The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20251294.tiffUse by Special Review (USR) Application Planning Department Use: Date Received: Amount $ Case # Assigned: Application Received By: Planner Assigned: P roperty Information Is the property currently in violation? RI No / ■ Yes Violation Case Number: Parcel Number: 1 0 5 7- 3 0- 1- 0 0- 0 4 2 & 1057-30-1-00-039 S ite Address: 19529 Highway 60 PT NE4 30-4-66 BEG N4 SEC COR TH S89D59E 1437.47 S01 D34W 1184.17 N46D41 E 141.08 N38D55E 101.05 N32D32E 91.98 N21 D51 E 100.04 N19D13E 146.21 N24D57E 338.87 N25D15E 133.11 N27D58E 161.23 N06D35E 130.68 S89D59E 626.06 Legal Description: S00D40E 2652.41 S89D44W 2624.9 N00D37W 25.57 N89D22E 368.24 N00D37W 591.14 S89D22W 368.31 N00D37W 2048.16 TO POB, and Lot A RE -3144 Section: 30 , Township 4 N, Range 66 W Zoning District: A Acreage: 150.66 Within subdivision or townsite? [XI No / ■ Yes Name: Water (well permit # or water district tap #): Central Weld County Water District Sewer (On -site wastewater treatment system permit # or sewer account #): OWTS SE -0100074 Floodplain ►A No / ■ Yes Geological Hazard 21 No / ■ Yes Airport Overlay IXi No / ■ Yes P roject U SR Use being applied for: Sand & Gravel Mining N ame of proposed business: Sweet Valle_y Pit P roperty Owner(s) (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) N ame: Randy Ray, Executive Director Company: Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Phone #: 970-330-4540 Email: rray@ccwcd.org Street Address: 3209 W 28th St. City/State/Zip Code: Greeley, CO 80634 APPLICANT/AUTHORIZED AGENT (Authorization Form must be included if there is an Authorized Agent) N ame: J.C. York P.E. Company: J&T Consulting Inc. Phone #: 970-222-9530 Email: jcyork@j-tconsulting.com Street Address: 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D City/State/Zip Code: Fort Lupton, CO 80621 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, or 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. Signature 12/11/24 • c Date Signature Randy Ray - Owner J.C. York - Authorized Agent Print Print 12/11/24 Date STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY 1. This Statement of Authority relates to Central Colorado Water Conservancy District, Groundwater Management Subdistrict, Well Augmentation Subdistrict, and is executed on behalf of the entity pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172, C.R.S. 2. 2. The type of entity is a governmental subdivision of the State of Colorado 3. The entity is formed under the laws of the Colorado Water Conservancy Act. 4. The mailing address for the entity is 3209 W. 28th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 5. The person and position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the entity is Randy W. Ray, Executive Director. 6. The authority of the foregoing person to bind the entity is limited to: a. Business Activities relative to the Sweet Valley Water Storage Project and all such business relative to the District property located in the NE % of Section 30, Township 4N, Range 66W. Executed this 23rd day of February, 2024. Signature STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF Weld )SS: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 23rd day of February 2024, by :2 f r /I� -7 -nY [ � i ! fff� eV ' ill Jam' } ! ` t Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ycz Notary Public . LYNN KRAMER NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20034018159 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 2, 2027 Departments of Planning Building, Development Review and Environmental Health 1402 N 17TH Avenue P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80682 Authorization Form I, (we),CCWCD, Randy Ray, Executive Direct°Live permission fi© AT Consulting, Inc., J.C. York (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: 19529 Highway 60 PT NE4 30-4-66 BEG N4 SEC DOR TH S89D59E 1437.47 S01 D34W 1184.17 N46D41E 141.08 N38D55E 101.05 N32D32E 91.98 N21 D51 E 100.04 N 19D 13E 146,21 N24D57E 338.87 N25D 15E 133.11 N27D58E 161.23 N06D35E 130.!68 S89D59E 626.06 SOOD40E 2652.41 S89D44W 2624.9 NOOD37W 25.57 N89D22E 368.24 NOOD37W 591.14 S89D22W 368.31 NOOD37W 2048.16 TO POB & Lot A RE -3144 Legal Description: of Section 30 , Township 4 N, Range 66 w Subdivision Name: Lot Bloch Property Owners Information: Address: 3209 W 28TH ST Phone: 97a-330-4540 E-mail: rray@ccwcd.org Authorized Agent/Applicant Contact Information: Address: 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Phone: 970-857-6222 E -Mail: jcyork@j-tconsulting.com Correspondence to be sent to: Owner X Authorized Agent/Applicant X Additional Info: by: Mail Email X I (We) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and after carefully reading the entire contents of this dement, that the information stated above is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. ��--� Date 4[ 23/2024 Owner Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this f ,r My commission expires O? 7 Owner Signature :1 �� day of 3.1 r �r . fi ter, „;°i_ Npt n;visubiic t LYNN KRAll ER NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY Ili 20034018159 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 2, 2027 Date , 20 by 01/24 11 Use by Special Review (Mining Operation) Questionnaire Responses The following information addresses each section of the Use By Special Review questionnaire and is separated into responses for each specific section. 1. Describe any active mining permits that the applicant holds within Weld County. There are no active mining permits. 2. Describe the types, numbers and purpose of structures (offices, warehouses, scales, mechanical, trailers, silos, fuel stations, maintenance buildings, etc.) that will be built on -site and any operation and processing equipment and vehicles to be utilized, including overhead and below -surface conveyors and whether temporary or permanent. The operation may include two aggregate processing plants with, dry and wet screens, crushers, electrical/control trailers with line power and/or generator power, conveyors, and stacking facilities at various times during the mining activities as shown on the Extraction Plan map. All aggregate will be mined with an excavator, dozer, and/or loader with the raw product being conveyed to the processing facility via haul trucks and/or conveyors. A scale and scale operator trailer are located east of the Phase 2 south cell. Overburden and aggregate stockpiles will be located as shown on the Extraction Plan map. The stockpiles will have a height of 10 to 35. 3. Describe the number of shifts and/or rotations to be worked and the average and maximum number of employees. The standard operating hours will be during daylight hours, Monday through Saturday for the mining/processing facilities. Because federal highway paving projects are often required to conduct their work activities at night to minimize the impacts to traffic flows, the aggregate processing facilities may occasionally operate during night time hours if work on these types of projects is done. This would be requested by the applicant prior to operating at night to receive approval to do so. Typically, the CCWCD staff will be visiting the property two to four times a day for water storage operations but those visits can happen at any time during daylight hours. There will be a maximum of 60 employees on the site on any given day for the aggregate mining/processing facilities. There will be approximately 5 visitors per week on the site. 4. Describe any groups of persons who may access the site on a typical, expected basis including visitors, deliveries, etc. There will be a maximum of 60 employees on the site on any given day for the aggregate mining/processing facilities. There will be approximately 5 visitors per week on the site. 5. Explain if the operation will involve a wet or dry pit and/or a slurry wall. The aggregate mine operation will be conducted as a dry pit with a slurry wall constructed around the mining operation. 6. Describe the size of the area (by acreage and depth) to be worked at any one time. The area that is included in the permit boundary is 147.83 acres. As shown on the Extraction Plan map, the mine will progress in phases and slurry walls will be installed prior to mining. One phase will be actively mined at any given point in time. Phase 1 mining area is 32.42 acres and Phase 2 is 40.11 acres. The final depth of the mining will vary from 53 to 59 feet for Phase 1 and 57 to 66 feet for Phase 2. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Mining Operation) Use by Special Review (Mining Operation) Questionnaire Responses 7. Describe the estimated timeframe that will be required for the various stages of the operation including site preparation, site construction, pit and stockpile development, mining and reclamation. CCWCD anticipates mining and reclaiming the site in approximately 11 years and 8 months. Annual production is expected to be 650,000 tons per year depending on market demands. This production rate translates to 5 years and 7 months to mine Phase 1 and 6 years and 1 months to mine Phase 2. Reclamation will progress concurrently with the mining activity as each phase is completed. 8. Describe the type of material and the depth and thickness of the mineral deposit to be mined and the thickness of growth medium and/or overburden to be removed and stockpiled. The final depth of the mining will vary from 53 to 59 feet for the Phase 1 north cell and 57 to 66 feet for the Phase 2 south cell. Overburden thickness ranges from 0 to 7.5 feet throughout the site. The sand and gravel deposit thickness ranges from 49 to 66 feet. See the attached soils investigations for more detailed information. 9. Describe the proposed use of reclaimed lands and an explanation of the reclamation process, including if any water storage is proposed post -reclamation. The mine will be reclaimed as two lined water storage reservoirs. The reclamation process is explained in the attached reclamation plan approved by the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety. 10. Explain and justify any request to operate beyond the standard Mining Operations Policies per Section 23-4-290.A and/or B of the Weld County Code. Such waivers may be considered and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Excavation and processing of sand and gravel will be conducted a minimum of 10 feet from the boundary of adjacent properties, easements, irrigation ditches, and right-of-ways and also a minimum of 125 feet from any existing residence. The standard operating hours will be during daylight hours for all facilities on the site Monday through Saturday. Because federal highway paving projects are often required to conduct their work activities at night to minimize the impacts to traffic flows, the aggregate processing facilities may occasionally operate during night time hours if work on these types of projects is done, but this would be requested by the applicant prior to operating at night to receive approval to do so. 11. List any County, Municipal or CDOT roads and bridges to be utilized along with site entrance/exit points. All traffic to and from the site will originate from HWY 60 and turn west on CR 40 then turn north on to a leased roadway area on the Meining Cattle Company property until the site is reached along the south side of the permit boundary. There will be one entrance to the aggregate processing facilities as shown on the Extraction Plan map. All commercial traffic exiting the site will travel east on CR 40 then turn south on HWY 60. Commercial traffic entering the site will originate from HWY 60, travel west on CR 40 then turn north on to a leased roadway area on the Meining Cattle Company property until the site is reached along the south side of the permit boundary. Items referenced in this narrative with copies of each included in the overall County application: • DRMS 112(c) Reclamation Operation Permit Application and Approval LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Mining Operation) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses The following information addresses each section of the Use By Special Review Planning questionnaire and is separated into responses for each specific section. 1. Explain the proposed use and business name. The site is proposed to have a water storage reservoir on the north side of the Western Mutual Ditch and one on the south side of the ditch. The water storage reservoirs will be the north cell (Heritage Reservoir) and the south cell (Trailblazer Reservoir) and the cells will each have their own slurry wall. The cells would then be used to store water. The Extraction Plan map shows the layout for the two cells. The business name is Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD). CCWCD, Groundwater Management Subdistrict (GMS), and Well Augmentation Subdistrict is governed by a 15 — member Board of Directors. Board of Directors began purchasing senior water rights shortly after the formation of GMS in 1973. This water is used to fill reservoirs, recharge ponds and direct supply to the South Platte River. Some of the earliest stock certificates date back to 1980. The District and two Subdistricts have assembled a water portfolio that contains rights in twenty-three different ditch companies. 2. Explain the need for the proposed use. CCWCD includes two subdistricts for the purpose of augmenting high capacity wells, primarily irrigation wells, in Adams, Weld and Morgan Counties. In order for the 800 family farms to operate with a full water supply, CCWCD's augmentation plans requires an annual water supply of approximately 75,000 acre-feet. Central is still actively building out the full compliment of augmentation supplies necessary to achieve full allocation for all members on an annual basis. Since the two augmentation plans were approved in the mid -2000's by the Division 1 Water Court, annual member water allotments have averaged approximately 50`)/03. Preliminary estimates indicate that Central can create approximately 4,500 acre-feet of new water storage. This water storage will be a valuable resource and will complement Central's existing 22,000 acre-feet of lined gravel pit storage, located at various locations in the South Platte Basin. 3. Describe the current and previous use of the land. The current and previous use of the land is agricultural fields with irrigated crops. There is an existing house and existing sheds located on the property in the south east corner. 4. Describe the proximity of the proposed use to residences. The proposed use is adjacent to and on the east side of CR 25.5 and there are 4 residences on the west side of CR 25.5. The proposed use is adjacent to and on the south side of CR 42 and there is one residence on the north side of CR 42 and another residence on the south side of CR 42 that is also adjacent to the proposed use property. The proposed use is adjacent to and on the west side of Hwy 60 and there is one residence that is on east side of Hwy 60 and another residence that lies on the proposed use property at the southeast corner of the property. Another residence is adjacent to the proposed use property in the southwest corner just south of the proposed use property. 5. Describe the surrounding land uses of the site and how the proposed use is compatible with them. The majority of the surrounding land uses are agricultural fields that are irrigated and non -irrigated. To the west of CR 25.5 and north of CR 42 lands are owned by HS Land & Cattle and the majority of these lands are currently agricultural irrigated and non -irrigated crops but also have a DRMS 112 Permit (M 2022-009) and USR (USR 22-0030) associated with the land that is for gravel mining and L1 J&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses future reclaimed water storage. Northeast of the proposed use property are also irrigated and non - irrigated crop land that is owned by CAW Equities, LLC and this property has a DRMS 112 permit (M 2022-001) that has been approved for future gravel mining and water storage. On the east side of Hwy 60 the majority of the land use is currently irrigated and non -irrigated crop land that is owned by Terry and Janice Wiedeman. On the south side of the proposed use property the majority of the land use is currently irrigated and non -irrigated crop land that is owned by Meining Cattle Co, LLC (Scott Meining). There is also a parcel owned by CTW Properties, LLC (Terry Wiedeman) that is irrigated crop land. CDOT also owns property to the south and the land use is non -irrigated pastureland and their maintenance facility for snow plows and other equipment. The proposed land use is similar to the surrounding properties where it will be used for sand and gravel mining and future water storage. CCWCD's water storage will be for the benefit of agricultural lands where pumping of wells will be able to continue for irrigation of crops in the immediate area as well as CCWCD's other members. There are two other gravel mining permits that have received State approval and one that has received Weld County approval. 6. Describe the hours and days of operation. (i.e. Monday thru Friday; 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) The standard operating hours will be during daylight hours, Monday through Saturday for the mining/processing facilities. Because federal highway paving projects are often required to conduct their work activities at night to minimize the impacts to traffic flows, the aggregate processing facilities may occasionally operate during night time hours if work on these types of projects is done. This would be requested by the applicant prior to operating at night to receive approval to do so. Typically, the CCWCD staff will be visiting the property two to four times a day for water storage operations but those visits can happen at any time during daylight hours. 7. Describe the number of employees including full-time, part-time and contractors. If shift work is proposed, detail the number of employees, schedule, and duration of shifts. There will be a maximum of 60 employees on the site on any given day for the aggregate mining/processing facilities. There will be approximately 5 visitors per week on the site. There will be one shift that will operate during daylight hours Monday through Saturday. 8. Describe the maximum number of users, patrons, members, buyers or other visitors that the site will accommodate at any one time. The site can accommodate a maximum of 60 employees, 5 visitors, and the following vehicles for the aggregate mining/processing facilities: Passenger cars, pickups, 16 -ton tandem trucks, and 25 -ton semi -trucks and trailers, and single unit trucks will access the site daily. Occasional access will be made by mechanic's trucks, fuel trucks, etc. It is anticipated that the passenger cars and pickups, combined, will make a maximum of 20 trips per day. It is anticipated that the 16 -ton tandem trucks will make a maximum of 50 trips per day. It is anticipated that the 25 -ton semi -truck and trailers will make a maximum of 200 trips per day. It is anticipated that the mechanical trucks, fuel trucks, etc. will make a maximum of 5 trips per day. 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.). Not applicable to this USR. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses 10. List the types and number of operating and processing equipment. The operation may include two aggregate processing plants with, dry and wet screens, crushers, electrical/control trailers with line power and/or generator power, conveyors, and stacking facilities at various times during the mining activities as shown on the Extraction Plan map. All aggregate will be mined with an excavator, dozer, and/or loader with the raw product being conveyed to the processing facility via haul trucks and/or conveyors. Ascale and scale operator trailer are located east of the Phase 2 south cell. 11. List the types, number and uses of the existing and proposed structures. On -site oil and gas facilities used to include a tank battery on the west side of the property just south of the Western Mutal Ditch (this has been removed as the oil/gas wells are plugged and abandoned according to Petroleum Development Corporation (PDC) / Chevron); oil/gas wells that are plugged per PDC (now Chevron)) and abandoned; gas lines owned by Cureton Gilcrest (adjacent to Western Mutual Ditch and south on the property) and Suncor (existing line that runs north south on the eastern side of the property and a proposed line that has now been constructed) that cross the property; a private irrigation pipeline from the Western Mutual Ditch on the north side of the ditch running north to County Road 42 and this line is being relocated to outside the proposed north cell slurry wall. An existing box culvert crossing is located on the Western Mutual Ditch within the property and will be used to transport equipment and material from the Phase 1 mining area to the processing facilities. CCWCD will have future pipelines/pump stations for diversions to and from the proposed water storage cells for storing water and also taking water from storage. 12. Describe the size of any stockpile, storage or waste areas. Overburden and aggregate stockpiles will be located as shown on the Extraction Plan map. The stockpiles will have a height of 10 to 35. Wastes generated by the scale/operator house will be stored in a standard dumpster located adjacent to the scale/operator house. Wastes generated from the aggregate processing plants will be stored in standard dumpsters located adjacent to the processing plant areas. 13. Describe the method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, junk and other wastes associated with the proposed use. The volume of waste generated will be trash from the operation of the scale house, processing plants, and the employees of the mining operation (i.e. lunch containers, beverage containers, etc.). The volume will be collected in a 10 cubic yard dumpster and collected bi-weekly by the waste handler. 14. Include a timetable showing the periods of time required for the construction of the operation. CCWCD anticipates mining and reclaiming the site in approximately 11 years and 8 months. Annual production is expected to be 650,000 tons per year depending on market demands. This production rate translates to 5 years and 7 months to mine Phase 1 and 6 years and 1 months to mine Phase 2. Reclamation will progress concurrently with the mining activity as each phase is completed. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses 15. Describe the proposed and existing lot surface type and the square footage of each type (i.e. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings). Existing surfaces are as follows: Existing Western Mutual Ditch = 2.62 ac Existing access roads/gravel areas = 7.20 ac Existing Structures = 0.29 ac Existing Vegetation/crop land = 137.72 ac Proposed surface areas are as follows: Reservoir water surface (North Cell) = 32.23 ac Reservoir water surface (South Cell) = 40.10 ac Access Roads (North Cell) = 2.11 ac Access Roads (South Cell) = 2.42 ac Reclaimed vegetated land - Disturbed land and slopes above reservoir water surface (North Cell) = 7.80 ac - Disturbed land and slopes above reservoir water surface (S. Cell) = 12.67 ac - Disturbed land for processing area and stockpiles = 41.66 ac Existing access roads/gravel areas = 7.20 ac Existing structures = 0.29 ac Existing Western Mutual Ditch = 2.62 ac 16. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicap -accessible parking spaces are proposed? There will be 1 handicap parking space each for the processing plants next to the scale house. A parking area is designated on the Extraction Map. 17. Describe the existing and proposed fencing and screening for the site including all parking and outdoor storage areas. No existing fencing around the perimeter of the property currently exists. The only existing fencing is adjacent to the Graybill residence. A four or five wire barbed wire perimeter fence is proposed during the mining phases. Screening berms will be provided adjacent to residences per our conversations and requests with each resident. The screening berm heights vary based on resident requests from our neighborhood meeting and conversations/meetings with residents. 18. Describe the existing and proposed landscaping for the site. The existing landscape consists of agricultural fields with irrigated crops and dryland pasture vegetation. The mine will be reclaimed as lined water storage reservoirs. Portions of the mining areas will be reclaimed as native areas, which will be re -seeded with native vegetation. The majority of the of the mining area will be reclaimed as water storage reservoirs. The reclamation process is explained in the attached reclamation plan approved by the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety. All disturbed areas will be reclaimed and seeded with the seed mix shown in the attached DRMS reclamation plan when the reclamation activity for each phase is completed. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses 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 The reclamation will follow the procedures outlined in the attached reclamation plan approved by the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety. The reclamation will occur concurrently with the mining as each phase is completed with final reclamation completed approximately one year after the conclusion of mining. 20. Describe the proposed fire protection measures. Fire protection will be provided by Platteville-Gilcrest Fire Protection District. Fire extinguishers will also be present at the mine site in all equipment and at the scale house location. 21. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan per Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code. CCWCD, Groundwater Management Subdistrict (GMS), and Well Augmentation Subdistrict is governed by a 15 — member Board of Directors. Board of Directors began purchasing senior water rights shortly after the formation of GMS in 1973. This water is used to fill reservoirs, recharge ponds and direct supply to the South Platte River. Some of the earliest stock certificates date back to 1980. The District and two Subdistricts have assembled a water portfolio that contains rights in twenty-three different ditch companies. The two subdistricts were formed for the purpose of augmenting high capacity wells, primarily irrigation wells, in Adams, Weld and Morgan Counties. In order for over 800 family farms to operate with a full water supply, CCWCD's augmentation plans requires an annual water supply of approximately 75,000 acre-feet. Central is still actively building out the full compliment of augmentation supplies necessary to achieve full allocation for all members on an annual basis. Since the two augmentation plans were approved in the mid -2000's by the Division 1 Water Court, annual member water allotments have averaged approximately 50%. CCWCD is a necessary tool for farmers in Weld County to continue to produce agriculture products that not only Weld County relies on for food but also our State and Country. This proposal is consistent with Weld County Code Chapter 22 Sec. 22-2-30. - Land use goals and objectives. Paragraph A. Commit to the economic future of agriculture., part 4. a. Weld County Right to Farm Statement. Section 22-5-80 of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, paragraph A. CM.Goal 1 states "Conserve lands which provide valuable natural mineral deposits for potential future use in accordance with state law." This site contains a valuable commercial deposit of sand and gravel located in the alluvium of the South Platte River which is available for extraction. Paragraph B CM.Goal 2 states "Promote the reasonable and orderly development of mineral resources. There are other permitted mines are within one -quarter mile or less of the site. This indicates that the parcel is also viable for a future permit application for sand and gravel extraction activities and the orderly development of the resource can occur. 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.) This site is in the "A" Agricultural Zone District. Section 23-3-40 of the Weld County Code, paragraph JJ. Uses similar to the Uses listed as permitted as long as the Use complies with the general intent of the Zone District. The proposed mining and reclamation for water storage and use of water storage is consistent with this guideline. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Planning) Questionnaire Responses Section 23-3-40 of the Weld County Code, Paragraph R. lists Open MINING and processing of minerals, subject to the additional requirements of Article IV, Division 4, of this Chapter. The future use of the site as an aggregate mine is consistent with this guideline and a future Use by Special Review permit will be applied for once a DRMS 112 permit is approved. 23. Explain how this proposal will be compatible with future development of the surrounding area or adopted master plans of affected municipalities. Permitted sand and gravel operations are located in areas similar to this along the South Platte River corridors as evidenced by other mines being in close proximity to this site that have been permitted by the DRMS/VVeld County and have future reclaimed water storage as the end use. The end use for the site will be lined water storage reservoirs which is compatible with the agricultural nature of the general area. 24. Explain how this proposal impacts the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. CCWCD will follow the Design Standards in the Weld County Code (Section 23-2-240), and the Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250), which provide adequate provisions for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. 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. According to the "Important Farmlands of Weld County Colorado" map prepared by the USDA - Soil Conservation Service and Colorado State University Experiment Station, all of the proposed use area lies within the prime agricultural land. The locational use is based on CCWCD's ownership of augmentation wells in the vicinity of the storage location as well as the Western Mutual Ditch in which CCWCD owns shares in along with owning shares in the FIDCO ditch. The storage can be utilized to store water from the ditches and augmentation wells to enable CCWCD to re -time flows with the storage and deliver augmentation water back to the South Platte River. The benefits of the proposed use are to increase water yields on irrigation for farms in the immediate area as well as Weld County. 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. According to the Weld County GIS the site is not in a Special Flood Hazard Area. According to the Weld County GIS the site is not in the Weld County Airport overlay district area. According to the "Geologic Hazard Area Map of Potential Ground Subsidence Areas in Weld County, Colorado", dated May 10th, 1978, the site is not in a geologic 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. DRMS 112 Reclamation Operation — Sweet Valley Pit, File No. M-2024-015 Weld County Grading Permit — GRD24-0008 Weld County Access Permit — TAP24-0016 LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Planning) Use by Special Review (Development Review) Questionnaire Responses The following information addresses each section of the Use By Special Review questionnaire and is separated into responses for each specific section. 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 access to the site will be located along the south side of the site. The access is approximately 2,670 feet south from the intersection of CR 40 and CR 25.5, and 1,300 feet east of CR 25.5. The access permit (TAP 24-0016) has been approved by Weld County. The use for this access will be for the transportation of sand and gravel products. A temporary access road will be leased from the Meining Cattle Co. to access the site. The access road starts at a point 1,000 feet east of the intersection of CR 25.5 and CR 40. The roadway runs to the north along Meining Cattle Co. east property line to meet with the sites access point. 2. Describe any anticipated change(s) to an existing access, if applicable. No changes are proposed for any of the existing accesses to the CCWCD property. 3. Describe in detail any existing or proposed access gate including its location. No existing gate and no proposed access gate is anticipated for this project. 4. Describe the location of all existing accesses on adjacent parcels and on parcels located on the opposite side of the road. Include the approximate distance each access is from an intersecting county road. a. 1St Access to 19801 CR 25.5, west side of CR 25.5 is 995 feet south of the intersection of CR 42 and CR 25.5. b. 2nd access to 19729 CR 25.5, west side of CR 25.5 is 1,575 feet south of the intersection of CR 42 and CR 25.5. c. 3rd access to 19619 CR 25.5, west side of CR 25.5 is 1,970 feet south of the intersection of CR 42 and CR 25.5. d. 4t" access to 19529 CR 25.5, west side of CR 25.5 is 2,285 feet south of the intersection of CR 42 and CR 25.5. e. 5t" access to 19440 CR 25.5, east side of CR 25.5 is 2,445 feet north of the intersection of CR 40 and CR 25.5. f. 6t" access to 12591 CR 42, north side of CR 42 is 640 feet east of the intersection of CR 42 and CR 25.5. g 7t" access to 12774 CR 42, south side of CR 42 is 1,170 feet west of the intersection of CR 42 and Hwy 60. h. 8t" access to 13042 CR 42, south side of CR 42 is 490 feet east of the intersection of CR 42 and Hwy 60. 5. Describe any difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from an existing access and any anticipated difficulties seeing oncoming traffic from a proposed access. The sight distance from the leased access road on the north side of CR 40 is approximately 1,500 feet to the west with little elevation change and approximately 1,390 feet to the east with little elevation change. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Development Review) Use by Special Review (Development Review) Questionnaire Responses 6. Describe any horizontal curve (using terms like mild curve, sharp curve, reverse curve, etc.) in the vicinity of an existing or proposed access. There are no curves on CR 25.5. There is a mild curve on CR 40 that turns to the north approximately 1,390 feet to the east of the leased access road on the north side of CR 40. 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. The topography of CR 25.5 in the vicinity of the existing access points is flat. The topography of CR 40 in the vicinity of the leased access road is flat. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Development Review) Use by Special Review (Environmental Health) Questionnaire Responses The following information addresses each section of the Use By Special Review questionnaire and is separated into responses for each specific section. 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. Bottled water will be used for domestic use during the construction of the slurry walls. There is one existing domestic water tap, owned by CCWCD and the water provider is Central Weld County Water District. The tap number is 000506-02. This tap serves the existing residence in the southeast corner of the property. 2. Discuss the existing and proposed sewage disposal system. What type of sewage disposal system is on the property? If utilizing an existing on -site wastewater treatment system, provide the on -site wastewater treatment permit number. (If there is no on -site wastewater treatment 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 policy.) The proposed site will be utilizing portable sanitary facilities during the mining. There is an existing septic and leach field (permit SE - 0100074) that serves the existing residence that is in the southeast corner of the property. 3. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? Overburden and aggregate stockpiles will be located as shown on the Extraction Plan map. The stockpiles will have a height of 10 to 35. 4. Describe where and how storage and/or stockpile of wastes, chemicals, and/or petroleum will occur on this site. Wastes generated by the scale/operator house will be stored in a standard dumpster located adjacent to the scale/operator house. Wastes generated from the aggregate processing plants will be stored in standard dumpsters located adjacent to the processing plant areas. The dumpsters will be collected/emptied weekly. 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. There will be a 1,000 gallon fuel storage tank at the staging area for the processing plants and it will include secondary containment. Mobile fueling/lubrication will typically be used to fuel equipment. 6. If there will be washing of vehicles or equipment on site, indicate how the wash water will be contained. No washing of vehicles or equipment will occur. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Environmental Health) Use by Special Review (Environmental Health) Questionnaire Responses 7. If there will be floor drains, indicate how the fluids will be contained. There will be no floor drains. 8. Indicate if there will be any air emissions (e.g. painting, oil storage, etc.). There will be air emissions and dust from the aggregate processing plant and equipment which will be permitted through the CDPHE air pollution emissions notice (APEN) and controlled with counter measures to ensure the emissions are within regulatory limits. 9. Provide a design and operations plan if applicable (e.g. composting, landfills, etc.). Not applicable 10. Provide a nuisance management plan if applicable (e.g. dairies, feedlots, etc.). Not applicable 11. Additional information may be requested depending on type of land use requested. LiJ&T Consulting, Inc. Central Colorado Water Conservancy District USR Application Use by Special Review (Environmental Health) WELD COUNTY ACCESS PERMIT DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1402 North 17th Ave P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 Permit Number: TAP24-0016 Phone (970) 400-6100 Issuance of this permit binds applicant and its contractors to all requirements, provisions, and ordinances of Weld County, Colorado. Project Name: Permit Expiration Date: Planning/Building Process Parcel(s): Proposed Use: 10/30/2025 105730400044 Temporary Access is on WCR: 40 Nearest Intersection WCR: 40 - 25.5 Distance from Intersection: 1000 Number of Existing 0 Accesses: Access Width: 40ft. Access Turning Radii: 65ft. Latitude: 40.27541 Longitude: -104.81692 Applicant Information: Name: Company: Phone: Email. Randy Ray Central Colorado Water Conservancy District 970-330-4540 rray@ccwcd.org Owner Information: Name: Company: Phone: Email. Scott Meining Meining Cattle Co, LLC 970-381-3668 tsgmeining@msn.com Road Surface Type and Construction Information: Road Surface: Gravel Culvert Size and Type: 15" CMP/RCP or equivalent Material to Construct Access: Roadbase Start Date: Finish Date: A Copy of this permit must be on site at all times during construction hours Daily work hours are Monday through Friday DAYLIGHT to 1/2 HOUR BEFORE DARK (applies to weekends if approved) Approved MUTCD traffic control / Warning devices are required before work begins and must remain until completion of work ** Crushed or recycled concrete SHALL NOT be used for tracking material in the County ROW All access points shall comply with Chapter 8, Article XIV and Appendix 8-Q found at: https://library.municode.com/co/weld county/codes/charter and county code?nodeld=CH8PUWO ARTXIVROACPO https://library.municode.com/co/weld county/codes/charter and county code?nodeld=CH8PUWO APXB-QWECOENCOCR Unless otherwise authorized. Special Requirements or Comments Utilize new access point on CR. 40 (1 -TEMP) located approx. 1,000ft east of CR. 25.5 in accordance with executed surface use agreement. This access is replacing permitted AG access (AP24-00187) on CR. 25.5, located approx. 2,630ft. south of CR. 42. Access is for slurry wall construction only. At such time in the future that a proposed change of use of the access occurs, the access shall come into compliance with all applicable Weld County standards and requirements. Approved By: FLercy Digitally signed by Stephanie Flores Date: 2024.1 1.06 11:51:46 -07'00' Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Prepared By: Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. http://www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com/ Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE 343.589.6875 joe@sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Joseph L. Henderson's electronic or digital seal and signature is effective only as to that version of this document as originally published by Joseph L. Henderson. Joseph L. Henderson is not responsible for any subsequent modification, corruption, or unauthorized use of this document. To verify the validity or applicability of the seal and signature, contact Joseph L. Henderson. Table of Contents Page 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Existing Conditions 1 2.1 Existing Traffic Volumes 1 3.0 Site Generated Traffic Volumes 1 3.1 Trip Generation 1 3.