The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20240352.tiffUSE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE: AMOUNT $ APPLICATION RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED: CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: P ROPERTY INFORMATION Is the property currently in violation? Parcel Number: 0 8 0 5 No / [ Yes Violation Case Number: 7 _ 0 _ 0 0 _ 0 2 3 S ite Address: near 13653 Highway 392, Weld, CO 80631 17838 PT S2 17 6 66 (65.4A) VIZ BEG AT SE COR N675' TO CANAL N32D48'W 270' N26D24'W 200' N44D20'W 145' S60D35'W 210' S31 D14'W 170' S58D3'W 200' S72D48'W 225' S89D56'W 640' N70D3'W 175' N51D20'W 125' N34D12'W 650' N64D13'W 150' S71 D24'W 258' TO N & S2 SEC LN S86D43'W 146' N82D14'W 266' Legal Description N65D44'W 210' S70D34 W 490' S60D35 W 92' S42D50 E 30.9' N89D36 E 1121.4' TO N & S2 SEC LN S1344' TO S4 COR E2644.5' TO BEG (4R) Section: 17 , Township 6 Within subdivision or townsite? V N, Range 66 No / Yes Name: Water (well permit # or water district tap #): N/A W Zoning District: A Acreage: 68.2896 Sewer (On -site wastewater treatment system permit # or sewer account #): N/A Floodplain V No/ Yes Geological Hazard P ROJECT U SR Use being applied for: Solar Facilities Name of proposed business: CBEP Solar 22, LLC No/ Yes Airport Overlay PROPERTY OWNER(S) (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Name: Lee & Ruby Linblad No/ Yes Company: Phone #: (970) 396-7385 Email: ruby@tanagermanagement.com Street Address: 13313 Highway 392 City/State/Zip Code: Greeley, CO 80631 APPLICANT/AUTHORIZED AGENT (Authorization Form must be included if there is an Authorized Agent) Name: Zach Brammer Company: CBEP Solar 22, LLC Phone #: (970) 425-3175 Email: zach@cloudbreakenergy.com Street Address: PO Box 1255 City/State/Zip Code: Sterling, CO 80751 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. gu_____,7 S ign ure Zachary Brammer P rint 04/24/2023 Date Signature Date Print 07/22 9 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE: AMOUNT $ APPLICATION RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED: CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: P ROPERTY INFORMATION Is the property currently in violation? Parcel Number: 0 8 0 5 _ 1 No / [ Yes Violation Case Number: 7 _ 0 _ 0 0 _ 0 3 9 S ite Address: near 13313 Highway 392, Weld, CO 80631 Legal Description: A portion of PT SE4SW4 17-6-66 LOT B REC EXEMPT RE -391 (.75R.26SHT) Section: 17 , Township 6 N, Range 66 W Zoning District: A Within subdivision or townsite? No / Yes Name: Water (well permit # or water district tap #): N/A Acreage: 29.39 Sewer (On -site wastewater treatment system permit # or sewer account #): N/A Floodplain No/ Yes Geological Hazard P ROJECT U SR Use being applied for: Solar Facilities Name of proposed business: CBEP Solar 23, LLC No/ Yes Airport Overlay PROPERTY OWNER(S) (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Name: No/ Yes Company: Phone #: M A Lindblad LLC (970) 396-7385 Email: ruby@tanagermanagement.com Street Address: 13313 Highway 392 City/State/Zip Code: Greeley, CO 80631 APPLICANT/AUTHORIZED AGENT (Authorization Form must be included if there is an Authorized Agent) Name: Zach Brammer Company: CBEP Solar 23, LLC Phone #: (970) 425-3175 Email: zach@cloudbreakenergy.com Street Address: PO Box 1255 City/State/Zip Code: Sterling, CO 80751 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. 04/24/2023 'gnat re Date Zachary Brammer Signature Date Print Print Owner Signature DEPARTMENTS OF PLANNING BUILDING, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 1402 NORTH 17TH AVENUE PO BOX 758 GREELEY, CO 80632 AUTHORIZATION FORM CBEP Solar 22, LLC I, (We), Rubsi liMbl&4 gn LG L fr 4j d 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: OQDcn0000 23 FAr'ta('Cchim lewMtan 0-1)in / Legal Description: wnJhi jt X Worth of Section r , Township 06 N, Range W Lot Block r patty. mange/ix( G&) i it 6 .r� . N'/A c Subdivision Name: Property Owners Information: Address: I33iIBiqhwe4j3I2 &reaey. Co f%3( Phone: ~7395 E-mail: L42 g *aii Z Ymarla Verde • tQb t (q70)J9& Authorized Agent/Applicant Contact Information: Address: Phone: Po (30x l2S51, ,ttt,+'Iing, CO 005/ Om y25 -3l ?S E -Mail: uthe CiOdd in/mane/Key. wm Correspondence to be sent to: Owner Authorized Agent/Applicant X by: Mail Email X Additional Info: I (We) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and after carefully reading the entire contents of this document, that the information stated above Is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Ile � Date' Owner Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this )1' day of hi Limit- Ir,,d Lwd Ltzc Lind'6 lad My commission expires 21 (0/3q a a SS s` a a S9 4 KIMBERLY D GROUT 4 NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20124053469 0 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 10, 2024 Date 'e- 7 -Li 20 023 by Notary Public DEPARTMENTS OF PLANNING BUILDING, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 1402 NORTH 17TH AVENUE PO BOX 758 GREELEY, CO 80632 couNTY LuUnc*ig,manayr of 1, (we), )11A. Undblad LtG AUTHORIZATION FORM , give permission to (Owner — please print) (Authorized Agent/Applicant—please print) CBEP Solar 23, LLC to apply for any Planning, Building, Access, Grading or CANTS permits on our behalf, for the property located at (address or parcel number) below: 000517 g0003q PrSELISW9 l7te"G&t0r8 Legal Description:xz6i HPr rZf -gig j of Section {.-7Srz.205 t) Subdivision Name: Property Owners Information: Address: 331 Phone: 4g7O 39(Q - 731 W/A i7 , Township 0Q2 N, Range && W 2 LO i0O31 Lot Block E-mail: iVby@ jeAYlQlG!'t'YlgY1QlGYY(N1f = Authorized Agent/Applicant Contact Information: Address: Phone: PcL&QX 1Z -cc , ftirn-fi y , !A 5107CI (17o)qzc-3775 E -Mail: Zbriar-G!t',(nl . GOlyl Correspondence to be sent to: Owner Additional Info: Authorized Agent/Applicant X by: Mail Email I (We) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and after carefully reading the entire contents of this document, that the information stated above is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Date 2 N2-2-27 Date Owner Signature Owner Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of &12 ; .( Lc' -c 1 - ft) cLLind << in anai e_e My commission expires / /0 o7 4 1 c7.7 m47 L ,n d& (ac/ L I{ (.. ilunt:60„5/ KIMBERLY D GROUT NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20124053469 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 10, 2024 Notary Public ,20 '1 by 6. &cif./ Document processing fee If document is filed on paper If document is filed electronically Fees & forms/cover sheets are subject to change. To file electronically, access instructions for this form/cover sheet and other information or print copies of filed documents, visit ww-w.sos.state.co.us and select Business Center. Paper documents must be typewritten or machine printed. $125.00 S 25.00 Colorado Secretary of State Date and Time: 07/19/2006 10:10 AM Id Number: 20061294627 Document number: 20061294627 ABOVE SPACE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Articles of Organization filed pursuant to §7-90-301, et seq. and §7-80-204 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S) 1. Entity name: M.A. LINDBLAD, LLC (The name of a limited liability company must contain the term or abbreviation "limited liability company", "ltd. liability company ", "limited liability co. ", "ltd. liability co.", "limited", "llc ", "l.l.c. ", or "ltd." §7-90-601, C.R.S.) 2. Use of Restricted Words at any of these terms are contained in an entity name, true name of an entity, trade name or trademark stated in this document, mark the applicable box) : "bank" or "trust" or any derivative thereof "credit union" "savings and loan" "insurance", "casualty", "mutual", or "surety" 3. Principal office street address: 13313 Hwy 392 4. Principal office mailing address (Street name and number) Greeley CO 80631 (City) (State (Postal/Zip Code) United States (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not US) (if different from above): (Street name and number or Post Office Box information) (City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code) (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not. US) 5. Registered agent name (if an individual): Lindblad OR (if a business organization): (Last) Mary Alice (First) (Middle) (S)4fix) 6. The person identified above as registered agent has consented to being so appointed. 7. Registered agent street address: 13313 Hwy 392 (Street name and number) Greeley CO 80631 (Cu)) (State) (Postal./Zip Code) ARTORG_LLC Page 1 of 3 Rev. 11/16/2005 8. Registered agent mailing address (if different from above): 9. Name(s) and mailing address(es) of person(s) forming the limited liability company: (Street name and number or Post Office Box information) (City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code) (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not US) (if an individual) Lindblad OR (if a business organization) (if an individual) OR (if a business organization) (if an individual) OR (if a business organization) (Last) Mary Alice (First) (Middle) (Suffix) 13313 Hwy 392 (Street name and number or Post Office Box information) Greeley CO 80631 (City) U n(i ed States (Postal/Zip Code) (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not US) (Last) (First) (Middle) (Suffix) (Street name and number or Post Office Box information) (City) U n(Itetd' States (Postal/Zip Code) (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not US) (Last) (First) (Middle) (Suffix) (Street name and number or Post Office Box information) (City) Uni(' States tate (Postal/Zip Code) ed (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not. US) (If more than three persons are forming the limited liability company, mark this box LJ and include an attachment stating the true names and mailing addresses of all additional persons forming the limited liability company) 10. The management of the limited liability company is vested in managers OR is vested in the members 11. There is at least one member of the limited liability company. 1 ARTORG_LLC Page 2 of 3 Rev. 11/16/2005 12. (Optional) Delayed effective date: (mm/dd/yyyy) 13. Additional information may be included pursuant to other organic statutes such as title 12, C.R.S. If applicable, mark this box ❑ and include an attachment stating the additional information. Notice: 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., 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. 14. Name(s) and address(es) of the individual(s) causing the document to be delivered for filing: Rutz Ronald W (Last) (First) 2625 Redwing Road, Suite 180 (Middle) (Suffix) (Street name and number or Post. Office Box information) Fort Collins CO 80526 (City) U AS States (Postal/Zip Code) (Province — if applicable) (Country — if not US) (The document need not state the true name and address of more than one individual. However, if you wish to state the name and address of any additional individuals causing the document to be delivered for filing, mark this box ❑ and include an attachment stating the name and address of such individuals.) Disclaimer: This form, and any related instructions, are not intended to provide legal, business or tax advice, and are offered as a public service without representation or warranty. While this form is believed to satisfy minimum legal requirements as of its revision date, compliance with applicable law, as the same may be amended from time to time, remains the responsibility of the user of this form. Questions should be addressed to the user's attorney. ARTORG_LLC Page 3 of 3 Rev. 11/16/2005 4237012 09/15/2016 03:10 PM Total Pages: 2 Rec Fee: $16.00 Carly Koppes - Clerk and Recorder, Weld County, CO 11111111111111111111111111111111 STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY (38-30-172, O.R.S.) 1, This Statement of Authority relates to an entity' named MA, LINDBLAD, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 2. The type of entity is a: Corporation Nonprofit Corporation Limited Liability Company General Partnership Limited Partnership X 3, The entity is formed under the laws of COLORADO Registered Limited Liability Partnership Registered Limited Liability limited Partnership Limited Partnership Association Government or Governmental Subdivision or Agency Trust 4, The mailing address for the entity is 13313 HIGHWAY 392, GREELEY, CO 80631 5, The X name X position of each person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the entity is LEE LINDBLAD, MANAGER 6. The authority of the foregoing person(s) to bind the entity: is' not limited X is limited as follows: MAJORITY INTEREST OF MEMBERS REQUIRED TO BORROW OR SELL 7. Other matters concerning the manner in which the entity deals with interests in real property: NONE 8. This Statement of Authority is executed on behalf of the entity pursuant to the provisions of §38-30-172, C.RS 3 9. This Statement of Authority amends and supersedes in all respects any and all prior dated Statements of Authority executed on behalf of the entity. (Signature and Notary Acknowledgment on Second Page) 1 This form should not be used unless the entity is capable of holding title to real property. 2 The absence of any limitation shall be prima fade evidence that no such limitation exists. 3 The statement of authority must be recorded to obtain the benefits of the statute. Form 13759 03/2005 soa.odt FC25135056 {2$264727} pg 1 of 2 Pr" Lind Titk G N4Airu COV..1'1801Y 4237012 09/15/2016 03:10 PM Page 2 of 2 —EX2CutPd this /C74thy of State of COLORADO County of WELD ) )ss bs-N a-43 tc- LEE LINDBLAD, MANAGER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 5-4---%- day of "'?"ti 6--n a0 I. L•• by LEE LINDBLAD AS MANAGER OF M.A. LINDB LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Witness my hand and official seal. G l I My commission expires: ( O lac � WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: M.A. LINDBLAD, LLC 13313 HWY 392 GREELEY, CO 80631 otary Public SHAWN GRIMES NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 19934011149 MY GaIIAlY118SiOIM EXPIRES G9/1OV2pf f Poun 13759 03/2005 soa.odt FC25135056 {26264727} pg 2 of 2 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Total Pages: 6 Rec Fee: $38.00 Carly Koppes - Clerk and Recorder, Weld County , Co MEMORANDUM OF LEASE AND EASEMENT OPTION AGREEMENT THIS MEMORANDUM OF LEASE AND EASEMENT OPTION AGREEMENT ("Memorandum") is entered into as of Not; ...,,. by and between Lee E Lindblad and Ruby H Lindblad (together, "Owner"),and Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and its successors and assigns ("Operator"). RECITALS A. Owner and Operator have entered into that certain Lease and Easement Option Agreement (the "Lease Agreement"), dated pc 0 3 , 2022 (the "Effective Date"), whereby Owner has granted Operator the right to conduct due diligence on the Owner's Property and an option to lease and develop a portion of the Owner's Property (the "Option"), together with easement rights on, over, under, across, and through said Owner's Property, in the County of Weld, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described in Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Owner's Property"). B. This Memorandum is being executed and recorded to evidence the Lease Agreement and shall not be construed to limit, amend or modify the provisions of the Lease Agreement in any respect. MEMORANDUM 1. OWNER. The name of the Owner is Lee E Lindblad and Ruby H Lindblad with an address of 13653 Highway 392, Greeley, CO 80631. 2. OPERATOR. The name of the Operator is Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, having an address of 4845 Pearl East Circle, Suite 118 #53242, Boulder, Colorado 80301, and its successors and assigns. 3. LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The specific legal description of the Owner's Property is described on Schedule A and is incorporated herein by this reference. 4. OPTION TERM. Owner has granted Operator the right to conduct due diligence on the Owner's Property to determine if the Operator would like to qnter into a lease. The initial term of the Option Agreement is a period which commenced on � , 2022 and ends on Jsb 2a- 7 . The term of the Option may be extended, at Operator's discretion, for one (1) calendar year(s), as provided in the Lease Agreement. 5. LEASE TERM. In the event the Option is exercised under the Lease Agreement, the term of the lease will commence on the Commencement Date (as defined in the Lease Agreement) and shall expire on the twentieth (20th) anniversary of the Commercial Operation Date (as defined in the Lease Agreement). 6. EXTENTION TERMS. Operator has the option to extend the term of the lease for three (3) additional extension terms of five (5) years each on the terms and conditions more particularly set forth in the Lease Agreement. 1 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 2 of 6 7. EASEMENTS. In connection with the Lease Agreement, Owner has granted or has agreed to grant Operator a number of easements on, over, under, across and through Owner's Property, which are fully described in the Lease Agreement. 8. OTHER TERMS. In addition to those terms referenced herein, the Lease Agreement contains numerous other terms, covenants and conditions, and notice is hereby given that reference should be made to the Lease Agreement directly with respect to the details of such terms, covenants, and conditions. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this instrument and the Lease Agreement, the provisions of the Lease Agreement shall control. 9. AGREEMENT TO COOPERATE. At the request of Owner after expiration of the termination of. the Lease Agreement, Operator shall reasonably cooperate with Owner in all respects with obtaining the removal of the Memorandum from title, including without limitation executing a termination of Memorandum in form reasonably required by Owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this instrument to be executed as of the date first written above. OWNER Lee E Lindblad Zee, STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY/CITY OF \rn,tc1CI )ss. CHRYSTAL B BEACH NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20154030358 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 3, 2023 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 03 day of NpVembeir , 2022, by LQ g . l.irdwd Witness my hand and official seal My commission expires:'\vt5 3, #2,5Zt My Notary number is: 2D1DbsSfa • blic Or\ve‘5 �-2✓i i3.NbG1N Rest of page intentionally left blank, signatures continue on the following page 2 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 3 of 6 My commission expires: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this instrument to be executed as of the date first written above. OWNER Ruby H Lindblad STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY/CITY OF \fla� The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 03 day of tstova,bcr , 20??, by ruby Lin4kM2ct Witness my hand and official seal 3, 262,3 Ort. My Notary number is: ZoISa4o3o3S $ Notary P lie Q,r y Sk--a. &acK ANL._i+AN. t e t a m e n ale CHRYSTAL B BEACH 4 NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO 4 NOTARY ID 20154030358 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 3, 2023 Sesernisuremenareensis Rest ofpage intentionally left blank, signatures continue on the_ following page 3 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 4of6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this instrument to be executed as of the date first written above. OPERATOR Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: pew :.t, 11e Name: - rLatntss ?Th Title: ca. c..Lc. CD4\1\e,r STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF \Net4 ) ss. ) c) ay -A --"€-y' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 03 day of l*cimeitei, 2022, by Retheas, G lc , the 2M6srizzzl, S; cyetehks.64of Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delawarelimited liability company, on be alf of the limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal My commission expires: 1A9 3/2.02,S Notary Public reje.ta Carte. CHRYSTAL B BEACH NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20154630358 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 3, 2023 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 5 of 6 SCHEDULE A Legal Description of Owner's Property A portion of the following real property located in the County of Weld, State of Colorado: Parcel number: 080517000023 Legal: All that part of Section Seventeen (17) in Township Six (6) North, Range Sixty -Six (66) West of the 6th P.M. bounded and described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said section; thence running in a northerly direction along the East section line of said section, 675 feet to a point on said section line South of No. 2 Canal; thence along the South side of No. 2 Canal on the following courses; North 32° 48' West 270 feet; thence North 26° 24' West 200 feet; thence North 44° 20' West 145 feet; thence South 60° 35' West 210 feet; thence South 31° 14' West 170 feet; thence South 58° 03' West 200 feet: thence South 72° 48' West 225 feet; thence South 89° 56' West 640 feet; thence North 70° 03' West 175 feet; thence North 51° 20' West 125 feet; thence North 34° 12' West 650 feet; thence North 64° 13' West 150 feet; thence South 71° 24' West 258 feet to North and South half section line of said section; thence South 86° 43' West 146 feet; thence North 82° 14' West 266 feet; thence North 65° 44' West 210 feet; thence South 70° 34' West 490 feet; thence South 60° 35' West 92 feet; thence South 42° 50' East 30.9 feet; thence North 89° 361 East 1121.4 feet to the North and South section line of said section; thence in a southerly direction along said half section line 1344 feet to south 1/4 corner of said section; thence in an easterly direction along south section line of said section 2644.5 feet, more or less, to the Point of Beginning, County of Weld, State of Colorado. Seller Reserves all oil, gas and other mineral rights presently owned by seller if any. also known by street address as: 13653 Highway 392, Greeley, Co 80631 Depiction on following page 4872212 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 6of6 Depletion: Up to 50 Acres Included in Leased Area 6 •;:eRe:Y6n,0/////neric'.�e;Y4t:::')Y.'knei... 4872213 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Total Pages: 4 Rec Fee: $28.00 Carly Koppes - Clerk and Recorder, Weld County , CO MEMORANDUM OF LEASE AND EASEMENT OPTION AGREEMENT THIS MEMORANDUM OF LEASE AND EASEMENT OPTION AGREEMENT ("Memorandum") is entered into as of , , 2 Q by and between M.A. Lindblad LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, ("Owner"), and Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and its successors and assigns ("Operator"). RECITALS A. Owner and Operator have entered into that certain Lease and Easement Option Agreement (the "Lease Agreement"), dated 11 , 2022 (the "Effective Date"), whereby Owner has granted Operator the right to conduct due diligence on the Owner's Property and an option to lease and develop a portion of the Owner's Property (the "Option"), together with easement rights on, over, under, across, and through said Owner's Property, in the County of Weld, State of Colorado, and being more particularly described in Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Owner's Property"). B. This Memorandum is being executed and recorded to evidence the Lease Agreement and shall not be construed to limit, amend or modify the provisions of the Lease Agreement in any respect. MEMORANDUM 1. OWNER. The name of the Owner is M.A. Lindblad LLC, a Colorado limited liability company with an address of 13313 State Highway 392, Greeley, CO 80631. 2. OPERATOR. The name of the Operator is Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, having an address of 4845 Pearl East Circle, Suite 118 #53242, Boulder, Colorado 80301, and its successors and assigns. 3. LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The specific legal description of the Owner's Property is described on Schedule A and is incorporated herein by this reference. 4. OPTION TERM. Owner has granted Operator the right to conductdue diligence on the Owner's Property to determine if the Operator would like to enter into a lease. The initial term of the Option Agreement is a period which commenced on /1-3 , 2022 and ends on H -- 3 --,,2 d �� The term of the Option may be extended, at Operator's discretion, for one (1) calendar year(s), as provided in the Lease Agreement. 5. LEASE TERM. In the event the Option is exercised under the Lease Agreement, the term of the lease will commence on the Commencement Date (as defined in the Lease Agreement) and shall expire on the twentieth (20t11) anniversary of the Commercial Operation Date (as defined in the Lease Agreement). 1 4811-7089-4018.9 4872213 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 2 of 4 6. EXTENTION TERMS. Operator has the option to extend the term of the lease for three (3) additional extension terms of five (5) years each on the terms and conditions more particularly set forth in the Lease Agreement. 7. EASEMENTS. In connection with the Lease Agreement, Owner has granted or has agreed to grant Operator a number of easements on, over, under, across and through Owner's Property, which are fully described in the Lease Agreement. 8. OTHER TERMS. In addition to those terms referenced herein, the Lease Agreement contains numerous other terms, covenants and conditions, and notice is hereby given that reference should be made to the Lease Agreement directly with respect to the details of such terms, covenants, and conditions. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this instrument and the Lease Agreement, the provisions of the Lease Agreement shall control. 9. AGREEMENT TO COOPERATE. At the request of Owner after expiration of the termination of the Lease Agreement, Operator shall reasonably cooperate with Owner in all respects with obtaining the removal of the Memorandum fromtitle, including without limitation executing a termination of Memorandum in form reasonably required by Owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this instrument to be executed as of the date first written above. OWNER M.A. Lindblad LLC a Colorado limited liability company STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY/CITY OF Nj.Q,t (� ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this° day of k'\'vtittbe( a 2fl2i, by Lite e. LiaVA ll.C Manabehalf �'�v�' of V\. � . Ltdb1'I , , a Colorado limited liability on of the limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal -.�.otaiy Pub is ≥1'nv9*A\ ?ea&. 2 4811-7089-4018.9 , the CHRYSTAL B BEACH ) NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20154030358 4P MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 3, 2023 4872213 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 3 of 4 My commission expires: OM 3,2.4)23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this instrument to be executed as of the date first written above. OPERATOR Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Name: Rontsc, (D..\ trv\ Title: Pt'vckat, z-t.a. $ e�wNrti J 3 STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY of wetCt MOV1/4dein; ()Art% e The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 03 day of tAbwomb-cv , 202t by R€)o-ccca Gait -ex -9 , the cw'wot ;te Cl Siy(1 of Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on bf of the limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal baebsor otary Public csivmsw snot My commission expires: Pt\,v'j � f'LOTS CHRYSTAL B BEACH NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF COLORADO 4 4 NOTARY ID 20154030358 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG 3, 2023 4811-7089-4018.9 4872213 12/14/2022 04:22 PM Page 4of4 SCHEDULE A Legal Description of Owner's Property A portion of the following real property located in the County of Weld, State of Colorado: Parcel number: 080 17000039 Legal: Lot B of Recorded. Exemption No. O8Q5-17--3-RE391, according to the Plat recorded May 16, 1979, reception number 17907 60, located in the SE '4 SW 1/4 of Section 17, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the e Principal Meridians Weld County, Colorado. Depiction: `YFi:::. w:ry .....re 4811-7089-4018,9 Included Leased Area Parcel ID OSO4 11) 7000039 n nT: nnn�n rvn� ..... .•n.'..wyu�yM ' nyNn n nnrys'r� ....r r 11 iehway 39.E . :Ss't„e;it :iF.E-•::4".0 S3:`C::Y .t:............................. www' Irwr L- .: fXnyP.� 'K'.:etita::;Ca:... di if:i'.�<�eLL:.;..... :'u'�.yrr'.k,L:6F.:::3a .:.: (N :':'y�R;.::.......cv'C:l f'�'i.: Up to 10 Acres Included in Leased Area 4 CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC *Ks PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 CLOUDBREAK INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Planning Questionnaire 1. Explain the proposed use and business name: o CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC are proposing to construct and operate the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project ("Project") in unincorporated Weld County on Parcel ID numbers 080517000023 (Antelope Hill 1) & 080517000039 (Antelope Hill 2). The Project will consist of two community solar gardens, one being 5.0MWac (Antelope Hill 1) & another being 1.0MWac (Antelope Hill 2). These will be constructed on approximately 46.3 acres, for Antelope Hill 1, & 10.2 acres, for Antelope Hill 2, of privately owned land. They will consist of solar modules mounted about 5 feet above the existing grade on single -axis trackers, which allow the panels to track the sun from east to west over the course of the day. The Project will also include inverters mounted on steel posts or beams, concrete -pad mounted transformers, other electrical equipment, an access road, and a perimeter game fence with gates. 2. Explain the need for the proposed use: o Ensuring long-term energy security for the United States requires a mixture of all different types of energy production, including community solar projects like the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project. 3. Describe the current and previous use of the land. o The parcel containing Antelope Hill 1 historically and currently is used for crop production, as well as oil and gas production. The landowners also reside on this parcel. The parcel containing Antelope Hill 2 historically and currently is used for crop production. 4. Describe the proximity of the proposed use to residences. o Antelope Hill l's nearest residence is approximately 530 feet from the southern side of the project. Antelope Hill 2's nearest residence will be approximately 886 feet from the western edge of the project's fenceline. The landowners also have a residence in an excluded area on the Antelope Hill 1 Project. (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE2 5. Describe the surrounding land uses of the site and how the proposed use is compatible with them. o The surrounding land use includes residential, oil and gas production, and agricultural land use. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses as this Project will ensure the parcels remain agriculturally productive. CBEP Solar 22, LLC and CBEP Solar 23, LLC will be planting a native seed mixture underneath the solar arrays following the commencement of construction. These grasses will strengthen local pollinator habitats and help restore soil health over the next 35 years. For the majority of projects, Cloudbreak also employs sheep grazing as an additional way to keep the land agriculturally productive. This Project will fit in well with the rural community for additional reasons, as it will have minimal visual impacts as well as minimal sound, odor, noise, and traffic impacts. This Project will benefit the community with improved electrical infrastructure, increased energy independence, and help reduce the burden on the energy grid as the community continues to grow and expand. 6. Describe the hours and days of operation (i.e. Monday thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 P . m .) o Construction activities will take place Monday through Saturday from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. After construction is completed, occasional maintenance will occur between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM as needed. 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. o Construction may require up to 50 workers to be on site at one time during the peak of construction. These contractors will all be on during the day shift. Construction employees may include up t0 15 civil workers, 15 electricians, 15 racking builders, and an additional 5 employees. During operations, two to four employees may be needed for maintenance, as needed, approximately twice a year. 8. Describe the maximum number of users, patrons, members, buyers or other visitors that the site will accommodate at any one time. o No users, patrons, members, buyers, or other visitors are expected to be on the site at any time. 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.). o Up to 500 sheep. 10. List the types and number of operating and processing equipment. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 3 o The Project will consist of approximately 11,583 solar modules (Antelope Hill 1) & 1,917 solar modules (Antelope Hill 2) mounted about 5 feet above the existing grade on single -axis trackers, which allow the panels to track the sun from east to west over the course of the day. The project will also include 50 inverters (Antelope Hill 1) & 10 inverters (Antelope Hill 2) mounted on steel posts or beams, 2 concrete pad mounted transformers (Antelope Hill 1) & 1 (Antelope Hill 2) concrete pad mounted transformer, and other electrical equipment. 11. List the types, number and uses of the existing and proposed structures. o There are no existing structures on the Project's site. o The proposed structures for the Project will include: i. Approximately 11,583 solar modules (Antelope Hill 1) & 1,917 solar modules (Antelope Hill 2) mounted about 5 feet above the existing grade on single -axis trackers, which allow the panels to track the sun from east to west over the course of the day. ii. 50 inverters (Antelope Hill 1) & 10 inverters (Antelope Hill 2) mounted on steel posts or beams iii. 2 concrete pad mounted transformers (Antelope Hill 1) & 1 (Antelope Hill 2) concrete pad mounted transformer iv. Approximately 5 utility poles (Antelope Hill 1) & 5 utility poles (Antelope Hill 2) that will connect the project to the existing Xcel Energy distribution line on the on the southeast side of parcel 080517000023 and on the south side of parcel 080517000039 of the property. v. Two temporary construction trailers, one per site vi. Four 10' x 40' storage containers that will store parts, tools, and equipment on site during construction and operations. There will be two per site. 12. Describe the size of any stockpile, storage or waste areas. o During construction, a laydown area located within the limits of the Project area will be used to store Project facility items while facilities are installed. During operations, there will be no open stockpiling, uncovered storage, or waste areas. Up to two storage containers approximately 40 -feet in length, 10 feet in width, and 10 feet in height to store spare parts, tools, and equipment on site during construction and operations. 13. Describe the method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, junk and other wastes associated with the proposed use. o Debris, junk, and other wastes will be stored in appropriate waste receptacles, such as dumpsters, during construction. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC or their contractors will hire a waste management provider to regularly (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 4 remove waste associated with construction of the Project from the receptacles and bring the waste to an approved landfill or disposal site. Maintenance contractors will properly dispose of any wastes generated during operation of the Project by bringing the waste to an approved landfill or disposal site. 14. Include a timetable showing the periods of time required for the construction of the operation. o Project construction is expected to begin in O1 2024 and is expected to be completed in O2 2024. Construction activities would follow the estimated timetable below: Construction Phase Season/Duration Construction Begins Q3 2024 Site preparation 1-2 months Structural work 3-5 months Electrical work 2-4 months Utility work 2-4 months Construction Completion O4 2024 15. Describe the proposed and existing lot surface type and the square footage of each type (i.e. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings). o The existing lot surface type is all vegetated land. The proposed surface types and square footage of each type are listed below: i. Concrete: 4,123 sq ft (Antelope Hill 1) & 1,374 sq ft (Antelope Hill 2) ii. Gravel: 40,003 sq ft (Antelope Hill 1) & 16,165 sq ft (Antelope Hill 2) iii. Swales: 0 sq ft for both Antelope Hill 1 and Antelope Hill 2 iv. Grass/Vacant: 1,641,562 sq ft (Antelope Hill 1) & 355,977 sq ft (Antelope Hill 2) v. Solar Racking: 331,908 sq ft (Antelope Hill 1) & 54,403 sq ft (Antelope Hill 2) 16. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicap -accessible parking spaces are proposed? o No parking spaces or handicap -accessible parking spaces are proposed. 17. Describe the existing and proposed fencing and screening for the site including all parking and outdoor storage areas. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGES o There is no existing fencing or screening on the sites. The Project will be surrounded by a game fence that is at least 7 feet tall. 18. Describe the existing and or000sed landscaping for the site. o There is n0 existing landscaping on either of the two sites. See the Landscaping and Screening Plan for details on proposed future landscaping. 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. o Decommissioning of the Project will commence within 12 months after power production has permanently ceased and be completed within 12 months of the decommissioning work commencing. Decommissioning will include the removal of: i. All non -utility owned equipment, conduits, structures, fencing, and foundations to a depth of at least three (3) feet below grade ii. All fences, graveled areas and access roads unless the property owner agrees for this to remain o The property will be restored to a condition reasonably similar to its condition prior to the development of the Project. 20. Describe the proposed fire protection measures. o The Project is located within the Windsor Severance Fire Protection District. The Project will comply with all Colorado Public Utilities Commission requirements as well as national codes and standards for construction, electrical, and fire. A supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system will remotely monitor and control the Project 24 hours per day. The SCADA system will transmit Project data and control signals over the internet. 21. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan per Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code. o The Project is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan because it: i. Does not interfere with any existing agricultural operations within the vicinity. ii. Respects private property rights by allowing the owner of the property to do what is in their best interest while complying with local regulations and not interfering with or infringing upon the rights of others. iii. Promotes economic growth and stability by providing a diversified source of income for the landowner, the shepherd, and the County while also offering local residents the opportunity to save money on their (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE6 electricity bills through Xcel's Solar*Rewards Community Program. iv. Protects the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the County by providing an emission -free source of energy. v. Is harmonious with surrounding agricultural and industrial uses. vi. Supports future mineral development by reserving space on the landowner's property where minerals can be extracted in the future. 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.) o The new solar development will not interfere with any of the surrounding agricultural land uses. The Project's array will protect the land underneath and in turn allow the soil to revitalize over time, therefore preserving the land to be u sed for agricultural purposes in the future, if desired. We will be planting a n ative seed mixture on the property that will not require irrigation. 23. Explain how this proposal will be compatible with future development of the surrounding area or adopted master plans of affected municipalities. o The Project will be located within the Windsor IGA and Severance IGA's Intergovernmental Agreement area. o The Project's area is not included on the Growth Strategy maps in the 2016 Windsor Comprehensive Plan which assumes that the land currently falls under "Undetermined Use". Therefore, the proposed solar development will not go against any established future plans. The Project's area is also included on the Future Land Use Map in the Town of Severance's 2020 Comprehensive Plan which identifies the project area as "Rural Residential Conservation/Agriculture." This project will fit well under this designation as the parcels will have sheep grazing underneath the solar array. This Project will fit in well with the rural community as it will have minimal visual impacts as well as minimal sound, odor, noise, and traffic impacts. This Project will benefit the community with improved electrical infrastructure, increased energy independence, and help reduce the burden on the energy grid as the community continues to grow and expand. 24. Explain how this proposal impacts the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. o The Project is not anticipated to impact the health, safety, and welfare of Weld County citizens. Designs will comply with Colorado Public Utilities Commission (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 7 requirements, as well as national codes and standards for construction, electrical, and fire. A supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system will remotely monitor and control the Project 24 hours per day. The SCADA system will transmit Project data and control signals over the Internet. 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. o We will be planting a native seed mixture on the property and grazing sheep to maintain the vegetation at a height of no more than 18-22 inches. The Antelope Hill 2 site currently has water rights, but the landowners have decided the solar array is the best use of the land. The landowner will use the water rights to support their remaining agricultural land, the sheep grazing underneath the array, and the native seed mixture. The Antelope Hill 1 site does not have water rights. 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. o The Project's site is not located within any Overlay Zoning District or Special Flood Hazard Area. 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. o There are no Federal permits required for the Project. o There are three State permits that may be required - the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Permit and the Colorado Department of Transportation Access Permit. No applications for State permits have been submitted. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Environmental Health Questionnaire 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.: o The Project's area does not have an existing potable water source. There is no proposed potable water source for the Project. Bottled water will be provided for the construction team. Any water used for dust mitigation will be brought to the property from an external source. 2. Discuss the existing and proposed sewage disposal system. What type of sewage disposal system is on the property? If utilizing an existinc on -site wastewater treatment system, provide the on -site wastewater treatment permit number. (If there is no on -site wastewater treatment permit due to the age of the existing on -site wastewater treatment system, apply for a on -site wastewater treatment permit through the Department of Public Health 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.) o There is no existing on -site sewage disposal system. The operation of the Project is not anticipated to require a sewage disposal system. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC or their contractors will provide portable toilets during construction. 3. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored: o The Project will include up to four 10' x 40' storage containers that will store parts, tools, and equipment on site during construction and operations. 4. Describe where and how storage and/or stockpile of wastes, chemicals, and/or petroleum will occur on this site: o During construction wastes will be stored in appropriate waste receptacles such as dumpsters. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC and their contractors will hire a waste management provider to regularly remove wastes associated (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 2 with construction of the Project from the receptacles and bring the waste to an approved landfill or disposal site. Maintenance contractors will properly dispose of any wastes generated during operation of the Project by bringing the wastes to an approved landfill or disposal site. During construction, up to 1,000 gallons of fuel will be stored on -site in appropriate containers. No fuel will be stored on site for operations. No other chemicals are anticipated to be stored during construction or operation of the Project. 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: o Up to 2,000 gallons of fuel are anticipated to be stored on site at one time during construction. Storage of fuel will follow secondary containment requirements, as applicable. There will not be fuel storage during the operation of the Project. 6. If there will be washing of vehicles or equipment on site, indicate how the wash water will be contained: o There will not be vehicle washing/equipment on site during the construction and operation of the Project. 7. If there will be floor drains, indicate how the fluids will be contained: o None of the facilities constructed for the Project will contain floor drains or require wastewater treatment. 8. Indicate if there will be any air emissions (e.g. painting, oil storage, etc.): o Traffic volume, primarily in the form of passenger vehicles, would increase in and around the Project area during construction. The increased traffic would temporarily increase odors and exhaust from vehicle emissions. Odors are anticipated from the operation of heavy machinery during grading, pile driving, and other installation activities at specific time periods throughout construction. Impacts from odors during Project operation would be minimal, likely restricted to emissions from the vehicles of maintenance personnel. 9. Provide a design and operations plan if applicable (e.g. composting, landfills, etc.): o A design and operations plan is not applicable to the Project. 10. Provide a nuisance management plan if applicable (e.g. dairies, feedlots, etc.): o A nuisance management plan is not applicable to the Project. 11. Additional information may be requested depending on type of land use requested: o If any additional information is required, please don't hesitate to contact Zach Brammeratzach@cloudbreakenergy.com- (970) 425-3175. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Development Review Questionnaire 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: The Antelope Hill 1 project parcel (080517000023) has 4 existing accesses and 1 proposed access. o Access 1 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29, approximately 55 feet north of CO -392 and 5,040 feet south of County Road 70. This is an existing Agricultural and Oil and Gas access. o Access 2, is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 1,720 feet west of County Road 29 and 3,525 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Residential and Agricultural access. o Access 3 is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 2,340 feet west of County Road 29 and 2,910 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Residential and Agricultural access. o Access 4 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29. This access is approximately 665 feet north of CO -392 and 4,565 feet south of County Road 70. This is an existing Agricultural access. o Access 5, the proposed access for both the Antelope 1 and the Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project, is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392, approximately 1,000 feet west of County Road 29 and 4,302 feet east of County Road 27. This access will be a new access, constructed to serve the purpose of the Project. The Antelope Hill 2 project parcel (080517000039) has 2 existing accesses. o Access 1 is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 2,910 feet west of County Road 29 and 2,280 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Agricultural access. o Access 2 is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 3,550 feet west of County Road 29 and 1,640 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Residential and Agricultural access. (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 2 2. Describe any anticipated change(s) to an existing access, if applicable: a No existing accesses will be relocated or updated. 3. Describe in detail any existing or proposed access gate including its location: a There will be a 7 -foot -tall perimeter fence around the Project. The access gate will be located on the southern side of parcel 080517000023. 4. Describe the location of all existing accesses on adjacent parcels and on parcels located o n the opposite side of the road. Include the approximate distance each access is from an intersecting county road: There are 9 parcels adjacent to the Antelope Hill 1 Project parcel (080517000023). The parcel to the west of the Project parcel has 1 access located on the southern side of the parcel off of CO -392, approximately 2,900 feet west of County Road 29 and 2,330 feet east of County Road 27. There are two adjacent parcels to the north of the Project parcel. The western parcel to the north of the Project parcel has 3 accesses. o Access 1 is on the west side of the parcel on County Road 27, approximately 1,590 feet north of CO 392 and 3,630 feet south of County Road 70. o Access 2 is on the west side of the parcel on County Road 27, approximately 3,240 feet north of CO 392 and 1,980 feet south of County Road 70. o Access 3 is on the north side of the parcel on County Road 70, approximately 2,700 feet east of County Road 29 and 2,575 feet west of County Road 29. The eastern parcel to the north of the Project parcel has 1 access located on the eastern side of the parcel, approximately 1,230 feet north of CO -392 and 4,035 feet south of County Road 70. There are two adjacent parcels across County Road 29 to the east of the Project parcel. The southern parcel to the east of the Project parcel has 1 access that it shares with the adjacent parcel to the north. This access is located on the western side of the parcels off of County Road 29, approximately 365 feet north of CO 392 and 4,900 feet to the south of County Road 70. The northern parcel to the east of the Project parcel has 4 accesses, including the one shared with the adjacent parcel to the south. o Access 1 is shared with the parcel to the south (see above). o Access 2 is located on the western side of the parcels off of County Road 29, approximately 410 feet north of CO 392 and 4,835 feet to the south of County Road 70. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK P A G E 3 o Access 3 is located on the western side of the parcels off of County Road 29, approximately 555 feet north of CO 392 and 4,680 feet to the south of County Road 70. o Access 4 is located on the western side of the parcels off of County Road 29, approximately 635 feet north of CO 392 and 4,610 feet to the south of County Road 70. There are four adjacent parcels across CO -392 to the south of the Project parcel. Below the parcels are numbered Southern parcel 1-4, moving from west to east. Southern Parcel 1, the westernmost parcel to the south of the Project parcel, has 2 accesses. The first access is located on the northern side of the parcel on CO -392, approximately 1,755 feet to the west of County Road 27 and 3,440 feet east of County Road 29. The second access to this parcel is located on the northern side of the parcel o n CO -392, approximately 2,255 feet to the west of County Road 27 and 2,960 feet east of County Road 29. Southern parcel 2, the second westernmost parcel to the south of the Project parcel, has 1 access located on the northern side of the parcel, approximately 1,320 feet to the west of County Road 29 and 3,905 feet to the east of County Road 27 Southern parcel 3, the second easternmost parcel to the south of the Project parcel, has 1 access located on the northern side of the parcel, approximately 1,065 to the west of County Road 29 and 4,155 to the east of County Road 27. Southern parcel 4, the easternmost parcel to the south of the Project parcel, has 3 accesses. o Access 1 is located on the northern side of the parcel on CO -392, approximately 945 feet to the west of County Road 29 and 4,275 feet east of County Road 27. o Access 2 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29, approximately 1,765 feet to the south of CO -392 and 3,480 feet north of County Road 66. o Access 3 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29, approximately 2,615 feet to the south of CO -392 and 2,635 feet north of County Road 66. There are 3 adjacent parcels to the Antelope Hill 2 project parcel (080517000039). The parcel to the north/east has 4 accesses. o Access 1 is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 1,720 feet west of County Road 29 and 3,525 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Residential and Agricultural access. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 4 o Access 2 is located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 2,340 feet west of County Road 29 and 2,910 feet east of County Road 27. This is an existing Residential and Agricultural access. o Access 4 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29. This access is approximately 55 feet north of CO -392 and 5,040 feet south of County Road 70. This is an existing Agricultural and Oil and Gas access. o Access 5 is located on the eastern side of the parcel on County Road 29. This access is approximately 665 feet north of CO -392 and 4,565 feet south of County Road 70. This is an existing Agricultural access. The parcel to the west of the Project parcel has 1 access located on the southern side of the parcel on CO -392. This access is approximately 4,350 feet west of County Road 29 and 860 feet to the east of County Road 27. The parcel across CO -392 to the south of the Project parcel has 2 accesses. The first access is located on the northern side of the parcel on CO -392. This parcel is approximately 2,215 feet east of County Road 27 and 2,985 feet west of County Road 29. The second access is located on the northern side of the parcel on CO -392. This parcel is approximately 1,010 feet east of County Road 27 and 4,240 feet west of County Road 29. 5. Describe any difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from an existing access and any anticipated difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from a proposed access: o The existing and proposed accesses should not have any difficulties seeing oncoming traffic. 6. Describe any horizontal curve (using terms like mild curve, sharp curve, reverse curve, etc.) in the vicinity of an existing or proposed access: o The existing and proposed accesses both do not have any horizontal curves in the vicinity. 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: o The topography of the road in the vicinity of the existing and proposed accesses is flat. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Decommissioning Plan Approach CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC have developed this decommissioning plan for the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project to be implemented after the contracted lease term has ended. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC, the owners of the 5.0MW (Antelope Hill 1) & 1.0MW (Antelope Hill 2) AC Solar Energy Facility (SEF) will be responsible for the decommissioning. Decommissioning of the Project will include removal of all above and below -ground infrastructure, including the arrays, inverter structures, concrete foundations and pads, and electrical infrastructure. All fences, graveled areas and access roads shall be removed unless landowner agreement to retain is presented, in writing, in which the property owner agrees for this to remain. The property shall be restored to a condition reasonably similar to its condition prior to development of the 5.0MW (Antelope Hill 1) & 1.0MW (Antelope Hill 2) AC SEF. Grading and re -vegetation will comply with all applicable rules and regulations. Exclusions from the decommissioning plan include planting trees, removing internal site roads, and re -grading to previous conditions. All non -utility owned equipment, conduits, structures, fencing, and foundations to a depth of at least 3' below grade shall be removed. Decommissioning activities will follow the CDOT best management practices (BMPs) for erosion and sediment control and stormwater management that are applied during project construction, or any new BMPs relevant at the time. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC will decommission the Project once the contracted lease term is over, if the lease term is not extended or renewed. Decommissioning may also be initiated if the project is no longer viable, or in the case of a force majeure event (described below). CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC will provide notice to Weld County prior to commencement of decommissioning the Project. Estimated Timeline and Cost Decommissioning/reclamation shall commence within 12 months after power production has permanently ceased and be completed within 12 months from the start date of the decommissioning/reclamation work. Decommissioning/reclamation cost estimates, which shall (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE2 be updated every five years from the establishment and submittal of the Security, shall include all costs associated with the dismantlement, recycling, and safe disposal of facility components and site reclamation activities, including the following elements: • All labor, equipment, transportation, and disposal costs associated with the removal all facility components from the facility site • All costs associated with full reclamation of the facility site, including removal of non-native soils, fences, and constructed access roads • All costs associated with reclamation of any primary agricultural soils at the facility site to ensure each area of direct impact shall be materially similar to the condition it was before construction • All decommissioning/reclamation activity management, site supervision, and site safety costs • All other costs, including administration costs, associated with the decommissioning and reclamation of the facility site • The established date of submission of the financial assurance mechanism to Weld County Prior to construction, CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC will provide the County with an irrevocable standby letter of credit, bond, or alternate form of financial assurance mechanism in an amount sufficient to fund the estimated decommissioning costs required by the Code. The Security shall: • Name the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County as the sole beneficiary of the letter of credit • Be issued by an A -rated financial institution based upon a rating provided by S&P, Moody's, Fitch, AM Best, or other rating agency with similar credentials • Include an automatic extension provision or "evergreen clause" • Be "bankruptcy remote", meaning the financial assurance mechanism will be unaffected by the bankruptcy of the SEF operator Weld County, in its sole discretion, may approve alternative forms of a financial assurance mechanism such as, but not limited t0 bonds, letters of credit, or other securities, if it finds that such alternative forms will provide an assurance of the availability of financial resources for decommissioning/reclamation that equals or exceeds that provided by the form required herein. Furthermore, Weld County shall have the right to draw upon the irrevocable standby letter of credit, or other form of financial assurance mechanism, to pay for decommissioning in the event that the holder has not commenced decommissioning/reclamation activities within 90 days of the Board of County Commissioners order or resolution directing decommissioning/reclamation. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 3 Continued Beneficial Use If prior to decommissioning the Project, the landowner determines that any of the Project components can be beneficially used on the land after disassembly, such items would be exempt from the requirements for decommissioning. If a third party acquires the Project or a portion of the Project, such third party would be responsible for providing evidence of a plan of continued beneficial use for their relevant Project components. Force Majeure An exception to these requirements will be allowed for a force majeure event, which is defined as any event or circumstance that wholly or partly prevents or delays the performance of any material obligation arising under the Project permits, but only to the extent: • Such event is not within the reasonable control, directly or indirectly, of CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC (including without limitation events such as fire, earthquake, flood, tornado, hurricane, acts of God and natural disasters; war, civil strife or other similar violence); • CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC have taken all reasonable precautions and measures to prevent or avoid such event or mitigate the effect of such event on CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC's ability t0 perform its obligations under the Project permits and which, by the exercise of due diligence, it has been unable to overcome; and • Such event is not the direct or indirect result of the fault or negligence of CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC. In the event of a force majeure event, which results in the absence of electrical generation by the Project for 12 months, CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC must demonstrate to Weld County by the end of the 12 months of non -operation that the Project will be substantially operational and producing electricity within 24 months of the force majeure event. If such a demonstration is not made to Weld County's satisfaction, then decommissioning of the Project must be initiated 18 months after the force majeure event. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM Kimley >) Horn PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT Antelope Hill 1 Weld County Case # TBD Northwest of the Intersection of Weld County Rd 68/Highway 392 & Weld County Rd 29 Weld County, CO Prepared by: Kimley-Horn Inc. 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400 Denver, CO 80202 Contact: Adam Harrison, P.E. Phone: (303) 228-2311 Prepared on: April 27, 2023 Antelope Hill 1- Weld County, Co April 2023 Page 1 Kimley >) Horn TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & SCOPE OF WORK 3 1.1. Project Location 3 1.2. Nearby Water Features & Ownership 4 1.3. Report & Analysis Methodologies 4 1.4. Stormwater Management 5 2. CONCLUSION 5 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 - FEMA Firm Map Exhibit 2 - NRCS Report Exhibit 3 — NOAA Rainfall Data Exhibit 4 — Pre -Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit 5 — Post -Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit 6 — Hydrologic Calculations & Detention/WQCV Calculations Exhibit 7 — Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Antelope Hill 1 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 2 Kimley >) Horn 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & SCOPE OF WORK The development is a proposed 4.7-MWac Solar power generating facility located in Weld County, CO. The solar power generating facility will consist of rows of Photovoltaic Solar Modules, gravel access driveways, associated electrical equipment, underground utilities, and a substation (by others). Solar modules will be mounted on piles and elevated above the ground as to preserve the existing underlying soil and allow for revegetation and infiltration. The project will be surrounded by a perimeter fence. Ground area within the limits of development that is not occupied by gravel roads or foundations will be seeded to establish permanent vegetation. This drainage narrative is intended to provide Weld County with preliminary information regarding the drainage and land disturbance activities related to the proposed Antelope Hill 1 Solar, small scale solar facility (Project). The project will be designed and will be constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes storm water related impacts, in accordance with Weld County drainage criteria. Project name, Property Address and Weld County Parcel No. Antelope Hill 1 Solar, 13001-13999 HVVY 392 Weld 80615, Parcel No. 080517000023 Developer/Owner CloudBreak Energy Partners, LLC, 218 S. 3rd Street Sterling, CO 80751 Urbanizing/Non-Urbanizing This site is located more than a quarter mile away from the nearest Weld County municipal boundary and is classified as "Non -Urbanizing". Therefore, detention ponds designed for this site would be sized using 10 -year runoff rates. 1.1. Project Location The existing site subject property is a parcel of 93.1 acres. The project is located on approximately 46.3 acres of agricultural and undeveloped, lightly vegetated land. The project is located east of Windsor, within Weld County. The site is bounded to the north by Greeley Canal Number 2, to the west by Linblad property parcel number 080517000039, to the east by Weld County Road 29 and south by Highway 392. Section Township Range Property is located within a portion of the southern half of Section 17, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Per FEMA Map Panels 08123C1510E effective 01/20/2016, none of the development area is within a flood hazard area. (Refer to Exhibit 1 for FEMA Map). The NRCS Report dated 02/01/2023, concludes that onsite soils consist mostly of Kim loam, Aquolls and Aquepts and Olney fine sandy loam that classify as hydrologic soil group (HSG) type A, D and B respectively. The site was modeled using all type D soils for conservative runoff calculations. For additional detail, refer to Exhibit 2 for the N RCS Report. Antelope Hill 1 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 3 Kimley >) Horn 1.2. Nearby Water Features & Ownership In the existing condition, a majority of the site drains to the south to a pre-existing drainage ditch along highway 392/Weld County Road 68. The nearest water feature is the Greeley Canal Number 2 which bounds the project site on the north. Greeley Canal Number 2 is the receiving waters of the project site. The existing drainage patterns will be maintained in the proposed condition. Refer to Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 5 for the Pre and Post -Development Drainage Area Maps. 1.3. Report & Analysis Methodologies This report evaluates the pre and post development runoff characteristics of the development (including solar facility footprint and access drive) and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. Hydrologic Design Criteria The table below notes the hydrologic design criteria used in the analysis. Parameter Value Unit Reference Time of Concentration, Tc - min. Exhibit 6 Runoff Coefficient, C - - MHFD Criteria Manual, Chapter 6, Table 6-4 1 -hr Point Rainfall, P1 (100 -Year) 2.76 Inches NOAA Rainfall Data (Exhibit 3) Storm Runoff, Q - cfs Q = CIA Basin Conditions The drainage areas of the site are shown for the site as Pre -construction (Exhibit 4) and Post - construction (Exhibit 5). Pre -construction drainage basins were analyzed to calculate the peak historic runoff for the design storm. Proposed post construction drainage basins were analyzed to calculate the peak runoff for the design storm using an impervious percentage of 3.7% (see Exhibit 6 for the imperviousness summary). The tracking solar panels are not classified as an impervious surface because precipitation falling on the solar panels will shed onto the vegetated surface below. Stormwater Runoff The stormwater runoff for the existing and proposed conditions is calculated utilizing the Rational Method. The 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event was analyzed for pre and post -construction drainage basins. The flow path for the basins can be seen in Exhibits 4 & 5. The time of concentration to the point of accumulation was calculated using MHFD equations and can be found in Exhibit 6. The Runoff Coefficients are also included in Exhibit 6. The precipitation data used for the 100 - year, 1 -hour storm event is based on NOAA rainfall data from the project site (Exhibit 3). A summary of the rational calculation findings is shown in the table below. Antelope Hill 1 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 4 Kimley >) Horn Existing Proposed Area 46.3 ac 46.3 ac Imperviousness 2.4 % 3.7 % Q1oo 80.15 cfs 81.60 cfs 1.4. Stormwater Management A study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering researched the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generating facilities. The study utilized a model to simulate runoff from pre -and post -solar panel conditions. The study concluded that the solar panels themselves have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall losses, most notably infiltration, are not impacted by the solar panels. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. Refer to Exhibit 7 for the study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. Under developed conditions, runoff will follow existing drainage patterns and will not significantly increase peak flows (increases from 80.15 cfs to 81.60 cfs under 100-year,1-hour storm event). 2. CONCLUSION The following list summarizes key components of the Project and findings related to land disturbance and storm water impacts. • Installation of the solar facility will temporarily disturb the ground surface within the 46.3 acre Project area, but won't require clearing and grubbing of vegetation or grading, except for concrete equipment pads and gravel access drive installations. • The areas considered impervious (100 percent impervious 4,123 sq ft concrete pads) or semi -impervious (40 percent impervious 27,446 sf gravel access drive) total 1.77 acres or 3.82% of the project area. This increase in imperviousness is negligible as it relates to total stormwater runoff for the planned solar development. • Under existing conditions, the peak flow from the site area for the 100 yr- 1hr storm event is 80.15 cfs. • Under developed conditions, the peak flow from the site area for the 100 yr — 1 hr storm event is 81.60 cfs. • Installation of the solar facility is not expected to impact existing drainage patterns or flow rates on or around the project site. Runoff water quality will not be impacted by the solar facility components. • The project design will adequately protect public health, safety and general welfare and have no adverse effects on Weld County right-of-way or offsite properties. As noted above, a study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering (Exhibit 7) researched the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generating facilities. The study utilized a model to simulate runoff from pre -development and post -development solar panel conditions. The study concluded that the solar panels themselves have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall losses, most notably infiltration, are not impacted by the solar panels. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. Grading is proposed with minimal changes to the existing site drainage patterns and onsite access roads will be made of gravel. Based on the proposed improvements on the project site, the findings of the above referenced study, and the calculations included within this report, increases in runoff will be negligible. Therefore, permanent stormwater detention and water quality facilities are not proposed with the project. Antelope Hill 1 - Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 5 Kimley >) Horn We trust that the information provided is acceptable and complete for preliminary site plan review drainage report requirements. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information. KIMLEY-HORN LEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Adam Harrison, PE Project Manager Antelope Hill 1 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 6 Exhibit 1 — FEMA Firm Map National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette FEMA Legend 104°48'15"W 40°29'11"N 104°47'37"W 40°28'43"N 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 Feet 1:6,000 SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone 4, V. 499 With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AN, VF, AR Regulatory Floodway OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS O.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 zone x Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes. Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zone x Effective LOM Rs Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D - Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer i i i i i i i Levee, Dike, or Floodwall 20.2 Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 1765 Water Surface Elevation 8 - - - - Coastal Transect .� ,1 n Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary - - - - Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature 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 2/1/2023 at 1:31 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. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette FEMA Legend 104°48'3"W 40°29'12"N 104°47'26"W 40°28'44"N F MINIMALFLO OD..HAZARD 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 Feet 1:6,000 SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone 4, V, 499 With BFE or Depth Zone AE, 40, AN, VF, AR Regulatory Floodway OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 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 zone x Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes. Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Leveezone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zone x Effective LOM Rs Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard zone D - Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer milli Levee, Dike, or Floodwall 20.2 Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 1765 Water Surface Elevation 8 - - - - Coastal Transect .� ,1 n Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary - - - - Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature 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 2/1/2023 at 1:40 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. Exhibit 2 — NRCS Report 40° 29' 13" N S aD 40° 28' 44" N r 8 r` r r r 8 r r r 7 J N 516400 516500 516600 Soil Map may not be valid at this to N 516400 I 'I 516500 516600 516700 516700 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part (Polygons) 516800 516800 Map Scale: 1:6,340 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet Meters 0 50 100 200 300 516900 516900 517000 517000 Feet 0 300 600 1200 1800 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTT/1 Zone 13N WGS84 517100 517100 517200 517200 517300 517300 517400 517400 517500 517500 517600 J 517600 7 N 517700 8 517700 N N 40° 29' 13" N 40° 28'44" N kka; Natural Resources lain Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 1 of 4 10-40 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part (Polygons) MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AO!) Area of Interest (A01) ) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines A A/D B B/D C C/D kipii D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points O O O A A/D B B/D MAP INFORMATION C The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background ,; Aerial Photography 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-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 21, Sep 1, 2022 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. ,b Natural Resources lain Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Polygons Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 4 Aquolls flooded and Aquepts, D 10.9 16.6% 32 Kim loam, slopes 1 to 3 percent A 29.5 44.9% 47 Olney fine 1 to 3 sandy percent loam, slopes B 25.4 38.6% Totals for Area of Interest 65.8 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, BID, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. e Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 3of4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Polygons Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie -break Rule: Higher e Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 4of4 Exhibit 3 — NOAA Rainfall Data NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Greeley, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 40.4821°, Longitude: -104.7969° Elevation: 4773.97 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES 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)1 Duration 5 -min 10 -min J 15 -min 30 -min 60 -min 2 -hr 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day 60 -day Average recurrence interval (years) 0.242 (0.194-0.302) 0.354 (0.284-0.443) 0.432 (0.347-0.540) 0.581 (0.466-0.727) 0.721 (0.578-0.901) 0.86600 (0.695-1.07) 0.941 (0.763-1.16) 1.08 (0.882-1.32) 1.27 (1.04-1.54) 1.52 (1.26-1.83) 1.76 (1.47-2.09) 1.92 (1.61-2.28) 2.05 (1.72-2.41) 2.31 (1.95-2.71) 2.55 (2.16-2.98) 3.27 (2.80-3.78) 3.85 (3.30-4.43) 4.53 (3.90-5.17) 5.06 (4.37-5.76) 0.291 (0.233-0.365) 0.427 (0.342-0.534) 0.520 (0.417-0.651) 10.698 (0.559-0.873) 0.857 (0.686-1.07) 1.01 (0.819-1.26) 1.10 (0.894-1.36) 1.28 (1.05-1.57) 1.52 (1.25-1.84) 1.79 (1.48-2.15) 2.07 (1.72-2.46) 2.23 (1.87-2.65) 2.37 (1.99-2.80) 2.71 (2.29-3.18. 3.00 (2.55-3.51 )..] 