.— then PI=0.73(LL-20) O p Equation of"U"-line °� Z Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7, G� )- 30 --- then PI=0.9(LL-8) - / - - CD o 20 Go • 0 i MH or OH 10 I 7 `---;, ...•tMLr/` 4 ML or OL 0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) m , l lerracon Form 111--0/98 _ ROCK CLASSIFICATION (Based on ASTM C-294) Sedimentary Rocks Sedimentary rocks are stratified materials laid down by water or wind. The sediments may be composed of particles of pre-existing rocks derived by mechanical weathering, evaporation or by chemical or organic origin. The sediments are usually indurated by cementation or compaction. Chert Very fine-grained siliceous rock composed of micro-crystalline or crypto- crystalline quartz, chalcedony or opal. Chert is various colored, porous to dense, hard and has a conchoidal to splintery fracture. Claystone Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Soft massive; gray, black, brown, reddish or green and may contain carbonate minerals. Conglomerate Rock consisting of a considerable amount of rounded gravel, sand and cobbles with or without interstitial or cementing material. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other materials. Dolomite A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral dolomite [CaMg (CO3)21. May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Limestone A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral calcite (CaCo3). May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Sandstone Rock consisting of particles of sand with or without interstitial and cementing materials. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other material. Shale Fine-grained rock composed of, or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Shale is hard, platy, or fissile may be gray, black, reddish or green and may contain some carbonate minerals (calcareous shale). Siltstone Fine grained rock composed of, or derived by erosion of silts or rock containing silt. Siltstones consist predominantly of silt sized particles (0.0625 to 0.002 mm in diameter) and are intermediate rocks between claystones and sandstones, may be gray, black, brown, reddish or green and may contain carbonate minerals. lierracon REFERRAL LIST Name: John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, : _3 Case# PF-555 County Towns & Cities Fire Districts _Attorney _Ault _Ault F-1 2-Health Department _Berthoud _Berthoud F-2 $$$ _Extension Office _Brighton _Briggsdale F-24 _Emergency Mgt Office - Ed Herring _Dacono _Brighton F-3 z-Sheriffs Office _Eaton _Eaton F-4 2—Public Works _Erie _Fort Lupton F-5 _Housing Authority _Evans _Galeton F-6 _Airport Authority z Firestone _Hudson F-7 2- Building Inspection _Fort Lupton _Johnstown F-8 CodeCompliance_S.-Ann_N-Beth _Frederick _LaSalle F-9 _ Kim Ogle (Landscape Plans) _Garden City &Mountain View F-10 _Lin (Addressing Change of Zone) _Gilcrest _Milliken F-11 -2-Assessor, Chris Woodruff _Greeley _Nunn F-12 _Grover _Pawnee F-22 State _Hudson _Platteville F-13 Div._ of Water Resources _Johnstown _Platte Valley F-14 _Geological Survey _Keenesburg _Poudre Valley F-15 _Department of Health _Kersey _Raymer F-2 z-Department of Transportation _LaSalle _Southeast Weld F-16 _Historical Society _Lochbuie _Union Colony F-20 _Water Conservation Board _Longmont _Wiggins F-18 _Oil&Gas Conservation Commission z Mead _Windsor/Severance F-17 _Milliken Division of Wildlife _New Raymer South Hwy 66 (Loveland) _Northglenn _North Hwy 66 (Greeley) _Nunn _Division of Minerals/Geology _Pierce Commissioner _Platteville _ Soil Conservation Districts _Severance Big Thompson/ FTC _Thornton _Boulder Valley/Longmont _Windsor _Brighton/SE Weld _Centennial Counties _Greeley/West Greeley _Adams _Platte Valley _Boulder _West Adams _Broomfield _Little Thompson _Larimer Federal Government Agencies Other US Army Corps of Engrs _School District RE- _ _USDA-APHIS Vet Service _Central Colo. Water Conservancy _Federal Aviation Admin (Structures _RR over 200 ft or w/in 20000 ft of Pub z Highland Ditch Airport _Art Elmquist (MUD Area) - Info Only _Federal Communications Comm a RE I/l/�C sN 6 94.1} CE . S MAY 23 2005 Weld County Planning Depatt�eptilield County Rczar eferral C GREELEY OFFICE �/�/ JUN X 3 2005 COLORADO RECEIVED May 18, 2005 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, Case Number PF-555 LLC Please Reply By June 15, 2005 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat for a 15 Lot Commercial/Industrial PUD in the MUD Legal • Pt NW4 of Section 26, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location East of and adjacent to 1-25 Frontage Road, and south of and adjacent to State Highway 66 Parcel Number 1207 26 000034 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you :,-insider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give fi ill consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemegto be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions rey:,rdill.g the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) June 9, 2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. U See attached letter. ,�} Comments: / V O earn men/ ri} • Signature #fin� - id Date 6/27/0 se- Agency Lnntr 4cces3 �iJ +Weld County Planning Dept. .918 10'Street, Greeley, CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 .(970)304-6498 fax 411" Bunn Weld County Referral 1111 D COLORADO May 18, 2005 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, Case Number PF-555 LLC Please Reply By June 15, 2005 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat for a 15 Lot Commercial/Industrial PUD in the MUD Legal Pt NW4 of Section 26, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location East of and adjacent to I-25 Frontage Road, and south of and adjacent to State Highway 66 Parcel Number 1207 26 000034 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) June 9, 2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan CrWe have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. U See attached letter. Comments: Cipan /L-(UC1l ) Ocfl2 /L 5Le-2 4nc,,LiSignature V l�L Date _Self-OS Agency ja77 ! billA/P,V9.AJ +Weld County Planning ❖918 10 Street, Greeley, CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax Weld County Sheriffs Office Me Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE To: Kim Ogle MAY 2 3 2005 From Ken Poncelow �l ✓ RECEIVED CC: Date: May 23, 2005 Re: PF-555 Kim, the Sheriffs Office approves this plan. Please notify the developer / owner that the Sheriffs Office would be willing to assist in the development of a security plan for the site free of charge. If this is of interest, please have them contact me. 1 JUN. 2.2005 3 00PM USA SOLUTIONS N0.63CP.2- - bNIra POWER FAX TRANSMITTAL June 2,2005 TO: WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES C/O KIM OGLE, PLANNER Phone: 970-353-6100 Fax: 970-304-6498 FROM: AI Trujillo, Senior Right Of Way Specialist Phone: 303-637-1241 Fax: 303-637-1338 I , L RESPONSE/RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NON-EXC LUSIVE EASEMENTS NAME OF kthuirshsioi4 FILING RECEIPT OF NOTICE COMMENTS DUE LYONS 66 PACIFIC L N/A 1 JUNE 01,2005 N/A COMMERCIAL PARK LOOKS GREAT FROM A RIGHT OF WAY PERSP ' ECTIVE L l i X 1 1 PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF I CAN BE OF FURTHER ASSISTANCE ON THIS MATTER AND THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR HELP. A CONSUMER OWNED UTILITY gouNra,ti MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Administrative Office: 9119 County Line Road • Longmont, CO 80501 (303) 772-0710• FAX (303) 651-7702 F viev+ June 2. 