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment 1 4.0 Capacity Analysis 1 5.0 Auxiliary Lanes 2 6.0 Conclusions 3 Appendix A Appendix B List of Appendices Traffic Count Data VISTRO Analysis Results List of Tables Table 1 — Existing and Projected Daily Traffic Volumes Table 2 — Trip Generation Estimate Table 3 — Permanent Traffic Volume Scenario Table 4 — Auxiliary Lane Evaluation at SH 60 / WCR 40 List of Figures Figure 1 — Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Trip Distribution Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study 1.0 Introduction The Meining Farm Pit is proposed southwest of SH 60 / WCR 42 in Weld County. The location of the quarry is shown in Figure 1. The haul route will include SH 60 / WCR 40. The Meining Farm Pit is expected to operate Monday through Saturday during daylight hours. This report documents the impacts of the permanent scenario where the aggregate will be mined and processed at the Meining Farm Pit. The mine is expected to open in Year 2025 and mining is expected to be completed by the Year 2035. This traffic analysis has been prepared based on the requirements in the State Highway Access Code' (SHAG). 2.0 Existing Conditions 2.1 Existing Traffic Volumes Traffic count data were collected at SH 60 / WCR 40 on Tuesday, November 28, 2023 by Sustainable Traffic Solutions. Thirteen hours of data were collected from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to allow the analysis of the hours when the quarry will be generating traffic. The existing and future daily volumes are summarized in Table 1 The traffic count data are contained in Appendix A. 3.0 Site Generated Traffic Volumes 3.1 Trip Generation Quarries are not a land use that is addressed in Trip Generation2, therefore, the trip generation was determined based on information that was provided by J2 Contracting. The truck and passenger vehicle traffic are summarized in Table 2. At the estimated trip generation, the Meining Farm Pit has approximately 10 years of life (9.97 years). 3.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment The trip distribution assumption for traffic associated with the quarry is contained in Figure 2. 4.0 Capacity Analysis To evaluate the performance of SH 60 / WCR 40 and the eastbound left turn movement, the level of service (LOS) was calculated using PTV VISTRO software. 1 2 State Highway Access Code. The Transportation Commission of Colorado. Amended March 2002. Trip Generation, 11th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers. September 2021. Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. 1 Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 This software package utilizes criteria described in the Highway Capacity Manual3. LOS is a measure used to describe operational conditions at an intersection. LOS categories ranging from A to F are assigned based on the predicted delay in seconds per vehicle for the intersection as a whole, as well as for individual turning movements. LOS A indicates very good operations, and LOS F indicates poor, congested operations. The following table summarizes the analysis of the background and total traffic volume scenarios including the impact of an eastbound to northbound left turn acceleration lane. The table shows that the addition of an eastbound to northbound left turn acceleration lane will reduce the average delay per vehicle and improve the level of service. Even though that movement is expected to operate at LOS E during the evening peak hour of the Year 2035 without the left turn acceleration lane, the average delay per vehicle is only 35.4 seconds. Considering that the passenger car equivalent for this movement is expected to be approximately 20 during the evening peak hour including nine passenger vehicles and four trucks, STS doesn't believe that a left turn acceleration lane is warranted for this movement. The analysis results are contained in Appendix B. EBLT Delay and LOS Summary Scenario Peak Hour Delay Morning Delay Evening Year 2023 17.6 C 26.2 D Year 2025 Background 18.1 C 27.5 D Year 2025 Total 18.9 C 30.4 D Year 2025 Total with EB to NB LT Accel Lane 14.5 B 19.0 C Year 2035 Background 21.2 C 31.5 D Year 2035 Total 22.4 C 35.4 E Year 2035 Total with EB to NB LT Accel Lane 15.9 C 20.4 C 5.0 Auxiliary Lanes STS reviewed the need for auxiliary lanes at SH 60 / WCR 40 based on the SHAC. SH 60 is classified as an R -A roadway by CDOT and has a 65 MPH speed limit. Table 3 contains a summary of the turning volumes for the movements at the intersection. A summary of the auxiliary lane analysis is contained in Table 4. The table shows the following. • The geometry of the northbound left turn decel lane meets SHAC requirements. • The geometry of the southbound right turn decel lane meets SHAG requirements. 3 Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition. National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. 2 Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 • An eastbound to southbound right turn accel lane will not be warranted. • An eastbound to northbound left turn accel lane will not be necessary to accommodate the traffic from the quarry as discussed in Section 5.0. 6.0 Conclusions STS has drawn the following conclusions for the auxiliary lanes at SH 60 / WCR 40 based on the analysis performed in the study. • The geometry of the northbound left turn decel lane meets SHAC requirements. • The geometry of the southbound right turn decel lane meets SHAC requirements. • An eastbound to southbound right turn accel lane is not warranted. • The traffic generated by the quarry will not require an eastbound to northbound left turn acceleration lane. Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. 3 Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Tables Table 1 — Existing and Projected Daily Traffic Volumes Table 2 — Trip Generation Estimate Table 3 — Permanent Traffic Volume Scenario Table 4 — Auxiliary Lane Evaluation at SH 60 / WCR 40 Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Table 1. Existing and Projected Daily Traffic Volumes Link Year 2023 1 Meining Pit Traffic Farm Background Year 2025 Year 2025 Total Year Background 2035 year 2035 I Total S H 60 north of WCR 40 8,229 100 8,480 8,580 9,890 9,990 SH 60 south of WCR 40 8,067 240 8,320 8,560 9,690 9,930 WCR 40 west of S H 60 371 340 400 740 400 740 Notes 1. Daily volumes collected for the study are highlighted in yellow. Meining Farm Pit 2-14-24 1 - Daily Vol CDOT Perm 4/23/2024 3:38 PM Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate Quarry 1 Total Daily In Trips Out Daily Passenger Outbound Car Equivalents Inbound Passenger Car Trucks a 40' Trucks > 40' Total Passenger Car Trucks a 40' Trucks ' 40' Total Passenger Vehicles 40 20 20 20 0 0 20 20 0 0 20 Dump Truck (Less than 40') 60 30 30 0 60 0 60 0 60 0 60 Semi (Longer Truck and than Trailer 40') 240 120 120 0 0 360 360 0 0 360 360 Total 340 170 170 20 60 360 440 20 60 360 440 Meining Farm Pit 2-14-24 2 - Trip Gen 4/23/2024 3:41 PM Table 3. Permanent Traffic Volume Scenario SH60lWCR40 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Mvmt PV TKS<.40' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS4L0' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS4L0' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS4L0' TKS>40' PCE Year 2023 Traffic NBLT 1 0 0 1 7 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 4 2 2 0 6 SBRT 5 0 0 5 15 1 0 17 7 1 0 9 1 0 0 1 6 0 1 9 10 2 0 14 EBLT 6 0 0 6 11 0 0 11 6 0 0 6 5 0 0 5 8 0 0 8 5 0 0 5 EBRT 7 0 0 7 5 0 0 5 4 0 1 7 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 7 0 0 7 Trucks Hauling Aggregate from the Meining Farm Pit (Includes Passenger Vehicle Traffic Associated with the Meining Farm Pit) NBLT 7 1 7 31 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 SBRT 3 1 3 13 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 EBLT 0 1 3 10 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 EBRT 0 1 7 24 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 Year 2035 Total Traffic NBLT 8 1 7 32 8 1 7 32 1 1 7 25 2 1 7 26 5 2 7 30 3 4 7 32 SBRT 8 1 3 18 15 2 3 28 7 2 3 20 1 1 3 12 6 1 4 20 10 3 3 25 EBLT 6 1 3 16 11 1 3 22 6 1 3 17 5 1 3 16 8 1 3 19 5 1 3 16 EBRT 7 1 7 31 6 1 7 30 5 1 8 32 3 1 7 27 2 2 7 27 8 2 7 33 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Mvmt PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. PV TK34t0' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. PV TKS<40' TKS>40' PCE PV TKS410' TKS>40' PCE Year 2023 Traffic NBLT 1 2 0 5 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 6 0 0 1 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 SBRT 5 0 0 5 6 0 0 6 4 0 0 4 4 0 0 4 10 0 0 10 11 0 0 11 6 0 0 6 EBLT 5 1 0 7 5 0 0 5 9 0 0 9 6 0 2 12 22 1 0 24 9 0 0 9 2 0 0 2 EBRT 3 0 0 3 6 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 3 0 1 6 4 0 0 4 4 0 0 4 Trucks Hauling Aggregate from the Meining Farm Pit (Includes Passenger Vehicle Traffic Associated with the Meining Farm Pit) NBLT 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 0 2 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 0 0 0 0 SBRT 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 0 0 0 EBLT 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 0 1 3 11 3 0 0 3 EBRT 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 1 2 7 26 0 2 7 25 1 1 7 25 1 1 7 25 7 0 0 7 Year 2035 Total Traffic NBLT 2 4 7 31 3 2 7 28 1 2 9 32 0 2 8 28 4 1 7 28 1 1 7 25 5 0 0 5 SBRT 5 1 3 16 6 1 3 17 4 1 3 15 4 1 3 15 10 1 3 21 11 1 3 22 6 0 0 6 EBLT 5 2 3 18 5 1 3 16 9 1 3 20 6 1 5 23 22 2 3 35 9 1 3 20 5 0 0 5 EBRT 4 2 7 29 7 2 7 32 2 2 7 27 3 2 7 25 4 1 8 31 5 1 7 29 11 0 0 11 Meining Farm Pit 2-14-24 3 - Turning Volumes Perm 4/24/2024 12:17 PM Table 4. Auxiliary Lane Evaluation at SH 60 / WCR 40 Movement Criteria Speed Limit Threshold 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. 8:00 a.m. 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. 9:00 10:00 a.m. to a.m. 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. 11:00 12:00 a.m. to p.m. 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. NBLT Decel Lane CDOT R -A 65 Existing 32 32 25 26 30 32 31 Existing Geometry 2 SBRT Decel Lane CDOT R -A 65 Existing 18 28 20 12 20 25 16 Existing Geometry 3 EBLT Decel Lane Weld County Local 45 10 VPH 16 22 17 16 19 16. 18 EB to NR Left Turn Accel Lane CDOT R -A 65 --- 16 22 17 16 19 16 18 EBRT Decel Lane Weld County Local 45 25 VPH 31 30 32 27 27 33 29 EB to SB Right Turn Accel Lane CDOT R -A 65 > 50 VPH 31 30 32 27 27 33 29 Movement 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Deco! Length Taper Length Storage Length Total 4:00 p.m. NBLT Decel Lane 28 32 28 28 25 5 800 300 32 832 Existing Geometry 2 800 300 100 900 SBRT Decel Lane 17 15 15 21 22 6 800 300 0 800 Existing Geometry 3 870 320 0 870 EBLT Decel Lane 18 16 23 35 20 5 435 162 35 470 EB to NR Left Turn Accel Lane 18 16 23 35 20 5 See Note 5 EBRT Decel Lane 32 27 25 31 29 11 435 162 0 435 EB to SB Right Turn Accel Lane 32 27 25 31 29 11 Not Warranted Legend Notes 1. Traffic volumes contained in the table are expressed in passenger car equivalents. 2. The length of this lane was measured using Google Earth. Part of the decel distance is included in the redirect taper. The length of the taper assumed a 12' wide turn lane. 3. The length of this lane was measured using Google Earth. 4. The taper length is included in the accel/decel length. XX Exceeds Threshold 5. A maximum of four trucks is predicted during any hour of the day (an average of one truck every 15 minutes). There will be enough adequate gaps to allow the trucks to enter the roadway. Meining Farm Pit 2-14-24 4 - Aux Lane Perm 4/24/2024 3:26 PM Figures Figure 1 — Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Trip Distribution Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Appendix A Traffic Count Data Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 HWY 60 / WCR 40 1 November 28th, 2023 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Pedestrian Crossing Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Total North South East West Time Turn Turn Turn Turn 6:00 0 0 33 0 0 2 127 1 0 3 0 1 0 2 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 40 0 0 1 125 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 6:30 0 1 52 0 0 1 127 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 6:45 0 0 41 1 0 1 112 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 161 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 2 54 0 0 0 118 3 0 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 184 0 0 0 0 7:15 0 1 71 1 0 0 106 2 0 5 1 1 0 1 1 0 190 0 0 0 0 7:30 0 1 65 0 0 0 108 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 181 0 0 0 0 7:45 0 3 59 0 0 0 100 8 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 174 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 57 0 0 0 67 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 131 0 0 0 0 8:15 0 0 58 0 0 1 63 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 128 0 0 0 0 8:30 0 0 55 0 0 0 48 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 108 0 0 0 0 8:45 0 0 55 0 0 0 48 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 108 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 43 0 0 0 46 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 9:15 0 0 43 0 0 0 46 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 9:30 0 1 52 0 0 1 49 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 0 0 9:45 0 1 32 0 0 0 41 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 1 32 0 0 0 41 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 0 0 0 0 10:15 0 1 39 1 0 0 46 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 92 0 0 0 0 10:30 0 0 33 1 0 2 42 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 82 0 0 0 0 10:45 0 2 43 0 0 0 35 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 85 0 0 0 0 11:00 0 2 43 0 0 0 35 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 85 0 0 0 0 11:15 0 1 49 0 0 1 37 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 96 0 0 0 0 11:30 0 1 49 0 0 1 37 4 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 96 0 0 0 0 11:45 0 4 44 0 0 0 27 2 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 82 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 1 44 1 0 0 46 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 95 0 0 0 0 12:15 0 1 44 1 0 0 46 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 95 0 0 0 0 12:30 0 1 39 0 0 0 44 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 91 0 0 0 0 12:45 0 1 31 1 0 0 51 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 89 0 0 0 0 13:00 0 1 31 1 0 0 51 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 89 0 0 0 0 13:15 0 2 48 0 0 0 29 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 88 0 0 0 0 13:30 0 0 35 0 0 0 40 2 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 84 0 0 0 0 13:45 0 1 53 0 0 0 27 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 85 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 0 55 0 0 1 39 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 14:15 0 1 45 0 0 2 48 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 98 0 0 0 0 14:30 0 1 68 0 0 1 43 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 14:45 0 0 53 0 0 3 48 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 113 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 0 69 2 0 0 52 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 127 0 0 0 0 15:15 0 0 74 1 1 0 49 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 132 0 0 0 0 15:30 0 0 78 0 0 0 69 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 4 155 0 0 0 0 15:45 0 1 102 0 0 0 48 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 155 0 0 0 0 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 HWY60/WCR40 2 November 28th, 2023 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Pedestrian Crossing Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Total North South East West Time Turn Turn Turn Turn 16:00 0 0 109 0 0 0 81 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 195 0 0 0 0 16:15 0 0 141 0 0 2 48 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 199 0 0 0 0 16:30 0 2 150 0 0 0 59 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 0 16:45 0 1 144 0 0 1 78 4 0 15 1 3 0 0 1 2 250 0 0 0 0 17:00 0 0 132 1 0 0 62 4 0 7 0 1 0 1 1 0 209 0 0 0 0 17:15 0 0 149 0 0 1 82 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 242 0 0 0 0 17:30 0 0 139 0 0 0 80 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 226 0 0 0 0 17:45 0 0 144 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 216 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 2 100 0 0 0 39 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 146 0 0 0 0 18:15 0 2 83 0 0 0 27 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 114 0 0 0 0 18:30 0 1 84 1 0 0 19 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 0 0 0 0 18:45 0 0 49 0 0 1 31 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 41 3435 13 1 23 3035 91 0 105 16 43 0 10 20 37 6870 0 0 0 0 Trucks 0% 17% 8°/0 15% 0°/0 0% Highway 60 Northbound 9% 50/0 0% 4c/0 19% 5% 0% 40% 15% 14% 8% Highway 60 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Pedestrian Crossing Hour by Hour U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right Total North South East West Turn Turn Turn Turn 6:00 0 1 166 1 0 5 491 5 0 6 0 7 0 2 0 1 685 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 7 249 1 0 0 432 16 0 11 2 5 0 2 3 1 729 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 225 0 0 1 226 5 0 9 1 4 0 0 2 2 475 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 2 170 0 0 1 182 1 0 5 2 5 0 0 0 0 368 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 4 147 2 0 2 164 3 0 7 0 0 0 1 0 6 336 0 0 0 0 11:00 0 8 185 0 0 2 136 11 0 6 3 3 0 0 3 2 359 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 4 158 3 0 0 187 4 0 7 1 1 0 0 3 2 370 0 0 0 0 13:00 0 4 167 1 0 0 147 9 0 4 2 6 0 0 2 4 346 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 2 221 0 0 7 178 4 0 9 2 1 0 2 0 2 428 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 1 323 3 1 0 218 4 0 8 0 3 0 0 1 7 569 0 0 0 0 16:00 0 3 544 0 0 3 266 10 0 23 1 4 0 1 2 4 861 0 0 0 0 17:00 0 0 564 1 0 1 292 11 0 9 2 4 0 2 3 4 893 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 5 316 1 0 1 116 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 451 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 41 3435 13 1 23 3035 91 0 105 16 43 0 10 20 37 6870 0 0 0 0 HWY 60 / WCR 40 3 November 28th, 2023 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Passenger Vehicles Highway 60 Highway 60 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 6:00 0 0 33 0 0 2 120 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 160 6:15 0 0 39 0 0 1 116 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 159 6:30 0 1 50 0 0 1 123 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 180 6:45 0 0 37 1 0 1 105 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 150 7:00 0 2 47 0 0 0 112 2 0 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 170 7:15 0 1 61 0 0 0 101 2 0 5 1 1 0 1 1 0 174 7:30 0 1 59 0 0 0 104 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 171 7:45 0 3 44 0 0 0 93 8 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 152 8:00 0 0 52 0 0 0 61 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 119 8:15 0 0 51 0 0 1 56 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 114 8:30 0 0 48 0 0 0 44 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 96 8:45 0 0 34 0 0 0 60 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 98 9:00 0 0 39 0 0 0 38 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 80 9:15 0 0 39 0 0 0 38 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 80 9:30 0 0 41 0 0 1 44 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 88 9:45 0 1 24 0 0 0 36 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 10:00 0 1 24 0 0 0 36 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 10:15 0 1 36 0 0 0 35 5 0 2 0 1 1 1 1 0 83 10:30 0 0 27 1 0 2 36 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 70 10:45 0 2 36 0 0 0 29 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 70 11:00 0 0 31 0 0 0 28 3 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 68 11:15 0 0 42 0 0 1 34 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 84 11:30 0 0 42 0 0 1 34 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 84 11:45 0 2 26 0 0 0 29 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 62 12:00 0 0 38 1 0 0 37 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 79 12:15 0 0 38 1 0 0 37 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 79 12:30 0 0 37 0 0 1 44 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 87 12:45 0 1 28 1 0 0 44 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 78 13:00 0 1 28 1 0 0 44 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 78 13:15 0 0 34 0 0 0 35 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 76 13:30 0 0 34 0 0 0 35 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 76 13:45 0 1 44 0 0 0 25 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 74 14:00 0 0 52 0 0 1 37 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 93 14:15 0 0 40 0 0 2 45 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 14:30 0 0 56 0 0 1 37 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 14:45 0 0 46 0 0 3 43 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 101 15:00 0 0 66 1 0 0 46 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 117 15:15 0 0 66 1 1 0 48 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 122 15:30 0 0 75 0 0 0 64 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 4 146 15:45 0 0 98 0 0 0 45 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 147 HWY 60 / WCR 40 4 November 28th, 2023 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Passenger Vehicles Highway 60 Highway 60 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 16:00 0 0 106 0 0 0 71 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 16:15 0 0 135 0 0 2 47 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 16:30 0 2 148 0 0 0 57 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:45 0 1 138 0 0 1 73 4 0 15 1 3 0 0 0 2 17:00 0 0 131 1 0 0 60 4 0 7 0 1 0 1 1 0 17:15 0 0 143 0 0 1 78 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 17:30 0 0 137 0 0 0 73 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 17:45 0 0 140 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 18:00 0 2 100 0 0 0 44 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 18:15 0 2 83 0 0 0 26 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18:30 0 1 80 1 0 0 18 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:45 0 0 48 0 0 1 31 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 182 190 212 238 206 232 217 210 149 113 104 81 Count Total 0 26 3131 10 1 24 2822 90 0 99 15 47 1 7 16 26 6315 Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Southbound Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Eastbound Westbound Hour by Hour um Left Thru Right Tum Left Thru Right Tum Left Thru Right Tum Left Thru Right T Total 6:00 0 1 159 1 0 5 464 5 0 6 0 7 0 0 0 1 7:00 0 7 211 0 0 0 410 15 0 11 2 5 0 2 3 1 8:00 0 0 185 0 0 1 221 7 0 6 0 4 0 0 2 1 9:00 0 1 143 0 0 1 156 1 0 5 3 2 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 4 123 1 0 2 136 6 0 8 0 1 1 2 1 2 11:00 0 2 141 0 0 2 125 10 0 5 3 7 0 0 2 1 12:00 0 1 141 3 0 1 162 5 0 5 0 3 0 0 2 0 13:00 0 2 140 1 0 0 139 6 0 5 2 6 0 0 1 2 14:00 0 0 194 0 0 7 162 4 0 9 2 1 0 1 0 2 15:00 0 0 305 2 1 0 203 4 0 6 0 3 0 0 1 7 16:00 0 3 527 0 0 3 248 10 0 22 1 3 0 0 1 4 17:00 0 0 551 1 0 1 277 11 0 9 2 4 0 2 3 4 18:00 0 5 311 1 0 1 119 6 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 649 667 427 312 287 298 323 304 382 532 822 865 447 Count Total 0 26 3131 10 1 24 2822 90 0 99 15 47 1 7 16 26 6315 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Southbound HWY60/WCR40 5 November 28th, 2023 Trucks Less Than 40' Long Weld County Road 40 Eastbound Weld County Road 40 Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 0 0 8 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:15 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:30 0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:45 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:15 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:15 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:30 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 1 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 0 1 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13:15 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13:45 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:15 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:30 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:45 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:15 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 2 3 10 12 6 7 4 2 6 4 4 4 11 6 6 7 4 5 9 5 5 2 8 8 9 6 6 3 3 4 3 2 8 4 3 5 2 1 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Southbound HWY60/WCR40 6 November 28th, 2023 Trucks Less Than 40' Long Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Eastbound Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 16:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16:15 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 16:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17:15 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 17:45 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:30 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 18:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 4 111 1 0 0 107 4 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 5 237 Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Hour by Hour Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Total 6:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 0 21 1 0 0 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 8 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 14 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 11:00 0 2 8 0 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 2 8 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 13:00 0 0 7 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 14:00 0 0 12 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 0 7 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 17:00 0 0 6 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 35 16 25 22 21 31 16 17 11 12 13 4 Count Total 0 4 111 1 0 0 107 4 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 5 237 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Southbound HWY60/WCR40 7 November 28th, 2023 Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Weld County Road 40 Eastbound Weld County Road 40 Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 6:15 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 0 0 10 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 0 0 7 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8:45 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:15 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:30 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:45 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:15 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:45 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:15 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:30 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:45 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 12:45 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13:45 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:15 0 1 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14:30 0 1 6 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14:45 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:15 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:30 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15:45 0 1 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 4 8 4 4 4 15 8 12 6 8 8 8 7 7 7 11 8 10 7 7 7 8 8 8 5 5 5 5 5 7 2 8 11 8 7 5 7 7 Sustainable Traffic Solutions www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Southbound HWY60/WCR40 8 November 28th, 2023 Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Eastbound Westbound Interval Start U- U U U Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Time Turn Turn Turn Turn Total 16:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 16:15 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 16:30 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16:45 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17:15 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 17:30 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 17:45 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 18:00 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Count Total 0 3 159 1 0 0 153 1 0 2 2 2 0 3 2 0 328 Highway 60 Northbound Highway 60 Weld County Road 40 Weld County Road 40 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Hour by Hour Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Left Thru Right Turn Total 6:00 0 0 6 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 7:00 0 0 17 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 0 0 19 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9:00 0 0 14 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 22 0 0 0 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 0 0 16 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 0 0 10 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 13:00 0 0 7 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 0 2 15 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 15:00 0 1 11 1 0 0 11 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 0 0 12 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 17:00 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 27 34 30 36 29 26 22 29 26 27 15 5 Count Total 0 3 159 1 0 0 153 1 0 2 2 2 0 3 2 0 328 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com North Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB 12:00 38 12:15 39 12:30 47 12:45 45 39 36 38 30 4 4 7 4 3 2 2 2 5 2 2 3 3 5 2 2 47 45 56 52 45 43 42 34 169 143 19 9 12 12 200 164 13:00 24 13:15 24 13:30 26 13:45 26 44 6 44 6 45 0 45 0 1 1 4 4 4 4 2 2 4 4 5 5 34 34 28 28 49 49 54 54 100 178 12 10 12 18 124 206 14:00 39 14:15 39 14:30 39 14:45 48 52 59 59 53 1 2 2 1 2 6 6 3 1 4 4 4 1 6 6 4 41 45 45 53 55 71 71 60 165 223 6 17 13 17 184 257 15:00 51 15:15 51 15:30 64 15:45 47 69 0 69 0 80 2 100 0 5 5 0 1 1 1 3 3 4 4 4 3 52 52 69 50 78 78 84 104 213 318 2 11 8 15 223 344 16:00 73 16:15 52 16:30 58 16:45 78 109 3 137 0 152 2 155 0 261 553 5 1 2 2 1 6 7 1 0 5 2 4 1 5 13 12 83 53 60 83 112 143 155 161 279 571 17:00 64 17:15 83 17:30 76 17:45 66 138 1 147 2 138 3 141 1 1 3 0 2 1 2 4 1 0 66 139 3 87 153 2 83 140 2 68 145 289 564 7 6 8 7 304 577 18:00 45 18:15 42 18:30 27 18:45 21 101 0 100 0 84 0 81 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 1 2 45 103 1 42 101 0 28 84 0 22 85 135 366 0 4 2 3 137 373 19:00 33 19:15 12 19:30 28 19:45 21 48 0 43 0 40 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 33 49 0 12 43 0 30 40 0 21 24 94 155 0 0 2 1 96 156 20:00 22 20:15 10 20:30 16 20:45 6 31 1 15 0 14 1 23 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 24 11 18 7 32 15 14 23 54 83 2 0 4 1 60 84 21:00 21:15 21:30 21:45 16 14 10 9 26 0 16 0 23 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 16 14 11 10 28 16 23 11 49 76 0 0 2 2 51 78 22:00 22:15 22:30 22:45 6 4 10 3 13 0 9 0 11 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 4 10 3 14 9 11 9 23 42 0 0 0 1 23 43 23:00 23:15 23:30 23:45 4 7 3 3 11 8 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 4 7 3 4 11 10 8 4 17 31 0 0 1 2 18 33 Count Total 1569 2732 53 63 77 91 1699 2886 Percent 92% 95% 30/0 2% 5c/0 3% 1 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com North Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB 00:00 2 00:15 1 00:30 2 00:45 1 4 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 3 2 1 6 2 3 1 6 9 0 0 2 3 8 12 01:00 5 01:15 4 01:30 1 01:45 1 6 3 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 5 5 1 1 6 4 3 4 11 15 0 0 1 2 12 17 02:00 02:15 02:30 02:45 6 3 2 3 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 1 0 0 0 7 4 4 6 3 0 1 1 14 4 0 0 7 1 21 5 03:00 7 03:15 7 03:30 10 03:45 11 0 4 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 7 10 11 0 5 4 5 35 12 0 1 1 1 36 14 04:00 21 04:15 31 04:30 32 04:45 58 4 6 4 5 142 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 21 4 1 31 7 0 32 4 0 59 5 1 143 20 05:00 60 05:15 99 05:30 101 05:45 123 14 0 14 0 21 0 23 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 62 15 1 99 15 3 103 24 1 124 25 383 72 1 1 4 6 388 79 06:00 123 06:15 118 06:30 124 06:45 109 36 39 52 39 3 6 1 3 474 166 13 0 0 1 0 1 4 3 3 4 14 0 1 1 4 6 130 127 128 116 36 40 54 43 501 173 07:00 114 07:15 103 07:30 107 07:45 101 50 66 62 45 5 3 3 2 5 8 3 5 2 2 1 5 2 2 3 10 121 108 111 108 57 76 68 60 425 223 13 21 10 17 448 261 08:00 65 08:15 58 08:30 44 08:45 62 53 53 52 34 1 2 2 2 2 0 4 2 5 5 2 2 3 7 3 6 71 65 48 66 58 60 59 42 229 192 7 8 14 19 250 219 09:00 38 09:15 46 09:30 46 09:45 36 40 47 41 27 3 4 3 2 1 2 8 4 5 1 3 3 3 3 4 4 46 51 52 41 44 52 53 35 166 155 12 15 12 14 190 184 10:00 39 10:15 40 10:30 39 10:45 29 37 38 29 39 2 4 1 3 2 2 3 2 6 2 5 4 4 9 3 6 47 46 45 36 43 49 35 47 147 143 10 9 17 22 174 174 11:00 31 11:15 38 11:30 21 11:45 30 33 43 41 28 8 1 6 1 1 3 2 1 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 5 43 42 29 34 37 50 46 34 120 145 16 7 12 15 148 167 Count Total 2152 1155 72 63 95 107 2319 1325 Percent 93% 87% 3% 5% 4c/0 8% 2 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com South Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 12:00 39 12:15 33 12:30 37 12:45 30 37 38 46 45 4 2 1 1 4 4 7 4 3 5 2 2 5 2 2 3 46 40 40 33 46 44 55 52 139 166 8 19 12 12 159 197 13:00 45 13:15 45 13:30 45 13:45 45 23 23 26 26 1 1 4 4 5 5 0 0 4 4 5 5 3 3 2 2 50 50 54 54 31 31 28 28 180 98 10 10 18 10 208 118 14:00 52 14:15 56 14:30 56 14:45 46 38 38 38 43 2 6 6 3 1 2 2 1 1 7 7 4 1 4 4 4 55 69 69 53 40 44 44 48 210 157 17 6 19 13 246 176 15:00 67 15:15 67 15:30 75 15:45 98 49 49 66 45 5 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 3 4 1 1 3 3 75 75 78 103 50 50 71 48 307 209 11 2 13 8 331 219 16:00 106 16:15 135 16:30 150 16:45 139 71 47 57 76 530 251 1 2 1 1 5 3 1 2 0 6 2 4 1 5 7 109 81 2 141 50 0 152 59 5 145 81 12 14 547 271 17:00 132 17:15 143 17:30 137 17:45 140 62 79 73 69 1 3 0 2 1 2 3 1 0 3 2 2 1 133 64 2 149 83 4 139 80 1 144 71 552 283 6 7 7 8 565 298 18:00 102 18:15 101 18:30 85 18:45 82 45 39 26 18 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 104 45 0 102 39 1 85 27 1 86 19 370 128 4 0 3 2 377 130 19:00 48 19:15 45 19:30 40 19:45 24 31 11 26 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 49 31 0 45 11 2 40 28 0 24 21 157 89 0 0 1 2 158 91 20:00 31 20:15 15 20:30 14 20:45 23 23 10 16 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 32 15 14 23 25 11 18 6 83 54 0 2 1 4 84 60 21:00 26 21:15 17 21:30 24 21:45 11 15 12 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 28 15 0 17 12 1 24 11 1 11 9 78 45 0 0 2 2 80 47 22:00 22:15 22:30 22:45 12 9 11 9 6 4 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 9 11 9 6 4 10 3 41 23 0 0 1 0 42 23 23:00 12 23:15 8 23:30 7 23:45 4 4 7 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 10 7 4 4 7 3 4 31 17 0 0 2 1 33 18 Count Total 2678 1520 61 52 91 76 2830 1648 Percent 95% 92% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com South Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 00:00 4 00:15 2 00:30 2 00:45 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 6 2 3 1 2 3 2 1 9 6 0 0 3 2 12 8 01:00 01:15 01:30 01:45 6 3 3 4 5 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 6 4 4 4 5 5 1 1 16 11 0 0 2 1 18 12 02:00 2 02:15 0 02:30 1 02:45 1 6 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 3 0 1 1 7 4 4 6 4 14 0 0 1 7 5 21 03:00 0 03:15 4 03:30 3 03:45 5 7 7 10 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 4 5 8 7 10 11 12 35 1 0 1 1 14 36 04:00 4 21 0 04:15 6 31 0 04:30 4 32 0 04:45 5 58 0 19 142 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 4 7 4 5 21 31 32 59 20 143 05:00 12 05:15 13 05:30 20 05:45 23 60 0 100 0 98 0 122 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 2 13 62 0 14 100 2 23 100 0 25 123 68 380 1 1 6 4 75 385 06:00 33 06:15 39 06:30 51 06:45 38 121 0 118 0 126 1 106 0 3 6 1 3 0 1 1 4 6 3 3 4 33 40 53 42 130 127 130 113 161 471 1 13 6 16 168 500 07:00 49 07:15 62 07:30 60 07:45 47 115 103 105 94 5 9 3 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 3 10 2 2 1 5 56 73 66 62 121 108 109 101 218 417 22 12 17 10 257 439 08:00 52 08:15 51 08:30 48 08:45 34 62 57 44 62 2 0 4 2 1 2 2 1 3 7 3 6 5 5 3 2 57 58 55 42 68 64 49 65 185 225 8 6 19 15 212 246 09:00 39 09:15 48 09:30 41 09:45 25 39 46 44 36 1 2 8 4 3 5 3 2 3 3 4 4 5 1 3 3 43 53 53 33 47 52 50 41 153 165 15 13 14 12 182 190 10:00 35 10:15 37 10:30 28 10:45 38 38 37 37 29 138 141 2 2 3 1 8 2 4 1 3 10 4 9 3 6 6 2 5 3 22 16 41 48 34 45 46 43 43 35 168 167 11:00 31 11:15 42 11:30 42 11:45 28 31 35 20 31 1 4 2 1 8 0 6 1 3 4 4 5 4 3 2 3 35 50 48 34 43 38 28 35 143 117 8 15 16 12 167 144 Count Total 1126 2124 64 70 108 97 1298 2291 Percent 87% 93% 5% 3% 8% 4% 4 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com East Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB 12:00 1 12:15 2 12:30 0 12:45 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 0 1 0 5 4 13:00 2 13:15 2 13:30 1 13:45 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 14:00 1 14:15 0 14:30 0 14:45 2 2 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 2 2 3 3 9 0 0 0 0 3 9 15:00 2 15:15 2 15:30 4 15:45 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 1 1 1 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 9 2 16:00 1 16:15 2 16:30 0 16:45 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 3 0 2 0 2 5 4 1 0 1 0 7 4 17:00 2 17:15 4 17:30 1 17:45 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 2 1 1 2 0 9 4 0 0 0 0 9 4 18:00 0 18:15 2 18:30 1 18:45 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 19:00 0 19:15 0 19:30 0 19:45 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 20:00 0 20:15 1 20:30 0 20:45 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 1 21:15 0 21:30 1 21:45 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 22:00 1 22:15 0 22:30 0 22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 23:00 0 23:15 0 23:30 0 23:45 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Count Total 42 31 2 0 2 0 46 31 Percent 91% 100% 4% 0% 4c/0 0% 5 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com East Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB 00:00 0 00:15 0 00:30 0 00:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 0 01:15 0 01:30 0 01:45 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 02:00 0 02:15 0 02:30 0 02:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 03:00 0 03:15 0 03:30 0 03:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 04:15 0 04:30 0 04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 1 05:15 0 05:30 0 05:45 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 06:00 0 06:15 0 06:30 0 06:45 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 6 0 0 2 0 3 6 07:00 1 07:15 2 07:30 1 07:45 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 6 2 0 1 0 0 6 3 08:00 0 08:15 2 08:30 1 08:45 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 2 09:00 0 09:15 0 09:30 0 09:45 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 10:00 3 10:15 3 10:30 2 10:45 1 1 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 2 2 1 1 3 0 9 5 2 0 0 0 11 5 11:00 0 11:15 1 11:30 1 11:45 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 3 4 Count Total 23 24 2 3 2 0 27 27 Percent 85% 89% 70/0 11% 7% 0% 6 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com West Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 12:00 1 12:15 4 12:30 3 12:45 3 2 3 2 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 11 9 1 1 0 1 12 11 13:00 13:15 13:30 13:45 2 2 2 2 6 6 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 2 2 8 8 3 3 8 18 0 2 0 2 8 22 14:00 1 14:15 5 14:30 5 14:45 5 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 5 5 1 2 2 2 16 5 0 0 0 2 16 7 15:00 2 15:15 2 15:30 3 15:45 1 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 3 4 1 3 3 0 3 8 8 0 0 3 1 11 9 16:00 2 16:15 1 16:30 4 16:45 19 2 4 3 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 5 19 2 4 3 6 26 14 1 0 1 1 28 15 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 8 2 3 2 5 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 3 2 5 5 4 0 15 14 0 0 0 0 15 14 18:00 2 18:15 0 18:30 0 18:45 1 3 6 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 6 3 4 3 16 0 0 0 0 3 16 19:00 0 19:15 0 19:30 1 19:45 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 6 0 0 0 0 2 6 20:00 1 20:15 0 20:30 0 20:45 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 21:00 0 21:15 0 21:30 0 21:45 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 22:00 0 22:15 0 22:30 0 22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 0 23:15 0 23:30 1 23:45 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 91 97 2 3 4 7 97 107 Percent 94% 91c/0 2% 3% 4% 7% 7 CD Sustainable Traffic Solutions Interval Start Time HWY 60 / WCR 40 NOV 28 - NOV 29, 2023 www.sustainabletrafficsolutions.com West Leg Passenger Vehicles Trucks Less Than 40' Long Trucks Greater Than 40' Long Total EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 00:00 0 00:15 0 00:30 0 00:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01:00 0 01:15 0 01:30 0 01:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:00 0 02:15 0 02:30 0 02:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 03:00 0 03:15 0 03:30 0 03:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 0 04:15 0 04:30 0 04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:00 1 05:15 2 05:30 1 05:45 2 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 2 3 6 5 0 0 0 0 6 5 06:00 06:15 06:30 06:45 4 2 5 2 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 5 2 1 1 1 3 13 6 0 0 0 0 13 6 07:00 07:15 07:30 07:45 6 7 3 2 4 0 4 0 4 0 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 3 2 5 4 4 13 18 25 0 1 0 0 18 26 08:00 08:15 08:30 08:45 2 3 3 2 4 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 4 2 4 3 0 3 10 9 1 1 1 0 12 10 09:00 3 09:15 2 09:30 1 09:45 3 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 3 0 2 1 1 9 4 1 0 0 0 10 4 10:00 1 10:15 3 10:30 1 10:45 2 2 7 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 2 2 8 1 3 7 12 0 1 0 1 7 14 11:00 6 3 0 11:15 3 4 0 11:30 4 6 0 11:45 3 3 0 16 16 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 6 3 4 3 3 6 7 3 16 19 Count Total 79 77 3 5 1 2 83 84 Percent 95% 92% 4% 6% 1% 2% 8 Appendix B VISTRO Analysis Results Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study J&T Consulting, Inc. Weld County, Colorado April 24, 2024 Year 2023 Traffic Volumes Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 1: 1 2023 AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 17.6 C 0.055 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 11 I 2 I 5 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 71 0 0 116 4 4 1 2 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8 I 283 I 1 0 I 465 I 17 17 I 3 I 8 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.45 0.00 0.00 !.ob 0.00 17.61 16.93 11.99 17.24 16.51 10.07 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.07 0.07 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.58 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 6.34 I 6.34 I 6.34 1.83 I 1.83 I 1.83 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.23 0.00 15.93 15.98 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.79 Intersection LOS C 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 1: 1 2023 AM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD 1 SH 60 / WCR 40 1 -4- Ci Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:\...