The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20242132.tiffUSE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION FOR PLANNING DEPART EJ T USE: AMOUNT $ APPLICATION RECEIVED BY PROPERTY INFORMATION DATE RECEIVED: CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: Is the property currently in violation? TA No / Yes Violation Case Number: Parcel Number: 1 0 5 3 1 9_ 3 _ 0 0_ 0 3 7 Site Address: 24125 County Road 42, La Salle, CO 80645 Legal Description: Lot A RE -1506, PT SW4 19-4-64 Section: 19 , Township 4 N, Range 64 W Zoning District: Within subdivision or townsite? M No / Yes Name: N/A N/A A Acreage: 8.39 +/- Water (well permit # or water district tap #): Well permit no. 294098 Sewer (On -site wastewater treatment system permit # or sewer account #): SP -1400103 Floodplain TA No / Yes Geological Hazard TA No / MYes Airport Overlay ] No / OYes P ROJECT U SR Use being applied for: Name of proposed business: Major Amendment to USR12-0061 to update operations of oil and gas support and services operation Atlas Energy PROPERTY OWNER(S) (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Name: William Parker Guttersen, Manager Company: COLORADO PROPERTY HOLDING COMPANY, LLC Phone #: (970) 371-1111 Email: parker@fortressds.com Street Address: 4407 29th Street City/State/Zip Code Greeley, CO 80634 APPLICANT/AUTHORIZED AGENT (Authorization Form must be included if there is an Authorized Agent) Name: Hannah Dutrow Company: AGPROfessionals Phone #: (970) 535-9318 Street Address: 3050 67th Avenue City/State/Zip Code: Greeley, CO 80634 Email: hdutrow@agpros.com I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, and/or plans submitted with or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. All fee owners of the property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, an Authorization Form signed by all fee owners must be included with the application. If the fee owner is a corporation, evidence must be included indicating the signatory has the legal authority to sign for the corporation. aN S ignature �.� `-- " Date Signature William Parker Guttersen, Manager Print Print Date 07/22 DEPARTMENTS OF PLANNING BUILDING, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 1402 NORTH 17TH AVENUE PO BOX 758 GREELEY CO 80632 AUTHORIZATION FORM Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC AGPROfessionals I, (We), , give permission to (Owner — please print) (Authorized Agent/Applicant—please print) to apply for any Planning, Building, Access, Grading or OWTS permits on our behalf, for the property located at (address or parcel number) below: Parcel no. 105319300037 Address: 24125 WCR 42, La Salle, CO 80645 Lot A RE -1506 19 4 64 Legal Description: of Section , Township N, Range W Subdivision Name: NIA Property Owners Information: 4407 W. 29th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 Address: Lot N/A Block N/A (970) 371-1111 Phone: E-mail: parker@fortressds.com rker@fortressds.com Authorized Agent/Applicant Contact Information: Address: 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80634 (970) 535-9318 Phone: HDUTROW@AGPROS.COM E -Mail: Correspondence to be sent to: Owner Authorized Agent/Applicant by: Mail Email Additional Info: I (We) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and after carefully reading the entire contents of this document_ that theinfor # *ation stated above is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Date1 41 � L Owner Signaturd¢_ Owner Signature {h Subscribed and sworn to before me this q day of Cy1 visa( irlcer 6u*eren My commission expires ozistoi I2O2L0 Date 20 2.4 by MEAGAN BECHLER Notary Public State of Colorado • Notary ID # 20224030390 My Commission Expires 08-04-2026 07/22 11 <,/e e\>4\s COLORADO PR a The type of $%Ise: WHEN RECD REfUR(V�O: 49070 07/05/2023 08:47 Tot iges: 1 Rec Fee: $ oppes - Clerk and� <4> COLORADO PROPERTY H ,© rder, Weld Count O tr COMPANY, LLC, A COLO 4407 29TH STREET, (3 ley, ZO 80634 „ co) STATEMENT �O_,{F�t�THORIIY 1. This Statement of relates to an entity1 named HOLDING COMPANY, OLORADO LIMED LIABI 11 II Co 0 onprofit Corporation Limited Liability Company General Partnership (_ Limited Partnership (7 3. The entity is fo 4. The mailing 5. The Li Registered Limited Liability P ce-N> El Registered Limited Liabil it cited Partnership El Limited Partnership • . •'ation err O Government o mental Subdivision or Pgen Trust %@)% v a: '1 PIC\aMITED LIABILITY COMPANY(S.:—. OM 12nd Tale irons. PANY der the laws of Colorado for the entity is 4407 29Th S ET, Greeley, CO 80634 position of each person 4orized to execute instruments ng, encumbering or otherwise1ng title to real 4 <\c? on behalf of the entity is WIL • ; . ARKER GUTTERSEN, MANA 6. ie authority of the foregoing persoah to bind the entity: El is2 not lirnQ Q is limited as follows: 7. Other matters concerning 'th Vier in which the entity deals gists in real property: � � P Pe1'tY 8. This Statement of Ault)?i executed on behalf of the en ty ant to the provisions of §38-3 9. This Statement of � d'rity amends and supersedes in �,iQ pects any and all prior dated ents of Authority executed on be cter C) the entity- � ,.cam' Executed this t, ay June 30th, 2023 COLO N . PROPERTY HO ' IN COMP ' r * LLC, A COL O LIMITED LI )d sys,PARKER G State of Colorado.�C County of r 4c\s.? <S )ss. The g instrument was ac owledg re me on this d COL O PROPERTY HOLDI G COM , LLC, A COLO Less my hand and official seal My Commission expires: is fm m should be ati unless the entity is capable of holding ' to real property. 2 he absence of tatfan shall be patina fade evidence that limitation Sn afie ststern ty must be recorded to obtain the be of the statute. 60 op \/ 884 closing/recordings/so& <\(?9 (.1/3 C.R.S. 3 g\> ne 3 by WIL PARKER G Vie• _= IffY ' a MPANY c‘\ "\;,? C;44 AS MANAGER OF ISABEL GALINDO-GLUE OTARY PUBLIC .> STATE OF COLORAD V N OTA RY ID 2022402 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES O6/1`412026 \s› S ©® c� %tcY ty> %/). Ift lilIlillil I i 111111111III� ` Colorado Secretary of State Colorado Secretary of State ID#: 20231623442 Document #: 20231623442 Filed on: 06/12/2023 12:04:12 PM Paid: $50.00 Articles of Organization for a Limited Liability Company filed pursuant to § 7-90-301 and § 7-80-204 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) The domestic entity name of the limited liability company is Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC The principal office street address is 4407 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US The principal office mailing address is 4407 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US The name of the registered agent is William Guttersen The registered agent's street address is 4407 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US The registered agent's mailing address is 4407 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US The person above has agreed to be appointed as the registered agent for this entity. The management of the limited liability company is vested in Managers There is at least one member of the limited liability company. Person(s) forming the limited liability company William Guttersen 4407 W 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US Causing this document to be delivered to the Secretary of State for filing shall constitute the affirmation or acknowledgment of each individual causing such delivery, under penalties of perjury, that the document is the individual's act and deed, or that the individual in good faith believes the document is the act and deed of the person on whose behalf the individual is causing the document to be delivered for filing, taken in conformity with the requirements of part 3 of article 90 of title 7, C.R.S., and, if applicable, the constituent documents, and the organic statutes, and that the individual in good faith believes the facts stated in the document are true and the document complies with the requirements of that Part, the constituent documents, and the organic statutes. This perjury notice applies to each individual who causes this document to be delivered to the Secretary of State, whether or not such individual is named in the document as one who has caused it to be delivered. Name(s) and address(es) of the individual(s) causing the document to be delivered for filing Thomas Ritter 4407 W 29th St Greeley CO 80634 US AGPROfessionals L)LOPE RS OF AGRICULTURE Weld County Amended Use by Special Review (MUSR) Questionnaire Prepared for Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC See pages 10-15 for additional clarification. Planning Questions: (Section 23-2-260. A, B, C, & E of the Weld County Code) 1. Explain the proposed use and business name. Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC is requesting an amendment to Use by Special Review (USR) USR12-0061 to update operations of an existing oil and gas support and services operation on site. Their primary operations are roustabout and hydro -vac services. The 8.39 -acre subject property is located in Part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the 6th P.M. being Lot A of RE -1506. Access to the facility is via Weld County Road (WCR) 42 east of WCR 49. The proposed business name is Atlas Energy Services, LLC (Atlas Energy). The on -site operations will primarily be the maintenance of vehicles and equipment for use at oil and gas sites and will be contained within the commercial buildings on the property. The majority of Atlas Energy's operations will occur off -site at various oil and gas locations around the county. USR12-0061 is permitted as a mineral resource development facility, including an oil and gas support and service facility (parking, staging, and maintenance of oil and gas trucks) with up to 35 employees (30 off -site employees and 5 on -site employees). The USR amendment request is to increase the number of employees to 150 (140 off -site employees and 10 on -site employees) and to add a second shop to the site. 2. Explain the need for the proposed use. The proposed USR amendment is to update the uses permitted under USR12-0061 to align with Atlas Energy's proposed operations. Weld County recognizes mineral resources as vital to the state's economy. Oil and gas support service businesses are an important part of the mineral resource industry. 3. Describe the current and previous use of the land. The site is currently permitted under USR 12-0061 as a mineral resource development facility, including an oil, and gas support and service facility (parking, staging, and maintenance of oil and gas trucks) with up to 35 employees (30 off -site employees and 5 on - site employees). There is an existing residence and shop. ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE HO & Mailing: 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200, Greeley, CO 80634 1970-535-9318 office 970-535-9854 fax Idaho: 213 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 100, Twin Falls, ID 83301 1208-595-5301 www.agpros.com Page 2of9 4. Describe the proximity of the proposed use to residences. There is an existing residence on the property. The closest residences are across Weld County Road (WCR) 49, approximately 285 -feet, and 550 -feet west of the property boundary. 5. Describe the surrounding land uses of the site and how the proposed use is compatible with them. The existing USR and proposed amendment are compatible with the surrounding land uses. The subject property is located on WCR 49, which is also known as the Weld County Parkway/Highway. The site is within the Weld County Comprehensive Plan Opportunity Zone that overlays WCR 49. There are several USRs in the area, including oil and gas support service facilities, mineral resource development facilities, anaerobic digesters, communication towers, feedlots, and dairies. There is an oil and gas tank battery directly east of the site. The property directly north of the site is an irrigated pivot owned by the City of Broomfield. South of the property across WCR 42 is non -irrigated rangeland. USR Development Standards establish operating parameters and nuisance mitigation requirements. 6. Describe the hours and days of operation (i.e. Monday thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). USR12-0061 permits 24 -hours per day, 7 -days per week operations. There are no changes to the approved hours of operation. The primary hours of operation will be between 4:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Occasional operations outside of the primary hours may occur due to the oil and gas industry service needs. 7. Describe the number of employees including full-time, part-time and contractors. If shift work is proposed, detail number of employees, schedule and duration of shifts. The proposed USR amendment is for up to 150 full-time employees. The expected work hours will vary based on job type. Off -Site Employees: There will be one shift per day. Starting hours are expected to be staggered between 4:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. and ending between 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 140 employees are expected; they will pick up their work trucks and equipment, then leave for off -site operations. Yard Employees Expected work hours will be 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Ten employees will be on -site regularly; they may occasionally be off -site bringing tools, equipment, or products to the job sites. Page 3 of 9 8. Describe the maximum number of users, patrons, members, buyers, or other visitors that the site will accommodate at any one time. 150 employees are expected to access the site per day. As starting hours vary, their trip times are staggered throughout the day. In addition, 5 delivery truck visits per day are expected. Due to the type of business, customers are not expected to come to the property. 9. List the types and maximum numbers of animals to be on the site at any one time (for dairies, livestock confinement operations, kennels, etc.) N/A. 10. List the types and number of operating and processing equipment. 25 — Semi -trucks 5 — Hydro -vac trucks 70 — Work pickup trucks 30 — Trailers 100 — Employee vehicles 11. List the types, number, and uses of the existing and proposed structures. The subject property is an existing oil and gas support facility. There is one dwelling, one shop building, and designated parking areas on -site. A new shop is proposed for indoor parking and general maintenance of Atlas Energy vehicles and equipment. 12. Describe the size of any stockpile, storage or waste areas. No storage or stockpiling of wastes is proposed. Trash will be collected in covered, confined dumpsters, and removed as needed by a trash removal company. Atlas Energy will provide portable toilets to various job sites. Portable toilets that are not in use at job locations will be stored on -site. It is anticipated that most portable toilets will be in use off -site during the summer, and that more will be stored on -site during the winter off season. Portable toilets will be stored in the three storage areas (SA) as depicted on the site plan. The combined storage area totals approximately 3,800 square feet. 13. Describe the method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, junk and other wastes associated with the proposed use. The proposed use is not anticipated to produce nuisance debris, junk, or other wastes. A waste service provider will be used to dispose of trash. Both shops will have floor drains, which will be connected to vaults. The vaults will be appropriately sized, alarmed, and cleaned out with a hydro -vac service, as necessary. Page 4 of 9 14. Include a time -table showing the periods of time required for the construction of the operation. Expansion of the parking areas and construction of the detention pond are anticipated to occur in the summer/fall of 2024. The proposed shop is expected to be built at a later date but has been shown on the site plan so that it is accounted for the in Amended USR permit and site engineering. 15. Describe the proposed and existing lot surface type and the square footage of each type (i.e. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings). Lot surface areas are included in the Preliminary Drainage Report, which was prepared for this Amended USR application. 16. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicapped -accessible parking spaces are proposed? For employee vehicles and work trucks, 171 total standard parking spaces are proposed, 2 of which will be ADA spaces. 35 parking spaces for hydro -vac trucks and trailers and 25 semi - truck parking spaces are proposed. 17. Describe the existing and proposed fencing and screening for the site including all parking and outdoor storage areas. There is existing pipe fencing around the property and solid vinyl fencing around the residence. A six-foot corrugated metal fence is proposed along the western and southern sides of the main parking area. 18. Describe the existing and proposed landscaping for the site. There is existing landscaping around the residence and along WCR 42. 19. Describe reclamation procedures to be employed as stages of the operation are phased out or upon cessation of the Use by Special Review activity. Upon cessation of the Use by Special Review activity, equipment/vehicles specific to the business will be removed. The existing structures will remain. 20. Describe the proposed fire protection measures. Fire protection for the site is provided by the La Salle Fire Protection District. The fire protection measures for the proposed shop will be evaluated at the time of building permit through the Fire District Notification process. Page 5of9 21. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan per Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code. The approval of this request would be consistent with Section 22-2-10 B. of the Weld County Code, which states "One of the basic principles upon which the United States was founded is the right of citizens to own and utilize property so long as that use complies with local regulations and does not interfere with or infringe upon the rights of others." The Amended USR request is to expand an existing use. The use will not inhibit agricultural production or operations. The existing USR and proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The subject property is located on WCR 49, which is also known as the Weld County Parkway/Highway. The site is within the Weld County Comprehensive Plan Opportunity Zone that overlays WCR 49. There are several USRs in the area, including oil and gas support service facilities, mineral resource development facilities, anaerobic digesters, communication towers, feedlots, and dairies. There is an oil and gas tank battery directly east of the site. The property directly north of the site is an irrigated pivot owned by the City of Broomfield. South of the property across WCR 42 is non -irrigated rangeland. 22. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the zone district in which it is located. (Intent statements can be found at the beginning of each zone district section in Article III of Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code.) The A (Agricultural) Zone District is intended to provide areas for the conduct of agricultural activities and activities related to agriculture and agricultural production, and for areas for natural resource extraction and energy development, without the interference of other incompatible land uses. The proposed use supports the natural resource extraction and energy development occurring in Weld County. In addition, Article III of Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code lists oil and gas support and service businesses as a use allowed by special review outside of subdivisions and historic townsites. 23. Explain how this proposal will be compatible with future development of the surrounding area or adopted master plans of affected municipalities. The subject property is not within any coordinated planning areas or growth management areas of any municipalities. The site is within the Weld County Comprehensive Plan Opportunity Zone that overlays WCR 49. Zone changes to commercial and industrial districts are anticipated within the Opportunity Zone. 24. Explain how this proposal impacts the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. The proposed use is expected to have minimal impact on the health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the county. Operations will occur primarily in the shop buildings or off -site at specific job locations. A Nuisance and Waste Management Plan has been developed and is included with this request. The main parking area will be screened by a six-foot corrugated metal fence. Page 6of9 USR Development Standards establish operating parameters and nuisance mitigation requirements. 25. Describe any irrigation features. If the proposed use is to be located in the A (Agricultural) Zone District, explain your efforts to conserve prime agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use. There are no existing irrigation ditches or canals crossing this site. The site is existing and the expanded parking areas are in a non -irrigated native grass area. The site is not currently used for farming as it is a pivot corner and is too small to be economically viable as a commercial farm. 26. Explain how this proposal complies with Article V and Article XI of Chapter 23 if the proposal is located within any Overlay Zoning District (Airport, Geologic Hazard, or Historic Townsites Overlay Districts) or a Special Flood Hazard Area identified by maps officially adopted by the County. The site is not located within any Geologic Hazard Overlay Districts, Historic Townsites Overlay Districts, or Special Flood Hazard Areas. The northwest corner of the property is in the Greeley -Weld Airport Overlay District. As the site is approximately 9.5 miles southeast of the Greeley -Weld Airport, the proposed use will not interfere with the operations of the airport. 27. Detail known State or Federal permits required for your proposed use(s) and the status of each permit. Provide a copy of any application or permit. No state or federal permits are anticipated with this Amended USR. Environmental Health Questions: (Chapters 14, 23, and 30 of the Weld County Code) 1. Discuss the existing and proposed potable water source. If utilizing a drinking water well, include either the well permit or well permit application that was submitted to the State Division of Water Resources. If utilizing a public water tap, include a letter from the Water District, a tap or meter number, or a copy of the water bill. There is an existing well, permit no. 294098, a copy of which is included with this application. Bottled water will be provided for off -site employees as they will be on -site for less than 2 consecutive hours per day. No changes to the water source are proposed. A new restroom is proposed in the future shop building for on -site employees. Page 7of9 2. Discuss the existing and proposed sewage disposal system. What type of sewage disposal system is on the property? If utilizing an existing on -site wastewater treatment system provide the on -site wastewater treatment permit number. (If there is no on -site wastewater treatment system permit due to the age of the existing on -site wastewater treatment system, apply for an on -site wastewater treatment system permit through the Department of Public Hearing and Environment prior to submitting this application.) If a new on -site wastewater treatment system will be installed, please state "a new on -site wastewater treatment system is proposed." (Only propose portable toilets if the use is consistent with the Department of Public Health and Environment's portable toilet p olicy.) There is an existing septic system, permit no. SP -1400103, that provides sewage disposal to the property. Portable toilets will be provided for off -site employees as they will be on -site for less than 2 consecutive hours per day. The operator will utilize an appropriate sanitary services provider to manage the toilets and remove and dispose of contents as needed in accordance with applicable requirements. A new septic system for the proposed restroom in the future shop building is proposed. 3. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? The site is not proposed to be used for long-term storage or warehousing. 4. Describe where and how storage and/or stockpile of wastes, chemicals, and/or petroleum will occur on this site. The site is not proposed to be used for the storage and/or stockpiling of wastes or chemicals. Fuel storage is described below. 5. If there will be fuel storage on site, indicate the gallons and the secondary containment. State the number of tanks and gallons per tank. One 4,000 -gallon highway diesel tank, one 2,000 -gallon red -dyed diesel tank, and one 1,000 - gallon gasoline tank are proposed with appropriate secondary containment (double -walled tank or containment area [i.e., walled concrete pad] that can hold 110% of tank volume). 6. If there will be washing or vehicles or equipment on site, indicate how the wash water will be contained. Washing of vehicles or equipment is not proposed. 7. If there will be floor drains, indicate how the fluids will be contained. Both shops will have floor drains, which will be connected to vaults. The vaults will be appropriately sized, alarmed, and cleaned out with a hydro -vac service, as necessary. Page 8 of 9 8. Indicate if there will be any air emissions (e.g. painting, oil storage, etc.). No regulated air emissions are anticipated at this site. 9. Provide a design and operations plan if applicable (e.g. composting, landfills, etc.) N/A. 10. Provide a nuisance management plan if applicable (e.g. dairies, feedlots, etc.) A Nuisance and Waste Management Plan is included with the application package. 11. Additional information may be requested depending on type of land use requested. Noted. Public Works Questions: (Section 8-11-40, Appendix 8-Q, and Section 8-14-10 of the Weld County Code) 1. Describe the access location and applicable use types (i.e., agricultural, residential, commercial/industrial, and/or oil and gas) of all existing and proposed accesses to the parcel. Include the approximate distance each access is (or will be if proposed) from an intersecting county road. State that no existing access is present or that no new access is proposed, if applicable. There are two existing accesses on WCR 42, permit no. AP13-00331, one for residential use, one for commercial use. The accesses are approximately 230 -feet apart. There are no proposed changes to the existing accesses. 2. Describe any anticipated change(s) to an existing access, if applicable. No additional access points or changes to the permitted accesses are proposed. 3. Describe in detail any existing or proposed access gate including its location. The residential access has a swing gate. The commercial access is not gated. 4. Describe the location of all existing accesses on adjacent parcels and on parcels located on the opposite side of the road. Include the approximate distance each access is from an intersecting county road. There is an existing field access on the south side of WCR 42, approximately 300 feet west of the residential access. There is an existing oil and gas access on the north side of WCR 42, approximately 300 feet east of the commercial access. Page 9 of 9 5. Describe any difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from an existing access and any anticipated difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from a proposed access. There are no known visual obstructions in the sight triangles or difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from the existing permitted access points. 6. Describe any horizontal curve (using terms like mid curve, sharp curve, reverse curve, etc.) in the vicinity of an existing or proposed access. WCR 42 is a relatively straight roadway in front of the entries and there are no significant horizontal curves in the vicinity of the existing approved accesses. 7. Describe the topography (using terms like flat, slight hills, steep hills, etc.) of the road in the vicinity of an existing or proposed access. WCR 42 slopes gently from the east to the west as it approaches WCR 49. WCR 42 in the vicinity of the existing accesses is relatively flat. WELD COUNTY Completeness Review REVIEW DATE: 2/22/2024 TYPE OF 1 MJUSR24-12-0061 (PRE23-0282)APPLICATION: LEGAL 105319300037; Lot A of RE -1506 SW4 19-4-64 DESCRIPTION: OWNER: "Parker" Colorado Guttersen Property Holding Company LLC c/o William Parker OPERATOR: Atlas Energy and/or Fortress Development Solutions REPRESENTATIVE: Hannah Dutrow - AgPros PLEASE NOTE: The following completeness review notes are provided as a courtesy to the applicant. While we strive to identify significant issues, the following notes may not identify all issues, even major ones that may be raised during the formal review of your application. The information contained herein has been placed on file with the Department of Planning Services. Please submit a copy of this form when you submit the revisions to your Land Use Application. If you have any questions regarding the process and/or application, please call Diana Aungst at 970-400-3524, or email at daungst@weld.gov REVIEW: Please email the below listed items to the Department of Planning Services. Submit a new questionnaire narrative with the below comments addressed and submit the other items as requested. REVIEW STAFF: Planning: DianaAungst—daungst@weld.gov - 970-400-3524 Engineering: Melissa King — mking@weld.gov- 970-400-3762 Public Health: Ryan Fernandez — rfernandez@weld.gov- 970-400-2227 PLANNING COMMENTS: The Department of Planning Services has reviewed the Completeness Review Application and has the following comments. 1. Who is living in the house? 2. What type of equipment will be stored on the site? Show the equipment storage area on the USR map. 3. Show the screened storage area for all the for rent portable toilets and dumpsters on the USR map. 4. Where will the dumpsters be stored? The dumpsters that Atlas rents to O&G operators. Mention the dumpsters on the questionnaire and show the storage location on the USR ma P. 5. Is Fortress Development Solutions and Atlas Energy the same business? Will there be two businesses on the site? Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley CO 80632 Fax: 970-304-6498 * Phone: 970-400-6100 Page 1 of 3 WELD COUNTY Completeness Review 6. Will all these services be operational from this site? If so, or in any combination detail that in the planning questionnaire. ■ Hydro Excavation & Daylighting Services ■ Pipeline & Facility Construction ■ Waste Management ■ Equipment Hauling ■ Civil Construction & Grading ■ Reclamation & Restoration ■ Dumpsters m psters ■ Material Hauling ■ Drilling Services ■ Water Hauling ■ General Roustabout 7. Clean this up on the USR map and state what will be stored at these locations. GA STORAGE AREA 8. Provide an updated Statement of Taxes. 9. Provide a lighting and landscape plan. 10. Provide at least 6 ADA parking stalls: Total Parking Facility' in Garage) Number Parking (Lod Spaces of or Total Parking of Minimum Required Accessible Number Spaces Number Van Sparking Minimum Accessible Spaces of 1-25 1 1 26-50 2 1 51-75 3 1 76-100 4 1 101 - 150 5 1 151-200 €6 1 201 - 300 7 2 301- 400 8 2 4.01-500 9 2 501 - 1000 2% of total 1 uol and aver i- 20, plus 1 for each 100, or _ ra ction thereof, over 1000 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley CO 80632 Fax: 970-304-6498 * Phone: 970-400-6100 Page 2of3 WELD COUNTY Completeness Review 11. Please use a different graphic for one of these fences as when the fence is exactly on the property line it is impossible to see if the fence along CR 49 and CR 42 is barbed wire or corrugate metal. EXISTING BARBED WIRE FENCE PROPERTY BOUNDARY Q x x PROPOSED CORRUGATED METAL FENCE 12. Does this mean that the maintenance will be contained in the commercial building or that the equipment will be contained in the building? The on -site operations will primarily be the maintenance of vehicles and equipment for use at oil and gas sites and will be contained within the commercial buildings on the property. The majority of Atlas Energy's operations will occur off -site at various oil and gas locations around the county. 13. What is considered the "main parking area"? 14. Please note that this is a Major Amendment so the case # is 1 MJUSR24-12-0061. PUBLIC HEALTH COMMENTS: No Comments ENGINEERING COMMENTS: No comments. Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley CO 80632 Fax: 970-304-6498 * Phone: 970-400-6100 Page 3of3 ROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE March 12, 2024 Weld County Planning Department Attn: Diana Aungst 1402 N 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: 1MJUSR24-12-0061 — Response to Completeness Review Comments Colorado Property Holding Company LLC AGPRO Project #1145-02 Dear Mrs. Aungst: This letter is provided to address the Completeness Review comments from staff dated February 22, 2024. Responses to the review comments are indicated in BLUE below. Planning Services 1. Who is living in the house? A primary residence is allowed in the Agricultural zone district and is not required to be associated with the USR request, nor is the tenant required to be associated with the use on site. 2. What type of equipment will be stored on the site? Show the equipment storage area on the USR map. Storage areas have been designated on the USR map as "SA". They are proposed to store portable toilets and will be screened with corrugated metal fencing. Additional storage may occur in the buildings on site. 3. Show the screened storage area for all the for rent portable toilets and dumpsters on the USR map. The storage areas designated as "SA" will be used for portable toilets. Corrugated metal fencing is proposed for screening. The USR site plan has been updated to show these areas. In addition, please review Note 2 included on sheet USR-2. 4. Where will the dumpsters be stored? The dumpsters that Atlas rents to O&G operators. Mention the dumpsters on the questionnaire and show the storage location on the USR map. Dumpsters are currently on site during initial construction of the site. Dumpster storage associated with the business operation is not proposed for this site and is not included in the questionnaire or USR map. ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE HQ & Mailing: 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200, Greeley, CO 80634 1970-535-9318 officej970-535-9854 970-535-9854 fax Idaho: 213 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 100, Twin Falls, ID 83301 1208-595-5301 vitww.agpros.coni Page 2 of 3 5. Is Fortress Development Solutions and Atlas Energy the same business? Will there be two businesses on the site? There will not be two separate businesses on site. Atlas Energy Services and Fortress Development Solutions are both operated by Mr. Guttersen. This is not the only site Atlas Energy Services will operate from. 6. Will all these services be operational from this site? If so, or in any combination detail that in the planning questionnaire. The site is being developed for oil and gas support and services operation. The services listed would occur almost exclusively off -site. The site being developed is primarily used for the parking of equipment such as trailers and vehicles associated with off -site operations. In addition, maintenance of the equipment and vehicles will occur within the buildings on site. 7. Clean this up on the USR map and state what will be stored at these locations. The label on the USR map has been updated. Note 2 indicates these areas as storage for portable toilets. 8. Provide an updated Statement of Taxes. An updated statement of taxes dated March 8, 2024, has been provided. 9. Provide a lighting and landscape plan. The USR plan has been updated to show pole lights in the main parking areas, as well as fence and building mounted lighting. Landscaping around the residence is expected to remain. No additional landscaping is proposed for this operation. 10. Provide at least 6 ADA parking stalls An additional 2 ADA parking stalls have been provided on the USR site plan. Based on the table, approximately 100 employee parking spaces have been provided, requiring 4 ADA spaces. The remaining spaces are for work pick-up trucks and large commercial vehicles which are picked up by said employees coming on site. 11. Please use a different graphic for one of these fences as when the fence is exactly on the property line it is impossible to see if the fence along CR 49 and CR 42 is barbed wire or corrugated metal. Fencing line types have been revised as requested. Corrugated metal fencing is proposed along both CR 49 and CR 42. Page 3 of 3 12. Does this mean that the maintenance will be contained in the commercial building or that the equipment will be contained in the building? Maintenance operations are proposed to be contained with the commercial buildings on the property. Equipment proposed to be on site includes trailers associated with the off -site trucking operations, portable toilets, etc. It can also be reasonably expected that there will be some storage contained within the building. 13. What is considered the "main parking area"? The main parking area is the area to the west where the majority of parking spaces are contained. There is an additional employee parking area to the east of the existing shop as well. 14. Please note that this is a Major Amendment so the case # is 1MJUSR24-12-0061. Noted. Please contact me at (970) 535-9318 or hdutrow - agpros.com if you have any questions. Sincerely, Hannah Dutrow Land Planner III CC: Diana Aungst, Weld County Planning Department daungst(a,weld.gov Enclosures: 1. Revised USR Site Plan 2. March 8, 2024, Statement of Taxes FOR COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Business Name: Address: 4407 W. 29th Street City, state, zip: Greeley, CO 80634 Business Owner Heme Address: 24125 WCR 42 City, state, zip: La Salle, CO 80645 Site List up to three persons in the order to be called in the event of an emergency: Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC Phone: (970) 371-1111 William Parker Guttersen, manager Phone: (970) 371-1111 NAME William Parker Guttersen TITLE Manager PHONE (970) 371-1111 ADDRESS 4407 W. 29th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 David Devitt Site/Operations Manager (970) 333-6008 24125 WCR 42, LaSalle, CO 80645 Business Hours: 24 hours I day Days: 7 days / week UTILITY SHUT OFF LOCATIONS: Main Electrical: Southwest of shop building Gas Shut Off: No gas to shop building Exterior Water Shutoff: 10' north of northwest entry door/vault Interior Water Shutoff: All controlled from vault 07/22 12 Preliminary Drainage Report For Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC SECTION 19, TO W vSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P. M. , COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COL ORAD O AGPi Ofessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE AGPROfessionals HQ: 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80634 Idaho: 213 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 100, Twin Falls, ID 83301 (970) 535-9318 January 2, 2024 Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Table of Contents Certifications 3 Introduction 4 1. Location 4 2. Description of Property 4 Drainage Basin and Sub -Basins 5 1. Major Basin Description 5 2. Sub -Basin Description 5 Drainage Design Criteria 6 1. Development Criteria 6 2. Hydrological Criteria 6 3. Hydraulic Criteria 6 Drainage Facility Design 8 1. General Concept 8 2. Specific Details 8 Conclusions 10 1. Compliance with Weld County Code 10 2. Drainage Concept 10 List of References 11 Appendices ii Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Certifications I hereby certify that this drainage report for the Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC Amended Use by Special Review (USR) was prepared under my direct supervision in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County storm drainage criteria for the owners thereof. Valene Cauhorn, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 0058321 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 3 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Weld County Drainage Code Certificate of Compliance Weld County Case Number: 1 M U S R 12-0061 Parcel Number: 105319300037 Legal Description, Section/Township/Range: PT SW4 19-4-64, Lot A RE -1506 Date: 01/02/2024 I Valene L. Cauhorn, PE Consultant for Engineer Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC 9 _ (Applicant), understand and acknowledge that the applicant is seeking land use approval of the case and parcel in the description above. I have designed or reviewed the design for the proposed land use set for in the application. I hereby certify, on behalf of the applicant, that the design will meet all applicable drainage requirements of the Weld County Code with the exception of the variances) described on the attached exhibits. This certification is not a guarantee or warranty either expressed or implied. Engineer's Stamp: Engineer of Record Signature Variance Request (If Applicable) 1. Describe the hardship for which the variance is being requested. 2. List the design criteria of the Weld County Code of which a variance is being requested. 3. Describe the proposed alternative with engineering rationale which supports the intent of the Weld County Code. Demonstrate that granting of the variance will still adequately protect public health, safety, and general welfare and that there are no adverse impacts from stormwater runoff to the public rights -of -way and/or offsite properties as a result of the project. 1. Due to the limited distance between the property line, the proposed semi parking spots, the client is requesting a swale depth variance. 2. Sec 8-11-80 B. Open Channel Design Principles. 3. It is proposed that the the freeboard requirement to the swale convey 1.33 times the 100 year design flow. Calculations have been provided in the drainage report. Public Works Director/Designee Review (If Applicable) Public Works Director/Designee Name Date of Signature Comments: Signature Approved ❑ Denied Department of Public Works I Development Review 1111 H Street, Greeley, CO 80631 I Ph: 970-304-6496 I www.weldgov.com/departments/public_works/development_ review 08/02/2019 Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report General Location and Description 1. Location The subject property is Lot A RE -1506, located in Part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the 6th PM. The west boundary of the site runs along Weld County Road (WCR) 49 and the south boundary of the site runs along WCR 42. No other major roadways are located within or adjacent to the property. The property contains an existing oil and gas support services operation, Use by Special Review (USR) permit no. USR12-0061. A vicinity map is shown in Appendix A.1. 2. Description of Property The site is located at 24125 WCR 42, La Salle, CO 80645, parcel no. 105319300037. The proposed site development will be approximately 8.13 acres of the 8.39 -acre parcel. Approximately 6.5 acres will be disturbed during construction. There is existing infrastructure that will be a part of the development but will not require additional construction or soil disturbance. There is an existing residence, shop, and vehicle and equipment parking areas. There are two types of soil: Otero sandy loam and Valent sand. The majority of the soil is Valent sand. The soil is excessively drained with a very low runoff potential and a hydrologic soil group A (see USDA-NRCS Custom Soil Resource Report in Appendix A.2.). There are no major open channels within or adjacent to the proposed property. This project is proposing a roustabout company that will include commercial vehicle and equipment parking, and an addition of a shop for maintenance and offices. 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 4 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Drainage Basin and Sub -Basins 1. Major Basin Description The proposed site is in Weld County, Colorado and is surrounded by agricultural and grazing land. A Master Drainage Plan for the site area is not currently available. Historically, runoff from the proposed site will run southwest towards the Gilmore Ditch. Gilmore Ditch ultimately flows into the South Platte River. A topographic map that shows the contours of the project location and surrounding properties are shown on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) website and is shown in Appendix A.3. A Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) map of the project area is included in Appendix A.4. The property is located on panel 08123C1775E and is not currently located within a 100 -year floodplain. There are no wetlands neighboring or within the property boundaries, the nearest wetlands are approximately 3.15 miles to the east. The major basin on the proposed site is referred to as Basin A. Basin A is approximately 8.13 acres and will consist of gravel, native grass, buildings, and concrete. Flow from Basin A will sheet flow to the west portion of the property into a proposed swale. The proposed swale will then flow any runoff into the proposed detention pond. 2. Sub -Basin Description The proposed site consists of one offsite subbasin, OS -1. OS -1 is located on the northwest corner of the property and will not be developed. Historical flow rates and pattern will be maintained. 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 5 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Corn any, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Resort Drainage Design Criteria 1. Development Criteria The proposed site runoff was evaluated using the criteria set forth in the Mile High and Flood District (MHFD) Criteria Manual Volumes 1, 2 and 3 and the Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria (WCECC) manual. 