2005 Mr. Kim Ogle Weld County Planning Department 9l 8 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Ogle: I have reviewed the submitted material pertaining to the final plat for the Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Center Park, located south and adjacent to Highway 66 and west and adjacent to the I- 25 Frontage Road (Case Number: PF-555). All applicable codes as they pertain to water supply. fire hydrant locations, and fire department access must be met. Please note that the Fire District has never been provided with plans that show proposed fire hydrant locations. • A minimum fire flow of 2,500 gallons per minute, measured at a residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch, is required for a commercial/light industrial subdivision and may require more depending on a building size and type of construction as per Appendix Ill-A of the Uniform Fire Code. • Construction plans for the utilities, showing the location of fire hydrants, the size of water mains and available fire flows will need to be submitted to the Fire District for review and approval before street construction may begin. It should be noted. the maximum spacing between fire hydrants on public streets and along fire apparatus access roads is 300 feet in commercial subdivisions. • Fire apparatus roads must be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus (75,00(1 pounds) and must have a surface that provides all-weather driving capabilities. • Buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the pro%isions of the of the Uniform Fire Code, as ratified by the Weld County Commissioners, and all other codes and ordinances, as enforced by Weld County. • Street intersections must be marked with signs showing the street name and address range when building construction begins. If non-standard street signs arc used. the District respectfully requests to comment with regard to sign visibility. • All buildings within the subdivision shall have a legible address that is clearly visible from the street fronting the property Address numbers or letters shall contrast with their background. Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 Station 7 9119 Cnty Line Rd. 14308 Mead St.Unit B P.O.Box 575 P.O.Box 11 10911 Dobbin Run 50 Bonanza Dr. P.O.Box 40 Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 8500 Niwot Road Lafayette,CO Erie,CO 100 So.Forest St. 80501 80504 Mead,CO 80542 Niwol,CO 80544 80026 80516 Dacono,CO 80514 Mr. Kim Ogle June 2. 2005 Page Two • Plans for all buildings to be built within the subdivision need to be submitted to the Fire District prior to the beginning of construction. All applicable fire codes, as they pertain to buildings and construction, must be met for each individual pad site. Final site plans for individual pads will need to be provided to the Fire District for review and approval as development proceeds. • As soon as the final plat is approved, please have the applicant provide to the Fire District an eight and one half-inch by eleven-inch map of the subdivision showing the street configuration, street names, hydrant locations and addresses of the lots if available. Nothing in this review is intended to authorize or approve of any aspect of this project that does not comply with all applicable codt.ts and standards. We appreciate being involved in the planning process, should you have any questions,please contact me at(303) 772-0710. Sincerely, C4 \1 �G LuAnn Penfold Fire Marshal LMP/Ip cc: John Davis, 1224 Commerce Court, Unit 6, Lafayette, CO 80026 project file 'x.04.05 Weld County Referral C. COLORADO May 18, 2005 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, Case Number PF-555 LLC Please Reply By June 15, 2005 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat for a 15 Lot Commercial/Industrial PUD in the MUD Legal Pt NW4 of Section 26, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location East of and adjacent to 1-25 Frontage Road, and south of and adjacent to State Highway 66 Parcel Number 1207 26 000034 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services, If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) June 9, 2005 U We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan Ni We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. U See attached letter. Comments: /n,lee2D 9D,• r) </-1 a� WW2& co- .O1,4,O. Signature /79-a. 4x7// Date /p 3N.ec— aoar— Agency Cot c-weld County Planning Dept. 4918 10'"Street, Greeley, CO. 80631 4(970)353-6100 ext3540 4(970)304-6498 fax 2 'd E999-9LL-E0E aatlpltn 40 uotstnIQ BEE :G0 50 01 unC 4711 • Q RECEIVED i P( 2 3 2005 ounty Planning DepartmeWe/d County Referral 0 GREELEY OFFICE COLORADORECEIVED 2 4 2005 May 18, 2005 RECEIVED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, Case Number PF-555 LLC Please Reply By June 15, 2005 Planner Kim Ogle Project Final Plat for a 15 Lot Commercial/Industrial PUD in the MUD Legal Pt NW4 of Section 26, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location East of and adjacent to 1-25 Frontage Road, and south of and adjacent to State Highway 66 Parcel Number 1207 26 000034 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Utility Board Hearing (if applicable) June 9, 2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan U We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attaoksdttt. &wft � v� Comments:7Lt lotrn.& 5°a.cQ 0-61ec ci -k'h 9 l 'HALL. `ta. R u n c 1 - La(.a eisuctc744 nt hcd,Ua.& TrzAnn 9 AtiVVt4-tiAA (4- 46°4p(,ta_4441,44;0, K/ (( 414444. 0-4-teat. o WWI r- ` a Lxn t u1. -FL 8°- 61.4 -Fowl& rn aivt ka4eg criA. Signature A -7-1-w-1/4_aJ. D D. a-a. (nit, Date 6 I ( 3/0 5 Agency0 f Ake_0.A 111 •:weld County Planning Dept. ÷918 10`"Street, Greeley, CO. 80631 :•(970) 353-6100 ext.3540 ÷(970)304-6498 fax uaid - Tinning Department ' OFFICE 200! ipED Memorandum TO: Kim Ogle, W.C. Planning 1111 C DATE: June 16, 2005 • FROM: Pam Smith, W.C. Health Department p � I) COLORADO U CASE NO.: PF-555 NAME: Lyons 66 Pacific The Weld County Health Department has reviewed this Final Rat. There are no notes on the plat. During the Change of Zone review the Department recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall obtain water service from the Little Thompson Water District. 2. The applicant shall obtain sewer service from the St. Vrain Sanitation District. 3. The applicant shall obtain a storm water discharge permit from the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, if required. Silt fences shall be maintained on the down gradient portion of the site during all parts of the construction phase of the project. 4. During development of the site, all land disturbances shall be conducted so that nuisance conditions are not created. If dust emissions create nuisance conditions, at the request of the Weld County Health Department, a fugitive dust control plan must be submitted. 5. In accordance with the Regulations of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission any development that disturbs more than 5 acres of land must incorporate all available and practical methods which are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to minimize dust emissions. a. If land development creates more than a 25 acre contiguous disturbance, or exceeds 6 months in duration, the responsible party shall prepare a fugitive dust control plan, submit an air pollution emissions notice, and apply for a permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. 