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2023 PM.pdf Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 1 2023 PM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.247 26.2 D V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 26.2 D 0.247 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 24 I 3 I 5 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 148 0 1 82 4 14 2 3 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1 I 594 I 1 2 I 328 I 16 57 I 7 I 12 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.25 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.05 0.00 0.00 8.79 0.00 26.20 24.33 15.70 21.37 19.49 12.76 Movement LOS A A A A A A D C C C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.17 1.17 1.17 0.15 0.15 0.15 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.06 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.16 I 0.00 I 0.00 29.33 I 29.33 I 29.33 3.77 I 3.77 I 3.77 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.01 0.05 24.37 16.36 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.07 Intersection LOS D 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD 1 SH 60 / WCR 40 1 -4- Ci Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 1: 1 2023 PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Year 2025 Traffic Volume Scenarios Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Back AM.pdf Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 4 4 2025 Back AM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.057 18.1 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 18.1 C 0.057 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 7 I 256 I 1 0 I 445 I 16 11 I 2 I 5 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 73 0 0 120 4 4 1 2 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8 I 291 I 1 0 I 478 I 17 17 I 3 I 8 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.49 0.00 0.00 ! .9'i 0.00 18.06 17.30 12.15 17.66 16.84 10.14 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.08 0.08 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.58 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 6.54 I 6.54 I 6.54 1.88 I 1.88 I 1.88 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.23 0.00 16.29 16.31 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.79 Intersection LOS C 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 r D.' :• ',At.. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointion procigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD 1 SH 60 / WCR 40 1 -4- Ci Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *41,1 r D.' :• ',At.. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointion procigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Back PM.pdf Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 4 4 2025 Back PM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th EB Left 0.259 27.5 D V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 27.5 D 0.259 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 2 I 311 I 15 24 I 3 I 5 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 153 0 1 85 4 14 2 3 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 2 I 338 I 16 57 I 7 I 12 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.26 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.07 0.00 0.00 8.85 0.00 27.52 25.46 16.36 22.15 20.07 12.97 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D C C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.24 1.24 1.24 0.16 0.16 0.16 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.06 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.16 I 0.00 I 0.00 30.99 I 30.99 I 30.99 3.91 I 3.91 I 3.91 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.01 0.05 25.57 16.78 Approach LOS A A D C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.11 Intersection LOS D 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 r D.' :• ',At.. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointion procigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD 1 SH 60 / WCR 40 1 -4- Ci Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 4: 4 4 2025 Back PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix OP:' :• 'At r tiliorfi oft Or:N V024 In procigintscre shot r"printe _ . with pe siti :. SH 60 / WCR 40 1 5 4 44-s8)1 r \\,,,,,, isLa. Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Total AM.pdf Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 5 2025 Total AM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.081 18.9 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 18.9 C 0.081 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 15 I 256 I 1 0 I 445 I 20 15 I 2 I 13 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 73 0 0 120 5 6 1 5 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 I 291 I 1 0 I 478 I 22 23 I 3 I 20 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.08 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.54 0.00 0.00 ! .9'i 0.00 18.85 18.02 11.46 18.62 17.34 10.17 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.08 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 1.25 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 7.39 I 7.39 I 2.69 1.98 I 1.98 I 1.98 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.47 0.00 15.58 16.92 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.16 Intersection LOS C 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix ' : sat 0 zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *A sat r 9 oft Corp tl'a'►rtil2024 nili grjhTi lira n 13,�.� Illiconittftprocigtotscre _ .-s SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Total AM with LT Accel Lane.pdf Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane 4/24/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th W g Left 0.011 18.6 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 18.6 C 0.011 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu 1000.00 usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 15 I 256 I 1 0 I 445 I 20 15 I 2 I 13 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 73 0 0 120 5 6 1 5 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 I 291 I 1 0 I 478 I 22 23 I 3 I 20 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Yes No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I 1 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.54 0.00 0.00 ! .9'i 0.00 14.52 14.50 11.46 18.58 17.34 10.17 Movement LOS A A A A A B B B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.08 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 1.25 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 5.13 I 5.13 I 2.69 1.98 I 1.98 I 1.98 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.47 0.00 13.19 16.91 Approach LOS A A B C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.03 Intersection LOS C 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix ' : sat 0 zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r), _ Corptilic prody scre shotrgprrnte with pe sl:o �c ��irr►� oft C SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips *A sat r 9 oft Corp '►r 2024 niH �, rjhlri lira n 13,�.� Illiconitipftprocigtotscre _ .-s SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *A sat r 9 oft Corp tl'a'►rtil2024 nili grjhTi lira n 13,�.� Illiconittftprocigtotscre _ .-s SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Total PM.pdf Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 5 2025 Total PM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.314 30.4 D V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 30.4 D 0.314 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 9 I 581 I 1 2 I 311 I 19 28 I 3 I 13 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 153 0 1 85 5 17 2 8 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 9 I 612 I 1 2 I 338 I 21 67 I 7 I 31 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.31 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.11 0.00 0.00 8.85 0.00 30.37 28.18 10.44 23.56 20.63 13.01 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.45 1.45 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.16 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.58 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.16 I 0.00 I 0.00 36.20 I 36.20 I 3.51 4.04 I 4.04 I 4.04 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.12 0.05 24.34 17.19 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.65 Intersection LOS D 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix ' : sat 0 zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips gib Jr,Maly -- • tb, SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 5: 5 2025 Total PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix ' : sat O zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:N (2024 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane.pdf Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Scenario 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane 4/24/2024 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th W g Left 0.010 23.4 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 23.4 C 0.010 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu 1000.00 usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0300 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 9 I 581 I 1 2 I 311 I 19 28 I 3 I 13 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 153 0 1 85 5 17 2 8 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 9 I 612 I 1 2 I 338 I 21 67 I 7 I 31 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Yes No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I 1 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.20 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.11 0.00 0.00 8.85 0.00 18.97 18.37 10.44 23.41 20.63 13.01 Movement LOS A A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.16 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.58 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.16 I 0.00 I 0.00 20.95 I 20.95 I 3.51 4.04 I 4.04 I 4.04 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.12 0.05 16.41 17.17 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.89 Intersection LOS C 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix r D' : sat rilicrofi oft C orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r], _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shot rgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips *A sat r 9 oft Corp tl'a'►rtil2024 niH grjhTi lira n 13,�.� Illiconittftprocigtotscre _ .-s SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 8: 8 2025 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix r D' : sat rilicrofi oft C orp. or:N 2024 00thi.i lira n r], _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shot rgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Year 2035 Traffic Volume Scenarios Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Back AM.pdf Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 6 2035 Back AM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.070 21.2 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 21.2 C 0.070 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 7 I 299 I 1 0 I 518 I 16 11 I 2 I 5 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 85 0 0 139 4 4 1 2 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8 I 340 I 1 0 I 557 I 17 17 I 3 I 8 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0', 0.00 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.74 0.00 0.00 i.uy 0.00 21.22 19.89 13.25 20.59 19.15 10.58 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.09 0.09 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.62 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 7.98 I 7.98 I 7.98 2.26 I 2.26 I 2.26 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.20 0.00 18.80 18.62 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.78 Intersection LOS C 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD 1 SH 60 / WCR 40 1 -4- Ci Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Back PM.pdf Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 6 2035 Back PM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.292 31.5 D V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 31.5 D 0.292 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r + + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu 0.00 u.L. u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1 I 626 I 1 2 I 335 I 15 24 I 3 I 5 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 165 0 1 91 4 14 2 3 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1 I 659 I 1 2 I 364 I 16 57 I 7 I 12 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.29 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.14 0.00 0.00 9.01 0.00 31.50 28.88 18.46 24.35 21.70 13.56 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D C C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.43 1.43 1.43 0.17 0.17 0.17 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.07 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.17 I 0.00 I 0.00 35.87 I 35.87 I 35.87 4.30 I 4.30 I 4.30 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.01 0.05 29.20 17.96 Approach LOS A A D C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.23 Intersection LOS D 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *41,1 :• .ar .. r ZD.g4. tilior.o eft Corp.... Pillotointionprocigotscre shot rc printe _ . with pormitsitir" SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips eiD SH 60 / WCR 40 1 1 Ci i X Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 6: 6 2035 Back PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *41,1 OP: :• .ar r tilior.o eft procigoiscre shot rc printe _ . with pe siti :. SH 60 / WCR 40 24 3 5 \\\ Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Total AM.pdf Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 7 2035 Total AM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.099 22.4 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 22.4 C 0.099 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 15 I 299 I 1 0 I 518 I 20 15 I 2 I 13 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 85 0 0 139 5 6 1 5 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 I 340 I 1 0 I 557 I 22 23 I 3 I 20 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0', 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.79 0.00 0.00 '.uy 0.00 22.36 20.91 12.19 21.82 19.77 10.62 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 1.34 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 9.19 I 9.19 I 2.99 2.39 I 2.39 I 2.39 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.42 0.00 17.85 19.39 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.14 Intersection LOS C 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix ' : sat 0 zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total AM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix ' : sat O zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:N (2024 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\AM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane.pdf Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Scenario 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane 4/24/2024 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th W g Left 0.014 21.8 C V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 21.8 C 0.014 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu 1000.00 usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 7 I 249 I 1 0 I 432 I 16 I 11 I 2 5 2 3 1 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.2000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 15 I 299 I 1 0 I 518 I 20 15 I 2 I 13 2 3 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.8800 0.8800 0.8800 0.9300 0.9300 0.9300 0.6400 0.6400 0.6400 0.7500 0.7500 0.7500 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 85 0 0 139 5 6 1 5 1 1 0 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 I 340 I 1 0 I 557 I 22 23 I 3 I 20 3 4 1 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Yes No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I 1 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 n 0', 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.00 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.79 0.00 0.00 i.uy 0.00 15.85 15.64 12.19 21.76 19.77 10.62 Movement LOS A A A A A C C B C C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 1.34 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 5.83 I 5.83 I 2.99 2.39 I 2.39 I 2.39 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.42 0.00 14.25 19.37 Approach LOS A A B C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.97 Intersection LOS C 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix 0 o ' : sat oft orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n _ Corptilic prody scre shotrgprrnte with pe sl:o �c ��irr►� oft C SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips *A sat r 9 oft Corp tl'a'►rtil2024 niH grjhTi lira n 13,�.� Illiconittftprocigtotscre _ .-s SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total AM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix O o' : sat oft orp. or:N 2024 00thi.i lira n _ Corptilic prody scre shotrgprrnte with pe sl:o �c ��irr►� oft C SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Total PM.pdf Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 7 2035 Total PM 4/23/2024 ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th E B Left 0.354 35.4 E V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 35.4 E 0.354 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 9 I 626 I 1 2 I 335 I 19 28 I 3 I 13 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 165 0 1 91 5 17 2 8 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 9 I 659 I 1 2 I 364 I 21 67 I 7 I 31 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.35 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.18 0.00 0.00 9.01 0.00 35.37 32.58 10.63 25.98 22.33 13.61 Movement LOS A A A A A A E D B D C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.69 1.69 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.18 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.60 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.17 I 0.00 I 0.00 42.27 I 42.27 I 3.63 4.45 I 4.45 I 4.45 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.11 0.05 27.88 18.43 Approach LOS A A D C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.82 Intersection LOS E 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix ' : sat 0 zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips gib Jr,Maly -- • tb, SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 7: 7 2035 Total PM Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix ' : sat O zogA rificrofi oft c orp. or:N (2024 00thi.i lira n r), _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shotrgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/23/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) VISTRO Vistro File: C:1...\PM.vistro Report File: C:\...\2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane.pdf Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Scenario 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane 4/24/2024 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Type 1 S H 60 / WC R 40 Two-way stop H C Edition M 7th W g Left 0.011 25.8 D V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Control Type: Analysis Method: Analysis Period: Intersection Setup VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Two-way stop HCM 7th Edition 15 minutes Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: SH 60 / WCR 40 Delay (sec / veh): Level Of Service: Volume to Capacity (v/c): 25.8 D 0.011 Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration 41 h -41 I r 1r + Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 1 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.D 100.00 00.00 100.00 100.00 100.0: 100.00 00.00 J00.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] u.uu u.uu 0.0u u.uu u.uu usuu u.uu u.uu Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crosswalk No No No No Volumes Name SH 60 SH 60 WCR 40 WCR 40 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1 I 564 I 1 2 I 302 I 15 I 24 I 3 5 1 4 5 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 8.00 I 8.00 I 8.00 7.00 I 7.00 I 7.00 5.00 I 5.00 I 5.00 Growth Factor 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.1100 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 8 0 0 0 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 9 I 626 I 1 2 I 335 I 19 28 I 3 I 13 1 4 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.9500 0.9500 0.9500 0.9200 0.9200 0.9200 0.4200 0.4200 0.4200 0.6300 0.6300 0.6300 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0 000 11.0 000 11.0 000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 1.0000 11.0000 11.0000 Total 15 -Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 165 0 1 91 5 17 2 8 0 2 2 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 9 I 659 I 1 2 I 364 I 21 67 I 7 I 31 2 6 8 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Intersection Settings VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance Yes No Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 I 1 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 n 0f 0.00 0.22 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.18 0.00 0.00 9.01 0.00 20.40 19.57 10.63 25.76 22.33 13.61 Movement LOS A A A A A A C C B D C B 95th -Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.92 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.18 95th -Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.60 I 0.00 I 0.00 0.17 I 0.00 I 0.00 22.96 I 22.96 I 3.63 4.44 I 4.44 I 4.44 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.11 0.05 17.46 18.40 Approach LOS A A C C d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.89 Intersection LOS D 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 1: Lane Configuration and Traffic Control *ix r D' : sat rilicrofi oft C orp. or:NE br vo24 00thi.i lira n r], _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shot rgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Report Figure 2d: Traffic Volume - Net New Site Trips SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. Generated with PTV VISTRO Scenario 9: 9 2035 Total PM with LT Accel Lane Version 2024 (SP 0-4) Report Figure 2f: Traffic Volume - Future Total Volume *ix r D' : sat rilicrofi oft C orp. or:N 2024 00thi.i lira n r], _ T tilicanittiftprodyitscre shot rgprrnte with permissioirro oft Corp SH 60 / WCR 40 Meining Farm Pit Traffic Study Weld County, CO 4/24/2024 Joseph L. Henderson, PE, PTOE Sustainable Traffic Solutions, Inc. 1 Iart' inrr'n1it; re es Inn J ax A NisAV aW till t.ill6' Illy • December 10, 2024 Weld County Planning Services ATTN : Dawn Anderson Development Review Manager 1402 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80632 RE: Weld County Road 40 Right Turn Deceleration Lane Variance Request Dawn, On behalf of J-2 Contracting Co. (J-2) we are requesting a variance to the Weld County Engineering & Construction Criteria to shorten the proposed right turn deceleration lane on Weld County Road 40 into the proposed Sweet Valley Pit access. This access is proposed to be from Weld County Road 40, approximately 1,000 feet east of the intersection of Weld County Road 25.5 and Weld County Road 40. With both the Sweet Valley Pit and CDOT facility site accesses in close proximity, J-2 proposes that the posted speed limit be 35 mph in the area of the accesses. J-2 feels this speed limit is justified to slow traffic down in the area to provide the safest stretch of roadway as possible adjacent the two accesses. County Road 40 is classified as a local road with 60 -ft right-of-way per the Weld County Functional Classification Map, amended 5/13/2024. We ask that you please consider the following in evaluating this request for a variance: 1. Identification of the criteria or Weld County Code section to be waived or varied Using a design speed of 45 mph (70 mph above the posted speed limit), Table 8-6 of the Weld County Engineering & Construction criteria (Criteria) specifies a required deceleration lane length of 435 feet, including a transition taper. J-2 is asking for a variance to shorten the deceleration lane length to 349 feet, including the transition taper. Note that if a design speed of 35 mph was used (matching the posted speed limit) the proposed deceleration length of 349 feet would exceed the required 35 mph length of 370 feet shown in Table 8-6. 2. Identification of the construction criteria adhered to The deceleration lane will be paved, a minimum of 12 feet in width, per Table 2- 1 of the criteria, and will include the required transition taper of 762 feet per Table 8-6 of the Criteria (12 ft x 13.5:7 transition taper ratio). The proposed access is 450 feet to the west of an existing CDOT access. This distance is greater than the 150 feet required per Table 8-2 of the Criteria. The proposed access will be 40 feet wide with a 65 -foot turning radius to tie into County Road 40 per Table 8-3 of the Criteria for a commercial access. Note that traffic VI 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D • Fort Lupton, CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 Weld County Planning Services ATTN: Dawn Anderson Development Review Manager RE: Weld County Road 40 Deceleration Lane Variance Request Page 2 movement to from the proposed access will be limited to left out (east)/right in (north) movements. 3. Justification for the variance, which will demonstrate the following: • Hardship is created if the variance is not approved. The proposed Sweet Valley Pit access is between an existing concrete irrigation ditch and irrigation pipe that crosses County Road 40 to the west, which serves an agricultural property on the north side of County Road 40, and an existing access onto County Road 40 from an existing CDOT facility to the east. The concrete irrigation ditch and pipe to the west cannot be moved without adversely affecting the agricultural property's ability to irrigate their lands. The access from the CDOT property onto County Road 40 to the east is also fixed. There is not enough remaining frontage to install a deceleration lane 435 feet in length between the existing CDOT access and the proposed Sweet Valley Pit access turning radius. • There will be only minimal impact on public safety. Minimal impact to public safety will result from this variance because traffic entering the site will have sufficient time/lane length to enter the deceleration lane and decelerate outside the main traffic through lane as it enters the access and follows the entry radius into the access outside of the county road right-of-way. • The variance is not contrary to best engineering practices. The Criteria required deceleration length of 435 feet is still being provided, but using a non-standard geometry. • The variance is not contrary to the intent and general purpose of these criteria and the Weld County Code. A deceleration lane will be provided for traffic entering the site meeting the intent and general purpose of the Criteria for safe traffic patterns near the access. • The variance does not result in a significant impact to the public due to maintenance of the improvement. No impact to the public will result from the variance. There will be no change in the maintenance of the improvement that results from the variance. • The variance does not result in a significant impact to the aesthetic appearance of the improvement. No significant impact to the aesthetic appearance of the deceleration lane will result from the variance. • VI 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D • Fort Lupton, CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 Weld County Planning Services ATTN: Dawn Anderson Development Review Manager RE: Weld County Road 40 Deceleration Lane Variance Request Page 3 • The variance is the minimum exception from the criteria necessary to afford relief from the hardship. The deceleration lane and transition taper have been made as long as possible to fit between the concrete irrigation ditch and irrigation pipe to the west, and the CDO T access onto County Road 40 to the east. Note that there is sufficient length of the deceleration lane for traffic to decelerate within 435 feet as the deceleration lane follows the entry radius into the access. • The variance is reasonably necessary for the health, safety, and welfare of the public. J-2 desires to provide the longest deceleration lane possible at the access to provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the public. We appreciate your consideration of this request and look forward to your response. Please contact us if you have any questions or require any additional information. Regards, e J.C. York Principal/Owner VI 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D • Fort Lupton, CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 iwa 1 I12:11 Cara cal lilt -an Ira I J tx, 1 \se/V11►.7 tat LAMS, 111 • Memorandum Date: December 10, 2024 JT Project No. 23038 To: Randy Ray, Executive Director, Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Subject: Sweet Valley Pit Drainage Narrative From: J.C. York This narrative describes the drainage patterns and facilities on the existing CCWCD property, and the planned methods that CCWCD will employ to manage these patterns and facilities during the mining and reclamation activities on the site. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The proposed project is located in the NE 1/4 of Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 66 West of the 6t" Principal Meridian, County of Weld, State of Colorado. The proposed site is located adjacent to private property on the south property line and a piece of private property along the north property line. CR 42 is immediately adjacent to the north side of the property/permit boundary. CR 25.5 is immediately adjacent to the west side of the property/permit boundary. Hwy 60 is immediately adjacent to the east side of the property/permit boundary. The area of the overall property in the proposed USR permit boundary is 147.84 acres. The land currently consists of agricultural crop and pasture land, access/farm roads. There are no jurisdictional wetlands present within the permit boundary. An irrigation ditch (Western Mutual Ditch) splits the property and runs from CR 25.5 east then turning northeast and exiting the property on the east side near the intersection of CR 42 and Hwy 60. An existing house, outbuildings, and sheds are located near the southeast corner of the property. Oil and gas pipelines and active/abandoned oil/gas wells are also located within the site. Please reference the attached USR Map for the locations of the described site features. DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND FACILITIES EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND FACILITIES The drainage on the site within the proposed slurry wall areas sheet flows from south to north across the site. Runoff from the area west of the site flows to the CR 25.5 ROW and does not enter the site. Runoff from the area to the north of the site flows long the CR 42 ROW and does not enter the site. Runoff from the area south of the site flows to the east and does not enter the site. Runoff from Hwy 60 to the east remains within the Hwy 60 ROW and flows to the north and does not enter the site. The drainage on the site, within the permit boundary, sheet flows across the site from the south to the north, and east boundaries of the site. The flows from the south property continue north until reaching the elevated ditch bank of the Western Mutual Ditch and then flow to the east and north east until reaching the Hwy 60 ROW where drainage continues north. The flows from the north property (north of the Western Mutual Ditch) continue north until reaching the CR 42 ROW and collect in a low point along CR 42. 4 I' 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 • Fax: 303-857-6224 Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Slurry Wall Construction Drainage Narrative July 12, 2024 -2- MINING PATTERNS AND FACILITIES No drainage flows will be allowed to directly flow offsite from any disturbed area. All drainage flows from disturbed areas will be directed into the open pits. The flows that enter the pits will be diverted into the sediment settling ponds via a dewatering trench around the bottom of each pit. The sediment settling ponds will allow any sediment to settle from water before being discharged to the existing adjacent irrigation laterals where possible to limit the disturbance to the surrounding land or discharge the dewatering flows via CCWCD's proposed pipeline that discharges directly to the South Platte River. All discharges will be monitored to ensure contaminants are removed per Stormwater and Dewatering Discharge Permits from CDPHE that will be obtained prior to any offsite stormwater/dewatering discharges. Please reference the attached Drainage Patterns and Facilities Map. DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND FACILITIES AFTER RECLAMATION The mine will be reclaimed as lined water storage reservoir cells. A slurry wall will be installed around each reservoir cell to make them impervious and prevent groundwater from entering or exiting the lined cells. Drainage flows outside the mined/reclaimed areas will continue to follow their historic pathways adjacent to the site. Drainage flows within the mined/reclaimed areas will be directed to the reclaimed water storage reservoir cells. Please reference the attached DRMS Exhibit F Reclamation Plan Maps. DRAINAGE SUMMARY The proposed Sweet Valley Pit will maintain the historic drainage flow patterns for all undisturbed areas within the permit boundary. For all disturbed areas, drainage flows will be conveyed to and contained within the open pit or sediment settling pond areas. This will ensure that no adverse effects to the existing drainage patterns or facilities will occur during the mining and reclamation activities. 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 I12:11 Cara cal lf-irtw Ira J tx, 1 \se/V11►.7 tat LAMS, 111 • Memorandum Date: December 10, 2024 JT Project No. 23038 To: To Whom It May Concern — Weld County Planning and Zoning Subject: CCWCD — Sweet Valley Pit — Mining Operation — Dust Abatement Plan From: J.C. York, P.E. To whom it may concern: CCWCD will provide dust abatement through its mining contractor. A water truck will be used to treat the on -site areas (haul roads, aggregate processing area, etc.) in order to suppress dust. A water truck and/or sprinklers will be used to control dust in circulation areas and material handling/stockpile areas. On a daily basis prior to starting up plant operations all haul roads, processing area, circulation areas, and stockpiles will be inspected to determine if wetting the surfaces are needed. If the roads and stockpiles are dry where dust could be generated, they are to be wetted using a water truck. Areas that cannot be reached with the water truck will be wetted using sprinklers. The same areas are inspected again at mid -day to determine if wetting the areas is needed. If at any time during the day the mining operations begin to generate dust that is leaving the site CCWCD's contractor will have a water truck on stand-by such that an area can be wetted immediately. Sincerely, c J. C. York, P. E. 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 WELD COUNTY GRADING PERMIT DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1402 NORTH 17TH AVE GREELEY, CO 80631 PHONE: (970) 400-6100 FAX: (970) 304-6498 Permit Number: GRD24-OOO8 Issuance of this Grading Permit binds Permit Holder and its Contractors to all requirements, provisions, and ordinances of Weld County, Colorado. The Permit Holder is required to call for inspections at the stabilization of Grading. Intermittent inspections may occur without notification and prior to the request for final inspection. The Permit Holder shall have this issued Grading Permit available onsite for the inspector. Grading Permits are not transferable. Italicized words within this Grading Permit correspond to defined terms contained in Weld County Code Chapter 8, Article XII. As a condition of issuance of this Grading Permit, Permit Holder acknowledges that in the case where this Grading Permit is issued prior to the final approval of any required land use application and/or prior to the satisfaction by Permit Holder of the terms and conditions of any conditionally approved land use application or permit, all work conducted pursuant to this Grading Permit is at the sole risk and responsibility of Permit Holder, its officers, employees, subcontractors, Contractors, and agents. Issuance of this Grading Permit in no way represents or implies that Weld County, its officers, employees, departments, or boards and commissions will approve, or favor approval of, any pending land use application made by Permit Holder. As a condition of issuance of this Grading Permit, Permit Holder, its agents, employees, subcontractors, contractors and assigns hereby agree to hold Weld County, Colorado, the agencies thereof and their officers and employees harmless from any and all loss and damage or any claims which may arise out of, or be connected with, the construction within the area covered by this Grading Permit; excluding any such loss and damage or any claims (including consequential damages) which may be caused solely by the negligence of Weld County, the agencies thereof or its officers and employees. Do Not Begin Site Grading Until All Erosion Contol Measures Are In Place Per The Accepted Grading Plans. Project Address: Disturbed Acres: Nearest Intersection: Project Name: Job Description: 19529 State Highway 60 72.4 State Highway 60 & C R 42 Sweet Valley Pit Slurry Walls Status: Issued Issued Date: 05/03/2024 Expiration Date: 05/08/2025 Planning Case: NA Grading associated with constructing slurry walls for water storage. Parcel Number (s): 105730100039, 105730100042 Owner Name: Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Owner Address: 3209 West 28th Street Greeley, CO 80634 Contact Type Applicant Business First Name Last Name Name J-2 Contracting Chris Leone Company Authorized J-2 Contracting Chris Agent Company Payment Summary: Receipt # Payment Method 137543 Credit Card Leone Payment Ref # Mailing Addr1 105 Coronado Court Unit A- 101 105 Coronado Court Unit A- 101 Payment Date 05/03/2024 Total: Mailing Addr2 Fort Collins, CO 80525 Phone Email Fort Collins, CO 80525 970-219-3916 970-219-3916 Payment Amount $500.00 $500.00 chrisleone@j2 contracting.co m chrisleone@j2 contracting.co m WV Cara cal 1+;rtw Ira J tx, 1 ‘...m.t.i3 till MKS, illy• Memorandum Date: December 10, 2024 JT Project No. 23038 To: To Whom It May Concern — Weld County Planning and Zoning Subject: CCWCD — Sweet Valley Pit — Mining Operation — Lighting Plan From: J.C. York, P.E. To Whom It May Concern: The standard operating hours will be during daylight hours for the mining/processing facilities on the site Monday through Saturday. Because federal highway paving projects are often required to conduct their work activities at night to minimize the impacts to traffic flows, the aggregate processing facilities may occasionally operate during night time hours. If work on these types of projects is done, this would be requested by the applicant prior to operating at night to receive approval to do so. Portable light plants may be used for the processing facilities, scale, and scale house if night work is performed. Sincerely, c J. C. York, P.E. 