2. Hydrological Criteria From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 the estimated rainfall from the 10 -year, 1 -hour precipitation is 1.41 inches and the 100 -year, 1 -hour precipitation is 2.70 inches (see NOAA Atlas 14 Precipitation Data in Appendix A.5). These values were used for runoff calculations and to estimate the required detention volume. Percentage of imperviousness was determined using the recommended values from Mile High Flood District (MHFD) Table 6-3. A percentage of imperviousness of two percent was used for the historic flow. The percentage of imperviousness for Basin A was estimated to be 37% and is approximately 8.13 acres (Appendix A.6). Using the 10 -year, 1 -hour, and 100 -year, 1 -hour design storm, and the UDFCD Detention Basin spreadsheet, the peak runoff flowrates were calculated using the time of concentration (from UD-Rational v.1.02a spreadsheet), runoff coefficient, and the precipitation depth in the UDFCD spreadsheet for the Historical Total, Proposed Total, and OS -1 runoff. These values are summarized in Table 1 (see UDFCD Runoff Calculation in Appendix A.7). Table 1: Peak Runoff Flowrates Peak Runoff 10 Year Peak Flowrate (cfs) 100 Year Peak Flowrate (cfs) 0.98 5.86 Historical Total 7.01 18.55 Proposed Total OS -1 0.03 0.15 cfs = cubic feet per second 3. Hydraulic Criteria The 10 -year historic release rate was determined using the area of the proposed site and an estimated two percent historic imperviousness (see 10 -Year Historic Release Rate calculation in Appendix B.1). The volume for the proposed detention pond is 0.90 acre- feet. The release rate is 0.98 cubic feet per second (cfs). The required detention volume was calculated using the Modified FAA method from the UDFCD Detention Basin Volume Estimating Workbook (see UDFCD Detention Volume calculation in Appendix B.2). The proposed detention pond will have a capacity greater than the required 0.90 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 6 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report acre-feet at the 100 -year water surface elevation with an additional 1 foot of freeboard (see Table 2 and UDFCD Stage Storage in Appendix B.3). Table 2: Stage Storage Summai Pond Stage (Drainage Basin 1) Elevation (feet) Volume Required feet) (acre- Volume Elevation at Pond (acre- feet) WQCV 4847.40 0.13 0.165 100-Year/Spillway Crest 4849.60 0.90 0.944 4850.60 Top of Pond An orifice plate is proposed for the outlet structure that is designed to release the water quality capture volume (WQCV) over 40 hours. The WQCV is included within the detention volume for the 100 -year storm. A restrictor plate is proposed to control the flowrate through the outlet culvert (see MHFD WQCV and MHFD Restrictor Plate calculations in Appendix B.4 and Appendix B.5). A single stage outlet structure is proposed with a rectangular opening and a 12 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) culvert (see MHFD Outlet Structure and MHFD Outlet Culvert in Appendix B.6 and Appendix B.7.). A spillway is proposed that is designed to release the 100 -year peak flowrate from the site. The spillway crest will be at or above the invert of the freeboard elevation and the depth of the flow should be less than six inches (see MHFD Spillway in Appendix B.8). The detention pond is triangular in shape. Basin A sheet flows west to a grass lined swale. The grass lined trapezoid swale was sized to capture 1.33 times the 100 -year, 1 - hour runoff for the drainage basin with 3:1 side slopes (see Swale Calculations in Appendix B.9). A variance request is requested for this swale as 1 foot of freeboard is not feasible with the property boundary and existing gravel infrastructure. The grass lined swale will be native grass that will be managed at the 3:1 side slopes. A rock chute was designed for riprap protection for the channelized flow (see NRCS Rock Chute Design in Appendix B.10). The culvert design and rip rap sizes were determined using the MHFD Culvert spreadsheet. Calculations for the culvert capacity and rip rap sizing are included in Appendix B.11. Table 3: Culvert Summar Culvert Diameter (inches) Material Slope (percent) Outlet 12" Reinforced Concrete Pipe 0.5 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 7 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Drainage Facility Design 1. General Concept A detention pond is proposed along the north side of the site. Runoff should generally sheet flow towards a grassy swale on the west side of the project site. The grassy swale will flow to the pond. The pond is designed to detain the 100 -year storm event and release at the 10 -year historic rate. The site should not significantly alter the historic drainage pattern. A general drainage plan, drainage and erosion control plan, and drainage and erosion control details are shown in Appendix C. 2. Specific Details Maintenance access is provided on the southwest corner of the pond. A. Scheduled Maintenance of Proposed Facilities Scheduled maintenance will occur during daylight, weekday hours. Routine maintenance will include but should not be limited to the following: • Mowing of the bank slopes and area around the pond on a monthly basis during the growing season and as needed during the cooler months. • The outfall structure from the pond and other areas shall be inspected monthly for debris which could inhibit the proper flow of discharge. Any debris shall be removed immediately and disposed of or placed in a location to prevent future maintenance and to not cause impact up or downstream of the structure. • Trash shall be removed from around the pond to prevent entering the pond. Generally, the site should be kept free of loose trash which could be carried off site by wind or rain. • Inspect the pond and outfall structure for non -routine maintenance need. B. Periodic or Non -Scheduled Maintenance of Proposed Facility Periodic or non-scheduled maintenance includes routine inspection of the pond area and discharge/outfall structures to identify needed repairs and non -routine maintenance. These items may include but should not be limited to the following: • Pond area and outfall structure should be inspected after significant storm events. • Re -growth of trees on or around the pond bank. These should be cut and removed from the pond area. Sediment from the site may accumulate in the pond bottom and reduce the pond to below design volume requirements. The pond should be excavated if the pond bottom elevation reached a level that allows excessive aquatic growth or reduces the pond efficiency such that the sediments are passing the discharge structure and release off site. • Stabilization or re -grading of side slopes may be required periodically or after excessive rain events. Any disturbance of slopes should be reseeded or may 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 8 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report require installation of erosion control materials until seeding can reestablish adequate grasses to prevent future erosion. • Any other maintenance or repairs which would minimize other maintenance to the pond or outfall structure. If the pond is significantly impaired such that the pond is incapable of properly functioning to meet the Weld County stormwater discharge requirements, the owner should assess the corrective action needed and have the pond restored by properly trained personnel. 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 9 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Conclusions 1. Compliance with Weld County Code The drainage design of the Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC Amended USR is consistent with the Weld County Engineering and Construction Guidelines and the Weld County Code. 2. Drainage Concept Historical flow patterns and run-off amounts should be maintained in such a manner that should reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off for the 100 -year storm event. The drainage design included in this report should be effective in controlling damage from the design storm runoff by detaining the 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event and releasing at the 10 -year historic rate. No irrigation companies or property owners should be affected by the proposed development. 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 10 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report List of References Autodesk. "Civil 3D 2020 Imperial." Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk Civil 3D. 2020. Computer Software. Federal Emergency Management Agency. "FEMA Flood Map Service Center." FEMA Flood Map Service Center. FEMA, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 22 November 2023. <https://msc.fema.gov/portal>. Mile High and Flood District. Calculation of Peak Runoff Using Rational Method. Computer software. Software. Vers. 1.02a. <http://udfcd.org/software>. Mile High Flood District. Detention Basin Volume Estimating Workbook. Computer software. Software. Vers. 2.34. <http://udfcd.org/software>. Mile High Flood District. Determination of Culvert Headwater and Outlet Protection. Computer Software. UD-Culvert Vers. 3.05. <http://udfcd.org/software>. Mile High Flood District. Peak Runoff Prediction by the Rational Method. Computer software. Software. Vers. 2.00. <http://udfcd.org/software>. Mile High Flood District. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1." USDCM: Volume 1 Management, Hydrology and Hydraulics. UDFCD, Mar. 2017. Web. 22 November 2023. <http://udfcd.org/volume-one>. Mile High Flood District. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volumes 2." USDCM: Volume 2 Structures, Storage and Recreation. UDFCD, Sep. 2017. Web. 22 November 2023. <http://udfcd.org/volume-two>. United State Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service. Rock Chute Design Program. Computer Software. Version WI -July -2010. <haps://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nres 142p2_024307.xls>. United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service. "Web Soil Survey." Web Soil Survey. USDA - NRCS, 2006. Web. 22 November 2023. <http://websoilsurvey. sc. egov.usda.gov/App/Web SoilSurvey. aspx>. United States Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "NOAA's National Weather Service." Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates. USDC - NOAA National Weather Service. Web. 21 December 2023. <https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.3194&lon=- 104.7041 &data=depth&units=english&series=pds>. United States Geological Survey. "Maps." Overview - Maps, United States Geological Survey. USGS, 2016. Web. 22 November 2023. <www.usgs.gov/products/maps/topo- maps>. 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 11 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Weld County. "Property Portal - Map Search." Property Portal - Map Search. Weld County, 19 Dec. 2017. Web. 22 November 2023. <https://propertyreport.co.weld.co.us/?account=R678OO8O>. Weld County. "Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria Guidelines." Weld County Engineering, July 2017. Web. 22 November 2023. <www.weldgov.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 6/File/Departments/Public%20Works/En gineering/WCECG%20-%208-3-17.pdf.> 1/3/2024 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 12 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`'' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Colorado Property Holding Corn any, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Re -Port Appendices A. Hydrologic Computations 1. Vicinity Map 2. USDA-NRCS Soil Report 3. USGS Topographic Map 4. FEMA FIRMette Map 5. NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Maps 6. Percentage of Imperviousness 7. UDFCD Runoff Calculations B. Hydraulic Computations 1. 10 -Year Historic Release Rate 2. UDFCD Detention Volume 3. UDFCD Stage Storage 4. UDFCD WQCV 5. UDFCD Restrictor Plate 6. UDFCD Outlet Structure 7. UDFCD Outlet Culvert 8. UDFCD Spillway 9. Swale Calculations 10. NRCS Rock Chute Calculations 11. UDFCD Culvert & Rip Rap Calculations C. 24x 36 Maps 1. General Drainage Plan 2. Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 3. Drainage and Erosion Control Details Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Appendix A Hydrologic Computations 4 lillitt ti l Parcels Highway Boundary I. •I CID 24630 1 � . Notes 1,117.3 0 558.67 1,117.3 Feet This map is •user generated staticoutput• •site• • is for Data layers aaccurate, reference only. that appear this •may or may not WGS 1984 Web Mercator •reliable. USDA United States Department of Agriculture ACS Natural Resources Conservation Service I IJ A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 1 I 1 M '24 t. 3 IL • .7. w�. I v 0 400 ft —_; Itla a r- . -p * tren '. =• • 'Ito`d i ;n41 ni "sir- r November 22, 2023 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). 142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made 5 Soil Map 8 Soil Map 9 Legend 10 Map Unit Legend 11 Map Unit Descriptions 11 Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 13 52 Otero sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes 13 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes 14 References 16 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 40° 17' 36" N 8 40° 17' 25" N 104° 36'10"JV 533760 533810 533860 533910 533760 533810 533860 533910 533960 534010 534060 534110 534160 534210 534260 Map Scale: 1:2,430 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. 0 35 70 140 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 533960 534010 Meters 210 Feet 0 100 200 400 600 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 9 534060 534110 534160 534210 534260 104° 35' 48" W 1040 35' 48" W 0 0 Co 40° 17' 36" N 40° 17' 25" N Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AO!) Area of Interest (AO1) Soils C Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout r, O 0 v •m 4 4 404 Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot a Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background iair°§1 Aerial Photography MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA -MRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 22, Aug 24, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 8, 2021 Jun 12, 2021 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 52 Otero sandy loam, percent slopes 3 to 5 0.5 5.0% 70 Valent slopes sand, 3 to 9 percent 10.3 95.0% Totals for Area of Interest 10.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, 11 Custom Soil Resource Report onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 52 Otero sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 3631 Elevation: 4,700 to 5,250 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Otero and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Otero Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits and/or mixed outwash Typical profile H1 - 0 to 12 inches: sandy loam H2 - 12 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (non irrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R067BY024CO - Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Kim Percent of map unit: 12 percent Hydric soil rating: No 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Vona Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczf Elevation: 3,050 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Dunes, hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backsiope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, crest, head slope, nose slope Down -slope shape: Convex, linear Across -slope shape: Convex, linear Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: sand AC - 5 to 12 inches: sand Cl - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 1 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Custom Soil Resource Report Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R067BY015CO - Deep Sand, R072XY109KS - Rolling Sands Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R067BY015CO - Deep Sand, R072XA021 KS - Sands (North) (PE 16-20) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Head slope, nose slope, side slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY024CO - Sandy Plains, R072XA022KS - Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) Hydric soil rating: No Haxtun Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R072XY111 KS - Sandy Plains, R067BY024CO - Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. N ational Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U .S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detai I/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=n res142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=n res142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. U nited States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. U nited States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. N ational forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 p2_053374 U nited States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. N ational range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepastu re/?cid=stelprdb 1043084 16 Custom Soil Resource Report U nited States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. N ational soil survey handbook, title 430 -VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detai I/soils/scientists/?cid=nres 142p2 054242 U nited States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 U nited States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nres142p2_052290.pdf 17 USGSU.S. DEPARTMELITI OF THE INTERIOR seisms Ow othisqlky Wit -/046200• an Project Site 61 37 Se 33 34 35 36 ►t; US Topo 37 3$ 39 40 41 VALLEY VIEW SCHOOL QUADRANGLE COLORADO - WELD COUNTY 7.5-MMJTE SERIES 42 •to6soar 67 63 I II .. D N ../^ af. 'J - ,., t., _ - �' r ! I jai ii • I I �+7��'~`�\ ' - '`\ % / aar aar 1. • a 1, 1 6__0+0.1 1 air a0 unto, tvoile, die* arprt iii , / a 111 Turf \ kirp al •pcit - ` -- 4000 r a nrdt ata - 0 a A f �' v \ t ii) Al. ( �`� -mil -(- Iti \...A4 ...." • i i' i r1 I i )cl s 400.1 lr 4 Q 4 flu 1 j 1 ,. N. ( ( el r" 1 ir /9' 1 's Z aa+0 i 1 as ` 1J so io0Se• J , \ ir I it i e! \ ICrn 1 0 I. \ /C \ (,\E , ,.,..„....2 J { 1 ars , \ \ 'IN 's 1 ) ( "1-..__,......" - 1 i ( I - _N...........r. c li ) \ \ — _ . . ... ....., a0.:s.so- 32 10. 621 33 Produced by the United States Geological Survey +era Lorry.. Oslo a. r.) .140.)I Neil Gnaw Srttaa et IS fet4S.4I knave .rtl 1 r0 -area 6111f,..nna Tram won Man S. Ism 1yr Tet duo . wit . soya 1.[ •.tetlt ED1.liana. sae to '1.rc•aN lor On asp ta4. M./4 41.3.1%4 rata" remented,404/ N/ w t/r+ln. 064th OM-- Mbre 0•141•4 Os.44 Iasi oar -. ..MM sags st • .e-..140.. 12,1 ea ... U.S. Ca 6Lr.a.. 7616 Nall. CNS. Pet a• 0444 •ba40ea••4-. 1110..- th'30I4 r aims, 2004 2M• h40�.rt. .......—Allie.al OAS Det40.at 1007 isb1es.... _._— _E. 4actl . sae ■e.•Ut es Erb 2021 Palk Sal Sums lam. .. ..... _SA 2021 wage t.—____JUS Mien *an Yw.4ry in toot 34 • I t 35 VMS a ut )A1 aacaicC 110.71. 0110.MATIONI.t aacfl.7 t.aN, Is ism, W H Oars. Ore* 36 1 Os 37 SCALE 1:24 000 ratCACIE/6 38 2 ION Ito I3 0 MREIK ) 1000 )000 tte.ES lea1000 O St 1.0• 1000 406 1000 1000 T6p• SOS $000 10000 Res tar 0Wref tl1vat ft Fr 1VITM IaKACaa sllnK0 OATS Of is. MIN 404. -e Illisiscod Y o•sar1. 4040* a. Inn Arta Ana US Tree 444444 It - 34 40 6 tOIG•a•0 000 000 000 1 Caraa4T :Gorses )4807.60,10e 4 La tat4 I Mardis • sea Sarni I Ian lam . Tama 040 orla•.40,4n 41 Sacas-MT Malt Rawls 69 60 67 66 65 64 63 62 1 i 57 X1eel 10 ZSDO' •10150017 IMD CLASSIFICATION •11411{40140 ins UK" CnMects, Lail Road Imo US Rasa 0luso lbws. VALLEY VIEW SCHOOL, CO 2022 National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette FEMA Legend 104°36'21"W 40°17'42"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT 104°35'44' W 40°17 15"N 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 Feet 2,000 1:6,000 Baser -nap Imagery Source: USGS Natrona/ Map 2023 SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BEE) Zone A. V, A99 With BFE or Depth "one Al, AO. AH. WE. AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes. Area with Flood Risk due to Levee NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard 0 Effective LOMRs Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard GENERAL - - - - Channel. Culvert, or Storm Sewer STRUCTURES t I I I I I I Levee, Dike, or Floodwall 20.2 Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation e Coastal Transect -�»;ra-- Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary -- Coastal Transect Baseline OTHER Profile Baseline FEATURES Hydrographic Feature MAP PANELS ci Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 11/22/2023 at 1.42 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: La Salle, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 40.291°, Longitude: -104.6001° Elevation: 4863 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES fir -r • r+ )ll�r_4 19 L ti4 r, - F ti Irk.- Sanja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Michael Yekta, Geoffery Bonnin NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF _tabular I PF graphical I Maps_&_aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches Duration 5 -min 10 -min 15 -min Average recurrence interval (years) 1 0.243 (0.198-0.301) 0.356 (0.289-0.441) 0.434 (0.353-0.538) 30 -min 0.582 J[°473° .722)j 60 -min 2 -hr 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 0.722 (0.587-0.895) 0.861 (0.705-1.06) 0.943 0.776-1.15 1.09 0.903-1.32) 1.27 1.06-1.53) 1.51 (1.27-1.80) 1.73 (1.47-2.05) 1.90 (1.62-2.23) 2.02 (1.73-2.37) 0.294 (0.239-0.365) 0.431 (0.350-0.535 0.525 (0.427-0.652), 0.703 (0.571-0.873) 0.859 (0.698-1.07 J 1.02 (0.830-1.25J 1.10 (0.903-1.35) i _ 5 0.392 (0.317-0.488) 10 0.485 (0.390-0.607) 0.573 (0.464-0.714) 0.699 (0.566-0.871) 0.935 (0.756-1.16) 1.13 (0.916-1.41) 0.710 (0.571-0.889), 0.866 1.16 (0.931-1.45) 1.41 (1.13-1.76) 1.33 (1.08-1.64) 1.66 (1.34-2.05) 1.43 (1.17-1.76) 1.27 1.65 1.06-1.55) (1.36-2.01) 1.51 (1.26-1.82) 1.78 1.50-2.12) 2.06 1.74-2.43) 2.22 (1.89-2.62) 2.36 (2.01-2.76) 1.95 (1.62-2.36) 2.27 (1.90-2.71) 2.62 (2.22-3.11) 2.80 (2.37-3.30) 2.94 (2.50-3.45) 1.77 (1.44-2.19) 2.04 (1.67-2.49) 2.38 (1.96-2.88) 2.72 (2.26-3.27) 3.12 (2.62-3.72) 3.30 (2.78-3.92) 3.45 (2.91-4.07) I 25 0.633 (0.497-0.847) 0.927 (0.728-1.24) 50 0.762 (0.578-1.03) 100 0.904 (0.658-1.25) 200 1.06 (0.735-1.51) 1.12 1.32 0.846-1.51) (0.963-1.83) 1.13 (0.887-1.51) 1.52 (1.19-2.03) 1.85 (1.46-2.50) 2.19 (1.75-2.94) 2.36 (1.89-3.15) 2.67 (2.16-3.53) 3.04 (2.46-3.92) 3.42 (2.77-4.34) 3.86 (3.14-4.81) 4.05 3.30-5.01) 4.20 3.44-5.17 1.36 1.62 (1.03-1.84) (1.17-2.24) 1.83 1.39-2.47) 2.25 1.71-3.05) 2.68 (2.06-3.60) 2.89 (2.23-3.88) 2.17 (1.58-3.01) 2.70 (1.97-3.75) 3.22 (2.37-4.45) 3.49 (2.59-4.80) 3.25 3.90 (2.53-4.31) 2.91-5.30) 3.62 (2.83-4.72) 4.01 3.15-5.15) 4.26 (3.20-5.69) 4.66 (3.52-6.13) 4.47 5.10 (3.53-5.64) (3.88-6.61) 114.66 3.7o84)� 5.30 82) 4.81 (3.83-6.01) 5.46 4.18-6.99) 1.56 (1.08-2.22) 1.90 (1.31-2.70) 2.56 (1.77-3.64) 3.20 (2.22-4.58) 3.84 (2.69-5.45) 4.18 (2.94-5.90) 4.63 (3.29-6.46) 4.96 (3.55-6.81) 5.36 (3.86-7.26) 5.78 (4.20-7.71) 5.99 (4.37-7.93) 6.14 4.50-8.10) 500 1.29 (0.853-1.89) 1.89 (1.25-2.77) 2.31 (1.52-3.38) 3.11 (2.06-4.56) 3.94 (2.60-5.79) 1000 1.48 (0.942-2.18) 2.17 (1.38-3.19) 2.64 (1.68-3.89) 3.57 (2.27-5.26) 4.55 (2.90-6.70) 4.76 5.53 (3.18-6.94) (3.55-8.06) 5.20 (3.50-7.54) 5.72 (3.88-8.19 J 5.99 (4.09-8.45) 6.37 (4.39-8.87) 6.73 (4.68-9.24) 6.94 (4.85-9.46) 7.10 (4.99-9.64)1 6.06 (3.92-8.78) 6.62 (4.32-9.49) 6.83 (4.50-9.68) 7.19 (4.79-10.1) 7.49 (5.04-10.41 7.71 (5.22-10.6) 7.86 (5.35-10.8) 7 -day 10-dayJ 20-dayJ 30 -day 45 -day 2.31 (1.98-2.68) 2.55 (2.20-2.95) 3.26 (2.84-3.74) 3.83 3.35-4.37) 4.53 (3.98-5.13) 60 -dad (4.49-5.75) 09. 5. 