6. The Right to Farm statement as included in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan dated October 31, 2000 be required to be placed on any recorded plat. O:\PAM\PLANNINGWINAL PLATPF-555.RTF DDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES BUILDING INSPECTION 0 NORTH OFFICE 9181 Street (II ij GREELEY, COLORADO 0, E80631 54 j♦�' PHONE (970)353-6100, EXT.3540 FAX (970)304-6498 WI ' SOUTHWEST OFFICE 4209 CR 24.5 O • LONGMONT CO 80504 . PHONE (720)652-4210FAX (720)652-4211 COLORADO June 22, 2005 John Davis, Lyons 66 Pacific, LLC PF-555 Final Plat for a 15 Lot Commercial / Industrial PUB in the MUD. 1. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any new building. 2. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Plans shall include a floor plan. Plans may be required to bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. Two complete sets of plans are required when applying for each permit. Include a Code Analysis Data sheet provided by the Weld County Building Department with each Building permit application. Provide plans to Mountain View Fire Protection District for their review and approval. 3. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2003 International Building Code; 2003 International Residential Code; 2003 International Mechanical Code; 2003 International Plumbing Code; 2003 International Fuel Gas Code; and the 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code. 4. Each building will be classified for occupancy and building type at the plan review stage. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code for the purpose of determining the maximum building size and height for various uses and types of construction and to determine compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 27 of the Weld County Code. Building height shall be measured in accordance with Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code in order to determine compliance with offset and setback requirements. Offset and setback requirements am measured to the farthest projection from the building. Please contact me for any further information regarding this project. Sinc ely,j o er igiLp/�il Building Official Service,Teamwork,Integrity,Quality Weld County Planning Derni-tment GREELEY OFFICE OrH4.41446° JUN 2 9 2005 MEMORANDUM RECEIVED TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Mana er ' DATE: 28-June-2005 Q FROM: Peter Schei, P.E., PubI /i rks Department It COLORADO SUBJECT: PF-0555 Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park PUD(Final Plat) Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed these final plan materials and has the following development referral comments. Comments ❑ The applicant must address construction phasing of the proposed development, since this was documented at change of zone. o Access must be addressed to the off-site roadway system for any proposed phasing. ❑ Public Works has received a transportation impact study: 1-25 / State Highway 66 Commercial—Weld County, Colorado, (LSC #001200) sealed by Alex J. Ariniello (Colorado PE #14982) with LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. dated September 27, 2000. The report is acceptable to Public Works. o The applicant will be responsible for participation in the recommendations of the traffic impact study associated with the proposed development. Items must be listed in the off-site improvements agreement. o An Addendum Letter(dated April 4,2001,by Benjamin T. Waldman with LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.)to the above September 2000 traffic impact study was submitted by the engineer. • This information stated that the project will contribute approximately 10% of the traffic on the adjacent section of SH 66. The developer will be required to escrow funds to pay for improvements to SH 66 mitigating traffic impacts. ❑ Public Works has received an amended drainage report regarding this application from the applicant's engineer(Kinsfather). The Final Drainage Report—Lyons 66 Pacific Commercial Park—Weld County, Colorado, sealed by John. J. Kinsfathter(Colorado PE#36801)with Swift and Associates, dated February 7,2004,has been accepted by Public Works. o The department will keep the sealed report in the case file for use during the construction phase. ❑ Public Works has received: Pavement Thickness Design and Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report— Lyons 66 Pacific Commercial Park—Southeast Corner of Interstate 25 and State Highway 66— Weld County, Colorado, sealed by Eric S. Willis (Colorado PE #27741) and Edward J. Paas (Colorado PE #15776) with Terracon (Terracon Project No. 22005203) dated September 17,2001. The report is acceptable to Public Works. o The applicant has provided a pavement design: the minimum recommended pavement section is 5.5-inches Asphalt Concrete Surface over 9-inches Aggregate Base Course(access road),which is acceptable to Weld County. o Weld County does not approve full-depth pavement sections for roadways. ❑ In addition, Public Works has received: Geotechnical Engineering Report for Pavement Thickness Design — Lyons 66 Pacific Commercial Park— State Highway 66 Acceleration and Deceleration Lanes— South Side of Highway 66, East of Interstate 25 — Weld County.Colorado,sealed by Eric S. Willis(Colorado PE#27741)and Edward J. Paas(Colorado PE#15776)with Terracon (Terracon Project No.22005203A)dated September 17,2001. The report is acceptable to Public Works. o The applicant has provided a pavement design: the minimum recommended pavement section is 5-inches Asphalt Concrete Surface over 9-inches Aggregate Base Course (acceleration& deceleration lanes), which is acceptable to Weld County. o The applicant should coordinate State Highway improvements with Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). .______.______ Page 1 of 2 .. ❑ Public Works has reviewed (January 2004) roadway, drainage, utility/ construction plan drawings, by John J. Swift, P.E. with Swift and Associates—Consulting Engineers. The drawings are generally acceptable to Public Works. o Currently the plans are marked,"Plans for Review Only—Not for Construction". o Outlot D must be labeled as "reserved as CDOT right-of-way" along SH 66. Gloria Hice-Idler, in her letter dated 07-Feb-2005,asked Mr.Davis to reserve an additional 100-foot of right-of-way along State Highway 66. o Outlot E should be reserved for the proposed future connection with CR 9.5 (80-feet right-of-way). The outlot must be dimensioned and labeled with respect to `proposed future connection with CR 9.5 (80 feet right-of-way)' on the final plat drawings. o The Typical Road Cross-Section should specifically show and dimension: travel lanes, center turn lane, curb & gutter and sidewalk on all final drawing plans. o The plans must be resubmitted to Public Works. All drawings must be sealed by the engineer of record,before the Department will permit the case to proceed through the development process and before the plat may be recorded. o Certified drawings will remain in the department's file for use during construction. ❑ The applicant shall discuss the proposed off-site improvements to the I-25 Frontage Road as it connects to SH 66 (not on the applicant's property), including right-of-way, alignment with Mead Street / intersection, coordination with