'di 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 I12:11 Cara cal lf-irtw Ira J tx, 1 \se/V11►.7 tat LAMS, 111 • Memorandum Date: December 10, 2024 JT Project No. 23038 To: To Whom It May Concern — Weld County Planning and Zoning Subject: CCWCD — Sweet Valley Pit — Mining Operation — Noise Control Plan From: J.C. York, P.E. To whom it may concern: CCWCD through its mining contractor will ensure that mufflers are installed on all motorized equipment to limit the noise from motors. The operation of the mine includes excavating materials and moving materials with track hoes, loaders, scrapers, and dozers. These are all motorized vehicles that have mufflers to reduce the noise from the motors. As mining progresses a screening plant, crusher, and wash plant will be implemented into the operations. The noise study by Wave Engineering shows the information that was used to develop the study and the noise contours for the worst -case scenarios during the mining operation. Please refer to the study for the locations and noise decibel level contours for more specific information. CCWCD will comply with the Weld County Code Article IX Noise, Section 14-9-40 Maximum Permissible Noise Levels for construction activities. Sincerely, e J. C. York, P.E. �I 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 I12:11 Cara cal lf-irtw Ira J tx, 1 \se/V11►.7 tat LAMS, 111 • Memorandum Date: December 10, 2024 JT Project No. 23038 To: To Whom It May Concern — Weld County Planning and Zoning Subject: CCWCD — Sweet Valley Pit — Mining Operation — Waste Handling Plan From: J.C. York, P.E. To whom it may concern: CCWCD through its mining contractor will implement a Waste Handling Plan for the mining operation. Wastes generated by the scale/operator house will be stored in a standard dumpster located adjacent to the scale/operator house. Wastes generated from the aggregate processing plants will be stored in a standard dumpster located adjacent to the processing plant area. The volume of waste generated will be trash from the operation of the scale house, processing plant, and the employees of the mining operation (i.e. lunch containers, beverage containers, etc.). The volume will be collected in a 10 cubic yard dumpster and collected weekly by the waste handler. The waste handler and facility where waste will be disposed is as follows: Waste Handler: Waste Management Facility Name: North Weld Landfill Address: 40000 Weld County Road 25 Ault, Colorado 80610 Phone Number (866) 482-6319 Sincerely, c J. C. York, P.E. 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 5 Sherman Street, 3000, Denver, Colo fight -of -Way and E47- ent Agreement date 2019 (the "Agree ") covering and affec1the following descri #ownship 4 North, R 66 West of the 6`n p 4 Section 30: Part othe /2SE and Part oft 14 Q Tax Parcel Nu rs 105730100041 and �130000037 Weld County d orado WHEREAS, O WHERE company is the curre ner of certain oil and adjacent pro es ("Leased Lands" which Company int operatio i 1uding, but not limited t , drilling, completin op locatec t, the Leased Lands C e ations"); b interest the surfaceOe of the Property; © easehold or other ri in to conduct certain ogas rating, and produc‘fr m wells roperty (tie "Propert �O 0� O O <\ WHEREAS, pursua�to the terms of the A meat, Owner has grate to Company an elusive ri ht -of -w nd easement for t °'nstallation constru '. operation, repair, replacement, reco v tion, removal, and V nance of an access r `Access Road") acro •v over, and throu t e Property as descr : and depicted on Ex c Ass ("Easement") f e u ose of : sin the Leased Law The Easement shal sixty feet(60')wid nnP� � g � y g construct'of f the road and shall rev to a permanent width thirty feet (30') with an ghteen (18') f riving surface after c CO WHEREAS, the anent shall remain i s leasehold estate in eased Lands expires operations on the d Lands ("Easement ado oil and Gas Co c NOHEREPORE this Meandum is placed of re of the ement. The parties ac , owledge that they are of th c reement and that the reement is a covenan inu& to the benefit of Own@ and Company and theaspective heirs, person cessors and assigns. o e Agreement, with , its terms, conditio "provisions, is referre and incorporated in is Memorandum for having a lawful n r legitimate interest i ►► e Agreement may g g y exa at Company's required by the 4495 06/05/2019 04:397_, � T ta�ages: 4 Rec Fee: � 00 y Koppes - Clerk a�,��ecorder, Weld Cou��1�O ©\? �O© MEMORANDU '' RIGHT-OF-WAY EA NT AGREEMENT �n 4 -)\WHEREAS, Donald ' einin , whose addres ' ° 9440 County Road 2 Co*feo 80651 ("Owner"Vand PDC Energy, Inc., elaware Corporation,' 80203 "Company" , tered into a Road As, ctive the day % o Ov C� is the current owner 2�J U C� r�✓ Lone Mesa 4N66W3� �O e during normal bus ;.c ruction, except for de O O f� force and effect unt s terminated and Co "), including any r ation Commission (" C CC") . ated driveway and to 63' 2, Platteville, ose address is and areas. mpany's oil and y has concluded all % tion or reclamation © JJ' C for the purpose of giv'41 notice d by all of the terms . :�, conditions ning with the Prope nd binds and representatives, venants and other urposes. Any person, e�'a copy of the Agree Page 1 �O IN WI S WHEREOF, the � 2019. C� Name: d R. Meining Q� State of Colorado On this Mei,�, known to me to be instThment, and who ackno <\,^ 4b>\/ (SEAL) County of We )10 - day of /7-7 '4" My commiss ,,c)44 K_J5O b %State of Colorado 4495 06/05/2019 04:36 P of 4 %\-,p> hereto have execut- pis instrument this ;? teraton ® PDC E b ACKNOWLED,ENTS 2019, before me p rsons described in a ged to me that they ex o > C� 1res: p J /7 c� City and County enver On this ' day of Director) Land, for PDC Ener exe \ci the foregoing instr g g 604 CARROLL MAC NE NOTARY PU.•. ®� � �• � STATE OF ADO NOTARY I 04003933 % MY COMMISSI PIRES MAY 03, 20"2 1J nand irec or of Land onally appeared Donal ho executed the fore ted the same. b SEAL) My cornmissio ti K\7\? fires: (7� PI 24DI 4-) ;2019, before me persoilly appeared Paul W c., known to me to •9he person described i and who acknowleto me that they exec ©%\tone Mesa 4N66W30 1-8�% n ublic RA �� LENOX �1 • Y PUBLIC TTE of COLORADO ARY ID 20194000594 Y� ISSION EXPIRES JANUARY 7, U' and, who the same. Page 2 of 2 v� o9 See Attached] 4495 06/05/2019 04:36 P of 4 Dom' CSO hibit A 4 'Easement" A r. c o # 2>.i %A�> .2`6 e�P\3'P\'>' I i 4 4 4 4 S 4 r�✓ C� c gC C,1 it A to Memorandum o 'of --Way and Easement A went Q \ Q 4495 4 06/05/2019 04:364 P �� of 4 (S9 a� b �iOoh' o� EXHI Ali Page 1 ofQ Q "A" T is Eic'hibit is attached Easement Agreement by to .n mot, between ade a part Donald of that R. Meininw certain Owner, emorandum of Road and PDC Energy, Right inc 4:—s —o —Way ompany. ° 0vering the O Q following land ( � i ° O Township 4 North, Q ^Q Rang�66 West, eth P.M. - C. %.b...›S\\*".? Q Q Reviewed lniti �h� J h `� . 2 Q wner: l� / lc/\:::--) � \> Q , Donald Mt; Section Parcel Weld R. Meining Count County, \ V Number(s): 30: Part C ‘3 of \g€E/4, Part 30000037, 10573010004 a of the (C3 O NE/4 Q @--).\\\C'? Q1@:) O Q �Q Q �� L._II\ ,,-./,�/:i'/iw��i �N,,,,,,i[,^ • )i/� ' / •/iii//,'%•. .% ' / " / .. / , • ./ • / ./ / �.,• - / / / • s - / t^, . t ,� 1 •, :: : 4• / .[o."gar A. .. .G�R::>::; • ,'1 +'. •• �,n, ,,. ,.• Vii. >≥: vii / . •.. , s•• i/ • •/ ..y /4'.FS'e:: ^ii'.": "n q� ':.•t^ r6'/:: //G' :Y,A•; a ."•." ",: .. .. / . / - E;.:._.,K+ X;..n..... ^ �. < PARCEL NO.: l n , A. 10573010004\1 , .! EI 4, xA - TWO..` > „ x' R'•[, T s !..1" i. y'.'t-9�...., -• ' , •, • re :a ; ,l , : ,• '." .`.=• ^- " :.." : " /" • ./ - " .• \ ;. ^ •, :.::�� PARCEL NO.: 101'00038 . .•. ;• :: .•" „ }.• ; n" • �s . ;,. ! >'N�•♦.O. A�^F ,�'" .i/i n /i,�• ry rv,//fin%' ./A - /, a '/'.nn:2^xn ""n , , n ;,j)"iF •ii'^, ,,,, i,� , , . / . . , / / , ,/ , , ' , ♦•1K ,YF.Gn i n, %// n •..`n %/ •w I• rvn yRw7. •�_•iJ♦ / a!x\,n :.�;,:^!a:: ,. 'w /"•: xq^ r •. 2 w /.y' -F%' • .{ A ;•Y`R ,•^ :: H� r1 R': AAA; lx "^ i.r" .,. •:: / '4/• ,4,(A qtr!'•.• It. t ". tin.tl• ^AR)n„"` s. ),: y'• ''F}Z• A G ^ `.'N,4v .� a" \ ,•' ^ ,( • A ,/! �^`a'n A "i'n/ '"^ n .r`w^�: .! n xr". `. R^.6 n3 n.O:w ," n<y"F ,1• `t !F, ^..,x v,/."^ A.."�'r ?`?n5i� ,iiJ"'1%';..4'^•F ' w`w / F A , AA .n a 1r. / 3`:,^ �_ • • ./ 2nXx HA„ �Fw ,! I //J ^/t '/wH n, :/ r /.F.E i "In•, A^ ^„t - /n•// " /.E ie %'.r ";.' "i •l;a>� „VFn./^'„�,^'�afy � • {�yaYj} .y.^."�F •22(.2•2 n < N'. M^/, � , . " 41.O4.t <n /, , r> `^.' Fiz"�: �^'. .(..•"> 'ir �Tw-i"" _ r �' Ti` >'f• � iA:w`.�: E S'.. •<e> !r` 'rtt, ^i1 `C •r, „ rats. of .IYLtwR'}.^:•C"A'M L,,,., /,,,}, nt ^ , Z ri/ Qti. /�. n„wn.!l •^O•i."1.•n��,ti `F!iin x''•; j<^/'^!F[,i. iin >:' I } � �,. ,F i. ^l'v v�..v'C ,. " ,/ . • ,• ; r"".HS �:e:w,: �/ 'J+ ".,A 4,' 7., ! ,/. /n ' .J ':.f s^ ��M•r��,w,.�. '.. in:r fl'F::^r <• ""'• r;•A, ^ rr": •�.i•F `F. • ! / ' r .T. ^x.n',-:" !+�uA •>w .. L, •x ^ ��..C.I,y,l�" .^ n �^." ^/NC^" nS�: ^"`/^/''" ^•r .f er $�(�� ,>, nC r .. T ^ ? •.'1 n✓, •• ' / -�• F,\/Gw .Alantllkan! „,,fi'uV,•`—`-+a ,'xr " ^ •RaT.ISs .::^.:.d'."-R-\�M"xn: .. , e -may i/, v• .. n=..e.- ;' n.r/ /, ' •" ,/ _ ^ ^.^pn:yr q. _yam. ... ..... ;c i rat," /.'.'^;`:I / • ,,,,ot ,•-• n?!••.. "./ ^Taa r'�' . '/f Cam�•:,/t�;.� :-;i' 'i �.•r e .'.'i :'", , r / r /.. �w..•-. t _ i` .�✓ C i y'n.,i ".F:'$f , i1�x''11t✓' iy{e�. .. +, ` '-5,.t..�.. • " : ,�'wf••"- w."•a �I�n�:[%,!I•I•�!Ma/ 31 :.R� ,.� , J, n„w'r."^ r• ^ ,^ie,'w /n, "' iw . °.: ,A,^ ^ •n" x ^o `t.E/,J^n "n L f ia iYrk %(..' wx,"a j;ta ^ y • • y._n "•\- ^ •• ; Af "r ' {'.�. —'/^.. /• .. ` • ' ,n " itVlV //n ^ "'• •"'. ?f' // ,./ ' " , "NA, �" G Ma n / '`Y..t.,t'yhC'♦r..".✓/Y "-1J-ten ^ /.R',Fw". • ,✓ e!^.,r,`n^r^niT'^i. *v/[L^•Q'"I^•A,iG>"S^ w. �J/^/"Lni^'. ',F1r''^w^"i.R' Rnl!-' n'i]e a , ^n"rf/Fr Yf, w a�n�C^.Jn/,�1' =,42-•-• ".A 4,itick.,-'^w A'A ..,44.„.'S‘ Y.aAl: ".,?a: �,^':i*n A+ -n"✓ TA,.M 1i n •✓' ,', /wA. /n'A n +: " ,%' • " r.�. , C•.^ ^ �t ^ re^, •. .l! , w,_•,' 'nx t •a, ..t`, ww :r;S"• , ,y {. �.^+ nfA,♦ i•r -,M;r j,• •-�L„• f»`,n n, A.x" :-,Ilw x. "yi`i/"'¢. ', n• ,% A'I�A i j�i .R "/�>•' Fd C2 u A, ,T ."^',:t' >' tx^A n . • , 'ti ,x•4•"', �/.•[ > ''f:✓"' ia/1•`x ... r. "^•Yl' x": A.w aa:": ;: ,"^,. A " ,;,� ,, ;.s, .r ka n"^...:•r•'Y , .� .fw<..«S- ..... .,:`�^A A. a>r ".e 4. •t�. 6 .Y c'►.::,. w1.`^w }F Ntx�.%-..w' "rv^'..n A �w` "x� .Rt%�.. ^„/x ,YO_ i •%A ^wp.-,^►I• -:' . •� . €H nr.,„r,'• 'M' "•,^,G�, .".o ` jam' '<" : r ' ♦ " w `•!v,". \ + '.�. CIF •', xiw n.r,T- ,."� ^ ^ ' " :wwn 'y�, ^- w / .w^ ;RZ^1!•:, :x A.•,„' n' "f {yG� .e,. A. :?:. w"J x v �. Jw`� .y ,��T�yw, w.nl.M'1n. S wS�,•n.,w. , `� n•^, <•'; • ^ r^ :Fr ..t "' .yy��,. 3. �� ,ya w `[}M (e,'.'. r^•ii,•:l.,Cl w.l?n.. /,.r • w w /i• M n , w11:::: w`l'a,p "I�:, ,A :•�'"Y'in."/,^ :v \. ..r • ^• Jn' 3' :"4' " rv,"?� C/r,<.:r+ ?- '':6'/rr _1 rF :r 4 .w'le, n•^A ,\ .iew.' , w'♦ y rF„,^ ...H \,,R•YA,^ -'"^ x'A:t.^,A' ;.w. .,.•�.• ,y{.ly�" Ty^,.r », 1 A py� '",i,• R xx A! -^AF M �'< ^ �"o.t f• w, •.2„ / ,•c .,,.nF., . • r w• .. ^ ! w^.i•P i ,,r 22 • ^/ a„ k "A • .. t ::'qg i`w'^+ n J^Y��V ;; .'11+` ."^"/^• ^">< n"., ,. < . .it'n`^n,'•;'. } '1. ,, a": C "Z,T.: �'n i,1M., `^ �.y^.w'""yY," a�i , ,'/ ••:MJ/"." .. J- N nw• .. r •.n w ^;'F •• :a"e n,/.�'"n` ^(I}t •.". / ' f^ //1 .'"�`'s` ^ .�t�.! Rr"ex ; ^ } ...'•-•n• / J ^',,,,A/"•'.^�,^'"• .e.w^LH 4 w, - M, .,.,x•. "^"An ".*;, ,a.a.r Iw,...,.n^^.w..' ^h i '�,/ A . Aw..n w S "�`' r +.x :'^'' .w. ,411: ^w•R.. yp�/.,�'' w rv'A["^,M• R„'Sii ��/ '"•• " x�,kf ♦ S�I� M rn-/!'^ CwJ`" `P -.A',� 'A �J.'w _ 1 n " •, .n"�'AA'� rF^w \ ,^1.^ S• . %� f :L..S R .\ w T'w'i i^••I.�� A. xF" nvY[.. 1+F T ^ ,< : t=t. n:'/• M.: alr'. „ y�;;s�: x �. `!S ' Y K ` ,♦14....2.‘"":"...,VR• �t �ni .J+r`2 ^r` , v % "n"K,' ♦J/, . T/^^.Aw, �:. n� I f' / / � r,�F ,w", s %,CC!r. /C1; ; w"• a: ^•^.R:a,An v ,''"h '' /i , • • / {wi S ,o ,• v , ?%: R, •Mw^,.. y� ('^ `w ^ ^ // . y",�nr '� iM ry' ; ":� ^ a,r', �' Jn/n; ^ ' ,ln , .A• _ ^ n n N"•Mn'ILR•w„I.^V.,^ ` M ^'. " w. n n A " rvC• w,.'i">%: ,: "i ^i. w 7,. �n n"• . A,. y1. .•. An V: JI. \, .. y 1 .,/,.'"v.^," .vp^. ^n.. C X� {F " .t�> `�. ^„'A,•w•vSIIF Mi In ,A�/n. , / �.F r ,i n"n,.^ G.S''^^ti YA"w""'/K ^ �'a'/a,n"`•i �"i, �"un+•�'R. A n " � ""F ^ n �..R Ti" _ i'[ivY.Yd., w ,^ a"•..M 'v"/.e. y'',AwAYR%II .Ann ! 5.•\" " n�,��/'Ii..lkl��'L tJA ^iY-,�^„ /i ! Cw"^J. ^" " k � M "^k Tea^ N.A =Rw .^ .i.R .lC. ,.1;,...•„..x". w..,/" A �." ,^`^, ^� T ^ :w.;:n; ? 'M- � �.. ".;�.. *: rs yr \,,�s. -,., ..►.^.,.R�, n \ An^" ^n/ti_•. ^/^^.." i , y ,C/A:• ^,� "' A� �. n n ^ S ^, j. •*, " 'r" n wd _?'!:). i"I�.r,/(i: '•'EJ n'C, t[k- w k -"> i"^'�'<'rit.�R!" 4w,-. µ•,I..�.. wn"""'4-<J a > ., y o';.n'' ^,t";':q;:. y,:,'I:s:.:":.: ^ ."a '"''f".�'c.'t�Ny,< '�'"5'>Xw A "n,v^,,. ry ^ wat \n ^ y' �Y� <�� .^ "r < ^� A n N :'ek k a+Tit .,' , x ' ' Y , ^.,'"^ ]^w ^x ,Sn+ In'M^,R> nn •^•['k•," L"F t Kly 9'A,�tl�« '' ..fiw.4• r '= '/ 1 vw ^" !«M Y '\n Al''i>>• - i% 'Ii " ,( V ^11N�i " w O, ^ ^ �f SA.` !F^ :A/ �. dh, 4C, <^ �I `L^• r •1�^?QS, •'t nx ^^•>n"."n>:'iw "P w.^ A"r \I�^n�^w. " //� Ai'.'G 1. "w.'n^, n i�" ...A"�^'�"„lw::%.^:,R,:.:a:^"", '='„n.,A„"Ir. t 1, :,r1sM,.[k' ni.�.•,.^x l'/,wXC ';l •S 1^A.^ A•w. o ,FAr.R x;'t,,^•�wSj.-4�;^ a,x"x .,%r /.a>., />,,; ^,.c'x`;:' ' , \i ^� `w . A C'♦, [ ` A i , ALt'n+'..�i`,w. !J / •f, ^"• .„^,nA , " A w''.'r.•IA./.. ��J '•^i,".'' ,S •'A" ,•l^ <t n/-"), � 'wv,nAwi,. ^q� , n» ,wrNC��^vww 'h.; ;i,'.']' wr wf�/•, _k'"(= '"r -`'v ^'>, "4-1" ,<i `t, , .N, r M '�"^w"..^t:"«r ^•ur•.c• .M'a.' " n• r ¢ '` C• +vr! [x., C• • ^,\n %ai, i a A �• /,F •'i4 n ; t,/(,FAi 'Wee • in. _ s � ; •.%' .'a• A 'n T t ' N.Os aiC n i 4%[ " il�1' '�:[: "i•: .,` • x > "'%'r r•" .., ^ v.N 't >•^„ '"r M "+R'. " .� ,. m ^.k!<. ,If;;44d.w a " ,, , t!!'" „ w i'i• v Si , / i/ '- nw[i.'} / MA ` ", ^/,';'j' a` 'f•," ..' i ' ..r/%•x ,iPn f. . ".'/'.i.. s•• ,�' ," J a' •. , ✓+, . /•„N ;i,•a„ A.s`..�. • x\. ^� n' ,"w ",(}.^ '\`, , . \ j,.. ,,., R , n".„ '[r'^.i'^i"r `:� '.� .^_ • ^ r,, A." v `.,' /i[/ , tl.,J^ •A A. ^! ( . L., x>.. /' • / A �< ,A ^ „ "r r "..• A " ;✓, ' 1.... . �>�YA ^ .w.R,?" FR•rv,.. k„�w' ^, .. � •S-:r^A"„ , �" '�. ,v 1, ,!TM " rv" , -2.[ r%'L ,Ah, •" ,%vi' n+il�y •"%'�`C: {, w ` M"." >Q• a"// . •a,^ S rv/,n/ t'• �[ J •..•r.i ?• w ^:l. •"ACS ' _ ' '" %'<'^r'�.t,A rlA•,^.'.^ A,n•,I,�n .iJ^'i^'n .� n..�' A{, „ • /' , QwJ , ,^/e • •':•' . v .,Z. el" .. r, u ry 4 'u Y M ,.:',..4.,,,... 'fw^ n. <innw•.M. M'2 �" � "n^ JA -t ,-,,,N k' •`nAn a. 1.InI,'� .r ,n k ,`t`nt r .A •:� 4, ". a," iln > '•"� "w"".w t :..R[� o ^.n:.". ,� :i w:'::.,r'^/x3% 'iw•l.A. ".w ' xL I " .^4 'Ra:A' , ;(w^,^." ri •"'^4 •" .••n A" .A ^ • . 'N,"" .. X�;;n•+" ,""•Y"Ff w'^4••• y , "H""'.gip"', •'" „F'[,,.T , / �w ' Sv/`.(%'r ,�•/'• win"! • I ^fti '7yh•: + 147.,>; •/•h/>1,.A: n" w'IRIA "w ,n �tn�L''.�,}o,�� x!' `.w k "/ w. '^.Af �,x}",^ ^ ,'� •{' "KA"n^C/.tn �i^" M -,An\ ,y ,,.nry^ �� "�A'nn T ^n�].�i�ntA�,xt„4,tA,k x" " y^/»'^ 'vf NA ✓' A�„w nT L'♦.'4f, " ^<,i A" .t y�'f-" n �ffY, r „i�M. .ae^ X("""IF^ C.^ .Mx w. r .9..' •\ ,.I !, i ^,R, 'A.-�C -n n ,^n ' � 'b •, , ^Y' F ) �Il .n'!♦ -.^ u�,t : " G" w . ...,1^"':!a 7 T�T►.w .,I, wx ",i.; w/. 1.,.'..,<„ M, i, " J r }.M. ./ A. J+S.r.:•^":^ ,u^'. 1^: t" ,f•. pG i,^u L' r.n`�^^'•,.x,."A . ^yA" w J1�:'R ,w" '!`%1,r'.' `'"'/ki..k` s' nyjy_ /,j.�>'RA . f ., wl('" . . ?a. w: tt!!yy `y y(g�y w, \V v • Y A,.,^ Ai. !., n,'}"T .n - ^I. n Duw '<T' " r .F ^>:id r.:.•.: "'" ^; X ^ �xi'I>"-1='r..,:^.^.^ .. w w .,1.^...,ti. nA",`" \ 1 a ^w�• [t.^ <;ew,^ e'il- S' Ie,�..Y,. %fn g �" .A.AniC"'l,'''�kW��` [' & S n M. f ,"'} H.f �::,y'." wY •x „� sl.}n/w •\C !'" ,.•T .w Ra.;,In""^"�' '�4n4 '� 1 .It. .S .^..,' w a• " ( +�, ^"♦"r� / n"^T-'" w �AtS .,.•:.I�^"• µ' .'�^A ,^ A ^ 'll "L•"`.^ ,.y -n^ ."'ia^ ,t'n •.n'.Rfwix •.w� ^,r"III,} .>-,i>n��'4:-ro f �i .' ,C• ` •".it..F� .,.'S,.,S�FIS^r\r� n w'F w?ATw-+ 'N ,,(��LLjj jrIR.M.� . < r"...... - 'n tiw.',!^+�. �^i"c�^ ,[4 f i..F „ ./.. ` t� .4 M'ry ^ '.R11.1$" L M Y n w A • N : Y Mn i^/"^, ^ '.E.! " ^. TX A ,L: " �R.w,• nA 4" .ate "' K'" ^'"' 3 'ik "i+./f ^C'>. a'•x.•.w" 1 V^R]^l •^.'' , xf. .,,< '4• ^t v ,! . a,Tx�.^ ae' >''M�w• >�a�,;I,.^,�e' ."Ya �!•' ✓ , .✓ '^: • /" ' ^< ^ /( lt' MC,•..'KJ�v . .•,. ;t "" /. ,,•'AR ..,e' '^+[ ,Aw:[ AVP' , , tia•at WS. ^ ^ " �(y� y " •^,4 M^,�'.%^ , .�,� n w,-1't•JAn N"� �,C"x�C/w,v •/•An.Ix "n" S,�Ot•'"i `� "f. ^' nA,;,^ •A'n �, x'f n/wL •44... / . •/�aiA. ,y, +v, �'` ../..r'[""w .c.0 ,x w w^^ !Gi e'x :'4.,� ^ ir•4 n t •i /w n '�y��i`vn f✓'W "^'q�' "i• pJ L .LY,,rt AS-w.�.w" .r, Vin.. v.. 1 . �•••,�y,��e• a ':.1e9 ^ •,i'S � Y t"[ , ",w �. .. Z' 1R n /a may; R e `S Y''H:r '•'la/'/^'••,�^ ` ^A.'^i.,T'./," r•w.. ],n,tl.nn{T., �T.F^/Y �i"''T,^ �r • •..Y4 M. ..„,, !.^^�C k».Y,.. x�: ,ts_"i•'�'^ �,..w'1�a W sF X, \„malt! ^ 1S.^, "weµlA;; • ra �."<.v, 'M✓ ^.,. wf �OLn..C'x ^M-.^A.w.^w, ,Iw@�w.^." .<\\ \ �..a�:• 'x"^f 'Aa .�. Ak,T, Rrww�!•h ^ '.�nw^/i.f` iJ. ".a ^t. •r"„ h:,, :'Nt \ �<. .f> .^ .w1�, w� w w , • " �,.N. ,,/'L L, ^ .F.,a.:i}e > A- "^ a xYlti "� . . .� " ' T. k. ...N�1>.",I�.^ {•" la. f .y,' ;AI,...- x xC.. 'Q<e.k�.n y�.r y...t.. w.b' tv" M ' k• .�.•'�"Aj" "{�".w••�'r�-^n...v1:.w S ` r " w,"R" ',,• : A"" � Y aaw A: N T -,� w Y ,[ y M ` .,w'�.,^, ",. ^ I.,, •. , 1)S " 1i \ ` a\fA ,4,'.^' `\ y o '+T••F" ^♦, " ;�ww.^ A •,. S ',.N / 3 / A. ' a \ 9'�i",. ,.","t•.a�"�^. / C 1:�': .w:.[ Z \ n, .xR Y . •^ " ,• -^'i. T^ ti « ` / '';•e�i 1.`�n•^' "`�'n0.1." ` r[ ,r.T • .x. 4 • 4 �w •:... ✓«',i .." !'. Vii/ . / , •C^. / L>"i,.i, .;, " ,L, +R' w• ��JyI,(.' ^` ^T''C<"v'�,i, / /n. _/ f^.,., %.//. AF /,.rp�+'^• r r " f n i `," •^ � 1 'iF.F!•�.^.� �`i: F' ♦/+" ,> ..A^i ., /aA^i,:" Ra^ .•H a^o- 1,.n `^'!A^ wr, " >{'. 'y,. en,'.A..w^„ 4. % n ?, iX 'nx Yw.i,/ ^4"ti 1,.. L' rxc ]a n • ,[.., � ((Ark -2.1-7.412-- ^^"^ts"x.. , 'yk' ., /y ,n " , wr I U w:• ^.�,^,/^,^`^" ^,w,^, x>"^ ,'•i "r.'ygrnJ.;3w ^.^'�"' PARCEL �w";.'^�,-""� w^._� At.' ^ A' ✓.S " w.'>,,. "`i) A,x Zn.A: ^n,"r IiJA, n`^C, ^ v.i` " , •.w b:.i // • "♦M,.>• ^.9 •i�`A°:1. Atte ri.A A../'•^xa . :;,^.A",`i . a A.i.il` �w .^Jw..-,., \ "`l[•`n. "'.n"n "r i. q, .Y-..� . ] .! i.n A:;w.^ N • .S , . '•.c , ('• • .. ^ ,'Rn n`�>✓/'", i n i': .n F r/. , " ' "/, ^, ry .A ♦.s S . „/„ r^>"•."^ .r.e.,,"•A, ..A^.- . ". 5730000037-" - A , N •� •i ( / // . 4. e• "'i't "�` 4/� 3i ,_ ,. s.`a �� '%.:�'Y.. /i-' I Jnl,, /. n , / _ E y 'I �1 "^ t , iP SR :. > /Fp, . t nn "',iiw \ > "" • i i"•l` i.„a, ♦ n:✓' • n / a '. •�� ^:✓'. rl^ , w k 'k� AKi ^ ..•,Y/ CG'•„^,n(fwe ,."^ , R' "M/f n'•,^..•'7.,", 1 q•xx .: C:,!'5.^ , w'ni ." :iie,'•'/•.x " A , e{: r'.Sn,' • .r .'.> , • ,At^.^, �/J'J,:A" e ' ,: A.. ,'r` �'., f�%;.�. , ,'s;.M./Y w+:.C,e •... s'^ i�„''w.:' /.iy .•'.Yn"^.v,R..,e A. r ,T/i',Ai: '" .I,� .T, .nFA.,^,.':'<.'.nnn•.T `•>,...r.n. F, [^., .AQ \,• 'I. ..0. ,wi�En .n k •. , , .w.>^2wn."[, w'"'•`',1�+ ^ �.. ' N ? A.. f '(��lw . 1 , ^� I�'J wn" w! ^� w ^;,�.. ap „ w:I •yT ,^,! N' l' J' .M.M ^ ".A''•.� "J`z.•'>."` .•w��^�" •SaX'� >`f: ,.1�'�'l�'+ T?:R.r^ i:A£•vU".'xn:^".T-,L-i.'t'f'r".... ctk ..^ •, ^:M."w±~ ..yy.[M�M.,�,, �' xl` tw,i ti,` ...n, ^:>�^ M<• •.4t!'s ,�.- ri.„ .!• t .A, wAtwm K .,,,. y. C, k"..•' �k r " ,'.), �' y 4. w. : n T"a`}.'' w" '�,.^-'".hn. i ` ) A`. �t�-:.�r::�•.r��r;� s w ^ [ 7k ::. ^,w , Y /. „l,A. ^•- 1`t�i. n} > S•' . `.,T'�''1�' \ .Y'♦ •r . I,.a� <x•,..ry . i - ) Oi. ` \ "A , ,A M ,T�Jx•''n, ^ ^l� n•'M^�k k (,"^> /V r ".e vk5- n*" '.P'`t n" :"'X�M�"�ik �^ A."'x Ya•,, .9•Tjl, .w \�V` ; ^" xtJ?t` A•e l n,^ A �',•}•-.Ax'xw,w d: il..^ ^^AJ^A 5.. .^<,n }. Y^ Fw1n ,.n,� °.� . R w '" �,. V, 44 i^ r„C/:+'" , .1. A »' ;^� Ia v; lnvi`A.^,.� w ��;S,', / A �y •aS � i s: x!x^,. "�,a 1w.TJe wa ^.^.' w .^M...'r.1;•: n 3'�A w fv.Y'a'^!h, *�,1 ?. , /,1, �A. .,{ L� .f ` Y •,yH ✓^ Q _.< ^["ns A^wi, l^w.lM"r 'x. A"n ^w.".,�'�-w.^«"wiv^Ax ^'�'�"^." Iln, �,l�,'� .r♦a � \ } 4FJ A'J�' i7G":��"� f �a t y< k; !- ^ .xY n4,.... !.. ^.Cx .^, a>, ,i,:r r„n Mtn\�y >y l � w•� n "h 1,n1 .•1, i�. (r �.}i.n x.a.�[.A..7 ^' A"A.;";,C.. IwA. w�H�r..T.".v a J^, S. .. ..� "^Y" b ,j>• f. n ..e, < r1�n"••.'.�,( ..... x .y.:,.,nw, "'•�^^.M,iS•n ni' .1 � �,'(.• ,1„�% ^.r'�\+'.r r t Y' • .. •Si,. �.!w�t'<,, AR..N1-1 ^A ..,i1. ,y >N. M"� y'( f(11•+ ..'1., 'y k.• y„w, ,`!. •�3�v<`,<,` ^,"11 n 1 k nu1 . ii A.^" T Vin. \p , yyL, T. �srT c aP $ "' >" _ "'..'An\ ,."^ •,azZ��"A ,•n'"" \ (\ ,c ` .l .'{ f^ ._d('. [^ .At •..'� X < npw.-2"' '.'";�4. #x,-7 ,.'R _ A." :a'L'' Y " • '� _ rv.f Y�yti 'lY... T.,,. �/.nry,, y+l"+r ^a. 3 e'i v�` 1 lMw ;.n<^ a.'S • w •i w A,.^ -C^ ..Sw'tA ` C w'n M ^ I•, An . .a /.w W ,"M•a` ."t�'" 'ZS r/w"w "n" w .\ '.}k'� \ x r+ ;Y '^ "^ 3.0 ^. •e ts'".�."N•.+r. '"."' f .'•'�^ ,may �` _ w..,�„ •�i "A'�' :A>'u . rv^'t. Yn <. S 'w )'a' 1 �'•Y w.'E,'`� nt •. ,.,. " . `� • . a . »'�'l�' I.! C'� ��•aw Y,< .,�, 'i �^y> " S,w "•w1 a"'^ N.^n y! tF��(i.fv{�< ,F y_ \. ^^ • iS' w - .p.•K A , t .xF C nI'r: ^lv ry � ,a' • r. T "'fix " `T,^•x^[Il 1 .w ^' .. `� "S`> '.Yw /wvn "lm i„ !'[�::"".�^,.. •`1^� y i'��„] •i.+ • "'t, i ^" <� X,y W,Tj. t ) "i,�e' .1• r fin. ,,• 3 ', .� .c\ �, ^ A 'AI! S. r nw, 6^. ..n�ron f > -,.i 't/•v r 'I ? t i "' ,l.�a; !.^' i.. •'',y' ^ .tJ.'� S�,u, .` f= yi" ' w^" �4"n+ r wAr^ !, !w -T'\ w"'A A\A < Sw, , ^ 1M')'. ` � ",.('�v. Tr �`� Q,n"i " L K.., .. fwx" ��^�"� w• 't (t\ w J•/ 1.d " Irvfky 'v .per•`3T k� T r "itc!' ^ ^„ �� 4>� K^, .. `iJ $N.l•� •i�',iJl�^ , wt `r3l ..p �" `n If1.'.n ^.,f Y<.sl S , ,If , a •�� _ :.r. •^,[ ^aa"' ^� " . .�' Rx, '^ �r 44, \ 6 \„: yFl: `�a 4,0 .5A \ < "l x, � w.!!.E �� r 2a...w.^..e- / .e „^. .Z.w�F<•�3�,, .�, .,,^.•./' .A,x .gin,".:..^/. ^, it �A"Fj (' ran. k .;,n x%SAw. A' J �Y/ A } iI> `iw Nn r Ad s .F^`'/,ins`.' `�' !/>^ ;Fie ,. a! "T'xa^ "Iw^/^•'E>•_. . i /. . r.(•. ..g ,/,> ;,♦, •i qn�' .N "T, '" , a / n ^ ^i'1'T.I�ti, •, iw`� !w /T .MN ? y(' -M."^ . 'i.[„ > / ni,, 'ia/"'•^ x t„ �M • w C1 n %'x`'n ..n. ' ^ ^' An. r .nom` / 1 / , -„t J ,/'rv.ry ^`-^. .SA ' y" " i aA"w`w. .,. a / ^\ ,'"a ^'.e :,.,•w•� ".., w.� .4..t w"r: . �T �^ T n^ ^ i n // x" "^1•. "a xu �., f w, FJ.:: '.7. nSlfi,• • I! A •�J, •, .w< .. n'A ", ry •"T` 'd^�. • w^ a n , ,. i-T/ , _ /% , •� •6• n 1�.. _. . ..�A�� ./". .A.wiA RnfT':r>,��.R^�A;'>, R' ` , ' "'n',a •{^ • / r ..�w'�1 y�S t�^'b^w�i•'"'�: "'✓ Y,•i"w �'n^•{^, �.'n..� ,": .tom '•T T•!.:^1.5%�•' `r -> q•: +,' aw n rk. L • ^ ... a M .yc t - (" U ,,� AY,e �Y T! x- "w,x^ Jt'• - C h ��J].a • O n'.I• / / .�Al. a t 1r� T 'Ji: , \`'f\ S[.'1n. .' "',.wa i.,' ,• � w "'�""^ '�''j:1. i , " 1 w ~ L `+ .� jT� !f w tRn,>� .2..... M / ♦ .R i T e,.1n . ! i1F n , H ,t`•"v :' ... Nt• T' •+ S".i.'.A.. '^�6 ,``k ^�wR��•- t� ,�`^a�' +i ♦ S''" "^w.%,� : ' _ t "gin` . YS 3Y a^ -S'. e " t'IF� .- i, !• S , "s.t,.;,ll. . :C<>) v 't „(• ^"� �ie 'ri 'i^ <yy f 1 ^ 3 ^tx• ! M •^ .�.�''••� t v• -•Ak+^".'^^" J `C ,. .! 1•...-.. !•�i•' • 1 h iN n/`<lw . "w - }l .. VN- [�•a��{' "" W V \ x" ` • � �� ' \" T • ` uy� " '.x. • �nYV . f< �.� . �' new a L^ "'"f •!I' ,i > \hW S ft 4 v-L�' F „`"^>•'C• ^ �ti•` ., t "4n"J ', .. 4c � •� .'kC '�." )�. «R?,.. k '>?,' w.n of " . An a.�'% nn .w r,AkC [ 4..n' ' y ""; rvA. �p^w.: ^r>.+ T.^i. •,9'xy .! _ „ , y [A " \ �.""�'^, �^ x'ww^..w t ^f[^.^i+n;•i '+. (j IA'T ^'[nJ n•y y n•.^i A. ^n^n A / /'`•a'` F '..win 4'..w} �,' .! w Y.w.� a,p':� ` ..k4 y.• ,ACA-tw^Tnn�l%., ' " few , «//y!n� n. 'C�,^^[ ni'".M+ >wA. n^M.n.': ,:nAJMI F .M• p ., M , , ^! . "w C"w.iAxw -•ttr 'w In" "!'•"+ ^ "*. w. `�,, /"^.n`^ ., 1^ C"n'S' .;.A• . '�. / ^"t1'w. A.^ "•"i�.a.•• A'•}IG!'S.:a A" ,w,^^ Ah AIR" a,.:w A:>'•% w!'•M^w ..,,./�...^S A. 21.... w.� ^F wM„wt ,t,.wn�.,�„^ ^T, S,+w; 9\i, " w^r C'C^ n^ -K. ft• A.. w. ,l R' .1" ' nX(" .t. M ,,}e� . w. ^.A� „^•XA. jt"'n"t"^.w x " ''R" 't ,Aw.Y . .w Y•,. n`1'^ten./. •Vw., Wit. rw < rw • /Aw ^A`lte:ti .. Cir.•.^ .i •, <Iln�\•.�T>. <. v w•x' ," wn"V !'n• YyY. '.^^2� •. _ rvn ?',\` a"•li,� •>..�. qy.• y,A•A, tS:. .•�J ,RA^w.oSl.4:.r 's t •• •A..'.-,L:.a^,�•.••^w."?.r.•xs'.>n'11.�,."• t^.A:?.'' n -'s "^•♦". Oj. w rU L w'' .'f. ^R'. " ".� v "'. .w. • r ""nA,C.. `I r'•. w,. �>R r " *, i.•n,:"; Sn^^!�„ Sx _^'Fi.^'. ^"F i' �•;''p'\, ,7, n.:aty an^"^' "...? r a . A •wp� -A^"'•,^: >:.:^.FF,t r • ! .. .r •€C•Akx.;\n rv3`' ['" Q "�,.t•.�„w.A.C^ 3(:n ".yy�. ' yam.` " T•� •x , . n,`p .•f ' A.,l ili y HY. •-[Q t [•nln,a.J,'t^ w,fM• ` `/"irT'k."^ii�r ".•R••••:e`/.'-", \ iti < ., %,".n.x.Ssw!'x<w 1. IIA. A ✓ Y'.`r.'. .i ' 2^ _A+, .w,• " .Yia{':c^n �i•. '6^ r, yA.M ^• $'i%;y[yi.. •.�I' ,^./h.+l :,,A" l^.p( rlr:. T^ �` 'lry �ww Sn . ^^^ afAr:0.`�AFt;^.• "• G'1 :. ..x^ �, „r :„•. • `ACK •.,,• A`1 -A«'' Mi"w _G:•3 �.. w l ;w.yp kA•: "r^, » .1•. " ?tit n ,G,.,< ./' n.I .S 'i+J> n. k}'•a!�'�A `'•1....f/R.]. . ue•n�-A nn/iiw .ry•• •An". ww•Y •< ;.."/ „'•12. ;, .e't"n• .%^ A ,A w i^ww S n ,w . A�•^n. n A." •.,,A < h ,..,• a AC' "atw1.1 +ww`?.t.. �`wt+""�F.��•�.r'y 11!"' �.� '!.^j'^ Jt C.n.:.R ,. •'t •"`n n''�" �. n.' + C" �^ i..'�r"'-'�n�t� ^A. "Av' R.K-�'"->k.FAwx 'w M„'M1'n ".L I'A + f !1 6. Y M • • R A [i nx/ ^.;% 0.61. 10 :n,^,A•x. _ ^..,�A�'^%�n^ <�.t^.A .. w.,•P'..,y •n �^ ^ I 8 r a "'4:-" " A .. 3'v n� �\"'^ `�'.•. w^AF�'y-w"IE M �, ^OM,A <ARInIR.:. 'A^ ^,✓w J,. "^f ^w.4a� .^ [M , Y' .R: Tw...,�.�t')-"," ,Mx'♦ .r.:Ar .w,T •I^t'r r . >.^.t;itcK.,;^ waln ^,a i "MY w A••"q ». x!•:^A: . STF S s.. r•" y, Cr ». "^ R,� r n n .'�,o ;`.S R ,: A• -.Ai."..(/`fw�y[ A .. "^ ».• y� ,S A ' ,,,. " sS !f rn ",a ^. w.....A :'r "l:i•^i •.w. ^ ^)J.^: [�}[�r,� • _ an « '� r. v yy ♦? /nY w.. . w. `<�i/ �- t'1 yy r „ }. � \' �. \`�j♦ ✓ `. ,.nt ^ w 14.1-7 enY•`nl¢'n ^ '^ ^r 4.I. >rv".,:^i'Aa- x;^ ., ala.�A.x''^•. '°� AJ"I^ 1. n`""A! r...; r ...a ki.,G„^:•x. r, .); '1Fr !f .?. yl"".Mn�,%.r .� {'. .nn f-wAy, y' f�.).inS'' `. gn[^:Mr •.•+n �• M^ S. w, on ..." ♦ ,rx^: •: ,} "AT'f ...'�. " rna.'1J>wil]. w �'-�^.R^ .R a .>ig' M•r:.. ^ rv. n .rtn. w•w(w >'JAwtl:l�,^tn �{Y�n ,� � x ytW V�� M ♦ :� Y 471, �J 't '43 , J •n,l�"( JJ�� ♦•" Y,n a..'r"^ ry ',^ '•Y ≥<� •x•. \`•� �^7 .if_ .}w'. `:. r ! t LE W.. ^ iF " X^�F,.. ,]Y'„.`. Yf' NCyQ, w., y�. t�' Y". r�Y ,may : n.I"" .�E �[( •• , %. n .R uY ^ A.' Y`� 'M '^ >'\` .nI [C ate* ,:Y n k`' X•S ,f eV ,EF tlwFt' " rR ,R iJ ..•.iL � y try n 't S<a�, r" ., ..�..E ♦'vP .;+ TI>♦ M.• ry�-, v"a��«a ww ./.•�.�y' ✓,' '��Fx \N��.jf� ft.f.`` w., ! v^''l\� i,r^ i($ N ! c' r'^ .,4,4'''' ralt.[�• ^ •A +[ p"\t G. ..r rr , r �t� $ �• `i`.^Ak`'w.' >n J s"^ w�..:^. v+r i �>` ` c' 3^IA...,. .*^ 0R>.5 _ �. " Y .v` .T. •"a .. , t. 'r.J"� r,e` { .'N ^�;Jy{��♦ ^yT ^l\`SWI ♦ ". i,, e ,nh -�'F •i..^ `�� , T �• V C '4. •/n^^•.a"`"^w..^t X `1r„�Y`" ,R 7' t" T �J'� �( .t .^Z 'IA ^ . • T>. >S ty ' ' '. a 4r '.t'1' .• >'>�Y.,A.n ,ry• - 'C .Y>:• ,.� n. 4 ' !. "et ^ wit n ?H 4 } • nA �M , •f J W •'IaY� 4 .M Yi"i, tiM .. .i �, � ww,•. .wC Y >'� ,>h.��ii'`�`- 11' •- ;', rj�w' M �' St, .5 "St 's'�'^;" 1.,,. ^xiin !\1 ,R . w en'i.nn \ . *>t' •<^ r/^c • '�P ai" .^.R f' � a" w.t1A^-.•k. " '.l..w' .! ; ' o. . .F� ^ M'.w ! •\`^ %.^"}. N, f. t} Iq.x r •1. '7kaT.^I�fy / ^ i Y " " r .e.- ^ ITi" 1�. --un �4 \. A x t• "M.I ,�.�,`t, . t�F•1.� .R �e s F. •t,v. C �P .a,}• 'R']i,',,iSt'M,•`11 W' r•Y•,'cr M Fi Y�t> ,.�y1�4 J S ,� Ci ( "'C��' '�I' wti �'�`.„w, ' ...�: , ••f, ' .� J •g,�" , .'x ^^.I'4y. TM3 ,.f°s `.r' •a�;y,•'•..r, t. n� ? h. " w k' iA >A„ ^^ • 'Y,' ,},, 6 .•A►'•< '"fib F. f'>w v'� 'G @ti ^ y',^J, 1-..V n !T<i l �F,`\ J. a� 'a '.>, \O . ' if .w�. � �. f', '1� 1," t` `.(. w .A. ,`•.. TI.^ ' `RT'J.Y^•A , Tx„ i} ' ,rtat. M `j• :LC r Aw �+!�t i' '�\ " •"SiC r> '.RTa. Y "w. .R.` 'N n 4 • • �.r�� w. » F" ^' `,6?+r-• ♦ •�{�.' / ' `Y• ` lAn v/,�ii^Y C . '{ — a ' {I ' 3�•< r, 'nM _ .^,^,,,, '< ' ♦, ZY'.1 � ••^ V:tl, _ J �" \ y, >Y^ a V a-tt• CS y "f <> V. •ti' wwn, F k.1 Ldw " �" `I' M Y A " MLG ^ 71 •pe. 1 •♦'tJ•i.' \' . h '1" •' \•w'/ ��av �J 4'! ^:<a•a^A" r i• . 1 .f„ fi•r, e ' .. 'i. \ �, cfi iJ" w{ ".•a ^ i]k 'i v. .I{.' "i iC g 7 s" n� .L x \% `. ^` w ?.a }� " 1. " f%,: ^" I' •i �:ti •^ (`A �•,u re ..w 4' . .• j • AC n" I.x- F .j ^`T •.F: f; .i.J. �.,^fin$ r \ l: :.:s'n S';xA r•, X!�"n ^ M•% + r •<�n •4 �' /•.', ^`?tt. >J w+lA A`V . .�.n r4"R t A wI r '• " s :.• d's x^ f'"4€F•, .r ;t rn `trAflr,�.a<F�%e'•Q2,'•'f F'^,1T n:f. AIf w1n ^uA ".,f�.;..%�. ,Af :^�.R. - a,... .. .xcx ^.a. tx-v� x'•N•A: x>..4, t••• ^.Ma''A<^.Ax n .l.A• ,i+. C1tM3a^n :•n^r,•^."^ GS ,: f'�X.tw, �": i s .:xi!`wA: �,Ax ,•y'.F.?.".� ..• "^x"'x"a nf•, nC/4.„ �• ..'.1. 4. t^ w."n ..�w`• "^ ,5.fi Rr. ,� w g:t.^ .an a, .R9r= A•`AR " .,E M^ n .,w„n,^ . r " %.Q'.' " .? .^ ^• r. ^�yF' � w•JJ ka;.;.•:J�1. 2 n !,:.: .t. �,r•3w. .t�wy n,`A'"• ^::Int' "«�:,, I ? h o,:x" e :•»t":,p• ^"^"..�'�T.: ^'RSt•" • • w^w: ,. aa. A 'x!r'. s• �," . w ^ n.� yy.�^.�^ n "t .. ..."..'�a'x,<F••• .JaJa, V `� } ' ,. �/* lnR.n"M, " .i.. a.. 4Y S1/' s.S n 'S 1 .A �,3►', � itnAMKnI••. ,S» v 2 tit.: 1 /Y0• . • ^T• • J� > -� .',y�S. r'�t� p w.�^ � p-lR.... .{3]';rtt,}.31.^. 1r•^'A-.'wC +.1 `3e�z �YZy4. 3`.VS]i{�V a>w• ..�j tr 3", T J)C >�, -1s''^!An . "` . } A t`^�13R.•' e` 3" • ". ere ,d ^x"%ua .>•" - '�•\." +p� 'nw "^ �v � �.yx ,: �( lWF„" •.1 ". ,A.[t.�?^°•� i'4y •`"F�.• !y: �!' 1 . 3 i!. x•A 'yam al ^ •a^� .a ..r.l. < • v 1 6"eQ` ��'n ^A"^��a.:^"' �Als. ].E•'•Jt. �. �• 4✓ " '�„' nAj. "'I,: i. L^ '� ^.n ��"� �>. ,ye"w �,.^ ♦ ,,. . i:'�j ,• "^al• r� •'�" k"^ 'w"�".tt,,.",t ,F, ° , !. n" . �" .,"•tw„ " .•. Ak ,[., .l ,✓ :,. FA Aw w x 4, •,;} n6�^•� ,' q .% :� [^A ^n. afww �S;." • 'z ^•::.n.1 42: Min w..,."w '7`•� s^ n? „ .n••1'.. r.>��' 2 • _H C^t., /`..".fir w. ^e`4i,1,. `n n 1.,,•. ^^., FA.^ n�x" A LMt. \ S+^.V w+'^p•`''1, .,'•Ak • • . ,^r, u� S^ rN�4 ...:1 . .�'.n` Cnill�•�,x � Alf.^n^^w.n^. " .>t � A "';,;, ,H, ..y"r: %•,Ir, A ".i."^:" ". < „'..^A q".y-M. • 'I{. Mpg I^a .C d w,.".,'1 �^" "( " .�'^ M • i"'.'.a `''�, .�.1� "S^AC . ^ - -'t `•'t r - . 'gin:., wr'it•rf .t �s'A^w r"'t" r` ^ Y'• i) a A,`. Oin S ♦ .�j.'t�`. • . e#Y �,.,, ,.�yti. �<.y . • d� * '� 1" n" F, • ` ' ^ ,� ^.R •Y ^, T1�? ,n}I,.'. u 5/. •t•, i /. ,n F..M., AF' Y "'lC. •a -n. w.,M n x� ^' M J" " ^ "n v \ 4 •� V x�''4 f X A ^.an '•• ^n S Y \ `R ICt s.' ".\ " r" [!'M;: �;t�n' "R % .i, .r- ,xJ t#,.• M'." i-', . ^-�^ l ry✓'SA ••�, .w. -.C1<":"..`A iA'^'`w^'?Fe^w "••,, "/ .^�..N x�^ . • ',v,: w. , A•;'Y'-,C.(• •' ...c • ,.i}•' y v •� ' rw ,^''.�,.^w. ,^ fi.,. "^ ^,n+:i'Fyy ".o" _ ` '!, N • ^x.w. . �'f w^ A / -i ^.w�v,, ^tv�SJ ,i. ^'YY.RR ,t' •Ei'L•".A, n'R-^ * �`'R n�•' y, ..t'T •" •`iA -"••��, -'•.: v ,Y ^� ^'J•.: k , , A.^ . r NZ' �q+f.^ r.^^`n." S ,: `ai n31 .x„", , a .I>. Y•IF ^, .,%, rv.�.•. ite ." 'S' Yl. "�.h, ., r' `Y x > ,.r. �\, w"4c ^t'�SKw'�."1QtA :�. '.na •,y Vr4n'•kr r �X ^ lY♦"5 ( F .• //' •// .:.^ axk �.,>. \" ,w ,J1. 2>. wf.l^.rnt,a• >w_,✓ "^,e''^f�".^`:'n [r3:xay r,w �, , rr ^„p� ^ •�.'�.^ n t Jy� �.y.i A, y �`,,ypf�� ,>, /!.?•" tt �A F.^1w. yi.'•.,, ��^/.x2''^^,A. x x.(.w�'"Q�.^,Iv< ^aM ,� xf.... wn- . p R niF„ �w n,, w.I� `., I w„MT r`w .w^,^ •n�^•i . T<^.•n^ wt»Z n'!. 1''x�A !' ^^-1'Y .,,,'S" .i • ' "r,•I,.. �,AA. V: w, �. h tt ta„r/!.• n oll�fi.• :I:/7/,- +` ^.w."^x..... „ ": 4,, •M ,",H �" a �> �!'^wN hs"•, ,=i.. =:}i -y .1lt.d•CM :"naxn ">a'•aZ,: int , ••A,• 1 . ^...;w"C^'"' a' ,� ^' 1:- � -...w N.'^"^^ iiA`;P'Fn n ?... • ,1 M n "'"'i•,^. r i�+. ^wjp n.n n ux: C"",,. `n^.._ w...I.C••• .w"�..,..x ' rk'.>ff:\ `>"\"•>• „n � \-P. ^ .✓ . 'i '.Sw /",`"'1�' ,A y / n.Ann ^ , '' `^••.a'r4� .N "^"; ` .�,� Mme• �� "✓ " F. / �jw� wr�2 It a 2"�."��.(•e �] .w.' .*9,x': . , .w., e 3 M A •^,t ,�{.`n.- I�A. J�A.,^„/! ,ly. �y�', . C, . w.•i"P/A vail'�'✓ 4a„'w<�<,, -y, N ^v, cS�a C\ ` ^a -y>, ^i.#%" :'k:f:'r•,S< f > C `A+,•` ,. �R. 'W,R^w R .�'.. , '.t' Y. 'tip^: A>. R.,xS'^ r^ Qwn• /\+1,,•J� •w a' �`^ `F r (. ^Sf". ,� .!:'"y� J [ • 1. '0,41(j..� d.,, \'• i P,, , Y • i ^ 1....,n I^�. nw.%^,^ .n /pSCu�Jh' '�' C b /Yr rM r �x yN I,t�^jja,'�y}�1,a • ,• " l,n l�.i. \ .sy.�P�,,,.#4:4.1:'> , kh'1 "wl n . ^^w'A.,: n,x .A '" P/, '•t 5 M. M .^YA.yn-w a.• '.t,CIw.M..in, , u, �i •FXli'Ae� 1 .{� . w, " - ,Y ' 'W .r� V , l �`'I _ ..?. �Al. '?c t}"" " ..+a -.'�� >, fir' A"i W �� ["" y: ....F': r..t �(. N• w. r. . C..e./vh. •i A� 'R`^�,,• w 'I w ' "�R. '• \n `�Y Y-^. "• •1^^' ns"•, AC^ -,M ^ 5 S, ,J + �.A.`,✓• ", .E.. �f $", !r� y(�{ ,/��^•:'T1^ , '. .{.>. `S •w.. wi� ii.».,w'i,w•v .y. 4 _4- .Ann• 'I.M1M1M1 i �.r wyA�': 'k R.�••f- .%', "'Y • 2l• M y i1 �,l! `,t. , .. 4, R ,iA "^!' ,R A'^ iY'� L'ay,J' e " 44:1 .`," �"f,w.•.f /"A. 1N^^R\.An /. ^ SA _ \"-AwA x^. , : rw'y,�.in: ty ,r.' •[xt .:•C�3• ^.A2..wa°1Fa7'lw�:•...� / n ^^""x .t' �w}. T,^.^"^ y'.M,y,Ati,�\ ^ I"•S^ wX,, ^'„^/". •i A.'`iA � 1 ,, ^�A^may"'YNw''x^A, YR: . _" M. ^J AYf^1'w y�y w.if. :"i/lnr. ,+74,"/• [' y . N^ ,Y 39. t�'r:+.: 'I�!yp,�..Tq»JI.'�3T .,'11.KK :.'11:4::e t S �•~.(,.Y"n[L��' 1 f.,ro , T�N,N /,M „('��, A -:: ^.: :. '- . �.:^ : t .:� � ... . �a^. ' n S•!i �r ^n R'` s I`4A\.i4. ^wS�.9"i ," ^" C'I „ M. ,/,.^,:! 'i'nNCn'"r"A J A", �:4 •A"':• .' n^ •",,, ^..,.. "^n " 'i R. w ,{Tiin a' r - . �, :•:(" n}i ,.,"^ t2Cn/ ^'R SACA>�'''.� n+, " y^• '!•• ,.',A,.. •• •Y,• ,„, .,i. 4.."; C.•4.�M"'. 'I n, •' i.(� w"in •: " (X}, �^,, a) ••. !w. n ;-. .M^n i' i. H�A,:/h �w,�,•: w :i.•.^"" Y ,A.". ,+ A. ill".>x'"'^ .,�{� 'L f • ^n."R"�,,'^A,^ ^A A•,". ." ":r. A t•A . w: p:, i/�. k •. ` -A,M 'i` •Y, Mw n�.Iv S""<n • ^•L•, ^'•R ^ ^•r ",^„+'•'�a•^x ^'.lil^�"M. >k� x \ ,^^w, ,'r'• / •••/9-• ^<j�^•,. /.: n'."."anxA. +%• �R ^\yam J �J ." ", '! �A'M, AA: „ ,"< . ".r.^ ♦_ " A 'T.4 ., r• -,•A ,"" , ^ f /nA?/i + xGxn�i^ / wfAJ. xA .,,w ^ .),tlllh^^ ni.,x'-^nC w.N.^n.f/ rn • ,•" :C i ni!`'I'.^ �^ /�, �✓ rogw,, w :• v„"`M' n n 0. >.;,'^TA.• i ;nrx, j✓n .:''", M�^ �' fax' ," �. •^."i,v t•• w.wn• PARCEL _ w _ n''�.�'f^nr\w \f n.. l" Aw l ,A AwA ^G'R„ . R v .xEC"S1""N^ %^ " t _ ./vnt• �� j, '.� ,�' N ll < ,.{,�.'h`.Yp�,.y�.y�� tC �� f< Cn .n• if q I'vs.,"".) YI' F Z `�T 65730400045 _ •w` •'f l\ rV•, i5 •. H `^i - p !t. --It�•n ar�J• , \, ��.,. .J'• "'G' i. •i' » ,[.. E _ M • •i,'i in.l'i•,Y.,'-nt^".+^. C JA . 'w i A ' M..�:" ' .Y _ w . °. !`-. > .^ V ��<+FL ..H,)�,T ` eSJ>jR, 'u^" v, yhA,a `. ' Y Or ,Jty t N • R 'l�" n •t,f r J�' , \ �'A ^f ' : C iyyr Z.n' ��<v ' ,l; ,r V aY � inT^ � v �•�4 'Y»i „+" w.+ �• � I' 1 w. Y 'l:ii,Ri'ni'" •>• \n�4^ ^t�Q 4 i��i��J�! ' ' w !'-N./{ 4 n<.a.•S ^*� •'�, 1 l"<v v wa'.� , AA a ^V' x , . i `i.V ... ^v' <wE_ Y`'.a i 1, _ ^�"l `yyyam vnX G'�.T."� { 'Y` . �� 'Tn � Y,- �y .... •\ } rx { t •A'^, Y.' t C 'O.- gIt,��s)1 �w^�' �',♦ w.i M. ^ In ,.., T< 'aT.-F ' % IY ,AI� ..t ..# 'F7� ' L P A ? " 1 �'!`i C.!•.. w'R vY, 7..•tn.^M•,,, w,t, ww' ,u T l^/ � �` :tee! A♦ •,'Jf'w'5f ..R.w.• ,l. ^ ^ne ^/•"al N. r , !."�^nFYF.<i^.wa^ ! q.•Nr ,�yP i y\�!M� A"•. Jn ,.: ",^ i •�. a:R.9 • • t>,_. .•\J: M,.". ,., s.t. !' �''^,." ,,I i ' N [(fell \ .rR psi,• c:�, :• ".,\ �, /r, f Sn�:.Nn a;^`•'' / n • ^ M�^w..w C di, 4 x r4.. i• $ ,'t:."^• ^Ti.•r� vy",a:'. " ,R,:a•^�9:r-, :..,ne4.r.:w"( ✓i , dq- �. gF ": •‘t- cam..' "" n ".A.z• . .t `, ^� ,� T �..^ . ...;f e. F •3" [ y .4/"t. �%' r` fl i. a• y i < [y •' ,. w .I a. Y h:•.R A*"" S ,.J, ,.Yw�y..a ,'V ` C^: I+' aA.gy, _ ti`"`/ .':n W" yS''•�'+IR:w•1 • •;;Ys�-i^ ' •✓ ' ;aKe.:" ^', , J.`� ", •�^.,•"A�� "s'" ,f.' , n^wn:...^":J .21...I) •.�%Mn'n w^,•^;y• v^.,•n-` / ": /"Aw, .n. ^A!x „�' is .w„w..w„ n. . A. ' -.Ai. T• x•^,'•Aa^w?,, a� rZ' w. .a SY*2. . .aYtEi...A A'S;:>T -, Z^.,> r �' x :Mi. •lp" 'Iil', ..C/'x, .I' ^>,'.• n .n ' f 1 �.�� ,,, "; t �< _ , A ton sw, �,j\may t, o!• tsnf S•Y..'"� ' `."" "Cw , ,.�,. 4 ',T �+ �.• y �+ n �'l. .."'l ;Je ,l;I. .1' x/ , 4 .n1t Q'Nnn,v a� ^n.At Jam} ^" w,.'�^` •,! ' K�'.l^' G ,R R.�,,``^.> 773 �/y .�•AS., w^ w,q r . °'?w"'A . L"lx... tK"^ ^ il.r•2> �r • v ay • , .,, .'A x"" k w. R', y^,Ari% , .R,. ..,; x may(' ,fir.." _ ,.'J. RA �Tr" • ,.x.T<M w? 1i••••/•a" > A-ny`, "w •'t ]S•'., 'aA' NA;.x, l ..•C^^ M" 1M'Ma• r M.n'�".Rk"^w.•ate, ..N.. w: A "„ %y } t' .R. ,h•'n t ... a TJ '11 :L .m: n , w.A"n. ,.A.♦ to o . ✓ ` r , \ q..•a r•, .," •w , w. , aw...R ,'^ ^ .r. .',i. \+ n a ,L ^^A. ro $ ^ S^^r 3� r ^ R." ^ a�• .^>��, nx-, �^ yn�A, • / ,^/!.^. • / " ^ A^ "aS .r n S • -t'x 1a w. a "A,w �y ly�..�.. ryf' 4'4 ` �}, ] y .�.�a� %'•,1 ^`�''w: nn^`t;, • • • •A: r e' ..� .`.in :AA^,i. "•� .w:1•:C "n' "i. T I" w.n .w:'Y` %' n v ,^R'"N'•w"' 1�w5^ .Y ""'\.L. - �N' ,`N" '.F' iT^ w . �,' A ^,a.,.. a TF� t w �:%i.�Y^�v. ,, '•i:.I[�•M11 :,l 4' � C' w , /' T'"'n'".. w.r rn . ^ 'A, .. a.^. .?", :rya < fa ." :6,^ in: 't 'y, '', jta.r f1 ;` ' �' s. ;. , ' < V l 'i » /'Q :f w "A "3` n/ '• •y e. , • • , • , ^•I.PAT : !�.^ "C. N'r". > •t'(. , -�, ,+} ^ _ .�. < R ..,ti-, '�'n. "<.^.^^ 2 1^•-,"w:e x: �'�n-,JT, "T ^ •/' „rM„ , pr .,G „-., YN, •Cw: (w. 4: <{� ^tw .•:IZ y !>.p� .,l.xY,r" " A ^'.�qn , .>n. \• D + • �`'li":v^,!�' _ 'A, aY...n'`"[,,,, xMaRl• C" J'll n,,�T .•` ^iA 4•• ,�n�f.-'' 'j. •N •0 ,.^jam^.^i C,,.[• nI �• _ "•�'04,.t'Ti •ri^N, ^ .. A^ .,A, <.^r"n^x n4. py� n,'.\ "AC n ,.A'rAA Y `.w1` V!^ •�i. N �• •'�� v v i fix'" �.! �T'� ,t i „ , v / , ' / / ,• ^n. '�;•. t.iAI'n..Q' ,s.„ •A ;n ,!, � ..Sx : Ra�/i ��`•- S:w•""'•,^, i .r ,f.:,T�w^ .;� w�.Zn^ '•1^` N w� , !"wY' a 'a. •2".. JR5 :. .�. i.\ < ,tyl ,!" Y' • . "%t'fig' ,/, �.vj] w w•,, .!. ." nr •"7' T. ," yy I. ,n..G^n. nj"4 .,,�.i. :' T . ^A"i.%' • rI , S'M -C C A"+n` ,N n" w.�,_.Axn' ."EA�/An \V�.!' ._C• x �M-f.,^ tl. {"t A.^e"'i.'.".lan}.� a ,� A AIb , rJ ! a.�, , �''e {IInN'. `�iaw.'^.n". . �'! .._"^F. , ^ ('��: .►. T.,,^R^w.3,E 2t, �l ' Jr� ^'"?" is ` /..w �,.xx: �:n1 y'R'A�'n "(�r' 9.1! ^w.�/aN!/w A «•.A A� .w �in� L',^n•F.^ .^ Q. '.A'1,x1 � s,�l!•kv`w,,rw.: 5.• � � wn :.q • ��{' �,�^ � >^ t✓{S :� n1 �;^:�%N,, w!!:M �^: .l �'a�ia, q ^ , ,Vt,, ^. ' " ' 1. �'„" '" nf' I,.", Fy., ' T`^A .A "iG W ^, ': ^ ':.F. .� L , /A ` , • ` ` : . . , • :,�w.`w. ^nn ,� :in A.Ce L n�r.'o't ..t.C. :^L <AI"t' . ,•^� ^ � . �-/ ."n n .' ..ty x " _ +1,, I>. , `]ll//'I a<.w �' " "�A-",.�."."w"w ,n<.r t,i,^, a x> A r »IS:.'^""> n ^'c = ,^,...u. t1�-. F f ,,.. Y ' .... .wl''r, sFX aC: "1/ , " • •s �'SL c^.+ , • f :/ `" n•Af' •, • A3 fi',w,• w .;,u"'c:'w•,a. ; e A.: w;.. ,.,., A r"„ •!.Y•. /rt,a, ►^''y,,�,`s" •. , w • „l •. A ,^..3 ✓r' .r 'y< ^ " ,w^ ..s C .•r ^ ^ 9 "- ' S 'k ;p t^-^".. !. ' x. ;, •• , f •! w[:w..ni. /n" 3." "`+ ^...r'•:-.>� wrvM."w'�' �~ . h"" *. A i �, " A`, iA C-�, �,{. • - - , ,^C�}` : AL.:C:7. S. /. •" J�'�x , x ,�•"^.n , „..'-," w v- , I'CMv �i •irva/. .,�x,"t[n'A tNF Y�v'"',' ^^•^AAi. ,'A M� .R rv,^Mi. f1.A,"�`".Rn AY M(•\,i. M .�T^ ♦ .11lu p A•!C� 'i'• r . w.^ A. •^�. .Ax" r.A Ic T(.a.,, YS�•, .. '.f.'4, 1 <r 'F '• ,. .;n^ "w: Ay _ , .R �Y n ^/,i •.II�w. R�,.,'x;:•= w ? �.,J1, AfA•Sn ¢ ^ FYi�g�. .�n.J H • , a,a}'M"j',^. a,� �, „l•. `�':`�R, •. 1, .f / • • • . nSn ^• „ n,5N,! ".'J, fl#!':: •",. �n ...n Ar ,n in", :' .1..^x2 •". �T „.^".-.. a- es sn" •.R'ti":...n,+A". ..„„, ,>I , :'>'.' rvr ,%',>Ct i li >;, ^S.I."ox,`T,^.,xw. J[ >..•,.".,jt2.w,^,=", •�,nn,].^^,'rw^w�.M• �x`A,.1;:'^"t'.^.w^ ,^w^. t."C,,,."/R ".. w.,."• k \ N ate` ai • }l ;A.^ti. ' A" . V ',.yI,J'�.;,n Aa nw„ .."CR.' !A`<'•: y.>"'' +. rl. :!,','ti w. / ':"t":. i'T.,?-s:ltw Ai:" >A"' ", '` l.,:l, A, rMy, '�,,• ^.• '^" ' •A^"1, ^ , ••> a, � A "t',.. v .. ..Rn.•a, ,R•. v- :^ H/';' ;'� / •• 4 .• 'r w1 .. �' iA•t , _ , A :r', A• .• , ^, ^ .^ x: .k " <t1� '•)... w, r ".�." -, p -.1)A -. - ..`:A..N..•,f-A", :n,s>x1C v -A `a • , • . ^rJX . AAw ..•^�vw, , r'L ;''« r ;'C'" ., w,♦, ^ ^''>,;, .r-. ^ ... -:��a'".'4`� �' •A .�<,i" .Fri ..tY .. .� "ii ^.7' ^Ai`r." Sa^` 'i ".k 4'.!'"^P :: ,y{•'„4, '' w. A w„ , • s x�, ,, ':i Rxk• 'Ti 'J1t. 4 ^.!�` '^^F,"Jt`J -.!*'` ►.J{'i:^A ?,M, AA ..# "� , - ..r�' , v,w w.� ��`1 1, c . A>[ .f.",�w + .n.,. ,n`i•A"' nt k wN.^ .M.^�A• A"•T A•!Kx'^�"' .�.'*'S. .'�A , <^.A"y., •M,k.�^"•.A�I.R ^, ^n*'t. `"'".t.•An,' n>n, ^: w�. w, 4 n A^ y,�`<,",^,.w;, :.�� .RI.n:M et ^a�✓.nwx'R"71'T 3e.. >R,.— „Li.''"..J � ••f^,\^1.,n w vs* n MIn"�MC, �- +,•.jam .�r <"✓i .•. 'y Yi./r, ^ u� ^-'x j F^ �,1 �;- r. 1,�. w a ^� , r a. :,Mr. i i , n 1 • `w, w n1 ^.,,•.w',x.::. ".)... • `n "-Jf•'.:w• '1,,:^ `• IS ",'^,''^* ,::' , , , .. t�A•• _/^; ,. ".�"r `w x5'•.'..' .xe "n'Y ^ a a A. ." .^ . ,A, , ^?w" .„.i�.'••AAe''.A. . '': 'R^X x�1w..;. ;,'v, k�bt. , , };.n"MnI `a A,.. , ^.lw.• .^. Cl. , A.,4M!.l''ti'; •,•: " ,;,,*!" .e,., ;e. .��!yx,• S. i \t x>.'i.`^'...n @ xa.x/.A'.f wl�„a .r`` .' „ ,w n, :'�. S i , r,<w,w 'x., . ^i tr' , A -""' : N;A \ " ♦ :r 't.'a',AA>^ •T.^ a!';•n•"i!:.;.JM,R'A. t:" '"R /�^Nw Mx< �'1l�'A+ , [�" / q,A. A. , L ^%ARet$ T•^ *Q.r1'nwA �.. �• , • ,,A ,.wA .A , v,, a, = i'p , C^ 'r W 7Q.. ?. ,..' N'� ^�' ">ll:. i .• •n Y . A ,h-.. a r.•• A • :::� s ",F` . > „ .il." ^ •.r ''�w rf.=..s"e /i'�' .rS .. .:. .3,•w. �w ,{>. '. 'MYC.f. M M^^•• M.I G.. , '^i /• • [•`•<A,., ^^F" ",.Rn, �' 'J;7•,tn •X �.Ret: ".w„ / �n �4 �^n �� L^ "ly ."n^�rnSni n.,n, nix�A'�'A^I. 'A'wn .�.., •S ^^1•.,,Ta y' 'Tn M.'A � n•wl!'w.eM An! y� / 'nJ/•i ," . W C n• •"'i �y iN',11�"!.'ar ••• ^•..^'A.T• ,, ,, xT "'"1i� ,,., n. V" •} •. i,1 'd`, : n �`• ^ n n.^. .,.♦ w • ...;t •l,",fp,_ „x. i ' ,.-.v]G•`n ..,wJ•Saw A: • 2 ••w., �• ., ,G!: >w n•„'•= 'v44 .C' �,.1 1�• S,w ^'al "r' . •n .'.yFAn . �A >•tl+a.. +ll-. T^.A, a'IR .A •,. { rrtew,, ^. �^ n :^�."^,?,,,n^ ..k _ t ,iy "� ,.K^x/i r, ••<l yin^ <:: [V,>n" w'�"•: .,iJ lnn�^, /N^.^nAt/l''ew�4.•^T^a Yv JJ,^n...., 'i,:,AJin- yii:�.