3.81 (3.25-4.41) 4.44 3.80-5.11) 5.21 (4.48-5.96) 5.84 (5.04-6.66) 5 0.388 (0.310-0.487) 0.568 (0.453-0.713) 0.692 (0.553-0.869) 0.927 (0.740-1.16) 1.13 (0.905-1.42) 1.34 (1.08-1.67) 1.45 (1.17-1.79) r 1.69 [(1.37-2.08) 1.98 (1.62-2.41) 2.28 (1.88-2.75) r 2.62 (2.17-3.13) r 2.79 (2.32-3.32) 2.94 (2.46-3.48) 3.38 (2.84-3.98) 3.75 (3.17-4.39) 4.67 (3.97-5.42) 5.39 (4.60-6.21) r 6.29 [(5.39-7.22) 7.07 (6.08-8.08) 10 0.483 (0.383-0.609) 0.707 (0.560-0.891) 0.862 (0.683-1.09) 1.15 (0.915-1.46) 25 0.635 (0.494-0.860) 0.930 (0.724-1.26) 1.13 (0.883-1.54) 1.52 (1.18-2.06) 1.42 1.12-1.78) 1.68 (1.34-2.10) 1.81 (1.45-2.25) 2.10 (1.70-2.59) 2.43 (1.98-2.97) 2.74 (2.25-3.32) 3.12 (2.57-3.74) 3.29 (2.73-3.94) 3.45 (2.87-4.11) 3.96 (3.31-4.68) 4.38 (3.68-5.15) 5.38 (4.55-6.26) 6.15 (5.23-7.13) 7.16 (6.10-8.25) 1.88 (1.47-2.56) 2.24 (1.77-3.03) 2.42 (1.93-3.27) 2.78 (2.21-3.68) 3.13 (2.50-4.07) 3.47 (2.78-4.44) 3.87 (3.11-4.88) 4.06 (3.28-5.08) 4.23 3.42-5.27) 4.79 3.88-5.88) 5.26 4.27-6.39) 6.33 5.16-7.58) 50 o.»01(0.579-1.05 1.13 0.848-1.54) 1.38 (1.03-1.88) 2.98 (2.28-4.04) 3.38 2.60-4.51) 3.74 2.89-4.90) 4.09 3.18-5.29) 4.50 3.52-5.74) 4.70 3.69-5.95) 4.87 (3.84-6.14) 100 0.920 (0.664-1.29) 1.35 (0.972-1.88) 1.64 (1.19-2.30) 3.62 (2.66-5.01) 4.06 (3.00-5.55) 4.41 (3.28-5.93) 4.77 (3.57-6.33) 5.18 (3.91-6.77) 5.38 [(4.08-6.98) (5.56 (4.23-7.18) k4.32-6.785.46 I 6.15 ) (4.70-7.83) 5.95 (4.71-7.32) 7.06 5.63-8.57) 7.18 5.88-8.53) 8.31 6.83-9.79) 8.04 (6.88-9.23) 9.32 (7.68-10.9) 6.64 [(5.08-8.37) 7.77 (6.00-9.67) 7.96 8.71 (6.38-9.59) (6.76-10.8) 9.16 7.37-11.0) 10.3 (8.28-12.2) 9.98 [j7.78-12.2) r 11.1 (8.71-13.6) 200 11.09 (0.748-1.56) 1.59 (1.10-2.29) 1.94 (1.34-2.79) 4.35 3.04-6.18 4.83 (3.40-6.77) 5.15 3.66-7.11) 5.52 (3.95-7.52) 5.91 (4.27-7.94) 500 1000 1.33 (0.876-1.97) 1.95 (1.28-2.89) 2.38 (1.56-3.52) 3.21 (2.1V4.74) 4.08 (2.68-6.04) 4.95 (3.29-7.26) 5.43 (3.63-7.92) 5.96 [(4.02-8.57) 6.23 (4.24-8.83) 6.60 (4.53-9.24) 6.95 (4.81-9.59) 6.12 I 7.17 (4.44-8.16) (5.00-9.83) 6.31 7.36 (4.60-8.37) (5.15-10.0) 6.88 (5.03-8.99) 7.35 (5.40-9.52) 8.49 (6.29-10.8) 9.46 (7.04-12.0) 10.8 (8.07-13.6) 12.0 (9.02-15.0) 7.87 (5.54-10.6) C8.30 (5.86-11.1) 9.42 (6.72-12.4) 10.4 (7.47-13.6) 11.8 (8.51-15.2) 13.1 (9.46-16.8) 1.54 (0.973-2.28) 2.25 (1.43-3.34) 2.75 (1.74-4.07) 3.70 (2.34-5.49) 4.73 (3.00-7.02) 5.76 (3.68-8.45) 6.34 (4.08-9.23) 6.90 (4.48-9.94) 7.11 (4.67-10.1) 7.49 (4.97-10.5) 7.79 (5.23-10.8) 8.02 (5.42-11.1) 8.21 (5.57-11.3) 8.65 (5.92-11.8) 9.02 (6.21-12.2) 10.1 (7.04-13.5) 11.1 (7.79-14.8) 12.5 (8.84-16.5) 13.8 (9.80-18.1) 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 PDS-based depth -duration -frequency (DDF) curves Latitude: 40.4821°r Longitude: -104.7969° Precipitation depth (in) Precipitation depth (in) 14 12 10 14 12 10 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 a a a I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I ; 1 / a a a a a a a 1 1 a 1 1 a a ,- a a • • . • Y Y • a • a • ▪ • • a 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I • • I I • • • I P , P • I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 a 1 a Y 1 1 V I / I I I e e 5 e t 1 t I I I 1 a a I a I a a a a a I a a a I a _ r I 1 _ a 1 • t e a V I I 1 • • ' . I a i • a a i a a . • a a a• a a if n I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 t t 1 I 1 1 1 1 a 1 I 1 I I I I e e e • e e e _ •� � _ F_Rj,A• I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I - 1 I I I a I a a a a a _ 1'�- -- --• - � 1- --- a. Y Y 1 1 Y a e 1 1 I 1 1 t �� If 1 t • t. 1 1 ; Y • I Y + I I a � • • • • - • l•1".!I• �r 1 I 1 1 t t l 1 1 I 1 - 1 - 1 1 • - i i r '1 1 1 1 - . 1 i I _ ryr. - a • _ , , t _ • • • • e t , , 1 - - .rte I F°r' . i a 1 1 t a • a : i t t 1 1 I 1 • - I I t li.eroofe I r r t a t t / I 1 t - 1 - • 1 t 1 I' 1 1 1 1 1 1 t r / 1 e , • - t r c c IA rol th 5 10 25 50 100 200 NOM Atlas 14, Volume 8t Version 2 L. la L44 relel O sic N Duration r' , _TiTt �]}ELI 115 111 I I rs4 ! " 1rzi Average recurrence interval (years) f eD p p p 6 u10 cttD 500 1000 Created {GMT): Mon Feb 6 20:01:39 2023 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5' 10 25 50 100 200 , 500 1 000 Duration 2 -day 1 G-mo — 3 -day 15' -min — 4 -day 30 -min — 7 -day 60 -min — 10 -day 2 -hr — 2.0 -day 34',r — 30 -day. 5 -hr — 45 -day 12 -hr — 50 -day 24 -hr Large scale map i . i Large scale terrain S Cheyenne Fort CoIli: s O I" ■ mrefeelley :Longmont Boulder env er 100km 60mi isims 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 Exhibit 4 — Pre -Development Drainage Area Map Q z SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, z Q U O U) a 0 C cc 0 w O Q a a 0 a 0 a N 0 H O z 0 rn N 0z N � N \V) N 0 � U Q W - 0 U z 0 �w D -a wo Lela' Q_ Q_Q w O_ cc f. Q LJ C)_ < Z Qo CC LL 0z IJ � U X z w / C cnL.0 s -o n o- • X � W LL N w /Ffli O w aI c UO U -i O O 0 Lo o C Iw I z U — a- C U •- cc /lefi "0 0 O , - --i L O U) _>? C O < UZ — w o O w o O � coz Ica Q 0 ~ L._ w M U -O 0 D o w a o w • � o ~ z3 W 0 no 0 c. o >- z C ui cL a z < Ei,f, /4 HzR_E( cTi a >_ C SEMI (25 CD NO "A CC7) ,I\ (4.C) ° ,I\ O (C\HC° iv-) r%j 4C :LI § (-) aj RI -IS LiJ ic I- CD n II RI 1O `I>) DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED DATE: BY: 02/24/23 BY: BY: LDS LDS AJH J 1 % Lr%1 —I De _ 0 0 -4( CE 0 rTh 0 O < Z >-... 0 0 z ii D 0 w >. ry "" O O co O W Z co 0 0. 0 D O i Ct O. z PR LIMINARY FOR CONSTRUCTION Kimley-Horn Wier)) NOT REVIEW and Associates, FOR ONLY orn Inc. PROJECT 196664000 NO. DRAWING NAME X-4 I I 0 7- i i I i i i i I i I o /\ \ 1 ;0•••••• 1 \0 I I I I i 3.77O' Atl CD O G - u) H 1 N 77 7 0 1 } i O O 1 1 • 1 JI\; I GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 75 150 300 LEGEND Vy OH 700 f•-1 NOTES PROPERTY BOUNDARY PRE CONDITIONS SUB -BASIN EX. EASEMENT EX. SITE SETBACK EX. UNDERGROUND GAS LINE EX. UNDERGROUND WATER LINE EX. BARB WIRE FENCE EX. OVERHEAD WIRE EX. UTILITY POLE EX. FLOW PATH EX. CONTOURS EX. GRAVEL ROAD EX. SLOPE LABEL SUB -BASIN IDENTIFICATION IMPERVIOUSNESS DRAINAGE AREA (ACRES) DESIGN POINT EX. BUILDING EX. TREES 1. THIS DRAINAGE MAP AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IN ASSOCIATION WITH CLOUDBREAK ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC. DRAINAGE NARRATIVE AND USE BY THE SPECIAL REVIEW PLANS. 2. WITH REFERENCE TO THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEM A) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP(FIRM), MAP NUMBER 081 23C1 510E, THERE ARE NO FLOODPLAINS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT SITE. OLGRADO Exhibit 5 — Post -Development Drainage Area Map SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. U z 0 0 a 0 a z 0 w J m 0 H Q. Q 0 a z a z 0 p a 0 Q I - 0_o Isr)� r -IZ w CNo 0CN U7 Nz • 0 Q � W U � Oo 0 O u >,5 O 0 z a LL cpa U w Ce 01 o ow 0_Q Iw n QN I � w - U Q Z _ Qo CC LL oz 1 L 0 X Wzz u)w ▪ 0 fl 0- • ix _co xu w LL N w /FA 0 w < U0 U 15 U z 0° in 0 I U� fl W /I • O 0 �O I_ Luz • D U) >z C O < UZ �a — w o I� 0 w 0 w 0 ce it 0 - co z o r /z Q • v) 0.) Q) L._w M o D U o w CDI- O E5 �W • � o U � Iw zn w 0 no c. o >- z C in ct a z .44,4 44 &if), (T35 C LIM CI "1/44 ,i\ ,I\ >%4 a) (25 ° 0 No CICCNI°\1 Ni 0 rj CN1 CCN) CC -I:11 (4.C) 0 :LI .C l- 1: P-) Li_l 13 III CD Nol— RI cLo T DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED DATE: BY: 04/27/23 BY: BY: LDS LDS AJH 12 co < CI D 0 0 I 0 0 0_ 2 O ,,. ---1/4 < Et 0 z > ,e -4-1/4 Lt ", u_ ij >2 , es, < Z 0 O 0 D Lt Zo_ D 0 O 0 il r 0 W >. co U) Cf) D 0 ° I w 0 PR LIMINARY FOR CONSTRUCTION Kinty* Kimley-Horn NOT REVIEW Associates, FOR ONLY Inc. and orn PROJECT 196664000 NO. DRAWING NAME X-5 � f 1 4755rrr-_ lW J X u • w • DA -08 0.9 7.4% 2.9 4.4% N I i i i i i i i w • IMF • w • DA -02 w • w • • w • w • a.► DA -01 w • w • w • w • • w • w • • w • • 2 a a a a a a a a a r r w X h It- aJ■ gst w • • • • a a C. X -t ammi � c DA -09 II II 6.1 4.0% 1 \IL NOTES GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 75 150 300 1. THIS DRAINAGE MAP AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IN ASSOCIATION WITH CLOUDBREAK ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC. DRAINAGE NARRATIVE AND USE BY THE SPECIAL REVIEW PLANS. 2. WITH REFERENCE TO THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP(FIRM), MAP NUMBER 08123C1510E, THERE ARE NO FLOODPLAINS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT SITE. Exhibit 6 — Hydrologic Calculations & Detention/WQCV Calculations Kimley>>)Horn STANDARD FORM SF -1 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS - IMPERVIOUS CALCULATION - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 2/24/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH PAVED GRAVEL TYPE VEGETATED OPEN D SPACE SOIL BUILDING ROOF COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE: AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA 2 -YEAR COEFF. 0.83 0.30 _ 0.01 0.74 0.69 5 -YEAR COEFF. 0.84 0.36 0.05 0.76 0.72 100 -YEAR COEFF. 0.89 0.65 0.49 0.85 0.83 IMPERVIOUS % 100% 40% 2% 90% 85% VEGETATED BUILDING FUTURE Imp % DESIGN DESIGN PAVED AREA GRAVEL AREA OPEN AREA SPACE ROOF AREA COMMERCIAL AREA TOTAL AREA BASIN POINT (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) Cc(2) Cc(5) Cc(100) On -Site Basins PRE -DA -01 1 0.13 14.29 14.42 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.3% PRE -DA -02 2 0.07 5.73 5.80 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.4% PRE -DA -03 3 5.19 5.19 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% PRE -DA -04 4 1.48 1.48 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% PRE -DA -05 5 0.26 3.83 4.09 0.03 0.07 0.50 4.4% PRE -DA -06 6 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.14 0.54 13.6% PRE -DA -07 7 5.38 5.38 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% PRE -DA -08 8 0.85 0.85 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% PRE -DA -09 9 6.08 6.08 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% PRE -DA -10 10 2.89 2.89 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% SUBTOTAL BASIN 0.00 0.50 45.83 0.00 0.00 46.33 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.4% 0% 1% 99% 0% 0% 100% Kimley>> Horn STANDARD FORM SF -2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PROJECT NAME: NUMBER: 196664000 Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 DATE: 2/24/2023 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH SUB -BASIN INITIAL TRAVEL TIME Tc CHECK FINAL DATA TIME (T1) (Ti) (URBANIZED BASINS) Tc DESIGN BASIN AREA Ac (2) SLOPE % (5) SLOPE % (8) C, (9) Land Surface VEL fps (11) Tc Min. (17) Min. C2 C5 C100 C5 (3) LENGTH (4) Ft T1 Min. (6) LENGTH Ft. (7) Min. (12) Tt COMP. tc (13) TOTAL TOTAL SLOPE TOTAL IMP. (10) LENGTH (1) (14) (15) (16) On -Site Basins PRE -DA -01 14.424 0.05 500 1.3% 39.4 947 1.1% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.5 30.3 69.7 1447 1.2% 2% 49.7 49.7 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -02 5.799 0.05 500 1.6% 36.6 469 1.2% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.6 14.1 50.7 969 1.4% 2% 40.1 40.1 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -03 5.193 0.05 500 1.3% 39.0 93 0.0% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.0 70.6 109.6 593 1.1% 2% 35.7 35.7 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -04 1.477 0.05 241 2.6% 21.6 Tillage/Field 21.6 241 2.6% 2% 28.3 21.6 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -05 4.092 0.07 278 2.7% 22.7 474 0.0% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.0 673.9 696.6 751 1.0% 4% 38.4 38.4 0.03 0.07 0.50 PRE -DA -06 0.150 0.14 43 4.8% 6.8 61 0.5% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.3 3.0 9.8 105 2.3% 14% 24.8 9.8 0.10 0.14 0.54 PRE -DA -07 5.376 0.05 500 0.6% 51.6 261 0.5% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.3 12.8 64.5 761 0.5% 2% 44.3 44.3 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -08 0.849 0.05 74 0.9% 17.3 Tillage/Field 17.3 74 0.9% 2% 27.1 17.3 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -09 6.080 0.05 500 0.6% 50.7 599 0.5% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.4 27.2 77.9 1099 0.6% 2% 51.8 51.8 0.01 0.05 0.49 PRE -DA -10 2.889 0.05 500 0.6% 51.7 476 0.6% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.4 21.2 72.9 976 0.6% 2% 48.9 48.9 0.01 0.05 0.49 '� 0. 39501. 1 - ( � � r '� - - 17� t. _ (2 - _ �'t � lip., O K 60V, s - STANDARD FORM SF -3 Kimley*> orn STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN - RATIONAL METHOD 100 YEAR EVENT - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 DATE: 2/24/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 Pi (1 -Hour Rainfall) . 2.76 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH 4 N ►-a STREET REMARKS DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF PIPE TRAVEL TIME C*A(ac) tc(max) LtEET )W(cfs sCa?i v) W 4 wo 1 44 13' --i , 44 r,:i :64eb' , * :•..) L-4 .: ...., :se: . ,.., , r:,..4 ,..... .., „...., W a 0 t g LTG (ft) 0 svi 41 4 U 1 su e cy i `--' — C le, .� D.* -- Ci i `-� 01 I C a le, `-' em.1 a W N r--1 ``' W `,.•a4 U .� •al _ ° .� �, ` (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) On -Site Basins 1 PRE -DA -01 14.42 0.49 49.66 7.12 3.16 22.52 2 PRE -DA -02 5.80 0.49 40.06 2.86 3.63 10.40 3 PRE -DA -03 5.19 0.49 35.67 2.56 3.90 9.97 4 PRE -DA -04 1.48 0.49 21.64 0.73 5.21 3.79 5 PRE -DA -05 4.09 0.50 38.37 2.05 3.73 7.66 6 PRE -DA -06 0.15 0.54 9.80 0.08 7.52 0.61 7 PRE -DA -07 5.38 0.49 44.30 2.65 3.41 9.01 8 PRE -DA -08 0.85 0.49 17.27 0.42 5.85 2.45 9 PRE -DA -09 6.08 0.49 51.77 2.99 3.08 9.21 10 PRE -DA -10 2.89 0.49 48.92 1.42 3.19 4.54 Total 46.33 80.15 Kimley>>> Horn STANDARD FORM SF -1 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS - IMPERVIOUS CALCULATION - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 4/27/2023 PROJECT CALCULATED NUMBER: 196664000 BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH TYPE D SOIL VEGETATED PAVED GRAVEL OPEN LAND USE: AREA AREA AREA BUILDING SPACE ROOF AREA FUTURE COMMERCIA AREA 2 -YEAR COEFF. 0.83 0.30 0.01 0.74 0.69 5 -YEAR COEFF. 0.84 0.36 0.05 0.76 0.72 100 -YEAR COEFF. 0.89 0.65 0.49 0.85 0.83 IMPERVIOUS % 100% 40% 2% 90% 85% DESIGN BASIN DESIGN PAVED AREA GRAVEL AREA VEGETATED OPEN AREA SPACE BUILDING ROOF AREA FUTURE COMMERCIA L AREA TOTAL AREA Cc(2) Cc(5) Cc(100) Imp % POINT (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) On -Site Basins POST -DA -01 1 0.03 0.52 13.87 14.42 0.02 0.06 0.50 3.6% POST -DA -02 2 0.01 5.79 5.80 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.1% POST -DA -03 3 0.20 4.99 5.19 0.02 0.06 0.50 3.5% POST -DA -04 4 1.48 1.48 0.01 0.05 0.49 2.0% POST -DA -05 5 0.08 4.01 4.09 0.02 0.06 0.50 2.8% POST -DA -06 6 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.14 0.54 13.6% POST -DA -07 7 0.03 0.37 4.97 5.38 0.03 0.08 0.51 5.2% POST -DA -08 8 0.12 0.73 0.85 0.05 0.09 0.51 7.4% POST -DA -09 9 0.03 0.24 5.81 6.08 0.03 0.07 0.50 4.0% POST -DA -10 10 0.00 0.18 2.71 2.89 0.03 0.07 0.50 4.4% BASIN 0.09 1.77 44.46 0.00 0.00 46.33 0.02 0.06 0.50 3.7% 0% 4% 96% 0% 0% 100% SUBTOTAL ley>>> Kim orn STANDARD FORM SF -2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 DATE: 4/27/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH SUB -BASIN INITIAL TRAVEL TIME Te CHECK FINAL DATA (Ti) (URBANIZED BASINS) 're_ TIME (T1) c DESIGN AREA C5 SLOPE Ti Min. (6) C,, (9) Land Surface TOTAL TOTAL IMP. (16) Min. (17) Te Min. C2 C5 C100 LENGTH LENGTH SLOPE VEL Tt COMP. TOTAL BASIN Ac Ft (4) % (5) Ft. (7) % (8) (10) fps Min. tt LENGTH SLOPE (1) (2) (3) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) On -Site Basins POST -DA -01 14.424 0.06 500 1.3% 39.1 947 1.1% 5.0 0.5 30.3 69.4 1447 1.2% 4% 49.0 49.0 0.02 0.06 0.50 Tillage/Field POST -DA -02 5.799 0.05 500 1.6% 36.7 469 1.2% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.6 14.1 50.8 969 1.4% 2% 40.2 40.2 0.01 0.05 0.49 POST -DA -03 5.193 0.06 500 1.3% 38.5 93 0.0% 5.0 0.0 70.6 109.1 593 1.1% 3% 35.2 35.2 0.02 0.06 0.50 Tillage/Field POST -DA -04 1.477 0.05 241 2.6% 21.6 Tillage/Field 21.6 241 2.6% 2% 28.3 21.6 0.01 0.05 0.49 POST -DA -05 4.092 0.06 278 2.7% 23.0 474 0.0% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.0 673.9 696.9 751 1.0% 3% 39.0 39.0 0.02 0.06 0.50 POST -DA -06 0.150 0.14 43 4.8% 6.8 61 0.5% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.3 3.0 9.8 105 2.3% 14% 24.8 9.8 0.10 0.14 0.54 POST -DA -07 5.376 0.08 500 0.6% 50.4 261 0.5% 5.0 0.3 12.8 63.2 761 0.5% 5% 42.9 42.9 0.03 0.08 0.51 Tillage/Field POST -DA -08 0.849 0.09 74 0.9% 16.6 16.6 74 0.9% 7% 26.1 16.6 0.05 0.09 0.51 Tillage/Field POST -DA -09 6.080 0.07 500 0.6% 49.9 599 0.5% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.4 27.2 77.1 1099 0.6% 4% 50.7 50.7 0.03 0.07 0.50 POST -DA -10 2.889 0.07 500 0.6% 50.8 476 0.6% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.4 21.2 72.0 976 0.6% 4% 47.7 47.7 0.03 0.07 0.50 395(1.1 '_ L,, '--s.(26-171)+ tr 10. t W i.. T _ 1 1 . . " 6OK VS4I, I, 6O1; 60(141 4 9)IS, STANDARD FORM SF -3 Kimley>>>Hc�rn STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN - RATIONAL METHOD 100 YEAR EVENT - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 1 DATE: 4/27/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 P1 (1 -Hour Rainfall) = 2.76 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET PIPE TRAVEL TIME REMARKS tc (min) C*A(ac) Pio ,OCI' Y iit ©� LEO ©�--oo tc(ma: �� E. N wv°w� z oo �a a �• o __ � 5 " r a w p w� �� .� '- ' .� '—' •`� i 1 ,� w `� ct up AA A� _ �v a (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) i (22) On -Site Basins 1 POST -DA -01 14.42 0.50 49.01 7.19 3.19 22.95 2 POST -DA -02 5.80 0.49 40.20 2.86 3.62 10.35 3 POST -DA -03 5.19 0.50 35.20 2.59 3.93 10.18 4 POST -DA -04 1.48 0.49 21.64 0.73 5.21 3.79 5 POST -DA -05 4.09 0.50 38.98 2.03 3.69 7.48 6 POST -DA -06 0.15 0.54 9.80 0.08 7.52 0.61 7 POST -DA -07 5.38 0.51 42.90 2.72 3.48 9.44 8 POST -DA -08 0.85 0.51 16.56 0.44 5.97 2.61 9 POST -DA -09 6.08 0.50 50.68 3.04 3.12 9.49 10 POST -DA -10 2.89 0.50 47.69 1.45 3.25 4.71 Total 46.33 81.60 Exhibit 7 — Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Lauren M. Cook, S.M.ASCE1; and Richard H. McCuen, M.ASCE2 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. Abstract: Because of the benefits of solar energy, the number of solar farms is increasing; however, their hydrologic impacts have not been studied. The goal of this study was to determine the hydrologic effects of solar farms and examine whether or not storm -water management is needed to control runoff volumes and rates. A model of a solar farm was used to simulate runoff for two conditions: the pre- and postpaneled conditions. Using sensitivity analyses, modeling showed that the solar panels themselves did not have a significant effect on the runoff volumes, peaks, or times to peak. However, if the ground cover under the panels is gravel or bare ground, owing to design decisions or lack of maintenance, the peak discharge may increase significantly with storm -water management needed. In addition, the kinetic energy of the flow that drains from the panels was found to be greater than that of the rainfall, which could cause erosion at the base of the panels. Thus, it is recommended that the grass beneath the panels be well maintained or that a buffer strip be placed after the most downgradient row of panels. This study, along with design recommendations, can be used as a guide for the future design of solar farms. DOE 10.1061/(ASCE) HE.1943-5584.0000530. © 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers. CE Database subject headings: Hydrology; Land use; Solar power; Floods; Surface water; Runoff; Stormwater management. Author keywords: Hydrology; Land use change; Solar energy; Flooding; Surface water runoff; Storm -water management. Introduction Storm -water management practices are generally implemented to reverse the effects of land -cover changes that cause increases in volumes and rates of runoff. This is a concern posed for new types of land -cover change such as the solar farm. Solar energy is a re- newable energy source that is expected to increase in importance in the near future. Because solar farms require considerable land, it is necessary to understand the design of solar farms and their potential effect on erosion rates and storm runoff, especially the impact on offsite properties and receiving streams. These farms can vary in size from 8 ha (20 acres) in residential areas to 250 ha (600 acres) in areas where land is abundant. The solar panels are impervious to rain water; however, they are mounted on metal rods and placed over pervious land. In some cases, the area below the panel is paved or covered with gravel. Service roads are generally located between rows of panels. Altl- hough some panels are stationary, others are designed to move so that the angle of the panel varies with the angle of the sun. The angle can range, depending on the latitude, from 22° during the summer months to 74° during the winter months. In addition, the angle and direction can also change throughout the day. The issue posed is whether or not these rows of impervious panels will change the runoff characteristics of the site, specifically increase runoff volumes or peak discharge rates. If the increases are hydro- logically significant, storm -water management facilities may be needed. Additionally, it is possible that the velocity of water 1Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-3021. 2The Ben Dyer Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineer- ing, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-3021 (corresponding author). E-mail: rhmccuen@eng.umd.edu Note. This manuscript was submitted on August 12, 2010; approved on October 20, 2011; published online on October 24, 2011. Discussion period open until October 1, 2013; separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydrologic Engi- neering, Vol. 18, No. 5, May 1, 2013. © ASCE, ISSN 1084-069912013/5- 536-541/$25.00. draining from the edge of the panels is sufficient to cause erosion of the soil below the panels, especially where the maintenance roadways are bare ground. The outcome of this study provides guidance for assessing the hydrologic effects of solar farms, which is important to those who plan, design, and install arrays of solar panels. Those who design solar farms may need to provide for storm -water management. This study investigated the hydrologic effects of solar farms, assessed whether or not storm -water management might be needed, and if the velocity of the runoff from the panels could be sufficient to cause erosion of the soil below the panels. Model Development Solar farms are generally designed to maximize the amount of en- ergy produced per unit of land area, while still allowing space for maintenance. The hydrologic response of solar farms is not usually considered in design. Typically, the panels will be arrayed in long rows with separations between the rows to allow for maintenance vehicles. To model a typical layout, a unit width of one panel was assumed, with the length of the downgradient strip depending on the size of the farm. For example, a solar farm with 30 rows of 200 panels each could be modeled as a strip of 30 panels with space between the panels for maintenance vehicles. Rainwater that drains from the upper panel onto the ground will flow over the land under the 29 panels on the downgradient strip. Depending on the land cover, infiltration losses would be expected as the runoff flows to the bottom of the slope. To determine the effects that the solar panels have on runoff characteristics, a model of a solar farm was developed. Runoff in the form of sheet flow without the addition of the solar panels served as the prepaneled condition. The paneled condition assumed a downgradient series of cells with one solar panel per ground cell. Each cell was separated into three sections: wet, dry, and spacer. The dry section is that portion directly underneath the solar panel, unexposed directly to the rainfall. As the angle of the panel from the horizontal increases, more of the rain will fall directly onto 536 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. the ground; this section of the cell is referred to as the wet section. The spacer section is the area between the rows of panels used by maintenance vehicles. Fig. 1 is an image of two solar panels and the spacer section allotted for maintenance vehicles. Fig. 2 is a sche- matic of the wet, dry, and spacer sections with their respective di- mensions. In Fig. 1, tracks from the vehicles are visible on what is modeled within as the spacer section. When the solar panel is hori- zontal, then the length longitudinal to the direction that runoff will occur is the length of the dry and wet sections combined. Runoff from a dry section drains onto the downgradient spacer section. Runoff from the spacer section flows to the wet section of the next downgradient cell. Water that drains from a solar panel falls directly onto the spacer section of that cell. The length of the spacer section is constant. During a storm event, the loss rate was assumed constant for the 24-h storm be- cause a wet antecedent condition was assumed. The lengths of the wet and dry sections changed depending on the angle of the solar panel. The total length of the wet and dry sections was set Fig. 1. Maintenance or "spacer" section between two rows of solar panels (photo by John E. Showler, reprinted with permission) Ld Direction of Flow Wet section Dry section Spacer section 5 m 3.5 m Fig. 2. Wet, dry, and spacer sections of a single cell with lengths Lw, Ls, and Ld with the solar panel covering the dry section equal to the length of one horizontal solar panel, which was as- sumed to be 3.5 m. When a solar panel is horizontal, the dry section length would equal 3.5 m and the wet section length would be zero. In the paneled condition, the dry section does not receive direct rainfall because the rain first falls onto the solar panel then drains onto the spacer section. However, the dry section does infiltrate some of the runoff that comes from the upgradient wet section. The wet section was modeled similar to the spacer section with rain falling directly onto the section and assuming a constant loss rate. For the presolar panel condition, the spacer and wet sections are modeled the same as in the paneled condition; however, the cell does not include a dry section. In the prepaneled condition, rain falls directly onto the entire cell. When modeling the prepaneled condition, all cells receive rainfall at the same rate and are subject to losses. All other conditions were assumed to remain the same such that the prepaneled and paneled conditions can be compared. Rainfall was modeled after an natural resources conservation service (NRCS) Type II Storm (McCuen 2005) because it is an ac- curate representation of actual storms of varying characteristics that are imbedded in intensity -duration -frequency (IDF) curves. For each duration of interest, a dimensionless hyetograph was devel- oped using a time increment of 12 s over the duration of the storm (see Fig. 3). The depth of rainfall that corresponds to each storm magnitude was then multiplied by the dimensionless hyetograph. For a 2-h storm duration, depths of 40.6, 76.2, and 101.6 mm were used for the 2-, 25-, and 100 -year events. The 2- and 6-h duration hyetographs were developed using the center portion of the 24-h storm, with the rainfall depths established with the Baltimore IDF curve. The corresponding depths for a 6-h duration were 53.3, 106.7, and 132.1 mm, respectively. These magnitudes were chosen to give a range of storm conditions. During each time increment, the depth of rain is multiplied by the cell area to determine the volume of rain added to each section of each cell. This volume becomes the storage in each cell. Depend- ing on the soil group, a constant volume of losses was subtracted from the storage. The runoff velocity from a solar panel was calcu- lated using Manning's equation, with the hydraulic radius for sheet flow assumed to equal the depth of the storage on the panel (Bedient and Huber 2002). Similar assumptions were made to com- pute the velocities in each section of the surface sections. 20 40 60 Time (min) 80 100 120 Fig. 3. Dimensionless hyetograph of 2-h Type II storm JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 537 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. Runoff from one section to the next and then to the next downgradient cell was routed using the continuity of mass. The routing coefficient depended on the depth of flow in storage and the velocity of runoff. Flow was routed from the wet section to the dry section to the spacer section, with flow from the spacer section draining to the wet section of the next cell. Flow from the most downgradient cell was assumed to be the outflow. Discharge rates and volumes from the most downgradient cell were used for com- parisons between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. Alternative Model Scenarios To assess the effects of the different variables, a section of 30 cells, each with a solar panel, was assumed for the base model. Each cell was separated individually into wet, dry, and spacer sections. The area had a total ground length of 225 m with a ground slope of 1% and width of 5 m, which was the width of an average solar panel. The roughness coefficient (Engman 1986) for the silicon solar panel was assumed to be that of glass, 0.01. Roughness coefficients of 0.15 for grass and 0.02 for bare ground were also assumed. Loss rates of 0.5715 cm/h (0.225 in./h) and 0.254 cm/h (0.1 in./h) for B and C soils, respectively, were assumed. The prepaneled condition using the 2-h, 25 -year rainfall was assumed for the base condition, with each cell assumed to have a good grass cover condition. All other analyses were made assum- ing a paneled condition. For most scenarios, the runoff volumes and peak discharge rates from the paneled model were not significantly greater than those for the prepaneled condition. Over a total length of 225 m with 30 solar panels, the runoff increased by 0.26 m3, which was a difference of only 0.35%. The slight increase in runoff volume reflects the slightly higher velocities for the paneled con- dition. The peak discharge increased by 0.0013 m3, a change of only 0.31%. The time to peak was delayed by one time increment, i.e., 12 s. Inclusion of the panels did not have a significant hydro- logic impact. Storm Magnitude The effect of storm magnitude was investigated by changing the magnitude from a 25 -year storm to a 2 -year storm. For the 2 -year storm, the rainfall and runoff volumes decreased by approximately 50%. However, the runoff from the paneled watershed condition increased compared to the prepaneled condition by approximately the same volume as for the 25 -year analysis, 0.26 m3. This increase represents only a 0.78% increase in volume. The peak discharge and the time to peak did not change significantly. These results re- flect runoff from a good grass cover condition and indicated that the general conclusion of very minimal impacts was the same for dif- ferent storm magnitudes. Ground Slope The effect of the downgradient ground slope of the solar farm was also examined. The angle of the solar panels would influence the velocity of flows from the panels. As the ground slope was in- creased, the velocity of flow over the ground surface would be closer to that on the panels. This could cause an overall increase in discharge rates. The ground slope was changed from 1 to 5%, with all other conditions remaining the same as the base conditions. With the steeper incline, the volume of losses decreased from that for the 1% slope, which is to be expected because the faster velocity of the runoff would provide less opportunity for infiltra- tion. However, between the prepaneled and paneled conditions, the increase in runoff volume was less than 1%. The peak discharge and the time to peak did not change. Therefore, the greater ground slope did not significantly influence the response of the solar farm. Soil Type The effect of soil type on the runoff was also examined. The soil group was changed from B soil to C soil by varying the loss rate. As expected, owing to the higher loss rate for the C soil, the depths of runoff increased by approximately 7.5% with the C soil when com- pared with the volume for B soils. However, the runoff volume for the C soil condition only increased by 0.17% from the prepaneled condition to the paneled condition. In comparison with the B soil, a difference of 0.35% in volume resulted between the two conditions. Therefore, the soil group influenced the actual volumes and rates, but not the relative effect of the paneled condition when compared to the prepaneled condition. Panel Angle Because runoff velocities increase with slope, the effect of the angle of the solar panel on the hydrologic response was examined. Analy- ses were made for angles of 30° and 70° to test an average range from winter to summer. The hydrologic response for these angles was compared to that of the base condition angle of 45°. The other site conditions remained the same. The analyses showed that the angle of the panel had only a slight effect on runoff volumes and discharge rates. The lower angle of 30° was associated with an in- creased runoff volume, whereas the runoff volume decreased for the steeper angle of 70° when compared with the base condition of 45°. However, the differences (-0.5%) were very slight. Never- theless, these results indicate that, when the solar panel was closer to horizontal, i.e., at a lower angle, a larger difference in runoff volume occurred between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. These differences in the response result are from differences in loss rates. The peak discharge was also lower at the lower angle. At an angle of 30°, the peak discharge was slightly lower than at the higher angle of 70°. For the 2-h storm duration, the time to peak of the 30° angle was 2 min delayed from the time to peak of when the panel was positioned at a 70° angle, which reflects the longer travel times across the solar panels. Storm Duration To assess the effect of storm duration, analyses were made for 6-h storms, testing magnitudes for 2-, 25-, and 100 -year return periods, with the results compared with those for the 2-h rainfall events. The longer storm duration was tested to determine whether a longer du- ration storm would produce a different ratio of increase in runoff between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. When compared to runoff volumes from the 2-h storm, those for the 6-h storm were 34% greater in both the paneled and prepaneled cases. However, when comparing the prepaneled to the paneled condition, the in- crease in the runoff volume with the 6-h storm was less than 1% regardless of the return period. The peak discharge and the time -to -peak did not differ significantly between the two condi- tions. The trends in the hydrologic response of the solar farm did not vary with storm duration. Ground Cover The ground cover under the panels was assumed to be a native grass that received little maintenance. For some solar farms, the area be- neath the panel is covered in gravel or partially paved because the panels prevent the grass from receiving sunlight. Depending on the 538 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. volume of traffic, the spacer cell could be grass, patches of grass, or bare ground. Thus, it was necessary to determine whether or not these alternative ground -cover conditions would affect the runoff characteristics. This was accomplished by changing the Manning's n for the ground beneath the panels. The value of n under the pan- els, i.e., the dry section, was set to 0.015 for gravel, with the value for the spacer or maintenance section set to 0.02, i.e., bare ground. These can be compared to the base condition of a native grass (n = 0.15). A good cover should promote losses and delay the runoff. For the smoother surfaces, the velocity of the runoff increased and the losses decreased, which resulted in increasing runoff vol- umes. This occurred both when the ground cover under the panels was changed to gravel and when the cover in the spacer section was changed to bare ground. Owing to the higher velocities of the flow, runoff rates from the cells increased significantly such that it was necessary to reduce the computational time increment. Fig. 4(a) shows the hydrograph from a 30 -panel area with a time incre- ment of 12 s. With a time increment of 12 s, the water in each cell is discharged at the end of every time increment, which results in no attenuation of the flow; thus, the undulations shown in Fig. 4(a) result. The time increment was reduced to 3 s for the 2-h storm, which resulted in watershed smoothing and a rational hydrograph shape [Fig. 4(b)] . The results showed that the storm runoff 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 coE 0.06 0 0.05 co 0 0.04 0.03 (a) 0.02 0.01 0 0.07 0.06 0.05 U) 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Time (min) 0 _ 0 (b) I Paneled Pre -paneled 4 - alb NC IS 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Time (min) 180 200 Fig. 4. Hydrograph with time increment of (a) 12 s; (b) 3 s with Manning's n for bare ground increased by 7% from the grass -covered scenario to the scenario with gravel under the panel. The peak discharge increased by 73% for the gravel ground cover when compared with the grass cover without the panels. The time to peak was 10 min less with the gravel than with the grass, which reflects the effect of differ- ences in surface roughness and the resulting velocities. If maintenance vehicles used the spacer section regularly and the grass cover was not adequately maintained, the soil in the spacer section would be compacted and potentially the runoff volumes and rates would increase. Grass that is not maintained has the potential to become patchy and turn to bare ground. The grass under the panel may not get enough sunlight and die. Fig. 1 shows the result of the maintenance trucks frequently driving in the spacer section, which diminished the grass cover. The effect of the lack of solar farm maintenance on runoff char- acteristics was modeled by changing the Manning's n to a value of 0.02 for bare ground. In this scenario, the roughness coefficient for the ground under the panels, i.e., the dry section, as well as in the spacer cell was changed from grass covered to bare ground (n = 0.02).The effects were nearly identical to that of the gravel. The runoff volume increased by 7% from the grass -covered to the bare -ground condition. The peak discharge increased by 72% when compared with the grass -covered condition. The runoff for the bare - ground condition also resulted in an earlier time to peak by approx- imately 10 min. Two other conditions were also modeled, showing similar results. In the first scenario, gravel was placed directly under the panel, and healthy grass was placed in the spacer section, which mimics a possible design decision. Under these conditions, the peak discharge increased by 42%, and the volume of runoff increased by 4%, which suggests that storm -water management would be necessary if gravel is placed anywhere. Fig. 5 shows two solar panels from a solar farm in New Jersey. The bare ground between the panels can cause increased runoff rates and reductions in time of concentration, both of which could necessitate storm -water management. The final condition modeled involved the assumption of healthy grass beneath the panels and bare ground in the spacer section, which would simulate the con- dition of unmaintained grass resulting from vehicles that drive over the spacer section. Because the spacer section is 53% of the cell, the change in land cover to bare ground would reduce losses and de- crease runoff travel times, which would cause runoff to amass as it Fig. 5. Site showing the initiation of bare ground below the panels, which increases the potential for erosion (photo by John Showler, reprinted with permission) JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 539 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. moves downgradient. With the spacer section as bare ground, the peak discharge increased by 100%, which reflected the increases in volume and decrease in timing. These results illustrate the need for maintenance of the grass below and between the panels. Design Suggestions With well -maintained grass underneath the panels, the solar panels themselves do not have much effect on total volumes of the runoff or peak discharge rates. Although the panels are impervious, the rainwater that drains from the panels appears as runoff over the downgradient cells. Some of the runoff infiltrates. If the grass cover of a solar farm is not maintained, it can deteriorate either because of a lack of sunlight or maintenance vehicle traffic. In this case, the runoff characteristics can change significantly with both runoff rates and volumes increasing by significant amounts. In addition, if gravel or pavement is placed underneath the panels, this can also contribute to a significant increase in the hydrologic response. If bare ground is foreseen to be a problem or gravel is to be placed under the panels to prevent erosion, it is necessary to counteract the excess runoff using some form of storm -water man- agement. A simple practice that can be implemented is a buffer strip (Dabney et al. 2006) at the downgradient end of the solar farm. The buffer strip length must be sufficient to return the runoff character- istics with the panels to those of runoff experienced before the gravel and panels were installed. Alternatively, a detention basin can be installed. A buffer strip was modeled along with the panels. For approxi- mately every 200 m of panels, or 29 cells, the buffer must be 5 cells long (or 35 m) to reduce the runoff volume to that which occurred before the panels were added. Even if a gravel base is not placed under the panels, the inclusion of a buffer strip may be a good prac- tice when grass maintenance is not a top funding priority. Fig. 6 shows the peak discharge from the graveled surface versus the length of the buffer needed to keep the discharge to prepaneled peak rate. Water draining from a solar panel can increase the potential for erosion of the spacer section. If the spacer section is bare ground, the high kinetic energy of water draining from the panel can cause soil detachment and transport (Garde and Raju 1977; Beuselinck et al. 2002). The amount and risk of erosion was modeled using the velocity of water coming off a solar panel compared with the velocity and intensity of the rainwater. The velocity of panel 0.07 0.06 0.05 M 0.04 0 11 0.03 o_ 0.02 0.01 5 10 15 20 25 Length of buffer (m) Pre -paneled peak Q Peak Q vs. buffer length - 30 35 40 Fig. 6. Peak discharge over gravel compared with buffer length runoff was calculated using Manning's equation, and the velocity of falling rainwater was calculated using the following: Vt = 120 d).35 (1) where d,. = diameter of a raindrop, assumed to be 1 mm. The re- lationship between kinetic energy and rainfall intensity is Ke = 916 + 3301og10 i (2) where i = rainfall intensity (in./h) and Ke = kinetic energy (ft -tons per ac -in. of rain) of rain falling onto the wet section and the panel, as well as the water flowing off of the end of the panel (Wischmeier and Smith 1978). The kinetic energy (Salles et al. 2002) of the rain- fall was greater than that coming off the panel, but the area under the panel (i.e., the product of the length, width, and cosine of the panel angle) is greater than the area under the edge of the panel where the water drains from the panel onto the ground. Thus, dividing the kinetic energy by the respective areas gives a more accurate representation of the kinetic energy experienced by the soil. The energy of the water draining from the panel onto the ground can be nearly 10 times greater than the rain itself falling onto the ground area. If the solar panel runoff falls onto an un- sealed soil, considerable detachment can result (Motha et al. 2004). Thus, because of the increased kinetic energy, it is pos- sible that the soil is much more prone to erosion with the panels than without. Where panels are installed, methods of erosion control should be included in the design. Conclusions Solar farms are the energy generators of the future; thus, it is im- portant to determine the environmental and hydrologic effects of these farms, both existing and proposed. A model was created to simulate storm -water runoff over a land surface without panels and then with solar panels added. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted including changing the storm duration and volume, soil type, ground slope, panel angle, and ground cover to determine the effect that each of these factors would have on the volumes and peak discharge rates of the runoff. The addition of solar panels over a grassy field does not have much of an effect on the volume of runoff, the peak discharge, nor the time to peak. With each analysis, the runoff volume increased slightly but not enough to require storm -water management facili- ties. However, when the land -cover type was changed under the panels, the hydrologic response changed significantly. When gravel or pavement was placed under the panels, with the spacer section left as patchy grass or bare ground, the volume of the runoff in- creased significantly and the peak discharge increased by approx- imately 100%. This was also the result when the entire cell was assumed to be bare ground. The potential for erosion of the soil at the base of the solar pan- els was also studied. It was determined that the kinetic energy of the water draining from the solar panel could be as much as 10 times greater than that of rainfall. Thus, because the energy of the water draining from the panels is much higher, it is very possible that soil below the base of the solar panel could erode owing to the concen- trated flow of water off the panel, especially if there is bare ground in the spacer section of the cell. If necessary, erosion control meth- ods should be used. Bare ground beneath the panels and in the spacer section is a realistic possibility (see Figs. 1 and 5). Thus, a good, well - maintained grass cover beneath the panels and in the spacer section is highly recommended. If gravel, pavement, or bare ground is 540 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. deemed unavoidable below the panels or in the spacer section, it may necessary to add a buffer section to control the excess runoff volume and ensure adequate losses. If these simple measures are taken, solar farms will not have an adverse hydrologic impact from excess runoff or contribute eroded soil particles to receiving streams and waterways. Acknowledgments The authors appreciate the photographs (Figs. 1 and 5) of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, 1001 Route 202, North Raritan, New Jersey, 08869, provided by John E. Showler, Environmental Scientist, New Jersey Department of Agriculture. The extensive comments of reviewers resulted in an improved paper. References Bedient, P. B., and Huber, W. C. (2002). Hydrology and,floodplain analy- sis, Prentice -Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Beuselinck, L., Govers, G., Hairsince, P. B., Sander, G. C., and Breynaert, M. (2002). "The influence of rainfall on sediment transport by overland flow over areas of net deposition." J. Hydrol., 257(1-4), 145-163. Dabney, S. M., Moore, M. T., and Locke, M. A. (2006). "Integrated man- agement of in -field, edge -of -field, and after -field buffers." J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 42(1), 15-24. Engman, E. T. (1986). "Roughness coefficients for routing surface runoff." J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 112(1), 39-53. Garde, R. J., and Raju, K. G. (1977). Mechanics of sediment transportation and alluvial stream problems, Wiley, New York. McCuen, R. H. (2005). Hydrologic analysis and design, 3rd Ed., Pearson/ Prentice -Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Motha, J. A., Wallbrink, P. J., Hairsine, P. B., and Grayson, R. B. (2004). "Unsealed roads as suspended sediment sources in agricultural catch- ment in south-eastern Australia." J. Hydrol., 286(1-4), 1-18. Salles, C., Poesen, J., and Sempere-Torres, D. (2002). "Kinetic energy of rain and its functional relationship with intensity." J. Hydrol., 257(1-4), 256-270. Wischmeier, W. H., and Smith, D. D. (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: A guide to conservation planning, USDA Handbook 537, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 541 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Kimley >) Horn PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT Antelope Hill 2 Solar Weld County Case # TBD North of Weld County Rd 68/Highway 392 & Midway Between Weld County Rd 27 and Weld County Rd 29 Weld County, CO Prepared by: Kimley-Horn Inc. 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400 Denver, CO 80202 Contact: Adam Harrison, P.E. Phone: (303) 228-2311 Prepared on: April 27, 2023 Antelope Hill 2 —Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 1 Kimley >) Horn TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & SCOPE OF WORK 3 1.1. Project Location 3 1.2. Nearby Water Features & Ownership 4 1.3. Report & Analysis Methodologies 4 1.4. Stormwater Management 5 2. CONCLUSION 5 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 - FEMA Firm Map Exhibit 2 - NRCS Report Exhibit 3 — NOAA Rainfall Data Exhibit 4 — Pre -Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit 5 — Post -Development Drainage Area Map Exhibit 6 — Hydrologic Calculations & Detention/WQCV Calculations Exhibit 7 — Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Antelope Hill 2 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 2 Kimley >) Horn 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & SCOPE OF WORK The development is a proposed 0.8-MWac solar power generating facility located in Weld County, CO. The solar power generating facility will consist of rows of Photovoltaic Solar Modules, gravel access driveways, associated electrical equipment, underground utilities, and a substation (by others). Solar modules will be mounted on piles and elevated above the ground as to preserve the existing underlying soil and allow for revegetation and infiltration. The project will be surrounded by a perimeter fence. Ground area within the limits of development that is not occupied by gravel roads or foundations will be seeded to establish permanent vegetation. This drainage narrative is intended to provide Weld County with preliminary information regarding the drainage and land disturbance activities related to the proposed Antelope Hill 2 Solar, small scale solar facility (Project). The project will be designed and will be constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes storm water related impacts, in accordance with Weld County drainage criteria. Project name, Property Address and Weld County Parcel No. Antelope Hill 2 Solar, 13001-13999 Highway 392 Weld 80631, Parcel No. 080517000039 Developer/Owner CloudBreak Energy Partners, LLC, 218 S. 3rd Street Sterling, CO 80751 Urbanizing/Non-Urbanizing This site is located more than a quarter mile away from the nearest Weld County municipal boundary and is classified as "Non -Urbanizing". Therefore, detention ponds designed for this site would be sized using 10 -year runoff rates. 1.1. Project Location The existing site subject property is a parcel of 93.1 acres. The project is located on approximately 10.2 acres of undeveloped, lightly vegetated land. The project is located east of Windsor, within Weld County. The site is bounded to the north and east by Linblad property parcel number 080517000023, to the west by Linblad property parcel number 080517000038, and to the south by Highway 392. Section Township Range Property is located within a portion of the southern half of Section 17, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Per FEMA Map Panels 08123C1510E effective 01/20/2016, none of the development area is within a flood hazard area. (Refer to Exhibit 1 for FEMA Map). The NRCS Report dated 02/01/2023, concludes that onsite soils consist mostly of Kim loam, Aquolls and Aquepts and Olney fine sandy loam that classify as hydrologic soil group (HSG) type A, D and B respectively. The site was modeled using all type D soils for conservative runoff calculations. For additional detail, refer to Exhibit 2 for the N RCS Report. Antelope Hill 2 —Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 3 Kimley >) Horn 1.2. Nearby Water Features & Ownership In the existing condition, a majority of the site drains to the southwest to a pre-existing drainage ditch by highway 392/Weld County Road 68. The nearest water feature is the Greeley Canal Number 2 approximately 150 feet north of the north project area property boundary. Greeley Canal Number 2 is the receiving waters of the project site. The existing drainage patterns will be maintained in the proposed condition. Refer to Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 5 for the Pre and Post - Development Drainage Area Maps. 1.3. Report & Analysis Methodologies This report evaluates the pre and post development runoff characteristics of the development (including solar facility footprint and access drive) and addresses the stormwater requirements of Weld County and the state of Colorado. Hydrologic Design Criteria The table below notes the hydrologic design criteria used in the analysis. Parameter Value Unit Reference Time of Concentration, Tc - min. Exhibit 6 Runoff Coefficient, C - - MHFD Criteria Manual, Chapter 6, Table 6-4 1 -hr Point Rainfall, P1 (100 -Year) 2.76 Inches NOAA Rainfall Data (Exhibit 3) Storm Runoff, Q - cfs Q = CIA Basin Conditions The drainage areas of the site are shown for the site as Pre -construction (Exhibit 4) and Post - construction (Exhibit 5). Pre -construction drainage basins were analyzed to calculate the historic peak runoff for the design storm. Proposed post construction drainage basins were analyzed to calculate the peak runoff for the design storm using an impervious percentage of 4.4% (see Exhibit 6 for the imperviousness summary). The tracking solar panels are not classified as an impervious surface because precipitation falling on the solar panels will shed onto the vegetated surface below. Stormwater Runoff The stormwater runoff for the existing and proposed conditions is calculated utilizing the Rational Method. The 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event was analyzed for pre and post -construction drainage basins. The flow path for the basins can be seen in Exhibits 4 & 5. The time of concentration to the point of accumulation was calculated using MHFD equations and can be found in Exhibit 6. The Runoff Coefficients are also included in Exhibit 6. The precipitation data used for the 100 - year, 1 -hour storm event is based on NOAA rainfall data from the project site (Exhibit 3). Existing Proposed Area 10.17 ac 10.17 ac Imperviousness 2.7 % 4.4 % Q1oo 16.55 cfs 16.97 cfs Antelope Hill 2 —Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 4 Kimley >) Horn 1.4. Stormwater Management A study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering researched the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generating facilities. The study utilized a model to simulate runoff from pre -and post -solar panel conditions. The study concluded that the solar panels themselves have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall losses, most notably infiltration, are not impacted by the solar panels. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. Refer to Exhibit 7 for the study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. Under developed conditions, runoff will follow existing drainage patterns and will not significantly increase peak flows (increases from 16.55 cfs to 16.97 cfs in the 100-year,1-hour storm event). 2. CONCLUSION The following list summarizes key components of the Project and findings related to land disturbance and storm water impacts. • Installation of the solar facility will temporarily disturb the ground surface within the 10.2 acre Project area, but won't require clearing and grubbing of vegetation or grading, except for concrete equipment pads and gravel access drive installations. • The areas considered impervious (100 percent impervious 1,374 sq ft concrete pads) or semi -impervious (40 percent impervious 16,165 sf gravel access drive) total 0.55 acres or 5.40% of the project area. This increase in imperviousness is negligible as it relates to total stormwater runoff for the planned solar development. • Under existing conditions, the peak flow from the site area for the 100 yr - 1 hr storm event is 16.55 cfs. • Under developed conditions, the peak flow from the site area for the 100 yr - 1 hr storm event is 16.97 cfs. • Installation of the solar facility is not expected to impact existing drainage patterns or flow rates on or around the project site. Runoff water quality will not be impacted by the solar facility components. • The project design will adequately protect public health, safety and general welfare and have no adverse effects on Weld County right-of-way or offsite properties. As noted above, a study published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering (Exhibit 7) researched the hydrologic impacts of utility scale solar generating facilities. The study utilized a model to simulate runoff from pre -development and post -development solar panel conditions. The study concluded that the solar panels themselves have little to no impact on runoff volumes or rates. Rainfall losses, most notably infiltration, are not impacted by the solar panels. Rainfall that falls directly on a solar panel runs to the pervious areas around and under the surrounding panels. Grading is proposed with minimal changes to the existing site drainage patterns and onsite access roads will be made of gravel. Based on the proposed improvements on the project site, the findings of the above referenced study, and the calculations included within this report, increases in runoff will be negligible. Therefore, permanent stormwater detention and water quality facilities are not proposed with the project. Antelope Hill 2 -Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 5 Kimley >) Horn We trust that the information provided is acceptable and complete for preliminary site plan review drainage report requirements. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information. KIMLEY-HORN LEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Adam Harrison, PE Project Manager Antelope Hill 2 — Weld County, CO April 2023 Page 6 Exhibit 1 — FEMA Firm Map National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette FEMA Legend 104°48'27"W 40°29'12"N 104°4750"W 40°28'45"N 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 Feet 1:6,000 SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V. A99 With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AN, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 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. Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zone x Effective LOM Rs Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D - Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer milli Levee, Dike, or Floodwall 20.2 Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 1765 Water Surface Elevation 8 - - - - Coastal Transect .� ,1 n Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary - - - - Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature 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 2/1/2023 at 12:57 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. Exhibit 2 — NRCS Report Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 4 4 40° 29' 5" N 400 28' 49" N 516540 I r 0 r— r C r r LV co 7- 7- O 516540 N ri 4 0 516600 516660 Soil Map may not be valid at th 516600 516660 f I I I I Map Scale: 1:2,380 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. 0 35 70 0 100 200 516720 516720 516780 516780 Meters 140 Feet 400 600 210 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84 516840 516840 516900 516900 �-I 8 40° 29' 5" N C 07) 4 40° 28' 49" N Natural Resources Web Soil Survey all Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 1 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AO!) Area of Interest (A01) ) Soils Soil Rating Polygons A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines 0 0 A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points II O O O A A/D B B/D C C/D D Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background ,; 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-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 21, Sep 1, 2022 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. ,b Natural Resources lain Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 4 Aquolls flooded and Aquepts, D 10.4 96.1% 32 Kim loam, slopes 1 to 3 percent A 0.2 2.2% 47 Olney fine 1 to 3 sandy percent loam, slopes B 0.2 1.7% Totals for Area of Interest 10.8 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long -duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, BID, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or CID), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. e Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie -break Rule: Higher e Natural Resources Web Soil Survey Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 2/1/2023 Page 4of4 Exhibit 3 — NOAA Rainfall Data NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Greeley, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 40.4829°, Longitude: -104.8024° Elevation: 4760 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES 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)1 Duration 5 -min J 10 -min J 15 -min 30 -min 60 -min 2 -hr 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day 60 -day Average recurrence interval (years) 1 1 0.242 (0.194-0.302) 0.354 (0.284-0.443) 0.432 (0.347-0.540) 0.581 (0.466-0.727) 0.721 (0.578-0.901) 1.01 (0.695-1.07) (0.819-1.26) 0.941 1.10 (0.763-1.16L0.894-1.36) (0.894-1.36) 1.08 � 1.28 (0.882-1.32) (1.05-1.57) 0.291 (0.233-0.365) 0.427 (0.342-0.534) 0.520 (0.417-0.651) 10.698 (0.559-0.873) 0.857 (0.686-1.07) 1.27 (1.04-1.54) 1.52 (1.26-1.83) 1.76 (1.47-2.09) 1.92 (1.61-2.28) 2.05 (1.72-2.41) 2.31 (1.95-2.71) 2.55 (2.16-2.98) 3.27 (2.80-3.78) 3.85 (3.30-4.43) 4.53 (3.90-5.17) 5.06 (4.37-5.76) 1.52 (1.25-1.84) 1.79 (1.48-2.15) 2.07 (1.72-2.46) 2.23 (1.87-2.65) 2.37 (1.99-2.80) 2.71 (2.29-3.18. 3.00 (2.55-3.51) ..] 3.81 (3.25-4.41) 4.44 3.80-5.11) 5.21 (4.48-5.96) 5.84 (5.04-6.66) 5 J 0.388 (0.310-0.487) 0.568 (0.453-0.713) 0.692 (0.553-0.869) 0.927 (0.740-1.16) 1.13 (0.905-1.42) 1.34 (1.08-1.67) 1.45 (1.17-1.79) 1.69 (1.37-2.08) 1.98 (1.62-2.41) 2.28 (1.88-2.75) r 2.62 (2.17-3.13) 10 0.483 (0.383-0.609) 0.707 (0.560-0.891) 0.862 (0.683-1.09) 1.15 (0.915-1.46) 25 0.635 (0.494-0.860) 0.930 (0.724-1.26) 1.13 (0.883-1.54) 1.52 1.18-2.06) 1.42 (1.12-1.78) 1.68 (1.34-2.10) 1.81 [(1.45-2.25) 2.10 (1.70-2.59) 2.43 (1.98-2.97) 2.74 (2.25-3.32) 3.12 (2.57-3.74) 2.79 ][ 3.29 (2.32-3.32) (2.73-3.94) 2.94 3.45 (2.46-3.48) 3.38 (2.84-3.98) 3.75 (3.17-4.39) 4.67 (3.97-5.42) 5.39 (4.60-6.21) 6.29 (5.39-7.22) 7.07 (6.08-8.08) 3.96 [(3.31-4.68) 4.38 (3.68-5.15) 5.38 (4.55-6.26) 6.15 (5.23-7.13) 7.16 (6.10-8.25) 8.04 (6.88-9.23) 1.88 (1.47-2.56) 2.24 (1.77-3.03) 2.42 (1.93-3.27) 2.78 (2.21-3.68) 3.13 (2.50-4.07) 3.47 (2.78-4.44) 3.87 (3.11-4.88) 4.06 (3.28-5.08) 4.23 3.42-5.27) 4.79 3.88-5.88) 5.26 (4.27-6.39) 6.33 (5.16-7.58) 7.18 (5.88-8.53) 8.31 6.83-9.79) 9.32 (7.68-10.9) 50 o.»01(0.579-1.05 1.13 0.848-1.54) 1.38 (1.03-1.88) 1.84 (1.39-2.52) 2.30 (1.73-3.14) 2.75 (2.09-3.73) 2.98 (2.28-4.04) 3.38 2.60-4.51) 3.74 2.89-4.90) 4.09 3.18-5.29) 4.50 3.52-5.74) 4.70 3.69-5.95) 4.87 (3.84-6.14) 5.46 I (4.32-6.78) 5.95 (4.71-7.32) 7.06 5.63-8.57) 100 0.920 (0.664-1.29) 1.35 (0.972-1.88) 1.64 (1.19-2.30) 2.21 (1.59-3.09) 2.76 (2.00-3.88) 3.32 I(2.42-4.62) 3.62 (2.66-5.01) 4.06 (3.00-5.55) 4.41 (3.28-5.93) 4.77 (3.57-6.33) 200 IF 500 1000 11.09 (0.748-1.56) 1.59 (1.10-2.29) 1.94 (1.34-2.79) 2.61 1.80-3.76) 3.29 (2.27-4.75) 3.98 (2.77-5.68) 4.35 (3.04-6.18 4.83 (3.40-6.77) 1.33 (0.876-1.97) 1.95 1.28-2.89) 2.38 (1.56-3.52) 3.21 (2.11-4.74) 1.54 (0.973-2.28) 2.25 (1.43-3.34) 2.75 (1.74-4.07) 3.70 (2.34-5.49) 4.08 (2.68-6.04) 4.95 (3.29-7.26) 5.43 (3.63-7.92) 5.96 [(4.02-8.57) 5.15 6.23 (3.66-7.11) (4.24-8.83) 5.52 II 6.60 (3.95-7.52) (4.53-9.24) 5.18 r 5.91 l� 6.95 (3.91-6.77) I (4.27-7.94) (4.81-9.59) 5.38 I. 6.12 (4.44-8.16) 5.56 (4.23-7.18) 6.15 (4.70-7.83) 6.64 (5.08-8.37) 7.77 (6.00-9.67) 7.96 8.71 (6.38-9.59) (6.76-10.8) 9.16 9.98 7.37-11.0) (7.78-12.2) 10.3 11.1 (8.28-12.2) (8.71-13.6) 7.17 (5.00-9.83) 6.31 I 7.36 (4.60-8.37) (5.15-10.0) 6.88 (5.03-8.99) 7.35 (5.40-9.52) 8.49 (6.29-10.8) 9.46 (7.04-12.0) 10.8 (8.07-13.6) 12.0 (9.02-15.0) 7.87 (5.54-10.6) C8.30 (5.86-11.1) 9.42 (6.72-12.4) 10.4 [(7.47-13.6) 11.8 (8.51-15.2) 13.1 (9.46-16.8) 4.73 (3.00-7.02) 5.76 (3.68-8.45) 6.34 (4.08-9.23) 6.90 (4.48-9.94) 7.11 (4.67-10.1) 7.49 (4.97-10.5) 7.79 (5.23-10.8) 8.02 (5.42-11.1) 8.21 (5.57-11.3) 8.65 (5.92-11.8) 9.02 (6.21-12.2) 10.1 (7.04-13.5) 11.1 (7.79-14.8) 12.5 (8.84-16.5) 13.8 (9.80-18.1) 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 PDS-based depth -duration -frequency (DDF) curves Latitude: 40A829O, Longitude: -104.8024° a 0 147, , - CL U- di CU C U- 14 12 10 8 14 12 10 C C 6 5 10 25 50 100 200 NOAA Atlas 14. Volume 8, Version 2 C Lel im r6 I th N Duration az _ 113 fa fri -a --a U rn'zr A 6 Average recurrence interval (years) O t ter- LO 500 1000 Created (GMT) : Mon Feb 6 20:00:12 2023 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5' 10 25 50 100 200 500 1 000 Duration 10 -mm 15 -min 3O -min 60 -min 2-t r -41r 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day. 45-r ay 50 -day 3km I 1 2mi Large scale terrain az !Tart tal Fri 4 — Irsri 0 t Large scale map Fi+rtUDI1i Is 100km I I 60mi Denver f Fort Collin:!; I ■eels+'' Lcinglic:rlt Boulder rti 60mi Denver fit 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 Exhibit 4 — Pre -Development Drainage Area Map SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. z U 0 a ce a z 0 >- >- 0 Q 0_ a 0 a 0 z a 0 N 0 D Q w 0 1 O in o I- N,- O N 00 N o N 0 - U - z �-i w L� Nft + Joo O 0_ _C 0 U z < LL 0 U0, hid �a 0_0 � �o- QN II- - CWT = Q U z <0 oz z 1 U x o z c- o _OPE W c� 0 N L-1 /Fir) O w O I- 1..1.. Uo /:_ o f 0z O 0 r w 0 I Z -- 0- V ct �o 0 o ,_ L- w 0 >a �Q O < UZ 7)a o ow ow co a -o Q O w • IE mZ -0 0 D o w a o w /0 ' 512 U ~ Iw z3 W U Do c. Isl Ul cL a z Y in < EzuL A 4%1°2! ow Lli C SEMI (25 CD No "A CC7) ,°\ (4.C) ° ,I\ O CNCNIC° rii O O rNj 4C 1 § (-) aj RI -IS LiJ ic ni- RI 1O `1>) DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED DATE: BY: 02/24/23 BY: BY: LDS LDS AJH NV co ce 2 > 0 O < IY D O o 0 ° < z >: O O 0 z 0_ ( , N i D ON. 00 'N.. ' 0 co 0 co . z Go O 0 a D O 0 12 Ase 0 C PR LIMINARY FOR CONSTRUCTION Kimley-Horn Wier)) NOT REVIEW and Associates, FOR ONLY orn Inc. PROJECT 196664000 NO. DRAWING NAME X-4 1 479-- 1 4768 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LP 2 74 - 760' 1 1 1 1 1 7 iamb sum N°' 0.26% u v i 1 76 - •/1759) kt ti I \I i i Z / / OOP 7 N 1 0 \, V \ \� \\ 1 \ NN N N N N NN N N I \ \A\-\ \\ \k N N N N ame— N N • N N N N NN N N \\\ N \ I ' , \ \\\ N N \ ' \\\\ 1 \ \ \ \ I \ " \, ' / / I • • N 7 • GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 40 80 160 LEGEND OH 700 X.XX% PROPERTY BOUNDARY PRE CONDITIONS SUB -BASIN EX. EASEMENT EX. SITE SETBACK EX. UNDERGROUND GAS LINE EX. UNDERGROUND WATER LINE EX. BARB WIRE FENCE EX. OVERHEAD WIRE EX. UTILITY POLE EX. FLOW PATH EX. CONTOURS EX. GRAVEL ROAD EX. SLOPE LABEL SUB -BASIN IDENTIFICATION IMPERVIOUSNESS DRAINAGE AREA (ACRES) DESIGN POINT NOTES 1. THIS DRAINAGE MAP AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IN ASSOCIATION WITH CLOUDBREAK ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC. DRAINAGE NARRATIVE AND USE BY THE SPECIAL REVIEW PLANS. 2. WITH REFERENCE TO THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEM A) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP(FIRM), MAP NUMBER 08123C1510E, THERE ARE NO FLOODPLAINS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT SITE. OLGRADO Exhibit 5 — Post -Development Drainage Area Map U SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, U z Q 0 a z Q O w J m 0 Q I — a. Q 0 0 a z 0 p Q O D Q zw F I— C O N § 1.13 w NOD N O 00 Nz ictL\o U Z Q J U U ac O V J O 0 =a w �O neri ,w GOP o� CL< IE �o- QN II- w - 0 Q 2 z QLL oZ IJ LCD U X 0 %Q mw lb PE X L' 0 N wv) / aw Oj- < Co U -i O° r 0 Z z U - o L.J scI ('y / V � .O O O o_ 0 I- z w 2 U) �Q O cn UZ o= o ow ow co /z av) w m V -O 0 O w a o w W •5 o U Iw z� W0 00 /v, c. Isl 0 cii IJJ Et a z , t: L(Lif2j Lli C IINIM (25 CD NO "1/44 2 (4.C) CICC\1°\I ° ,i\ O ,I\ 0 rr) 0 >%4 1 r3 CN1 .C I- CU1: CCN) P-) LJ Tij II: CD ni- RI 1O T DESIGNED BY: LDS DRAWN BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH DATE: 04/27/23 CL < 2 < i: CO O 0 0 < < 0 D z > e„C 1/4..) < 0 ct Lt 0 O 0 Z < (a) >:. 00 ' Z O 0_ C\1DWD O rr >,_ . U O cc) (in 0 a z 0 O w D O CD C CL OA-• CC( PR LIMINARY FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Kinty* orn Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. PROJECT NO. 196664000 DRAWING NAME X-5 ♦ • WM- NNW ♦ • MEW NMI NEIN' NM MINI• SEW a 1476 %4-76 I I 1 I J i 1 0 477 I I I 1 1 Sas 1 DA -01 \9:90 1 1 1 4.1% i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 MIME X ^clo o sro 1 I i ♦ • • i \� N N 1 0 l < < K MMI NN \ID o \N N N N \\\k �, \\ \\ N N N / fl44 / GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 40 80 160 LEGEND OH 700 DIM tZnnnnnnZn•A PROPERTY BOUNDARY PRE CONDITIONS SUB -BASIN EX. EASEMENT EX. SITE SETBACK EX. UNDERGROUND GAS LINE EX. UNDERGROUND WATER LINE EX. BARB WIRE FENCE EX. OVERHEAD WIRE EX. UTILITY POLE SOLAR GARDEN PERIMETER FENCE (CHAIN LINK) SOLAR PANEL ARRAY PR. FLOW PATH EX. CONTOURS EX. SLOPE LABEL EX. GRAVEL ROAD ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT PADS UTILITY POLE PROPOSED PERMANENT 8c TEMPORARY TRAILERS PROPOSED 20' GRAVEL ACCESS DRIVEWAY PROPOSED SUB -BASIN IDENTIFICATION IMPERVIOUSNESS DRAINAGE AREA (ACRES) DESIGN POINT NOTES 1. THIS DRAINAGE MAP AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IN ASSOCIATION WITH CLOUDBREAK ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC. DRAINAGE NARRATIVE AND USE BY THE SPECIAL REVIEW PLANS. 2. WITH REFERENCE TO THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP(FIRM), MAP NUMBER 08123C1510E, THERE ARE NO FLOODPLAINS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT SITE. Exhibit 6 — Hydrologic Calculations & Detention/WQCV Calculations Kimley>>> Horn STANDARD FORM SF -1 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS - IMPERVIOUS CALCULATION - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 2/24/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH PAVED GRAVEL TYPE VEGETATED OPEN D SPACE SOIL BUILDING ROOF COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE: AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA 2 -YEAR COEFF. 0.83 0.30 _ 0.01 0.74 0.69 5 -YEAR COEFF. 0.84 0.36 0.05 0.76 0.72 100 -YEAR COEFF. 0.89 0.65 0.49 0.85 0.83 IMPERVIOUS % 100% 40% 2% 90% 85% VEGETATED BUILDING FUTURE Imp % DESIGN DESIGN PAVED AREA GRAVEL AREA OPEN AREA SPACE ROOF AREA COMMERCIAL AREA TOTAL AREA BASIN POINT (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) Cc(2) Cc(5) Cc(100) On -Site Basins PRE -DA -01 1 0.13 9.77 9.90 0.01 0.06 0.49 2.5% PRE -DA -02 2 0.05 0.22 0.26 0.06 0.10 0.52 8.7% SUBTOTAL BASIN 0.00 0.18 9.99 0.00 0.00 10.17 0.02 0.06 0.49 2.7% 0% 2% 98% 0% 0% 100% Kimley>>> Horn STANDARD FORM SF -2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PROJECT NAME: NUMBER: 196664000 Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 DATE: 2/24/2023 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH SUB -BASIN INITIAL TRAVEL TIME Tc CHECK FINAL DATA TIME (T1) (Ti) (URBANIZED BASINS) Tc DESIGN BASIN AREA Ac (2) SLOPE % (5) SLOPE % (8) C, (9) Land Surface VEL fps (11) Tc Min. (17) Min. C2 C5 C100 C5 (3) LENGTH (4) Ft T1 Min. (6) LENGTH Ft. (7) Min. (12) Tt COMP. tc (13) TOTAL TOTAL SLOPE TOTAL IMP. (10) LENGTH (1) (14) (15) (16) On -Site Basins PRE -DA -01 9.904 0.06 500 1.9% 34.5 871 0.9% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.5 31.1 65.6 1371 1.3% 3% 47.4 47.4 0.01 0.06 0.49 PRE -DA -02 0.264 0.10 384 1.3% 32.8 Tillage/Field 32.8 384 1.3% 9% 30.0 30.0 0.06 0.10 0.52 Lt Lt Li 03950 —C} ,1 ' _ = _ : -17� + . � r 0.33 60.E 0 4 S. .i 1 � a STANDARD Kimle>>>Hvrn FORM SF -3 l STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN - RATIONAL METHOD 100 YEAR EVENT - PRE -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 DATE: 2/24/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 Pi (1 -Hour Rainfall) . 2.76 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH o...., � STREET REMARKS DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF PIPE TRAVEL TIME C*A(ac) tc(max) LtEET )W(cfs �� O Wo s w c w „..., ..., F -- ;rn „0, ,.., , r:„ , . ,... LTG (ft) svi ��°w a� o ff4 .se: oQ � c�� 01 I oQfr Ate u �,w4 c ` (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) On -Site Basins 1 PRE -DA -01 9.90 0.49 47.41 4.90 3.26 15.96 2 PRE -DA -02 0.26 0.52 30.04 0.14 4.33 0.59 Total 10.17 16.55 Kimlev>>)Horn_ STANDARD FORM SF 1 RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS - IMPERVIOUS CALCULATION - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 4/27/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH TYPE D SOIL VEGETATED BUILDING FUTURE LAND PAVED GRAVEL OPEN USE: AREA AREA AREA SPACE ROOF COMMERCIAL AREA AREA 2 -YEAR COEFF. 0.83 0.30 0.01 0.74 0.69 5 -YEAR COEFF. 0.84 0.36 0.05 0.76 0.72 100 -YEAR COEFF. 0.89 0.65 0.49 0.85 0.83 IMPERVIOUS % 100% 40% 2% 90% 85% DESIGN BASIN Cc(2) Cc(5) Cc(100) Imp % VEGETATED BUILDING FUTURE PAVED GRAVEL OPEN SPACE ROOF COMMERCIAL TOTAL DESIGN AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA POINT (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) (AC) On -Site Basins POST -DA -01 1 0.03 0.48 9.40 9.90 0.03 0.07 0.50 4.1% 2 0.07 0.19 0.26 0.09 0.13 0.53 12.4% POST -DA -02 BASIN 0.03 0.55 9.59 0.00 0.00 10.17 0.03 0.07 0.50 4.4% SUBTOTAL 0% 5% 94% 0% 0% 100% K. om STANDARD FORM SF -2 TIME OF CONCENTRATION - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 DATE: 4/27/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH INITIAL Te CHECK SUB -BASIN DATA TRAVEL TIME FINAL (Ti) (URBANIZED BASINS) Te TIME (Ti) DESIGN AREA Ac (2) CS (3) SLOPE Ti Min. (6) SLOPE C,, (9) Land Surface Min. (12) Tt COMP. (13) to TOTAL TOTAL Min. (17) Te Min. C2 C5 C100 LENGTH LENGTH VEL TOTAL BASIN Ft (4) % (5) Ft. (7) % (8) (10) fps (11) LENGTH (14) SLOPE (15) IMP. (16) (1) On -Site Basins POST -DA -01 9.904 0.07 500 1.9% 34.0 871 0.5 31.1 65.2 1371 1.3% 4% 46.6 46.6 0.03 0.07 0.50 0.9% 5.0 Tillage/Field 0.264 0.13 384 1.3% 31.9 Tillage/Field 31.9 384 1.3% 12% 29.1 29.1 0.09 0.13 0.53 POST -DA -02 0.39 1.1- 1 1 r C.'5 - 170+ - 1"x=(26- 1 = t s 60.,x' ';, 6OV 60044 +9) L' STANDARD FORM SF -3 Kimle >>> Horn STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN - RATIONAL METHOD 100 YEAR EVENT - POST -CONSTRUCTION PROJECT NAME: Weld County - Cloudbreak - Antelope Hill 2 DATE: 4/27/2023 PROJECT NUMBER: 196664000 P1 (1 -Hour Rainfall) = 2.76 CALCULATED BY: LDS CHECKED BY: AJH W TRAVEL TIME REMARKS DIRECT RUNOFF TOTAL RUNOFF STREET PIPE (urtu) z) ^ ,-, ^ �, © a �. W '� p )W (ci N DC ''' ^ ,-, ^ I( [N ,-. c a � )E o ci) Sl LS za �' oo � 5 a �� A .4 w oo cip � W cip � IV ci) %.... t-' ct :41 (1) I (2) I (3) I (4) I (5) I (6) I (7) I (8) I (9) 1(10)1 (11) 1(12)1 (13) I (14) 1(15)1 (16) (17) 1(18)1 (19) 1 (20) (21) (22) On -Site Basins 1 POST -DA -01 9.90 0.50 46.61 4.96 3.30 16.35 2 POST -DA -02 0.26 0.53 29.14 0.14 4.41 0.62 I I I Total 110.17 I I I I 116.97 I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit 7 — Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Hydrologic Response of Solar Farms Lauren M. Cook, S.M.ASCE1; and Richard H. McCuen, M.ASCE2 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. Abstract: Because of the benefits of solar energy, the number of solar farms is increasing; however, their hydrologic impacts have not been studied. The goal of this study was to determine the hydrologic effects of solar farms and examine whether or not storm -water management is needed to control runoff volumes and rates. A model of a solar farm was used to simulate runoff for two conditions: the pre- and postpaneled conditions. Using sensitivity analyses, modeling showed that the solar panels themselves did not have a significant effect on the runoff volumes, peaks, or times to peak. However, if the ground cover under the panels is gravel or bare ground, owing to design decisions or lack of maintenance, the peak discharge may increase significantly with storm -water management needed. In addition, the kinetic energy of the flow that drains from the panels was found to be greater than that of the rainfall, which could cause erosion at the base of the panels. Thus, it is recommended that the grass beneath the panels be well maintained or that a buffer strip be placed after the most downgradient row of panels. This study, along with design recommendations, can be used as a guide for the future design of solar farms. DOE 10.1061/(ASCE) HE.1943-5584.0000530. © 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers. CE Database subject headings: Hydrology; Land use; Solar power; Floods; Surface water; Runoff; Stormwater management. Author keywords: Hydrology; Land use change; Solar energy; Flooding; Surface water runoff; Storm -water management. Introduction Storm -water management practices are generally implemented to reverse the effects of land -cover changes that cause increases in volumes and rates of runoff. This is a concern posed for new types of land -cover change such as the solar farm. Solar energy is a re- newable energy source that is expected to increase in importance in the near future. Because solar farms require considerable land, it is necessary to understand the design of solar farms and their potential effect on erosion rates and storm runoff, especially the impact on offsite properties and receiving streams. These farms can vary in size from 8 ha (20 acres) in residential areas to 250 ha (600 acres) in areas where land is abundant. The solar panels are impervious to rain water; however, they are mounted on metal rods and placed over pervious land. In some cases, the area below the panel is paved or covered with gravel. Service roads are generally located between rows of panels. Altl- hough some panels are stationary, others are designed to move so that the angle of the panel varies with the angle of the sun. The angle can range, depending on the latitude, from 22° during the summer months to 74° during the winter months. In addition, the angle and direction can also change throughout the day. The issue posed is whether or not these rows of impervious panels will change the runoff characteristics of the site, specifically increase runoff volumes or peak discharge rates. If the increases are hydro- logically significant, storm -water management facilities may be needed. Additionally, it is possible that the velocity of water 1Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-3021. 