CDOT, coordination with Mead,construction,and associated costs(which maybe included in the off-site roadway improvements agreement). o Alignment of Mead Street north of SH 66 must be address and all associated construction costs. ❑ The applicant has not submitted Improvements Agreements According to Policy Regarding Collateral For Improvements (Public Road Maintenance). o On-site and off site agreements shall be submitted to Public Works for review. o The temporary span wire signal system at SH 66 and Mead Street must be addressed. o The 1-25 Frontage Road construction shall be discussed in the agreement. o Roadways must be indicated as to"public"or"private"maintenance. o The Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the final plat shall approve the agreements. ❑ The applicant must submit three (3) additional sets of final roadway, drainage, utility / construction plan drawings (stamped, signed, and dated)to Public Works for Weld County Field Inspectors' use during construction of the subdivision. ❑ The applicant or their agents may be required to obtain permits from Weld County's Public Works - Utility Agent, Ted Eyl, for each utility. Recommendation ❑ The above comments are prerequisites and shall be fulfilled prior to recording the final plat. Any issues shall be resolved with Public Works prior to recording of the final plat. 'PC: PE-0555 Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park MD(Final Plat) Email&Original:Planner:Ogle PC by Past: Applicant:John Davis PC by Post: Engineer:Swift and Associates—Consulting Engineers. Page 2 of 2 Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE 'JAN p320n iity' s MEMORANDUM RECEIVED TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Manager r DATE: 30-December-2005 ui J' FROM: Peter Schei,P.E., Public epartment • I COLORADO SUBJECT: PF-0555 Lyons 66 Paci tc ommerce Park PUD -Filing ONE (Final Plat) Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed supplemental final plan materials and has the following development referral comments. Comments ❑ Public Works has reviewed roadway, drainage, utility/ construction plan drawings, sealed (20-Oct-2005)by John J. Swift, P.E. with Swift and Associates—Consulting Engineers. The drawings are acceptable to Public Works. o The applicant has submitted three(3)additional sets of final roadway/drainage/utility construction plan drawings (sealed)to Public Works for Weld County Field Inspectors' use during construction of the subdivision. o Certified drawings will remain in the department's file for use during construction. ❑ The applicant has submitted Improvements Agreements According to Policy Regarding Collateral For Improvements (Public Road Maintenance)signed by John Davis on April 20, 2005,which is acceptable to Public Works. o The Phase 2 (2006) and Phase 3 (2007) Estimated Cost of Improvements have now been itemized, incorporated into the improvements agreement and are acceptable. Phase 1 (Lot#1)costs are acceptable. o The Board of County Commissioners, prior to recording the final plat, shall approve the (on-site) improvements agreement. ❑ Public Works has received a CDOT(Colorado Department of Transportation) letter dated 21-October-2005,by Gloria Hice-Idler describing the phasing and responsible parties for infrastructure attributed with the Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park development. The Public Works Department is satisfied with the submitted letter and will retain it in the project files. o Public Works recommends the letter be attached to the improvements agreement as an EXHIBIT,and that the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the final plat shall approve the agreement. o The improvements agreement, may additionally list the recommendation of the LSC traffic impact study: [1-25 / State Highway 66 Commercial—Weld County, Colorado,(LSC#001200) sealed by Alex J. Ariniello(Colorado PE #14982) with LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. dated September 27, 2000], and the acknowledgement of the 10% traffic contribution to SH 66 [Addendum Letter (dated April 4, 2001, by Benjamin T. Waldman with LSC Transportation Consultants,Inc.)]in a basic EXHIBIT. Escrow will be required. Recommendation ❑ The above comments are prerequisites and shall be fulfilled prior to recording the final plat. Any issues shall be resolved with Public Works prior to recording of the final plat. PC: PF-0555 Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park PUD-Filing ONE(Final Plat) Email&Original:Planner:Ogle PC by Post: Applicant:John Davis PC by Post: Engineer:Swift and Associates—Consulting Engineers. Page 1 of 1 N0V-10-2005 09:19AM FR0GI-ADMT +9703502198 T-659 P.001/003 F-884 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX no, FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL To: } Record your long distance Phone no. (not FAX number) C ' f access code (if necessary) y + I I on the back of this form From: Phone no. Date Time S( 0 ri a Pages sent(Include this torm) Comments • EdItions prior to 6/92 are obsolete and may not be used cDOT Form#41 9/92 N0V-10-2005 09:19Aµ FROM-ADW +9703502198 T-659 P.002/003 F-884 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGION 4 TRAFFIC '• P OT 1420 Second Street Greeley,Colorado 80631 (970)350-2148 ........ (970)350-2198 fax October 21, 2005 H Kinsfather Swift and Associates 1699 Geneva Circle Longmont, CO 80501 Re: Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Dear JJ, The Weld County Public Works Department has requested written documentation from CDOT regarding the phasing and responsible parties for various aspects of highway, access and frontage road improvements that will involve the Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park project. The following is a summary of said improvements: 1, Construction Phase 1 of the commerce park will consist of only Lot 1, at the northeast corner of the site. The realignment of the Frontage Road will not be included with this first construction phase, and Lot 1 will have to obtain access directly off of State Highway 66 through the typical single lot access permit process. This process will be undertaken by the lot owner and is independent from the commerce park improvements. The interim temporary access will be removed in the future, upon completion of the frontage road access. Lyons 66 will assist in completing the single lot access permit process for Lot 1, Phase 1, if requested. 2. CDOT will complete design of interchange improvements at Interstate 25 and Highway 66. Part of these improvements will include the incorporation of the developer's design of realignment of the 1-25 Frontage road through the commerce park, as well as a temporary span wire signal at the intersection of the realigned Frontage Road/Mead Street/Highway 66 intersection. 3. CDOT will purchase necessary ROW from the owners of the John Deere property to allow for construction of the realignment of the Frontage Road directly south of the existing intersection of Mead Street and Highway 66. All frontage road realignment improvements have been designed, and will be constructed and paid for by the owners of the commerce park. 4. CDOT will complete the processing of the commerce park access permit application. This permit will include approval of the design of the frontage road realignment, and acceleration/deceleration lanes along Highway 66. The owners of the commerce park will construct the improvements authorized by this permit. 