�•, S f" MJC'` 'R�<E� t t« a I .'x'.l. ixN;.;.<••�///i•, • `:l aYT �'A•• ,Cw'Y�t iR K,C L'^I,.KC C•",Iw t'.1. Ir , z .•i!.'^ ,".'w •l. a,, ,.. z"t rK�v. SA M .\I '�^\ .R.rn,^ew.R •A, ..^.r1 ;AJa.C.^ .w n. ^.nw.,rlilt•.i,C.r .R k..•X�„"r�,,C..l'^"x"!S'' e t ^.''^k tAt 5 •n^ ",., • .. ^ ".IynfA'`^ ' S'�l ,•"" , n ' • , , • • • • • • wi^.4,^.••w >�i)/" '+ • M1n ".��,'t!`� n^ w rvAP rv.M�.� ^aA^•^• ^ ^Arw. �•.� ,..R ^ .,7• ,i,i'\ „il✓'' ' rk a 9f �'A•w^"''"..Gt' '( _ y. � �r j� ./�� • ./yam II:• C tw•"'�FA n• •n•^c `A '^ ,in`�,Af","[�n n^T •`, J"�.w"• I'"i. Aw v -� � x w ,A,R In •J'r^•,Y.n.M n i,n"A^^^'xC w w./CI,(i,i `�'M.'•,r/>.i.'I R .�""lin^•''� ' ^'•�"' t J. '.w^.nSA ni w.YA' i.>•�'Y !kl'nn• •J%!"[ >/ o•, ^ • `' [• n�Y , , • ,/ • • • ' • • •• . , •, • •4' .N, f .''[••",) Cn .T n r'1r1'; ,^'w:.n„�..w„'.Y„•n'5,. , w-.H-� H ;.^q`>`, Jy: „� •r.rv.t .x ^ �%.',',. ^.•. �'"/ln'+� R ,'k , .. ^ •'""^ e♦ : % ii .{,,n%n"^" wn <, 4-,,.w, wni.n^ wl^ Alma^. A•< n^rni" , G>%w,,,^Y,n..^S" w�.�(•'."y •M, •x».�•nf, M„ .''R,iPN ,nrLR.n•.^ nA.,�..' .'' y]j,•.An^n n.'' ."i-"` w :.F'�(,j^ ! iL'a`�' ..4.^ri M, . ,%ny%' ,.M a. a.',-.^'... a,^ !'S. 4 ."r ,•„ ww•�^.�' w".•4 H A x �'• ,2; ^ Y�, w .w..Mt^A' ,•, Q ' ' / M•,�>, /r .Tna,'v ^A [*.A Qrv,wn".A. : NI,.. .Pt„ ^'n: "„r 2i n.> n, ll.x`A^• It1 A• , ••//.. ,N.F n,�^ n, n^., w wlA Rnn ^.'•'q ,, n r� �w� ,w,rrvL x«J'1., J', ..w,^ ..C ti n'Sn.... , .J. .I. S` •�,`A,'a. ,\w 1/., ,'JwxA., XP4J/",F 'i, l • .. /'OC ' :CY'v .R\Qnx+^www An- ^S•µ,•j"•^ ^ wHC%(�j,'�",w'n"A."^, . nnhA, nl^- /�Ani C^i LnY, . ...,A ,A >�^,'SiN •itlll,, MI. ^" ,!! A`• '' r ^ A "ww n`.I' w.A n• ♦ f ilx+•/, " 2: *Rx.,, r^^r.r•, ^^n Ry.n,",� ,� n.'�!' 't >^1a, • A r 'P , f. nM T"l� `^ ,[ % 'ff`>adxn- '•y, `.'F,.S,,•^r,, i',i,. „ / )' , p, • ' , • / • •" I ww "Aw n^6�N,.n l,' . • µ,a^•\ ,r/ f ,r�� ^ , .�:;sw ,`+},:.J ^ r:',w•„na t' ^ ^R < '^w. wk. .i..^"n"-An a�.w n <n+;A ,.i. , w" 't?� ^S '�-' .in,•`; ,xn. �/� �'S • 'x>•)f :,; r, ` •q-•1{'nf n " nM.F •.ni" •xw�x. tR •aw'Aa v"wA Tni ^w,•^,Ci yRt .R' Y�..,"n/>^.YAw" aE_, .,S. w.^i " n ^.>•'R �':^'J'Lr^y�A A .,'!Y�i.'. •,M "ilt" lcA 4•...n,n.CA^.,�,S , �,•, [ F• �, ,st iRn n x,,, '.!' ^= ^« "'y�. ' '• n.. !x. " .,.spy 2'. ,.."� .t i �n `+ i i �" s n,� n r '^ , • .n ,' n r a. X. w;,'? " �. ,^", %. p, k A,�A ., n.^ ,� : J, ^'R. >,, •, n " ,e, . r'"(J.a. Z..*'+`, A:.^4•n�AA, n�,.•x,.f•/'Tr"n " /t. xN'i^ Cxn; • x"" ,'^'',', (R.'fN two ^ N>xA. w„ [o ,F -^r, :,.M .A.R.^„^ •nC l��'' w. S1w.. ,''w. .Tn^.y�,.K.^a '"i.; .: A"h. 9. .• x•rv[^ . w n•♦nn,^'rC�,,,f^ A., yM.•'� Cu., .., .>'�. •! Sw.A A' f w \'Y,n AZ ,l. �f dtn"t t i'%\n„ Sr h „nL'ww w.a •`t �•^n n,•^,In^ n.>ww Aw>� N. S'r,n•'x" " "�A<" A ^�"�' .'b �{e�,, F. •^. •'% P,i. •'F •'i Q'/y> ,@ , \ , • . /• 4 , / • n .w,Ali '"„ nZ , " ^A{+',q� ' ^''E'`^ A/ w _"^•1n, wne.(>. "'..^ ^, ,.i.^w ry •• ..N'A „'n. �(r"- ATn�n, , vwn,�A, n.(.'n ,/n"f"• w,"�"�y�., ,.C „�.^ �wn `S. a' .'" .,In .. it w.. n W n t•.^ l'.... 44, F + A rw„Ii, w, , 'e ♦' n^ "",�i,-1. „ -^ w •' nA x y n/t �, , t, >w ^ x . n ,r ,R,,,;Jwy[n , �w " An.{i' • n� 9 / ni r., i��yy, le-..if.rw, n9 F>•. .,,n•\tii^•) " n. .\:Q y.d�SS^'"^.i Ji n.-v^n`�>• l w :atilt S.1['A^n� ,M. ni.n, r 1'••,r / •. , ♦ '••r� (T Jt-`• , n -. V ,•-^wR n n ^Rte.`, ��'••. •'JP� �.Ta ^'.C4.luAr✓ 4k' i n'iA�Y.w�J•�v,.'rii.��•�1+i0.ifi_ 'vl.,A'J,Q, t • • v , , . , • , , , • , .A n , ", Y O O\e"\\5.) Q QQQ LEGEND o Q � NQ ° >4 f•-..".i( P�' ; ANENT DISTURBANCE = 0. ° CRES (,,I.:),.••.�;:,, o 200 0 =Cc PRIM.a,. , c' ROXIMATE c_ PERMANEN T O ESS EASEMENT O Q 111,11 ° ° ° 1 "=200' �DATE; 01/07/201�e %K° </?, PROJECT#: 201 i ,A >>� ,� � 1 , 1.L , (?n Meeting of The Board of Trustees Town of Gilcrest, Colorado 304 8t" Street Monday, December 9, 2024 AGENDA 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL To ORDER: Pledge of Allegiance-, Roll Call: 2. APPROVAL of THE REGULAR AGENDA: 3. PUBLIC INVITED To BE HEARD ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA: ( This time is allowed for individuals to address the Board on anything that is not listed on the ,Agenda. If you world tike your issue to be placed on a future agenda, please make the Board aware of that Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes and the information offered will be taken cruder consideration. No discussion or responses will be given during this period.) 4. CONSENT AGENDA: a. Board of Trustee Minutes for November 18, 2024 b. Bills for Approval ca Leave reports 6. OLD BUSINESS. a. Second Reading - Ordinance 2024-02, Special Use Permit for Keeping Animals 6. NEW BUSINESS: a. Oath of Office for Nearly Elected Trustees b. Appointment of Mayor Pro -Tern o. Mountain High Disposal - Presentation d. Resolution No..2024 — 08 - A Resolution Levying Property Taxes e. Resolution No. 2024 - 09 - A Resolution Appropriating SUMS of Money for the 2025 Budget Year f. Resolution No. 2024 - 10 - A Resolution Summarizing Expenditures and Revenues g* Severer Project Bid Award h. Central Colorado Conservancy District IGA 7. REPORTS: a. Code Enforcement Report b. Town Administrator +c. Board of Trustees 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION:, - If Needed 9. ADJOURNMENT: Page 1 of 1 Regular Meeting Minutes of The Board of Trustees Town of Gilcrest, Colorado 304 8t" Street - Town Hall December 9, 2024, 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL To ODDER: 7:00 P.M. a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll call — Mayor Nothem; Trustees: Fulton, Howton, Agripino, Garza, Howard Absent: Trustee Castro c, Chan Clean, Town Administrator, Brenda Joseph, Tern IerkiTreasurer; Bob Meisner, Public Works Supervisor 2. APPROVAL of THE REGULAR AGENDA: Motion - Trustee Hoton, Motion to approve the Regular Agenda amending it to add New Business 6i. Hazard Mitigation Flan, rd � Trustee Fulton. All voted Aye. Motion carried (5-0). 3. PUBLIC INVITED To BE HEARD ON MATTERS HOT ON THE AGENDA: Linda Shutt explained that she lives at 14486 County Road (CR) 42, Platteville, CO. and is at the Beard meeting tonight to submit her letter of interest to request to be on the Board of Trustees. She explained that although her address is listed as Platteville for mail purposes, she dues live just outside the Town of Gilcrest. She is also on the Turn of Giicrestis 'eater List. Next Courtney Edmondson, 904 'dine Street, Gilcrest, CO. explained that she is at the Board meeting tonight to submit her letter of interest as eve l l to request to be on the Board of Trustees. Mayor Nothem welcomed both to the meeting and thanked them both for their letter of interest, He then explained that after the recent election there is one vacant seat on the Board and that the Board can consider their request to be on the Town Board right after the Appointment of the Mayor Pro -Tern. 4. CONSENT AGENDA: a. Board of Trustee Minutes for November 18, 2024 b. Bills for Approval c. Leave Reports Motion Trustee Howton, Motion to approve the Consent Agenda, 2"d � Trustee Fulton„ All voted Aye. Motion carried (5-o). Rage I of 12 5. OLD BUSINESS: a. Second Reading - Ordinance 2024-02, Special Use Permit for Keeping Animals Town Administrator Dears explained that the Town Board directed staff to draft an ordinance permitting large animals within the Town of Gi'crest, During the first reading of the ordinance the Board directed that two changes be made to the ordinance. He further explained that Ordinance 2024-02 as revised is submitted for your consideration. The first change increased the upper limit of acreage from two and nine tenths (2 & 9/10) acres to three (3) acres, The second change increased the number of animals to three (3). Motion - Trustee Howton, Motion to approve Ordinance 2024-o2, An Ordinance Amending Chapter 7 of the Town of Gilcrest Municipal Code, Amending Section 7-g2 and by the Addition of a new Section 7-102, on Second Reading 2nd — Trustee Howard, All voted Aye* Motion carried (54-0). 6. NEW BUSINESS: a. Oath of Office for Newly Elected Trustees Town Administrator Clean explained that the November 5, 2024, Election for the Town of Gilcrest included the position of Mayor, five seats for Trustee, and a ballot issue con- sidering eliminating terra limits for elected officials. He further reported that no one filed a regular petition to run for Mayors Steve Nothem declared his intention to run as a write-in candidate after the deadline passed to submit a regular petition. As a write-in candidate he received 36 votes. Also, he explained that there were four candidates running for five (5) vacant Trustee seats. The three (3) candidates with the highest vote totals receive four (4) year terms. The individual with the fourth highest vote total receives a two (2) year term. He further reported that according to the certification notice from weld Counter Anna Garza, Manny Agripino, and Erandi Howard were elected to four (4) year terms. Laura Fulton was elected to a two (2) year term, The ballot question eliminating terra limits was defeated, the vote being 96 Yes/For and 278 No/Against. Mayor Nothem explained that next Town Clerk Joseph will swear in the elected Board members, After taking their Oath of Office as the Town of Gilcrest Board of Trustees, Annette (Anna) Garza, Manuel (Manny) Agripino, Brandi Howard and Laura Fulton tools their seats as Board of Trustees. Next, after taping his Math of Office, Mayor Nothem then took his seat as Mayor for the Town of G ilcrest. Page 2 of 12 b. Appointment of Mayor Pro -Tern Mayor Nothem explained that now that we have the Newlyn elected Board sworn in, the new Board of Trustees will now need to prof a Mayor Pro -Terms. He further explained to the Board of Trustees that if any of them were interested in being the Mayor Pro -Tern please let them know now. He also asked Trustee Agripino if he mould be willing to con- tinue as the Mayor Pro -Teri if the rest of the Board of Trustees were to appoint him? Trustee Agripin.o responded yes. Motion — Trustee Garza, Motion to appoint Trustee Manny Agripino as the Mayor Pro- Tem, 2nd — Trustee Fulton, All noted Aye. Motion carved (4-0). Trustee Agripino ab- stained from the vote. Next, Mayor Nothem asked Linda Shutt for her letter of interest and asked her to intro- duce herself to the Board of Trustees. Linda Shutt explained that she has been a resident of the Town of Gilcrest for fourteen years. She has nearer served on a Board of any capacity and isexcited to bring new ideas and perspectives to the Board. Mayor Nothem then asked Courtney Edmondson for her letter of interest and asked her to introduce herself to the Board of Trustees as well. Courtney Edmondson explained that her and her husband bought their home in the Town of Gilcrest two and half years ago and they have four children, They also own a small business, mobile pet grooming. She is interested in becoming a Board member to help by volunteering, make new connections and continue to help make Gilcrest the family community it is. She explained that she has not been on a Board before, but she has had HOA, Management experience. Trustee Garza asked Linda Shutt what had caused her interest in volunteering for the Torn. Linda Shutt responded by explaining that up until recently she has always worked but she is now semi -retired and will have more time to be on the Board. Trustee Howard asked Courtney Edmond if she thought she would be okays attending the evening Board meetings. Courtney responded that she would be fine with it. Motion Trustee Howard, Motion to appoint Linda Shutt as Board of Trustee, 2nd — Trustee Garza. All voted Aye. Motion carried (5-0). After the vote to appoint her, Linda Shutt took her Oath of Office as a Town of Gilcrest Board of Trustee and them took her seat as a new Trustee. Mayor Nothem and the Board of Trustees thanked Courtney Edmondson for submitting her letter of interest and attending the Board meeting. She thanked them and left the meeting. Page 3 of 12 c. Mountain High Disposal — Presentation Mayor Nothem and the Board of Trustees welcomed Chase Master, Mountain High Disposal, LLC to the Board meeting. Chase Master thanked the Board and explained that he is also joined tonight by a cou- ple other representatives from their company. He introduced Mark Master and John K. He explained that Mountain High Disposal is a locally owned and operated company, out of Ault Colorado. They were established in 2021. They have a customer base of over 20,000 and are growing. They provide residential, commercial, and indus- trial services. He further explained that, recently they acquired Bunting Disposal, Inc, this past summer 2024, so they now have a new location in Evans, CO, They have relo- cated their office to 3315 State Street, Evans, CO. It is the former Bunting Disposal lo- cation. Also, Chase Master, Mountain High Disposal, further explained that the building that they would potentially like to put in the Town of Gilcrest is a trash transfer station. He explained that they plan to have the building include a shop and office as well. He added that he has included a picture of one of their buildings in the packet he passed out. The building that they would like to build would be made of tin due to it is easier to maintain, If the Board is interested, they would like to put a similar building on the west of Highway 85, the Southwest Section of a parcel of land off CR 40. He added that they also have their customer service office in the city of Evans, so they have a local office for customers to contact, if needed. In addition, mayor hlothem asked if they will only support their trash trucks or will others be able to drop off items at the trash transfer station' Chase Master responded that oth- ers will be able to pay a fee to drop off at the site and it will be available for individuals as well, Additionally, Trustee Agripino asked if this would interfere with the Town's current con- tract for trash pickup services that they have with Foam 'Paste Systems Inca Town Ad- ministrator Dean responded that the Town would continue to honor the current contract with Para Waste System's Inc., but it is totally up to the individual/residents on who they choose for their trash services. Furthermore, Town Administrator Dean explained that nothing is official and that there are specific procedures in place for this that they will be following such as subdividing the land, zoning needs to be amended from I-1 to 1-2, a public hearing is required along with additional steps. He added that the presentation tonight is more of a "get to know you" presentation. Trustee Agripino added that they are here to present their idea to the Board to see if the Board of Trustees would be interested in potentially having their business located in the Town of Gilcrest before they move forward with discussions and the expense of having a site plan developed done which can be expensive. Page 4 of 12 Mayor Nothem asked if the Board had any additional questions for them? He added that from the response of the Board, he and the Board are interested in seeing more of their project information so if they would like to go to the next step they are interested. Also, Mark Master, Mountain High Disposal, explained that he wanted to mention that their buildings are cleaned every night. Trustee Agripino asked where do they dump the waste's They explained that it is brought to the Feld County landfill/dump site. Mark Master also explained that they life to do as much as possible locally. They also hank locally as well. Trustee Agripino explained that he does not wart to say much else as he is somewhat a part of this project. Mayor Nothem and the Board of Trustees thanked them for their presentation. No action was taken. d. Resolution No. 2024 — 08 A Resolution Levying Property Taxes Mayor Mother explained that the Board has been working with Town Administrator Dean and Staff on the proposed 2025 Budget for fiscal year 2025. Town Administrator Dean explained that this is the resolution that allows Town lerkiTreasurer .Joseph to certify the mill levy to the county. Also, due to the TABOR. amendment and the Tom's Cie-Brucing, the total mill remains consistent year to year at 31.586 mills. The general fund will now receive the entire 31.586 mills, generating $313,762.40 in general fund property tax revenue. He further explained that this resolu- tion needs to be enacted so that Weld County knows what mill levy to assess. Also, he explained that the current year's assessed valuation has reduced from the pre- vious year's assessed valuation, and he has adjusted this in the Budget for 2025. He added that due to oil and gas not reporting early it has reduced the assessed valuation. Motion - Trustee Howton, Motion to approve Resolution 2024 is 08 A Resolution setting the mill levy for the 2025 budget. 2nd — Trustee Fulton, All voted Aye. Motion carried (6-0)+ e. Resolution No. 2024 — og A Resolution Appropriating Burris of Loney for the 2025 Budget Year Town Administrator Dean explained that this is the resolution that allows funds to be spent in 2025. This resolution needs to be enacted so the money budgeted can be spent. Page 5 of 12 Motion -- Trustee Howton, Motion to approve Resolution 2024 - og A Resolution Appropriating Burns of Moneys for the 2025 Budget Year 2nd — Trustee Howard, AEI voted Aye. Motion carried (6-13). f, Resolution No. 20.24 —1 o A Resolution Summarizing Expenditures and Revenues Town Administrator Dean explained that this is the resolution that formally adopts the 2025 budget. He added that while we try to anticipate everything having a financial im- pact on the Town and adopt a budget that is adequate for the entire year, the Board can always amend the budget at any time during the budget year if circumstances or priori- ties change. He further explained that if so, the Board would have to advertise and hold a public hearing before doing so. Motion Is Trustee Garza, Motion to approve Resolution 2024 -10 A Resolution Summarizing Expenditures and Revenues 2"d — Trustee Howton, All noted Aye, Motion carries! (600). g. Sewer Project Bid Award Town Administrator Dean explained that Duran Excavation was the only bidder on the surer project. The original bid amount from Duran was $5,075,4 53,00, far in excess of the Town's available funding. He further explained that Mike Hager, Project Manager with Element Engineering, with the approval of the United States Department of Agricul- ture (USDA), negotiated a reduction in the contract by reducing the scope of services in the project. He pointed out that a memo from hike Hager has been included in the Beard packet outlining the work to be completed and a summary of the cost. He added that he has also included a Notice to Award, Additionally, Town Administrator Dean further explained that Iwwllike Hager has included in his memo that the Town of Gilcrest currently has 2,952,247.00 in funding for the con- struction part of the project. With Durans bid coming in over the funding amount, and the town not wanting to risk losing the funding, USDA agreed to allow the town to re- duce the scope and negotiate with Duran Excavating to complete the highest priority portions of the project. The reduced scope will include the replacement of both the 8th Street and 12th Street lift stations along with a few of the collection system line replace- ments. With this reduction in scope the negotiated cost from Duran Excavating is $ 2,719,914.00 which will leave 232, 33400 in contingency for unforeseen items which may arise during construction. Also, he explained that bike Hager, mentioned in his memo to the Beard of Trustees and Town Staff that Element Engineering's Staff has worked with Duran Excavating in the past and they are a reputable company and have been in business for over forty-five years. In addition, Town Administrator Dean reported that last Thursday, December 5, 2024, Mike Hager, contacted hire to discuss possibly reducing the scope even further due to Page 6 of 12 cast. There are different options for the Board to discuss such as reducing the scope by possibly replacing one lift station instead of two and/car increasing the monthly sewer fee by possibly increasing them by $15.00 - $30.00 annually. Mike Hager would figure out the breakdown on this and what the cost would then be for the sewer fees/user fee. Also, Trustee Garza asked if this would impact the entire Town or a portion of the Town. Public Works Supervisor Meisner responded that it will impact the entire Town. He further explained the lift stations have been there since the early eighties. Additionally, Trustee Ag ripino mentioned can the Town get a bond to help with this'd Town Administrator Dean responded that he has shared this with Chris La May, Re- gional Manager, Division of LocalGovernment/Department of Local Affairs (DOLA). He also explained that dike Hager, Element Engineering, discussed this morning, Decem- ber g, 2024, that they could do a loan but either way it will increase the user fees. Furthermore, Trustee Agripino asked ghat would happen without doing all that had been planned. Public Works Supervisor Meisner explained that if a lift station goes bad it will be even more costly. Trustee Howard commented that they will eventually have to do something as this could affect them in other ways too such as their health and/or possibly harm the water. In addition, Mayor Nothem commented to remember that the Sewer Fund has to pay for itself. In this case by paying back a loan. Also, Trustee Ag ripino asked how long they have to decide. Town Administrator Dean responded that the grant the Town has re- ceived has a time frame on it. It has to be utilized by February 2025 so they will need to decide soon. Mayor Nothem added they will need to decide ghat the minimum charge will be to the customers/user fee each month, In addition, Trustee Garza asked who the funding is through. Town Administrator Dean responded by explaining that the Town has a loan through the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) and a grant and a loan through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Town started getting the funding for this project in 2020-2021 and the design for it was done during co id with the funds the Town received from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), State and Lo- cal Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF), Also, Trustee Agripino suggested that they investigate the cost if they increase the user rates by 15.00-$30.00. He then asked what would happen if they did not do anything. He added he is wondering how much further they can go. In addition, Mayor Nothem suggested that they could consider making a $15.00 per month increase now and an additional $15.00 per month increase at a little later date, if it turns out that they need a $30.00 increase, After discussion, Mayor Mother and the Board of Trustees asked Town Administrator Dean to please ask Mike Hager, Project Manager, with Element Engineering to please figure out what the cast would be to potentially increase the sewer rates/user fees for Page 7 of 12 the Town by $15.00 or $30.00 monthly and they would like to continue the discussion to the Monday, January 6, 2025 Board Fleeting. No action was taken. h.Central Colorado Conservancy District I A Town Administrator Dean explained that the Town Board met with Central Colorado Water Conservation District (CCWCD) staff in late February this year, 2024. The con- sensus from that meeting was to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement RIGA), He added that the Town sent a list of topics to be covered in the I A inSeptember/ October 2024. The response the Town received was pared down considerably. Carrie McCool, Town Planner, has prepared a memo covering the issues. He added that due to its size he had to send it in a separate email. Additionally he pointed out that Town Planner Carrie Mc+Cool has outlined three options for their consideration as potential Board Action considering that C+CWCD► is not inter- ested in entering into an 1GA of any substance, the Board could take the following ac- tions: fiat, they could Enter into an I A with CC CD pursuant to the revised I+ A terms received on November 4, 2024 and provide review comments to 'weld County through the U R refe rra I p roes . All associated costs would be covered by the Town, Second, they could decline to enter into an I A with CC CD and provide review comments to Weld County through the U R referral process. All associated costs would be covered by the Town. Third, the could direct Staff to review the materials submitted on Novem- ber 4, 2824, and develop recommended next steps and/or generate comments to pro- tect the Town's interests for C CWCD to address. All associated costs would be covered by the Town. Trustee Agripino asked what about option number 4. He suggested ghat if the Board/Town does not do anything. Will it cost the Town money too. Trustee Howard and Trustee Garza commented they were wondering too, Town Administrator Clean re- sponded that there really is nothing the Town has that CC CD needs or wants. After discussion, Mayor Mother and the Board of Trustees asked Town Administrator Lean to please summarize option four and send it to Mayor Nothem and let hire know when the date is for him and Town Administrator Clean to show up at the hearing with Weld County and they can testify on behalf of the Town. I. Hazard Litigation Plan Town Administrator Dean explained that the Town has received a request from Weld County Office of Emergency Management to participate in an emergency management planning process that was received after the Board packets were sent out. Page 8 of 12 Also, he explained that to participate in the project both the Board of Trustees and Town Staff will be expected to devote several hours to the planning process. He further ex- plained that Public Works Supervisor Meisner and himself will be the two that will be ex- pected to devote the most time to the project. He also pointed out that he has handed out a Letter of Intent to Participate for their review, It is up to the Board if they would like to participate. Trustee Garza commented that the letter is stating this is a Federal Emergency Man-, agement Agency (FEMA) issue, so they are working on it too. She also asked if they had given the Tern the 2021 hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP). Trustee Howard re- sponded that we have it in place already. This will save some time, money, and effort. Trustee Garza mentioned that she was wondering what the time frame was for this. In addition, Trustee Howard asked Public Works Supervisor Meisner if he would life them to participate since it is hires that is most affected by this from the sounds of it. Public Works Supervisor Meisner responded yes; he does not have any problem with it. Town Administrator Clean explained that this is the letter of intent that needs to be sub- mitted to Weld Counter by January 2025 to secure funding,Weld County will start the update to the plan in 2025 and submit the plan to the state for review in the fall of 2026. Mayor Nothem explained that the Board can choose not to participate in this. He added that he is good with whatever they decide; it is up to therm. Trustee Howard then com- mented that she wondered what the repercussions are from the state and FEMA if they do not participate. Trustee Fulton asked if we knew if the a Town of Platteville is partici- pating. Trustee Garza and Trustee Howard commented that their schedules are full and neither of therm can commit to participating. Trustee . gripino commented that he would volunteer for this if the Board of Trustees would life to participate in it. Trustee Fulton also asked when was the last time we had one's Trustee Howard also asked hoar often this happens. She asked Town Administrator Clean if this is every year? Town Administrator Lean replied no. Motion - Trustee Agripino, Motion to participate in the Hazard Mitigation PIaniEmers gency Management planning process and for Mayor Nothem to sign the Letter of Intent to Participate 2nd — Trustee H+owton, Four voted Aye and Two voted nay. Motion car- ried (4-2). Town Administrator Dean commented that he will get the signed Letter of Intent to Par- ticipate sent back to Weld County to let them know that the Town of Gilcrest will partici- pate. 7. REPORTS: a. Code Enforcement Report Mayor Nothem asked if the Board has any questions andior concerns about the Code Enforcement Report. Trustee Garza mentioned that she wanted to comment on hers. Page 9 of 12 They are not able to put a license plate on the front bumper, there is no place for it, but the truck is licensed. It is her son's vehicle. The proof is on the vehicle, but Code Enforcement Officer Pratt would have to walk up to the vehicle to see it. Trustee Fulton commented that if there are cars parked in the street with no plates andior flat tires they cannot park there. Is that correct? Mayor hlothem mentioned that the street is a public right of way. Public Works Supervisor Meisner asked if she is asking about the vehicles off Tenth Street and Vine Street. Trustee Fulton responded yes. b. Town Administrator Town Administrator Dean reported that he received a request from Kaitlyn Becker with Caibre Engineering regarding survey data and planning requirements for a solar project at the high school. Also, he coordinated with Mike Hager, Project Manager with Element Engineering and Town Planner Carrie Mc Cool, to supply the requested information. Next, Town Administrator Dean reported that the Town received a draft boundary agreement from the Town of Milliken, He forwarded the proposal to Town Planner Carrie Mc Cool. She will be working with Milliken Town staff to finalize a proposal for the Board of Trustees to consider at a future meeting. Also, Town Administrator Dean reported that Dylan Webster is no longer employed by the Town. Aaron Hanson, who has filled in as a temporary employee during Dylan's absence, has succeeded him in the position. Town Administrator Dean also reported that Dan Alonzo, an engineer with Civil Arts, called inquiring about land uses on a two (2) acre parcel located at the corner of WCR 29 and 4th Street. He added that he sent him the pertinent section of the land use code for him to review with the property owner. Mr. Alonzo inquired about it for cement work which would require a conditional use permit. Additionally, he reported that Jose Sanchez operates an automobile detail shop at 601 Railroad Street. He is interested in expanding his business to include auto repair. In addition, he reported that he has received a notice of resignation from Chris Pratt, Code Enforcement Officer. He added that he has asked hire to take some time to reconsider. Chris Pratt did not put a date for when he wanted his last workday to be on his resignation letter. He further explained that Chris asked for more time to think about it, so he gave him until the end of this year to get back to him. Town Administrator Dean concluded his report but reminding the Board of Trustees that the Board moved the Monday, ,January 20, 2025, Board meeting, to Thursday, ,January 23, 2025. Also, they will have a work session at 6,00 pm that night with the Town Attorney Corey Hoffmann and then the Board meeting at 7:00 pm. He added that he will Page 10 of 12 let Corey know that they have an hour for his presentation, Trustee Howard commented that she will not be able to make it to the work session that right. c. Board of Trustees Trustee Fulton commented that she wanted to mention that their street has siding in the street and a porta potty due to a resident is having some work done on their home. Also, Trustee Garza commented that she wanted to suggest that they think about a tree lighting festival and/or parade for the Christmas Holiday next year. She has had residents ask her about this. Also, it is a good time to start thinking about making their plans for Easter, so we have time to properly plan. In addition, Trustee Garza and Trustee Howard commented that Town residents are complaining about how they were not notified about 'HERO being in their yards. Town Administrator Dean responded that VE R O told the Town Staff they would tape care of everything and will properly notify the residents/property owners. He will plan to put something in the January 2025 Newsletter such as a communication from the 'hero Community nity Events Manager, Lacey MaPly. He added that it is his understanding she is arranging a open house for residents to share the VERO information with residents. Additionally, Trustee Howard commented that she has had a couple people approach her about the train's horns when they are crossing. She added that it seems lately they honk their horns two, three or even four times. She explained that they are wondering if something has changed because they used to not hear it as often or at all. Town Administrator Dean commented that he will look into it. Also, Trustee Agripino asked when we will adopt the 2025 Budget. Mayor Nothem responded that they already did, earlier tonight's meeting. Trustee .Agripino responded by apologizing to Town Administrator Dean that they never did his Annual Evaluation. Mayor Nothem commented that they can still do the evaluation for hire. He then asked Town Administrator Dean to please send the evaluation form to him and each of the Board of Trustees via e-mail to complete. Also, he asked the Board of Trustees to please complete the evaluation farm and e-mail them back to him. In Addition, Trustee Garza asked Town Administrator Dean if the Town Attorney is up for reappointment, Town Administrator Dean responded yes. He further explained that they will vote on the re -appointment of Town Attorney Hoffmann, Town Municipal Judge Stewart and TownClerk/Treasurer ,Joseph at the Januarys 6, 2025, Board Meeting. He added that the Town has not put out bids for the Town Attorney. Trustee Fulton asked whys haven't we put out for bids for the Town Attorney, Trustee Howton responded to defend this a bit. We have reviewed all the contracts already. It was discussed that Town Attorneys Hoffmann knows the history of the Town and that we would want to tape that into consideration. Also, "town Administrator Dean added that Town Attorney Hoffmann raised his rates from $200.00 to $225.00 so it is within the neighborhood of ghat others are charging. He further explained that as long as the rates are in the Page 11 of 12 neighborhood it then becomes a matter of service. He also explained that if the Board is unhappy with the service, certainly he'd be happy to help them with that. The average rate for aCity/Town Attorney is $225.00 per hour, Trustee Garza asked if Town Attorneys Hoffmann is currently handling any legal issues for the Town. Town Administrator Dean responded no not at the time. He added that Town Attorney Hoffmann will be here on Thursday, January 23, 2025, for the work session. He also mentioned that she can decide whether to reappoint him or not. Mayor Nothem commented that the Board did compare the Town Attorney to others and Town Attorney Hoffmann is in the same ballpark as the others. Mayor Nothem reminded the Board of Trustees that this Thursday, December 12, 2024, is the Holiday Lighting Contest. Please remember to send your 1 st, 2nd and 3rd picks aria e-pmail by end of days Friday4 December 13, 2024, to Town Administrator Dean and Town Clerk/Treasurer Joseph. He also asked the Board of Trustees to think about ghat their expectations of how the growth of the Town should look. How would they life to see the Town grow. Trustee Fulton asked Town Administrator Dean what time the pizza party is at the ilcrest Elementary School on Friday, December 20, 2024. She plans to attend on behalf of the Board of Trustees. Town Administrator Dean responded that he will confirm the time and get back to her. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: a If Needed 9. ADJOURNMENT: Motion — Trustee Howton, Motion to adjourn the meeting at 3:50 p.m. on December g, 2024, 2nd — Trustee Howard. All noted Aye. Motion carried (6-0). ATTEST: Brenda Jose own TOWN OF GIL REST Steve Nothem, Mayor Page 12 of 12 A Fa rrt hp jailk%1044-""I *44 PO Box 128 30-1 8th Street Gilcrest, CO 80623 (9 70) 737-2.426 (9 70) 737-2.427 fax 1111 w. Tot V nolgit crest. oy g To: From: Through: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Honorable Steve Nothem and Board Members Carrie McCool, Town Planner Dan Dean, Town Administrator December 9, 2024 Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Intergovernmental Agreement Water Storage Facility and Future Mining Operation - Sweet Valley Pit, Permit No. M-2024-015 On February 26, 2024, the Board hosted a work session with the representatives from Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD) to discuss a Weld County Pre -Application to construct a slurry wall on the southwest corner of Highway 60 and Highway 42. Instead of annexing the property into the Town of Gilcrest and since CCWCD is aquasi-governmental entity, all agreed that entering into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Town would be a better approach to meet CCWCD's goal of being good neighbors. CCWCD submitted a 112c permit application on April 8, 2024. Subsequently, an amended application was filed on September 10, 2024, that seeks to permit 150.92 acres for a sand and gravel mining operation in Weld County, near Gilcrest, CO. The project will involve four mining phases, creating two ponds for post -mining water resource development. On November 6, 2024, the Town received notice from the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety of recommendation to Approve 112c Permit Application with Objections (attached). In April, staff provided CCWCD a list of potential terms to be included in a subsequent IGA including water table monitoring, compliance with all Federal, State, and County permitting and Town approval of plans such as groundwater model report/plan, lighting plan, truck haul map, landscape plan (screening), traffic study, drainage plan and a reclamation plan that includes the development of twenty (20) homes on the property. The list of potential terms is attached to this memorandum. On October 23, 2024, Randy Ray of CCWCD submitted a modified Cost Reimbursement Agreement that limited CCWCD's reimbursed cost to $1,500 and objected to the recommended deposit amount of $7,500. On October 30, 2024, staff met with CCWCD's engineer, J.C. York of J&T Consulting, Inc., to discuss the list of potential IGA terms. Key highlights of the discussion are provided below: • Regarding the construction of the pipeline that will discharge to the South Platte River and allowing the Town to tie into the pipeline for dewatering needs of the Town, Mr. York stated that the Town could tie into the pipeline but the cost to do so would be the responsibility of Page 1 A Fa rrt i fp ips PO Box 128 30-1 8th Street Gilcrest, CO 80623 (9 70) 737-2.426 (9 70) 737-2.427 fax 1111 w. Tot V nolgit crest. oy g the Town. Additionally, the Town would only be allowed to use the water if there is capacity. Since there will be wells on that pipeline, it didn't sound like there would ever be capacity. • DRMS Permit hearing is targeted for December 2024. • Weld County USR would be submitted once the DMRS permit is secured. Staff informed them that the Town expected all Town review comments to be addressed within the USR submittal to the County. • Confirmation that the operation would not be 24 hours. • The Reclamation Plan would be limited to returning the land to Agriculture only. The mining life would be 11 years and the reservoirs are permanent. • The documents/plans/studies to be reviewed/approved by the Town and incorporated in the USR submittal that were listed in the potential term sheet would be submitted to the Town. Clarifying statements would be provided to the Town on November 4, 2024. On November 4, 2024, Mr. Ray provided a revised list of IGA terms that removed essentially all of the items that were included in the original list provided to CCWCD. Mr. Ray stated that all of the terms were removed because Gilcrest has an IGA with Weld County, therefore allows Gilcrest to have a voice in the USR process. Additionally, CCWCD objected to submitting a Town Special/Temporary Permit application. Mr. Ray referred staff to the January 2024 groundwater model that would be available for the Town's review and noted the DRMS permit defines the impact to the slurry walls on the Water District lands and those modeled groundwater impacts are to be mitigated per the plan submitted to the DRMS. Modeling would be available via the DRMS permit. Regarding the reclamation plan, Mr. Ray indicated the comment made at the Gilcrest Board Work Session was intended to be a possibility of construction of single family homes, and 20 homes was an estimate. As of today, Central Water has no intention of development and could not construct living quarters on an active mine site. Gravel mining may continue up to the year 2040. Lastly, Mr. Ray provided a map indicating the location of monitoring wells on Central's property, traffic study and aerial showing the haul route from the gravel mine. Staff Analysis The response to the list of potential IGA terms is limited to: 1) noting that CCWCD is constructing a pipeline which will discharge to the South Platte River and Central may allow the Town to tie into the pipeline for dewatering needs of the Town as described in a future agreement and 2) the Town will collect monitoring well water level measurements from the Town's monitoring wells and Central's will collect monitoring well water level measurements on Central's Property. The Town and Central would agree to share the data. As noted above, the potential IGA lacks substance wherein CCWCD envisions any Town concerns would be voiced through the referral process outlined in the Weld County and Town of Gilcrest Intergovernmental Agreement. Page 2 A Fa rrt hp jailk%1044-""I *44 PO Box 128 30-1 8th Street Gr l crest, CO 80623 (9 70) 737-2.426 (9 70) 737-2.427 fax 1111 w. Tot V nolgit crest. oy g Based on the CCWCD's modifications to the Cost Reimbursement Agreement, staff has not reviewed the materials provided to the Town on November 4, 2024. As such, staff is unable to provide a substantive staff analysis. Potential Board Action Considering CCWCD is not interested in entering into an IGA of any substance, the Board could take the following actions: 1. Enter into an IGA with CCWCD pursuant to the revised IGA terms received on November 4, 2024 and provide review comments to Weld County through the USR referral process. All associated costs would be covered by the Town. 2. Decline to enter into an IGA with CCWCD and provide review comments to Weld County through the USR referral process. All associated costs would be covered by the Town. 3. Direct staff to review the materials submitted on November 4, 2024, and develop recommended next steps and/or generate comments to protect the Town's interests for CCWCD to address. All associated costs would be covered by the Town. Attachments A. DRMS Notice of Recommendation to Approve 112c Permit Application with Objections B. Town List of Potential IGA Terms issued in April 2024. C. CCWCD's Proposed IGA Terms received on November 4, 2024 D. Meining Site Monitor Well Locations E. Sweet Valley Pit Haul Route 8-15-2024 F. Meining Farm Pit — Permanent Scenario Traffic Impact Study dated April 24, 2024 G. Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex - Groundwater Impact Evaluation dated January 2024 Page 3 Q COLORADO Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources November 6, 2024 Attachment A: DRMS Notice of Recommendation to Approve RE: Sweet Valley Pit, Permit No. M-2024-015 Recommendation to Approve a 112c Permit Application with Objections Dear Party and/or Interested Person: The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) hereby issues its recommendation to approve the 112c permit application (Application) for the Sweet Valley Pit, File No. M-2024-015, submitted by Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (Applicant). This recommendation is based on the Division's determination that the Application satisfied the requirements of Section 34-32.5-115(4) of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, 34-32.5-101 et seq. , C.R.S. (Act). The Applicant addressed all adequacy issues which were identified by the Division during the adequacy review process to the Division's satisfaction. Therefore, on November 6, 2024, the Division determined the Application satisfied the requirements of C.R.S. 34-32.5-115(4) and issued its recommendation to approve the Application over objections. The Division's rationale for approval (Rationale) identifies that the objections raised are all outside the jurisdiction of the Division and the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board (Board). The issues raised by the objecting parties were grouped into the following four categories: 1) Concerns regarding aesthetic impact and quality of life 2) Concerns regarding the use of County Road 25.5 3) Concerns regarding dust and air pollution 4) Concerns regarding intergovernmental agreements The Division's Rationale provides a full and thorough analysis of the four broad categorical issues (listed above) which were raised by the objecting parties. A copy of the Division's Rationale is enclosed and is also available for public review on the Division's website at https://drms.colorado.gov/, by clicking on DRMS Electronic Documents (Laserfiche Weblink) then entering the file number "M2024015" into the Permit No. field and hitting Enter. The Division's recommendation to approve the Application is to the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board (Board). The Division received timely written objections to the Application. Therefore, pursuant to Rules 1.4.9(2)(a) and 1.7.4(2), the Division has scheduled the Application for consideration by the Board. During the hearing, the Board will consider the Application with objections and may decide to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Sweet Valley Pit application. The Formal Board Hearing is scheduled to occur during the December 11-12, 2024 Board meeting, beginning at 9:00 a.m, on December 11th, or as soon thereafter as the matter can be considered. Pursuant to o Physical: 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 I P: 303.866.3567 I F: 303.832.8106 Mailing: DRMS Room 215, 1001 E 62" Ave, Denver. CO 80216 I https://drms.colorado.gov Jared Pol is, Governor I Dan Gibbs, Executive Director I Michael A. Cunningham, Director November 6, 2024 Recommendation to Approve a 112c Permit Application with Objections Sweet Valley Pit, File No. M-2024-015 Page 2 of 2 Rule 2.7.1(5), the Pre -hearing Conference will be held after the Office has issued its written recommendation and at least 10 calendar days prior to the Formal Board Hearing. Additional details on the Pre -hearing Conference (once it is scheduled) and the Board Hearing will be provided under separate cover. If you have any questions, you may contact me by telephone at 720-774-0040 or by email at brock.bowles@state.co.us. Sincerely, fittred9' Brock Bowles Environmental Protection Specialist Encls: Rationale for Recommendation to Approve a 112c Permit Application with Objections, Sweet Valley Pit Rationale, File No. M-2024-015, dated November 6, 2024 Guide to Public Participation in the 112 Reclamation Permit Application Process for Construction Materials and Hard Rock/Metal Mining Operations Ec: Wenli Dickinson, P.E., Division of Water Resources at: wenli.dickinsonstate.co.us Lexi Hamous, Colorado Parks and Wildlife at: lexi.hamous-miller@state.co.us Todd Scott, at: toddscott3 5 (a,gmail. com Lacy Jo Mirus, at: laceyjo17@hotmail.com Hillary Ellis, at: hillary@greeleylockandkey.com Derek Ellis, at: derek@greeleylockandkey.com Town of Gilcrest, at: dan@townofgilcrest.org Randy Ray, Central Colorado Water Conservancy District at: rray@ccwcd.org J.C. York, J&T Consulting, Inc. at: jcyork@j-tconsulting.com Zach Trujillo, DRMS at: zach.trujilloAstate.co.us Jason Musick, DRMS at: Jason.musick@state.co.us Russ Means, DRMS at: russ.meansstate.co.us Jeff Fugate, AGO at: jefflugate@coagegov Scott Schultz, AGO at: scott.schultz@coag.gov Charles Kooyman, AGO at: charles.kooyman@coag.gov COLORADO Division of Reclamation, Mining an.d Safety ratirrient Of Nattiir i_i! F fly -_:.II. rCk-:,- November 6, 2024 Re: Sweet Valley Pit, Permit No. M-2024-015 New Permit Application with Objections Division's Rationale for Recommendation for Permit Application Approval Introduction On November 6, 2024, the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division/Office/DRMS) issued its recommendation to approve the permit application for the Sweet Valley Pit, File No. M- 2024-015, over objections. This rationale document is intended to explain the process by which the Division arrived at its recommendation for approval with conditions over objections and respond to the issues raised by the objecting parties. The Division reserves the right to further supplement, amend, modify, or clarify this document and recommendation with additional details as necessary.' Summary of the Review Process for the Permit Application The Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD/Applicant) submitted a 112c permit application to the Division on April 8, 2024. The permit application was deemed complete by the Division for the purposes of filing and review on April 19, 2024. On September 10, 2024, CCWCD amended their 112c permit application, which constituted as a new filing for the purpose of determining the date for consideration by the Office and for the deadline for a final decision on the application pursuant to Rule 1.8.1(3). The CCWCD's amended application proposes to permit 150.92 acres for a new sand and gravel pit. The site is located in Weld County, approximately 2.0 miles west of Gilcrest, CO. The Applicant intends to mine sand and gravel for road base and construction aggregate uses. The post mining land use proposed for the site is developed water resource which will consist of 2 separate ponds. The mining process will take place in four phases. Phases 1A (north pond) and 2A (south pond) will dry mine material down to 24 inches above the high-water table. Phases 1 and 2 will mine each pond down to bedrock after a slurry wall has been installed around each pond. Groundwater will not be exposed prior to the slurry wall installation, which will require the Applicant to obtain the 1 Herein, all references to the Act and Rules refer to the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, 34-32.5-101 et seq., C.R.S. (the Act), and to the Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for the Extraction of Construction Materials (the Rules or Rule). Copy of the Act and Rules are available through the Division's web site at https://drms.colorado.gov/rules-and-regulations. Physical Address: 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3567 F 303.832.8106 Mailing Address: DRMS Room 215, 1001 E 62nd Ave, Denver, CO 80216 https://drms.colorado.gov Jared S. Pol i s, Governor I Dan Gibbs, Executive Director I Michael A. Cunningham, Director Sweet Valley Pit, Rationale November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 4 necessary associated well permit(s) and an approved Substitute Water Supply Plan with the CO Division of Water Resources (DWR). The CCWCD is proposing to post bond for phase 1A and the facilities area. Additional bond will be posted before subsequent phases are started. The Applicant filed a Petition for a Declaratory Order with the Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB/Board) to be exempt from the Board's financial warranty requirements because of CCWCD's status as aquasi-municipal corporation. CCWCD's Petition would be considered by the MLRB if the board approves the application over objections. Pursuant to C.R.S. Section 34-32.5-112(9)(b), Rule 1.6.2(1)(d), Rule 1.6.5 and Rule 1.8.1, the Applicant published the required public notices for both the initial permit application and for the amendment to the application once a week for four consecutive weeks. The first publication for the initial application began on April 26, 2024, with the last date of publication on May 17, 2024. The first public comment period closed on June 6, 2024. The second publication for the amendment to the application began on September 13, 2024, with the last date of publication on October 4, 2024. The second public comment period closed on October 24, 2024. All public notices were published in the Greeley Tribune, a publication in general circulation in the vicinity of the proposed mine. During the public comment periods, the Division received five (5) written objections through the DRMS website and two (2) comments from the individuals and agencies listed below. There were no untimely letters of objection or comment letters to the application received by the Division. Timely Letters of Objection: Person or Entity Date Objection Received Todd Scott June 5, 2024 Derek Ellis June 6, 2024 Hillary Ellis June 6, 2024 Lacey Jo Mirus June 6, 2024 Town of Gilcrest October 22, 2024 Timely Commenting Agency: Agency Date Comment Received Division of Water Resources April 25, 2024 Colorado Parks and Wildlife May 3, 2024 The Division forwarded copies of the objections and comments to the Applicant and scheduled the amendment application for a mining permit for a Pre -hearing Conference and a hearing before the MLRB. The Division provided notice of the scheduled Pre -hearing Conference and Board hearing to Sweet Valley Pit, Rationale November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 4 all parties and interested persons. As a result of the timely objections received, the Division cannot procedurally make a decision on the application amendment for a mining permit, but rather makes a "recommendation" to the Board. During the review period the Division generated one (1) adequacy letter. The Applicant addressed all adequacy issues to the Division's satisfaction. Therefore, on November 6, 2024, the Division determined that the permit application satisfied the requirements of C.R.S. § 34-32.5-115(4) Issues Raised by the Objecting Parties It is the Division's position that the objections raised are all outside of the jurisdiction of the Division and Board, and therefore should not be categorized as jurisdictional items for consideration by the Board. The non -jurisdictional issues, as explained below, are more appropriately addressed by Weld County, CDOT, and CDPHE's Air Pollution Control Division. The issues raised by the objecting parties are represented by italic bold font. The last names of the objecting parties who raised the issue are listed after the issue. The Division's response follows in standard font. 1. Non -Jurisdictional Items Raised by the Objecting Parties In proceedings before the Board, jurisdiction is limited to enforcement of the specific requirements of the Act and Rules. The Division recognizes the importance of all timely submitted objections and comments in its review, but can address only the issues that directly relate to the specific requirements of an application as stated in the Act and Rules. a. Concerns regarding aesthetic impact and quality of life. (D. Ellis, H. Ellis, and Mirus) The Act and Rules do not address impacts to visually appealing landscapes, aesthetics, hours and/or days of operation, and quality of life. The Division and Board do not have jurisdiction over these issues, which are typically addressed at the local government level. These issues should be addressed with Weld County. The Applicant has affirmatively stated in Exhibit M of the permit application that a Weld County Use By Special Review Permit will be obtained prior to operations. b. Concerns regarding the use of County Road 25.5. (D. Ellis, H. Ellis, Scott, and Mirus) The Act and Rules which provide the jurisdiction of the Division and Board do not address public road access, use, or design issues. Such issues are under the jurisdiction of Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the Weld County Department of Public Works. The Applicant has affirmatively stated in Exhibit M of the permit application that a Weld County Use By Special Review Permit will be obtained prior to operations. Sweet Valley Pit, Rationale November 6, 2024 Page 4of4 c. Concerns regarding dust and air pollution. (Scott) The Act and Rules do not specifically address air quality issues. Such issues are under the jurisdiction of Weld County and the Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). The Applicant has affirmatively stated in Exhibit M of the permit application that an Air Pollution Emission Notice will be obtained prior to operations. The Act and Rules do not authorize the Division to directly regulate dust or air pollution issues. However, the protection and preservation of stockpiled topsoil is addressed under the performance standards of Rule 3.1.9. Pursuant to Rule 3.1.9(1), where it is necessary to remove overburden in order to expose the mineable materials, topsoil shall be removed and segregated from other spoil. If such topsoil is not replaced on a backfill area within a time short enough to avoid deterioration of the topsoil, vegetative cover or other means shall be employed so that the topsoil is protected from erosion, remains free of any contamination by toxic or acid-forming material, and is in a usable condition for reclamation. The Division has determined one year to be an appropriate time frame for the establishment of a protective vegetative cover for stockpiled topsoil for similar mining operations throughout Colorado. The Applicant has committed to establish vegetation on the topsoil stockpiles and committed to taking appropriate erosion control measures to stabilize topsoil stockpiles and berms. The Applicant has indicated that water will be used for dust control at the site. d. Concerns regarding a lack of intergovernmental agreement, cost reimbursement agreement and financial deposit between CCWCD and the Town of Gilcrest. (Town of Gilcrest) The Act and Rules do not address intergovernmental agreements or contracts that occur between local government and quasi -government entities such as CCWCD. Such agreements are considered by the Division as business arrangements that are outside the jurisdiction of the Division or Board. The Applicant has affirmatively stated in Exhibit M of the permit application that additional required permits and licenses will be obtained prior to operations which includes a Weld County Use By Special Review Permit. Conclusion After conducting a thorough technical review of the application, as outlined in part in the discussion above, on November 6, 2024, the Division has determined the permit application satisfied the requirements of the Act and Rules, and specifically C.R.S. § 34-32.5-115(4), and is issuing its recommendation to approve the Construction Materials 112 permit application for the Sweet Valley Pit, File No. M-2024-015 over objections. 0 COLORADO Division of Reclamation, on,,, Miii tg an. . Safety p.rtrinent ck1 Natural. Peso -taxes MEMORANDUM To: Whom it May Concern From: Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety, Minerals Program Date: October 2, 2001; Revised on October 19, 2001, August 2, 2004, January 12, 2006, and October 7, 2021 Re: Guide to Public Participation in the 112 Reclamation Permit Application Process for Construction Materials and Hard Rock/Metal Mining Operations Thank you for taking the time to be involved in the State of Colorado's process of reviewing applications for new mining operations or amendments to existing permits. The purpose of this memorandum is to explain the 112 reclamation permit application process for construction materials and hard rock/metal mining operations, your rights as either aparty or anon -party, and the jurisdiction of the Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB or the Board). Background Colorado's general assembly codified Colorado's Mined Land Reclamation Act (§ 34-32-101, C.R.S., et seq.) and the Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials (§ 34-32.5-101, C.R.S., et seq.; together "Acts") to regulate mining operations in the state. The corresponding Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operations ("Hard Rock/Metal Mining") and Extraction of Construction Materials ("Construction Materials") were subsequently promulgated by the Mined Land Reclamation Board (2 C.C.R. 407-1 and 2 C.C.R. 407-4; together "Rules"). The Acts and Rules are available at: https://drms.colorado.gov/rules-and-regulations. The Minerals Program of the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division or DRMS) issues various types of mining permits, including for: 110 Limited Impact Operations, 110 Limited Impact Designated Mining Operations, 111 Special Operations, 112 Regular Operations, and 112 Regular Designated Mining Operations. All permit applications are available at: https://drms.colorado.gov/forms/minerals-program-forms. This document is focused solely on the application review process for 112 reclamation permit applications. The Role of the Mined Land Reclamation Board Pursuant to the Acts, the Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the reclamation of a mining operation's affected lands. A reclamation permit establishes a post -mining land use for the affected lands. The post -mining land use may be for forest, rangeland, cropland, general agriculture, residential, recreational, industrial/commercial, developed water resources, or other "uses". Although the Board does not have jurisdiction over local land use decisions (e.g., visual impacts, economic impacts, noise, traffic), a permit Applicant must obtain all required permits, licenses, and approvals prior to conducting any mining operations. Local governmental entities have jurisdiction over their land use, zoning, and permitting processes. A reclamation permit Applicant may not be required to have all necessary approvals or permits from other agencies in place, including city and county zoning and land use permits, before a reclamation permit is issued. The Board is a multi -interest citizen board which establishes the regulations, standards, and policies that guide the Division. Colorado's governor appoints five Board members from nominations submitted by each of the various constituencies represented, resulting in two members with substantial experience in the mining industry, two with substantial experience in conservation and environmental resources, and one with substantial experience in agriculture. A sixth Board member is the Executive Director of the Department of Natural Resources, or his/her appointee, and the seventh is a member of the State Soil Conservation Board. (§ 34-32-105, C.R.S.). The Board typically meets for one to two days every month. Some of the Board's responsibilities include: promulgating Rules that implement the Acts; issuing violations, civil penalties, and cease and desist orders; determining corrective actions for operators found in violation of the Acts and Rules; and conducting hearings regarding reclamation permit applications. The Role of the Division Division staff specialize in numerous areas including geology, biology, wildlife management, range and soil science, engineering, hydrology, and chemistry. During the reclamation permit application process, the Division is responsible for ensuring that the contents of the application adequately address the requirements of the Acts and Rules. To monitor compliance with permit requirements, the Division conducts periodic inspections of all permitted mining, exploration, and prospecting operations in Colorado. If an operator fails to timely correct any compliance issues identified during an inspection, the Division may present the possible violations to the Board. The Division calculates the reclamation bond required for a proposed mining operation based on the operator's proposed reclamation plan. The bond is reassessed periodically throughout the life of mine to ensure it is sufficient for reclaiming the site in accordance with the approved plan. Where there is a written objection to a permit application or a request for reconsideration of a Board decision, the Division serves as staff to the Board. For 112 applications that receive no timely objections, or for which, all objecting parties withdraw prior to the scheduled Board Hearing, the Division is authorized to approve or deny the application without a hearing before the Board. 2 The Role of the Applicant During the reclamation permit application process, the Applicant has the burden of proving the application submitted to the Division meets all requirements of the Acts and Rules, including providing sufficient evidence that all required notices have been posted or delivered within the required timeframes. Applicants for 112 Reclamation Permits or Amendments must place a copy of the application at the County Clerk or Recorder's office in the county containing the land to be affected by mining. The Applicant must notify the local Board of County Commissioners, the Board of Supervisors of the local Soil Conservation District, all surface and mineral rights owners of the affected lands, and all surface owners within 200 feet of the affected lands. The Applicant must also post signs at the proposed mine site and publish a public notice in a local newspaper of general circulation once a week for four consecutive weeks. The Role of the Public Participant A person may participate in the Board Hearing process regarding a contested reclamation permit application as a party or a non-party. Pursuant to the Acts and Rules, a person may participate as a "party" if they: (1) Submit a written comment or objection to the Division not more than 20 calendar days after the last date for the newspaper publication of notice of the application. The comment or objection letter must include the person's: name, mailing address, telephone number, and an explanation of how they are directly and adversely affected or aggrieved by the proposed mining operation [see "party" definition in Construction Materials Rule 1.1(38) and Hard Rock/Metal Mining Rule 1.1(50)]. To ensure timely receipt, any comments or objections on an application should be submitted via our website at: https://dnrlaserfiche.state.co.us/Forms/DRMS _Comment; and (2) Attend the Pre -hearing Conference or provide a proxy authorization form (see attached Authorization to Appear on Behalf of a Party) to the Board's Pre -hearing Conference Officer on or before the date of the Pre -hearing Conference and the Party's authorized representative is present at the conference [pursuant to Rule 2.7.3(4)]. Any party may be represented by an attorney; and (3) Attend the Board Hearing. A party may present evidence, call witnesses, and cross-examine witnesses during the Board Hearing on the application. A party also has the right to sue or be sued in district court on matters regarding the Board's decision on the application. For additional information regarding a party's rights and responsibilities, please refer to Rules 1.7, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9. 3 Per Rule 2.7.3(3), any person who is a party to a matter before the Board, and who wishes to withdraw as a party, must do so in writing prior to the commencement of, or on the record during, the Formal Board Hearing on the matter (see attached Party Status Withdrawal Form). If you choose not to be a party, or to withdraw your party status, as a non-party, you may still address the Board on matters of concern during the public comment portion of the Board meeting. However, in this case, you will not preserve or be entitled to the rights of a party. In the event that all objecting parties withdraw prior to the Board Hearing, the Division is authorized to approve or deny the application without consideration by the Board. Thus, in this instance, there would be no opportunity for a non-party to provide public comment at a Board Hearing. The Role of Other Governmental Agencies Once a reclamation permit application is received by the Division and considered "filed" (or "complete"), the Division sends a notice of the application to various local, state, and federal agencies. These governmental agencies may include: county commissioners, county planning and zoning departments, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Colorado Division of Water Resources/Office of the State Engineer, local Conservation District(s), Colorado State Land Board, State Historic Preservation Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (for sites that overlap oil and gas facilities or are surrounded by oil and gas activity), Urban Drainage (for sites located within the 100 year floodplain in Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, or Jefferson County), U.S. Bureau of Land Management and/or U.S. Forest Service (for sites located on federal lands), and any municipalities located within 2 miles of the proposed affected lands. The Division's review of the application may be coordinated with these and/or other governmental agencies as appropriate. The 112 Reclamation Permit Application Process Completeness Review: Upon receipt of an application, the Division first determines whether it contains sufficient information for it to be considered "filed" (or "complete"), as defined by Construction Materials Rule 1.1(23) and Hard Rock/Metal Mining Rule 1.1(27). Adequacy Review: Once a 112 reclamation permit application is considered filed, the Division has 90 days to complete its adequacy review of the application and to make its decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. During the adequacy review process, the Division evaluates each exhibit in the application to verify that it meets all applicable requirements of the Acts and Rules (exhibit requirements are outlined in Rule 6). If the Division determines an exhibit is inadequate, it will send an adequacy review letter to the Applicant identifying the deficiencies. The Applicant must address all deficiencies in the application to the satisfaction of the Division in order for the application to be approved. The 90 -day application review period may be extended at the request of the Applicant, not to exceed 365 days from the date the application was filed, in order to provide the necessary information to meet the adequacy requirements. The 90 -day application review period may also be extended by the Division in accordance with Rule 1.4.1(7) in the case of "complex" applications, serious unforeseen circumstances, or significant snow cover on the affected land that 4 prevents a necessary on -site inspection, or Rule 1.4.1(13) where the Applicant failed to publish the public notice pursuant to Rule 1.6.2(1)(d). If the Division's review period is extended, the decision date on the application is reset. If no timely objections are received on a 112 reclamation permit application, the Division will make the decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application on or before the decision date. If timely objections are received on a 112 reclamation permit application, the Division will schedule the matter for a formal Board Hearing, during which, the Board will make the final decision on the application. In this case, on or before the application decision date, the Division will make a recommendation to the Board on whether to approve or deny the application. Such recommendation shall identify the issues raised by the Division or by timely objectors. The Division's recommendation and rationale for approval or denial shall be sent to all parties at least 3 working days prior to the Pre - hearing Conference. While a reclamation permit application may be approved by the Division or the Board, the permit is not issued until the required performance and financial warranties are received. Pre -hearing Conference: A Pre -hearing Conference is held after the Division has issued its recommendation and rationale on the application, and at least 10 calendar days prior to the Board Hearing. Persons seeking to participate in the hearing process are encouraged to review Rules 2.6, 2.7, and 2.8 prior to the Pre -hearing Conference. The purpose of the Pre -hearing Conference, which is held by a Pre -hearing Conference Officer ("PHCO") delegated by the Board, is to explain the Division's application review and Board Hearing processes, identify issues raised that are within and outside of the Board's jurisdiction, and recognize the parties. Following the Pre -hearing Conference, the PHCO drafts a proposed Pre -hearing Order for the Board to consider at the hearing. The PHCO's proposed Order recommends a list of parties, identifies issues within the Board's jurisdiction to be considered at the Board Hearing, and proposes a hearing schedule with time allotments (the Board may adopt this Order as drafted or amend it). Please note that parties are required to present their list of all potential witnesses and exhibits at the Pre -hearing Conference in accordance with Rule 2.6(2). Board Hearing: The Division shall provide all parties to an application at least 30 days written notice of the Board Hearing date. During the hearing, the Board will consider all of the evidence presented, deliberate on the issues, and vote on whether to approve the reclamation permit application. Subsequently, the Board's written decision, in the form of a Board Order, will be sent to all parties that participated in the hearing. Any decision by the Board is considered final agency action for purposes of appeal. 5 Helpful Weblinks: Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety homepage: https://drms.colorado.gov The Acts and Rules for Construction Materials and Hard Rock/Metal Mining operations are available at: https://drms.colorado.gov/rules-and-regulations. A list of permitting actions currently under review is available at: https://drms.colorado.gov/information/permitting-actions-currently-under-review. Comments or objections on an application under review can be submitted at: https://dnrlaserfiche.state.co.us/Forms/DRMS Comment. All (non -confidential) permit files are available for public review through our online imaged document system (called Laserfiche) at: https://dnrweblink.state.co.us/drms/search.aspx. A Laserfiche User Guide is available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1180Udf Mpjo3kxlHkP5hMH-w7MeStxX7/view. This guidance document as well as the attached Proxy Authorization and Party Status Withdrawal forms are available on our website (under the section labeled "Information") at: https://drms.colorado.gov/forms/minerals-program-forms. 6 AUTHORIZATION TO APPEAR ON BEHALF OF A PARTY (Please Type or Print the Requested Information) SIGNATURES MUST BE IN BLUE INK I (person's name) (title, if applicable) of (name of company, association, organization, etc., if applicable) hereby delegate to (person or entity's name) the right to appear on behalf of (person, company, association, organization, etc.) at the Pre -hearing Conference. SIGNED AND DATED THIS DAY OF If corporate attest (seal) Authorized Signature (must be signed in blue ink) Title: State of County of _ The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , by as of • • Notary Public My commission expires: SIGNATURES MUST BE IN BLUE INK STATE OF COLORADO MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD PARTY STATUS WITHDRAWAL FORM In the matter of File No. M- - , Permit or Amendment Application. Name of Operator/Applicant: Site Name: I hereby withdraw as a party to this matter. I hereby withdraw as a party to this matter and, if the Board holds a hearing, I wish to address the Board at the formal hearing, if held, as a non-party. (Please note that if all objecting parties withdraw prior to the date set for the Board's consideration of the application, the application may be approved by the Office without the Board holding a hearing. In that event, there will be no opportunity to address the Board on any issues related to the application. Also, the Board is not obligated to consider any issues raised by a person or an entity that has withdrawn as a party.) Regardless of a party status, the Division thoughtfully considers each issue submitted in writing to the Division and provides a response to those issues within its jurisdiction in the Division's "Rationale for Recommendation." The Rationale is available to any person by contacting the Division. For persons who do not wish to become a party or who withdraw as a party in this matter, please contact the Division for information on application status. Printed Name Home Phone # Address Work Phone # ( ) City, State Zip Code FAX # E -Mail Address Date Signature Attachment B: Town List of Potential IGA Terms Reimbursement agreement: • The Town incurs substantial costs with engineering and planning consultants in reviewing and analyzing a land use proposal. I discussed this with the Town Planner, and we recommend a deposit of $7,500. If our expenses do not exceed this amount the difference is refunded. If the expenses do exceed this amount additional funding is required. Special/Temporary Permit. This is a one-time fee of $150. An Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) protecting the town's interests. Water table monitoring: • Construct dewatering and allow the Town to tie into the pipeline. • Use monitoring well measurements from the Town's monitoring wells and your own monitoring well to detect negative impacts of your operation on the water table. • Mitigate any negative impacts on the Town's water table in conjunction with other similar neighboring operations. • Work with adjacent property owners to install dewatering wells to alleviate the high ground water issue in the area. • Submit ground water modeling. The Property Owners will obtain all permits as necessary for the Project, including, but not limited to: • Air Pollution Emission Notice (ADEN) Permit • Colorado Discharge Permit System (COPS) and Storm Water Management Plan -Storm Water Only. • The natural drainage will flow to the northwest, and a COGS00000 series discharge permit (comingled process, storm, and discharge water permit) and • Storm Water Management Plan will be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). • Obtain DMRS permit. Obtain Weld County USR approval The Property Owners shall comply with the following plans upon approval of the Town: • Groundwater Model Report/Plan • Lighting Plan • Haul route map (24 hour operation). They said they would send the map to us in January 2024, but I haven't seen it. • Landscape Plan depicting screening of parking areas, any outdoor storage, equipment, etc. • Traffic Study (I had in my notes that they said it was underway at the Jan 22, 2024 meeting with the District) • Drainage Plan • Reclamation Plan (Randy indicated that 20 homes could be built on the property) • County, State and Federal permits Attachment C: CCWCD' s Proposed IGA Terms Reimbursement agreement: • Central and the Town have a reimbursement agreement not to exceed $1,500. If the expenses exceed this amount of funding, the parties may extend the agreement upon mutual agreement of the parties. An Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) protecting the town's interests. Water table monitoring: • Central is constructing a pipeline which will discharge to the South Platte River and Central may allow the Town to tie into the pipeline for dewatering needs of the Town as described in a future agreement. • The Town will collect monitoring well water level measurements from the Town's monitoring wells and Central's will collect monitoring well water level measurements on Central's Property. The Town and Central would agree to share the data. This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION Attachment E Sweet Valley P Haul Route 8-15-2024 2000 ft Attachment G: Groundwater Impact Evaluation McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247 E -Mail: dennis@mcgranewater.com r #McGrane Water Engineering SWEET VALLEY RESERVOIR COMPLEX - GROUNDWATER IMPACT EVALUATION PREPARED FOR J&T GONSTULTIN FORT LUPTON, COLORADO JANUARY, 2024 PROJECT NO.: J&T(SVRC) SVRC Pit. Evaluation MCGRANE WATER ENGINEERING, INC. PROVIDES ACCURATE, COST-EFFECTIVE GROUND WA TER SOLUTIONS TO MUNICIPAL, INDUSTRIAL, MINING, AND RECREATIONAL WATER PROVIDERS USING EXPERIENCED PROFESSIONALS AND APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES. SWEET VALLEY RESERVOIR COMPLEX GROUNDWATER IMPACT EVALUATION PREPARED FOR J8c1" CONSULTING FORT LUPTON, COLORADO JANUARY, 2024 PROJECT NO.: J&T(SVRG) The technical material in this report was prepared by or under the supervision and direction of the undersigned, whose seals as a Professional Geologist and Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado are affixed below: The following independent consultants contributed to this report: Principal in Charge and Modeler: Dennis R. McGrane, P.E., C.P.G GIS Analyst: Tammi Renninger, ElephantFish, LLC AlcG^ane Water Engineering, LLC. Page i SVRC Pit Evaluation Table of Contents BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Water Level History Other Planned Pits Report Structure EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Model Results Summary SVRC Mitigation Options Impacts by Other Pits Mitigation Runs Pit Scenario Pit Scenario Pit Scenario Pit Scenario CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 4 2 - Only Section 20 Pits .4 3 - Only Monarch Pits 5 4 - Section 20 and Monarch Pits 5 5 - All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC ..5 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLES (within text) Table 1 - Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC (no Mitigation) . 