509 2.69 (2.31-3.13) 2.97 (2.57-3.44) 3.76 (3.27-4.32) 4.40 (3.85-5.02) 5.20 (4.56-5.90) 5.87 (5.17-6.63) 3.33 (2.85-3.89) 3.67 (3.16-4.27) 4.57 (3.96-5.26) 5.31 (4.62-6.08) 6.26 5.48-7.12) 7.09 [(6.22-8.03) 3.88 (3.30-4.55) 4.26 (3.64-4.97) 5.24 (4.51-6.05) 6.04 (5.23-6.94) 7.10 (6.18-8.12) 8.05 (7.02-9.16) 4.66 (3.83-5.67) 5.07 (4.18-6.12) 6.13 5.08-7.28) 7.02 (5.84-8.28) 5.29 (4.23-6.52) 5.71 (4.58-6.98) 6.81 (5.51-8.22) 7.76 (6.30-9.29) 8.22 � I 9.04 (6.86-9.62)J L(7.38-10.7) 9.30 10.2 (7.78-10.8) 5.93 (4.57-7.50) 6.34 (4.91-7.96) 7.47 (5.83-9.26) 8.47 (6.64-10.4) 6.59 (4.86-8.58) 7.00 5.18-9.04) 8.14 (6.07-10.4) 9.17 (6.88-11.6) 9.82 (7.74-12.0) 11.1 (8.73-13.4) 10.6 (7.98-13.3) 11.9 (8.98-14.8) 7.50 5.30-10.1) 7.86 (5.58-10.5) 9.00 (6.44-11.8) 10.1 (7.25-13.1) 8.21 (5.63-11.2) 8.53 (5.88-11.5) 9.64 (6.73-12.9) 10.7 (7.52-14.2) 11.5 (8.34-14.9) 12.9 (9.34-16.5) 12.2 (8.62-16.1) 13.6 (9.62-17.8) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical PICAS -based depth -duration -frequency (DDF) curves Latitude: 402910*., Longitude: 404.€0011 i C 4-1 a) U C O 1 Ea cLa a) 14 12 10 4 14:- 10 I C c e e� a ease raaI r-i fort Lri I C es Duration I ra r r t AI 'IS 4 >1 >n >n r reD IT 113 7 N' O 0 If) CA Average recurrence el (years) 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 ''''0 0'' 00 1000 Duration 5 -min 10 -min JO -min 60 -miry 2-r 644 r 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day — 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day Ieeeeeeeeeeea 60 -day 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 w:=:w00 Average recurrence interval (years) NOAA Atlas 140 Volume 8 Version 2 i_ rea te;j (T -MT: Thu _y e :_ 21 16:32:05 2023 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain I' i I Large scale terrain For tC.Oil ilr S L I1rj Peak Large scale map I • , Cheyenne r a „I 'reeler,' Longnfnt 100km r" sea 60mi u + t 4 4 .f'`.riA rl r, 5 Cbsyetinerama eeI'ey ■I L rigmor Boulder O igr 100km 60mi Large scale aerial Back to Top US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service National Water Center 1325 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Questions?: HDSC.Questions@noaa.gov Disclaimer AGPROfessionais I� DF\TFIJOPERS OF AGRICULTURE LTUR 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 www.agpros.com Project Number: 1145-02 Date: 12/21/23 4:16 PM Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Sheet: of Subject: Overall Proposed Impervious Area Calculation = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total SgFt Acres Impervious Greenbelts, agriculture 2% 61,150 0.03 Gravel Road 40% 268,860 2.47 Roofs 90% 19,612 0.41 Drive and Walk 90% 4,524 0.09 None 0% 0 0.00 None 0% 0 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 Square Feet 354,146 Acres Total Impervious Acres 130,489 3.00 Total Development Acres 354,146 8.13 3.00 Development %I Actual Design 37.0% CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy Existing Run-off 10 year I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 8.13 2.00 A Acres A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = Cl * P1 /(C2 + Td)AC3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= 03= P1= 10 28.50 10.00 0.786 1.41 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.07 0.00 -`` Reach 3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated 0-5.) Illustration Reach 21.-k overland Reach 1 flow 5_ LEGEND O Beginning Flour Dirty tion C atc patent B o undary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.0220 845 0.00 N/A 1 2 3 4 Sum 845 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 1.73 inch/hr 3.23 inch/hr 3.23 inch/hr 0.32 44.51 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Op = 44.51 14.69 14.69 0.98 1.82 1.82 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Existing 10 yr, Tc and PeakQ 12/21/2023, 11:13 AM CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy OS -1 10 yr runoff I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 0.27 2 A Acres A,B,C,orD II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= C3= P1= 10 28.50 10.00 0.786 1.41 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.07 0.00 Reach :3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration Reach 21— overland Reach 1 flour a LEGEND 4 (,J Beginning Flow Dirertio Cate Eine nit B o unitary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.0140 1,268 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 Sum 1,268 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 1.37 3.01 3.01 inch/hr inch/hr inch/hr N/A 0.33 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = 63.29 63.29 17.04 17.04 0.03 0.06 0.06 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Proposed 10 yr OS -1, Tc and PeakQ 12/22/2023, 9:05 AM CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy Proposed Run-off 10 year I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 8.13 37 A Acres A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = Cl * P1 /(C2 + Td)AC3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= 03= P1= 10 28.50 10.00 0.786 1.41 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = NRCS Land Type Conveyance 0.29 0.23 Reach 3 Heavy Meadow 2.5 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated 0-5.) Illustration Reach 2 Tillage/ Field 5 overland Reach 1 flow Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 LEGEND CI) Beginning - Flaw Direction 4- Ciatehrneht B o undue Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Flow Convey- Velocity ance V fps input output 0.0140 1.268 0.23 1 2 3 4 Sum 268 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 1.61 3.01 3.01 inch/hr inch/hr inch/hr N/A 0.42 50.14 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Flow Time Tf minutes output 50.14 17.04 17.04 3.74 7.01 7.01 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Proposed 10 yr, Tc and PeakQ 12/21/2023, 11:47 AM CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy Existing Basin A Run-off 100 year I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 8.13 2.00 A Acres A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = Cl * P1 /(C2 + Td)AC3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= 03= P1= 100 28.50 10.00 0.786 2.70 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.22 0.00 Reach 3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated 0-5.) Illustration Reach 2 �` Reach 1 overland fluff LEGEND O Beginning - Flow Direction I C air June ht Bound:ary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.0220 845 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 Sum 845 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 3.32 6.19 6.19 inch/hr inch/hr inch/hr N/A 0.32 44.51 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Op = 44.51 14.69 14.69 5.86 10.93 10.93 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Existing 100 yr, Tc and PeakQ 12/21/2023, 2:06 PM CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy OS -1 100yr runoff I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 0.27 2 A II. Rainfall Information Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= C3= P1= Acres A,B,C,orD I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)^C3 100 28.50 10.00 0.786 2.70 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.22 0.00 Reach 3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.) Illustration Reach 2 ,--t' overland Reach 1 flour LEGEND 0 Beginning Flow Direr tion C ate hrerut B o undary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.0140 1,268 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 Sum 1,268 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 2.63 5.76 5.76 inch/hr inch/hr inch/hr N/A 0.33 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = 63.29 63.29 17.04 17.04 0.15 0.34 0.34 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Proposed 100 yr OS -1, Tc and PeakQ 12/22/2023, 9:06 AM CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy Proposed Basin A Run-off 100 year I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 8.13 Acres A, B, C, or D 37 A II. Rainfall Information Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= 03= P1= I (inch/hr) = C1 * P1 /(C2 + Td)AC3 100 28.50 10.00 0.786 2.70 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.40 0.23 -`` Reach 3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated 0-5.) Illustration Reach 21.-k overland Reach 1 flow 5_ LEGEND O Beginning Flour Dirty tion C atc patent B o undary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 0.0140 1,268 1 2 3 4 5 Sum 1,268 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 3.07 5.76 5.76 inch/hr inch/hr inch/hr 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input 0.23 N/A Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.42 50.14 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Op = 50.14 17.04 17.04 9.90 18.55 18.55 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Proposed 100 yr, Tc and PeakQ 12/21/2023, 9:43 AM Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Appendix B Hydraulic Computations CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD Project Title: Catchment ID: Atlas Energy Existing Run-off 10 year I. Catchment Hydrologic Data Catchment ID = Area = Percent Imperviousness = NRCS Soil Type = Overall 8.13 2.00 A Acres A, B, C, or D II. Rainfall Information I (inch/hr) = Cl * P1 /(C2 + Td)AC3 Design Storm Return Period, Tr = 01= C2= 03= P1= 10 28.50 10.00 0.786 1.41 years (input return period for design storm) (input the value of C1) (input the value of C2) (input the value of C3) inches (input one -hr precipitation --see Sheet "Design Info") III. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment Runoff Coefficient, C = Overide Runoff Coefficient, C = 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = Overide 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C = 0.07 0.00 -`` Reach 3 (enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C.) (enter an overide C-5 value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated 0-5.) Illustration Reach 21.-k overland Reach 1 flow 5_ LEGEND O Beginning Flour Dirty tion C atc patent B o undary NRCS Land Type Conveyance Heavy Meadow 2.5 Tillage/ Field 5 Short Pasture/ Lawns 7 Nearly Bare Ground 10 Grassed Swales/ Waterways 15 Paved Areas & Shallow Paved Swales (Sheet Flow) 20 Calculations: Reach ID Overland Slope S ft/ft input Length L ft input 5-yr Runoff Coeff C-5 output NRCS Convey- ance input Flow Velocity V fps output Flow Time Tf minutes output 0.0220 845 0.00 N/A 1 2 3 4 Sum 845 IV. Peak Runoff Prediction Rainfall Intensity at Computed Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tc, I = Rainfall Intensity at User -Defined Tc, I = 1.73 inch/hr 3.23 inch/hr 3.23 inch/hr 0.32 44.51 Computed Tc = Regional Tc = User -Entered Tc = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Qp = Peak Flowrate, Op = 44.51 14.69 14.69 0.98 1.82 1.82 cfs cfs cfs UD-Rational v1.02a Existing 10 yr, Tc and PeakQ 12/21/2023, 11:13 AM DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A (For catchments less than 160 acres only. For larger catchments, use hydrograph routing method) (NOTE: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) Determination of MINOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Design Information (Input): Design Information (Input): Catchment Drainage Imperviousness la = 37.00 percent Catchment Drainage Imperviousness la = 37.00 percent Catchment Drainage Area A = 8.130 acres Catchment Drainage Area A = 8.130 acres Predevelopment NRCS Soil Group Type = A A, B, C, or D Predevelopment NRCS Soil Group Type = A A, B, C, or D Return Period for Detention Control T = 10 years (2, 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100) Return Period for Detention Control T = 100 years (2, 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100) Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = 17 minutes Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = 17 minutes Allowable Unit Release Rate q= 0.09 cfs/acre Allowable Unit Release Rate q= 0.12 cfs/acre One -hour Precipitation P1 = 1.41 inches One -hour Precipitation P1 = 2.70 inches Design Rainfall IDF Formula i = C1* P1/(C2+Tj^C3 Design Rainfall IDF Formula i = C1* P1/(C2+Tc)"C3 Coefficient One C1 = 28.50 Coefficient One C1 = 28.50 Coefficient Two C2 = 10 Coefficient Two C2 = 10 Coefficient Three C3 = 0.789 Coefficient Three C3 = 0.789 Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Calculated): Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Calculated): Runoff Coefficient C = 0.29 Runoff Coefficient C = 0.40 Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in = 7.02 cfs Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in = 18.55 cfs Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out = 0.73 cfs Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out = 0.98 cfs Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume = 11,973 cubic feet Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 39,928 cubic feet Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume = 0.3 acre -ft Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 0.9 acre -ft 10 <- Enter Rainfall Duration Incremental Increase Value Here (e.g. 5 for 5 -Minutes) Rainfall Duration minutes (input) Rainfall Intensity inches / hr (output) Inflow Volume acre-feet (output) Adjustment Factor "m" (output) Average Outflow cfs (output) Outflow Volume acre-feet (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) Rainfall Duration minutes (input) Rainfall Intensity inches / hr (output) Inflow Volume acre-feet (output) Adjustment Factor "m" (output) Average Outflow cfs (output) Outflow Volume acre-feet (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 10 3.78 0.123 1.00 0.73 0.010 0.113 10 7.24 0.324 1.00 0.98 0.013 0.311 20 2.75 0.178 0.93 0.68 0.019 0.160 20 5.26 0.471 0.93 0.90 0.025 0.446 30 2.19 0.213 0.78 0.57 0.024 0.189 30 4.19 0.563 0.78 0.77 0.032 0.531 40 1.83 0.238 0.71 0.52 0.029 0.210 40 3.51 0.629 0.71 0.70 0.038 0.591 50 1.59 0.258 0.67 0.49 0.034 0.224 50 3.04 0.681 0.67 0.65 0.045 0.636 60 1.41 0.274 0.64 0.47 0.039 0.235 60 2.69 0.724 0.64 0.63 0.052 0.672 70 1.27 0.288 0.62 0.45 0.044 0.244 70 2.42 0.760 0.62 0.61 0.058 0.702 80 1.15 0.300 0.61 0.44 0.049 0.251 80 2.21 0.792 0.61 0.59 0.065 0.727 90 1.06 0.310 0.59 0.44 0.054 0.256 90 2.03 0.820 0.59 0.58 0.072 0.748 100 0.98 0.320 0.59 0.43 0.059 0.261 100 1.89 0.845 0.59 0.57 0.079 0.766 110 0.92 0.328 0.58 0.42 0.064 0.264 110 1.76 0.868 0.58 0.56 0.085 0.782 120 0.86 0.336 0.57 0.42 0.069 0.267 120 1.65 0.889 0.57 0.56 0.092 0.797 130 0.81 0.344 0.57 0.41 0.074 0.270 130 1.56 0.908 0.57 0.55 0.099 0.809 140 0.77 0.351 0.56 0.41 0.079 0.271 140 1.48 0.926 0.56 0.55 0.106 0.820 150 0.73 0.357 0.56 0.41 0.084 0.273 150 1.40 0.943 0.56 0.54 0.112 0.831 160 0.70 0.363 0.55 0.40 0.089 0.274 160 1.34 0.959 0.55 0.54 0.119 0.840 170 0.67 0.369 0.55 0.40 0.094 0.274 170 1.28 0.974 0.55 0.54 0.126 0.848 180 0.64 0.374 0.55 0.40 0.099 0.275 180 1.23 0.988 0.55 0.53 0.132 0.856 190 0.61 0.379 0.54 0.40 0.104 0.275 190 1.18 1.002 0.54 0.53 0.139 0.862 200 0.59 0.384 0.54 0.40 0.109 0.275 200 1.13 1.014 0.54 0.53 0.146 0.869 210 0.57 0.389 0.54 0.40 0.114 0.274 210 1.09 1.027 0.54 0.53 0.153 0.874 220 0.55 0.393 0.54 0.39 0.119 0.274 220 1.05 1.039 0.54 0.53 0.159 0.879 230 0.53 0.398 0.54 0.39 0.124 0.273 230 1.02 1.050 0.54 0.52 0.166 0.884 240 0.52 0.402 0.54 0.39 0.130 0.272 240 0.99 1.061 0.54 0.52 0.173 0.888 250 0.50 0.406 0.53 0.39 0.135 0.271 250 0.96 1.071 0.53 0.52 0.179 0.892 260 0.48 0.409 0.53 0.39 0.140 0.270 260 0.93 1.082 0.53 0.52 0.186 0.895 270 0.47 0.413 0.53 0.39 0.145 0.269 270 0.90 1.091 0.53 0.52 0.193 0.899 280 0.46 0.417 0.53 0.39 0.150 0.267 280 0.88 1.101 0.53 0.52 0.200 0.901 290 0.45 0.420 0.53 0.39 0.155 0.266 290 0.85 1.110 0.53 0.52 0.206 0.904 300 0.43 0.424 0.53 0.39 0.160 0.264 300 0.83 1.119 0.53 0.52 0.213 0.906 310 0.42 0.427 0.53 0.39 0.165 0.262 310 0.81 1.128 0.53 0.51 0.220 0.908 320 0.41 0.430 0.53 0.39 0.170 0.260 320 0.79 1.136 0.53 0.51 0.226 0.910 330 0.40 0.433 0.53 0.38 0.175 0.258 330 0.77 1.144 0.53 0.51 0.233 0.911 340 0.40 0.436 0.53 0.38 0.180 0.256 340 0.76 1.152 0.53 0.51 0.240 0.913 350 0.39 0.439 0.52 0.38 0.185 0.254 350 0.74 1.160 0.52 0.51 0.247 0.914 360 0.38 0.442 0.52 0.38 0.190 0.252 360 0.72 1.168 0.52 0.51 0.253 0.915 370 0.37 0.445 0.52 0.38 0.195 0.250 370 0.71 1.175 0.52 0.51 0.260 0.915 380 0.36 0.448 0.52 0.38 0.200 0.248 380 0.69 1.183 0.52 0.51 0.267 0.916 390 0.36 0.450 0.52 0.38 0.205 0.245 390 0.68 1.190 0.52 0.51 0.273 0.916 400 0.35 0.453 0.52 0.38 0.210 0.243 400 0.67 1.197 0.52 0.51 0.280 0.917 410 0.34 0.456 0.52 0.38 0.215 0.240 410 0.66 1.204 0.52 0.51 0.287 0.917 420 0.34 0.458 0.52 0.38 0.220 0.238 420 0.64 1.210 0.52 0.51 0.294 0.917 430 0.33 0.461 0.52 0.38 0.225 0.235 430 0.63 1.217 0.52 0.51 0.300 0.916 440 0.32 0.463 0.52 0.38 0.230 0.233 440 0.62 1.223 0.52 0.51 0.307 0.916 450 0.32 0.465 0.52 0.38 0.235 0.230 450 0.61 1.229 0.52 0.51 0.314 0.916 460 0.31 0.468 0.52 0.38 0.240 0.227 460 0.60 1.236 0.52 0.51 0.321 0.915 470 0.31 0.470 0.52 0.38 0.245 0.225 470 0.59 1.242 0.52 0.51 0.327 0.914 480 0.30 0.472 0.52 0.38 0.250 0.222 480 0.58 1.248 0.52 0.51 0.334 0.914 490 0.30 0.475 0.52 0.38 0.256 0.219 490 0.57 1.254 0.52 0.50 0.341 0.913 500 0.29 0.477 0.52 0.38 0.261 0.216 500 0.56 1.259 0.52 0.50 0.347 0.912 510 0.29 0.479 0.52 0.38 0.266 0.213 510 0.55 1.265 0.52 0.50 0.354 0.911 520 0.28 0.481 0.52 0.38 0.271 0.210 520 0.55 1.270 0.52 0.50 0.361 0.910 530 0.28 0.483 0.52 0.38 0.276 0.207 530 0.54 1.276 0.52 0.50 0.368 0.908 540 0.28 0.485 0.52 0.38 0.281 0.204 540 0.53 1.281 0.52 0.50 0.374 0.907 550 0.27 0.487 0.52 0.38 0.286 0.201 550 0.52 1.287 0.52 0.50 0.381 0.906 560 0.27 0.489 0.52 0.38 0.291 0.198 560 0.52 1.292 0.52 0.50 0.388 0.904 570 0.27 0.491 0.51 0.38 0.296 0.195 570 0.51 1.297 0.51 0.50 0.394 0.903 580 0.26 0.493 0.51 0.38 0.301 0.192 580 0.50 1.302 0.51 0.50 0.401 0.901 590 0.26 0.495 0.51 0.38 0.306 0.189 590 0.49 1.307 0.51 0.50 0.408 0.899 600 0.25 0.497 0.51 0.38 0.311 0.186 600 0.49 1.312 0.51 0.50 0.415 0.897 Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume (cubic ft.) = 11,973 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (cubic ft.) = Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume (acre -ft.) = 0.2749 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (acre -ft.) = UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34, Released November 2013 39,928 0.9166 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Modified FAA 12/21/2023, 11:25 AM DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A ti Inflow and Outflow Volumes vs. Rainfall Duration 1A 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • Minor Storm Inflow Volume •— • Minor Storm Outflow Volume _. • .- Minor Storm Storage Volume Major Storm Inflow Volume T Major Storm Outflow Volume — • Major Storm Storage Volume a r riet .— • a r i 0 a , r r n cJc:J0 OOQ C 0.--, - rrr U� " r r {A a `- r _ 0 100 200 300 400 Duration (Minutes) 500 600 700 J UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34, Released November 2013 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Modified FAA 12/21/2023, 11:25 AM STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A Dam Side Slope Z - _- 4 4 _ Side Slope Z Flow Design Information (Input): Width of Basin Bottom, W = Length of Basin Bottom, L = Dam Side -slope (H:V), Zd = Stage -Storage Relationship: Dam A. kikr Side Slope Z 4 _ 145 t. > Side Slope Z 93.00 125.00 4.00 ft ft ft/ft Righ Isosceles Circl Darn L W Check Basin Shape t Triangle X Triangle Zectangle e / Ellipse Irregular Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Modified FAA': Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Hydrograph': Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Full -Spectrum': MINOR Side Slope z -r---- 4 Side Slope Z OR... OR... OR... OR... (Use Overide values in cells G32:G52) MAJOR 0.27 0.92 acre -ft. acre -ft. acre -ft. for & WQCV, Major Labels Storage Stages (input) Minor, Surface Elevation Water ft (input) Side Slope (H:V) Below (input) ft/ft El. Width (output) Basin Stage ft at Length (output) Basin Stage ft at Surface Area at Stage ft2 (output) Surface Area at Stage ft2 User Overide Volume (output) Below Stage ft3 Surface Area at Stage acres (output) Volume (output) Below Stage acre -ft for & Target (for WQCV, Major Volumes goal Volumes Storage Minor, seek) 4846.20 93.00 125.00 5,812.5 324 0.007 0.000 4846.40 93.60 125.80 5,887.1 2,075 240 0.048 0.006 4846.60 94.19 126.60 5,962.3 4,216 869 0.097 0.020 4846.80 94.79 127.40 6,037.8 6,192 1,910 0.142 0.044 4847.00 95.38 128.20 6,113.9 8,011 3,330 0.184 0.076 WQCV 4847.20 95.98 129.00 6,190.5 9,672 5,098 0.222 0.117 4847.40 96.57 129.80 6,267.5 11,176 7,183 0.257 0.165 4847.60 97.17 130.60 6,345.0 12,521 9,553 0.287 0.219 4847.80 97.76 131.40 6,422.9 13,688 12,174 0.314 0.279 4848.00 98.36 132.20 6,501.4 14,512 14,994 0.333 0.344 4848.20 98.95 133.00 6,580.3 14,998 17,945 0.344 0.412 4848.40 99.55 133.80 6,659.7 15,435 20,988 0.354 0.482 4848.60 100.14 134.60 6,739.6 15,876 24,119 0.364 0.554 4848.80 100.74 135.40 6,819.9 16,321 27,339 0.375 0.628 4849.00 101.33 136.20 6,900.8 16,771 30,648 0.385 0.704 4849.20 101.93 137.00 6,982.1 17,224 34,048 0.395 0.782 4849.40 102.52 137.80 7,063.8 17,681 37,538 0.406 0.862 Freeboard/Spillway 4849.60 103.12 138.60 7,146.1 18,142 41,120 0.416 0.944 4849.80 103.71 139.40 7,228.8 18,607 44,795 0.427 1.028 4850.00 104.31 140.20 7,312.0 19,076 48,563 0.438 1.115 4850.20 104.90 141.00 7,395.7 19,549 52,426 0.449 1.204 4850.40 105.50 141.80 7,479.9 20,026 56,383 0.460 1.294 Top of Berm 4850.60 106.09 142.60 7,564.5 20,507 60,437 0.471 1.387 4850.80 106.69 143.40 7,649.6 4,492 62,937 0.103 1.445 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A _ #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Basin 12/22/2023, 9:09 AM STAGE -STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS Project: Basin ID: 1- STAGE -STORAGE CURVE FOR THE POND 4851.00 0) 0) 4- a) 0) tv 4850.50 4850.00 4849.50 4849.00 4848.50 0.00 1.20 1.40 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 Storage (acre-feet) 1.60 1 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Basin 12/22/2023, 9:09 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) OUTLET Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A WQCV Design Volume (Input): Catchment Imperviousness, la = Catchment Area, A = Depth at WQCV outlet above lowest perforation, H = Vertical distance between rows, h = Number of rows, NL = Orifice discharge coefficient, Co _ Slope of Basin Trickle Channel, S = Time to Drain the Pond = Watershed Design Information (Input): Percent Soil Type A = Percent Soil Type B = Percent Soil Type C/D = Outlet Design Information (Output): 3 37.0 8.13 1 4.00 3.00 0.60 0.002 40 100 percent acres Diameter of holes, D = feet Number of holes per row, N = inches ft / ft hours Height of slot, H = Width of slot, W = Water Quality Capture Volume, WQCV = Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV) = Design Volume (WQCV / 12 * Area * 1.2) Vol = Outlet area per row, A0 = Total opening area at each row based on user -input above, A0 = Total opening area at each row based on user -input above, A0 = 0.769 1 OR inches inches inches 0.159 watershed inches 0.108 acre-feet 0.130 acre-feet 0.46 square inches 0.46 square inches 0.003 square feet O O O O O O O O J� n O O ° O O O O 1 _ O I I I l I 1 I 1 Perforated Plate Examples >, Central Elevations of Rows of Holes in feet E Flow Row 1 Row 2 Row 3 Row 4 Row 5 Row 6 Row 7 Row 8 Row 9 Row 10 Row 11 Row 12 Row 13 Row 14 Row 15 Row 16 Row 17 Row 18 Row 19 Row 20 Row 21 Row 22 Row 23 Row 23 4846.40 4846.73 4847.07 I I I I I I I I Collection Capacity for Each Row of Holes in cfs 4846.20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 4846.40 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 4846.60 0.0069 0.0000 0.0000 0.01 4846.80 0.0098 0.0041 0.0000 0.01 4847.00 0.0120 0.0081 0.0000 0.02 4847.20 0.0139 0.0106 0.0056 0.03 4847.40 0.0155 0.0127 0.0089 0.04 4847.60 0.0170 0.0145 0.0113 0.04 4847.80 0.0184 0.0161 0.0133 0.05 4848.00 0.0196 0.0175 0.0150 0.05 4848.20 0.0208 0.0188 0.0165 0.06 4848.40 0.0220 0.0201 0.0179 0.06 4848.60 0.0230 0.0212 0.0192 0.06 4848.80 0.0241 0.0223 0.0204 0.07 4849.00 0.0250 0.0234 0.0216 0.07 4849.20 0.0260 0.0244 0.0227 0.07 4849.40 0.0269 0.0254 0.0237 0.08 4849.60 0.0278 0.0263 0.0247 0.08 4849.80 0.0286 0.0272 0.0257 0.08 4850.00 0.0295 0.0281 0.0266 0.08 4850.20 0.0303 0.0289 0.0275 0.09 4850.40 0.0311 0.0297 0.0283 0.09 4850.60 0.0318 0.0305 0.0292 0.09 #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A 1 #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 1 #N/A Override Area Row 1 Override Area Row 2 Override Area Row 3 Override Area Row 4 Override Area Row 5 Override Area Row 6 Override Area Row 7 Override Area Row 8 Override Area Row 9 Override Area Row 10 Override Area Row 11 Override Area Row 12 Override Area Row 13 Override Area Row 14 Override Area Row 15 Override Area Row 16 Override Area Row 17 Override Area Row 18 Override Area Row 19 Override Area Row 20 Override Area Row 21 Override Area Row 22 Override Area Row 23 Override Area Row 24 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, WQCV 12/22/2023, 9:16 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME (WQCV) OUTLET Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A r .