2The Ben Dyer Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineer- ing, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-3021 (corresponding author). E-mail: rhmccuen@eng.umd.edu Note. This manuscript was submitted on August 12, 2010; approved on October 20, 2011; published online on October 24, 2011. Discussion period open until October 1, 2013; separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydrologic Engi- neering, Vol. 18, No. 5, May 1, 2013. © ASCE, ISSN 1084-069912013/5- 536-541/$25.00. draining from the edge of the panels is sufficient to cause erosion of the soil below the panels, especially where the maintenance roadways are bare ground. The outcome of this study provides guidance for assessing the hydrologic effects of solar farms, which is important to those who plan, design, and install arrays of solar panels. Those who design solar farms may need to provide for storm -water management. This study investigated the hydrologic effects of solar farms, assessed whether or not storm -water management might be needed, and if the velocity of the runoff from the panels could be sufficient to cause erosion of the soil below the panels. Model Development Solar farms are generally designed to maximize the amount of en- ergy produced per unit of land area, while still allowing space for maintenance. The hydrologic response of solar farms is not usually considered in design. Typically, the panels will be arrayed in long rows with separations between the rows to allow for maintenance vehicles. To model a typical layout, a unit width of one panel was assumed, with the length of the downgradient strip depending on the size of the farm. For example, a solar farm with 30 rows of 200 panels each could be modeled as a strip of 30 panels with space between the panels for maintenance vehicles. Rainwater that drains from the upper panel onto the ground will flow over the land under the 29 panels on the downgradient strip. Depending on the land cover, infiltration losses would be expected as the runoff flows to the bottom of the slope. To determine the effects that the solar panels have on runoff characteristics, a model of a solar farm was developed. Runoff in the form of sheet flow without the addition of the solar panels served as the prepaneled condition. The paneled condition assumed a downgradient series of cells with one solar panel per ground cell. Each cell was separated into three sections: wet, dry, and spacer. The dry section is that portion directly underneath the solar panel, unexposed directly to the rainfall. As the angle of the panel from the horizontal increases, more of the rain will fall directly onto 536 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. the ground; this section of the cell is referred to as the wet section. The spacer section is the area between the rows of panels used by maintenance vehicles. Fig. 1 is an image of two solar panels and the spacer section allotted for maintenance vehicles. Fig. 2 is a sche- matic of the wet, dry, and spacer sections with their respective di- mensions. In Fig. 1, tracks from the vehicles are visible on what is modeled within as the spacer section. When the solar panel is hori- zontal, then the length longitudinal to the direction that runoff will occur is the length of the dry and wet sections combined. Runoff from a dry section drains onto the downgradient spacer section. Runoff from the spacer section flows to the wet section of the next downgradient cell. Water that drains from a solar panel falls directly onto the spacer section of that cell. The length of the spacer section is constant. During a storm event, the loss rate was assumed constant for the 24-h storm be- cause a wet antecedent condition was assumed. The lengths of the wet and dry sections changed depending on the angle of the solar panel. The total length of the wet and dry sections was set Fig. 1. Maintenance or "spacer" section between two rows of solar panels (photo by John E. Showler, reprinted with permission) Ld Direction of Flow Wet section Dry section Spacer section 5 m 3.5 m Fig. 2. Wet, dry, and spacer sections of a single cell with lengths Lw, Ls, and Ld with the solar panel covering the dry section equal to the length of one horizontal solar panel, which was as- sumed to be 3.5 m. When a solar panel is horizontal, the dry section length would equal 3.5 m and the wet section length would be zero. In the paneled condition, the dry section does not receive direct rainfall because the rain first falls onto the solar panel then drains onto the spacer section. However, the dry section does infiltrate some of the runoff that comes from the upgradient wet section. The wet section was modeled similar to the spacer section with rain falling directly onto the section and assuming a constant loss rate. For the presolar panel condition, the spacer and wet sections are modeled the same as in the paneled condition; however, the cell does not include a dry section. In the prepaneled condition, rain falls directly onto the entire cell. When modeling the prepaneled condition, all cells receive rainfall at the same rate and are subject to losses. All other conditions were assumed to remain the same such that the prepaneled and paneled conditions can be compared. Rainfall was modeled after an natural resources conservation service (NRCS) Type II Storm (McCuen 2005) because it is an ac- curate representation of actual storms of varying characteristics that are imbedded in intensity -duration -frequency (IDF) curves. For each duration of interest, a dimensionless hyetograph was devel- oped using a time increment of 12 s over the duration of the storm (see Fig. 3). The depth of rainfall that corresponds to each storm magnitude was then multiplied by the dimensionless hyetograph. For a 2-h storm duration, depths of 40.6, 76.2, and 101.6 mm were used for the 2-, 25-, and 100 -year events. The 2- and 6-h duration hyetographs were developed using the center portion of the 24-h storm, with the rainfall depths established with the Baltimore IDF curve. The corresponding depths for a 6-h duration were 53.3, 106.7, and 132.1 mm, respectively. These magnitudes were chosen to give a range of storm conditions. During each time increment, the depth of rain is multiplied by the cell area to determine the volume of rain added to each section of each cell. This volume becomes the storage in each cell. Depend- ing on the soil group, a constant volume of losses was subtracted from the storage. The runoff velocity from a solar panel was calcu- lated using Manning's equation, with the hydraulic radius for sheet flow assumed to equal the depth of the storage on the panel (Bedient and Huber 2002). Similar assumptions were made to com- pute the velocities in each section of the surface sections. 20 40 60 Time (min) 80 100 120 Fig. 3. Dimensionless hyetograph of 2-h Type II storm JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 537 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. Runoff from one section to the next and then to the next downgradient cell was routed using the continuity of mass. The routing coefficient depended on the depth of flow in storage and the velocity of runoff. Flow was routed from the wet section to the dry section to the spacer section, with flow from the spacer section draining to the wet section of the next cell. Flow from the most downgradient cell was assumed to be the outflow. Discharge rates and volumes from the most downgradient cell were used for com- parisons between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. Alternative Model Scenarios To assess the effects of the different variables, a section of 30 cells, each with a solar panel, was assumed for the base model. Each cell was separated individually into wet, dry, and spacer sections. The area had a total ground length of 225 m with a ground slope of 1% and width of 5 m, which was the width of an average solar panel. The roughness coefficient (Engman 1986) for the silicon solar panel was assumed to be that of glass, 0.01. Roughness coefficients of 0.15 for grass and 0.02 for bare ground were also assumed. Loss rates of 0.5715 cm/h (0.225 in./h) and 0.254 cm/h (0.1 in./h) for B and C soils, respectively, were assumed. The prepaneled condition using the 2-h, 25 -year rainfall was assumed for the base condition, with each cell assumed to have a good grass cover condition. All other analyses were made assum- ing a paneled condition. For most scenarios, the runoff volumes and peak discharge rates from the paneled model were not significantly greater than those for the prepaneled condition. Over a total length of 225 m with 30 solar panels, the runoff increased by 0.26 m3, which was a difference of only 0.35%. The slight increase in runoff volume reflects the slightly higher velocities for the paneled con- dition. The peak discharge increased by 0.0013 m3, a change of only 0.31%. The time to peak was delayed by one time increment, i.e., 12 s. Inclusion of the panels did not have a significant hydro- logic impact. Storm Magnitude The effect of storm magnitude was investigated by changing the magnitude from a 25 -year storm to a 2 -year storm. For the 2 -year storm, the rainfall and runoff volumes decreased by approximately 50%. However, the runoff from the paneled watershed condition increased compared to the prepaneled condition by approximately the same volume as for the 25 -year analysis, 0.26 m3. This increase represents only a 0.78% increase in volume. The peak discharge and the time to peak did not change significantly. These results re- flect runoff from a good grass cover condition and indicated that the general conclusion of very minimal impacts was the same for dif- ferent storm magnitudes. Ground Slope The effect of the downgradient ground slope of the solar farm was also examined. The angle of the solar panels would influence the velocity of flows from the panels. As the ground slope was in- creased, the velocity of flow over the ground surface would be closer to that on the panels. This could cause an overall increase in discharge rates. The ground slope was changed from 1 to 5%, with all other conditions remaining the same as the base conditions. With the steeper incline, the volume of losses decreased from that for the 1% slope, which is to be expected because the faster velocity of the runoff would provide less opportunity for infiltra- tion. However, between the prepaneled and paneled conditions, the increase in runoff volume was less than 1%. The peak discharge and the time to peak did not change. Therefore, the greater ground slope did not significantly influence the response of the solar farm. Soil Type The effect of soil type on the runoff was also examined. The soil group was changed from B soil to C soil by varying the loss rate. As expected, owing to the higher loss rate for the C soil, the depths of runoff increased by approximately 7.5% with the C soil when com- pared with the volume for B soils. However, the runoff volume for the C soil condition only increased by 0.17% from the prepaneled condition to the paneled condition. In comparison with the B soil, a difference of 0.35% in volume resulted between the two conditions. Therefore, the soil group influenced the actual volumes and rates, but not the relative effect of the paneled condition when compared to the prepaneled condition. Panel Angle Because runoff velocities increase with slope, the effect of the angle of the solar panel on the hydrologic response was examined. Analy- ses were made for angles of 30° and 70° to test an average range from winter to summer. The hydrologic response for these angles was compared to that of the base condition angle of 45°. The other site conditions remained the same. The analyses showed that the angle of the panel had only a slight effect on runoff volumes and discharge rates. The lower angle of 30° was associated with an in- creased runoff volume, whereas the runoff volume decreased for the steeper angle of 70° when compared with the base condition of 45°. However, the differences (-0.5%) were very slight. Never- theless, these results indicate that, when the solar panel was closer to horizontal, i.e., at a lower angle, a larger difference in runoff volume occurred between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. These differences in the response result are from differences in loss rates. The peak discharge was also lower at the lower angle. At an angle of 30°, the peak discharge was slightly lower than at the higher angle of 70°. For the 2-h storm duration, the time to peak of the 30° angle was 2 min delayed from the time to peak of when the panel was positioned at a 70° angle, which reflects the longer travel times across the solar panels. Storm Duration To assess the effect of storm duration, analyses were made for 6-h storms, testing magnitudes for 2-, 25-, and 100 -year return periods, with the results compared with those for the 2-h rainfall events. The longer storm duration was tested to determine whether a longer du- ration storm would produce a different ratio of increase in runoff between the prepaneled and paneled conditions. When compared to runoff volumes from the 2-h storm, those for the 6-h storm were 34% greater in both the paneled and prepaneled cases. However, when comparing the prepaneled to the paneled condition, the in- crease in the runoff volume with the 6-h storm was less than 1% regardless of the return period. The peak discharge and the time -to -peak did not differ significantly between the two condi- tions. The trends in the hydrologic response of the solar farm did not vary with storm duration. Ground Cover The ground cover under the panels was assumed to be a native grass that received little maintenance. For some solar farms, the area be- neath the panel is covered in gravel or partially paved because the panels prevent the grass from receiving sunlight. Depending on the 538 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. volume of traffic, the spacer cell could be grass, patches of grass, or bare ground. Thus, it was necessary to determine whether or not these alternative ground -cover conditions would affect the runoff characteristics. This was accomplished by changing the Manning's n for the ground beneath the panels. The value of n under the pan- els, i.e., the dry section, was set to 0.015 for gravel, with the value for the spacer or maintenance section set to 0.02, i.e., bare ground. These can be compared to the base condition of a native grass (n = 0.15). A good cover should promote losses and delay the runoff. For the smoother surfaces, the velocity of the runoff increased and the losses decreased, which resulted in increasing runoff vol- umes. This occurred both when the ground cover under the panels was changed to gravel and when the cover in the spacer section was changed to bare ground. Owing to the higher velocities of the flow, runoff rates from the cells increased significantly such that it was necessary to reduce the computational time increment. Fig. 4(a) shows the hydrograph from a 30 -panel area with a time incre- ment of 12 s. With a time increment of 12 s, the water in each cell is discharged at the end of every time increment, which results in no attenuation of the flow; thus, the undulations shown in Fig. 4(a) result. The time increment was reduced to 3 s for the 2-h storm, which resulted in watershed smoothing and a rational hydrograph shape [Fig. 4(b)] . The results showed that the storm runoff 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 coE 0.06 0 0.05 co 0 0.04 0.03 (a) 0.02 0.01 0 0.07 0.06 0.05 U) 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Time (min) 0 _ 0 (b) I Paneled Pre -paneled 4 - alb NC IS 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Time (min) 180 200 Fig. 4. Hydrograph with time increment of (a) 12 s; (b) 3 s with Manning's n for bare ground increased by 7% from the grass -covered scenario to the scenario with gravel under the panel. The peak discharge increased by 73% for the gravel ground cover when compared with the grass cover without the panels. The time to peak was 10 min less with the gravel than with the grass, which reflects the effect of differ- ences in surface roughness and the resulting velocities. If maintenance vehicles used the spacer section regularly and the grass cover was not adequately maintained, the soil in the spacer section would be compacted and potentially the runoff volumes and rates would increase. Grass that is not maintained has the potential to become patchy and turn to bare ground. The grass under the panel may not get enough sunlight and die. Fig. 1 shows the result of the maintenance trucks frequently driving in the spacer section, which diminished the grass cover. The effect of the lack of solar farm maintenance on runoff char- acteristics was modeled by changing the Manning's n to a value of 0.02 for bare ground. In this scenario, the roughness coefficient for the ground under the panels, i.e., the dry section, as well as in the spacer cell was changed from grass covered to bare ground (n = 0.02).The effects were nearly identical to that of the gravel. The runoff volume increased by 7% from the grass -covered to the bare -ground condition. The peak discharge increased by 72% when compared with the grass -covered condition. The runoff for the bare - ground condition also resulted in an earlier time to peak by approx- imately 10 min. Two other conditions were also modeled, showing similar results. In the first scenario, gravel was placed directly under the panel, and healthy grass was placed in the spacer section, which mimics a possible design decision. Under these conditions, the peak discharge increased by 42%, and the volume of runoff increased by 4%, which suggests that storm -water management would be necessary if gravel is placed anywhere. Fig. 5 shows two solar panels from a solar farm in New Jersey. The bare ground between the panels can cause increased runoff rates and reductions in time of concentration, both of which could necessitate storm -water management. The final condition modeled involved the assumption of healthy grass beneath the panels and bare ground in the spacer section, which would simulate the con- dition of unmaintained grass resulting from vehicles that drive over the spacer section. Because the spacer section is 53% of the cell, the change in land cover to bare ground would reduce losses and de- crease runoff travel times, which would cause runoff to amass as it Fig. 5. Site showing the initiation of bare ground below the panels, which increases the potential for erosion (photo by John Showler, reprinted with permission) JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 539 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. moves downgradient. With the spacer section as bare ground, the peak discharge increased by 100%, which reflected the increases in volume and decrease in timing. These results illustrate the need for maintenance of the grass below and between the panels. Design Suggestions With well -maintained grass underneath the panels, the solar panels themselves do not have much effect on total volumes of the runoff or peak discharge rates. Although the panels are impervious, the rainwater that drains from the panels appears as runoff over the downgradient cells. Some of the runoff infiltrates. If the grass cover of a solar farm is not maintained, it can deteriorate either because of a lack of sunlight or maintenance vehicle traffic. In this case, the runoff characteristics can change significantly with both runoff rates and volumes increasing by significant amounts. In addition, if gravel or pavement is placed underneath the panels, this can also contribute to a significant increase in the hydrologic response. If bare ground is foreseen to be a problem or gravel is to be placed under the panels to prevent erosion, it is necessary to counteract the excess runoff using some form of storm -water man- agement. A simple practice that can be implemented is a buffer strip (Dabney et al. 2006) at the downgradient end of the solar farm. The buffer strip length must be sufficient to return the runoff character- istics with the panels to those of runoff experienced before the gravel and panels were installed. Alternatively, a detention basin can be installed. A buffer strip was modeled along with the panels. For approxi- mately every 200 m of panels, or 29 cells, the buffer must be 5 cells long (or 35 m) to reduce the runoff volume to that which occurred before the panels were added. Even if a gravel base is not placed under the panels, the inclusion of a buffer strip may be a good prac- tice when grass maintenance is not a top funding priority. Fig. 6 shows the peak discharge from the graveled surface versus the length of the buffer needed to keep the discharge to prepaneled peak rate. Water draining from a solar panel can increase the potential for erosion of the spacer section. If the spacer section is bare ground, the high kinetic energy of water draining from the panel can cause soil detachment and transport (Garde and Raju 1977; Beuselinck et al. 2002). The amount and risk of erosion was modeled using the velocity of water coming off a solar panel compared with the velocity and intensity of the rainwater. The velocity of panel 0.07 0.06 0.05 M 0.04 0 11 0.03 o_ 0.02 0.01 5 10 15 20 25 Length of buffer (m) Pre -paneled peak Q Peak Q vs. buffer length - 30 35 40 Fig. 6. Peak discharge over gravel compared with buffer length runoff was calculated using Manning's equation, and the velocity of falling rainwater was calculated using the following: Vt = 120 d).35 (1) where d,. = diameter of a raindrop, assumed to be 1 mm. The re- lationship between kinetic energy and rainfall intensity is Ke = 916 + 3301og10 i (2) where i = rainfall intensity (in./h) and Ke = kinetic energy (ft -tons per ac -in. of rain) of rain falling onto the wet section and the panel, as well as the water flowing off of the end of the panel (Wischmeier and Smith 1978). The kinetic energy (Salles et al. 2002) of the rain- fall was greater than that coming off the panel, but the area under the panel (i.e., the product of the length, width, and cosine of the panel angle) is greater than the area under the edge of the panel where the water drains from the panel onto the ground. Thus, dividing the kinetic energy by the respective areas gives a more accurate representation of the kinetic energy experienced by the soil. The energy of the water draining from the panel onto the ground can be nearly 10 times greater than the rain itself falling onto the ground area. If the solar panel runoff falls onto an un- sealed soil, considerable detachment can result (Motha et al. 2004). Thus, because of the increased kinetic energy, it is pos- sible that the soil is much more prone to erosion with the panels than without. Where panels are installed, methods of erosion control should be included in the design. Conclusions Solar farms are the energy generators of the future; thus, it is im- portant to determine the environmental and hydrologic effects of these farms, both existing and proposed. A model was created to simulate storm -water runoff over a land surface without panels and then with solar panels added. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted including changing the storm duration and volume, soil type, ground slope, panel angle, and ground cover to determine the effect that each of these factors would have on the volumes and peak discharge rates of the runoff. The addition of solar panels over a grassy field does not have much of an effect on the volume of runoff, the peak discharge, nor the time to peak. With each analysis, the runoff volume increased slightly but not enough to require storm -water management facili- ties. However, when the land -cover type was changed under the panels, the hydrologic response changed significantly. When gravel or pavement was placed under the panels, with the spacer section left as patchy grass or bare ground, the volume of the runoff in- creased significantly and the peak discharge increased by approx- imately 100%. This was also the result when the entire cell was assumed to be bare ground. The potential for erosion of the soil at the base of the solar pan- els was also studied. It was determined that the kinetic energy of the water draining from the solar panel could be as much as 10 times greater than that of rainfall. Thus, because the energy of the water draining from the panels is much higher, it is very possible that soil below the base of the solar panel could erode owing to the concen- trated flow of water off the panel, especially if there is bare ground in the spacer section of the cell. If necessary, erosion control meth- ods should be used. Bare ground beneath the panels and in the spacer section is a realistic possibility (see Figs. 1 and 5). Thus, a good, well - maintained grass cover beneath the panels and in the spacer section is highly recommended. If gravel, pavement, or bare ground is 540 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University Of Massachusetts Amherst on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved. deemed unavoidable below the panels or in the spacer section, it may necessary to add a buffer section to control the excess runoff volume and ensure adequate losses. If these simple measures are taken, solar farms will not have an adverse hydrologic impact from excess runoff or contribute eroded soil particles to receiving streams and waterways. Acknowledgments The authors appreciate the photographs (Figs. 1 and 5) of Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, 1001 Route 202, North Raritan, New Jersey, 08869, provided by John E. Showler, Environmental Scientist, New Jersey Department of Agriculture. The extensive comments of reviewers resulted in an improved paper. References Bedient, P. B., and Huber, W. C. (2002). Hydrology and,floodplain analy- sis, Prentice -Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Beuselinck, L., Govers, G., Hairsince, P. B., Sander, G. C., and Breynaert, M. (2002). "The influence of rainfall on sediment transport by overland flow over areas of net deposition." J. Hydrol., 257(1-4), 145-163. Dabney, S. M., Moore, M. T., and Locke, M. A. (2006). "Integrated man- agement of in -field, edge -of -field, and after -field buffers." J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 42(1), 15-24. Engman, E. T. (1986). "Roughness coefficients for routing surface runoff." J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 112(1), 39-53. Garde, R. J., and Raju, K. G. (1977). Mechanics of sediment transportation and alluvial stream problems, Wiley, New York. McCuen, R. H. (2005). Hydrologic analysis and design, 3rd Ed., Pearson/ Prentice -Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Motha, J. A., Wallbrink, P. J., Hairsine, P. B., and Grayson, R. B. (2004). "Unsealed roads as suspended sediment sources in agricultural catch- ment in south-eastern Australia." J. Hydrol., 286(1-4), 1-18. Salles, C., Poesen, J., and Sempere-Torres, D. (2002). "Kinetic energy of rain and its functional relationship with intensity." J. Hydrol., 257(1-4), 256-270. Wischmeier, W. H., and Smith, D. D. (1978). Predicting rainfall erosion losses: A guide to conservation planning, USDA Handbook 537, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 541 J. Hydrol. Eng. 2013.18:536-541. CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Dust Abatement Plan The purpose and intent of this Dust Abatement Plan is to ensure that the Project complies with applicable state and federal air quality standards. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets forth the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQs) pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Air quality impacts associated with construction projects generally arise from fugitive dust generation during the operation of heavy equipment. Colorado administers the NAAQS through issuance of the Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN). The Project will not exceed the NAAQS and will follow best management practices to ensure that the production of dust will be controlled by the regular application of water to the Project. The Project will obtain an APEN permit prior to construction. Minimal dust is expected to be generated during construction and operations due to the planned use of dust suppression best management practices and soil stabilization following construction and throughout operations. During construction, CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC and their contractors will control dust by applying water to disturbed soils and soil piles to control fugitive dust from blowing and impairing air quality. Once the construction phase is completed, the site will be visited 1-2 times per year for routine maintenance and as needed for emergency maintenance. Disturbed areas not covered with gravel as part of the Project design will be reseeded with native seed to revegetate disturbed areas and hold soil in place, minimizing fugitive dust impacts during operations. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC would employ native revegetation methods or chemical control methods for infestations of weeds during regular maintenance if necessary. (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Landscape and Screening Plan There is currently no landscaping on the Project's site. The Project will be surrounded by a 7 -foot tall game fence. Rocky Mountain Junipers will be planted along a portion of the outside of the southwestern fence line to provide natural screening for nearby residences. Example photos as well as a map depicting the proposed location for tree placement are provided below. Please refer to sheet C-401 of the USR Map for additional detail on the proposed security fence. CBEP Solar 22, LLC and CBEP Solar 23, LLC plans to work with Pawnee Buttes/Greencover to create a unique diversified seed mixture to be seeded within the Project Area and will utilize sheep grazing to maintain the land. EXAMPLE PHOTOS: (970) 425-3175 I INFO CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 2 PROPOSED LOCATION FOR TREE PLACEMENT: 'Rocky Mountain Junipers (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Lighting Plan CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC are proposing to construct and operate the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project in unincorporated Weld County, Colorado. The Project includes construction of 5 Megawatts (Antelope Hill 1) 8( 1 Megawatts (Antelope Hill 2) of solar electric generation on a 68.29 -acre parcel (Antelope Hill 1) & a 29.39 -acre parcel (Antelope Hill 2). This Lighting Plan describes lighting during the construction and operations phases of the Project. Temporary Construction Lighting: The need for lighting during construction is expected to be limited because the majority of construction activities will occur during daylight hours. If lighting is needed during construction, lights will be positioned and/or shielded from oncoming traffic and residences in the vicinity of the Project site, as necessary. Cutoff -type luminaires would be used where practicable. Individual light sources would not exceed 150,000 lumens per light source (typical of a 1250W metal halide light) and would project 0.1 lumen or less at property lines. Unnecessary lighting will not be used. Lights would not exceed 24 feet in height. Any lighting needed for construction is not shown in the dimensioned elevation drawing of the USR Map due to its temporary nature. Project Operations Lighting: There will be no lighting on the Project after construction is completed. (970) 425-3175 I INFO CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 28, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Manure Management Plan CBEP Solar 23, LLC and CBEP Solar 22, LLC are proposing to construct and operate the Antelope Hill 1 and Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project in unincorporated Weld County, Colorado. The Project includes the construction of 1 Megawatt (MW) of solar electric generation on a portion of a 29.39 -acre parcel, as well as 5 Megawatts (MW) of solar electric generation on a portion of a 93.1 -acre parcel. In addition to the solar array, the Project site will continue to contribute to the agricultural economy of Weld County by using the pasture land underneath the solar array for sheep grazing. This Manure Management Plan describes CBEP Solar 23, LLC's and CBEP Solar 22, LLC's plan to maintain and minimize the impacts of the manure on the Project's parcels and neighboring community. Background. CBEP Solar 23, LLC and CBEP Solar 22, LLC intend to partner with a local shepherd, of which will be grazing no more than 500 sheep on each of the project sites for periods during the grazing season. The Antelope Hill 2 and Antelope Hill 1 Solar Project is one of many fields the flock of sheep will rotate between. These sheep will be processed in Weld County at Innovative Foods. Manure Load Management: Through rotational grazing and harrowing, the manure load will be evenly distributed across the parcels and have minimal impact on the neighboring community. Rotational Grazing: The shepherd will section off portions of the Project and graze the herd in the subsections, rotating the sheep to new subsections regularly. The shepherd will also rotate the herd between several Cloudbreak solar projects to manage the manure load and forage materials on the land. This will make the overall manure load very manageable and reduce the impact to surrounding properties. The herd will not stay permanently at the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project. The Project site will not serve as a feedlot for sheep. Harrowing: A harrowing machine will be used on the Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project site to spread out and break up the manure once the sheep move on to the next (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM CLOUDBREAK PAGE 2 subsection or pasture. This machine will disturb the topsoil to help break down and bury the manure. Composting: If the manure load ever becomes problematic, CBEP Solar 23, LLC and/or CBEP Solar 22, LLC will physically remove the manure and compost it offsite. Community Feedback: In addition to the above Manure Management Plan, CBEP Solar 23, LLC and CBEP Solar 22, LLC has provided the County with a signed letter from community members that currently live near other fields that the shepherd grazes. These individuals have had a positive experience with the shepherd and haven't been impacted by the manure load. (970) 425-3175 I INFO©aCLOUDBPEAKENEPGY.COM I CLOUDBPEAKENEIRGY.COM Kimley >>Horn February 23, 2023 Mr. Zach Brammer CloudBreak Energy Partners 218 S. 3rd Street Sterling, CO 80751 Re: CloudBreak Antelope Hill 1 Sound Study Weld County, Colorado Dear Mr. Brammer: Executive Summary The purpose of this technical memorandum is to summarize the evaluated sound levels associated with the operational equipment located at the proposed Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site in Weld County, CO. The proposed solar photovoltaic project site is approximately 4 miles east of Windsor, approximately 6 miles northwest of downtown Greeley, approximately 4 miles southwest of Eaton, and approximately 4 miles southeast of Severance. The site is generally located south of County Road 70, east of County Road 27, west of County Road 29, and north of County Road 68/CO-392. The solar site will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses located west, south, and east of the project area. The location of the proposed Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site is shown in Figure 1. ArealyThifpanriptiotovoltaic project will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses west, south, and east of the project area. A noise goal of 55 dB(A) during daytime hours was established for this project. Unmitigated hourly equivalent operational noise levels are estimated to be below approximately 41 dB(A) during daytime hours at the closest noise -sensitive land uses west, south, and east of the site. Additionally, the operational noise levels are anticipated to remain below the Weld County Charter and County Code maximum permissible noise level at residential property boundaries during daytime hours; therefore, noise mitigation is not recommended at this time. Project Description The proposed Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site will be developed on approximately 50 acres of agricultural land broken into three (3) separate sections in an unincorporated portion of Weld County, CO. The solar power generating facility will consist of rows of Photovoltaic Solar Modules, gravel access driveways, and underground utilities. A substation with an associated transformer and inverters will be located in each of the 3 sections of the Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site. In the west and east sections of the site, the transformers and associated inverters will be located near the center of the site. In the center section of the site, the transformers and associated inverters will be located near the south edge of the site. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>) Horn Figure 1: Site Location and Vicinity Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 2 Number 2 Canal County Road 68 It 1 :'A.' County Road 29 e kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 3 Characteristics of Noise Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many natural and man-made sources. Sound pressure levels are usually measured and expressed in decibels (dB). The decibel scale is logarithmic and expresses the ratio of the sound pressure unit being measured to a standard reference level. Most sounds occurring in the environment do not consist of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of differing frequencies. The intensities of each frequency add together to generate sound. Because the human ear does not respond to all frequencies equally, the method commonly used to quantify environmental noise consists of evaluating all of the frequencies of a sound according to a weighting system. It has been found that the A -weighted decibel [dB(A)] filter on a sound level meter, which includes circuits to differentially measure selected audible frequencies, best approximates the frequency response of the human ear. The degree of disturbance from exposure to unwanted sound — noise — depends upon three factors: 1. The amount, nature, and duration of the intruding noise 2. The relationship between the intruding noise and the existing sound environment; and 3. The situation in which the disturbing noise is heard In considering the first of these factors, it is important to note that individuals have varying sensitivity to noise. Loud noises bother some people more than other people, and some individuals become increasingly upset if an unwanted noise persists. The time patterns and durations of noise(s) also affect perception as to whether or not it is offensive. For example, noises that occur during nighttime (sleeping) hours are typically considered to be more offensive than the same noises in the daytime. With regard to the second factor, individuals tend to judge the annoyance of an unwanted noise in terms of its relationship to noise from other sources (background noise). A car horn blowing at night when background noise levels are low would generally be more objectionable than one blowing in the afternoon when background noise levels are typically higher. The response to noise stimulus is analogous to the response to turning on an interior light. During the daytime an illuminated bulb simply adds to the ambient light, but when eyes are conditioned to the dark of night, a suddenly illuminated bulb can be temporarily blinding. The third factor — situational noise — is related to the interference of noise with activities of individuals. In a 60 dB(A) environment such as is commonly found in a large business office, normal conversation would be possible, while sleep might be difficult. Loud noises may easily interrupt activities that require a quiet setting for greater mental concentration or rest; however, the same loud noises may not interrupt activities requiring less mental focus or tranquility. As shown in Figure 2, most individuals are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources on a regular basis. To perceive sounds of greatly varying pressure levels, human hearing has a non- linear sensitivity to sound pressure exposure. Doubling the sound pressure results in a three decibel change in the noise level; however, variations of three decibels [3 dB(A)] or less are commonly considered "barely perceptible" to normal human hearing. A five decibel [5 dB(A)] change is more readily noticeable. A ten -fold increase in the sound pressure level correlates to a 10 decibel [10 dB(A)] noise level increase; however, it is judged by most people as only sounding "twice as loud". kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>) Horn Figure 2: Common Noise Levels Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 4 Kimley*) Horn Jet Engine Noise Source Police Siren Rock Band Garbage Truck Drilling Air Conditioner Whisper Motorcycle Vacuum Cleaner Refrigerator -. trr..te; 41.0 Normal Breathing Rustling Leaves too n typical A -weighted sound levels in decibels. "A" weighting approximates the frequency response o1 the human ear. Common Environmental Noise Levels dB(A)* Noise Level $5 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Response Times As Loud Harmfully loud 128 —I Painfully loud Regular exposer over 1 minute risks permanent hearing loss Very loud Annoying - interferes • with conversation Moderately loud Comfortable 1/2 1/4 Quiet • 1/8 Very quiet Just audible Threshold of hearing Over time, individuals tend to accept the noises that intrude into their lives on a regular basis. However, exposure to prolonged and/or extremely loud noise(s) can prevent use of exterior and interior spaces and has been theorized to pose health risks. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 5 Local Regulations The Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site is in Weld County, CO. Chapter 21, Article VII, Division 3 of the Weld County Charter and County Code describes the requirements for a permit for site selection of a solar energy facility and states that noise impacts must be analyzed. Chapter 14, Article IX of the Weld County Charter and County Code describes the noise regulations in Weld County, and Section 14-9-30 of this article states that a violation of this ordinance includes knowingly making, causing, or permitting to be made any excess noise or exceeding the sound levels provided in Section 14-9-40 of the Weld County Charter and County Code. The maximum permissible noise levels at different land uses are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Land Use Maximum 9:00 Noise pm 7:00 [dB(A)] am Maximum 7:00 am Noise -9:00 [dB(A)] pm Residential Property or Commercial Area 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Industrial Area or Construction Activities 80 dB(A) 75 dB(A) Nonspecified Areas 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) The closest noise -sensitive receptors around the Antelope Hill 1 Solar site are either residential or non -specified land uses. It should be noted that on -site operations are not anticipated to occur during nighttime hours and minimal operational noise will be produced; therefore, the daytime maximum permissible operational noise level of 55 dB(A) will be used. Noise Analysis Sound levels from the proposed Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site were evaluated using SoundPLAN. This program computes predicted sound levels at noise -sensitive areas through a series of adjustments to reference sound levels. SoundPLAN can also account for topography, groundcover type, and intervening structures. Sound levels generated from inverters are anticipated to be the main source of sound from the proposed solar photovoltaic project site. It should be noted that noise from surrounding roadways was not modeled in this analysis, although County Road 70, County Road 27, County Road 29, County Road 68/CO-392, and other rural roadways are anticipated to contribute to the ambient noise environment throughout the entire day. Inverters Photovoltaic (PV) inverter equipment generates steady, unvarying sound that can create issues when located near noise -sensitive areas. It was assumed that thirty-three (33) PV inverters will be present in the Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site. Each of the 3 sections of the site would contain eleven (11) PV inverters which were assumed to be located near the center of the east and west sections of the site and near the south edge of the center section of the site. Based on design specifications for the CPS SCH100/125KTL-DO/US-600 inverter, a reference sound level of 65 dB(A) at 1 meter for each PV inverter was used. The sound from the simultaneous operation of the PV inverter equipment was calculated at the closest noise -sensitive receptors surrounding the project area using SoundPLAN. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 6 Sound generated by the inverters is not anticipated to significantly contribute to the existing environmental sound levels surrounding the site. Also, sound generated by the inverters is expected to be mitigated by providing sufficient offsets between the inverters and surrounding noise -sensitive land uses as well as by the physical presence of the solar arrays, which are anticipated to shield and disperse some of the sound generated by the inverters. Transformers Transformers also generate steady, unvarying noise that can create issues when located near noise - sensitive uses. It was assumed that transformers would be located at each of 3 proposed substations, with one substation located in each section of the project site. The substations in the east and west sections of the site are located near the center of the site, and the substation in the center section is located near the south edge of the site. A reference sound level for a transformer of 79 dB(A) at 1 meter was used. The noise from the transformer operation at the substation was calculated at the at the noise -sensitive receptors in the area near the proposed substation using SoundPLAN. Noise generated from the transformer is not anticipated to significantly contribute to the operational project noise and is expected to be kept in control by distance to noise -sensitive receptors. Results The SoundPLAN-predicted maximum operational sound levels at the surrounding noise -sensitive land uses are anticipated to be below the Weld County Charter and County Code noise level limits. The anticipated operational sound contours are shown in Figure 3. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Figure 3: Operational Sound Contours Signs and symbols Antelope Hill 1 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 7 45 4 - 50 50 - 55 55 - 60 60 - 65 _ 65 Conclusions The site is generally located south of County Road 70, east of County Road 27, west of County Road 29, and north of County Road 68/CO-392. The solar site will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses located west, south, and east of the project area. After modeling and analyzing the anticipated operational sound levels throughout the proposed solar site, it was determined that noise mitigation measures are not needed at this time since the anticipated operational sound levels will remain below the Weld County Charter and County Code allowable noise levels at the nearest noise -sensitive receptors around the site during daytime hours. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley >>Horn February 23, 2023 Mr. Zach Brammer CloudBreak Energy Partners 218 S. 3rd Street Sterling, CO 80751 Re: CloudBreak Antelope Hill 2 Sound Study Weld County, Colorado Dear Mr. Brammer: Executive Summary The purpose of this technical memorandum is to summarize the evaluated sound levels associated with the operational equipment located at the proposed Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site in Weld County, CO. The proposed solar photovoltaic project site is approximately 4 miles east of Windsor, approximately 6 miles northwest of downtown Greeley, approximately 5 miles southwest of Eaton, and approximately 4 miles southeast of Severance. The site is generally located south of County Road 70, east of County Road 27, west of County Road 29, and north of County Road 68/CO-392. The solar site will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses located west, south, and east of the project area. The location of the proposed Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site is shown in Figure 1. ArealyThifpanriptiotovoltaic project will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses west, south, and east of the project area. A noise goal of 55 dB(A) during daytime hours was established for this project. Unmitigated hourly equivalent operational noise levels are estimated to be below approximately 32 dB(A) during daytime hours at the closest noise -sensitive land uses west, south, and east of the site. Additionally, the operational noise levels are anticipated to remain below the Weld County Charter and County Code maximum permissible noise level at residential property boundaries during daytime hours; therefore, noise mitigation is not recommended at this time. Project Description The proposed Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site will be developed on approximately 10 acres of agricultural land in an unincorporated portion of Weld County, CO. The solar power generating facility will consist of rows of Photovoltaic Solar Modules, a gravel access driveway, and underground utilities. A substation with an associated transformer and inverters will be located near the south edge of the site. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Figure 1: Site Location and Vicinity Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 2 Cosinty Road 68 Greeley Number 2 Canal County R id 684392j _ e kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 3 Characteristics of Noise Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many natural and man-made sources. Sound pressure levels are usually measured and expressed in decibels (dB). The decibel scale is logarithmic and expresses the ratio of the sound pressure unit being measured to a standard reference level. Most sounds occurring in the environment do not consist of a single frequency, but rather a broad band of differing frequencies. The intensities of each frequency add together to generate sound. Because the human ear does not respond to all frequencies equally, the method commonly used to quantify environmental noise consists of evaluating all of the frequencies of a sound according to a weighting system. It has been found that the A -weighted decibel [dB(A)] filter on a sound level meter, which includes circuits to differentially measure selected audible frequencies, best approximates the frequency response of the human ear. The degree of disturbance from exposure to unwanted sound — noise — depends upon three factors: 1. The amount, nature, and duration of the intruding noise 2. The relationship between the intruding noise and the existing sound environment; and 3. The situation in which the disturbing noise is heard In considering the first of these factors, it is important to note that individuals have varying sensitivity to noise. Loud noises bother some people more than other people, and some individuals become increasingly upset if an unwanted noise persists. The time patterns and durations of noise(s) also affect perception as to whether or not it is offensive. For example, noises that occur during nighttime (sleeping) hours are typically considered to be more offensive than the same noises in the daytime. With regard to the second factor, individuals tend to judge the annoyance of an unwanted noise in terms of its relationship to noise from other sources (background noise). A car horn blowing at night when background noise levels are low would generally be more objectionable than one blowing in the afternoon when background noise levels are typically higher. The response to noise stimulus is analogous to the response to turning on an interior light. During the daytime an illuminated bulb simply adds to the ambient light, but when eyes are conditioned to the dark of night, a suddenly illuminated bulb can be temporarily blinding. The third factor — situational noise — is related to the interference of noise with activities of individuals. In a 60 dB(A) environment such as is commonly found in a large business office, normal conversation would be possible, while sleep might be difficult. Loud noises may easily interrupt activities that require a quiet setting for greater mental concentration or rest; however, the same loud noises may not interrupt activities requiring less mental focus or tranquility. As shown in Figure 2, most individuals are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources on a regular basis. To perceive sounds of greatly varying pressure levels, human hearing has a non- linear sensitivity to sound pressure exposure. Doubling the sound pressure results in a three decibel change in the noise level; however, variations of three decibels [3 dB(A)] or less are commonly considered "barely perceptible" to normal human hearing. A five decibel [5 dB(A)] change is more readily noticeable. A ten -fold increase in the sound pressure level correlates to a 10 decibel [10 dB(A)] noise level increase; however, it is judged by most people as only sounding "twice as loud". kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>) Horn Figure 2: Common Noise Levels Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 4 Kimley*) Horn Jet Engine Noise Source Police Siren Rock Band Garbage Truck Drilling Air Conditioner Whisper Motorcycle Vacuum Cleaner Refrigerator -. trr..te; 41.0 Normal Breathing Rustling Leaves too n typical A -weighted sound levels in decibels. "A" weighting approximates the frequency response o1 the human ear. Common Environmental Noise Levels dB(A)* Noise Level $5 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Response Times As Loud Harmfully loud 128 —I Painfully loud Regular exposer over 1 minute risks permanent hearing loss Very loud Annoying - interferes • with conversation Moderately loud Comfortable 1/2 1/4 Quiet • 1/8 Very quiet Just audible Threshold of hearing Over time, individuals tend to accept the noises that intrude into their lives on a regular basis. However, exposure to prolonged and/or extremely loud noise(s) can prevent use of exterior and interior spaces and has been theorized to pose health risks. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 5 Local Regulations The Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site is in Weld County, CO. Chapter 21, Article VII, Division 3 of the Weld County Charter and County Code describes the requirements for a permit for site selection of a solar energy facility and states that noise impacts must be analyzed. Chapter 14, Article IX of the Weld County Charter and County Code describes the noise regulations in Weld County, and Section 14-9-30 of this article states that a violation of this ordinance includes knowingly making, causing, or permitting to be made any excess noise or exceeding the sound levels provided in Section 14-9-40 of the Weld County Charter and County Code. The maximum permissible noise levels at different land uses are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Land Use Maximum 7:00 am Noise -9:00 [dB(A)] pm Maximum 9:00 Noise pm 7:00 [dB(A)] am Residential Property or Commercial Area 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) Industrial Area or Construction Activities 80 dB(A) 75 dB(A) Nonspecified Areas 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A) The closest noise -sensitive receptors around the Antelope Hill 2 Solar site are either residential or non -specified land uses. It should be noted that on -site operations are not anticipated to occur during nighttime hours and minimal operational noise will be produced; therefore, the daytime maximum permissible operational noise level of 55 dB(A) will be used. Noise Analysis Sound levels from the proposed Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site were evaluated using SoundPLAN. This program computes predicted sound levels at noise -sensitive areas through a series of adjustments to reference sound levels. SoundPLAN can also account for topography, groundcover type, and intervening structures. Sound levels generated from inverters are anticipated to be the main source of sound from the proposed solar photovoltaic project site. It should be noted that noise from surrounding roadways was not modeled in this analysis, although County Road 70, County Road 27, County Road 29, County Road 68/CO-392, and other rural roadways are anticipated to contribute to the ambient noise environment throughout the entire day. Inverters Photovoltaic (PV) inverter equipment generates steady, unvarying sound that can create issues when located near noise -sensitive areas. It was assumed that eleven (11) PV inverters would be located near the south edge of the site. Based on design specifications for the CPS SCH100/125KTL-DO/US- 600 inverter, a reference sound level of 65 dB(A) at 1 meter for each PV inverter was used. The sound from the simultaneous operation of the PV inverter equipment was calculated at the closest noise -sensitive receptors surrounding the project area using SoundPLAN. Sound generated by the inverters is not anticipated to significantly contribute to the existing environmental sound levels surrounding the site. Also, sound generated by the inverters is expected kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 6 to be mitigated by providing sufficient offsets between the inverters and surrounding noise -sensitive land uses as well as by the physical presence of the solar arrays, which are anticipated to shield and disperse some of the sound generated by the inverters. Transformers Transformers also generate steady, unvarying noise that can create issues when located near noise - sensitive uses. It was assumed that the transformer would be located at the proposed substation near the south edge of the site, just south of the inverters. A reference sound level for a transformer of 79 dB(A) at 1 meter was used. The noise from the transformer operation at the substation was calculated at the at the noise -sensitive receptors in the area near the proposed substation using SoundPLAN. Noise generated from the transformer is not anticipated to significantly contribute to the operational project noise and is expected to be kept in control by distance to noise -sensitive receptors. Results The SoundPLAN-predicted maximum operational sound levels at the surrounding noise -sensitive land uses are anticipated to be below the Weld County Charter and County Code noise level limits. The anticipated operational sound contours are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3: Operational Sound Contours Signs and symbols Project Boundary Levels in d16(A) 5 45 0 50 .- 55 55 - 60 60 - 65 >= 65 kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn Antelope Hill 2 Solar Site Sound Study February 23, 2023 - Page 7 Conclusions The site is generally located south of County Road 70, east of County Road 27, west of County Road 29, and north of County Road 68/CO-392. The solar site will be located on agricultural land with rural residential land uses located west, south, and east of the project area. After modeling and analyzing the anticipated operational sound levels throughout the proposed solar site, it was determined that noise mitigation measures are not needed at this time since the anticipated operational sound levels will remain below the Weld County Charter and County Code allowable noise levels at the nearest noise -sensitive receptors around the site during daytime hours. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Sewage Disposal Documentation No sewage disposal will be required for the operation of the Project. CBEP Solar 22, LLC & CBEP Solar 23, LLC or their contractor will provide portable toilets during construction. (970) 425-3175 I IN FO©a CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM KimIey) Horn April 27, 2023 Mr. Zach Brammer CloudBreak Energy Partners, LLC 218 S. 3rd Street Sterling, Colorado 80751 Re: CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Traffic Study Letter Weld County, Colorado Dear Mr. Brammer: This traffic study letter has been prepared for the proposed CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar project located in Weld County, Colorado. The purpose of this letter is to provide trip generation, trip distribution, and project traffic assignment for the construction phase of the proposed solar project to determine the anticipated increase in traffic attributable to the proposed project. The proposed development is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of State Highway 392/Weld County Road 68 (SH-392/WCR-68) and WCR-29. A vicinity map illustrating the location of CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar is attached as Figure 1. The project will consist of a 5.5 MW solar facility with supporting infrastructure. A conceptual site plan for the proposed development is attached. The project will have four development areas with the first phase of construction being the western portion of the site. This traffic study identifies the amount of traffic associated with this proposed development during both construction and operational phases, and the expected trip distribution and traffic assignment. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND ACCESS Construction activity to assemble the entire solar facility is anticipated to commence Quarter 1 of 2024. The construction activities each month may vary based on phasing and the size of the phase. This traffic study was prepared analyzing the peak construction traffic during the highest months of activity. Construction will generally follow these steps: • Mobilization • Civil/site preparation • Cable plow/foundations construction • Post install • Racking install • Substation construction • Set major equipment • Module installation • Testing, commissioning, and energization • Demobilization Regional access to CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar will be provided by 1-25, US -85, US -34, and SH-392. Primary access will be provided by SH-392/ WCR-68 while direct kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn CloudBreak - Antelope Hill I & Antelope Hill 2 Traffic Study Letter Page 2 access is proposed from one full movement access along the west side of WCR-29. It should be noted that construction traffic will only occur in one development area on any given day. The preferred access route to CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar is via US -85 if traveling from the north, south, or east and the preferred route from the west is along SH-392/WCR-68. The anticipated vehicle route to the site from US -85 is to travel west on SH-392/WCR-68, then north onto WCR-29, then west into the project site access. The anticipated vehicle route to the site from the west is to travel east on SH-392/ WCR-68, then north onto WCR-29, the west into the project site access. Figure 2 illustrates the vehicle routes to and from the site. TRIP GENERATION Site -generated traffic estimates are determined through a process known as trip generation. The number of trips for the CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar facility was based on anticipated construction activity and operations. In order to study the effect of construction traffic created by the solar facility, the expected trips during the peak period of construction were used as the basis for this study. The peak construction traffic activity is anticipated to occur in 2024. Construction Traffic Generation The typical construction peak season workday will see workers arriving during a four-hour window between 6:00 am and 10:00 am and departing during a three-hour window between 1:00 pm and 4:00 pm. The standard construction hours are anticipated to be 6:30 am to 3:30 pm. The highest proportion of workers will arrive to the site between 6:00 and 7:00 am (half) and depart between 3:00 pm to 4:00 pm (one-third), although the volume will be fairly uniform during the arrival and departure hours. It is anticipated that construction of the facility will include a maximum of 20 construction workers. It is important to note the truck trip generation also includes the volume adjusted for the three (3) passenger car equivalents (PCE) per truck. The following Table 1 identifies the peak construction activity trip generation for the construction of CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar facility. Table 1 — Trip Generation: CloudBreak — Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Development Weekday Vehicles Trips Daily Round Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Trips In Out Total Inal Out Total 5 15 10 30 3 9 0 0 3 9 0 0 2 6 2 6 Heavy PCE Trips Duty Trucks (5) Passenger Vehicles (20) 20 40 10 0 10 0 7 7 Total Vehicles 25 35 50 70 13 19 0 0 13 19 0 0 9 13 13 9 Total PCE As shown in the table above, CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar is expected to generate approximately 50 daily trips (25 round trips) with 13 of these trips occurring in the morning peak hour and nine (9) of these trips occurring in the afternoon peak hour during the peak construction activities. This volume of daily traffic of 50 trips is expected to be the highest volume generated during solar facility construction. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Kimley>>> Horn CloudBreak - Antelope Hill I & Antelope Hill 2 Traffic Study Letter Page 3 Solar Facility Operational Phase Traffic Generation After the CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar project has been constructed, the number of trips generated by the solar plant is expected to be significantly less than during the construction period, approximately one vehicle per week (2 weekly trips). Therefore, traffic impacts related to the operation of the solar plant facility will be negligible and insignificant. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Trip distribution is based on the anticipated arrival location of employees along with the delivery route to be used for truck traffic. It is anticipated that truck traffic from the east will utilize the intersection of US -85 and SH-392/WCR-68, use SH-392/WCR-68 to head west, then travel north along WCR-29, and turn west into the site. Truck traffic from the west will travel east along SH-392/WCR-68, then travel north along WCR-29, and turn west into the site. Construction worker trips will be based on the arrival location from place of residence (permanent or temporary). The distribution for construction worker trips was derived based on distances to nearby cities and populations. The Town of Windsor is located approximately 5.5 miles west of the site and the City of Greeley is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the project site. Further west, approximately 21 miles northwest of the site is the City of Fort Collins. The City of Loveland is approximately 19.5 miles to the southwest. Based on these factors, it is anticipated that 50 percent of the traffic will be to and from the west and 50 percent of the traffic will be to and from the east. Attached Figure 3 illustrates the anticipated trip distribution. The project traffic assignment for vehicles is shown in attached Figure 4. CONCLUSION In summary, the CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar construction project traffic assignment shows a very low traffic volume assigned to the surrounding street network. Further, trips are negligible during the operational phase of the solar facility. Based on these results, CloudBreak - Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar will have a minimal traffic impact. The public street roadways and adjacent intersections are anticipated to successfully accommodate this project traffic volume. If you have any questions or require anything further, please feel free to call. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Tyler E. Smith, P.E. Traffic Engineer RE his•••• LL fl . /jet f 568971/-- i :. 04/27/2023 *: LQ it F ON A IL C----CS:C95'. kimley-horn.com 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400, Denver, CO 80202 303 228 2300 Figures NORTH NTS 196664000 SH-392/WCR-68 FIGURE 1 CLOUDBREAK - ANTELOPE HILL 1 & ANTELOPE HILL 2 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ,L VICINITY MAP i RIII1IPV)flflhlFfl r N ORm NTS 196664000 FIGURE 2 CLOUDBREAK - ANTELOPE HILL 1 8c ANTELOPE HILL 2 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO hL TRUCK ROUTE LEGEND 9ro9osec Truck Route u:..._1at atkv. Ua..a Iuuuuuu1,,,u nVo 11� N O 1=1-1- N TS 196664000 [100%] --_ T 0 0 T WCR-29 ACCESS 12) 0 0 LC) LU u u 50% 50% CSH-392/WCR-6B & WCR-29 :) FIGURE 3 CLOUDBREAK — ANTELOPE HILL 1 ac ANTELOPE HILL 2 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO tPOJEC TRIP DISRI3UHON XX% LEGEND Study Area Key Intersection External Trip Distribution Percentage Entering[Exiting] XX%[XX7O] Trip Distribution Percentage ilnasiam I I I KJIPV)))flOfl � Milan a NORTH NTS 196664000 FIGURE 4 CLOUDBREAK — ANTELOPE HILL 1 Sc ANTELOPE HILL 2 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 0(9) ~Th 0 co WCR-29 ACCESS 12) 7(0) CSH-392/WCR-6B & WCR-29 :) LEGEND Study Area Key Intersection XXX(XXX) Weekday AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XXX Estimated Daily Traffic Volume ilnasi an... I I I KJIPV)))flOfl1m� millAINII Conceptual Site Plan o_ o_ Q o_ 0) SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. INC. ADAPTATION z AUTHORIZATION ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT w 0 z W N O 0 N \o z N Q �o U LL O f„ U U2 2 IF nz U / �a �--� z a Lefi �o C O o- V) w w of Q� CDo /L` C.)ti C5z 0° I -0o a Z O - _0 LLi U O O I o_ USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW USR XX XXXX ANTELOPE HILL I SOLAR PROJECT WELD COUNTY ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517300047 OWNER: SCHAEFER HENRY FARM LLC z PROPOSED PV PANELS TYP. PROPOSED SECURITY FENCE PROPOSED LEASE AREA VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE ROAD CONNECTION• THROUGH SITE LINDBLAD 10 ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517000039 OWNER: M A LINDBLAD LLC. W EXISTING NWI• WETLAND W 1 i EXISTING WATER • STRUCTURE EXISTING 30' RIGHT- OF WAY i X 1 ><- i >< X $ / 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 X 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 N 0 0 0 ♦ ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517300047 OWNER: ULRICH STEVEN K (1/4 INT) ULRICH LONNA A (1/8 INT) ULRICH ELMER H. & CLARA (JT 1/8 INT) MCGLOTHLIN DEBORAH L. TRUST MCGLOTHLIN WILLIAM KELL 47.6191% OF 1/2 INT MCGLOTHLIN GORDON 19.0476% OF 1/2 INT EXISTING 2 -TRACK ROAD EXISTING EDGE OF CANAL EXISTING WATER WELL EXISTING WATER PUMP I • EXISTING METAL PIPE \\\ GATE \ VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE PROPOSED POWER CONNECTION • II II II II II II II II II II PROPOSED EQUIPMENT PADS. SEE SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 4 x 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 0 SEE TURNAROUND DETAIL. • SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 3 1 1 1 / / 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 aws 1 1 1 EXISTING PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY ,‘,*.;••••N-i'''' • • •:•<,•••••:•,•14•/<,,•••Z;<;‘,2" EXISTING 2 -TRACK ROAD 1 0 1 0 X 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 X X50.0' X X a,, EXISTING BUILDINGS • EXISTING 10' UTILITY EASEMENT i 50.0' Pte' e;pc dq— ciP i E / ,ac) eiN HIGHWAY 392, CR 68 0 / i 0 0 0 X 0 1 0 0 0 X EXISTING FOOT BRIDGE • WITH WING WALLS 0 0 X INACTIVE GAS WELLS API# 05-123-33548 API# 05-123-33549 API# 05-123-35995 API# 05-123-33251 API# 05-123-33252 API# 05-123-33265 API# 05-123-33239 ACTIVE GAS WELLS • API# 05-123-35997 API# 05-123-35996 API# 05-123-10764 API# 05-123-33246 SURFACE USE AGREEMENT 200' BUFFER AROUND • ACTIVE OIL AND GAS WELL VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE • 0 0 0 0 ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080520100043 OWNER: BROWN FARMS LLC. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E EXISTING. 2 —TRACK ROAD TO BE REMOVED 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 X 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 / 0 $ 0 1 0 1 0 / 0 $ 0 1 0 1 0 / EXISTING. 2 -TRACK ROAD 1 $ 1 1 1 / 1 VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE 111111 SEE TURNAROUND DETAIL. SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 3 ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080520000036 OWNER: NOLAN RICHARD C, BUNNY G. -1. 1 • PROPOSED EQUIPMENT PADS.. SEE SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 4 PROPOSED TEMPORARY . CONSTRUCTION TRAILER LIUUU VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE. I a 11 11 11 11 11 i PROPOSED OVERHEAD POWER CONNECTION In -W Jr a • ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 0805200000376 OWNER: HOOD SHERRI, DARLINDA • • EXISTING GAS LINE • EXISTING WATER LINE • EXISTING TELECOM LINE ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080516300055 OWNER: FAGERBERG LESLIE K REVOCABLE, LYNN A REVOCABLE EXISTING 75x100' SURFACE SITE EASEMENT EXISTING PIPELINE RIGHT -OF WAY . EXISTING UTILITY RACK EXISTING PIPELINE RIGHT OF WAY ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080516300059 OWNER: JACKSON ANDREW PROPOSED PERMANENT STORAGE TRAILERS PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD PROPOSED POWER POLES ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080516300058 OWNER: JACKSON PETER R (HEIRS OF) EXISTING EQUIPMENT BERM • EXISTING EQUIPMENT HUT ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080521200021 OWNER: FRITZLER FARMS LLC SITE STATISTICS COVERAGE TYPE CONCRETE GRAVEL LANDSCAPING SWALES GRASS/VACANT SOLAR RACKING AREA (SQUARE FEET) 4,123 79,364 NA NA 1,602,201 331,908 SITE PLAN GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 50 100 200 LEGEND EASEMENT PROPERTY UNE EXISTING ROAD PROPOSED FENCE EXISTING FENCE EXISTING GAS LINE LEASE AREA PROPOSED ELECTRIC PROPOSED PERMANENT az TEMPORARY TRAILERS OH OH 4. 4' t' t? PROPOSED OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC PROPOSED SETBACK PROPOSED SOLAR PANEL PROPOSED ROAD PROPOSED POWER POLE OLORA LiJ c5 A co gd 4411‘ op LuLz 4\1\ cu LiJ LiJ LiJ CO 0O DESIGNED BY: JCH DRAWN BY: JCH CHECKED BY: AJH DATE: 04/27/23 LL 1 - WELD COUNTY ANTELOPE COLORADO LJ imu >- cC1 PRELIMINARY FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Kimley*Horn Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. PROJECT NO. 196664000 DRAWING NAME 2.0 o_ V) SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. INC. ADAPTATION Z Q AUTHORIZATION D 0 Z w 0 0 0 w 0 w ce Iz ro CN oo CN r`Q N \o 'w W Va U �u 0 el - • u) F- UU -0 oLE U 0 I--- "w U / Co a C C o_ 0 0 o_ U- 0 Z >Z C< O < UZ -Ow a�= 0 IZ oW oW II -0Z O w U 1- L<F O W cn = •> o F- Iw 3 W 0 00 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW USR XX XXXX ANTELOPE HILL 2 SOLAR PROJECT WELD COUNTY EXISTING FENCE EXISTING 50' PIPELINE RIGHT -OF WAY • ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517000038 OWNER: LINDBLAD JASMINE EVE, CHRISTOPHER EUGENE, PUFFER PIGEON LLC. sib 50' SETBACK DISTANCE INACTIVE GAS WELL API# 05-123-33646 INACTIVE GAS WELL API# 05-123-23815 • I PROPOSED PV PANELS PROPOSED SECURITY FENCE PROPOSED LEASE AREA ±890.9' NEAREST RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 50. x x ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517300047 OWNER: SCHAEFER HENRY FARM LLC X X SEE TURNAROUND DETAIL. SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 3 PROPOSED PERMANENT STORAGE TRAILERS EXISTING 20' RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080520000041 OWNER: DALBDNIL LLC 11 PROPOSED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER PROPOSED POWER POLES MEW OEM- -MI MS ME MINI PROPOSED ACCESS ROAD EXISTING 30' RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING WATER STRUCTURE X X - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - 0 - - 0 O J INS X X 50.0' X • • • • SEE TURNAROUND DETAIL. SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 3 VEHICULAR ENTRANCE GATE I • • ZONE: AGRICULTURAL ARCEL: 080517300047 WNER: ULRICH STEVEN K (1/4 INT) LRICH LONNA A (1/8 INT) LRICH ELMER H. & CLARA (JT 1/8 INT) ICGLOTHLIN DEBORAH L. TRUST ICGLOTHLIN WILLIAM KELL 47.6191% OF /2 INT MCGLOTHLIN GORDON 19.0476% �F 1/2 INT • ROAD CONNECTION THROUGH SITE LINDBLAD 50 EXISTING NWI WETLAND PROPOSED EQUIPMENT PADS. SEE SHEET 3.0 DETAIL 4 1 r EXISTING 2- TRACK ROAD • EXISTING EDGE OF CANAL ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080517000023 OWNER: LINDBLAD RUBY H, LEE E. EXISTING WATER WELL EXISTING WATER PUMP • EXISTING METAL PIPE ±989.2' NEAREST RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EXISTING WOOD COVER EXISTING TELECOM LINE EXISTING WATER LINE MEI MEI HIGHWAY 392, CR 68 SIM ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080520100043 OWNER: BROWN FARMS LLC. EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINE EXISTING 10' UTILITY EASEMENT ZONE: AGRICULTURAL PARCEL: 080520100042 OWNER: ARAGON SARAH, WESLEY SITE PLAN 1" =100' GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 50 100 200 1 LEGEND X E OH OH XXXX \, 'XX> WV4?VVV;VI EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING ROAD PROPOSED FENCE EXISTING FENCE EXISTING GAS LINE LEASE AREA PROPOSED ELECTRIC PROPOSED OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC PROPOSED SETBACK EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR PROPOSED SOLAR PANEL PROPOSED ROAD PROPOSED POWER POLE PROPOSED PERMANENT & TEMPORARY TRAILERS SITE STATISTICS COVERAGE TYPE AREA (SQUARE FEET) CONCRETE 1,374 GRAVEL 16,165 LANDSCAPING NA SWALES NA GRASS/VACANT 355,977 SOLAR RACKING 54,403 art *hess. • :OLORADO,$11 W W A T' S I L L 17'1'1_ C A1_L # Tripp E you PIG o_ o_ Q W Q z 0 U) > W 0 z 4\1\ GJ U z V / LIJ Q U O U) U) Q z Q z 0 LiJ N O N 228- 2300 O O w w LO N O C 0 O U DESIGNED BY: JCH DRAWN BY: JCH CHECKED BY: AJH DATE: 04/27/23 I N J J 2 ANTELOPE COLORADO w Tti U W 11 ›- CO 00 PRELIMINARY FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Kimley>> Horn Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. PROJECT NO. 196664000 DRAWING NAME 2.0 CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 8( Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Traffic Narrative 1. Describe how many roundtrips/day are expected for each vehicle type: Passenger Cars/Pickups, Tandem Trucks, Semi-Truck/Trailer/RV (Roundtrip = One (1) trip in and One (1) trip out of site). • The maximum anticipated number of daily trips during peak period of construction: 10 - 15 vehicles per day during peak construction, 7am - 3:30pm are the general hours for Monday - Friday. • % of heavy vehicles during peak period of construction: 5 - 10% during the first few months of construction. • Typical anticipated number of daily trips after construction is complete: 2 - 4 trips per year depending on O&M contract details. 2. Describe the expected travel routes or haul routes for site traffic. • The primary travel/haul will be North on US -85, West on CO -392, and then arriving on at the Southern access of the parcels. 3. Describe the travel distribution along the routes (e.g. 50% of traffic will come from the north, 20% from the south, 30% from the east, etc.). • 100% of the expected travel will follow the primary travel/haul route detailed above. 