3 Table 2 - Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC (with Flow to Pipeline) 3 Table 3 - Pit Run Impact Summary 5 REPORT SUMMARY FIGURES 7 Figure 1 - Study Area and SEO Wells 8 APPENDIX A - GROUNDWATER EVALUATION AND MODELING Available Data HYDROGEOLOGY MODELING SOURCES Surficial Geo to gy Well Depth Bedro ck Elevatio n Water Levels Depth to Water Seasonal Fluctuations 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 Saturated Thickness 12 Well Yield 12 Aquifer Transmissivity 12 Hydraulic Conductivity (K) 12 12 Boundary Conditions 13 Modflow "River" Package 13 Model Calibration - Pre -pit Run 14 Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Distribution Mass Balance Water Level Changes Caused by the SVRC SVRC Mitigation Options Model Error and Uncertainty 15 15 15 16 17 17 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC. Page ii SVRC Pit Evaluation Table of Contents - Continued APPENDIX A TABLES APPENDIX A FIGURES .19 Table A1- SEO Well Data Used for Hydrologic Analysis (4 pages) ....20-23 Table A2 - SVRC Monitoring Well Water Levels 24 Table A3 - Section 20 Monitoring Well Water Levels (From J&T Consulting) 24 Table A4 - Modflow "River" Cell Parameters 14 Table A5 - Pre -pit Run Calibration Satistics 14 Table A6 - Pre -Pit Run Mass Balanct 15 Table A7 - Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC without Mitigation .16 Table A8 - Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC (with Flow to Pipeline) 16 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Figure Ala - Study Area with DWR Wells (NE) Figure Alb - Study Area with DWR Wells (SE) Figure Alc - Study Area with DWR Wells (SW) Figure Ald - Study Area with DWR Wells (NW) Figure A2 - Surficial Geology and Well Depth Figure A3 - Bedrock Elevation Contours Figure A4a- Year 2000 Water Table Figure A4b- Recent Water Table Figure Asa- Depth to Water (NE) Figure A5b- Depth to Water (SE) Figure A5c- Depth to Water (SW) Figure A5d- Depth to Water (NW) Figure A6 - Aquifer Saturated Thickness Figure A7 - Well Yield Figure A8 - Transmissivity Figure A9 - Hydraulic Conductivity Figure A10 - PrePit Water Table and Calibration Residuals Figure All - Scenario 1 - Change Caused by SVRC Pits Figure Al2 - Scenario 1 - SVRC Mitigation to CCWCD Pipeline Figure A13 - Scenario 1 - SVRC Mitigation to Drain APPENDIX B - GROUNDWATER EVALUATION AND MODELING BACKGROUND MITIGATION RUNS APPENDIX B TABLES APPENDIX B FIGURES Pit Scenario 2 - Only Section 20 Pits Pit Scenario 3 - Only Monarch Pits Pit Scenario 4 - Section 20 and Monarch Pits Pit Scenario 5 - All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC) Table B-1 - Pit Run Results Summar: Figure B1 - Scenario 2 - Change Caused by Section 20 Pits Figure B2- Scenario 2 - Section 20 Mitigation to Drain Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 45 46 46 46 47 47 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 B3 - Scenario 3 - Change Caused by Monarch Pits B4 - Scenario 3 - Monarch Mitigation to Drains B5 - Scenario 4 - Change Caused by Section 20 and Monarch Pits B6 - Scenario 4 - Section 20 and Monarch Pits Mitigation to Drains , B7 - Scenario 5 - Change Caused by All Pits (Section 20 and Monarch and SVRC) B8 - Scenario 5 - All Pits with Mitigation to Drains B9 - Scenario 5 - All Pits with Mitigation to Drains (SVRC to Pipeline) McGrane Water Engineering, LLC. Page iii SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 1 of 58 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The proposed Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex (SVRC) is located approximately 2 miles west of Gilcrest, Colorado in Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 66 West (6t' PM). The site is located approximately one mile east of the South Platte River (SPR) which flows northeast along this stretch. The SVRC consists of two proposed lined pits, each approximately 40 acres. The mine owner/applicant is the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD). As part of the mine permit application process, the mine consultant, J&T Consulting, Inc. (J&T) requested that McGrane Water Engineers, LLC. (MWE) determine the potential impacts of installing pit liners at the SVRC. Impacts typically include a rise in the water table ("mounding") on the up -gradient side of the slurry wall and a decline in the water table ("shadowing") on the down gradient side. Water level increases to within 10 feet of the surface on the up -gradient side of the pit could also cause flooding of low-lying structures such as home basements. A decline in water levels on the down gradient side could reduce the aquifer saturated thickness and well yields if the decline is more than approximately 10 percent of the saturated aquifer thickness. Water Level History The Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has documented a rise in alluvial aquifer groundwater levels in the vicinity of Gilcrest, Colorado over the past several decades (Topper and Others, 2014). The higher than normal water table is a concern among residence and regulators due to potential flooding of basements and water logging damage to agriculture. We created a "recent Pre -pit" water table based on CGS contours that represent 2012 conditions and modified them to consider more recent 2021 and 2023 water levels from SVRC and other pit monitoring wells. We conclude that although water levels in the pit vicinity have likely increased approximately 10 feet over past decades, they are still 10-15 feet below ground level at and upgradient from the pits. Other Planned Pits Other gravel mining operations ("Monarch" Pit and "Section 20" Pit) are planned and applications have submitted to DRMS. Applicants for both pits have proposed installing infiltration drains to mitigate mounding on the upgradient sides, and recharge ponds, trenches or subsurface "exfiltration" drains (to eliminate evaporation) downgradient to mitigate shadowing. Upgradient drains are also planned for the SVRC as discussed below. The study area surrounding the pits covers approximately 24 square miles and includes approximately 404 permitted and constructed wells (excluding abandoned wells and monitoring wells) per the State's well database (CDWR, 2023). Figure 1 shows the permitted wells (sorted by use), proposed pit boundaries (white), study area and natural features provided by Google Earth. Due to the increased density of wells closer to Gilcrest, we did not consider wells shown in yellow in our hydrology data set, but we did consider them in our water level impact (aka "change") analysis. Report Structure This report includes an: 1. Executive Summary of the study, modeling results and recommendations; 2. Appendix A that provides the hydrogeologic evaluation and description of the model conceptualization, construction and the SVRC impact and mitigation analyses; cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 2 of 58 3. Appendix B that evaluates impacts and mitigation measures of the other pits with and without the SVRC. All figures are located after each section. Some important unnumbered figures are located within the text to facilitate reading. Small numbered tables are located within the text with larger tables after each section. Figures and tables with prefixes "A" and "B" are located after the associated Appendix. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We: 1. Reviewed published technical groundwater literature focusing on the hydrogeology of the South Platte River (SPR) near Gilcrest; 2. Compiled well data from the State's Well database (Table Al); 3. Updated maps prepared by the US Geological survey depicting the water table and alluvial aquifer bottom surfaces (aka bedrock structural elevation map) using more recent monitoring well drilling data; 4. Compiled monitoring well water level from monitoring wells drilled around the SVRC and Section 20 Pit by the applicants (Table A2). 5. Updated the table map (Figure A4a) created by the CGS (Topper et al., 2014), by considering more recent measurements around the pits (Figure A4b); 6. Evaluated the hydrogeology of the study area and created a Modflow groundwater model (Appendix A) that we used to create the "Pre -pit" water table; 7. Evaluated seasonal water level changes at the site; 8. Updated depth to water maps prepared by the CGS (Topper et al., 2014) within the study area (Figures Asa, b, c, and d); 9. Evaluated changes in groundwater levels compared to the "Pre -pit" water table caused by the SVRC liner (Pit Scenario 1); 10. Evaluated changes in groundwater levels from other pit scenarios (Appendix B) including: Pit Scenario 2 - Section 20 pits; Pit Scenario 3 - Monarch Pits; Pit Scenario 4 - Both Section 20 and Monarch Pits; and Pit Scenario 5 - All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC). 11. Each Pit Scenario includes at least one mitigation run that reduces mounding and shadowing using dewatering wells and infiltration and exflltration drains discussed below. Model Results Summary The groundwater model was constructed using reasonable aquifer properties and boundary conditions (aquifer sides, bottom, thickness and river leakage assumptions). The Pre -pit Run was calibrated to recent water levels such that Root Mean Square (RMS) error is less than 3 ft (Figure A10). The modeled elevation contours are very similar to our Pre -pit water table (Figure A4b). Pit Scenario 1 simulates the effects of installing the SVRC liners. When the SVRC liners are installed, water level changes in the range of plus or minus (+/-) 1 to 3.5 feet occurs within a half mile upgradient (mounding) and a half -mile downgradient (shadowing). There are two registered McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 3 of 58 wells within the mounding and four registered wells located within the shadowing areas as summarized in Table 1: Table 1 - Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC (no Mitigation) Water Level Changes in Registered Wells (Run 1) lit # Name Twn Rng Sec Modeled Change (ft) Link to DWR Permit Mounding (+) 58-WCB KROSH & HANSEN 4 N 66 W 30 +1.2 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/C620058 54-WCQ HANSEN, CASTOR 4 N 66 W 30 i +1.9 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/C620054 Shadowing (-) 19924-U EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -2.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062686 19924-W EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.2 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062688 19924 -V -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062687 185466-A EATON 4 N 66 W 19 -1.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0371951B CATTLE CO The combined effect of upgradient mounding and seasonal water level increases may increase water levels to within 10 feet of ground level at these wells, which may require upgradient mitigation to prevent their basements Of they exist) from flooding. SVRC Mitigation Options We evaluated two mitigation options, both included installing two vertical dewatering wells upgradient of the SVRC and pumping a combined total of approximately 400 gpm total to offset upgradient mounding. The preferred option is to discharge the dewatering wells into a pipeline belonging to the applicant (CCWCD) which discharges near the SPR approximately 3 miles to the north. By doing so, the shadowing will increase due to drawdown from the extraction wells. Figure All shows that the downgradient shadowing of -1 to -3 feet extends approximately one-half mile from the SVRC. Eight wells are affected and summarized in Table 2. Table 2 - Pit Scenario 1 - Only SVRC (with Flow to CCWCD Pipeline) Downgradient Shadowing in Registered Wells (Run 1Mit-a) 'ermit # Name Twn Rng Sec Change Modeled (ft) Link to DWR Permit 19924-U EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -2.7 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062686 19924-W EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.7 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062688 19924 -V -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062687 185466-A 4 N 66 W 19 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/03719516 EATON CATTLE CO 14028-R UNITED WATER & SANIT/ 4 N 66 W 30 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9061848 19924 -T -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.4 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062685 23014 BRECKON, i-IOWARD W 4 N 66 W 19 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062965 11113-R 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 httpslidwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9060576 I -IS LAND & CATTLE LLC 1_1114-R 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9060577 I -IS LAND & CATTLE LLC 187426-A MORAN, TERESA 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0385674D 19924 -R -R 4 N 66 W 19 -1.0 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0343851 I -IS LAND & CATTLE LLC The second mitigation option is to install an exfiltration drain downgradient of the SVRC to infiltrate the 400 gpm pumped by the dewatering wells. This will effectively mitigate pit impacts as shown in Figure A13. Although this run demonstrates that exfiltration drains are effective, we believe pumping into CCWCD's pipeline may provide additional shadowing benefits downgradient and the small declines will not affect the yield of nearby wells. Impacts by Other Pits In Appendix B, we evaluated four additional pit development scenarios including: McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 4 of 58 • Pit Scenario 2 — Only Section 20 Pits (Run 2); • Pit Scenario 3 — Only Monarch Pits (Run 3); • Pit Scenario 4 - Both Section 20 and Monarch Pits (Run 4); and • Pit Scenario 5 - All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC) — Run 5. In each scenarios, we simulated pits in the model by assigning pit cells as impermeable "no -flow" cells and then calculated the "change" compared to water levels from the Pre -pit Run. Mitigation Runs In the Mitigation Runs, we attempt to minimize the upgradient change by simulating dewatering wells and or infiltration drains upgradient of pits to reduce drawdown. For Scenario 1 (Only SVRC Pit), discussed in Appendix A, we used two dewatering wells. For the Section 20 Pit, the applicant plans to install both drains and wells to mitigate upgradient mounding, and simulate downgradient recharge through a surface recharge pond located outside the center of the downgradient liner (Civil Resources, 2021 Sheet 6). To date, we are uncertain what Monarch's mitigation plan will entail, so we chose to evaluate the use of exfiltration drains. We believe that installing downgradient exfiltration drains will be more cost effective and require less maintenance and augmentation challenges than using recharge ponds, which is why we used them in this analysis. For Scenarios 2-5, we evaluated horizontal infiltration drains to mitigate mounding. Groundwater flow into a drain is controlled by the conductance term (COND) which is a function of the drain area, permeability of the gravel fill around the drain and depth below the water surface. We assume a 1 foot cross-sectional drain surrounded by gravel with a hydraulic conductivity (K) of 400 ft/day. COND is calculated internally by the model using the digitized length of drain across each model cell. Fora 100 foot -long model cell, COND = 40,000 ft^2day (400 ft/day x 1 ft x 100 ft). We determined the depth of each upgradient drains by trial -and -error to achieve zero drawdown, and then iteratively "hard wired" that amount as recharge using the Modflow "Recharge" package. Using this approach to simulate exfiltration drains, we were able to spread the water out over a longer stretch than could be achieved using a real drain where the water will drain alo n g the path of least resistence. We report the predicted drain flow for each model scenario which, in reality, will vary depending on the drain design and site -specific aquifer properties. Pit Scenario 2 — Only Section 20 Pits Figure B1 shows the impact of liners installed in Section 20 Pits under Scenario 2. The model predicts mounding in the range of +1 to + 6.2 feet in approximately 25 wells. Shadowing is expected in the range of +1 to + 6.4 feet in approximately 87 wells. We did not tabulate the well owners affected since it is not the purpose of this evaluation. To mitigate upgradient mounding Figure B2 shows a dashed yellow line that represents the upgradient drain and a solid yellow line representing the exfiltration drain along the northern pit boundary. The simulated drain flow is approximately 1467 gpm which reduces water level changes to nearly zero. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 5 of 58 Pit Scenario 3 - Only Monarch Pits Under Scenario 3 only Monarch Pits are simulated. The change in water levels associated with just the liner show mounding is expected in the range of +1 to + 4.2 feet in approximately 4 wells (See Figure B3). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -3.7 feet in approximately 76 wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if an upgradient drain is installed in front of Cell 1 (elevation 4742 ft) and Cell (elevation 4733 ft), and an exfiltration gallery is installed downgradient to reinfiltrate the groundwater (Figure B4). The simulated combined drain flow is approximately 1016 gpm. Pit Scenario 4 - Section 20 and Monarch Pits Under Scenario 4, both Section 20 Monarch Pits are simulated. Mounding is expected in the range of +1 to + 5.9 feet in approximately 27 wells (See Figure B5). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -6.4 feet in approximately 132 wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if upgradient and downgradient drains are installed at both pits (Figure B6). Model results show the infiltration and exfiltration drains will flow approximately 2373 gpm. Pit Scenario S —All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC) Under Scenario 5 only Monarch Pits are simulated together. The change in water levels associated with just the liners, shows mounding in the range of +1 to + 5.9 feet in approximately 27 upgradient wells (Figure B7). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -8.7 feet in approximately 133 downgradient wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if upgradient and downgradient infiltration and exfiltration drains are installed at both the Section 20 and Monarch pits. At the SVRC, we simulated two upgradient wells, each pumping 225 gpm (450 gpm total). Using an exfiltration drain (Figure B8), the total drain inflow is approximately 2367 gpm and exfiltration drain outflow is 2817 which includes the amount pumped. In the preferred mitigation run for SVRC, where pumped water is exported off -site into the CCWCD pipeline (Figure B9), the infiltration and exfiltration drain flows are the same (2367 gpm). Both mitigation runs are equally effective at reducing shadowing downgradient which is why the applicant prefers to discharge into the CCWCD drain. Table 3 summarizes each pit scenario impact and mitigation run. Table 3 - Pit Run Summa Pit Scenario Run Description Without Mitigation With Upgradient Mitigation Downgradient Mitigation Fig. Number or Wells with Water Level Change Fig. Well Pumping (gpm) Infiltration Gallery (gpm) Exfiltration Drain (gpm) Number or Wells with Water Level Change Mounding >1ft Shadowing >1ft Mounding >1ft Shadowing >1 ft 1 Only SVRC A11 2 4 Al2 400 na na 0 8 A13 400 na 400 0 0 2 Only Section 20 Pit B1 25 87 B2 na 1467 1467 0 0 3 Only Monarch Pit B3 4 76 B4 na 1016 1016 0 2 4 Section 20 and Monarch Pits B5 27 132 B6 na 2373 2373 0 0 5 Section 20, Monarch and SVRC (All Pits) B7 27 133 B8 450 2367 2817 0 0 B9 450 2367 2367 0 0 CONCLUSTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We conclude: 1. Over the past 20 years, rising groundwater levels in the G i 1 c r e s t area has been documented by the Colorado Geological Survey (Barkman and Others, 2014). McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 6 of 58 Groundwater levels increases of approximately 10 - 15 feet over the past 30 years are common over most of the model area. However, near the SVRC, monitoring well data suggests increases have slowed to only about 1 foot in the past decade. This is much less than the average 5 -foot seasonal fluctuation measured at the SVRC. 2. Based on updated recent depth to water maps, the depth to water near the SVRC site varies and in some areas upgradient of the pit are currently less than 10 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater levels downgradient near the mapped SPR are less than 5 feet from the ground surface. 3. Model simulations demonstrate that the SVRC liners will cause +/- 3.5 feet changes water levels up and downgradient which may increase levels above a depth of 10 feet. Potentially "impacted" wells are listed in the above tables. 4. Upgradient mitigation by pumping approximately 400 gpm from two wells can alleviate upgradient impacts (Figures Al2 and A13). 5. Carefully designed and constructed infiltration and exfiltration drains can effectively offset potential impacts. 6. We evaluated mitigation measures for the SVRC with and without other pits being constructed. In both options, upgradient dewatering will effectively mitigate upgradient mounding. We believe it would be more beneficial to vicinity property owners if pumped groundwater was transported off -site in a pipeline belonging to CCWCD. However, if that option is not approved, pumped groundwater can be reinfiltrated which will offset downgradient shadowing. 7. Other pits, including Monarch and Section 20 are expected to have much greater and broader impacts as shown in other model scenarios (Appendix B). 8. The combined impact of both the Monarch and Section 20 pits (Scenario 4, Figure B6) could impact hundreds of wells within a range of +9 feet of mounding to -6 feet of shadowing unless mitigation measures are implemented. 9. At all planned lined pit sites, careful mitigation using infiltration and exfiltration drains can effectively mitigate pit impacts. 10. We recommend that ongoing monitoring occur throughout the Gilcrest area to evaluate ongoing water level changes that may be naturally occurring or resulting from approved pit development. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 7 of 58 REPORT SUMMARY FIGURE 1 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; entail: demiis@mc;ranewater.com Page 8 of 58 FIGURE I Site Map Weld County, Colorado Sources: 1) JT Consulting Pit outlines; 2) Barkmann, 2014, Table 2017TM-1; USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Database; Google Earth Imagery (2021); Flap Legend [1 Studer Area Model Area Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Section 20 Pit Monarch Pit 'a- Eastern Slough* 'we + Western Slough* Western Canal Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex MW Section 20 Pit MW Mile Well W L -M-00 1 (ref. 2) DWR Wells Used for Geologic CharacterizationA O Domestic/Stock Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling 0 Municipal 'Standing Water per Goole Earth Image e June, 2021. u Q'e'�atering�,��ther/�JA � g "'Yellow symbols represent DW R that were not used for geologic characterization. Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NADg3/Colorado State Plane Forth, feet SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 9 of 58 APPENDIX A - GROUNDWATER EVALATION AND MODELING The proposed Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex (SVRC) is located approximately 2 miles west of Gilcrest, Colorado in Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 66 West (6th PM). The complex consists of two pits each consisting of approximately 40 acres. The site is located approximately 1 mile east of the South Platte River (SPR). In this appendix we will discuss: • The available data and study area hydrogeology; • Groundwater modeling assumption and model construction; • Model calibration; • Modeling results of the Pre -pit (pre -liner) run; • Modeled water level changes caused by the SVRC and mitigation options; and • Model error and uncertainty. In Appendix B (following), we evaluate the impact of other individual pits and joint impacts of combined pit scenarios. Available Data We compiled hydrogeologic data from: • Existing reports from the US Geological Survey, Colorado Geological Survey and Colorado Division of Water Resources (see Sources below); • Permitted well "completion reports" filed with the State Engineer's Office ("SEO" wells) located within approximately 2 miles of the proposed pit; and • Four monitoring wells installed around the SVRC and seven monitoring wells belonging to the Section 20 pit provided by J&T. Figure la, lb, lc and ld show the overall study area, model area, pit properties, permitted wells color coded by use, well permit numbers and SVRC and Section 20 private monitoring wells. They include 404 permitted wells located within the study area. Abandoned wells and other private monitoring wells were excluded because they cannot be impacted. The remaining wells shown on the figures are used for irrigation (226), domestic water supply (125), commercial (15) stock (7), industrial (4) municipal (2) and other purposes. Because the density of wells increases to the east toward the Town of Gilcrest, we did not utilize all the well data to characterize the aquifer. Figure 1 (shown before Appendix A) shows wells (colored yellow) that were excluded from the hydrologic data set. The remaining compiled data (Table Al) includes: the permit number, well owner, Colorado State Plane coordinate, USGS Digital Elevation Model (DEM) elevation, registered use, well depth, and reported static water level (SWL). Well use, depth and water level statistics are discussed below. HYDRO GEOLOGY McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 10 of 58 The hydrogeology of the SPR alluvial aquifer is described in detail by the US Geological Survey (Smith and Others, 1964, Hurr and Schneider, 1972, Robson, 2000, Lindsay and Others, 1998 and 2005). More recently, the Colorado State University, (CSU, 2013) updated the surface water and groundwater hydrology, while the Colorado Water Conservation Board prepared an extensive study on the SPR as part of the South Platte River Decision Support System (SPDSS) project (CDM, 2006 and 2013). In 2014, in response to observed evaluated water levels around Gilcrest (2 miles to the east), and LaSalle, the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) conducted a study (Barkmann and Others, 2014) focusing on groundwater level trends. Barkmann references the SPDSS data base for their analysis. The most recent geologic mapping was also prepared by the Colorado Geological Survey (Palkovic and Others, 2018), which we used to better refine the western edge of the alluvial aquifer. Surf cial Geology Figure A2 shows the site surficial geology mapped by the CGS (Palkovic and Others, 2018). The model area consists of alluvial deposits within the SPR floodplain. The alluvium consists of alluvial (Qa) sand and gravel (geologic map symbols: Qa, Qai, Qa2, and Qa3 ) based on their age (recent to older). The alluvial aquifer, consisting of mostly sand and gravel, extends below wind blow dune sand and loess (fine silt and sand) deposits (Qe) along the east side of the model near Gilcrest. Well Depth Figure A2 also shows the reported well depths from 288 wells (Table Al) ranging from 5 to 200 feet and averaging 58 feet within the study area. We assume that the depth of the wells is at the base of the alluvial aquifer (ie. top of bedrock). Assuming this, the alluvium appears to deepen from approximately 40-60 feet near the SPR to 80-90 feet along the east side of the model. Bedrock Elevation Figure A3 shows the elevation contours of the structural top of bedrock digitized from Robson and Others (2000) based on the ground surface topography above the floodplain combined with the elevation of bedrock determined from SEO well data. The well elevation data plotted from Table Al is consistent with the Robson contours and those prepared by the CGS (Barkman and Others, 2014, Fig. 7). The contours show that the bedrock drops abruptly from outcropping Fox Hills Sandstone west of the model into a paleochannel (erosional remnant) beneath the SPR. The bedrock surface rises in the center axis of the model and then drops into a deeper paleochannel that extends along the eastern side of the model beneath the Town of Gilcrest. This is consistent with the well depth data discussed above and shown in Figure A2. Water Levels We initially prepared a water table map (Figure A4a) using all SEO well data and contours prepared by Robson (2000). We then updated the map using SVRC monitoring well data measured in December, 2023 (Table A2) and Section 20 monitoring wells (Table A3) measured in December, 2021 (orange squares). The higher recent measurements near older wells suggest that water levels have risen approximately 10-15 feet in the pit vicinity since 2000 when Robson made his interpretation of reported values in the SEO well database. We updated more recent water level contours prepared by the Colorado Geological Survey that represent spring 2012 conditions (Topper and Others, 2014, Fig.10), using the recent monitoring well data and surveyed surface water elevations provided by J&T (Figure A4b, ref, blue diamonds). The resulting solid contours on Figure A4b represent CGS 2012 contours with dashed contours having a higher degree of uncertainty. The dotted contours were updated by MWE. We cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 11 of 58 believe Figure A4b represents recent, pre -pit conditions. We used Figure A4b contours and monitoring well level measurements to calibrate the groundwater model. Groundwater flows perpendicular to the water level contours, often preferentially through zones of higher permeability and thickness (the product of which is referred to as the transmissivity). The water table elevation at the southwest corner of the model is at approximately 4760 to 4770 ft (msl) and flows northwest toward the SPR. Most of the groundwater entering the model is from the south. The water table is tied to DEM elevations of the SPR at 10 -ft intervals. The water table gradient falls approximately 35 feet from approximately 4730 ft (msl) on the southwestern end to 4695 ft (msl) on the northwestern corner. The contours show that the SPR is a gaining stream throughout the reach. Depth to Water (ft) The CGS prepared a depth to water map using their spring 2012 water table (Barkmann and Others, 2014, Fig. 7) that shows shallow groundwater within 5-15 feet of the ground near the SPR and mapped sloughs, and near Gilcrest. We prepared an updated Depth to Water maps (Figures ASa, ASb, ASc, and ASd) using current water table conditions (Figure A4b). The maps show that the depth to water is mostly greater than 15 feet deep at the SVRC, Monarch and Section 20 pits, with shallower groundwater (within 10 -15 feet) upgradient. The depth to water is only less than 5 feet deep close to the SPR and in the vicinity of Gilcrest (Figure ASb). Seasonal Water 1 tlble fluctuations Monitoring Well WL-M-001 is located approximately 400 east of the north SVRC as shown on Figure A2. It was used by the CGS (Barkmann and Others, 2014, Table 2017TM-1) for their water level change evaluation. J&T provided us the continuous water level measurements plotted below. Depth to Water (ft) — Monitoring Well WL-M-001 (Barkmann, 2014, Table 2017TM-1) L ft 10 las 0 15 ct. 20 O 25 —Os D Cu 0 I —s epth to mater (ft) --II— Elevation (ft msl) - — Linear (Depth to Water (ft)) r-) I- hJ 0 1- s Ear; Date Cu t� tD t+� 1—s 4758.5 4753.5 4748.5 4743.5 4738.5 4..733.5 waft From this plot, we conclude: McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dermis@Ylcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 12 of 58 • The depth to water in the vicinity of the SVRC is approximately 15-20 feet below ground level; • Water levels away from the SPR fluctuate seasonally in the range approximately 5 feet per year; • High water levels occur in late September and early October most years; • The average water table level rose approximately 1 foot from 18 to 17 feet in the last decade; and • December water levels (used to upgrade the recent water table map (Figure A4b) closely represent the average water table depth, therefore • A reasonable "recent" average level plotted on Figure A4b is approximately 4741.5 ft. Saturated Aquifer Thickness We calculated the aquifer saturated thickness as the difference between the recent water table (Figure A4b) and the top of bedrock (Figure A3). Figure A6 shows how the average saturated aquifer thickens approximately 30 - 40 feet near the SPR to 60 - 86 feet within the paleochannel beneath the Town of Gilcrest. Well Yield Well yield is proportional to the aquifer saturated thickness. We plotted reported well yields extracted from the State's well database (Table Al) on Figure A7. Well yields range from 5 gpm for domestic wells to over 2500 gpm for irrigation wells. Aquifer Transmissivity Figure A8 shows the contoured aquifer transmissivity (T) which is the product of the aquifer hydraulic conductivity (a measure of permeability) multiplied by the saturated thickness (Figure A6). The computed transmissivity ranges from less than 50,000 gpd/ft near the SPR to over 300,000 gpd/ft near Gilcrest. The resulting transmissivity distribution used in our model is consistent with the CGS (Barkmann, 2014, Fig. E9) who reportedly refined aquifer properties from the SPDSS model (CDM, 2006, Fig. 7a). We plotted transmissivity values determined from SPDSs modeling which shows that our and Barkmann's values are typically higher. Hydraulic Conductivity (K) The transmissivity is equal to the hydraulic conductivity (K), a measure of permeability multiplied by the saturated thickness (Figure A9). The K distribution and values are similar to those determined for the Section 20 model (Civil Resources, 2021, Sheet 3). See "Model Calibration - Pre -pit Run" section below. MODELING We used the Groundwater Vistas (GV) pre and post processor (version 8.3 Build 87, Environmental Solutions, Inc.) to construct and run a MODFLOW2000 (Harbaugh et al, 2000) model and display the results. We exported processed cell -by -cell flow terms from the model into ArcView GIS software to process prepare report figures. The model consists of one layer, 180 rows and 220 columns using 100 -foot square model cells. (180,000 feet high and 220,000 feet wide). The active model area is approximately 12.7 square miles. Precipitation and evapotranspiration are not considered in the model runs because we do not expect there to be a significant change in either of these parameters resulting from pit lining or installing drains. Therefore, it is unnecessary to spend additional time to understand and simulate them. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dermis@Ylcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 13 of 58 Since both the pre -pit and post -pit steady-state runs represent average groundwater conditions, the differences shown in the figures below are average differences. As we will discuss later, these changes are comparable and sometimes exceed the average annual water table fluctuations. In addition, shadowing downgradient may actually benefit downgradient water users by dampening what was a natural increase in water levels. For this reason, we need to keep the discussion of "change" in perspective compared to seasonal changes that also will occur. Boundary Conditions The model is centered on the SVRC but extends up and downgradient approximately 2 miles. The model is rotated 40.49 degrees counterclockwise so that the SPR is parallel to the active western model boundary. Model cells west of the SPR were turned off (using Modflow "no -flow" cells) because significant groundwater flow does not flow underneath the SPR. The bottom bedrock surface was digitized in ESRI GIS software and imported into the model on a 100 ft grid. The south, north and east sides of the model consist of MODFLOW Constant Head (CH) cells that establish a fixed gradient within the stream alluvium. We assigned MODFLOW "River" cell stage elevations using 10m DEM data and interpolating in between. Modflow "River" Package We modeled the aquifer's connection to the SPR and sloughs located between the planned pits and the SPR using the MODFLOW "River" package which uses a streambed conductance term (COND) to calculated flow from one to the other in proportion to the hydraulic gradient between surface water and groundwater. . COND is calculated as the product of the streambed unit conductance (Ksb/m) times the wetted river area (length * width). Ksb is the streambed vertical permeability and m is the streambed thickness (m) which we assume is 1 ft so that Ksb/m equals Ksb. CDM-Smith (2006, Task 34.3 Streambed Conductance Figure 9) evaluated the streambed permeability at two sites (SC -O7 and SC -08 located within 10 miles of the SVRC pit, and came up with Kh values ranging from 137 ft/day to 377 ft/day. Tests conducted in 2009 by Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. (Denver, Co.) near Ft. Lupton (in Twn. 2N, Rng. 66W, Sec. 18) arrived at a Ksb value of 36 ft/day (Miller, 2009). Therefore, to be conservative, we decided to reduce the connection to the river by using a Ksb of 36 ft/day. For sloughs, we assume that fine-grained silt that accumulates and reduces Ksb by a factor of 10 to 3.6 ft/day. Using Google Earth imagery taken in October 2017, we measured the SPR river widths at the southwest corner of the model (115 ft), center (128 ft) an northwest (134 ft) corners of the model area (average = 126 ft). Representative MODFLOW River cell parameters are shown in the table below. For the eastern slough we measured the width at three locations along the "S" shape which averaged approximately 100 feet. For the western slough located west of the Monarch pits, the slough width averages 30 feet. Table A-4 shows COND variables. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 14 of 58 Table A-4 River Cell Parameters MODFLOW "River" Cell Parameters Location Width (ft) Length Cell (ft) Conductance Ksb/m Streambed (clayA-1) (ft^2/day) COND South Platte River 126 100 36 452400 Eastern Slough 100 100 3.6 36000 Western Slough 50 100 A 3.6 18000 Calculated CONDs range from 18,000 ft^2day for the western slough to 452,400 ft/2day for SPR River cells. The actual COND for each model cell is calculated by the model based on the digitized river or slough length in each "River" cell. The exchange of water between the river cells and aquifer is determined by multiplying COND by the head difference in the river and the underlying model cell. With such a high COND values (even for the western slough), we believe there is a free flow of water between groundwater and surface water in the model. Model Calibration - Pre -pit Run We calibrated the model to Pre -Pit Run (Figure A4b). The process of calibration involves changing hydraulic conductivity values until the modeled cell elevations closely match observed values for the model cells they are in. Figure A10 shows the modeled water table contours (aqua colored) compared to blue "target" contours (Figure A4b). The calibration "residuals" are the differences between observed monitoring well values compared to model generated output. Blue labels show where the observed values are higher than the modeled values, and red values are where observed values are below the modeled values. Calibration statistics and plotted observed verses modeled heads are shown in Table A-5. Table A-5 Pre -pit Run Calibration Statistics 4750 4745 0 4740 . 4735 a 4730 4725 3 4720 CD 4715 40 0 2 4710 i 4710 4720 4730 474►0 4750 Observed Water Table Elevation ift.msli Residual Mean 1.915 Absolute Residual Mean 2.141 Residual Std. Deviation 2.288 Sum of Squares 97.938 RMS Error 2.984 Min. Residual -0.912 Max. Residual 5.871 Number of Observations 11.000 Range in Observations 30.360 Scaled Residual Std. Deviation 0.075 Scaled Absolute Residual Mean 0.071 Scaled RMS Error 0.098 Scaled Residual Mean 0.063 If there were perfect match, the observed verses modeled data would plot on a straight line with a perfect 1:1 relationship. The best fit line shown above has a slope of 0.9996:1 which is a very close to perfect. The Root Mean Squared (RMS) error (2.984 ft) is the square of the difference between the observed and modeled values (aka "residual"). We feel this value is reasonable considering the data comes from two different years when precipitation recharge, well pumping, river stage fluctuations and agricultural return flow vary. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 15 of 58 Upon close inspection of the residuals on Figure A4b, the model does a good job matching heads at the Section 20 pit, but the modeled heads are 5-6 feet lower than observed levels at the SVRC. There appears to be a nearly a 10 -foot gradient across the SVRC site that the model does not closely replicate. We do not believe this is a critical for evaluating water level "changes" resulting from future lined pits since there is low risk that lined pits with mitigation will likely cause additional water level increases. Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Distribution We spent a considerable time trying to reduce the RMS by changing the K zoning and values. The K distribution was guided by the distribution created by Civil Resources for the Section 20 model (Civil Resources, LLC, December, 2022). Civil Resources (CR) "calibrated" their model to a Pre - pit water table constructed using monitoring well observations and published SEO well data. Their resulting K distribution showed a zonal increase from 370 to 805 ft/day from the SPR eastward through the SVRC and Section 20 sites (CR, 2022, Sheet 3). Our "best" calibration results occurred when we used a K zoning that increasing from 75 at the SPR to 400-600 ft/day at the SVRC and Section 20 sites as shown in Figure A9. Mess Balance Table A6 shows the model mass balance results of the Pre -pit Run (Run: Mein_SS6) which shows the inflow and outflow components that include alluvial aquifer inflow (19.84 cfs) and outflow (8.95 cfs), and 10.89 cfs (11.60-0.71) of river gains. Table A6 — Pre -Pit Run Mass Balance Mass Balance (cfs) Source Inflows Outflows Aquifer 19.84 -8.95 River 0.71 -11.60 Total 20.54 -20.54 Error= -0.006% The total aquifer inflow and outflow balance at 20.54 cfs. The mass balance error is less than .01 percent. 