-, a) m 4 a) a) 4- a) a) to 4851.00 4850.50 4850.00 4849.50 4849.00 4848.50 4848.00 4847.50 4847.00 4846.50 4846.00 STAGE -DISCHARGE CURVE FOR THE WQCV OUTLET STRUCTURE F 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Discharge (cfs) 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 1 K 40 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, WQCV 12/22/2023, 9:16 AM RESTRICTOR PLATE SIZING FOR CIRCULAR VERTICAL ORIFICES Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A X o o � C> C �- o o / \ 0 0 n Sizing the Restrictor Plate for Circular Vertical Orifices or Pipes (Input) Water Surface Elevation at Design Depth PipeNertical Orifice Entrance Invert Elevation Required Peak Flow through Orifice at Design Depth PipeNertical Orifice Diameter (inches) Orifice Coefficient Full -flow Capacity (Calculated) Full -flow area Half Central Angle in Radians Full -flow capacity Calculation of Orifice Flow Condition Half Central Angle (0<Theta<3.1416) Flow area Top width of Orifice (inches) Height from Invert of Orifice to Bottom of Plate (feet) Elevation of Bottom of Plate Resultant Peak Flow Through Orifice at Design Depth Width of Equivalent Rectangular Vertical Orifice Elev: WS = Elev: Invert = Q= Dia = Co = Af = Theta Qf Percent of Design Flow = Theta = A0 = To = Yo = Elev Plate Bottom Edge = Oo= Equivalent Width = #1 Vertical Orifice #2 Vertical Orifice 4,849.60 4,846.20 0.98 12.0 0.60 0.93 0.11 9.61 0.20 4,846.40 1.0 0.55 feet feet cfs inches sgft rad cfs rad sgft inches feet feet cfs !feet udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Restrictor Plate 12/22/2023, 9:20 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL) Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A Current Routing Order is # Design Information (Input): Circular Opening: OR Rectangular Opening: Routing Order # I (Standard) • W .S. F.L. YMaior W.S. EL. 1Mieor 112 n W.S. F.L. WQ III b6 V I V 2 Routing Order )t3 (Single Stage) • W S. EL. Design Storm • W.S. EL. WQ WQ III V s Diameter in Inches Dia. = Width in Feet Length (Height for Vertical) Percentage of Open Area After Trash Rack Reduction Orifice Coefficient Weir Coefficient Orifice Elevation (Bottom for Vertical) Calculation of Collection Capacity: W= LorH= % open = Co = CW = Eo = Routing Order 42 :7 W.S. EL. \Maio, W.S. EL. \Mi,,,,, III W.S. EL. WQ VI Wr Q V2 #2 Horiz. #1 Vert. #1 Horiz. #2 Vert. 3.00 0.55 3.00 0.20 70 100 0.60 0.60 2.60 4847.40 4,846.20 Net Opening Area (after Trash Rack Reduction) A0 = 6.30 OPTIONAL: User-Overide Net Opening Area A0 = Perimeter as Weir Length Lw = 10.20 OPTIONAL: User-Overide Weir Length LW = Top Elevation of Vertical Orifice Opening, Top = Center Elevation of Vertical Orifice Opening, Cen = 0.11 ft. ft. 4846.40 4846.30 inches ft. ft. 0/0 ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. ft. ft. Routing 3: Single Stage - Water flows through WQCV plate and #1 horizontal opening into #1 vertical opening. This flow will be applied to culvert sheet (#2 vertical & horizontal openings is not used). Horizontal Orifices Vertical Orifices Labels for WQCV, Minor, & Major Storage W.S. Elevations (input) Water Surface Elevation ft (linked) WQCV Plate/Riser Flow cfs (User -linked) #1 Horiz. #1 Horiz. Weir Orifice Flow Flow cfs cfs (output) (output) #2 Horiz. #2 Horiz. Weir Orifice Flow Flow cfs cfs (output) (output) #1 Vert. Collection Capacity cfs (output) #2 Vert. Collection Capacity cfs (output) Total Collection Capacity cfs (output) Target Volumes for WQCV, Minor, & Major Storage Volumes (link for goal seek) 4846.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4846.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 4846.60 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.01 4846.80 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.01 4847.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.02 4847.20 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.03 WQCV 4847.40 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.04 4847.60 0.04 2.37 13.57 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.60 4847.80 0.05 6.71 19.19 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.65 4848.00 0.05 12.33 23.50 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.69 4848.20 0.06 18.98 27.13 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.73 4848.40 0.06 26.52 30.33 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.77 4848.60 0.06 34.86 33.23 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.80 4848.80 0.07 43.93 35.89 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.00 0.84 4849.00 0.07 53.67 38.37 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.87 4849.20 0.07 64.04 40.70 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.90 4849.40 0.08 75.01 42.90 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.93 FB/Spillway 4849.60 0.08 86.54 44.99 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.96 4849.80 0.08 98.60 46.99 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.99 4850.00 0.08 111.18 48.91 0.00 0.00 1.02 0.00 1.02 4850.20 0.09 124.25 50.76 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 1.05 4850.40 0.09 137.80 52.54 0.00 0.00 1.07 0.00 1.07 Top of Berm 4850.60 0.09 151.81 54.26 0.00 0.00 1.10 0.00 1.10 4850.80 #N/A 166.26 55.93 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 _ #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 _ #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 0.00 #NIA udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Outlet 12/22/2023, 9:28 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE WEIRS AND ORIFICES (INLET CONTROL) Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A r STAGE -DISCHARGE CURVE FOR THE OUTLET STRUCTURE 4851.2 4850.7 - _ 4850.2 - _ 4849.7 0 0) CD 4849.2 i CD DI CO 4848.7 V) 4848.2 4847.7 4847.2 4846.7 4846.2 • _ 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Discharge (cfs) 1 1.2 udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Outlet 12/22/2023, 9:28 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE OUTLET CULVERT (INLET vs. OUTLET CONTROL WITH TAILWATER EFFECTS) Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A Status: Sheet Contains Warnings. See Culvert_ErrorList Range Design Information (Input): Circular Culvert: Barrel Diameter in Inches Circular Culvert: Inlet Edge Type (choose from pull -down list) OR: Box Culvert: Barrel Height (Rise) in Feet Box Culvert: Barrel Width (Span) in Feet Box Culvert: Inlet Edge Type (choose from pull -down list) Number of Barrels Inlet Elevation at Culvert Invert Outlet Elevation at Culvert Invert Culvert Length in Feet Manning's Roughness Bend Loss Coefficient Exit Loss Coefficient Design Information (calculated): Entrance Loss Coefficient Friction Loss Coefficient Sum of All Loss Coefficients Orifice Inlet Condition Coefficient Minimum Energy Condition Coefficient Calculations of Culvert Capacity (output): Water Surface Elevation From Sheet "Basin" (ft., linked) 4846.20 4846.40 4846.60 4846.80 4847.00 4847.20 4847.40 4847.60 4847.80 4848.00 4848.20 4848.40 4848.60 4848.80 4849.00 4849.20 4849.40 4849.60 4849.80 4850.00 4850.20 4850.40 4850.60 4850.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tailwater Surface Elevation ft (input if known) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Culvert Inlet -Control Flowrate cfs (output) 0.00 0.20 0.60 1.10 1.80 2.50 3.20 3.80 4.30 4.80 5.20 5.60 6.00 6.30 6.70 7.00 7.30 rang -Fit Wall wnItumo Its c uh-ert x s re iiem rpri a Ant riffle ----<..). Er ...S4e S atixn L D= Sfrjrr Sc. 12 Grooved End with Headwall Height (Rise) = Width (Span) = Square Edge w/ 90-15 deg. Flared Wingwall No = lelev = Oelev = L= n= Kb_ KX = Ke= K1= Ks= Cd = KElow = Culvert Outlet -Control Flowrate cfs (output) 0.00 1.01 1.35 144 1.55 1.74 2.20 2.65 3.05 3.40 3.73 4.02 4.31 4.56 4.81 5.04 5.27 1 4846.20 4846.00 40.0 0.0130 0.00 1.00 0.20 1.24 2.44 0.99 -0.09 Flowrate Into Culvert From Sheet "Outlet" (cfs, linked) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.60 0.65 0.69 0.73 0.77 0.80 0.84 0.87 0.90 0.93 in. ft. ft. ft. elev. ft. elev. ft. Controlling Culvert Flowrate cfs (output) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.60 0.65 0.69 0.73 0.77 0.80 0.84 0.87 0.90 0.93 Inlet Equation Used (output) No Flow (WS < inlet) Min. Energy. Eqn. Min. Energy. Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Regression Eqn. Orifice Eqn. 7.60 5.48 0.96 0.96 Orifice Eqn. 7.80 5.69 0.99 0.99 Orifice Eqn. 8.10 5.88 1.02 1.02 Orifice Eqn. 8.30 6.08 1.05 1.05 Orifice Eqn. 8.60 6.27 1.07 1.07 Orifice Eqn. 8.80 6.45 1.10 1.10 Orifice Eqn. 9.00 6.63 #NIA #N/A Orifice Eqn. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 #N/A #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #N /A #N/A #NIA #N/A #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #N/A #NIA No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #NIA #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #NIA #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #N/A #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #N/A #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #N/A #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #NIA #NIA No Flow (WS < inlet) 0.00 0.00 #N /A #N/A No Flow (WS < inlet) udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Culvert 12/22/2023, 9:31 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE OUTLET CULVERT (INLET vs. OUTLET CONTROL WITH TAILWATER EFFECTS) Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Basin A r STAGE -DISCHARGE CURVE FOR THE FINAL OUTLET PIPE CULVERT 4851.20 4850.70 4850.20 4849.70 4849.20 4848.70 4848.20 4847.70 4847.20 4846.70 4846.20 # _ 0.00 r 0.20 0.40 0.60 Discharge (cfs) 0.80 1.00 1.20 K J udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Culvert 12/22/2023, 9:31 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE SPILLWAY Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: PROPOSED POND SPILLWAY 75.96 4.00000 Design Information (input): Bottom Length of Weft Angle of Side Slope Weir Elev. for Weir Crest Coef. for Rectangular Weir Coef. for Trapezoidal Weir Calculation of Spillway Capacity (output): L= Angle = EL. Crest = CW = Ct = 18.00 25.00 4,849.60 3.00 3.00 Surface Elevation (linked) Water ft. Rect. Weir Flowrate cfs (output) Triangle Weir Flowrate cfs (output) Total Spillway Release cfs (output) Total Pond Release cfs (output) 4846.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4846.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4846.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4846.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4847.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4847.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 4847.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 4847.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 4847.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.65 4848.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 4848.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 4848.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 4848.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 4848.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.84 4849.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 4849.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 4849.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 4849.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 4849.80 4.83 0.03 4.85 5.84 4850.00 13.66 0.14 13.80 14.82 4850.10 19.09 0.25 19.34 20.37 4850.20 25.10 0.39 25.49 26.54 4850.40 38.64 0.80 39.44 40.51 4850.60 54.00 1.40 55.40 #N/A 4850.80 70.98 2.21 73.19 #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA _ #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #NIA #NIA #NIA #N/A #N/A #NIA #N/A #NIA #N/A feet degrees feet Bottom of spillway 6" flow depth udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Spillway 12/22/2023, 9:36 AM STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE SPILLWAY Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: PROPOSED POND SPILLWAY udfcd spreadsheet Basin Updated Version, Spillway 12/22/2023, 9:36 AM Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. Atlas Energy Proposed Swale Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) Total Depth (ft) Invert Elev (ft) Slope (%) N -Value Calculations Compute by: No. Increments Elev (ft) 4855.00 4854.50 4854.00 4853.50 4853.00 4852.50 4852.00 4851.50 3.00, 3.00 2.00 4852.00 0.50 0.035 Q vs Depth = 10 Section 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Highlighted Depth (ft) Q (cfs) Area (sqft) Velocity (ft/s) Wetted Perim (ft) Crit Depth, Yc (ft) Top Width (ft) EGL (ft) Tuesday, Jan 2 2024 1.80 26.26 9.72 2.70 11.38 1.37 10.80 1.91 Depth (ft) 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 -0.50 Reach (ft) Rock_Chute.xls for construction plan Rock Chute Design - Cut/Paste Plan (Version WI -July -2010, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998) Project: Atlas Energy Designer: AGPROfessionals Date: 12/22/2023 County: Weld Checked by: Date: Design Values D50 dia. = 10.9in. Rockchute thickness = 21.8in Inlet apron length = 10 ft. Outlet apron length = 14 ft. Radius = 30 ft Will bedding be used? No Notes: U pstrea Cnn Rock Gradation Envelope Passing D10U D85 - D50 D10 Diameter, in. (weight, lbs.) 16 - 22 (309 - 733) 14 - 20 (201 - 535) 11 - 16 (92 - 309) 9-14(47-201) Coefficient of Uniformity, (D 60)/(D 10) < 1.7 Quantities a 3 Rock = 102 yd 2 Geotextile (W CS -13)b = 205 yd Bedding = 0 yd3 Excavation = 0 yd3 Earthfill = 0 yd3 Seeding = 0.0acre a Rock, bedding, and geotextile quantities are determined from x -section below (neglect radius). b Geotextile Class I (Non -woven) shall be overlapped and anchored (18 -in. minimum along sides and 24 -in. minimum on the ends) --- quantity not included. C O Co Slope = 0.005 ft./ft. Stakeout Notes Sta. 0+00.0 0+06.3 0+10.0 0+13.6 0+20.0 0+34.0 0+41.5 Notes: Elev. (Pnt) 4849 ft. (1) 4849 ft. (2) 4848.8 ft. (3) 4848.1 ft. (4) 4846.5 ft. (5) 4846.5 ft. (6) 4849.5 ft. (7) 1 Radius = 30.302'ft. Geotextile Inlet apron elev. = 4849 ft. 2 3 Profile Along Centerline of Rock Chute Rock thickness = 21.8 in. , , , , , , Freeboard = 1 ft. Rock gradation envelope can be met with DOT Extra Heavy riprap Gradation Point No. 2 3 4 Outlet apron elev. = 4846.5r ?ft. 14 fic" Top width = 27 ft. Description Point of curvature (PC) Point of intersection (PI) Point of tangency (PT) Downstream Channel Slope = 0.001 ft./ft. d = 3 ft. Rock Chute Bedding '4 y= 3.33 1 ft. < Ber Geotexti Rock Chute Bedding Rock = thickness 21.8 in. *Use Hp throughout chute B' = 1 ft. but not less than z2. Rock Chute Cross Section Profile, Cross Sections, and Quantities 4NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service United States Department of Agriculture Atlas Energy Weld County Date Designe AGPROfessionals Drawn Checked Approved File Name Drawing Name Sheet Determination of Culvert Headwater and Outlet Protection Project: Atlas Energy Basin ID: Outlet Culvert Soil Type: - Choose One: ® Sandy O Non -Sandy Design Information (Input): Design Discharge Circular Culvert: Barrel Diameter in Inches Inlet Edge Type (Choose from pull -down list) Box Culvert: Barrel Height (Rise) in Feet Barrel Width (Span) in Feet Inlet Edge Type (Choose from pull -down list) Number of Barrels Inlet Elevation Outlet Elevation OR Slope Culvert Length Manning's Roughness Bend Loss Coefficient Exit Loss Coefficient Tailwater Surface Elevation Max Allowable Channel Velocity Q= D= Grooved End Projection Height (Rise) = Width (Span) = 0.98 cfs 12 finches V OR ift ft No= Elev IN = So = L= n= kb = kx = Elev Yt = V= V 1 4846.2 0.005 40 0.013 0 1 5 ft ft/ft ft ft ft/s Required Protection (Output): Tailwater Surface Height Flow Area at Max Channel Velocity Culvert Cross Sectional Area Available Entrance Loss Coefficient Friction Loss Coefficient Sum of All Losses Coefficients Culvert Normal Depth Culvert Critical Depth Tailwater Depth for Design Adjusted Diameter OR Adjusted Rise Expansion Factor Flow/Diameter2.5 OR Flow/(Span * Rise' 5) Froude Number Tailwater/Adjusted Diameter OR Tailwater/Adjusted Rise Inlet Control Headwater Outlet Control Headwater Design Headwater Elevation Headwater/Diameter OR Headwater/Rise Ratio Minimum Theoretical Riprap Size Nominal Riprap Size UDFCD Riprap Type Length of Protection Width of Protection Yt= At= A= ke = kf= ks = Yn _ Yc _ d= Ua = 1/(2*tan(0)) = Q/D^2.5 = Fr = Yt/D = HWI= HWo = HW = HW/D = _ d� _ Type = Lp = T= 0.40 0.20 0.79 0.20 1.24 2.44 0.43 0.42 0.71 alb 6.70 0.98 0.93 0.40 0.58 0.57 4,846.78 0.58 1 6 VL 3 2 ft ft2 ft` ft ft ft ft ft fte•b/s in in ft ft Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC, Preliminary Drainage Report Appendix C 24 x 36 Maps COLORADO PROPERTY HOLDING COMPANY, LLC LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO c ta"*„, 3 i 4 mot COUNTY ROAD 4; it 41 PROJECT LOCATION ! SIron Illik r, y..•.. w. . I. /.I .. -. Gk iu a • . • a �/€ • • __ -- • r t!.. ..H 1. VICINITY MAP LEGEND FLOW DIRECTION %C.A, I ' AIY! HISTORICAL DRAINAGE PLAN i 200 1 • 6 s • i 4 iii. .ers Will WEI - gaol' , UEV FLLOPE K 3050 67th Avenue. Suite 200 Greeiel CO 80634 (970) 535-0318 - fax (970) 535.9854 P*' p , , O u `1zt �ME `C' 'G( .4;. y c �R PLAN RICAL� DRAINAGI Vi } 1 1) et )12'I TY, CO SI DR IEET -1 r A I 3 1 • r7 t tt • iris LEGEND PRONOUN Itaxn?A RY ( XIV PIO GROUND *INF ma CONTOUR AND ILIVAI ION, I I PHLWOst. GRUUt/U sum ACt CONTOUR MU I LE VAS ION II • - I.MSTNG RAt>El * I I NCI IASIPIOGAS INE I xmi NG HEGIRA: ECTRA: INI F)tl51INC powiR I,NI -- %ISSNGtMEW NI IUIUNl I1,aW. MATING Raw SE CT IONtNE I *WINO IAS MINI AMi =IMF iral ORANAO1 BAh7N s• "- HMS PAIN, LENOM ASIM eW EXISTING UTIUIV POII tECIION d' I IDW MN) item y SIl1IINCE Ca. f a = °WIET PROTEctIDN IS ® cost,* II WAS IOUTAREA h _fr Ytltl[]F IR4Oa10C0N IRO! ® weIWAY DRAINAGE LEGEND n AREA NI>EHTIFII.H - AREA W1 -� OI STUN PON I - O,c PEAK FLOW RATE TO - O.rPIMIIUWHIIII RSTA NOTES I FOR TW C& OI1AILS 511 SNIT 1 ON -1 7. ARIA or OtPLXIBANCI - Ga0ACRE.S 1 DRAINAGE PLAN i a i1Jll1 � �. 9 3 5 0 a 0 I 4 IN. - iis OO - ` 6 PRA PERS C 2 354 t" O Lifts r Q1•• 47I a Y COLORADO PROPERTY HOLDING COMPANY_ LLC DRAINAGE PLAN HI ,1 t DR -2 a Sit Peace (SF) SC -1 colosses • 41C S•..1 WKS GV71D4LE -� ttuareITO *K.Ou C ,awl at soar •t Or deli remit _l• 'ran' Yeas K AMID rrntt Vast IN AMU a.t YrJew 'NN ROIMEtD 110 Of4 in bon now tam an nusew win .e rams I SILT FENCE I 1I I I Gs IectDkw4SOry1 ■ACCO elda WM le' owe runt u rat teat tens cocoaasTS "Kr as J Ist AI IV c -r s teO••K11 Of SWIM 4 n al - MIN r ia:leWtn Uri SECTION A SF -1. SILT FENCF Neveabes `01G Sandy Site MI11 »nd Bluesterr. Sand Lovegrass Indian Ratty .114 Prams Sandreed Green Needlegrass Utile b uestern Yellow indaangrasf Ctbset Dramas aa3 Fkod Castel Deena titan Nora Marine Cara Meaual L'otamt ! cerseral Seed Mil e} t4.r Wirig County (Champ Chet i (Bcnd, Native. Nell) (Neapar. R.mrock) (fit) (lodorm) (Blare, Cimarron. Camper) (Cheyenne. Holt Scout) Switchgrass (Brm kwer). Nebraska 281 Sand Deo teal 1 00 lbs pa/are 2 50 lbs tars; arc 3 0010: pit/acre 0 75 lbs pls/acre I SO Ras pis/sae 0 75 lbs pls/eue 0 SO lbs pit/acre 1 SO lbs on/acre LSO IBS uls/atrl Tout 12.00 pounds pla/we Wetter Slte MI>} Western whratgtast (Aruba, Barton Romani Slender wheatgrass (Pryu.. San Luis) Alkaiagt an dulls It Salt On Sea) Streart.bans Whratgrw (Soderl Sw,tchgaass (Nebraska 28, IpacksN1) Green Nredlegrass (sadism) sidecars Grants (Butte El Reno, Pierre) Perennial Nitwits' (Cal.bta a Garibaldi tetsaplold) Sand Dropseed Total: 10010s pis/acre 100 lbs ph/are 1 ;Orbs P1s/rc.e 2 SO IDs Mt/we 175 tut Or/eae 0.50 lbs ph/acre 1 00 tbs pis/acre 0 50 lbs 1115/acs Q.1111).S111.4111: r+; 14.00 pounds ph/acre St -s Vehicle ['racking Conti of I \ I (') SM-4 c i Oill- .....i ' ✓i 'Gui pinil—� -. . 4:.•.10 'a•r Ye `i si w . . ••..'. Y r. 77 RV 010114 Sit K ►111 C COR t PAN► s .tom =one du with seem «►:Ili l.?ca ;_ OR Mine Kr D tee ne%tI;r tMOMAAI SECTION_ A ant O1,O•4ta Mott e. u0“. aolleCeor We COOT MM ruts aa.Yt- �' Lt toreet aOa�,OrR o. e• aMa$ duct •• r1/\1 e Gee, AP. Mt Itt)fAAV Wins aI W t!..a .M1t1t14$,, .i.t MOT SOCt gins 3/449 -(10 1) °PMK MO.cc*n OR C veal IIOu Mee -WAR aCititta rases - areas six r.0 laDOt T a1S.-ewe WI (IA+ heaK yTC-1. AGGREGATE TRACKING CONTROL %msember 2010 Ultra Doane WI Flood t °Data Daso.ct Vita Starts Donut a:rtterta ttaautl Game Areas Ntxth of County Road 6$ Ng BUTralo Gress I Teaou. Shamir irnp!oredl Little Bkaestem (Blase. Cimarron, Limpet) Sldeoats Grama )Vaughn. butte None El Reno Blue Grama IHachitat, Lo+ingroni Western whealgian (Mriba, Barton, Rusanel Switchgrass (Nebraska 48. Blackwell) Perennial Ryegrass iCal'bra or Garibaldi tetreplaidl Sand Or unwed Areas Scat QLSBMPJ RRIISl68 Mia I S on pis/ecru 1 5 lbs ins/atre Haskell) 1 lb' ph/acre 3.5 lbs ph/acre 3 lbs pit/acre 1 5 Ibs pb/aae 0 15 lbs ph/eae y 1S lbs WI/afg Total- 14.00 pounds phinsen Western Wncatgrass (Aruba. Barton, Rosana) Blue Grama (liachllal, Lovington) Sadeuats Grants (Vaughn. Butte, Nine*. ( I Reno. Masks.) Smooth &ome Itintern Mancha,I Sand Oropteea Perennial RYetlrast ((antra or Garibaldi tetraploal Slender Wheatgnss (Prior, Revenue or San Luis) Alkallgrass (Fulls ti, Salt on Seal 5witchgrass (Nebraska 28. Blackwell} 2.50 lbs pit/acre 1.50 lbs pit/acre J TS Ras plyave 2.00 Ips pls/we 0 25 Ips pit/acre 0 7S ibs pts/acre 2 50 lbs pis/acre 1.25 lbs pit/acre j 00 lbs Oit/aut Tack 14.00 pound pie/Gen 4Tc-t ( tlntrt'te \\.1\huuI \Eta (( \\ .\) MM -1 ,ftwaslutece out, e%egcnett riot raNCRFTE WASHOUT AREA PLAN rgearre? elM t ',PIP( b( Kw14uta c?1 .+. 