5. Construction Phase 2 of the commerce park will include the realignment of the frontage road through the entire project, connecting to the existing frontage road at the southwest corner of the project, and Highway 66 at the northeast corner of the project. Phase 2 will commence after completing tight-of-way acquisition by CDOT for the Highway 66 widening and the frontage road realignment to Mead Street. N0V-10-2005 09:19AM FROM-ADIAT +9703502198 T-659 P.003/003 F-884 STA'l'E OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGION 4 TRAFFIC .w r OT 1420 Second Street Greeley,Colorado 80631 0 (970)350-2148 (970)360.2198 tax ............. _..,. 6. The owner of the commerce park will be responsible for the design of the temporary span wire signal. CDOT will construct the temporary span wire signal at the intersection of the Frontage Road/Mead Street/Highway 66.The owners of the commerce park will be responsible for paying for this improvement. 7. Construction Phase 3 of the commerce park will include completion of Pacific Circle and the remainder of the project. 8. When CDOT widens I-25 adjacent to the commerce park, the frontage road will be cul-de-saced, just off-site to the south of the commerce park unless CDOT, the town of Mead and/or Weld County come to an alternate design decision. 9. As agreed, CDOT is responsible for the acquisitions and the commerce park is responsible for the frontage road realignment constriction to Weld County standards. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, Cl oria Hice-Idler Access Manager xc: file 11/10/2005 10:33 3036667991 BOULDER PAC PAGE 01/03 Boulder Pacific Fax Sheet To: �.a ,-24 ea-7."-wn y Fax No: ti > ®y' Ce 970 -3 et- 6, 76) Date: //// o/a S" Fromm Subject: e� A cc/4.z; 424 O or ao /leg 1224 Commerce Crt#6 Lafayette,CO. 80026 ph: (303)926-7858 fax:303-666-7991 11/10/2005 10: 33 3036667991 BOULDER PAC PAGE 02/03 NOV-10-2005 00:20AM FROM-AOMT +8703502108 T-600 P.002/003 F-885 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION sREG �mTFIAFFIC s wi OT Greeley,Colorado 9003, , ...._ ___ (970)350-2148 " (970)350-2198 fax ..._ •.. .. .•. October 21,2005 LI Kinsfather Swift and Associates 1699 Geneva Circle Longmont, CO 80501 Re:Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park Dear JJ, The Weld County Public Works Department has requested written documentation from CDOT regarding the phasing and responsible parties for various aspects of highway, access and frontage mad improvements that will involve the Lyons 66 Pacific Commerce Park project The following is a summary of said improvements: 1. Construction Phase 1 of the commerce park will consist of only Lot 1,at the northeast corer of the site.The realignment of the Frontage Road will not be included with this first construction phase, and Lot I will have to obtain access directly off of Stare Highway 66 through the typical single lot access permit process. This process will be undertaken by the lot owner and is independent from the commerce park improvements. The interim temporary access will be removed in the future,upon completion of the frontage road access. Lyons 66 will assist in completing the single lot access permit process for Lot 1,Phase 1,if requested. 2. CBOT will complete design of interchange improvements at Interstate 25 and Highway 66.Part of these improvements will include the incorporation of the developer's design of realignment of the I-25 Frontage road through the commerce park, as well as a temporary span wire signal at the intersection of the realigned Frontage Road/Mead StxeetfHlghway 66 intersection. 3. CDOT will purchase necessary ROW from the owners of the John Deere property to allow for construction of the realignment of the Frontage Road directly south of the existing intersection of Mead Street and Highway 66. All frontage road realignment improvements have been designed, and will be constructed and paid for by the owners of the commerce park. 4. CDOT will complete the processing of the commerce park access permit application.This permit will include approval of the design of the frontage load realgnmcnt,and acceleration/deceleration lanes along Highway 66. The owners of the commerce park will construct the improvements authorized by this permit. 5. Construction Phase 2 of the commerce park will include the realignment of the frontage road through the entire project,connecting to the existing frontage mad at the southwest corner of the project, and Highway 66 at the northeast corner of the project. Phase 2 will commence after completing right-of-way acquisition by CDOT for the Highway 66 widening and the frontage road realignment to Mead Street. 11/10/2005 10: 33 3036667991 BOULDER PAC PAGE 03/03 N0V-10-2005 08:Z0AM FROM-ANT +8703502188 T-660 P.003/008 F-885 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORTATION REGION 4 TRAFFIC /rte S O T 1420 Second Street Greeley,Colorado 80831 (970)350.2148 (970)350-2198 fax 6. The owner of the commerce park will be responsible for the design of the temporary span wire signal. CDOT will construct the temporary span wire signal at the intersection of the Frontage Road/Mead StreerfiEghway 66.The owners of the commerce park will be responsible for paying for this improvement. 7. Construction Phase 3 of the commerce park will include completion of Pacific Circle and the remainder of thc project. 8. When CDOT widens I-25 adjacent to the commerce park, the frontage road will be cul-de-saced, just off-site to the south of the commerce park unless CDOT,thc town of Mead and/or Weld County come to an alternate design decision. 9. As agreed, CDOT is responsible for the acquisitions and the commerce park is responsible for the frontage road realignment constriction to Weld County standards, If you should have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, ?(CIA.0.24 —(dL— U on Hee Idler Access Manager se: file Page 1 of 2 Kim Ogle From: John Davis pdavis@boulderpacific.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:00 PM To: Drew Scheltinga; Kim Ogle Cc: Perry Eisenach; Peter Schei; Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US Subject: Re: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim,Drew,My partner and I think it is best to go ahead and plat per option #3 below. I have spoke with Dave Mantych at C-DOT who said he would e-mail our surveyor the necessary dedication details for the frontage rd. R.O.W. by tomorrow :am. Lyons 66 Pacific will provide a notarized, recordable restriction of sale document for lots with no surety. I am reviewing covenants for any changes there. This should get us to plat recording and timely schedule for Kum&Go Thanks, John Davis Original Message From: Drew Scheltinga To: Kim Ogle Cc: )davis@bouldejpacific.com ; Perry Eisenach ; Peter Schei ; Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT STATE.00.US Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:34 AM Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim This email is a follow up to a conference call between John Davis, Perry Eisenach, Peter Schei and me on Friday, March 3, 2006, our telephone conversation this morning and a telephone conversation with Gloria Hice-Idler this morning. On Friday we let John know that Weld County will maintain all the internal roads after the appropriate inspections and warranty periods as outlined in the Improvements Agreement (IA). Plat note 30 and the covenants will have to be revised accordingly. Also, Weld County will take over maintenance of the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat as a part of an agreement between CDOT and the County for Road 9%. CDOT requires the right-of-way for the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat have specific language dedicating that right-of- way to CDOT. That will provide for one continuous Frontage Road south of SH 66. CDOT will provide that language to me and I will foreword it to John and it can be added it the plat. The last item to resolve before recording the plat is how John will provide surety for the development phases. Three options were discussed and are acceptable to Public Works. 