4. Describe the time of day that you expect the highest traffic volumes. • 7:00am - 3:30pm Northern Feed & Bean it PlarfiorFreig tit Tools - ,4• I cam _ ." -, 4er.. • • - _ • Greeley _ , S. DbubleTree byTHUton Gropeleyrit. Lincoln Pork, Cdlo ado. lad l Railroad lvtu eyS n CLOUDBREAK CBEP SOLAR 22, LLC & CBEP SOLAR 23, LLC PO BOX 1255 STERLING, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 INFO©CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM DATE: August 25, 2023 PROJECT: Antelope Hill 1 & Antelope Hill 2 Solar Project SUBJECT: Utility and Other Infrastructure Owners Infrastructure Owner Name Address Overhead Electric Lines Public Colorado DBA Service Xcel Company Energy of 1800 80202 Larimer St, Denver, CO Pipeline Surface Facility Right -of -Way Grant / DCP Operating Company, LP 3026 4th CO 80631 Avenue, Greeley, Oil Easement and Gas Pipeline Associated Natural Gas Inc 3009 80634 49th Ave, Greeley, CO Power Line Easement DCP Operating Company, LP 3026 4th CO 80631 Avenue, Greeley, Pipeline Right -of -Way DCP Lucerne 2 Plant LLC 3026 4th CO 80631 Avenue, Greeley, Surface Use Agreement HRM Resources, LLC 555 17th Denver, St, CO Suite 80202 950, (970) 425-3175 I INFO CLOU DBREAKEN ERGY.COM I CLOUDBREAKENERGY.COM ERGY.COM DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB CDOT Permit No. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS CODE NOTICE TO PROCEED 424013 State Highway/Mile Post/Side 392B / 110.34/Left Local Jurisdiction CDOT Permittee(s): Lee Lindblad Lee Lindblad 13653 HWY 392 Greeley, Colorado 80631 (970) 396-7385 Applicant: Brysen Daughton CBEP Solar 22 & 23 LLC 1120 Pearl Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 (970) 425-3501 The permittee is hereby authorized to proceed with access construction within state highway right-of-way in accordance with the above referenced State Highway Access Permit and this Notice to Proceed. This Notice to Proceed is valid only if the referenced Access Permit has not expired. Access Permits expire one year from date of issue if not under construction, or completed. Access Permits may be extended in accordance with Section 2.3(11)(d), of the Access Code. Adequate advance warning is required at all times during access construction, in conformance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation. The permittee or applicant shall notify the Department prior to commencing construction as indicated on the Access Permit. Both the Access Permit and this Notice To Proceed shall be available for review at the construction site. This Notice to Proceed is conditional. The following items shall be addressed prior to or during construction as appropriate. Municipality or County Approval (When the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority) By (X) Title Date This Notice is not valid until signed by a duly authorized representative of the Department Colorado Department of Transportation By te DocuSigned by: (X) kkt, tu,nt, � r�_G9rLD10 n: 014 Required: D... Copy distributio Region (original) Applicant Staff Access Section Title Assistant Access Manager Make copies as necessary for: Local Authority Inspector MTCE Patrol Traffic Engineer Date 1/31/2024 112:43 PM Mr Form 1265 8/98, 6/99 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB COLORADO Department of Transportation Region 4 Traffic Section 10601 west 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 970-324-4823 January 31, 2024 ATTN: Brysen Daughton CBEP Solar 22 & 23 LLC 1120 Pearl Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 RE: State Highway Access Permit No. 424013 Located on 1,798 feet East of MM 110 and 981 feet West of County Road 29 on Hwy 52 on the left (North) side of the roadway. Dear Applicant, In accordance with Section 2.4(5) of the State Highway Access Code.. which states: "When necessary to amend a permit, and the Permittee is agreeable and waives the right to an administrative hearing on the amendment, a letter detailing the amendment with reasons for the amendment shall be prepared. The letter of amendment requires the approval of the issuing authority. the Department. and the Permittee." The subject Access permit(s) referenced above is/are hereby amended to include the following: The Landowners address as 13653 Hwy 392 Greeley CO 80631 And/or to omit the following: The Landowners address as 13653 Hwy 392 Ault CO 80631 10601 west 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 P 970-324-4823 F - https://codot.gov/accesspermits A — — I aa.a a a. r.. a DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB ss, Department of Transportation Region 4 Traffic Section 10601 west 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 970-324-4823 The undersigned agree to the permit amendment as described above. Permittee waives the right to an administrative hearing on the amendment. There are no other forms or verbal agreement. This form and the permit documents constitute the complete agreement. By (Print Name): Signature Date: Title: By (Print Name): Signature Date: Title: Colorado Department of By (Print YaBbLig ned by: Transportation (Issuing Authority) Signatur e Akita SLtq(wh F17B9FEB18614ED... Assistant Access Manager Date: 1/31/2024 12 :43 PM Title: 10601 west 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 P 970-324-4823 F - https://codot.gov/accesspermits DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT CDOT Permit No. 424013 Permit Fee $0.00 Date of Transmittal 01/18/2024 Region / Section / Patrol / Name 4/01 /17 West Greeley State Highway No / Mp / Side 392B / 110.340 / Left Local Jurisdiction CDOT The Permittee(s): Lee Lindblad 13653 HWY 392 Ault, Colorado 80631 (970) 396-7385 The Applicant(s): Brysen Daughton CBEP Solar 22 &23 LLC 1120 Pearl Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 (970) 425-3501 is hereby granted permission to have an access to the state highway at the location noted below. The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with this permit, including the State Highway Access Code and any attachments, terms, conditions and exhibits. This permit may be revoked by the Issuing Authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any parts of this permit. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit. Location: 1,798 feet East of MM 110 and 981 feet West of County Road 29 on Hwy 52 on the left (North) side of the roadway. Access to Provide Service to: (Land Use Code) (Size) (Units) Additional Information: This Access must be removed in its entirety and returned to its natural geographical state Prior to the use of the access associated with permit number 424012 MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority. Signature Print Name Date Title Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from Initiation. The permitted access shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to being used The permittee shall notify Bruce Barnett with the Colorado Department of Transportation, at (970) 381-1742 at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way. The person signing as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted access and have full authority to accept the permit and its terms and conditions. P emocu i ned it e ign dire: fist Co -Pe i6Rifure: (if applicable) Print Name Lee Lindblad Date 1/29/2024 111:55 AM PST Print Name Date This permit is not valid until signed by a duly authorized representative of the Department. seCatQWWQ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I rikatite F17RQFFRI Ltitutyi RR'I PP Print Mike NameTitleDate shepherd Assistant M n Access a age rl/29/2024 (of issue) I 12:56 PM MS1 Copy Distribution: Required: 1. Reg ion 2.Applicant 3.Staff Access Section 4.Central Files Make copies as necessary for: Local Authority Inspector MTCE Patrol Traffic Engineer Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Page 1 of 3 CDOT Form #101 5/07 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Form 101, Page 2 The following paragraphs are excerpts of the State Highway Access Code. These are provided for your convenience but do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the Access Code. A copy of the State Highway Access Code is available from your local issuing authority (local government) or the Colorado Department of Transportation (Department). When this permit was issued, the issuing authority made its decision based in part on information submitted by the applicant, on the access category which is assigned to the highway, what alternative access to other public roads and streets is available, and safety and design standards. Changes in use or design not approved by the permit or the issuing authority may cause the revocation or suspension of the permit. APPEALS 1. Should the permittee or applicant object to the denial of a permit application by the Department or object to any of the terms or conditions of a permit placed there by the Department, the applicant and permittee (appellant) have a right to appeal the decision to the [Transportation] Commission [of Colorado]. To appeal a decision, submit a request for administrative hearing to the Transportation Commission of Colorado within 60 days of transmittal of n otice of denial or transmittal of the permit for signature. Submit the request to the Transportation Commission of Colorado, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80222-3400. The request shall include reasons for the appeal and may include changes, revisions, or conditions that would be acceptable to the permittee or applicant. 2. Any appeal by the applicant or permittee of action by a local issuing authority shall be filed with the local authority and be consistent with the appeal procedures of the local authority. 3. In submitting the request for administrative hearing, the appellant has the option of including within the appeal a request for a review by the Department's internal administrative review committee pursuant to [Code] subsection 2.10. When such committee review is requested, processing of the appeal for formal administrative hearing, 2.9(5) and (6), shall be suspended until the appellant notifies the Commission to proceed with the administrative hearing, o r the appellant submits a request to the Commission or the administrative law judge to withdraw the appeal. The two administrative processes, the internal administrative review committee, and the administrative hearing, may not run concurrently. 4. Regardless of any communications, meetings, administrative reviews or negotiations with the Department o r the internal administrative review Committee regarding revisions or objections to the permit or a denial, if the permittee or applicant wishes to appeal the Department's decision to the Commission for a hearing, the appeal must be brought to the Commission within 60 days of transmittal of notice of denial or transmittal of the permit. PERMIT EXPIRATION 1. A permit shall be considered expired if the access is not u nder construction within one year of the permit issue date o r before the expiration of any authorized extension. When the permittee is unable to commence construction within one year after the permit issue date, the permittee may request a o ne year extension from the issuing authority. No more than two one-year extensions may be granted under any circumstances. If the access is not under construction within three years from date of issue the permit will be considered expired. Any request for an extension must be in writing and submitted to the issuing authority before the permit expires. The request should state the reasons why the extension is n ecessary, when construction is anticipated, and include a copy of page 1 (face of permit) of the access permit. Extension approvals shall be in writing. The local issuing authority shall obtain the concurrence of the Department prior to the approval of an extension, and shall notify the Department of all denied extensions within ten days. Any person wishing to reestablish an access permit that has expired may begin again with the application procedures. An approved Notice to Proceed, automatically renews the access permit for the period of the Notice to Proceed. CONSTRUCTION 1. Construction may not begin until a Notice to Proceed is approved. (Code subsection 2.4] 2. The construction of the access and its appurtenances as required by the terms and conditions of the permit shall be completed at the expense of the permittee except as provided in subsection 2.14. All materials used in the construction of the access within the highway right-of-way or o n permanent easements, become public property. Any materials removed from the highway right-of-way will be disposed of only as directed by the Department. All fencing, guard rail, traffic control devices and other equipment and materials removed in the course of access construction shall be given to the Department unless otherwise instructed by the permit or the Department inspector. 3. The permittee shall notify the individual or the office specified on the permit or Notice to Proceed at least two working days prior to any construction within state highway right-of-way. Construction of the access shall not proceed u ntil both the access permit and the Notice to Proceed are issued. The access shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation of construction within the highway right-of-way. A construction time extension not to exceed 30 working days may be requested from the individual or office specified on the permit. 4. The issuing authority and the Department may inspect the access during construction and upon completion of the access to ensure that all terms and conditions of the permit are met. Inspectors are authorized to enforce the conditions of the permit during construction and to halt any activities within state right-of-way that do not comply with the provisions of the permit, that conflict with concurrent highway construction or maintenance work, that endanger highway property, natural or cultural resources protected by law, or the health and safety of workers or the public. DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB 5. Prior to using the access, the permittee is required to complete the construction according to the terms and conditions of the permit. Failure by the permittee to abide by all permit terms and conditions shall be sufficient cause for the Department or issuing authority to initiate action to suspend or revoke the permit and close the access. If in the determination of the Department or issuing authority the failure to comply with or complete the construction requirements of the permit create a highway safety hazard, such shall be sufficient cause for the summary suspension of the permit. If the permittee wishes to use the access prior to completion, arrangements must be approved by the issuing authority and Department and included in the permit. The Department or issuing authority may order a halt to any u nauthorized use of the access pursuant to statutory and regulatory powers. Reconstruction or improvement of the access may be required when the permittee has failed to meet required specifications of design or materials. If any construction element fails within two years due to improper construction or material specifications, the permittee shall be responsible for all repairs. Failure to make such repairs may result in suspension of the permit and closure of the access. 6. The permittee shall provide construction traffic control devices at all times during access construction, in conformance with the M.U.T.C.D. as required by section 42- 4-104, C.R.S., as amended. 7. A utility permit shall be obtained for any utility work within highway right-of-way. Where necessary to remove, relocate, o r repair a traffic control device or public or private utilities for the construction of a permitted access, the relocation, removal or repair shall be accomplished by the permittee without cost to the Department or issuing authority, and at the direction of the Department or utility company. Any damage to the state highway or other public right-of-way beyond that which is allowed in the permit shall be repaired immediately. The permittee is responsible for the repair of any utility damaged in the course of access construction, reconstruction or repair. 8. In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right- of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access shall be securely braced with an approved end post before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire removed are Department property and shall be turned over to a representative of the Department. 9. The permittee shall ensure that a copy of the permit is available for review at the construction site at all times. The permit may require the contractor to notify the individual or office specified on the permit at any specified phases in construction to allow the field inspector to inspect various aspects of construction such as concrete forms, subbase, base course compaction, and materials specifications. Minor changes and additions may be ordered by the Department o r local authority field inspector to meet unanticipated site conditions. 10. Each access shall be constructed in a manner that shall n ot cause water to enter onto the roadway or shoulder, and shall not interfere with the existing drainage system on the right-of-way or any adopted municipal system and drainage plan. 11. By accepting the permit, permittee agrees to save, indemnify, and hold harmless to the extent allowed by law, the issuing authority, the Department, its officers, and e mployees from suits, actions, claims of any type or character brought because of injuries or damage sustained by any person resulting from the permittee's use of the access permit during the construction of the access. CHANGES IN ACCESS USE AND PERMIT VIOLATIONS 1. It is the responsibility of the property owner and permittee to ensure that the use of the access to the property is not in violation of the Code, permit terms and conditions or the Act. The terms and conditions of any permit are binding u pon all assigns, successors -in -interest, heirs and o ccupants. If any significant changes are made or will be made in the use of the property which will affect access o peration, traffic volume and or vehicle type, the permittee or property owner shall contact the local issuing authority or the Department to determine if a new access permit and modifications to the access are required. 2. When an access is constructed or used in violation of the Code, section 43-2-147(5)(c), C.R.S., of the Act applies. The Department or issuing authority may summarily suspend an access permit and immediately order closure of the access when its continued use presents an immediate threat to public health, welfare or safety. Summary suspension shall comply with article 4 of title 24, C.R.S. MAINTENANCE 1. The permittee, his or her heirs, successors -in -interest, assigns, and occupants of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit, the repair and maintenance of the access beyond the edge of the roadway including any cattle guard and gate, and the removal or clearance of snow or ice u pon the access even though deposited on the access in the course of Department snow removal operations. Within u nincorporated areas the Department will keep access culverts clean as part of maintenance of the highway drainage system. However, the permittee is responsible for the repair and replacement of any access -related culverts within the right-of-way. Within incorporated areas, drainage responsibilities for municipalities are determined by statute and local ordinance. The Department will maintain the roadway including auxiliary lanes and shoulders, except in those cases where the access installation has failed due to improper access construction and/or failure to follow permit requirements and specifications in which case the permittee shall be responsible for such repair. Any significant repairs such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, requires authorization from the Department. Form 101, Page 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9O6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3O-06F5005959AB CIAL USE PERMIT STANDARD PROVISIONS ‘...4.._. 4 kJ 111_411 1 .1 1 / 1\1�L U...ly 1 1.11 1 / 101 11 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Environmental Clearances Information Summary PURPOSE - This summary is intended to inform entities external to CDOT that may be entering the state highway right-of-way to perform work related to their own facilities (such as Utility, Special Use or Access Permittees), about some of the more commonly encountered environmental permits/clearances that may apply to their activities. This listing is not all -inclusive —additional environmental or cultural resource permits/clearances may be required in certain instances. Appropriate local, state and federal agencies should be contacted for additional information if there is any uncertainty about what permits/clearances are required for a specific activity. IMPORTANT: Please Review The Following Information Carefully — Failure to Comply With Regulatory Requirements May Result In Suspension or Revocation of Your CDOT Permit, Or Enforcement Actions By Other Agencies. CLEARANCE CONTACTS - As indicated in the permit/clearance descriptions listed below, the following agencies may be contacted for additional information: • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE): General Information — (303) 692-2000 Water Quality Control Division (WQCD): (303) 692-3500 Environmental Permitting Website https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/all-permits • CDOT Water Quality Program Manager: (303) 512-4053 https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality • CDOT Asbestos Project Manager: (303) 512-5519 • Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation: (303) 866-5216 • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, District Regulatory Offices: Omaha District (Northeastern CO), Denver Office (303) 979-4120 http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Colorado.aspx Sacramento District (Western CO), Grand Junction Office (970) 243-1199 http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx Albuquerque District (Southeastern CO), Pueblo Office (719) 543-9459 http://www.spa.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx • CDOT Utilities, Special Use and Access Permitting: (303) 757-9654 https://www.codot.gov/business/permits Wildlife Resources - Disturbance of wildlife shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Entry into areas of known or suspected threatened or endangered species habitat requires special authorization from the CDOT permitting office. If any threatened or endangered species are encountered during the progress of the permitted work, work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Information about threatened or endangered species may be obtained from the CDOT website, http://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines, or the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) website, http://www.cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Additional guidance may be provided by the appropriate Region Planning and Environmental Manager (RPEM). Cultural Resources - The applicant must request a file search of the permit area through the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP), Denver, to ascertain if historic or archaeological resources have previously been identified (https://www.historycolorado.org/file-access; 303-866-5216). Inventory of the permit area by a qualified cultural resources specialist may be necessary, per the recommendation of CDOT. If archaeological sites/artifacts or historic resources are encountered as the project progresses, all work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office and RPEM. Paleontological Resources - The level of effort required for paleontological resources is dependent on the amount of ground disturbance, including rock scaling, digging, trenching, boring, ground leveling, and similar activities. • If the permit will involve extensive ground disturbance (generally involving more than one mile of CDOT ROW), a full review will be required by a qualified paleontologist, including map, file, and locality searches, with final recommendations provided by the CDOT paleontologist upon receipt of the report. Based on results of the review, a survey or inventory of the permit area may be necessary. • If the permit will involve a small amount of ground disturbance (less than one mile of ROW), the applicant must request a fossil locality search through the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History (https://www.colorado.edu/cumuseum/research- collections/paleontology/policies-procedure) and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science (https://www.dmns.org/science/earth- sciences/earth-sciences-collections/). The museum collections manager will provide information about localities in the project area. If there are no known localities, the permit requirement for paleontology is complete upon submitting that information to CDOT. If there are known localities, the CDOT paleontologist will be contacted by the museum with details, and additional recommendations will be made if necessary. Note that museum staff are not required to disclose the details of fossil localities to the permit applicant, nor is detailed locality information required for the permit application to proceed. • If the permit involve no ground disturbance, no action is required for paleontological resources. If fossils are encountered during the permitted action, all work in the immediate area of the find should stop and the CDOT Staff Paleontologist and the Region Environmental Manager should be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office in the Permit Special Provisions. Contact Information: See the museum websites listed above. The CDOT Paleontologist is not able to conduct locality searches independently. For further information contact CDOT Paleontologist Nicole Peavey at nicole.peavey@state.co.us or (303)757-9632. Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 1 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation June 2020 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB CDOT UTILITY/RELOCATION/SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARD PROVISIONS Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste - (6 of The CCR hazardous Solid all from chemicals, 1007-2), Act own solid contact C.R.S. the Wastes dumpster). waste or prohibit 25-15-301 hazardous ROW mine the CDOT Disposal except CDOT and tailings, Hazardous solid If disposed Sites et at wastes pre-existing Regional waste al, permitted and and etc.) that Materials of is Permitting Facilities disposal the at solid encountered TSD might a Colorado permitted without sites. waste Management Act be Office generated There or C.R.S. Hazardous during facility an hazardous for 30-20-100, approved are direction the Supervisor: by or no Waste the designated performance permitted materials Certificate activities as et al, Regulations to (303) how and collection contamination landfills of of 512-5524. of to Regulations entities work, Designation (6 proceed. CCR or point the TSD entering Pertaining (a 1007-3) sites (e.g., (including permittee landfill within the for prohibit shall State solid oil to the or Solid the halt Waste permit). transfer, State Highway waste, petroleum work Contact in Disposal Highway a the The storage Right utility Information: contaminated Colorado affected Sites Right of or or Way construction and disposal of area Theresa Hazardous must Way. Facilities soil, and (TSD) be Therefore, removed company's asbestos, immediately Santangelo-Dreiling, Waste Asbestos Containing Materials, Asbestos Contaminated Soil - All any permit work ACM listed special (APCD) and Management on involved above. asbestos Waste provisions. Regulation in Additional Management the Supervisor: containing 8. work Contact information Disposal for materials Division's which Info: (303) of CDPHE 512-5524. ACM, authorization concerning (ACM) (HMWMD) and APCD must work and clearance comply Solid is done being HMWMD in Waste with requested. on asbestos Regulations CDOT the Regulations. - projects applicable contaminated The Additional can is (303) available application be 512-5519, accessed requirements guidance from soil, for or via the must any Theresa or the of comply CDOT requirements CDPHE CDOT the Asbestos Santangelo-Dreiling, permit CDPHE with Environmental the must Project Air may Pollution CDPHE specifically be specified Manager Permitting Hazardous Hazardous Control identify in the Website Division's Materials Materials Transportation of Hazardous Materials - or No the an from person United classed, exemption, the may States Colorado US described, offer approval DOT Department or Public for inter- accept packaged, or Utilities registration and a of hazardous Transportation intra- marked, Commission. state has material labeled, been HAZMAT Contact regulations issued. for and Registration transportation in Vehicles Information: at condition 49 CFR, requiring (303) in for For Part shipment commerce authorization 969-6748. a placard, as Colorado unless required must and that obtain more or Public info person 171. authorized authorization call Utilities the is The Federal Commission: registered hazardous by applicable and Motor a in material State (303) conformance requirements, Safety HAZMAT 894-2868. must Carrier be Permit with properly Administration, Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material — 404 Permits Administered By the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications Issued by the CDPHE WQCD - wetlands. the quality Clean type most certification Water of Several commonly 404 Act permit section types of authorized from may 404 section the CDPHE be permits required type 404 WQCD are often permits for activities is also (contact required exist, required. information with including relatively for the Contact above). nationwide, discharge minor the Contact impacts. appropriate of regional dredged the If CDPHE general, an Corps individual or fill Water and District material individual 404 Regulatory Quality permit into Control permits. is Office waters required, Division for of Nationwide information the section at U.S., (303) including permits 401 about 692-3500. water are what Working on or in any stream or its bank - streams In order or vary or project to of providing downstream measured a protect natural Natural live and existing Resources. of by water the valley preserve project; stream A beneficial length. stream the or state's and/or The its to is CPW banks defined fish 4) fish and segments application, or and tributaries, as wildlife; wildlife 1) represented of resources and/or streams as it may 3) per guidelines having be segments by from necessary a solid wetlands actions agreed blue of streams to line upon that present obtain may on supporting by a USGS within CDOT Senate 7.5' and obstruct, Bill quadrangle 25% 200 CPW, 40 certification or yards can more diminish, upstream be maps; cover accessed and/or destroy, from within or downstream at the 2) 100 https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines. change, Colorado intermittent yards modify, upstream of Department the Erosion and Sediment Control Practices - Any control Specifications activities Control control requirements that and disturb measures 107.25, Stormwater one will should 208, or be Quality specified 213 more be taken and acres 216 Guide in that to (https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot- of minimize land permit. require erosion a In situations Stormwater and sedimentation. where Construction a stormwater Control Permit permit practices (SCP) is from not should construction-specifications). required, the CDPHE-WQCD. be in accordance all reasonable Erosion with erosion & sediment and CDOT Standard The CDOT sediment Erosion (website: can also be used to design erosion/sediment https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape-architecture/erosion-storm-quality) controls. Website: Contact https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. Site Stabilization - All disturbances 212-217 Website: and https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape- require 623. The a stabilization CDOT Erosion plan, native Control seeding and Stormwater or landscape Quality design Guide architecture/erosion-storm-quality plan should according also to applicable be used to plan CDOT restoration of Standard disturbed Specifications vegetation. Stormwater Discharge From Industrial Facilities - Discharges Contact of Information: stormwater Contact runoff the from CDPHE-WQCD certain types of at (303) industrial 692- 3500. facilities, Website: such as concrete batch https://colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-commerce-and-industry-permits plants - require a CDPS Stormwater Permit. Concrete Washout - Waste Concrete drainageways, generated waste and shall inlets. from be concrete Concrete placed activities in a temporary washout shall shall NOT concrete be in be allowed accordance washout and to to refer flow facility CDOT into to and the specifications the must specifications drainage be ways, located and and guidelines inlets, a their minimum receiving of at revisions 50 for waters, feet or in from https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot-construction-specifications the state CDOT waters, ROW. sections 101, 107 and 208. Construction Dewatering (Discharge or Infiltration) and Remediation or Remediation Activities - Discharges Activities Discharge of water encountered Permit. Contact during excavation or work in wet areas may require a Construction Dewatering Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 2 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation June 2020 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB Information: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits. Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. For Applications and Instructions: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Requirements - applicable When within related working the provisions requirements. in boundaries a MS4 of the area, of All Colorado a discharges municipality discharges Water to that to the the Quality storm has CDOT a Control sewer MS4 highway permit, Act, system drainage the the are Water owner subject of system Quality statutes) such to activity or Control CDOT's within and to the inspection should the Commission or CDOT other Right contact MS4 municipalities' of by the Way (WQCC) Permit CDOT (ROW) and municipality #COS Regulations CDPHE. must -000005 MS4 Permit. regarding comply For (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wqcc-regulations-and-policies-and-water-quality- For stormwater with activities the (https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/documents). Discharges are https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater-programs. subject CDOT-related MS4 programs and requirements, go to: Post -Construction Permanent Water Quality - When Information working in a on the CDOT requirements MS4 area and can the be activity found disturbs under programs/pwq-permanent-water-quality the one CDOT or more acres, Permanent Water permanent Quality water MS4 quality Program control at: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater- measures may be required. Discharges to Storm Sewer Systems discharges and CDOT are flow subject include, Illicit condensation, from to Discharge to ground but stormwater firefighting the are provisions not water irrigation MS4 limited systems infiltration activities. Program of the to, water, Colorado substances are Contact PDD allowed to uncontaminated separate at: Information: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water- Water such without Quality as storm wash a springs, sewers, permit Contact Control water, footing from discharges the Act paint, the CDPHE-WQCD drains, and CDPHE-WQCD: automotive from the Colorado water potable line at fluids, (303) landscape flushing, Discharge water solvents, 692-3500. flows Prohibited Discharges - The and All found discharges flows, wetlands, following air discharges conditioning in uncontaminated the Permit oils Allowable or soaps Regulations. Discharges and sediment. Prohibited - irrigation, sources, from Information quality/stormwater-programs/idde.html. riparian diverted foundation can habitats also stream drains, be Spill Reporting - Spills reported be shall danger found Spills to at be the https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/emergency-reporting-line. contained on to CDOT the highways, Illicit public and shall cleaned Discharge into be waterways, reported up Hotline as soon at any by calling as (303) spill possible. 512-4426 in the 911, Spills highway and (4H20), shall shall right-of-way also NOT as be be well reported washed as the exceeding to Regional down the into 25 CDPHE Permitting gallons, the storm or that at 1-877-518-5608. Office drain or and may otherwise buried. Regional More All Maintenance present information spills shall an immediate can be Supervisor. Disposal of Drilling Fluids - of solids the future Drilling man-made drilling the (telephone that be (less that work area fluids pumped are than fluid specifically restored or approved in #'s used 1 the natural consists or cubic listed in vacuumed area, as operations yard accept waterway of for required above). only use of from such solids) water in such drinking by is the wastes. prohibited CDOT as may and construction Horizontal permit Disposal be bentonite water left by Water on well requirements -site Directional area, of clay, drilling; drilling Quality after removed or, if 2) fluids either required the (Utility, Drilling Control solids from into being Special may the storm and/or for are separated proper be State fully classified drains, Solid Use, contained Highway drilling or Waste from storm Access as fluids properties, "discharges" Right regulations. in sewers, Permits, a of or pit, Way, roadside after small and etc.). or Small infiltration are and "solid Contact not wastes," disposed ditches quantities of quantities likely 3) Information: the the or water, to solids and of pose any of of at are in drilling provided: polymer a Contact permitted other nuisance general, covered type fluid additives CDPHE should facilities 1) to and Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species Management Plan - Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species guidance can and plans the be found Colorado involving by contacting the Division of control the Parks of Colorado and noxious Wildlife weeds Department (http://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/RS-NoxiousWeeds.aspx). of Agriculture (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/agconservation/noxiousweeds) In either will case, be required. management associated with the permitted activity and cleaning of equipment Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 3 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation June 2020 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB COLORADO Department of Transportation What is stormwater runoff? Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground. Impervious surfaces like roads and sidewalks prevent stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground Why is stormwater runoff a problem? Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt and other pollutants and flow into CDOT's storm drain system or directly into a stream, river, lake, wetland or reservoir. Anything that enters CDOT's storm drain system is discharged untreated into the waterways we use for fishing, swimming, and providing drinking water. Dredged spoil, dirt,, slum;, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, sewage sludge, garbage, trash, chemical waste, biological nutrient, biological material, radioactive material, heat, pH, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, any industrial, municipal, or agricultural waste. Tips for Reporting an Illicit Discharge Call the illicit discharge hotline at (303) 512-4426 From a safe distance try to estimate the amount of the discharge. Identify characteristics of the discharge (color, odor, algae, etc.). Obtain information on the vehicle dumping the waste (if applicable). Do not approach! Call *CSP for illicit dumping. If possible, take a photo, record a license plate. REMEMBER: Never get too close to the illicit discharge, it may be dangerous!!! For more information on CDOT Utility Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/utilitie sspecialuse For more information on CDOT Access Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/access permits For more information on CDOT Water Quality Program: Water Quality Program Manager 4201 E. Arkansas Ave. Shumate Building Denver, Colorado 80222 303-757-9343 COLORADO Department of Transportation Water Quality program Industrial Facilities program CDOT has a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit, otherwise known as (MS4) from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit states that only stormwater can be discharged from CDOT's storm drain system ewer pipe —4Pms THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT catch basin sad e— storm drain. pipe TO THE LOCAL WATERR ODY As part of the permit, CDOT has several different programs to prevent pollutants from entering into the storm drain system: Construction Site Program New Development Redevelopment Program Illicit Discharge Program Industrial Facilities Program Public Education and Outreach Program Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Program Wet Weather Monitoring Program DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB £0 Control Measures for Industrial Facilities COLORADO Department of Transportation Industrial facilities can use control measures (CM) otherwise known as Best Management Practices (BMP) during the construction of a facility and when operating the facility. Control measures are schedules of activities, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent and reduce pollution entering into CDOT's storm drain system. Control Measures also include treatment, operating procedures, and practices to control site run off which can include structural and non-structural controls. THE GAUNT!.F'T CIn compliance!! N ARE THERE POLLUTANTS? , IS THERE A 9MP PRESENT? IS THIS THE PRQPER 11419 FOR THE POILLTA,\P IS THE BMP PROPERLY MAINTAINED? FIND INGI CDOT defines a utility, or utility facility as any privately, publicly, or cooperatively owned line, facility, or system producing, transmitting or distributing the following: Communications Cable television Power Electricity Light Heat Gas Oil Crude Products Water Stream Waste Stormwater not connected with highway drainage Similar Commodity COLORADO Department of Transportation Industrial Facilities Program Elements: 1. Educate and outreach to owners or operators that have potential to contribute substantial pollutant to water. 2. Report and include information on discharge and water quality concerns. Provide written notification within 15 days of discovery to CDPHE. 3. Submit an annual report to CDPHE containing the number of informational brochures distributed; name and title of each individual trained. Education There are instances when a utility company or other entity doing work in the state highway right-of-way will require some type of environmental permit or clearance for that work. CDOT has put together an Environmental Clearances Information Summary for those applying for a CDOT Utility and Special Use Permit or Access Permit to obtain all required clearances. This fact sheet is given to each permittee and is available at: htt p: / / www. col oradodot . info/ programs/ environmental/ resources/ guidance - standards/ Environmental%20Clearances% 20l of o%2OSu mma ry. pdf DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions 1. If there are any questions regarding this permit, please contact Mike Shepherd at 970-324-4823. 2. The Permittee or the contractor shall notify Bruce Barnett at 970-381-1742 at least two working days prior to beginning any access improvements or construction of any kind within the State Highway right-of-way. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in revocation of this permit. 3. The Permittee shall request final inspection by Bruce Barnett at 970-381-1742 within 10 days following the completion of access removal, and prior to authorized completion. The Permittee or their representative shall be present. 4. A fully executed complete copy of this permit must be on the job site with the contractor at all times during construction. Failure to comply with this or any other construction requirement may result in the immediate suspension of work by order of the Department inspector or the issuing authority. 5. The Permittee shall refer to all additional standard requirements included with this permit and any enclosed additional terms, conditions, exhibits, and noted attachments. 6. Incorporated as part of this permit are the following: Application for Access Permit (CDOT Form No. 137) Permit (CDOT Form No. 101) and its attachments Exhibits: "A" — Vicinity Map "B" — Seeding 7. This permit is issued in accordance with the State Highway Access Code (2 CCR 601-1), and is based upon the information submitted by the Permittee. This permit is only for the use and purpose stated in the Application and Permit. Any changes in traffic volumes or type, drainage, or other operation aspects may render this permit void, requiring a new permit to be applied for based upon the existing and anticipated future conditions. 8. All work is to conform to the plans referenced by this permit on file with the Department or as modified by this permit. (If discrepancies arise, this permit shall take precedence over the plans.) The Department plan review is only for the general conformance with the Department's design and code requirements. The Department is not responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the design, dimensions, elevations, and any other elements which shall be confirmed and correlated at the work site. The Department, through the approval of this document, assumes no responsibility for the completeness and/or accuracy of the plans. 9. The Permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary additional federal, state, and/or city/county permits or clearances required for construction of the access. Approval of this access permit does not constitute verification of this action by the Permittee. 10. The State requires a Certificate of Insurance prior to commencing any work on the State Highway right-of-way. Policies shall name the State of Colorado as additional insured party. All DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions vendors, contractors, and utility companies shall procure, at their own expense, and maintain for the duration of the work period, the following minimum insurance coverages: A. Standard workman's compensation and employer's liability, including occupational disease, covering all employees engaged in performance of the work at the site, in the amount required by State Statutes. B. Comprehensive general liability in the amount of $600,000 combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, each occurrence and $2,000,000 annual aggregate. C. Automobile liability in the amount of $600,000 combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, for each accident. Certificates of insurance showing compliance with these provisions shall be attached to and made a part of this permit and be available on the site during construction. 11. All costs associated with the removal of this access are the responsibility of the Permittee. This includes design, construction and removal, signing and striping, utility relocation, testing of materials, and inspections. In the event a signal is warranted in the future, CDOT will not participate in any fashion with that signal installation, including financially. 12. The Department will not participate in any costs related to the design and installation of a traffic signal, should one be warranted or approved at this access location or any other serving this development. 13. The development of this property shall not negatively impact adjacent nearby properties. Correction of the problem and cost resulting from damages shall be borne by the Permittee. 14. It is the responsibility of the Permittee to determine which environmental clearances and/or regulations apply to the project, and to obtain any clearances that are required directly for the appropriate agency prior to commencing work. Please refer to or request a copy of the "CDOT Environmental Clearance Information Summary" (ECIS) for details. The ECIS may be obtained from the CDOT Permitting Offices or may be accessed via the CDOT Planning/Construction- Environmental Guidance webpage at http://www.dot.state.co.us/environmental/Forms/asp. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN THE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF YOUR CDOT PERMIT, OR ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS BY OTHER AGENCIES. ALL discharges are subject to the provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Act and the Colorado Discharge Permit Regulations. Prohibited discharges include substances such as: wash water, paint, automotive fluids, solvents, oils or soaps. Unless otherwise identified by CDOT or the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environmental (CDPHE) Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) as significant sources of pollutants to the waters of the State, the following discharges to storm water systems are allowed without a Colorado Discharge Permit System Permit: landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, uncontaminated ground water infiltration to separate storm sewers, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air condition condensation, irrigation water, DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions springs, footing drains, waterline flushing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, and flow from fire -fighting activities. ANY OTHER DISCHARGES, including storm water discharges from industrial facility or construction sites, may require Colorado Discharge Permit System permits from CDPHE before work begins. For additional information and forms, go to the CHPHE website at: http://cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit/wqu. 15. Should any excavation encounter plant or animal fossils, the remains of historic or prehistoric structures, artifacts, (pottery, stone tools, arrowheads, etc.), the work shall be stopped and the Permittee shall notify the Department inspector. 16. Survey markers or monuments must be preserved in their original positions. Notify the Department at 970-302-2587 immediately upon damage to or discovery of such markers or monuments at the work site. Any survey markers or monuments disturbed during the permitted work shall be repaired and/or replaced immediately at the expense of the Permittee. 17. Landscaping and site construction shall not obstruct sight distance at any State Highway access point. Landscaping within the State Highway right-of-way requires the Permittee to obtain a CDOT Landscaping Permit from the Traffic/Access Section. The access permit does not authorize that activity. Irrigation of features within the right-of-way may require the Permittee to install a subsurface drain in accordance with CDOT Standard M-605-1 or other approved system. The Permittee shall contact Allyson Mattson at the Greeley Traffic Office, 970-381-8995 to obtain the Landscaping Permit. 18. This permit is subject to revocation due to: 1) Noncompliance with the provisions of this permit; 2) Abandonment; 3) Supersedure by new permit covering the same installation; or 4) Conflict with necessary planned highway construction and/or improvements. The permittee shall promptly terminate occupancy upon notice of cancellation of the permit from the Department, unless a new permit is applied for and granted. 19. The Department inspector may suspend work due to: 1) Noncompliance with the provisions of this permit; 2) Adverse weather or traffic conditions; 3) Concurrent highway construction or maintenance in conflict with permit work; 4) Any condition deemed unsafe for workers or the general public. The work may be resumed upon notice from the Department Inspector. 20. If necessary, minor changes, corrections, and/or additions to this permit may be ordered by the Department inspector, other Department representative or local authority to meet unanticipated site conditions. Changes may not be in violation of the State Highway Access Code. All major changes to the plan must be approved in writing by the Department prior to commencement of any work on or within the State Highway right-of-way. DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions 21. Reconstruction and improvements to the access may be required when the Permittee has failed to meet the required design and/or material specifications. If any construction element fails within two years due to improper construction or material specifications, the Permittee is responsible for all such repairs. 22. The Department retains the right to perform any necessary maintenance work in this area. 23. Routine, periodic maintenance and emergency repairs may be performed within the State Highway right-of-way, under general terms and conditions of the permit. Any significant repairs such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, will require written authorization from the Department. The Department shall be given proper advance notice whenever maintenance work will affect the movement or safety of traffic on the State Highway. In an emergency, the Department Region Office and the State Patrol shall immediately be notified of possible hazards. 24. Access construction and removal methods and materials shall conform to the Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (current edition). 25. All materials, equipment, removal, construction, and design, including the auxiliary lane(s) and intersection improvement(s) within the State Highway shall be in accordance with the following Department standard references as applicable. A. State Highway Access Code, 2 CCR601-1 B. Roadway Design Manual C. Materials Manual D. Construction Manual E. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, latest edition F. Standard Plans (M&S Standards) G. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (M.U.T.C.D.) for Streets and Highways and the Colorado Supplement thereto H. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), latest edition I. AASHTO Roadside Design Guide J. Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions Some of the reference materials listed above (A through E) may be purchased from: Colorado Department of Transportation Bid Plans Room 2829 W. Howard PI. Denver, CO 80204 970-757-9011 The State Highway Access Code may be purchased from: The Public Records Corporation 1666 Lafayette Street PO Box 18186 Denver, CO 80218 (303) 832-8262 The website address is: www.cdot.gov 26. All workers within the State Highway right-of-way shall comply with their employer's safety and health policies/procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations — including, but not limited to, the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational Safety and Health Standards and 29 CRF Part 1926 - Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. At a minimum, all workers in the State Highway right-of-way, except when in their vehicles, shall wear the following personal protective equipment: • Head protection that complies with the ANSI Z89.1-1997 standard; • At all construction sites or whenever there is danger of injury to feet, protective footwear that complies with the ANSI Z41-1999 standard will be worn • High visibility apparel as specified in the Traffic Control provision of this permit (at such a minimum ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, Class 2). Where any of the above referenced ANSI standards have been revised, the most recent version of the standard shall apply. 27. No work will be allowed at night, or on Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays without prior authorization from the Department. The Department may also restrict work within the State Highway right-of-way during adverse weather conditions. 28. No construction vehicles shall be parked, or construction materials/equipment stored, on the State Highway right-of-way overnight. DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions 29. Backing maneuvers within and into the State Highway right-of-way are strictly prohibited. All vehicles shall enter and exit the highway right-of-way in forward movement. Backing into the right-of-way shall be considered a violation of the terms and conditions of the access permit and may result in revocation of the permit by the Department and/or the issuing authority. 30. Traffic detours or lane closures will not be allowed, unless pre -approved by the Department. 31. Two-way traffic shall be maintained throughout the work area at all times unless specific written authorization is obtained from the Department. 32. Construction traffic control devices, when not in use, shall be removed or turned away from traffic. Devices must be stored outside of the roadway clear zone per the latest AASHTO guidelines. 33. If State Highway right-of-way fence exists or is proposed, the Permittee must contact Bruce Barnett at the Greeley Traffic Office, 970-381-1742 prior to removal or installation. The Permittee will be required to obtain a highway right-of-way fence agreement for a special fence if the Permittee desires to remove the existing standard highway fencing in this area. When it is necessary to remove any highway right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access entrance shall be securely braced with approved end posts and in conformance with the Department's M-607-1 standard, before the fence is cut to prevent slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire removed shall be returned to the Department. 34. The access removal shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation of construction within State Highway right-of-way. 35. All required access improvements shall be installed prior to the herein authorized use of this access. Failure to do so will result in the appropriate legal action from the Department, up to Permit Revocation. 36. The access shall be removed and seeded immediately upon completion of earthwork construction and prior to use. 37. No paved surface shall be cut unless specified in this permit. Asphalt removal shall be saw cut to assure a straight edge for patching. Full panel concrete replacement is required for any concrete work. 38. Any new State Highway pavement shall slope on the same plane as the present pavement surface. DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB State Highway Access Permit Attachment to Permit No. 4240113 - Additional Terms and Conditions 39. If frost, water, or moisture is present in the subgrade, no surfacing materials shall be placed until all frost, water, or moisture is gone or removed. 40. The closed access shall be maintained in such a manner that will not cause water to enter onto the roadway, and will not interfere with the existing drainage system within the State Highway right-of-way. Drainage to the State Highway right-of-way shall not exceed historical rate of flow. 41. All existing drainage structures shall be extended, modified, or upgraded as necessary, to accommodate all new construction and safety standards, in accordance to the Department's standard specifications. 42. This access must be removed in its entirety before the use of the access associated with permit 424012. Removal shall include, but is not limited to, the return of the highway right-of-way slopes, ditches, and fences to match existing adjacent conditions, INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ASPHALT APRONS. Any asphalt removed from the highway shall result in a smooth finished edge. The right-of-way must be restored to the original condition on this date using the included seeding mixture. Revegetation efforts must be continuously monitored until they are accepted by the CDOT Access Inspector. DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB I _ COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT APPLICATION Issuing authority application acceptance date: Please or Instructions: type print - - - - - If - Contact Contact Complete Submit you For additional the the an have this issuing application Colorado any form questions information authority (some Department for questions each contact see to CDOT's determine access of the Transportation what may not affected. issuing Access apply authority. Management plans (CDOT) and to you) other or and website your documents attach local at all http://www.dot.state.co.us/AccessPermits/index.htm government are required necessary documents to determine to be submitted your and Submit issuing with authority. your it to the application. issuing authority. 1) Property Lee owner (Permittee) & Ruby Lindblad 2) Applicant CBEP or Solar Agent for 22, permittee LLC (if & different CBEP from Solar property owner) 23, LLC Street 13653 address HWY 392 WELD, Weld County, 80631 Mailing 1120 address Pearl Street City, state Ault, & zip CO 80610 Phone # 9703967385 City, state Boulder, & zip CO 80302 Phone # 9704253501 (required) E-mail rubylindblad@yahoo.com address lee@rentunc . corn E-mail Brysen@cloudbreakenergy.com address if available 3) Address 13653 of property HWY to 392 be served WELD, by Weld permit (required) County, 80631 4) county Weld Legal description of subdivision property: If within jurisdictional block limits of Municipality, city and/or lot County, section 17 which one? township 6 North range 66 West 5) What CO State -392 Highway are you requesting access from? 6) What side of the highway? S E W aN 7) How 1, many 7 98 feet is the feet ( proposed N S access from the E W) from: nearest mile 10 post? How many 981 feet is the feet proposed I N access S E❑W) from the from: nearest Weld cross street? CR 29 ■❑ 8) What 2/1/2024 is the approximate date you intend to begin construction? 9) Check new change here if you are requesting access temporary in access use a: access (duration anticipated: of ) improvement access relocation to existing access of an existing access (provide detail) aremoval 10) Provide Aggriculture existing property use 11) Do We you have no knowledge requesting yes, of any State if yes - what the Highway are removal the access permit number(s) of permits this serving and access this provide property, copies: or adjacent Unknown Rd. properties in which you have and/or, a property permit date: interest? . are 12) Does the property no owner own or yes, if yes - have please any interests describe: in any property adjacent owners property? own properties on west side of proposed acces . 13) Are there other no existing or dedicated yes, if yes - list them public streets, on your plans roads, and highways indicate or the access proposed easements and existing bordering or access within points. the property? . 14) If No, you are requesting removing agricultural existing field access - access how many acres will from 392. the access serve? 15) If you are requesting commercial business/land use or industrial access please indicate square the footage types and number of businesses and business provide the floor area square footage square of each. footage Commercial "Community Solar Garden" 1899216 CBEP Solar 22, LLC 1899216 Commercial "Community Solar Garden" 444312 CBEP Solar 23, LLC 444312 16) If you are requesting type residential developement access, what is the number type (single of units family, apartment, townhouse) type and number of units? number of units 17) Provide the following vehicle count estimates for vehicles that will use the access. Leaving the property then returning is two counts. Indicate peak if your hour volumes counts are or average daily volumes. # of passenger cars and light trucks at peak hour volumes # of multi unit trucks at peak hour volumes • # of single unit vehicles in excess of 30 ft. # of farm vehicles (field equipment) Total 0 count of all vehicles Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Page 1 of 2 CDOT Form #137 01/10 DocuSign 18) Check Envelope a) b) c) d) with Property Highway Drainage Map development the ID: issuing and 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB map and plan letters authority indicating driveway in showing detailing and along to plan impact other determine utility the access, profile. to right-of-way. locations the which highway bordering before of the right-of-way. following roads and after documents and streets. are required e) Subdivision, f) Proposed g) Parcel h) Traffic i) Proof to complete of and studies. ownership. access the zoning, ownership design. review or development maps of your including application. plan. easements. 1- It is the applicant's responsibility to contact appropriate agencies and obtain all environmental clearances that apply to their activities. Such clearances may include Corps of Engineers 404 Permits or Colorado Discharge Permit System permits, or ecological, archeological, historical or cultural resource clearances. CDOT Environmental Clearances The Information Summary presents contact information for agencies administering certain clearances, information about prohibited discharges, and may be obtained from Regional CDOT Utility/Special Use Permit offices or accessed via the CDOT Planning/Construction-Environmental-Guidance webpage http://www.dot.state.co.us/environmental/Forms.asp. 2- All workers within the State Highway right of way shall comply with their employer's safety and health policies/ procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations - including, but not limited to the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational Safety and Health Standards and 29 CFR Part 1926 - Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Personal protective equipment (e.g. head protection, footwear, high visibility apparel, safety glasses, hearing protection, respirators, gloves, etc.) shall be worn as appropriate for the work being performed, and as specified in regulation. At a minimum, all workers in the State Highway right of way, except when in their vehicles, shall wear the following personal protective equipment: High visibility apparel as specified in the Control provisions of the documentation Traffic accompanying the Notice to Proceed related to this permit (at a minimum, ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, class 2); head protection that complies with the ANSI Z89.1-1997 standard; and at all construction sites or whenever there is danger of injury to feet, workers shall comply with OSHA's PPE requirements for foot protection per 29 CFR 1910.136, 1926.95, and 1926.96. If required, such footwear shall meet the requirements of ANSI Z41-1999. Where any of the above -referenced ANSI standards have been revised, the most recent version of the standard shall apply. 3- Permittee is responsible for complying with the Revised Guidelines that have been adopted by the Access Board The under the American Disabilities Act (ADA). guidelines define traversable slope requirements and prescribe the These use of a defined pattern of truncated domes as detectable warnings at street crossings. The new Standards Plans and can be found on the Design and Construction Project Support web page at: <http://www.dot.state.co.us/DesignSupport/>, then click on Design Bulletins. If an access permit is issued to you, it will state the terms and conditions for its use. Any changes in the use of the permitted access not consistent with the terms and conditions listed on the permit may be considered a violation of the permit. The applicant declares under penalty of perjury in the second degree, and any other applicable state or federal laws, that all information provided on this form and submitted attachments are to the best of their knowledge true and complete. I understand receipt of an access permit does not constitute permission to start access construction work. Applicant or Agent for Permittee signature Print name Date [-DocuSiynedby frst,1it, awkok, Brysen Daughton 12/08/2023 4a 3LictocAcro... -18€ If the applicant is not the owner of the property, we require this application also to be signed by the property owner or their legally authorized representative (or other acceptable written evidence). signature shall constitute agreement This with this application by all owners -of -interest unless stated in writing. If a permit is issued, the property owner, in most cases, will be listed as the permittee. Property owner signature Print name Date DocuSigned by: Lee Lindblad 12/27/2023 CD2B3C8391CD42E... Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Page 2 of 2 CDOT Form #137 01/10 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB • Y_• a- 4, 1 6 Move Access to align with access across the street 4,t3/4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB -t... `V vat DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB • 'I Ws/mitt It kip Removal of Access #2 Removal of Access #1 0 I d < C. LI n t' '"may DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB 4781636 12/02/2021 01:42 PM Total Pages: 2 Rec Fee: $18.00 Doc Fee: $90.00 Carly Koppes - Clerk and Recorder, Weld County , CO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED is dated the 30th day of November, 2021, and is made between (whether one, or more than one), Fritzler Farms, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company the "Grantor" of the County of Weld and State of Colorado and Lee E. Lindblad and Ruby H. Lindblad State Doc Fee: $90.00 Recording Fee: $23.00 L'fr5i M4Ae;'gi%2 &a.Iey • efr'as Joint Tenants, (whether one, or more than one), the "Grantee", whose legal address is , of the County of `--(1 Weld and State of Colorado. L':1/6")-3 I WITNESS, that the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($900,000,00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, conveys and confirms unto the Grantee and the Grantee's heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with any improvements thereon, located in the County of Weld and State of Colorado described as follows: All that part of Section Seventeen (17) in Township Six (6) North, Range Sixty -Six (66) West of the 6th P.M. bounded and described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said section; thence running in a northerly direction along the East section line of said section, 675 feet to a point on said section line South of No. 2 Canal; thence along the South side of No. 2 Canal on the following courses; North 32° 48' West 270 feet; thence North 26° 24' West 200 feet; thence North 44° 20' West 145 feet; thence South 60° 35' West 210 feet; thence South 31° 14' West 170 feet; thence South 58° 03' West 200 feet; thence South 72° 48' West 225 feet; thence South 89° 56' West 640 feet; thence North 70° 03' West 175 feet; thence North 51° 20' West 125 feet; thence North 34° 12' West 650 feet; thence North 64° 13' West 150 feet; thence South 71° 24' West 258 feet to North and South half section line of said section; thence South 86° 43' West 146 feet; thence North 82° 14' West 266 feet; thence North 65° 44' West 210 feet; thence South 70° 34' West 490 feet; thence South 60° 35' West 92 feet; thence South 42° 50` East 30.9 feet; thence North 89° 36' East 1121.4 feet to the North and South section line of said section; thence in a southerly direction along said half section line 1344 feet to south 1/4 corner of said section; thence in an easterly direction along south section line of said section 2644.5 feet, more or less, to the Point of Beginning, County of Weld, State of Colorado. Seller Reserves all oil, gas and other mineral rights presently owned by seller if any. also known by street address as: 13653 Highway 392, Greeley, CO 80631 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, the reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the Grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the Grantee, and the Grantee's heirs and assigns forever. The Grantor, for the Grantor and the Grantor's heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree that the Grantor shall and will WARRANT THE TITLE AND DEFEND the above described premises, in the quiet and peaceable possession of the Grantee and the heirs and assigns of the Grantee, against all and every person or persons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by, through, or under the Grantor except and subject to: Statutory Exceptions as defined in G.R.S. § 38-30- 113(5)(a). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. Stewart Title File No.: 1488154 Page 1 of 2 Statutory Special Warranty Deed Co DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB 4781636 12/02/2021 01:42 PM Paget of2 Fritzler Farms, LC, a by J J. F ctzI .# r, Maria State of Colorado County of Weld orado limited liability company Thf o egoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 30th day of November, 2021 by John J. Fritzler as Manager of Fritzler Farms, PLC, a Colorado limited liability company. _f. ry Public Commission Expires: ammo. AJIMsfitislir.as...... C i 4 4L 4 I r 2/51 STATE 01' NOTARY ID 20044002134 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 07, 2024 I CHRISTINE M, 4r NOTARY PUBU . STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20044002134 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 07, 2024 Stewart Title File No.: 1488154 Page 2 of 2 Statutory Special Warranty Deed Co DocuSign Envelope ID: 9C6A0D44-4D62-4B5D-8D3C-06F5005959AB Seed Mix 1 - Orange Elevation: Low Water: Low Grasses 1. Achnatherum hymenoides (indian ricegrass) — 7% (1.0 lbs/acre) 2. Andropogon hallii (sand bluestem) — 4% (0.5 lbs/acre) 3. Bouteloua curtipendula (sideoats grama) — 5% (0.6 lbs/acre) 4. Bouteloua gracilis (blue grams) — 7% (0.5 lbs/acre) 5. Distichlis spicata (saltgrass) — 2% (0.3 lbs/acre) 6. Elymus canadensis (Canada wildrye) — 4% (0.7 lbs/acre) 7. Elymus elymoides (squirreltail) — 7% (1.5 lbs/acre) 8. Hesperostipa comata (needle and thread) — 7% (1.2 lbs/acre) 9. Panicum virgatum (switchgrass) — 7% (0.4 lbs/acre) 10. Schizachyrium scoparium (little bluestem) — 5% (0.5 lbs/acre) 11. Sporobolus airoides (alkali sacaton) — 5% (0.1 lbs/acre) 12. Sporobolus cryptandrus (sand dropseed) — 5% (0.1 lbs/acre) Forbs/Flowering 1. Asclepias speciosa (showy milkweed) — 6% (1.8 lbs/acre) 2. Cleome serrulata (Rocky Mountain bee plant) — 5% (0.8 lbs/acre) 3. Coreopsis tinctoria (golden tickseed) — 3% (0.03 lbs/acre) 4. Dales purpurea (purple prairie clover) — 3% (0.2 lbs/acre) 5. Gaillardia aristata (blanketflower) — 4% (0.6 lbs/acre) 6. Helianthus annuus (common sunflower) — 5% (0.8 lbs/acre) 7. Linum lewisii (Lewis flax) — 4% (0.3 lbs/acre) 8. Machaeranthera tanacetifolia (Tahoka daisy) — 2% (0.2 lbs/acre) 9. Verbena stricta (hoary verbena) — 3% (0.03 lbs/acre) Seeding Application: Drill seed 0.25" to 0.50" into the topsoil. In areas that are not accessible to drill, hand broadcast at triple the above rate and rake 0.25" to 0.50" into the topsoil. Mulching Application: 1.5 tons of certified weed free hay per acre to be mechanically crimped into the topsoil in combination with an organic mulch tackifier at 200 pounds per acre. Note: Hydroseeding and/or Hydromulching will not be allowed. FOR COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Business Name: Address: Business Owner: Home Address: CBEP Solar 23, LLC and CBEP Solar 22, LLC PO Box 1255 Cloudbreak Energy Partners, LLC PO Box 1255 Phone: City, state, zip: Phone: City, state, zip: List up to three persons in the order to be called in the event of an emergency: NAME Zachary Brammer TITLE COO PHONE (970) 425-3175 (970) 425-3175 Sterling, CO 80751 (970) 425-3175 Sterling, CO 80751 ADDRESS PO Box 1255, Sterling, CO 80751 Becca Gallery Partner (970) 573-6440 PO Box 1255, Sterling, CO 80751 James Cleland CEO (970) 425-3175 PO Box 1255, Sterling, CO 80751 Business Hours: 8-5 UTILITY SHUT OFF LOCATIONS: Main Electrical: Gas Shut Off: Depicted on USR Map Days: M -F N/A Exterior Water Shutoff: N/A Interior Water Shutoff: N/A 07/22 12 Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R1330986 Assessed To Parcel 0805 1 7000039 M A LINDBLAD D LLC 13313 HIGHWAY 392 GREELEY, CO 80631-9353 Legal Description PT SE4SW4 17-6-66 LOT B REC EXEMPT RE -391 (.75R.26SHT) Year Tax Tax Charge 2022 Interest Fees Situs Address Payments Balance Total Tax Charge $281.96 $0.00 $0.00 ($281.96) $0.00 $0.00 Grand Total Due as of 08/25/2023 Tax Billed at 2022 Rates for Tax Area 0430 - 0430 Authority WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DIST RE4 NORTHERN COLORADO WATER (NC WINDSOR -SEVERANCE FIRE AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE CLEARVIEW LIBRARY WEST GREELEY CONSERVATION Taxes Billed 2022 * Credit Levy Mill Levy 15.0380000* 50.8790000 1.0000000 8.2500000 6.3070000 3.5530000 0.4140000 85,4410000 Amount $49.6 I $16791 $3.30 $27.23 $20.82 $11.72 $L37 $281.96 Values AG -FLOOD IRRRIGATED LAND AG -GRAZING LAND Total Actual $1 L933 $568 $0.00 Assessed $3,150 $150 $12,501 $3,300 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 17t" 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 that as of this date, all current and prior year taxes related to this parcel have been paid in full. 4 Signed: r Date: _ Li 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631. PO Box 458, Greeley, CO 80632. (970) 400-3290 Page 1 of 1 Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R1330486 Assessed To Parcel 080517000023 LINDBLAD LEE E 13313 HIGHWAY 392 GREELEY, CO 80631-9353 Legal Description Sims Address 17838 PT S2 17 6 66 (65 4A) VIZ BEG AT SE COI. N675' TO CANAL N32D48'W 270' N26D24'W 200' N44D20'W 145' $60D35'W 210' S31 D I4'W 170' S58D3'W 200' S72D48'W 225' S89D56'W 640' N70D3'W 175' N5 l D20'W 125' N34D12'W 650' N64D 13'W 150' S71 D24'W 258' TO N & S2 SEC LN S86D43'W 146' N82D I 4'W 266' N65D44'W 210' Additional Legal on File Year Tax Tax Charge 13653 HIGHWAY 392 WELD Interest Fees Payments Balance 2022 $2,200.96 $0.00 _ $0.00 ($2,200.96) $0.00 Total Tax Charge $0.00 Grand Total Duc as of 08/25/2023 $0.00 Tax Billed at 2022 Rates for Tax Area 0430 - 0430 Authority WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DIST RE4 NORTHERN COLORADO WATER (NC WINDSOR -SEVERANCE FIRE AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE CLEARVIEW LIBRARY WEST GREELEY CONSERVATION Taxes Billed 2022 * Credit Levy Mill Levy 15.0380000* 50.8790000 1.0000000 8.2500000 6.3070000 3.5530000 0.4140000 85.4410000 Amount $387,39 $1,310.64 $25.76 $212,52 $162.47 $91.52 $10,66 $2,200.96 Values AG -FLOOD IRRRIGATED LAND AG -GRAZING LAND FARM/RANCH RESIDENCE -IMPS OTHER BLDGS.- AGRICULTURAL Total Actual Assessed $53,699 $14,180 $249 $70 $137,986 $9,590 $7,263 $1,920 $199,197 $25,760 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. c ° o. 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 that as of this date, all current and prior year taxes related to this parcel have been paid in full. Signed: Date: 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631. PO Box 458, Greeley, CO 80632. (970) 400-3290 Page 1 of 1 Hello