'tit IrlaSpe4 -lffal (/1X • c Mier! De Pater Wet a reeete...;/ 1 III1I'''" l a t e rims. l AM:' IttA[aeal COS. (US eft - SECTION A a. tWA-1 _ CONCRETE WAShQuT AREA cN rCIt.L..ret. rum ,. tit ••t.* au0941 -rT Kaissa. .A'w'ip. 2 CO slit won ae IM#CD CS Kra age Or NO ISIS. MasrK WAS* Oa 1ri11MQA to MKS &A:ay. eta • K' V Se etas Oe OiTatrat0 TARP SWIM 3 IT sIT fta*liseirs sal sus rwet belt cat N near Peat tot] env Oa Wt. tpt — w4- i anginal .►s• W ta111Tea•et1 Ina) to Ulm a eit Si' rit canna At It m Gin, PVC MtwsGrw S1 d i SYltSue O[IIMIIS a tic *SAE awe MKS( Ale tlaa" S at a W t%I P i IS •etteallp as to C MP % n. Set fat 1•e e teSnits CA • ruel MAGUIle1Q a•e •wt a k aait e' K Or out Or tl•r %a*,Siet est tat K l i ne Item* Ht err bull in ai teal S r S foal liAgetem et1C RIM asst 4KA rlr 'MC Cwt 4OIal RNA eau II .411117 er 1' 4. sfsG..t TRAMS PAC Vvea K hOtCO da Neat tat tea ✓ t.:MS O4a ` asst lit at )$4 yel'Wa^_ es Ir11MITc(. A' TM Cis. Cut uutana NZ sd.ZlWrur fa 'a a, rams let =ARO. ar Ipt Cw 10 cosustorg P •.sari It eats Mdi Sitar IPA ♦ grit hcass!W gonna TAO IrarrlTN 11Ltar caner*. Naveibir2OMI this Dolor marked teed Dan thee. %a.- Map C UNIS Maim Vohs s CPA Misr--Sisims I MM WOK PPP 1C A GA NKr. mean .aria t ofstawnrrialtto a arum No CAA; •. Stare a4a1e Ban MIS eie twine w caw V Av too rev est ^.OOtst oa •apps. toil MKS: a APT -1. _ -.41Gals ter PP NW MKintratIll En ''7 IOW Iagtw• u. to Raps ap apt e. dotal lot c shit. 14(44Iwt.►a4 claimed Utb.0 lat.age sea RAP Coital Detect N.r.es bo :c:' 1_ ctsa Storm asap CI dens Stretut Volaar ant Gams. • autaaao oast • rain ovally SAM teRAA.0MI elan NO enitiLtilletae QYra4D W tlasee A• TO a t. , Tut rasher %sits Nitta name art I, tai is aatm ow tit tai. *voA lar0.K SIAM WI to ItaAaarC IC arena OPTS* i m he wt 11 aye ass as *Turdw halo tO541 114 T•ata ON SUMP .tam -C TWA' ttiraet OM ItreaN'AttN csAS ICATCS •.1141 A WI 01Tiataae mat:Mw Ma .Oe AWL* mo Si; aartawrtur Ma tit,Allt YWI K Oar ywsnb Ala OVAITIWTRe N Atr.alt MM Altw COOT TACTICS SOTS Wall MINA M COOT ,a is QOM SYK (SUM Mk Cpl1 fl tAtral K. INA Tor eseee.etwee r soft eau r. mew COO' ar6.arata+ »aids Gap aft to alt at riga) cavil/ reek OI*•a. TMMaw net en. Kl aa[eb vela able ailiaIts ISM TI'a sataa othintt1 tegaislUu YI OUTLET STRUCTURE MUST• • ann•s A Any tie r raw Orr .�y eI� •.!r!fi T.77Va .la arse Ad % ate ri_Mt sarnauteo ,e va.I = cults ttrenetate -` eORv.aL • •� mix% rwrJ KATI leo' aa••tO a•.n.n anti. SECTION EWE asenetste aeru rust mart laeane A' SeraC11A'TK IS-Iwt watew!Co .A...,. KanI Bann Oft ter 'eta OgNI1sAOr cunt, en Ir -. 46ttW1 aleetaO14a / area KAtS flat 'kr KWdete bKeaebW r •t.IW net / sr T flat EMERGENCY SPILLWAY TtAaereT Suss v et �e ,..� - f • era' {- �� r -y ▪ +.f�LG_ I mil, l ,r�aer. yet- wore east r - .TM war r- a 1/-Y U lees I COO, at '• MAP TWA ..r...a.rre C+Ia..r. �. .. -c.;t•;d"+' ... (/ns'c Una.1.w Uss* e 1' ,it{1NT view - I'IMA r• f 41410414114 TT avet•tsan - 1 Itr, rt an team A' rg tawoaln -0 aunnSn - 1 Slur tact AeN1aMt@.l '.AL4QVC! PUMA' !COUllailn ran amt. rimimam rinsova r Q>VNCC[O CAST'. W TATOAa4 as; , OtTaer. i NSISO CA cau.fl o MP**, Intl i. • R.aca TO to ct t n /- Of cal WU, rec &AhmI fir u ataiwma.taraw PC at tee MCA Claire1K Pan an pasta Slannnc. sit "AA Waal a CaeeI.C ItS Venn nSWIM shset St A Oifll Ca S... an tat MAm at spasmart rat, et asap Taal'I41Naueerc rTtaaar Caber to nil 11.1110940,6010 Ka W Kale MO COreMO Wale seep malt♦+it tarn IS Mae M eassu• WIT MI I AO AT TIC Tar it rats ewef twtlealr. 0rlpa ikt1 fie ante ra• K 'lot nn eta 1c Nas,O-ra•o KaG T curtail MWst*cnn ,n a matilltiT arta'eat A CVOS?! CUTOUT Mir Mae alias '.a that al Teti Oe4P Ala►trl,OMwl A arlaua a '$111. Prat Mt0 Tut CIIMATIate OM VATI TIOI a sec seal see ae•ts a o a f1paso OMGat M1lM1101. TOOT 114 ea4rttNC.Y•\tWA' rttnnTlah an at TAD WA CIO TIC TOP Of I t4Alaustht sitaA W►ataM MOM asc • 'i''TIM Ira). M COO AKA ANN MI DM a Mn COOT iT101RA'O4 ¶bAMATO' l.mllltte. Ike Ii Ir/nintLN` talks • ., Lies Seale t« Male t4 -•.r ,.- '1 VALID ;ti L-rs i,Vo...A RO.t..,r,1 WELD COUNTY As Cott/utle& ...St VIL MA 111... /r rt4T marl • Ai M1� •. a_,o.. OUTLET AND SPILLWAY DETAILS Proplcl ttrt Code V..! cyY.• q. .• C I a s i 1 it L a 1 t fW J% CO .J __ J GPRI :LOPERS tree 200 2 34 n 535-9854 Ake i • 4PcwAt PEK I Y HUI PICAL Dl WELD C UUYf SHEET DR -3 AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Nuisance and Waste Management Plan Prepared for Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC Amended USR Application Introduction This Nuisance and Waste Management Plan has been developed for the Colorado Property Holding Company, LLC amendment to Use by Special Review (USR) USR12-0061. The amended USR will update operations of an existing oil and gas support and services operation on site. Their primary operations are roustabout and hydro -vac services. The 8.39 -acre subject property is located in Part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the 6th P.M. being Lot A of RE -1506. Access to the facility is via Weld County Road (WCR) 42 east of WCR 49. The proposed business name is Atlas Energy Services, LLC (Atlas Energy). The on -site operations will primarily be the maintenance of vehicles and equipment for use at oil and gas sites and will be contained within the commercial buildings on the property. The majority of Atlas Energy's operations will occur off -site at various oil and gas locations around the county. USR12-0061 is permitted as a mineral resource development facility, including an oil and gas support and service facility (parking, staging, and maintenance of oil and gas trucks) with up to 35 employees (30 off -site employees and 5 on -site employees). The USR amendment request is to increase the number of employees to 150 (140 off -site employees and 10 on -site employees) and to add a second shop to the site. The subject property is located on Weld County Road (WCR) 49, which is also known as the Weld County Parkway/Highway. Other uses in the surrounding area include oil and gas support service facilities, mineral resource development facilities, anaerobic digesters, communication towers, feedlots, and dairies. There is an oil and gas tank battery directly east of the site. The property directly north of the site is an irrigated pivot owned by the City of Broomfield. South of the property across WCR 42 is non -irrigated rangeland. USR Development Standards will be applied to the amended USR to establish operating parameters and nuisance mitigation requirements. Atlas Energy will also use the methods described below to minimize potential nuisances and waste produced as a result of the proposed uses. ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE HQ & Mailing: 3050 67t11 Avenue, Suite 200, Greeley, CO 80634 1970-535-9318 office 970-535-9854 fax Idaho: 213 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 100, Twin Falls, ID 83301 208-595-5301 www.agpros.com Page 2 of 4 Noise The property owner or operator will attempt to minimize noise generated during operation and maintain compliance with Weld County noise requirements. Most of the operations will be off - site. On -site operations will primarily occur within the existing shop buildings providing an additional sound buffer. As there is no decibel limit in the Agricultural Zone District, the potential impact on the nearest residence was evaluated. The greatest potential for nuisance noise conditions to occur is in the morning when semi -trucks are picked up by employees. As such, semi -trucks were used in this evaluation. The site is surrounded by an irrigated pivot to the north and east, and by non -irrigated, undeveloped rangeland to the south. WCR 49 (Weld County Parkway/Highway) borders the site to the west. The nearest residence to the proposed operation is across WCR 49, to the west of the site. Calculations were performed to understand the noise impact the operation would have on this location. It was estimated that during operations no more than six trucks will be simultaneously idling. Given that an idling truck emits 85 dB(A), the noise produced by six idling trucks was approximated to be 94.7 dB(A), at the source. Using equation (1) to determine the linear propagation of sound outside and considering the shortest distance of 590 feet between the semi - truck parking spaces and the nearest residence, it was approximated that the facility's operation could result in 31.4 dB(A) at the nearest residence. dB(A)distance]rom_sorn•ce = dB(A)source - 10 log (4 ?C distance from source) (1) To understand how the dB(A) potentially produced by the operation compares to the ambient noise (mostly attributable to traffic on WCR 49) at this location, a noise survey was conducted in the vicinity of the proposed facility. At the time of the survey there were no active operations. Recorded noise measurements were collected utilizing a NIOSH application capable of collecting and recording weighted averages of the noise occurring over time (LAeq (dBA)), maximum noise (dB(A)rnax), and minimum noise (dB(A)1). Measurement positions were aligned along the fence line of the nearest residence on the west side of WCR 49 at approximately 90, 380, and 500 feet north of WCR 42. The LAeq measurements and the position of these measurements with respect to the nearest residence to the facility were inputted in equation (1) to estimate the dB(A) levels that are likely occurring at the nearest residence due to highway traffic. Table 1 shows the measurements collected, their distance to the residence, and the estimated propagation of sound to the nearest residence point. Page 3 of 4 Table 1. Noise Survey Results Position ID LAeq (dB(A)) Distance measurement and residence between position Ambient nearest noise residence estimated dB(A) to (ft) (m) #10 #12 #13 70.2 392.2 119.6 38.4 86.7 48.2 158.3 53.7 86.9 49.7 159.8 53.9 As evidenced by the Table 1 results, the calculated noise produced by six idling trucks (31.4 dB(A)) at the nearest residence is considerably lower than the estimations based on the ambient noise produced by the highway. Therefore, nuisance noise conditions are not anticipated for the proposed use. Light Outdoor lighting will be building -mounted and new LED pole lights are proposed in the parking area. Sources of light will be shielded so that light rays will not shine directly onto adjacent properties where such would cause a nuisance or interfere with the use on the adjacent properties. Neither the direct, nor reflected light from any light source will create a traffic hazard to operators of motor vehicles on public or private streets. No colored light will be used which may be confused with, or construed as, traffic control devices. Waste Management The proposed use is not anticipated to produce nuisance debris, junk, or other wastes. The property owner or operator will be responsible for controlling noxious weeds on the site. Trash will be collected in a covered, confined trash dumpster and removed as needed by a trash removal company. Both shops will have floor drains which will be connected to vaults. The vaults will be appropriately sized, alarmed, and cleaned out with a hydro -vac service, as necessary. There is no sanitary sewer service to, or within four hundred feet of, the subject property. There is an existing septic system, permit no. SP -1400103, that provides sewage disposal to the property. Portable toilets will be provided for off -site employees as they will be on -site for less than 2 consecutive hours per day. The operator will utilize an appropriate sanitary services provider to manage the toilets and remove and dispose of contents as needed in accordance with applicable requirements. Page 4 of 4 One 4,000 -gallon highway diesel tank, one 2,000 -gallon red -dyed diesel tank, and one 1,000 - gallon gasoline tank are proposed with appropriate secondary containment (double -walled tank or containment area [i.e., walled concrete pad] that can hold 110% of tank volume). Dust Abatement The operation is not expected to generate disproportionate amounts of fugitive dust. Lot surfaces are primarily native grass and improved gravel surfaces in roadways, parking, and operations areas. Parking is internal to the site. There are two existing accesses on WCR 42, permit no. AP 13-00331, one for residential use, one for commercial use. As the accesses and WCR 42 are gravel, additional tracking control measures at the entrances are not needed. WCR 42 is a local gravel road maintained by Weld County. Vehicles will not gain significant speed on WCR 42 before the road intersects with WCR 49 due to the distance from the access points to WCR 49. There is a paved apron at the WCR 42 — WCR 49 intersection. Watering of surfaces will occur on -site as necessary to suppress dust. Screening Operations will occur primarily in the shop buildings or off -site at specific job locations. A six-foot corrugated metal fence is proposed along the western and southern sides of the main parking area. Atlas Energy 24125 CR 42, Weld County, Colorado Traffic Impact Study KE Job #2024-012 Prepared for: AGPROfessionals 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Prepared by: KELLAR ENGINEERING www.kellarengineering.com 970.219.1602 phone January 30, 2024 Sean K. Kellar, PE, PTOE This document, together with the concepts and recommendations presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization from Kellar Engineering LLC shall be without liability to Kellar Engineering LLC. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Existing Conditions and Roadway Network 2.1 Recent Traffic Volumes 3.0 Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities 4.0 Proposed Development 4.1 Trip Generation 4.2 Trip Distribution 4.3 Traffic Assignment 4.4 Short Range and Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic 5.0 Traffic Operation Analysis 5.1 Analysis Methodology 5.2 Intersection Operational Analysis 5.3 Auxiliary Lane Requirements 6.0 Findings List of Figures: Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: Figure 9: Vicinity Map Site Plan Recent Peak Hour Traffic 2025 Background Peak Hour Traffic 2045 Background Peak Hour Traffic Trip Distribution Site Generated Peak Hour Traffic 2025 Short Range Total Peak Hour Traffic 2045 Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Page 3 3 3 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 22 Page 4 5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) List of Tables: Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Appendices: Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Trip Generation 2024 Recent Peak Hour Operations 2025 Background Peak Hour Operations 2045 Background Peak Hour Operations 2025 Short Range Total Peak Hour Operations 2045 Short Range Total Peak Hour Operations Traffic Counts Level of Service (LOS) Tables Aerial Image and Street View Appendix D: Weld County Functional Classification Map Appendix E: HCM Calculations (Synchro) Page 9 17 18 19 20 21 Page 24 28 29 31 32 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 2 1.0 Introduction The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is to identify project traffic generation characteristics, to identify potential traffic related impacts on the adjacent street system, and to develop mitigation measures required for identified traffic impacts. This TIS is for the Atlas Energy project located at 24125 CR 42 in Weld County, CO. See Figure 1: Vicinity Map. Kellar Engineering LLC (KE) has prepared the TIS to document the results of the project's anticipated traffic conditions in accordance with Weld County's requirements and to identify projected impacts to the local and regional traffic system. 2.0 Existing Conditions and Roadway Network The project site is located at 24125 CR 42 in Weld County, CO. CR 49 is an existing north/south roadway with a posted speed of 65 mph at the CR 49/CR 42 intersection. CR 49 is classified as a 4 -Lane Controlled -Access County Highway on the Weld County Functional Classification Map. CR 42 is an existing east/west unpaved local roadway. CR 42 is a local roadway on the Weld County Functional Classification Map 2.1 Recent Traffic Volumes Recent peak hour traffic volume counts were conducted by All Traffic Data Services using data collection video cameras. The traffic counts were conducted in 15 -minute intervals on Thursday, 1/18/24 from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The traffic counts are shown in Figure 3 with the count sheets provided in Appendix A. Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 3 Figure 1: Vicinity Map Vint an, S. 3 aal r cy7 24 f1 Anti 36 r ,.te J.r. M. i i : c1u.}t,, • florets ) 9 I.J}. Ma • Naiad Nip $441 owns J ' lea Fr PROJECT LOCAT C_ '°,,,a aSSC CR 42 time -man Mint .441450 wsais! , ii a 20,. e y 9' IT IItEn Ts CR40 31 4.-n 32 4._ abaft Mara rp Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 4 Figure 2: Site Plan (For reference only. Provided by Civil Engineer. See Civil Engineering Drawings for more information) i a RI t r v - 41 — I 1. I NOTE LEGEND I 1. 'MELTON'S TO IIIGE APRE IPNATE I3ECOILIONf CONTO hSeW PTIOPEI'TTPS ST DOUBLEandleLlE CFIccfroKIENr411c41ti4;1C1ii Mal '1P CrTMJCVCLIAR. -- _ -. r•.+_- -_--- GROG Ct3MOLA'S AND ElEVAllON. FT on _-PPa..asnrcnn PIMPCS.33.YIO1FDtLWJL'e' r QO►J"uOLTS MG ELEVA11Ot rT —s— 'TED— FENCE k E KdWE MEMO &1ffLPOST iCJELEFENCE I 0 0 0 0 o E0.333►dCi r3JGE �;-• :• t 1 zr 'a ' k ,:rt YN 11 —•—•—•—•—•—•—•—•— IOCISTFIOTOAJFENCE PIuPCS COfUk1 A I � PROPOSED MIM. FENCE y 'r ' t a T r-- 11EYQ4E PENCE arrinn6u POND ra-rla 13l43 urJE ki.eikceri. 3 flflJ3ELECTnt,UPE r ` _k_k_�_ E%fl4(J CELE LEE Ewe- Ka O EFFE LI Fl Pr _ I E74STIN j FLOW 9 r _--r f \ rtflfl rc o w. ; k— - SECTION LIE ry ^y a71M7�-�JE r j° EI E61EMT {, `-- { s sTCAPS9GT+Yil_ a lal CN a; -. Eii6'u14G LRL1rr POLE C.ALLE PDC _ ` y '71 7' r .. y/ / rTKwornow ON:iELCIM I i J J MITE natal lOP1 _ - - - _ r `\ c. '11EAMESTILI5TirE r+" .� .. i .: f•.: �{ I I ' .rC I $ ". r Ern#iTfEE • S.. - 9iSD 5 . .1 ek 1 T 5 .*. dr = f WI _- f- 100.030 �uwmalraar .h _= 1r 4 .i 1aria 1� _ \� J _ I I I II `• 4 ; .' -_: P3,3'4iGiTi'0.1J7L'KI f' 14 'I �' _ .. - —.,, _ ,- ....LA.' l7A 1LP.ELETD OE RIMO RC9 `, K_ i 4# I� 13 I r_ TAM (T#9 CL RCIJt7tT7' 1 -I r' 1,7-.. Qt •' - -_ ,1!? /1,/ i. !rr :.: I ' YCFY71�1 I s f _• - + "'-PTWOYCI mt=�?,..In�: r,r QrtO ELY �i &,- - _}_ O cLi'J.flA'TC7Y17LM1V1[LII\ 1 iii r 444-6 I 1} 4 .. J' PI�LXmRIdTAl#4! _'. i 1 r" "Zr - :.rr:_:r. '�' J' 33 if", ` 1-. c > _.I ,..+ `Olrta: !L'7C[tl f1,,._- `{ _ 4 MIMI M1 jet'MX* I ¢ r R MI Vic' i I/il{JItiG 140 1044 PG I, I3C Ilil— I -_ - I— ..rTrr u # J tg i"m ��a:. mod, I CI I _ I ¢— n outran ,yam y ? I —5si = _ T — 1 _ _ *,4 �"r —# I t� rrir, Qss gip, _ } F F^ • • c_ I i l s - / I • � MOPS', r ,: c.P.1.CL p wit '/E! 1 . _ r SMWRICIL i- ra'•. _ f _ ,• / :, _ - l C£OC + 11LiQt± RL N. �B'[ FJS i[S1 - 1 11 ° I. . qv' Ana. -o . it9" y a ''T'1 alliffir CeLtiefla P I f -- Iw- rt ILL MCC Wan -t STEEL ;MI :;. ' —\ y •�_ L __ .. _. `jr .. YfTY a pwa-- _ ZMOIT-IM - ~ �— R _ — .�. n �.�. 1� �, r,�a ;R—= — — 1 �a •' r -�i —n r h �+ � J� # `/1 :01- 19.r3.W.ItttCKt7.•86II2L-1.r---.' a ---- — r -, k—o—� CORRUGATED CORRUGATED MIETJ METAL L. FENCE - Tru . -.. ,. — I --_ .. 'at nunta 'lYES oar '" l�lf��',y�7� Y1VL8 gyygyl M.-7CL2 5GFL: P{5'_: P9 W. 01711q'a1r- COMMWCIAL CM a 7rAI 11'I !-1 1 ITS PLAN liCi 'F .r• -r: I'=AC 1 ( a I L I n I r I III I a I M S 4 I •9 O t y rj ri 1" w railill GRID yai Crast l nEals,t N R2 SFEET: U sR-2 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 5 3.0 Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities Currently there are no existing sidewalks or bicycle facilities adjacent to the project site. Additionally, the project is not anticipated to generate additional pedestrian or bicycle trips. Any additional pedestrian or bicycle traffic from this project, if any, would be negligible. 4.0 Proposed Development The proposed project consists of oil and gas support services operations. Vehicular access to the project site is proposed from a two existing full -movement accesses to CR 42. See Table 1: Trip Generation and Figure 2: Site Plan. 4.1 Trip Generation Site generated traffic estimates are determined through a process known as trip generation. Rates and equations are applied to the proposed land use to estimate traffic generated by the development during a specific time interval. The acknowledged source for trip generation rates is the Trip Generation Report published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition does not provide detailed data on the proposed project. As such, KE was able to estimate the weekday peak hour trip generation for the AM and PM peak hours based upon information provided by the client and project team. The proposed project is anticipated to generate a maximum of approximately 350 daily weekday trips, 30 AM total peak hour trips, and 290 PM total peak hour trips. One round-trip equals two vehicle trips. See Table 1: Trip Generation. 4.2 Trip Distribution Distribution of site traffic on the street system was based on the area street system characteristics, existing traffic patterns and volumes, anticipated surrounding development areas, and the proposed access system for the project. The directional distribution of traffic is a means to quantify the percentage of site generated traffic that approaches the site from a given direction and departs the site back to the original source. Figure 6 illustrates the trip distribution used for the project's analysis. Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 6 4.3 Traffic Assignment Traffic assignment was obtained by applying the trip distributions to the estimated trip generation of the development. Figure 7 shows the site generated peak hour traffic assignment. 4.4 Short Range and Long Range Total Peak Hour Traffic Site generated peak hour traffic volumes were added to the background traffic volumes to represent the estimated traffic conditions for the short range 2025 horizon and the 2045 long range 2045 horizon. These traffic volumes are shown in Figures 8 and Figure 9 respectively. The analysis includes the proposed development for the project plus a 2% increase in background traffic per Weld County growth rates. 5.0 Traffic Operation Analysis KE's analysis of traffic operations in the site vicinity was conducted to determine the capacity at the identified intersection. The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity is the latest edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. 5.1 Analysis Methodology Capacity analysis results are listed in terms of level of service (LOS). LOS is a qualitative term describing operating conditions a driver will experience while traveling on a particular street or highway during a specific time interval. LOS ranges from an A (very little delay) to an F (long delays). A description of the level of service (LOS) for signalized and unsignalized intersections from the Highway Capacity Manual are provided in Appendix B. Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 7 5.2 Intersection Operational Analysis Operational analysis was performed for the short range 2025 total horizon. The calculations for this analysis are provided in Appendix E. Using the short range total traffic volumes shown in Figure 8, the project's intersections are projected to meet level of service (LOS) criteria in the short range total future. It should be noted that the Synchro traffic model results showed the potential for unacceptable LOS for the year 2045 Long Range Total future at the CR 49/CR 42 intersection. A traffic signal intersection improvement project should be considered by the County as a possible long range regional improvement in the future. However, since the development is not generating enough traffic to warrant an intersection improvement on its own, any improvements to the CR 49/CR 42 intersection should not be the development's responsibility to implement with this project. 