1. Use the submitted IA and surety that covers only Lot 1 and allow temporary access to SH 66 and plat only Lot 1 along with all public rights-of-way. 2. Wait for CDOT to get the 1-25 widening funded and get a revised letter from CDOT committing to construction. A revised IA eliminating surety for phase 2 could be submitted. 3. Use the submitted IA that covers only Lot 1 with no additional surety but restrict the sale of any lots within a phase in which surety has not been provided. John said he would check with his partner and let us know how he will proceed. Drew Scheltinga, P. E. Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P. O. Box 758 03/09/2006 Page 2 of 2 Greeley, CO 80632 970-356-4000 X3750 dscheltinga(@co.weld.co.us From: Kim Ogle Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:32 AM To: John Davis Cc: Drew Scheltinga; Peter Schei Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Thanks, If possible please let me know what their conditions for the plat may entail. Also, due to CDOT's construction of main road, with PW accepting maintenance after one year, the covenants will require revision prior to recording. Please resubmit text for review by County Attorney. Thanks for your update John. Kim Ogle Planning Manager Southwest Weld Service Center 4209 CR 24.5 Longmont, CO 80505 720.652.4210 extension 8730 T 720.652.4211 Facsimile kogle@co.weld.co.us From: John Davis [mailto:jdavis@boulderpacific.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:22 AM To: Kim Ogle Subject: Fw: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim, have talked with Drew&Peter and have direction to finalize plat. Thanks, John Original Message 03/09/2006 Page 1 of 2 Kim Ogle From: Drew Scheltinga Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:34 AM To: Kim Ogle Cc: jdavis@boulderpacific.com; Perry Eisenach; Peter Schei; Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim This email is a follow up to a conference call between John Davis, Perry Eisenach, Peter Schei and me on Friday, March 3, 2006, our telephone conversation this morning and a telephone conversation with Gloria Hice-Idler this morning. On Friday we let John know that Weld County will maintain all the internal roads after the appropriate inspections and warranty periods as outlined in the Improvements Agreement (IA). Plat note 30 and the covenants will have to be revised accordingly. Also, Weld County will take over maintenance of the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat as a part of an agreement between CDOT and the County for Road 9%. CDOT requires the right-of-way for the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat have specific language dedicating that right-of-way to CDOT. That will provide for one continuous Frontage Road south of SH 66. CDOT will provide that language to me and I will foreword it to John and it can be added it the plat. Tha !net itam to racniva hafnra rarnrrlinn the plat is hrnnr.IInhn will nrnvirta ci irate for?ha rlovolnnmant nhncac Threo nntinnc 'nmro discussed and are acceptable to Public Works. 1. Use the submitted IA and surety that covers only Lot 1 and allow temporary access to SH 66 and plat only Lot 1 along with all public rights-of-way. 2. Wait for CDOT to get the 1-25 widening funded and get a revised letter from CDOT committing to construction. A revised IA eliminating surety for phase 2 could be submitted. 3. Use the submitted IA that covers only Lot 1 with no additional surety but restrict the sale of any lots within a phase in which surety has not been provided. John said he would check with his partner and let us know how he will proceed. Drew Scheltinga, P. E. Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P. O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 970-356-4000 X3750 dscheltinga©co.weld.co.us From: Kim Ogle Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:32 AM To: John Davis Cc: Drew Scheltinga; Peter Schei Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Thanks, If possible please let me know what their conditions for the plat may entail. Also, due to CDOT's construction of main road, with PW accepting maintenance after one year, the covenants will require revision prior to recording. Please resubmit text for review by County Attorney. Thanks for your update John. Kim Ogle Planning Manager Southwest Weld Service Center 4209 CR 24.5 Longmont, CO 80505 03/09/2006 Page 2 of 2 720.652.4210 extension 8730 T 720.652.4211 Facsimile kogle@co.weld.co.us From: John Davis [mailto:jdavis@boulderpacific.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:22 AM To: Kim Ogle Subject: Fw: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim, have talked with Drew&Peter and have direction to finalize plat. Thanks, John Original Message 03/09/2006 Kim Ogle To: Bruce Barker Subject: RE: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Thanks, Kim Original Message From: Bruce Barker Sent : Monday, March 20, 2006 1:25 PM To: Kim Ogle Subject : RE: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Mike Shea just e-mailed me and I will explain to him why I think it best to get a deed of trust. The property it would cover is the remainder, without Lot 1. I will send you a copy of what I send him. Bruce. Original Message From: Kim Ogle Sent : Monday, March 20, 2006 1:23 PM To: Bruce Barker Subject : RE: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Thank you. Original Message From: Bruce Barker Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 1:20 PM To: Kim Ogle; Cyndy Giauque Subject: RE: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Kim: I called Drew to let him know that I would prefer to have a deed of trust to secure Lot 1. It would make it so that they could not sell that lot without Weld signing a release. Bruce. Original Message From: Kim Ogle Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10 :42 AM To: Bruce Barker; Cyndy Giauque Subject : FW: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Bruce, please provide comment . Thanks, Kim Original Message From: John Davis [mailto:jdavis@boulderpacific.coml Sent : Friday, March 10, 2006 8 :39 AM To: Kim Ogle Cc: Drew Scheltinga Subject: Fw: Sale Restriction Agreement Lyons 66 Pacific Kim,Drew, Will this work for the restriction agreement. John Davis Original Message From: "Michael A. Shea" cMShea@rothgerber.com> To: <jdavia@boulderpacific. com> Sent : Thursday, March 09, 2006 2 :54 PM Subject : Sale Restriction Agreement email it to Kim Ogle at the County to see if this will be sufficient. 1 Michael A. Shea Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons LLP One Tabor Center 1200 17th Street, Suite 3000 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 628-9565 (303) 623-9222 (fax) The information contained in this electronic communication and any document attached hereto or transmitted herewith is attorney-client privileged, work product , or otherwise confidential and intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any examination, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or reply e-mail and destroy this communication. Thank you. 2 Page 1 of 2 Kim Ogle From: Drew Scheltinga Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:34 AM To: Kim Ogle Cc: jdavis@boulderpacific.com; Perry Eisenach; Peter Schei; Gloria.Hite-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim This email is a follow up to a conference call between John Davis, Perry Eisenach, Peter Schei and me on Friday, March 3, 2006, our telephone conversation this morning and a telephone conversation with Gloria Nice-Idler this morning. On Friday we let John know that Weld County will maintain all the internal roads after the appropriate inspections and warranty periods as outlined in the Improvements Agreement (IA). Plat note 30 and the covenants will have to be revised accordingly. Also, Weld County will take over maintenance of the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat as a part of an agreement between CDOT and the County for Road 9%. CDOT requires the right-of-way for the 1-25 Frontage Road shown on the plat have specific language dedicating that right-of-way to CDOT. That will provide for one continuous Frontage Road south of SH 66. CDOT will provide that language to me and I will foreword it to John and it can be added it the plat. The last item to resolve before recording the plat is how John will provide surety for the development phases. Three options were discussed and are acceptable to Public Works. 1. Use the submitted IA and surety that covers only Lot 1 and allow temporary access to SH 66 and plat only Lot 1 along with all public rights-of-way. 2. Wait for CDOT to get the 1-25 widening funded and get a revised letter from CDOT committing to construction. A revised IA eliminating surety for phase 2 could be submitted. 3. Use the submitted IA that covers only Lot 1 with no additional surety but restrict the sale of any lots within a phase in which surety has not been provided. John said he would check with his partner and let us know how he will proceed. Drew Scheltinga, P. E. Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P. O. Box 758 • Greeley, CO 80632 970-356-4000 X3750 dscheltinqa@co.weld.co.us From: Kim Ogle Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:32 AM To: John Davis Cc: Drew Scheltinga; Peter Schei Subject: RE: Lyons 66 plat notes Thanks, If possible please let me know what their conditions for the plat may entail. Also, due to CDOT's construction of main road, with PW accepting maintenance after one year, the covenants will require revision prior to recording. Please resubmit text for review by County Attorney. Thanks for your update John. 03/06/2006 Page 2 of 2 Kim Ogle Planning Manager Southwest Weld Service Center 4209 CR 24.5 Longmont, CO 80505 720.652.4210 extension 8730 T 720.652.4211 Facsimile kogle@co.weld.co.us From: John Davis [mailto:jdavis@boulderpacific.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 8:22 AM To: Kim Ogle Subject: Fw: Lyons 66 plat notes Kim, have talked with Drew&Peter and have direction to finalize plat. Thanks, John Original Message 03/06/2006 Lyons 66 Page 1 of 1 Kim Ogle From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.00.US] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 10:51 AM To: jdavis@boulderpacific.com; Kim Ogle; Drew Scheltinga; Steve.Zgorzynski@FHUENG.COM Cc: Davis, David D; Grube, Bob; Zufall, James Subject: Lyons 66 There seems to be some confusion regarding the dedication of the right-of-way for the frontage road within the Lyons 66 property. CDOT needs that property to be dedicated to us in order to proceed with our plans. Future maintenance of that road once WCR 9 1/2 is completed will be discussed in future e-mails. Gloria Hice-Idler Access Manager COOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 03/06/2006 Page 1 of 2 Kim Ogle From: Peter Schei Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 1:09 PM To: 'John Davis' Cc: Drew Scheltinga; Kim Ogle; Donald Stang Subject: PF-0555 ... plating Lyons 66 Importance: High Good Afternoon, John: Per our telephone conversation yesterday ... Please label and dimension DEDICATIONS or RESERVATIONS on the Final Plat and call-out the appropriate authority (CDOT, Weld County, HOA, etc.). I think the dedications or reservations of right-of-way can best be accomplished on the Final Plat. Maybe the 'dedication' of the OUTLOTS is Noted on the Final Plat as well ... and accomplishes the ownership of said outlot. Please sign, date and notarize the Improvements Agreement(s) and submit to Planning. (Public Works would appreciate a current copy of the improvements agreement to p_r_enare coordinated inspection services at this time. Send to our office_Thank you!) I think this takes care of everything. Have a good day, Peter. Peter SCHEL P.E., Weld County-Public Works Department 1111 -H Street, Greeley,CO 80632 970.356.4000 x3750 pschei@co.weld.co.us "Welcome Home - to Weld County" From: Kim Ogle Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:39 AM To: John Davis Cc: Drew Scheltinga; Peter Schei Subject: RE: plating Lyons 66 please direct this question to either drew or peter in public works. 970-356-4000 x 3750. Thanks, kim From: John Davis [mailto:bpinc0l@attglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:38 AM To: Kim Ogle Subject: Fw: plating Lyons 66 Kim, Still waiting on direction for dedications on plat to advise Flatirons Surveying. I anticipate providing a letter of credit for phase I collateral.Do I need to sign and notarize the improvements agreement? Original Message From: John Davis To: Kim Ogle Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:30 PM Subject: Re: plating Lyons 66 02/10/2006 Page 2 of 2 Kim,please advise on iteml.I below. The surveyors are finishing the requirements for the plat and are asking the same question-why aren't all these dedications to Weld county, CDOT,property owners, etc.dedicated at plat recording?Has a schedule been set for county commissioner approval and signature? Thanks,John Davis Original Message From: Km Ogle To: John Davis Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 4:24 PM Subject: RE: plating Lyons 66 From: John Davis [mailto:bpinc0l@attglobal.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 4:18 PM To: Kim Ogle Subject: Re: plating Lyons 66 Kim,re: iteml.G- I assume you have forwarded the copy of final covenants,1 sent you, to the Weld County Attorney's office for approval. Approved by Lee iteml.I-I thought the plat would record first and then we would deed outlots to the Property owners Assoc., as,in effect,we are doing on Lot 1. But I guess we can deed a meets and bounds description of the outlots already submitted in the covenants to the Assoc.prior to plat recording. Does that work? iteml.h-The Assoc. is currently being registered with the state , okay thanks Let me know,John Davis Original Message From: Kim Ogle To: John Davis Cc: Peter Schei ; Drew Scheltinga Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 8:56 AM Subject: RE: plating Lyons 66 comments were forwarded to you. with receipt of plats for review the turn around at this point is approximately two weeks. Collateral for Filing one improvements requires review and acceptance by the Board. this should be done sooner rather than later. Questions, please contact me by email. Thanks Kim Ogle Planning Manager Department of Planning Services 918 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 970 353 6100 x 3540 Telephone 970 304 6498 Facsimile From: John Davis [mailto:bpinc0l@attglobal.net] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:33 PM To: Kim Ogle Subject: plating Lyons 66 Kim,Can you give me a timeline for completing plating and recording? John Davis 02/10/2006 LYONS 66 PACIFIC COMMERCE PARK CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH RANGE 68 NWT OF 771E 6171 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO AREA = 35.01 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PHASE 2 HIGHWAY ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS t-�__-_.