5.3 Auxiliary Lane Requirements The auxiliary lane analysis for the study intersections were conducted using CDOT State Highway Access Code (SHAC). Based upon the SHAC for NR -B roadways, a left -turn lane with storage length plus taper length is required at an intersection with a projected peak hour ingress turning volume greater than 25 vph, and a right -turn deceleration lane with storage length plus taper length is required at an intersection with a projected peak hour ingress turning volume greater than 50 vph. Additionally, per Section 3.5 Auxiliary Turn Lanes in the CDOT SHAC, the auxiliary lanes required in the category design standards may be waived when the 20th year predicted roadway volumes conflicting with the turning vehicle are below the following minimum volume thresholds. The right turn deceleration lane may be dropped if the volume in the travel lane is predicted to be below 150 DHV. The left turn deceleration lane may be dropped if the opposing traffic is predicted to be below 100 DHV. The right turn acceleration lane may be dropped if the adjacent traveled lane is predicted to be below 120 DHV. The left turn acceleration lane may be dropped if the volume in the inside lane in the direction of travel is predicted to be below 120 DHV. The project's study intersections meet this above criteria and therefore auxiliary lanes are not required. The roadway volumes on CR 42 are low and the travel lane volumes are below the threshold in Section 3.5 of the CDOT State Highway Access Code (SHAC) where auxiliary turn lanes are required. Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 8 Table 1: Trip Generation Average Daily Trips AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Code ITE Land Use Size Rate Total Rate In Rate Out Total Rate In Rate Out Total N/A Oil & Gas Support Services 150 Employees * 350 * 20 * 10 30 * 140 * 150 290 N/A = Not Available * The Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition does not provide detailed data related to the proposed use. Therefore, trip generation is based upon information obtained from the client and project team. See Section 4.1 Trip Generation for more information Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 9 F En Figure 3: Recent Peak Hour Traffic N op Itzte c\I Or J1L 7/4 5/0 2/6 in„ 11/32 � 2/1 r- 0/3 11T CO CO (O tile co 25 co too NTS CR 42 Legend AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 10 Figure 4: 2025 Background Traffic N 714 510 � 216 nr At- 11/33 � 2/1 jai 0/3 11T 00 CD CO je gzt ,1/46 CN NTS CR 42 Leaend � AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 11 Figure 5: 2045 Background Traffic N C) O CO Co Nft r r 11/6 J 8/0 -IDiw 3/9 nr Af-i 17/49 � 3/2 0/5 so a) 43) LO LO NTS CR 42 Legend 4411 AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 12 Figure 6: Trip Distribution N co 15% I 0 I 10% NTS CR 42 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 13 Figure 7: Site Generated Traffic N C) w‘inb CL O C) ‘zri 3/21 tai At- 4/49 1/33 5/54 Co 00 CO CD CO JL 10/64 ili 9/63 el• U) c) 0 O • CO lan CD CO JL 9/63 NJ U) U) C) 0 c dC r 60 t- 1/7 -44- 1/7 NTS CR 42 end -114 AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 14 Figure 8: 2025 Short Range Total Traffic N CSC O O) !Is Ian CNI r J1L 7/4 il 8/21 � 2/6 nr t- 15/82 � 3/34 5/57 COCOA (SIC,' CO CO CO CO LO 10/64 il 42/201 --Do- U) Go col O O c) CO CO CO it— 1/7 JL � 23/173 N CO CD O c C 1) to 9/63 il 33/138 � NTS t— 1/7 f— 24/180 CR 42 Legend f— AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 15 Figure 9: 2045 Long Range Total Traffic N 00 co CO icia-Z5 11/6 11/21 --00- 3/9 nr ta 21/98 � 4/35 5/59 LC) Ci LO LO co CO 00 Inc 10/64 50/207 —► r it U) c) O 0 C a) CO CCD CO 117 JL� 30/192 9/63 ilt 41/144 —► Site Access #2 NTS 1/7 � 31/199 CR 42 Legend AM/PM Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 16 Table 2: 2024 Recent Peak Hour Operations Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 49/CR 42 EB Left C C C A EB Thru EB Right B B EB Approach C B WB Left A C WB Thru C D WB Right A B WB Approach B B NB Left A A NB Thru A A NB Right A A NB Approach A A SB Left A A SB Thru A A SB Right A A SB Approach A A Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 17 Table 3: 2025 Background Peak Hour Operations Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 49/CR 42 EB Left C C C A EB Thru EB Right B B EB Approach C B WB Left A C WB Thru C D WB Right A B WB Approach B B NB Left A A NB Thru A A NB Right A A NB Approach A A SB Left A A SB Thru A A SB Right A A SB Approach A A Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 18 Table 4: 2045 Background Peak Hour Operations Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 49/CR 42 EB Left E E E A EB Thru EB Right B B EB Approach C C WB Left A F (50.0 sec) WB Thru E F (58.0 sec) WB Right B B WB Approach C C NB Left A A NB Thru A A NB Right A A NB Approach A A SB Left A A SB Thru A A SB Right A A SB Approach A A Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 19 Table 5: 2025 Short Range Total Peak Hour Operations Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 49/CR 42 EB Left C E EB Thru C E EB Right B B EB Approach C D WB Left C F (51.6 sec) WB Thru C E WB Right A B WB Approach B D NB Left A A NB Thru A A NB Right A A NB Approach A A SB Left A A SB Thru A A SB Right A A SB Approach A A Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 42/Site Access #1 EB Left/Thru A A EB Approach A A WB Thru/Right A A WB Approach A A SB Left/Right A B SB Approach A B Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 42/Site Access #2 EB Left/Thru A A EB Approach A A WB Thru/Right A A WB Approach A A SB Left/Right A B SB Approach A B Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 20 Table 6: 2045 Long Range Total Peak Hour Operations Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 49/CR 42 EB Left E F (142.4 sec) EB Thru E F (126.5 sec) EB Right B B EB Approach E F (100.3 sec) WB Left D F (408.9 sec) WB Thru E F (150.8 sec) WB Right B B WB Approach C F (160.5 sec) NB Left B A NB Thru A A NB Right A A NB Approach A A SB Left A A SB Thru A A SB Right A A SB Approach A A Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 42/Site Access #1 EB Left/Thru A A EB Approach A A WB Thru/Right A A WB Approach A A SB Left/Right A B SB Approach A B Intersection Movement Level of Service (LOS) AM PM LOS LOS CR 42/Site Access #2 EB Left/Thru A A EB Approach A A WB Thru/Right A A WB Approach A A SB Left/Right A B SB Approach A B Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 21 6.0 Findings Based upon the analysis presented in this TIS, the proposed project will be able to be successfully meet Weld County's requirements. The study intersections are projected to operate acceptably upon development of the proposed project in the short range total horizon. The findings of the TIS are summarized below: • The proposed project is anticipated to generate a maximum of approximately 350 daily weekday trips, 30 AM total peak hour trips, and 290 PM total peak hour trips. One round-trip equals two vehicle trips. See Table 1: Trip Generation. • The study intersections are projected to operate acceptably and comply with the County's intersection level of service (LOS) requirements with full development of the proposed project and background traffic in the year 2025 short range total future. See Table 5. • The roadway volumes on CR 42 are low and the travel lane volumes are below the threshold in Section 3.5 of the CDOT State Highway Access Code (SHAG) where auxiliary turn lanes are required. See Section 5.3. • The existing street improvements and access points are sufficient to handle the proposed project's traffic for the short range total future. • Due to the high volumes on CR 49, the traffic model results showed the potential for unacceptable LOS for the year 2045 long range total future at the CR 49/CR 42 intersection. A traffic signal intersection improvement project should be considered by the County as a possible long range regional improvement in the future. However, since the development is not generating enough traffic to warrant an intersection improvement on its own, any improvements to the CR 49/CR 42 intersection should not be the development's responsibility to implement with this project. • Since CR 42 is currently a gravel roadway, it is recommended that CR 42 remain in its current maintained condition and that the developer works with Weld County to ensure that the condition of CR 42 continues to be in an acceptable, well -maintained condition per the discretion of Weld County. Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 22 APPENDICES: Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 23 Appendix A: Traffic Counts ALL TRAFFIC DAM, &ERVIC-E5 (303) 216-2439 wwve.uIItra fiscut i.riet Location: 1 WCR 4Y ,& WCR 42 AM Date: Thursday, January 18, 2024 Peak Hour 07:00 AM - 08:00 AM Peak 15 -Minutes: 07:00 AM - 07:15 AM Peak Hour- Motorized Vehicles i954I 11,:7 -- 13 't a.75 1t alp Y 0.87 383 (717) WDR4 I L t 1, 0.% 1 ro 1 I re' 2 ill 0'933] 512 0.94 369 gezi Note: T tp study cowls contained in p .. Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles VCR 42 Interval Eastbound Star: Time (—a Peak Hour - Bicycles 1- 4-0 0_ leap i 0 ca o 0 IRI. lit_ 0 0 ! �, 0 WOK 42 Vide&bound) 0 Cs 0 4-0 0 U -Try Left Thru Mitt U -Turn Left Thru Right s. O CO i WCR 49 Northbound Peak Hour - Pedestrians 0 VCR 49 Southbound 0 0 U -Turn Let Ito Right U -Turn Left Thu It Tai. 1 — l Rolfrig Pedestrian Crmings Hour West East South Nc'?h 7:0D AM 923 0 0 0 7.15 AM 7.30 AM 7.45 AM 0 2 1 1 a' 00 0 3 0 1 95 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 84 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 98 i41 0 0 3 125 a C 121 0 0 3 117 3 234 885 1 215 824 1 225 806 0 0 0 0 4 4 a 0 0 0 0 0 8.00 AM 8 5r4M 8'..0 AM 845 AM Count Total 0 4 0 1 0 al 12 0 0 0 1 6 0 1 1 0 4 0 a 0 a 0 a a 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 �pL 112 64 93 9'3 991 1 0 2 126 1 0 3 102 0 0 1 100 3 0 0 90 1 211 1 173 0 197 1 191 772 0 0 0 0 0 16 928 10 1.,695 0 0 CI 0 0 G u a 0 a a 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 T 5 2 0 0 2 11 0 4 3635 0 0 10 510 7 923 0 0 0 0 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 24 Ail TRAFFIC OW STRVWES (303) 216-2439 www.a Iltrafficduta. net Lotion. 1 WCR49&WCR42 PM Date: Thursdayp January 18, 2024 Peak Hour 04:15 PM - 05:15 PM Peak. 15 -Minutes: 04:45 PM - 05:0O PM Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles WICK 42 6 10 NCR 4I? (916) 495 0.95 669 (1;241) j r4 :P4 L 0.) 1 titL.32 36 4' IN fit_ E s.("3 - 12 ri 4 slawpi) we 1914) 496 0_90 662 (1 r2laj Note: Total rtudy count contained in p. enthe ._ Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Interval Start T€ne Eac.hc'and i 4 Peak Hour - Hulas Peak Hour - Pedestrians 0 0' 0 a 0 0 O 41 1 i Os .4 7 a ifil3 lebib. C a r I MWWOR 42 losaCR 49 tNCR 49 0 0 V/ IX r U 4 t0 0 We:staund Northbound Soulhbound Roily Pedestrian Crossings U-TLeft Thru Right L -Turn Left Thru Right Ilium Left Ttwu Right LI-Tur Left Thru Sir Total Hour West East South HI tl 40 PM 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 4 0 2 123 1 0 4 114 0 256 1,155 0 0 0 CI 4.15 PM 4:30 PM 0 2 0 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ,0 2 131 2 126 0 298 1203 0 0 0 1 293 1,190 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 50 Phil 0 1 0 0 1� 0 0 1 195 1 0 109 1 304 1,035 0 0 Q 5:15 PM 530 PM 5:45 PM Count Total Peak Hour 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 161 '0 0 0 121 1 285 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 132 0 0 1 99 1 237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12$ 0 0 0 80 0 2.09 0 5 3 8 0 5 5 .38 0 198 7 0 11 901 4 2,190 0 4 0 6 0 3 1 32 0 3 653 6 0 6 487 2 1,203 CI 0 0 0 CI 0 0 CI 0 0 0 CI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 25 Sean Kellar From: Sent: To: Subject: Great. Thanks! Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Sean Kellar <skellar@kellarengineeing.com Monday, January 27, 2024 10.47 AM Evan Pinkham Re: Weld County traffic growth rate 970.219.1602 skellar@kellarengineering.com On Jan 22, 2024, at 11:27 AM, Evan Pinkham Cepinkham@weld.gov> wrote: Seam, That is in the ballpark of what our growth rate is for traffic, so I would say that it is appropriate. We .have 2,5.1%, Thanks for checking. Thanks, Evan Evan Pinkham, NI PA Transportation Planner Weld County Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue I Greeley Direct: (970)400.3727 eni nkhamaweld.gov Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any ached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. It you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named ecipient is strictly prohibited. From: Sean Kellar CZ kellar@kellarengineering.corn> Sent: Monday, January 2?, 2024 10:19 AM To: Evan Pinkharn <epinkham@weld.gov> Subject: Weld County traffic growth rate Caution: This mail originated from outside of Weld County Govern m nt. Do not click links or open. attachments unless you recoppize the wader and blow the content is safe. 1 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 26 FE Evan, I have a project at CR 49 and CR 42. I was planning on using 2% per year for the traffic growth rate (consistent with NERMPO and C.DOT's data). Is this appropriate based what your data shows? Respectfully, Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Kellar Engineering Ph: 970.219.1 02 skellar@k:ellareng neerin .eom CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If your think that you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender and delete the original message immediately. Kellar Engineering LLC 2 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 27 IE Appendix B: Level of Service (LOS) Table Level of Service Definitions Level of Service Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection (LOS) Average Total Delay Average Total Delay (sec/veh) (sec/veh) A ≤ 10 ≤ 10 B >10 and ≤20 >10 and ≤15 C >20and ≤35 >15 and ≤25 D >35and≤55 >25and≤35 E >55and≤80 >35and≤50 F > 80 > 50 Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 28 Appendix C: Aerial Image (Google) Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 29 Street View (Google) Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 30 Appendix D: Weld County Functional Classification Map 421 GILCREST1 Legend Highway Paved Local Gravel Local 4 -Lane Controlled -Access County Highway .Arterial Collector Arterials Not Constructed 01 Future Alignment To Be Determined Note: The minimum right-of-way for WCR 29 between SH 392 and WCR 100 will be 100' except at the following intersections it will be 140': SH 392, WCR 74, SH 14, WCR 90, WCR 100_ Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 31 Appendix E: HCM Calculations (Synchro) Atlas Energy Traffic Impact Study Page 32 2024 Recent AM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi t r vs T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 5 2 0 2 11 4 365 0 10 510 7 Future Vol, veh/h 7 5 2 0 2 11 4 365 0 10 510 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 I= IMII 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 8 5 2 0 2 12 4 392 0 11 548 8 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 775 970 274 699 978 196 556 0 0 392 0 0 Stage 1 570 570 - 400 400 Stage 2 205 400 - 299 578 Critical Hdwy 7.86 6.86 7.26 7.86 6.86 7.26 4.46 MI - 4.46 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Follow-up Hdwy 3.68 4.18 3.48 3.68 4.18 3.48 2.38 - 2.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 261 226 678 298 223 765 908 - 1057 IM Stage 1 436 466 - 556 561 MIN MI MIN Stage 2 734 561 - 642 461 MI a a Platoon blocked, % IIMI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 252 223 678 288 220 765 908 MI - 1057 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 252 223 - 288 220 MIN MI MIN MIN Stage 1 434 461 - 554 559 a MI In a Stage 2 717 559 - 626 456 MI NM AM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 19 11.6 0.1 0.2 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 908 - 252 223 678 - 220 765 1057 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.03 0.024 0.003 - 0.01 0.015 0.01 HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - 19.7 21.5 10.3 0 21.5 9.8 8.4 HCM Lane LOS A CCB AC A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2024 Recent PM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 t r 'I T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 0 6 3 1 32 3 653 6 6 487 2 Future Vol, veh/h 4 0 6 3 1 32 3 653 6 6 487 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - 0 IIIII 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 O M 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 4 0 6 3 1 33 3 666 6 6 497 2 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 849 1187 249 933 1183 333 499 0 0 672 0 0 Stage 1 509 509 - 672 672 Stage 2 340 678 - 261 511 Critical Hdwy 7.76 6.76 7.16 7.76 6.76 7.16 4.36 MI - 4.36 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Follow-up Hdwy 3.63 4.13 3.43 3.63 4.13 3.43 2.33 - 2.33 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 237 172 719 205 173 632 988 MI - 844 IM Stage 1 488 510 - 387 427 MIN MI MIN Stage 2 619 424 - 691 509 SIP MI MEI MEI Platoon blocked, % MI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 222 170 719 202 171 632 988 MI - 844 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 222 170 - 202 171 MI MIN MIN Stage 1 487 506 - 386 426 MI In MEI Stage 2 584 423 - 680 505 MI NM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.7 12.4 0 0.1 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 988 - - 222 - 719 202 171 632 844 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - 0.018 - 0.009 0.015 0.006 0.052 0.007 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - 21.5 0 10.1 23.1 26.2 11 9.3 HCM Lane LOS A _C A BCD B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - 0 0 0 0.2 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Background AM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations li t r is T r 's tt r 's tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 5 2 0 2 11 4 372 0 10 520 7 Future Vol, veh/h 7 5 2 0 2 11 4 372 0 10 520 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 IMII 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 8 5 2 0 2 12 4 400 0 11 559 8 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 790 989 280 712 997 200 567 0 0 400 0 0 Stage 1 581 581 - 408 408 Stage 2 209 408 - 304 589 IIMI Critical Hdwy 7.86 6.86 7.26 7.86 6.86 7.26 4.46 MI - 4.46 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Follow-up Hdwy 3.68 4.18 3.48 3.68 4.18 3.48 2.38 - 2.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 254 220 671 291 217 760 898 - 1049 IM Stage 1 429 460 - 550 557 MIN MI MIN MIN Stage 2 730 557 - 638 456 MI MEI MEI Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 245 217 671 281 214 760 898 MI - 1049 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 245 217 - 281 214 MIN MI MIN MIN Stage 1 427 455 - 548 555 MI In MEI Stage 2 713 555 - 622 451 IIMI NM AM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 19.4 11.7 0.1 0.2 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 898 - 245 217 671 - 214 760 1049 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.031 0.025 0.003 - 0.01 0.016 0.01 HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - 20.2 22 10.4 0 22 9.8 8.5 HCM Lane LOS A CCB AC A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Background PM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 42 & CR 49 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 t r 'I T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 0 6 3 1 33 3 666 6 6 497 2 Future Vol, veh/h 4 0 6 3 1 33 3 666 6 6 497 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 IIIII 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 0 O M 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 4 0 6 3 1 34 3 680 6 6 507 2 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 866 1211 254 952 1207 340 509 0 0 686 0 0 Stage 1 519 519 - 686 686 Stage 2 347 692 - 266 521 Critical Hdwy 7.76 6.76 7.16 7.76 6.76 7.16 4.36 MI - 4.36 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 MIN Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Follow-up Hdwy 3.63 4.13 3.43 3.63 4.13 3.43 2.33 - 2.33 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 230 166 713 198 167 625 979 - 834 IM Stage 1 481 504 - 379 420 MIN IIMI MIN MIN Stage 2 613 417 - 686 503 In MI MEI MEI Platoon blocked, % MI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 215 164 713 195 165 625 979 - 834 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 215 164 - 195 165 MI MIN MIN Stage 1 480 500 - 378 419 MEI MEI Stage 2 577 416 - 675 499 MI GPI Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.9 12.6 0 0.1 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 979 - - 215 - 713 195 165 625 834 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - 0.019 - 0.009 0.016 0.006 0.054 0.007 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - 22.1 0 10.1 23.8 27 11.1 9.3 HCM Lane LOS A C A BCD B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 - 0 0 0 0.2 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 42 & CR 49 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations li t r is T r 's tt r 's tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 8 2 5 3 15 4 372 8 17 520 7 Future Vol, veh/h 7 8 2 5 3 15 4 372 8 17 520 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 IMII 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 8 9 2 5 3 16 4 400 9 18 559 8 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 805 1012 280 728 1011 200 567 0 0 409 0 0 Stage 1 595 595 - 408 408 Stage 2 210 417 - 320 603 IIMI Critical Hdwy 7.86 6.86 7.26 7.86 6.86 7.26 4.46 MI - 4.46 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Follow-up Hdwy 3.68 4.18 3.48 3.68 4.18 3.48 2.38 - 2.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 248 213 671 283 213 760 898 - 1040 IM Stage 1 420 453 - 550 557 MIN MI MIN MIN Stage 2 729 551 - 623 449 a MI In a Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 236 209 671 269 209 760 898 - - 1040 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 236 209 - 269 209 MIN MI MIN MIN Stage 1 418 445 - 548 555 a MI In a Stage 2 706 549 - 598 441 IIMI NM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 20.6 13.4 0.1 0.3 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 898 - 236 209 671 269 209 760 1040 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.032 0.041 0.003 0.02 0.015 0.021 0.018 HCM Control Delay (s) 9 - 20.8 23 10.4 18.7 22.5 9.8 8.5 HCM Lane LOS A OM CC BCC A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 IMO HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 8: CR 42 & Site Access #1 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I+ 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 42 23 1 0 5 Future Vol, veh/h 10 42 23 1 0 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 11 46 25 1 0 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 26 0 0 94 26 Stage 1 MI - 26 Stage 2 - 68 Critical Hdwy 4.28 - 6.58 6.38 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.58 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.58 Follow-up Hdwy 2.362 - 3.662 3.462 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1490 MI - 868 1006 Stage 1 MIN - 957 Stage 2 MI - 916 Platoon blocked, % IIMI OM Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1490 - 861 1006 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver MIN - 861 Stage 1 MI - 949 Stage 2 - 916 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1A 0 8.