-__-..-__-__-___._ Z.•Q•? •�•C•�*��s�a a aa��•Q*i••i•i G0i44".•i�G��i�i..4"4 i� ��•N.i:.-Led. )..• ,_1..01►•-••s:.AAA�AAt:A•�•..•. �tttt♦tt♦tt♦♦t♦♦♦t♦t♦♦t♦ttt t ' 7 v ♦t♦ ♦ :tttttt- ...�.s•.w..*parr, A►•,►� drPHASE•ArmZTEMPORARY ilk! •= ppieHIGHWAY ACCESS C110;cL2A-0AD W reed` PER COOT re♦ne, era 4 vi re"tvt ".►ttttt'Jr tttt ttttjtttttttttNti 44••••t?ttttt•►.1r Ott. ,•tA►tttttttt.5 )t 4AtttttttO /�� r ♦v-vs.:aptt►♦-r+t4�'t►t ttt•►��ttut►tt♦tt♦♦s•t♦♦tttttttttttt�t ls7/tttt�t� •!e�► ttt�•i�a g. tanr-.-- . A�t r t�1� ribi y �e�`lsrti��t� LEGEND )tss'i'tstttst•i t•►si+ts'ts' tt•�ttttttttt•ttt`� t O t t t t t p t t t t t t t t t t tai l t tt►ttttttttt�Ittttttt ...sttttt�tttt.' tr- r►t♦t ♦♦ttt♦♦tttt♦1�� ♦♦t♦♦♦♦♦t.tr.+�w► t,►t�r..1,,,.Vy1t PHASEtt• ttttttttttttl�si�t«, J14:`1sCt'`tttttsr4‘tttttPHASE 2✓.-�.lip♦tt/1t♦tsw'•►4r �tttts�t��0�1�t�t�t��f ... .. 4Ott*ttttttttttttt ♦► ►•tl�tttttttttttttttttt�ttttttttttttttttt♦t'��ttttttttttttttt�ttttt• PHASE 3 ►b♦!►'•tptpptttt�tt��t�ttt�tO�ttt0t 1 >t�t�t�t�t�t�tO�tO� Asa is<.►♦t♦♦t ♦♦t♦I. . -t♦ttttttt♦t♦♦ttttt --- S SS I II II I Malta SWIM WELD COUNTY ROAD ACCESS INFORMATION SHEET Weld County Department of Public Works 111 H Street, P.O. Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632 Phone: (970 )356-4000, Ext. 3750 Fax: (970) 304-6497 Road File #: Date: 4"- fa - °r RE # : Other Case #: 1. ApplicantNameTo4t) Diri_v/I--- Fc1 govr.pfri Pot-ti rrc rNC P hone i/70?)476-7rr£5 Address /214 Con.....tt. FCC (von-7 #6 City LA-Fatri-ci State Co Zip gOoj.6 2. Address or Location of Access J^'7CP.SC C7.av or Ai f#4,0 1'T 44 NO Si! 66 Section Z6 Township ? Range el Subdivision — Block Lot Weld C.,,,,,ty Road #:574 6.6 Side of Road Sov7,ar Distance from nearest intersection 47 '..7,--(retrEcr:°^r oG tir£.a0 .f- ,4g4 3. Is there an existing access to the property? Yes No X # of Accesses St, C 6 4. Proposed Use: rir Permanent U Residential/Agricultural Si Industrial ❑ Temporary R. Subdivision .3' Commercial ❑ Other 5. Site Sketch „) Legend for Access Description: /414D tr irate" d. AG = Agricultural v RES = Residential cif 66 I 3 I So- 6 6 O&G = Oil&Gas D.R. = Ditch Road I . l lC O = House vi ' •• A-az rodO = Shed K rodGc4 i ' *lotFn0N-raG (7-OA--DP • = Existing Access _® L 7 A = Proposed Access tiF_M.�� 1.. 1 T-LT- Li S (<f=ov QG £ Nr r SAD I Z 14 /mil/ • ****************e************xxr.******* OFFICE USE ONLY: Road ADT Date Accidents Date Road ADT Date Accidents Date Drainage Requirement Culvert Size Length Special Conditions ❑ Installation Authorized ❑ Information Insufficient Reviewed By: Title: -8- AFFIDAVIT OF INTERES TED LAND OWNERS Page 1 of 2 AFFIDAVIT OF INTERESTED LAND OWNERS SURFACE ESTATE. Subject Parcel: 120726000034 THE UNDERSIGNED, states that to the best of his or her knowledge the attached list is a true and accurate list of the names, addresses,and the corresponding Parcel Identification Number assigned by the Weld County Assessor of the owners of the property (the surface estate)within 500 feet of the property being considered. This list was compiled utilizing the records of the Weld County Assessor available on the Weld County Internet Mapping site, http://www.co.weld.co.us,and has not been modified from the original. The list compiled from the records of the Weld County Assessor was assembled within thirty days of the application's submission date. Signature _47/n � Date Property Owners Within 500 ft. of Parcel# 120. 726000034 NAME MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL IDENTIFICATION# C/O COYLE INC C & B LIMITED LLC 410 MAIN ST 120727102013 LONGMONT,CO 80501 P O BOX 245 CALABRESE INVESTMENTS LLC 120723304012 MEAD,CO 80542-0245 PO BOX 245 CALABRESE INVESTMENTS LLC 120723304013 MEAD,CO 80542-0245 8918 ROGERS RD EVEN MIKE& 120726201004 LONGMONT,CO 80503 2322 S ROGERS HILGERS DONALD C VILLA 20 120722000021 MESA,AZ 85202 LONGS PEAK EQUIPMENT 4322 HWY 66 PROPERTIES LLC 120726000026 LONGMONT,CO 80504 C/O FRED KELLY JR ONE MEAD CROSSINGS LLC TABOR CT 120727102014 1200 17 ST STE 1000 DENVER,CO 80202 C/O FRED KELLY JR ONE MEAD CROSSINGS LLC TABOR CT 120727102015 1200 17 ST STE 1000 DENVER,CO 80202 13855 DEERE COURT http://maps.merrick.com/website/weld/setSgl.asp?cmd=buffer&PIN=120726000034&Part=1... 2/16/05 AFFIDAVIT OF INTERESTED J_AND OWNERS Page 2 of 2 MERRIMAN RICHARD L 120726201002 LONGMONT,CO 80504 C/O STAR PRECISION INC NICOLAE LLC 7300 MILLER DR 120723304005 LONGMONT,CO 80504 17380 W 70TH AVE PRINTZ GROUP INC 120723304006 ARVADA,CO 80007 13184 COUNTY RD 13 R &M LAND COMPANY 120726000037 LONGMONT,CO 80504 137741-25 FRONTAGE RD RADEMACHER JANICE M 120726000029 LONGMONT,CO 80501 137281-25 FRONTAGE RD RADEMACHER ROBERT R& 120726000032 LONGMONT,CO 80504 PO BOX 64281 RESEARCH SEEDS INC 120723001051 ST PAUL,MN 55164-0281 14015 MEAD ST RJ FOOD MART LLC 120723304024 MEAD,CO 80542 14015 MEAD ST RJ FOOD MART LLC 120723304025 MEAD,CO 80542 4315 HWY 66 SEKICH CO LLC 120726201003 LONGMONT,CO 80504 C/O SEKICH FARMS SEKICH CO LLC 4315 HWY 66 #4 120723001004 LONGMONT,CO 80504 C/O SEKICH FARMS SEKICH CO LLC 4315 HWY 66 #4 120723001050 LONGMONT,CO 80504 4315 HWY 66 SEKICH COMPANY LLC 120726201001 LONGMONT,CO 80504 TWIN PEAKS LAND & 4100 S VALLEY DR INVESTMENT LLC 120723304022 MEAD,CO 80504 C/O JOHN P GLAVIN VALLEY SIXTY-SIX 513 LINCOLN AVE 120723304021 WINNETKA,IL 60093 http://maps.merrick.com/website/wel d/setSgl.asp?cmd=buffer&PIN=120726000034&Par 1=1... 2/16/05 LIST OF MINERAL OWNERS AND MINERAL LESSEES (Lyons 66) Subject Property: Township 3 North, Range 68 West, 6th P.M., Weld County, CO Section 26: That part of the NW'/ more particularly described in that certain Warranty Deed dated March 1, 2000, recorded under Rec. No. 2755526 of the real property records of Weld County. Crews & Zeren, LLC, a mineral title company, states that to the best of its knowledge the following is a true and accurate list of the names and addresses of the mineral owners and mineral leasehold owners having an interest in the Subject Property, based upon the real property records of Weld County, Colorado, as same were verified at February 20, 2005. A facsimile or photocopy of this list shall, for all purposes, be as valid as the original hereof. Dated this 2nd day of March, 2005. CREWS & ZEREN, LLC By: Wi i m G. Crews, CPL Certified Professional Landman #3477 Mineral Owners: Mineral Leasehold Owners: Lyons 66 Pacific LLC Kerr-McGee Rocky Mountain Corp. 1224 Commerce Court, Unit 6 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600 Lafayette, CO 80026 Denver, CO 80202 Crews e4'Zeren,LLC Mineral-'nth Services P.O. Box336337 (970)351-0733 Greeley, CO 80633-0606 Page 1 of 2 Fax(970)351-0867 Hello