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1490 MN - 1006 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 MI - 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 MP - 8.6 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 MI ME MI 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 10: C R 42 & Site Access #2 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I+ 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 33 24 1 1 5 Future Vol, veh/h 9 33 24 1 1 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 10 36 26 1 1 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 27 0 0 83 27 Stage 1 MI - 27 SIP Stage 2 - 56 Critical Hdwy 4.28 - 6.58 6.38 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.58 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.58 Follow-up Hdwy 2.362 - 3.662 3.462 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1489 MI - 881 1004 Stage 1 IIMI - 956 Stage 2 MI MI - 927 Platoon blocked, % MI OPP Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1489 MI - 875 1004 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 875 Stage 1 MI MI - 949 Stage 2 - 927 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.6 0 8.7 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1489 MN - 980 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 MI - 0.007 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 MP - 8.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 MI ME MI 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 t r 'I T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 4 21 6 57 34 82 3 666 62 55 497 2 Future Vol, veh/h 4 21 6 57 34 82 3 666 62 55 497 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - 0 IIIII 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 O M 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 4 21 6 58 35 84 3 680 63 56 507 2 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 983 1368 254 1062 1307 340 509 0 0 743 0 0 Stage 1 619 619 - 686 686 MI Stage 2 364 749 - 376 621 MN Critical Hdwy 7.76 6.76 7.16 7.76 6.76 7.16 4.36 MI - 4.36 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Follow-up Hdwy 3.63 4.13 3.43 3.63 4.13 3.43 2.33 - 2.33 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 188 132 713 164 145 625 979 - 791 IM IMO Stage 1 417 452 - 379 420 MIN IIMI MN NM Stage 2 598 392 - 588 451 In MI FM In Platoon blocked, % MI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 123 122 713 133 134 625 979 - 791 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 123 122 - 133 134 MI ON MN Stage 1 416 420 - 378 419 FM In Stage 2 474 391 - 514 419 MI OM OPP Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 34.1 30.6 0 1 HCM LOS D D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLnl EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 979 - - 123 122 713 133 134 625 791 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 - - 0.033 0.176 0.009 0.437 0.259 0.134 0.071 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - 35.3 40.7 10.1 51.6 41 11.6 9.9 HCM Lane LOS A - EEB F EB A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0.6 0 1.9 1 0.5 0.2 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 8: CR 42 & Site Access #1 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I* 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 64 201 173 7 8 68 Future Vol, veh/h 64 201 173 7 8 68 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 70 218 188 8 9 74 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 196 0 0 550 192 Stage 1 MI - 192 Stage 2 - 358 Critical Hdwy 4.23 - 6.53 6.33 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.53 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.53 Follow-up Hdwy 2.317 - 3.617 3.417 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1314 MI - 478 822 Stage 1 - 815 Stage 2 MI MI - 684 Platoon blocked, % MI OPP Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1314 MI - 449 822 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver MI - 449 Stage 1 MI IIMI - 765 SIP Stage 2 - 684 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.9 0 10.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1314 MN - 756 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 MI - 0.109 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 MP - 10.3 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 MI ME - 0.4 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2025 Short Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 10: C R 42 & Site Access #2 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 i+ 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 63 138 180 7 8 68 Future Vol, veh/h 63 138 180 7 8 68 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 68 150 196 8 9 74 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 204 0 0 486 200 Stage 1 MI M - 200 Stage 2 MI M - 286 Critical Hdwy 4.23 - 6.53 6.33 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - 5.53 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.53 Follow-up Hdwy 2.317 - 3.617 3.417 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1305 - 521 814 Stage 1 MIN - 808 Stage 2 MI - 738 Platoon blocked, % IIMI OPP Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1305 - 491 814 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver MIN I= IIMI - 491 Stage 1 - 762 SIP Stage 2 - 738 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.5 0 10.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1305 MN - 761 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.052 MI - 0.109 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 MP - 10.3 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 MI ME - 0.4 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Background AM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi t r vs T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 8 3 0 3 17 6 553 0 15 773 11 Future Vol, veh/h 11 8 3 0 3 17 6 553 0 15 773 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 12 9 3 0 3 18 6 595 0 16 831 12 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1174 1470 416 1059 1482 298 843 0 0 595 0 0 Stage 1 863 863 - 607 607 Stage 2 311 607 - 452 875 Critical Hdwy 7.86 6.86 7.26 7.86 6.86 7.26 4.46 MI - 4.46 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Follow-up Hdwy 3.68 4.18 3.48 3.68 4.18 3.48 2.38 - 2.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 129 109 543 159 107 653 694 MI - 875 MI Stage 1 284 335 - 413 447 MI Stage 2 631 447 - 516 330 SIP Platoon blocked, % MI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 120 106 543 145 104 653 694 - 875 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 120 106 - 145 104 MI MIN MIN Stage 1 281 329 - 409 443 SIP MI In MEI Stage 2 604 443 - 490 324 MI NM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 36 15.2 0.1 0.2 HCM LOS E C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 694 - 120 106 543 - 104 653 875 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - 0.099 0.081 0.006 - 0.031 0.028 0.018 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 - 38.3 41.9 11.7 0 40.7 10.7 9.2 HCM Lane LOS B OM E EB A E B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.3 0.3 0 - 0.1 0.1 0.1 IMO HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Background PM Peak Hour Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi t r vs T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 0 9 5 2 49 5 990 9 9 738 3 Future Vol, veh/h 6 0 9 5 2 49 5 990 9 9 738 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 IIIII 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 0 O M 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 6 0 9 5 2 50 5 1010 9 9 753 3 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1287 1800 377 1415 1794 505 756 0 0 1019 0 0 Stage 1 771 771 - 1020 1020 a Stage 2 516 1029 - 395 774 Critical Hdwy 7.76 6.76 7.16 7.76 6.76 7.16 4.36 MI - 4.36 MI Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Follow-up Hdwy 3.63 4.13 3.43 3.63 4.13 3.43 2.33 - 2.33 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 110 70 590 88 71 484 782 MI - 614 IM Stage 1 335 382 - 234 289 a Stage 2 483 286 - 573 381 SIP In a Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 95 69 590 85 70 484 782 MI - 614 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 95 69 - 85 70 MIN IIMI MIN Stage 1 333 376 - 233 287 IMP MI a In Stage 2 427 284 - 556 375 NM Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 24.9 18.2 0 0.1 HCM LOS C C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 782 - 95 590 85 70 484 614 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - 0.064 - 0.016 0.06 0.029 0.103 0.015 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 IIMI - 45.5 0 11.2 50 58 13.3 11 HCM Lane LOS A OPP E A B F F BB HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 W EI 0 0.2 0.1 0.3 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations vi t r vs T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 11 3 5 4 21 6 553 8 22 773 11 Future Vol, veh/h 11 11 3 5 4 21 6 553 8 22 773 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 0 ME 0 Grade, % 0 I= IMII 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 12 12 3 5 4 23 6 595 9 24 831 12 Major/Minor Minor2 M inorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1191 1495 416 1077 1498 298 843 0 0 604 0 0 Stage 1 879 879 - 607 607 Stage 2 312 616 - 470 891 Critical Hdwy 7.86 6.86 7.26 7.86 6.86 7.26 4.46 MI - 4.46 INN Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.86 5.86 - 6.86 5.86 Follow-up Hdwy 3.68 4.18 3.48 3.68 4.18 3.48 2.38 - 2.38 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 126 105 543 154 105 653 694 MI - 868 IM IMO Stage 1 278 329 - 413 447 MI ON MN Stage 2 630 442 - 503 324 SIP WI In Platoon blocked, % MI Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 114 101 543 136 101 653 694 - 868 IM Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 114 101 - 136 101 MI MN NM Stage 1 275 320 - 409 443 SIP MI WI In Stage 2 597 438 - 468 315 MI OM OPP Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 39 18.6 0.1 0.3 HCM LOS E C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 694 - 114 101 543 136 101 653 868 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - 0.104 0.117 0.006 0.04 0.043 0.035 0.027 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 - 40.2 45.3 11.7 32.6 42.2 10.7 9.3 HCM Lane LOS B OM E E BD E B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 IMO HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 8: CR 42 & Site Access #1 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I+ 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 50 30 1 0 5 Future Vol, veh/h 10 50 30 1 0 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 11 54 33 1 0 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 34 0 0 110 34 Stage 1 IMI - 34 SIP Stage 2 MN OM 76 Critical Hdwy 4.28 - 6.58 6.38 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.58 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.58 Follow-up Hdwy 2.362 - 3.662 3.462 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1480 MI - 850 995 Stage 1 - 949 Stage 2 IIMI - 908 Platoon blocked, % OPP Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1480 - 843 995 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver In IMI - 843 Stage 1 IIMI - 941 Stage 2 - 908 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.2 0 8.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1480 MN - 995 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 MI - 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 AMP - 8.6 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 MI ME MI 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total AM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 10: C R 42 & Site Access #2 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 i* 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 41 31 1 1 5 Future Vol, veh/h 9 41 31 1 1 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 18 18 18 18 18 18 Mvmt Flow 10 45 34 1 1 5 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 35 0 0 100 35 Stage 1 IMI - 35 Stage 2 MN - 65 Critical Hdwy 4.28 - 6.58 6.38 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.58 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.58 Follow-up Hdwy 2.362 - 3.662 3.462 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1479 MI - 861 994 Stage 1 - 948 Stage 2 MI MI - 919 Platoon blocked, % OPP Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1479 MI - 855 994 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 855 Stage 1 MI MI - 941 Stage 2 - 919 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.3 0 8.7 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1479 MN - 968 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 MI - 0.007 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 AMP - 8.7 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 MI ME MI 0 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 3: CR 49 & CR 42 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 16.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 t r 's T r '9tt r '9tt r Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 21 9 59 35 98 5 990 65 58 738 3 Future Vol, veh/h 6 21 9 59 35 98 5 990 65 58 738 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None MIMI - None - None Storage Length 100 - 100 100 - 100 760 - 410 700 - 400 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 MI 0 IIIII 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 0 O M 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 6 21 9 60 36 100 5 1010 66 59 753 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1404 1957 377 1525 1894 505 756 0 0 1076 0 0 Stage 1 871 871 - 1020 1020 In Stage 2 533 1086 - 505 874 Critical Hdwy 7.76 6.76 7.16 7.76 6.76 7.16 4.36 - - 4.36 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.76 5.76 - 6.76 5.76 Follow-up Hdwy 3.63 4.13 3.43 3.63 4.13 3.43 2.33 - 2.33 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 90 55 590 73 61 484 782 - 583 IM Stage 1 290 342 - 234 289 MIN MIN Stage 2 471 268 - 490 341 SIP Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 32 49 590 - 44 55 484 782 MI - 583 MI Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 32 49 - - 44 55 MIN IIMI Stage 1 288 307 - 233 287 SIP MI MEI Stage 2 325 266 - 403 307 GPI Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 100.3 160.5 0 0.9 HCM LOS F F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLnl EBLn2 EBLn3WBLn1WBLn2WBLn3 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 782 - 32 49 590 44 55 484 583 ME HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - 0.191 0.437 0.016 1.368 0.649 0.207 0.102 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 IIMI - 142.4 126.5 11. 408.9 150.8 14.4 11.9 HCM Lane LOS A F F B F F BB MI HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.6 1.6 0 5.9 2.6 0.8 0.3 Notes -: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 8: CR 42 & Site Access #1 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I* 'Y Traffic Vol, veh/h 64 207 192 7 8 68 Future Vol, veh/h 64 207 192 7 8 68 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 70 225 209 8 9 74 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 217 0 0 578 213 Stage 1 MI - 213 Stage 2 MI - 365 Critical Hdwy 4.23 - 6.53 6.33 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.53 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.53 Follow-up Hdwy 2.317 - 3.617 3.417 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1290 MI - 460 800 Stage 1 MIN - 797 Stage 2 MI - 679 Platoon blocked, % OM Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1290 MI - 431 800 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver MIN IMI MI - 431 Stage 1 IIMI - 748 Stage 2 - 679 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.9 0 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1290 MN - 734 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.054 MI - 0.113 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 MP - 10.5 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 MI ME - 0.4 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report 2045 Long Range Total PM Traffic Kellar Engineering LLC 10: C R 42 & Site Access #2 01/29/2024 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 I* V Traffic Vol, veh/h 63 144 199 7 8 68 Future Vol, veh/h 63 144 199 7 8 68 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length MI 0 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 ON 0 Grade, % 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 13 13 13 13 13 13 Mvmt Flow 68 157 216 8 9 74 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 224 0 0 513 220 Stage 1 MI - 220 Stage 2 - 293 Critical Hdwy 4.23 - 6.53 6.33 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 MI - 5.53 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.53 Follow-up Hdwy 2.317 - 3.617 3.417 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1282 MI - 502 793 Stage 1 - 791 Stage 2 MI MI - 733 Platoon blocked, % OM Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1282 MI - 473 793 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 473 Stage 1 MI IIMI - 745 Stage 2 MI - 733 Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.4 0 10.5 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1282 MN - 740 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 MI - 0.112 HCM Control Delay (s) 8 0 MP - 10.5 HCM Lane LOS A A OPP GPI B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 MI ME - 0.4 HCM 2010 TWSC Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Synchro Report KELLAR ENGINEERING Sean Kellar, PE, PTOE Principal Engineer Education B.S., Civil Engineering, Arizona State University — Tempe, AZ Registration Colorado, Professional Engineer (PE) Wyoming, Professional Engineer (PE) Idaho, Professional Engineer (PE) Arizona, Professional Engineer (PE) Kansas, Professional Engineer (PE) Missouri, Professional Engineer (PE) Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE) Professional Memberships Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Industry Tenure 24 Years WORK EXPERIENCE: Sean's wide range of expertise includes: transportation plan- ning, traffic modeling roadway design, bike and pedestrian facili- ties, traffic impact studies, traffic signal warrant analysis, parking studies, corridor planning and access management. Sean's experience in both the private and public sectors; passion for safety and ex- cellence; and strong communication and collaboration skills can bring great value to any project. Prior to starting Kellar Engineering, Sean was employed at the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) as the District Traffic Engineer for the Kansas City District. Sean also worked for the City of Loveland, CO for over 10 years as a Senior Civil Engineer supervising a division of transportation/traffic engineers. While at the City of Loveland, Sean managed several capital improvement projects, presented several projects to the City Council and Planning Commission in public hearings, and managed the revisions to the City's Street Standards. Sean is also proficient in Highway Capacity Software, Synchro, PT Vissim, Rodel, GIS, and AutoCAD. Kellar Engineering, Principal Engineer/President — January 2016 — Present Missouri Department of Transportation, District Traffic Engineer, Kansas City District — June 2015 — January 2016 City of Loveland, Colorado, Senior Civil Engineer, Public Works Department — February 2005 June 2015 Kirkham Michael Consulting Engineers, Project Manager - February 2004 — February 2005 Dibble and Associates Consulting Engineers, Project Engineer - August 1999 - February 2004 AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Names & Addresses of Oil and Gas, Irrigation Ditches/Laterals, Pipelines, Overhead Lines, Railroads & Other Infrastructure Prepared for Colorado Property Holding Company LLC Amended USR Application Infrastructure O&G Well (Status: P&A) (Well name: Victor C #19-13) (API: 05- 123-13508) Owner Name Noble Energy Inc. Address 2001 16th Street Suite 900, Denver, CO 80202 ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE HQ & Mailing: 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200, Greeley, CO 80634 1970-535-9318 office 1970-535-9854 fax Idaho: 213 Canyon Crest Drive, Suite 100, Twin Falls, ID 83301 ( 208-595-5301 www.atmros.com Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R8949956 Assessed To Parcel 105319300037 JUSTICE RUSSELL 24125 COUNTY ROAD 42 LA SALLE, CO 80645-9519 Legal Description Situs Address PT SW4 19-4-64 LOT A REC EXEMPT RE -1506 EXC BEG SW COR SEC TEE N69D58'W 94 02' TO TPOB TH N0D15'W 62.76' S46D25'E 46.32' N88D34'E 378.43' SOI D25'E 30' TO N ROW WCR 42 S88D34'W 412.5 TO TPOB 24125 COUNTY ROAD 42 Year Tax Charge Tax Interest 2023 $8.568.04 $0 00 Total Tax Charge First Half Duc as of 03/08/2024 Second Half Due as of 03/08/2024 Fees $0.00 Payments ($4,284.02) Balance $4,284.02 $4,284.02 $0.00 $4,284.02 Tax Billed at 2023 Rates for Tax Area 0748 - 0748 Authority WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DIST RE7-KERSEY CENTRAL COLORADO WATER (CCW CENTRAL COLORADO WATER SURD LA SALLE FIRE AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE HIGH PLAINS LIBRARY WEST GREELEY CONSERVATION Taxes Billed 2023 * Credit Levy Mill Levy 12.0240000* 7.2490000 0.8910000 1.3000000 51540000 6 3360000 3 1960000 0.4140000 Amount $2,817 58 $1,698.66 $208.80 $304 63 $1,207.73 $1,484.71 $748.92 $97.01 36 5640000 $8,568 04 Values WAREHOUSE/STORA GE -LAND OFFICES - IMPROVEMENTS WAREI-LOUSE/STORA GE -IMPS AG -DRY FARM LAND FARM/RANCH RESIDENCE -IMPS OTHER BLDGS - AGRICULTURAL Actual $168,523 $34,027 $399,257 $313 $1,168,379 $454 Assessed $47,020 $9,490 $1 1 1,390 $80 $78,280 $120 Total $1,770,953 $246,380 ALL TAX LIEN SALE AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DUE TO ENDORSEMENT OF CURRENT TAXES BY THE LIENHOLDER OR TO ADVERTISING AND DISTRAINT WARRANT FEES. CHANGES MAY OCCUR AND THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WILL NEED TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO REMITTANCE AFTER THE FOLLOWING DATES: PERSONAL PROPERTY, REAL PROPERTY, AND MOBILE HOMES - AUGUST 1 TAX LIEN SALE REDEMPTION AMOUNTS MUST BE PAID BY CASH OR CASHIER'S CHECK. POSTMARKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED ON TAX LIEN SALE REDEMPTION PAYMENTS PAYMENTS MUST BE IN OUR OFFICE AND PROCESSED BY THE LAST BUSINESS DAY OF THE MONTH. Weld County Treasurer's Office 1400 N 17th Avenue PO Box 458 Greeley, CO 80632 Phone: 970-400-3290 Pursuant to the Weld County Subdivision Ordinance, the attached Statement of Taxes Due issued by the Weld County Treasurer, are evidence of the status as of this date of all property taxes, special assessments, and prior tax liens attached to this account. Current year's taxes are due but not delinquent. Date: () (3J224* Hello