0.01% based on the difference between inflows and outflows. Wager Level Changes Caused by the SVRC Pit Scenario 1 (Run 1) simulates water level changes resulting from installing the SVRC liner compared to the Pre -pit Run. After installation, the model predicts water level changes up to plus or minus (+/-) 3.5 feet. Figure All shows the mapped change. The change is greatest at the pit walls but grades outward approximately ahalf-mile upgradient (mounding) and half -mile downgradient (shadowing). There are two registered wells within the mounding and four registered wells located within the shadowing areas summarized below. Well permit 58-WCB experiences the greatest mounding at +1.2 feet whereas Well permit 18824-U experiences the greatest shadowing. MCGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 16 of 58 Table A-7 Pit Scenario 1 Impacts - Only SVRC (without Mitigation) Water Level Changes in Registered Wells (Run 1) lit # Name Twn Rng See Modeled Change (ft) Link to DWR Permit Mounding (+) 58-WCB KROSH at HANSEN 4 N 66 W 30 v +1.2 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/C620058 54-WCB HANSEN, CASTOR 4 N 66 W 30 +1.9 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WellPermits/C620054 Shadowing (-) 19924-U EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 ' -2.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062686 19924-W EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.2 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062688 19924 -V -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062687 185466-A EATON CATTLE CO 4 N 66 W 19 -1.1 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0371951B With the depth to water being 10 to 15 feet deep at these wells (Figure A5d), the additional 1-3 feet of mounding in addition to the +/- 5 -foot seasonal fluctuation may cause flooding of basements if they exist. Therefore, we recommend monitoring and mitigation (drains or wells) upgradient of the SVRC to protect these wells. SVRC Mitigation Options We evaluated two mitigation options for the SVRC; both include installing two vertical dewatering wells upgradient of the SVRC to offset the expected mounding. For both runs, upgradient mounding will be eliminated by two pumping wells located approximately 800 feet apart, each pumping 200 gpm total (400 gpm total). The preferred option (Run 1 Mit-a) is to discharge the dewatering wells into a pipeline belonging to the CCWCD Water Conservancy District (CCWCD) which discharges approximately 3 miles to the north into the SPR. By doing so, the downgradient shadowing affect will increase due to drawdown from the extraction wells. Figure Al2 shows that the downgradient shadowing of -1 to -3 feet extending approximately one-half mile from the SVRC. Eight wells are affected and summarized in the table below. Pit Scenario 1 - Only SVRC (with Mitigation into CCWCD Pipeline) Downgradient Shadowing in Registered Wells (Run 1Mit-a) Permit # Name Twn Rng Sec Modeled Change (ft) Link to DWR Permit 19.924-U EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 s -2.7 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062686 19924-W EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.7 https://dwnstate.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062688 19924 -V -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062687 185466-A 4 N 66 W 19 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0371951B EATON CATTLE CO 14028-R UNITED WATER & SANIT/ 4 N 66 W 30 -1.5 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9061848 19924 -T -R EPPINGER LINDA KAY 4 N 66 W 19 -1.4 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062685 23014 BRECKON, HOWARD W 4 N 66 W 19 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9062965 11113-R 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9060576 HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 11114-R 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/9060577 HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 187426-A MORAN, TERESA 4 N 66 W 30 -1.3 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0385674D 19924 -R -R HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 4 N 66 W 19 -1.0 https://dwr.state.co.us/Tools/WeIlPermits/0343851 The second mitigation option is to install an exfiltration drain downgradient of the SVRC to infiltrate the 400 gpm pumped by the dewatering wells (Run 1 Mit-b). This was done iteratively by first determining the amount of upgradient pumping and then recharging that amount using the Modflow recharge package along a line of "Recharge" cells along the downgradient pit boundary. The combined effect of the upgradient mitigation and downgradient exfitration is that no wells will expereince any significant (> 0.5 ft) change in water levels as shown in Figure A13. McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 17 of 58 Although this run demonstrates that exfiltration drains are effective at mitigating downgradient shadowing, the applicant (CCWCD) believes that pumping into their pipeline is adequate. We agree because we believe that shadowing less than 3 feet will provide a benefit to homeowners who may be experiencing high groundwater conditions in recent years. In addition, a slight decline in water levels at the downgradient wells will not significantly reduce well yields. Model Error and Uncertainty Our modeled predictions include three types of error: 1) conceptual error (how the model is set up and what boundary conditions are used); 2) parametric error (how aquifer properties are measured and calculated); and 3) predictive error (which includes other influences such as seasonal recharge or climate change variations). It was beyond the scope of this project to quantitatively evaluate the sum of these errors. However, based on our professional opinion, we believe our model results are reasonably accurate for the purpose of this study. There is uncertainty in our predictions related to measurement and modeling error. USGS lOm DEM Data was used to assign ground elevations to off -site wells. The overall accuracy of expressed as the root mean square error (RMSE) for lOm DEM data for one study in (Haneberg, 2006) is 1.87 m or approximately +/- 6 ft. The accuracy of surveyed site well elevations data is much higher, probably within a tenth of a foot, and the accuracy of hand - measured water levels can vary several inches. SOURCES Barkmann, Peter E., Horn, Andy, Moore, Annette, Pike, Jeremy, and Curtiss, William. 2014. Gilcrest/LaSalle Pilot Project Hydrogeologic Characterization Report. Colorado Geological Survey, prepared for the Colorado Division of Water Resources and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. CDM-Smith, April, 2013a. South Platte Decision Support System Alluvial Groundwater Model Report. CDM-Smith, December 6, 2006. SPDSS Phase 3, Task 34.3 South Platte Alluvium Region Aquifer Property Technical Memoradum. Colorado Division of Water Resources (CDWR), June, 2023. Well permit website search: Memorandum. http://www.dwr.state.co.us/WellPermitSearch/ Colton, Roger B., 1978. Geologic Map of the Bounder —Fort Collins — Greeley, Area, Colorado. US. Geological Survey Map I -855-G. 1: 100,000. Civil Resources, LLC., December, 2022. Gilcrest Area Alluvial Groundwater Model — Potential Impacts of Proposed Gravel Mining. Prepared for Red Tierra Equities, LLC. Greenwood Village, Co. 80111 Colorado State University (CSU), December, 31, 2013. HB 12-1278 Study of the South Platte River Alluvial Aquifer. Report to the Colorado Legislature. Environmental Solutions, Inc. April 2023. Groundwater Vistas version 8.30 build 87. Developed by Jim and Doug Rumbaugh. https://www.groundwatermodels.com/ cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 18 of 58 Haneberg, August, 2006. Effects of Digital Elevation Model Erros on Spatially Distributed Seismic Slope Stability Calculations: An Example from Seattle, Wa. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, Vol. XII, no. 3, August, 2006, pp. 247-260. Hurr, R. Theodore, Schneider, Paul A., and Others, 1972. Hydrogeologic Characteristics of the Valley -Fill Aquifer in the Greeley Reach of the South Platte River Valley, Colorado. USGS Open File Report 93-124. Prepared in cooperation with the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Lindsay, D.A., Langer, W.H., and Knepper, D.H., 2005. Stratigraphy, Lithology, and Sedimentary Features of Quaternary Alluvial Deposits of the South Platte River and Some of its Tributaries East of the Front Range, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1705. Lindsey, D. A., Langer, W. H., and Shary, J. F., 1998, Gravel deposits of the South Platte River valley north of Denver, Colorado, Part B - Quality of gravel deposits for aggregate: U. S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 98-148-B, 24 p. McDonald, M.G., and Harbaugh, A.W., 1988, A modular three-dimensional finite -difference ground -water flow model: Techniques of Water -Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey, Book 6, Chapter Al, 586 p. Miller Groundwater Engineering, June 29, 2009. Groundwater model evaluations of the Broomfield Well Field. Letter report to Dennis McGrane, Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. Palkovic, Martin J, Lindsey, Kassandra O., Morgan, Matthew, L., 2018. Geologic Map of the Milliken Quadrangle, Weld County, Co. U. S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 18-02, 2 plates. Robson, S.G., Heiny, J.S., Arnold, L.R. 2000. Geohydrology of the Shallow Aquifers in the Fort Lupton- Gilcrest Area, Colorado. USGS Hydroologic Investigations Atlas HA -746-C. Sheet 2 of 5 — Altititude and Configuration of the Bedrock Surface. Smith, Rex O., Scheider, Paul A., Petri, Lester R., 1964. Ground -Water Resources of the South Platte River Basin in Western Adams and Southwestern Weld Counties Colorado., U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1658. cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 19 of 58 APPENDIX A -TABLES (not in text) cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 20 of 58 Table Al — SEO Well Data Used for Hydrologic Analysis (1 of 4) Permit Number Applicant Name COSPN — X COSPN Y — Well Use Well Depth (ft bgs) Depth to Bedrock (ft bgs) Bedrock Elev. (ft bgs} Yield (gpm} SWL (ft bgs) SWL Elev. 5-WCB 3184314 1351748 40 40 4685 -- 8 4717 MONGOMERY, VIOLET 633-WCB 3189427 1362510 32 32 4700 300 9 4723 BETZ, CARL 62457-DW 3179208 1346200 Dewatering 32 -- -- -- — -- FISCHER CONSTRUCTION 299322 BOOS, DONALD C 3184363 1345660 Domestic 60 -- -- -- - -- 268087 3191792 1356688 Domestic 60 -- -- -- -- -- EATON CATTLE CO 268086 3191792 1356688 Domestic 30 -- -- -- - -- HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 268085 3191862 1356664 Domestic 65 -- -- -- - -- HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 266836 CLARK GLENN & SANDRA 3182981 1343797 Domestic 60 -- -- -- - 232159 HENDERSON CONVENIENCE, LLC 3189642 1352388 Domestic 71 -- -- -- - 225280 GURLEY, GORDON 3187424 1343693 Domestic 40 -- -- -- - 187426 G UTFELDER, BEN L 3189434 1348160 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- - 187425 G UTFELDER, BEN L 3187081 1349373 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- - 185466 3189778 1350512 Domestic 3:1 -- -- -- -- -- EATON CATTLE CO 155687 BERNHARDT, HERBERT 3187538 1357432 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- -- 21.288 BAIER, JOHN H 3183700 1347234 Domestic 38 — -- -- -- -- 1.7583 HILDENBRANDT P L MRS 3183718 1344593 Domestic 48 -- — -- -- -- 17919-A HAREN THOMAS & CYNTHIA 3199325 1354611 Domestic 69 -- — -- -- -- 125566-A FARM BOY INC 3193791 1349232 Domestic 59 -- — - -- - 297336 KISSLER, JAMES D 3199436 1354355 Domestic 69 -- — - -- - 293470 ZABKA FARMS INC 3197391 1351934 Domestic 70 -- -- -- -- - 287458 LARA, REYMUNDO 3197578 1357305 Domestic 75 -- -- -- - - 260981 WIEDEMAN ROBERT & ESTHER 3193505 1349072 Domestic 90 -- -- -- - -- 251239 COGBURN NORM &JUDY 3196095 1349392 Domestic 30 -- -- -- - -- 207916 INGRAHAM, JOSHUA G. 3200120 1354708 Domestic 200 -- -- -- - -- 155183 WADDLE, RANDELL 3192134 1345135 Domestic -- -- -- -- - -- 80345 KAMMERZEL, GEORGE 3191831 "1361802 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- -- 74711 KAMMERZELLJR GEORGE 3191832 1362153 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- 53399 TUCKER SHELTON & ELOISE R 3192553 1359589 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- -- 17919 KCB LLC 3199397 1355113 Domestic 71 -- -- -- - -- 17101 INGERSOLL, LYLE 3189685 1341190 Domestic 40 -- -- -- -- - 21774 HODGSON, ALBERT 3194121 1359071 Domestic 30 27 4679 -- - - 275938 3189490 1352792 Domestic 59 58 4692 -- -- — HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 80345-A KAMMERZELL, GENE 3191831 1361802 Domestic 58 57 4650 15 20 4687 51636 TITCHENELL SR, JAMES E. 3192458 1358491 Domestic 34 32 4680 15 7 4705 268245 3188231 1358362 Domestic 135 97 4634 100 26 4705 BETZ CLIFFORD & TRACY 74711-A KAMMERZELL, GENE 3191807 1362152 Domestic 60 55 4671 30 20 4706 279370 JANECZKO, MICHAEL 3189246 1357432 Domestic 45 35 4678 15 6 4706 155687-A BERNHARDT, HERBERT 3187538 1357432 Domestic 25 19 4697 12 9 4707 225934 KNUTSON, RANDELL C 3194620 1355466 Domestic 50 45 4694 15 29 4710 267998 3197755 1355639 Domestic 80 75 4665 14 28 4712 BUCKENDORF MATTHEW & SUSAN 96112-VE BOHLING, FATIMER 3190443 1362273 Domestic 60 -- -- 15 18 4713 279437 NELSON CHARLES & PHYLLIS C 3195629 1355410 Domestic -- -- -- 14 29 4714 287458-A LARA, REYMUNDO 3197519 1357328 Domestic 51 -- -- 23 25 4714 1123 CAW EQUITIES LLC (LEMBKE, ROBERTA.) 3195517 1351127 Domestic 34 -- -- 15 34 4714 216684-A KARBOWSKI, RICHARD S. 3191992 1352433 Domestic 60 58 4691 15 34 4715 279438 OWENS, TOMM 3197132 1355419 Domestic 50 -- -- 15 26 4715 267999 HAREN THOMAS M & CYNTHIA 3197877 1356440 Domestic 80 75 4664 13 19 4720 23014 BRECKON, HOWARD W 3191502 1351098 Domestic 62 60 4689 15 28 4721 267997 WIEDEMAN CRAIG L & MICHELLE L 3197762 1354940 Domestic 80 75 4666 12 20 4721 187425-A 3187077 1349373 Domestic 55 51 4701 15 28 4724 GUTFELDER, BETTY A. 185466-A 3189498 1350501 Domestic 60 57 4698 15 30 4725 EATON CATTLE CO 251239-A HARDING CHARLES H & JULIE N 3196093 1349392 Domestic 60 58 4702 15 35 4725 297336-A KISSLER, JAMES D 3199382 1354371 Domestic 83 81 4670 15 24 4727 293470-A ZABKA FARMS INC 3197476 1352043 Domestic 62 58 4691 15 20 4729 187426-A MORAN, TERESA 3189430 1348160 Domestic 60 59 4701 15 31 4729 204050 JENKINS MARK & KAREN 3185519 1348707 Domestic 45 41 4708 15 19 4730 260982 WIEDEMAN ROBERT & ESTHER 3194539 1349103 Domestic 90 -- -- 14 25 4731 21288-A DANIELS, MARK J. 3183501 1346651 Domestic 54 -- -- 15 29 4732 560-WCB NESOM, ALBERT 3200717 1355124 Domestic 94 94 4654 -- 15 4733 84422 3189675 1341241 Domestic 77 -- -- 8 39 4734 FRITZLER, EDWARD J 155183-A WADDLE, RANDELL 3192144 1345136 Domestic 58 57 4708 15 31 4734 225280-A GURLEY, GORDON 3187424 1343673 Domestic 60 59 4708 15 32 4735 206387 FRANK, ALLAN 3186853 1346714 Domestic 52 50 4710 15 23 4737 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 21 of 58 Table Al — SEO Well Data Used for Hydrologic Analysis (2 of 4) Permit Number Applicant Name COSPN_ X COSPN Y _ Well Use Well Depth (ft bgs) Depth to Bedrock (ft bgs) Bedro (ft Elev. ( t bgs) Yield (gpm) SWL (ft bgs) SWL Elev. 270080 ARIAS, MICHAEL J. 3184442 1346854 Domestic 60 50 4712 15 23 4738 266836-A CLARK GLENN & SANDRA 3182981 1343797 Domestic 50 48 4.719 15 28 4739 155183-A DEROO, BRAD 3192134 1345214 Domestic 60 53 4712 15 26 4739 1336 HANSEN, CASTOR 3191567 1347134 Domestic 60 - -- - 20 4739 208693 BOOS, DON 3186895 1345028 Domestic 51 50 4715 15 23 474.2 14539-R BOOS DONALD C & BARBARA 3186993 1343853 Domestic 60 60 4709 -- 25 4744 1841.98 MARTINDALE JOHN & DELORES 3184822 1343796 Domestic 60 58 4706 15 20 4744 300729 EVANS, WILLIAM C. 3184502 1346194 Domestic 55 52 4710 15 14 4748 287838 VILL,ALOBOS, JOSE 3187288 1341014 Domestic 80 68 4704 15 17 4755 281801 MARTINDALE, DELORES 3186894 1341029 Domestic 72 69 4704 15 15 4757 282403 MARTINDALE, DELORES 3186852 1338648 Domestic 52 -- -- -- -- -- 262824 PTASNIK, MICHAEL) 3181481 1343929 Domestic -- -- -- -- -- -- 232768 ELMORE, STAN 3185981 1359627 Domestic -- -- -- - -- -- 169399 3181539 1344105 Domestic 54 -- -- -- — -- SCOTTDALE RANCH 4933 BERNHARDT, BEN 3186255 1359035 Domestic -- 35 4705 -- -- -- 232768-A 3185981 1359627 Domestic 48 39 4706 15 18 4727 LONG, CLIFTON 169399-A PTASNIK MICHAEL & JOY 3181539 1344095 Domestic 54 52 4714 7 27 4739 262824-A PTASNIK, MICHAEL 3181500 1343929 Domestic, 60 49 4719 15 25 4743 93438 RICE HAROLD E & DORIS A 3187167 1338572 Domestic -- -- -- 15 26 4751 5124 3180986 1355067 Domestic 45 43 4803 -- 15 4831 RUTT, ELMER 81-R BERNHARDT BEN & ESTHER 3187504 1359044 Irrigation 15 - -- - -- -- 738-R MICHEL, REUBEN 3192770 1357687 Irrigation 27 -- -- -- -- -- 7164-R 3187635 1347125 Irrigation 54 -- -- -- -- -- HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 42519-F BERNHARDT, DAIRY 3184728 1351757 Irrigation - - - - -- - 22306 -F -R BOOS, DONALD C 3186814 1345174 Irrigation 60 -- -- -- -- -- 19924-V EPPINGER LINDA KAY 3190201 1349774 Irrigation 62 -- -- -- -- -- 19924-R PHELPS, WILLIAM E 3188861 1351089 Irrigation 55 -- -- -- -- -- 14477-F KASTEN CHERYL L & CARLENE M KASTEN 3182972 1352168 Irrigation -- -- -- -- -- -- 13688-R RED TIERRA EQUITIES, L.L.C. (LEMBKE, ROBERT) 3192832 1352427 Irrigation — -- -- -- -- -- 12462-R SCHMIDT ROY A & MELVIN C & CLARENCE 3192800 1355046 Irrigation 49 -- -- -- -- -- 10223-R UNITED WATER & SANITATION DIST 3195480 1355076 Irrigation 64 -- -- -- -- — 10222-R UNITED WATER & SANITATION DIST 3195480 1355076 Irrigation 50 -- -- -- - - 10044-R 3191482 1352419 Irrigation 75 - - - - — HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 955-WCB BISKAS, NICK 3186387 1340528 Irrigation -- -- -- -- -- -- 52-R UNITED WATER & SANITATION DIST 3199397 1355113 Irrigation 93 -- -- -- -- -- 51-R SMITS MARTIN & CECILIA 3199423 1355115 Irrigation 91 -- -- -- -- -- 50-R SMITS MARTIN & CECILIA 3199397 1355113 Irrigation 90 -- -- -- -- - 20461 -T -R TITCHENELL SR, JAMES E. 3192785 1359150 Irrigation 29 - - - -- 20461-T MCMILLEN F DEE 3192749 1359151 Irrigation 30 -- -- - -- -- 13671-F-R RED TIERRA EQUITIES, L.L.C. (LEMBKE, ROBERT) 3196151 1351821 Irrigation 63 -- -- -- -- -- 13660-R CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DI 3191567 1347134 Irrigation - - - - -- - 13640-F RED TIERRA EQUITIES, L.L.C. (LEMBKE, ROBERT) 3194891 1351768 Irrigation 63 -- - - -- 10989-R WIEDEMAN, TERRY 3192913 1345820 Irrigation 96 -- -- -- -- - 4460-R PEVONKA JAMES E & ROSALIE R 3191426 1356355 Irrigation -- 34 4678 -- -- -- 20461-R HODGSON, ALBERT 3192754 1359074 Irrigation -- 30 4681 -- -- -- 7643-F MICHEL, REUBEN 3192770 1357687 Irrigation 27 25 4687 -- -- - 15499-F BERNHARDT, JACOB 3187683 1359814 Irrigation 35 35 4705 250 -- 14042-R FRANK, JANICE 3186685 1346496 Irrigation 60 -- -- 900 -- -- 54-WCB HANSEN, CASTOR 3189633 1346469 Irrigation 60 60 4703 900 -- -- 8818-F 3191462 1353726 Irrigation 63 60 4684 1119 -- -- HS LAND & CATTLE LLC 8302-R KAMMERZELL, GENE 3190651 1361021 Irrigation 48 47 4662 1800 12 4697 20461 -R -R HODGSON, LEE 3192794 1359536 Irrigation 32 27 4684 450 10 4701 13701-F BERNHARDT, HERBERT B 3187341 1355674 Irrigation 35 -- -- -- 15 4701 23881-F BERNHARDT, J 3189510 1359836 Irrigation 39 38 4676 1350 11 4702 739 -R -R FRONT RANGE LAND & LIVESTOCK 3192086 1357876 Irrigation 27 26 4686 525 8.5 4703 14523 -R -R 3188578 1357434 Irrigation 40 38 4673 1200 7 4704 BETZ CLIFFORD H & TROY L 591-WCB RYAN, MARY 3191426 1356355 Irrigation 34 34 4678 1000 7 4705 739-R FRONT RANGE LAND & LIVESTOCK 3192770 1357687 Irrigation 30 25 4687 -- 7 4705 15094-R MICHEL, REUBEN 3192770 1357687 Irrigation 27 25 4687 -- 7 4705 848-WCB MICHOL, REUBEN 3192770 1357687 Irrigation 30 25 4687 1000 7 4705 13042 -R -R WEBER, WAYNE 3201122 1354591 Irrigation 82 -- -- 1400 43 4706 14523 -R -R EHRLICH FEEDLOT INC 3188430 1357278 Irrigation 40 34 4678 1200 6 4706 14523-R PHELPS INVESTMENT CO 3188768 1357661 Irrigation 40 -- -- 1200 6 4706 62-WCB HANSEN & PURSE 3179713 1347320 Irrigation 62 61 4670 1200 24 4707 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 22 of 58 Table Al — SEO Well Data Used for Hydrologic Analysis (3 of 4) Permit Number Applicant Name COSPN — X COSPN — Y Well Use Well Depth (ft bgs) Depth to Bedrock (ft bgs) Bedrock Elev. (ft bgs) Yield (gpm) SWL (ft bgs) SWL Elev. 10682-R CULLOR, RACHEL F 3189000 1341842 Irrigation 97 -- -- — 22 4746 10682 -R -R CULLOR, RACHEL F 3189000 1341842 Irrigation 92 -- -- 1000 22 4746 10747-R PTASNIK MICHAELJ & JOY W 3183718 1344593 Irrigation 68 -- -- 1200 20 4747 10746-R PTASNIK MICHAELJ & JOY W 3183718 1344593 Irrigation 65 -- -- 1300 20 4747 13420 -R -R WESTERN EQUIPMENT & TRUCK INC 3189829 1338650 Irrigation 89 89 4688 1200 27 4750 13421 -R -R WESTERN EQUIPMENT & TRUCK INC 3190810 1338601 Irrigation 72 71 4710 935 30 4751 433-WCB LINDEN, CARL 3190309 1343174 Irrigation 97 -- -- 850 18 4751 20079 -S -R FRANK, VIOLA 3194094 1342405 Irrigation 91 89 4684 1100 21 4752 1747-R ASCHENBRENNER WILLIAM & PATRICIA J PAUL 3190309 1343174 Irrigation 98 -- -- -- 16 4753 11024-R MARTINDALE JOHN A & DELORES O 3187710 1339187 Irrigation 60 -- -- -- 15 4759 7026-R BRIGGS, CHARLIE 3186407 1337899 Irrigation -- -- -- -- -- -- 6371-R BESKAS NG TRUST 3186837 1338558 Irrigation -- -- -- -- -- -- 13626-R PTASNIK, MICHAELJ 3183739 1341958 Irrigation 60 -- -- - -- -- 11494-R PTASNIK MICHAELJ & JOY W 3182404 1342014 Irrigation 60 -- -- -- -- -- 11493-R OSTER, CHRIS C 31824.04 1342014 Irrigation 60 -- -- -- -- -- 11418-R MONFORT FEED LOTS INC 3197886 1363026 Irrigation 26 -- -- 600 5 4693 272-R SHABLE, ALVA L 3192446 1364493 Irrigation 42 - - 1200 19 4697 250-R AGGREGATOR LLC 3195071 1364449 Irrigation 42 -- -- 2500 13 4697 11419 -R -R 3199442 1362465 Irrigation 61 -- -- 143 28 4699 FIVE RIVERS RANCH CATTLE FEEDING LLC 13272 -R -R 3202383 1357245 Irrigation 70 69 4673 800 42 4700 FIVE RIVERS RANCH CATTLE FEEDING LLC 12065-R KAMMERZELL ANNA & GEO 3189214 1365679 Irrigation 42 -- -- 1000 9 4702 12740 -R -R ECKHARDT FARMS INC 3206775 1356221 Irrigation 104 102 4633 1250 33 4702 8895-F MONFORT FEED LOTS INC 3200648 1361742 Irrigation 65 -- -- 600 26 4704 8577 -R -R WESTERN EQUIPMENT & TRUCK INC 3204561 1357449 Irrigation 74 72.5 4668 900 36 4705 13437-R MONFORT FEED LOTS INC 3201979 1360439 Irrigation 63 - -- 1350 22 4708 13427-R 3199287 1359070 Irrigation 65 -- -- 1000 22 4710 FIVE RIVERS RANCH CATTLE FEEDING LLC 13438-R 3201325 1359788 Irrigation 60 -- -- 1350 22 4711 FIVE RIVERS RANCH CATTLE FEEDING LLC 2526 -F -R GRAHAM, DOUGLAS A 3207755 1352514 Irrigation 110 104 4631 673 23 4712 11588-R MOSIER, KATHRYN 3208230 1351753 Irrigation 83 -- -- 1200 22 4712 12740-R ECKHARDT LILLIE MRS 3206775 1356221 Irrigation 73 -- -- 700 22 4713 19923-R NESOM ALBERT & ANNE 3206092 1355231 Irrigation 72 - -- 750 25 4713 1.3118-F GILCREST TOWN OF 3201726 1347053 Irrigation 90 -- -- -- 35 4714 620 -R -R 3206115 1352620 Irrigation 99 99 4638 1200 23 4714 FRITZLER REAL ESTATE LLC 634-WCB BERNHARDT, JACOB 3187483 1360432 Irrigation 35 36 4701 250 19 4718 248-R KAMMERZELL GEORGE &ANNA 3189881 1363083 Irrigation 42 -- -- -- 10 4720 10943-F SCHAEFER CARL & VENICE 3203478 1348579 Irrigation 94 — -- 800 21 4721 10482-R SCHWINDT, RONNIE 3206125 1351300 Irrigation 95 99 4639 900 16 4722 14050-R GILCREST RESERVOIR COMPANY 3179737 1344679 Irrigation 60 -- -- -- 20 4724 16163-F NELSON, THYRA 3200007 1345496 Irrigation 98 97 4658 990 30 4725 13056-R HUNT DAVID W & KAYLEEN J 3202205 1344588 Irrigation 54 - -- -- 30 4728 592-WCB NELSON, HANS 3204855 1345971 Irrigation 51 -- -- 900 22 4731 12938-R HUNT, DAVID W. 3206147 1348654 Irrigation 34 -- -- 450 8 4735 11150-F 3204078 1346757 Irrigation 81 - -- 1000 13 4736 FRITZLER, JACOB 10449-R EHRLICH FEED LOTS INC 3184269 1360036 Irrigation 41 35 4715 280 13 4737 664 -R -R HUNT, DAVID W. 3199419 1343864 Irrigation 94 94 4667 900 22 4739 82 -R -R BERNHARDT, DAIRY 3184310 1359696 Irrigation 37 36 4717 500 13 4740 44472-F GILCREST RESERVOIR CO 3179839 1342742 Irrigation 43 42 4708 900 9 4741 11493 -R -R PTASNIK MICHAELJ & JOY W 3182515 1341340 Irrigation 70 70 4702 900 30 4742 4209-F PTASNIK MICHAELJ & JOY 3181066 1343358 Irrigation 52 -- -- 600 23 4742 12936-R HUNT, DAVID W. 3205487 1346644 Irrigation 32 -- — 350 8 4743 14043-R PTASNIK MICHAELJ &JOY 3181066 1343358 Irrigation 60 - - - 20 4745 664-R WATERMAN JULIUS & ZOLMAN E BROWN 3198242 1343236 Irrigation 54 -- -- -- 15 4747 19468-R NELSON HANS B & ERNA M C & HANS B 3203711 1344041 Irrigation 66 66 4700 650 17 4749 6373-R MARTINDALE, DELORES O 3186397 1339207 Irrigation 90 90 4684 1119 25 4749 210-R WPD STORAGE LLC 3195602 1340586 Irrigation 70 70 4698 1000 18 4750 6371 -R -R MARTINDALE, DELORES O 3186837 1338558 Irrigation 54 48 4730 650 24 4754 6372-R MARTINDALE, DELORES O 3186397 1339207 Irrigation 55 55 4719 915 20 4754 14541-RF PTASNIK MICHAELJ &JOY W 3183061 1340008 Irrigation 59 58 4717 950 20 4755 7025-R BRIGGS, CHARLIE 3186407 1337899 Irrigation 73 -- — 800 17 4760 1504 -R -R HUNT, DAVID W. 3189838 1334656 Irrigation 50 48 4737 700 25 4760 12674 -R -R 3189070 1336624 Irrigation 56 56 4723 1100 17 4762 MCGLOTHLIN, MARGARET 11158-F BROWN, ZOLMAN E 3199603 1340635 Irrigation 48 -- -- 400 10 4768 12564 -R -R TARIN, JOSE C 3195745 1338908 Irrigation 52 51 4723 150 5 4769 1501-R COMING, IONE 3191739 1335385 Irrigation 49 -- -- -- 16 4770 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 23 of 58 Table Al — SEO Well Data Used for Hydrologic Analysis (4 of 4) Permit Number Applicant Name COSPN — X COSPN — Y Well Use Well Depth (ft bgs) Depth to Bedrock (ft bgs) Bedrock Elev. (ft bgs) Yield (gpm) SWL (ft bgs) SWL Elev. 82-R BERNHARDT, BEN 3184945 1357668 Irrigation 40 -- -- 1500 10 4775 12053-R HUNT, DAVID V 3195651 1336730 Irrigation 47 -- -- 900 4 4778 12055-R HUNT, DAVID W. 3195651 1336730 Irrigation 57 -- -- 1000 4 4778 12565-R TARIN, JOSE C 3197146 1338685 Irrigation 10 -- -- 700 2 4779 12054-R HUNT, DAVID W. 3196972 1336732 Irrigation 47 -- -- 400 4 4784 63802-MH NOBLE ENERGY INC 3187423 1355160 Monitoring 15 -- -- -- -- -- 63296-MH 3189653 1346609 Monitoring 65 -- -- -- -- -- J-2 CONTRACTING CO (LEONE, CHRIS) 63185-MH NOBLE ENERGY INC 3187448 1355141 Monitoring 18 -- -- -- -- -- 63178-MH PDC ENERGY INC (OLSON, KAREN) 3185519 1354639 Monitoring 11 -- -- -- -- -- 63110-MH PDC ENERGY INC (OLSON, KAREN) 3186422 1355068 Monitoring 11 -- -- -- -- -- 62197-MH PDC ENERGY INC (OLSON, KAREN) 3186447 1353760 Monitoring 5 -- -- -- -- -- 22510-MH NORTHERN COLO WATER CONSERVANCY DIS 3192864 1349786 Monitoring 34 -- -- -- -- -- 3252.11 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3194845 1351884 Monitoring 47 -- -- -- -- -- 325206 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3194165 1354234 Monitoring 52 -- -- -- -- -- 3252.05 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3192973 1352114 Monitoring 53 -- -- -- -- -- 32.4583 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3187210 1346548 Monitoring 55 -- -- -- -- -- 324582 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3191512 1350298 Monitoring 60 -- -- -- -- -- 324581 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3189484 1348467 Monitoring 60 -- -- -- -- -- 324580 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3187792 1350076 Monitoring 60 -- -- -- -- -- 32.4579 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3191641 1352476 Monitoring 60 -- -- -- -- -- 324578 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3190150 1355025 Monitoring 40 -- -- -- -- -- 285471 GILCREST RESERVOIR COMPANY 3181150 1345896 Monitoring 41 -- -- -- -- -- 3252_10 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3193448 1349270 Monitoring 51 -- -- -- -- -- 325208 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3197470 1351056 Monitoring 52 -- -- -- -- -- 325207 RED TIERRA EQUITIES LLC 3197433 1353254 Monitoring 52 -- -- -- -- -- 261609 PRIMA OIL & GAS 3189687 1361068 Monitoring 23 -- -- -- -- -- 163692 CENTRAL COLO WTR CONSERVANCY DIST 3193509 1346459 Monitoring -- -- -- -- -- -- 324577 MONARCH MOUNTAIN MINERALS AND AGG 3191921 1355495 Monitoring 50 40 4686 -- -- -- 320417 LAFARGEHOLCIM / AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES (D 3191995 1361442 Monitoring 30 -- -- -- 15 4701 260892 PRIMA OIL & GAS 3189701 1360983 Monitoring 23 -- -- -- 9 4703 260893 PRIMA OIL & GAS 3189726 1360988 Monitoring 24 -- -- -- 8 4704 261610 PRIMA OIL & GAS 3189603 1360862 Monitoring 23 -- -- -- 8.5 4704 260775 PRIMA OIL & GAS 3189675 1360913 Monitoring 26 -- -- -- 5 4708 42858-MH TPI PETROLEUM INC 3194146 1352425 Monitoring 30 -- -- -- 21 4724 19084-MH NORTH FRONT RNG WTR QUAL PLNG ASSOC 3191567 1347134 Monitoring 35 -- -- -- 19 4740 61795-MH GREAT WESTERN OPERATING CO LLC 3187825 1361697 Monitoring 24 -- -- -- -- -- 38036-MH 3184917 1360404 Monitoring 19 -- -- -- -- -- HALL-IRWIN, CONSTRUCTION 38034-MH HALL-IRWIN, CONST 3183624 1357678 Monitoring 19 -- -- -- -- -- 316916 UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 3179684 1344940 Monitoring 43 57 4687 -- -- -- 316920 UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 3179766 1343608 Monitoring 46 45 4701 -- -- -- 316918 3179797 1343604 Monitoring 45 44 4703 -- -- -- UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 316917 UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 3179633 1344936 Monitoring 40 40 4703 -- -- -- 316921 UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 3178855 1344919 Monitoring 37 37 4706 -- -- -- 316926 UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 3178636 1345679 Monitoring 33 33 4707 -- -- -- 316925 3178644 1345631 Monitoring 33 33 4708 -- -- -- UNITED WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 64179-DW FISCHER CONSTRUCTION 3179874 1344856 Monitoring 37 -- 4750 -- 6 4744 285473 GILCREST RESERVOIR COMPANY 3180722 1343484 Monitoring 31 -- -- -- 10 4745 11685 -R -R HILL, V 3194180 1349792_ Municipal -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005102-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189513 1360946 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005090-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189332 1360864 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005103-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189593 1360952 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005100-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189737 1361027 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005099-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189692 1361064 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005098-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189705 1361046 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005097-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189764 1361003 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005096-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189595 1361020 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005095-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189593 1360947 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005094-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189736 1360908 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005093-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189659 1360853 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005092-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189649 1360995 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 2005091-AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189575 1360917 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 63753-1 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DI 3197992 1351889 Other 72 -- -- 1250 34 4719 2005101 -AB BUYS & ASSOCIATES 3189554 1364066 Other -- -- -- -- -- -- 538-WCB ROOT, CHARLES 3191444 1355035 Stock 31 30 4697 5 18 4709 3740 OWENS TOMM & DEBORAH 3196800 1355090 Stock 61 -- -- -- 26 4716 Count 324 283 118 -- 167 204 -- M i n 5 19 -- 5 2 -- Max 200 104 -- 2500 43 -- Average 58 56 -- 693 21 -- McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 24 of 58 Table A2- SVRC Monitoring Well Water Levels Well Designation Existing Monitor Well JT MW -1 _ JT MW -2 JT MW -3 Description Southwest Corner Northwest Comer Northeast Comer Southeast Comer Top of Well Elevation (ft) 4765.11 4754.77 4757.78 4763.64 Ground Elevation (ft) 4762.38 4752.57 4755.56 4761.50 Date Depth to Groundwater from Top of Well (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Ground (ft) Elevation of Groundwater (ft) . Depth to Groundwater from Top of Well (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Ground (ft) Elevation of Groundwater (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Top of Well (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Ground (ft) Elevation of Groundwater (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Top of Well (ft) Depth to Groundwater from Ground (ft) Elevation of Groundwater (ft) . October 26, 2023 16.17 13.44 4748.94 November 17, 2023 17.25 14.52 4747.86 17.00 14.80 4737.77 17.96 15.74 4739.82 16.00 13.86 4747.64 December 22, 2023 18.63 15.90 4746.49 18.10 15.90 4736.67 18.83 16.61 4738.95 17.25 15.11 4746.39 January 20, 2024 19.54 16.81 4745.57 18.92 16.72 4735.85 20.00 17.78 4737.78 18.25 16.11 4745.39 Note: December 22, 2023 water levels used in Pre -pit Run model calibration Table A3- Section 20 Monitoring Well Water Levels (From J&T Consulting) Date Measured Drilling estimate 11/4/2021 12/28/2021 3/16/2022 5/23/2022 6/22/2022 7/15/2022 Date Measured 12/28/2021 3/16/2022 5/23/2022 6/22/2022 7/15/2022 Section 20 Groundwater Monitoring Program* Monitoring Well MW -1 MW -2 25 24 26.4 25.5 26.6 25.9 26.7 25.7 26.7 24.4 28.6 I 24.4 MW -1 MW -2 4,725.90 4,717.50 4,725.70 4,717.10 4,725.60 4,717.30 4,725.60 4,718.60 4,723.70 4,718.60 MW -3 25 21.1 21.4 20.6 19.9 18.7 MW -3 4,723.70 4,723.40 4,724.20 4,724.90 4,726.10 MW -4 23 28.4 28.3 26.2 24.1 24.5 MW -4 4,728.60 4,728.70 4,730.80 4,732.90 4,732.50 MW -5 MW -6 MW -7 -- 14 27 30.2 22.2 28.8 30.2 22 28.6 28.2 20 I, 27.8 27.6 18.7 26.3 27.2 18.5 26 MW -5 MW -6 MW -7 4,733.90 4735.3 4,726.82 4,733.90 4735.5 4,727.02 4,735.90 4737.5 4,727.82 4,736.50 4738.8 4,729.32 4,736.90 4739 4,729.62 Notes: *All measurements are from table provided in Final Report 120222 - fart 1 39.pdf **December 28, 2023 water levels used in Pre -pit Run model calibration Tables A4 - AS in Text cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 25 of 58 APPENDIX A - FIGURES cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com Page 26 of 58 I r c 6111IC B 15499-F 83-f 2682451 54-R 155687 1556,87-A J 2488 631-C B w�' r 14523-R R 279370 14524-H. E841 - CB irtSiesa 13 i4 "sir c • ses! I� rkip Otabike- 7*Pf 13703-R � I.: di I� �av el 232159 1 D04" -R a• a 275938 _ 74, -A .,80345-A _- ' ^a se. 20461-S 53390 20 61-R7R 2 1 -T -Ft tit 51636 739-8-R 7643-F HI738-R 1509:44R 8 46-` CS 268087 26808 268086 447,4460-R 591 -'fee 1 9924 -R -R FIGURE Ala SEA► Well Data Used for Hydrogeologic Analyses Weld County, Colorado Sources: 1)11 -Consulting Pit outlines; 2) Barkrnann, 2014, Table 2017TM-1; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USG5 DEM 1Orn; COSS Well Database I 538-MCS 12461-R 5656-R 487 -Wee 1;462 -R -R MW -1 31689-I \-R 23014 w 21T74 M 2 13690-R T 422- CE 12008-R 664 12006 1, 010 -Ise -R 275-183-A 114175-R 13426-R 225934 279437 10223-R 10222-IR. 6582-F 13640-F 13176- 1 R 13427-R 671084 87458-A 27943 374CI 321654 91101-VE 6794* 2992,4-F - 55663- 293-.F 55064,E 267998 267997 _ A4W-3 •3 52'-R X67999 17919-,A 5a=I�•;1�29.i336-A ' Y Y ..11 et $° ,f 44 A 6 -R -R 13671 -F=R 63753-F 1023 Soo 1,000 �Y rte. YT °Z 11 687 -R -R I II et Map Legend DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Dewate ri ng/other/N A. s I Study Area Model Area *Standing water per Coogle Earth Image June, 2021 Western Canal ,r- Eastern Slough* is%%.,+ Western Slough* Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Section 20 Pit NA W Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet .--j vairsaw siasaokk.A.fra Page 27 of 58 I !1 i : `-.� 'j 0' 2593 279437 1 03;•cti., 10222- R 279438 3740 321654 Li658 2-F Alf 138404 131'9!- ieIA ` L. t ' t r A 1123 267998 267997 4Y6-WCB 52-R - 13043-R 63750-F 3;1 5-WC'B 5819-R- uuQAiiQI_��,��, ®- B 1304, R°R. 59,544 1'919-.A _ -R-R 2°79164-rav- 1i 3671 -F -R A'' 63153 -F 610-WC8 12091-F 260982 ameset 251239-A W-5 12661-R 59956-F 10'998 -R -R 63754-F - - ti 7 NU -41N 20031-R 20031-S 20031-T 231167 12092-F 9 52-Ra 24179 9:5.3, -R -R, 297336a .5'951-F 7554,0_,F41534a f� I'y 11687 -R -R 209-R _ 59953-F 63758-F ,13959-11-R 11-R 63759-F 208-R 842-I'CB 207-R 631-R 12791-R- 287311 0132-R FIGURE Alb SEO Well Data Used for Hydrogeolo ie Analyses Weld County, Colorado s 1 2 curses: } JT Consulting Pit outlines; 2) Barkmann, 2014, Table 017TM-1; Goggle Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEI'+10 100; DSS'V'Vell [database 630-R 59852-F 14959 -'R -R 2888674 619-R 62 --R-R 3=F igis 63757-F 1992.3-S -1274 6-R-Fks„ 140118 49286 63756f �„ 19923-R _ 87 _.I 11324-R } e)• 213562a 515-WCS 790%-F �A 665 -WC L3 432 -WC Et 47041 -F 59739-F 14968-R 131111-F 1! 311 9- F' -R. 31(3561 4838-F 109834 1239D. R 33342 644-w0 B 15'8311-A 3607-F 273505-A 601 62444 L 1 3A 620 -R -R 10482-R 30069 x'034 3507-A ' 277496_A MB 129.39-R 11150-F dr 20025 -R -R 500 -WC B 1305£-RO 500 1,000 / 2,000 13057-R 13058-R fMMII Feet 29 BaR 12937-R 12936 -Re AA Map Legend D' 'R Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock a Irrigation Municipal Dewatering/Other/NA =I Study Area Model Area *Standing water per Google Earth Image June, 2021 Western Canal Eastern Slough* Lined Section 20 Pit Li Section 20 Pit MW Date January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet r••s - crarellc.rJe. any alja isillisilliere I 44 fir '4.s. tor Page 28 of 58 13661-R 13659-R 1336 306 -F -R 208693 225280-A 433-VIC EI 1-747-R 10,6 - R- 81801 287338 11024‘R 155183-A 155183 725 -WC g 90'4 -WC B 1 0-g8G-R 1'997-Ra 260980 1 '46-R- I 63747-F 13420,R,R 13421 -R -R 2874-8-R 5549-F 277164-A 1504-R-1 . FIGURE Mc SEO Well Data Used for Hydrogeologlc Analyses Weld County, Colorado Sources: 1) JT Consulting Pit outlines; 2) Barkmann, 201, Table 2017TP+/1-1; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 1Orn; CDSS Well Database _.: 1 x4146 -At Map Legend DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Dewatering/other/NA 757'12-F 1 0987-iR 75.614 10988 -R -R h .63754-F 20031-U 20031-V 20079-1 20079--R 20079-R 12564 -FL -I 12055-R 12053-R IICV- i 0 tSt? Lined Monarch Pit Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83 Colorado State Plane North, feet 12791 -R -R 287'311 2O773 93952 30'023 12.565-8 096EA► 12054-R / ,2969- / :01 2,000 Feet 62451 -OW FIGURE Aid SEo Well Data Used for Hydrogeologic Analyses Weld County, Colorado Sources: 1� JT Consulting Pit outlines; 2) Barkrnann, 2014, Table 201?TNI-1; Goggle Earth Imagery (2021); USG5 DPM 10rn; CDSS Well Database 2993.22 723-WCE 17583 10746-R 10747-R 2,66836-A 114'9; -R-R Map Legend CS R Wells - by use type Domestic/ took ©' irrigation Dewatering/other/NA I Studer Area Model Area *Standing water per Coogle Earth Image June, 2021 204050 187425a 1 X 264: 308-F.R X208693 225°280-x, \Western Canal le 'a% Western Slough' Lined Svtireet Valle Reservoir- Complex Pit Lined Monarch Pit Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 29 of 58 232159 10045-R 199,24-V- 19924-11 1 1 G5_R 136011 Li 13661-R S4=1'CB 'pi 58 -WC g 433 -Wee. 1741-R 2,000 Feet 13419 -R -R Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex MW W -001 yet. Page 30 of 58 / 42 o, 32 �e , 26‘ , I ' / x.8'1 24�s� -• � 65 / ■ . / a I. �. wt.�'! 30 w ? '...al �,'J • T 31719 0 5 I - 'as Y! �. -,� y _ Igo PiNk : _ "° 1 '. v / / y �!�' z_ , }A / 'ig a34 ' ' 19 40 15 "'0 27 'w se -' Ak ,ir, e � � , � � ,.Nis //of .I 0 454140 keen t � 65 RD ty, T 3 ,1 ' w -s 8. 72 / 45 A� , �- - � 0 3t 49 6i �( 1: 93i 9180 0 0 �� A � I etitl ,,, A tan / 50a48 �' °°61 69 ,ilsi I,� tern --- r. 50 0 _ -' __ 82 / 63 Qe ( a 3 69 5 90 ee 52 g:.?,) tlietf 9 '� / 77 - � -1 - ��; py 70 Pi* FAA 75 60 do Ivry, • X01 3 �.� 6�' P.. 9 110 2 ®... Kfh 40 40 - rie72 �' - 63 L." �- r LI S i 58 . 0 2 04 �4, 102 A. F e ; ''' s ��'( ° gay52 I �� i t°e S 85 Qe Stga,11, A -4 i E.!' �L 58 8 I Lio62 A1F a. wn, ._�A, eT ' 62 ! 451 Livuu 34 If�4. 60 , ` a° �L .5Y 60 n a 4l y61) itt 90 90 • J?'4 _. A IL.� n,w - 18 5 , ,tl 60ill e• 57 47 ! 35 96 80 / I 1_ e / n .e la �,�, 80 r: q• ,b JP ,� A /32 � a } 8 1 0 5 62 `_. 96 / ,32 {, A110 L• / '� 96 � 1t A33 49 G0 60 �� X98 1g il+� �'If 581 R 51 ere74 it \ 437 65 , 68 58, 40 Y e f fr� e�!° 97 LLI 46A G+ f ' � , � '2 r�j�J1 '! f r t � ,� �� ¢7 .��J"■`} T �./ � 94 Of 3% e a �4,n 31 yy r,A60 Nfr 62 4�y A98 1' �eli� 9: - Q. Gas, yy�' � / At 5� w - 60 60 ...-eJ70 i�ee M' / 1! AI�N b • NW 7 ti 48 / A / � 59 Y'r / 55 W ^� ` 'lam ,L1. !, .Y( / / I. i• 7 — /y ! 6 Nr % , w 1 a % N, 47 47 / q / `��' � .� I - %.56 n 57 n / N• wr . 0- #' N. ,ere 4'9 r / / / 0 0.25 0.5 1 , , N. 50 / Mlle \ J _ "1/4 -- !'- FIGURE Surficial Weld County, A2 Geology Colorado and _ Well Depth Map Legend Geologic Unit (modified from: OF -18-02) -- Q Model Area Western Canal Disturbed Alluvium Eolian L.J DWR Depth Study Wells (ft) < 25' Area - Well a aim. �8 Eastern Western Slough* Lined Slough* Sweet Ground Artificial (af) Alluvium (dg) Fill Three Gravel deposit (Qgi) (Qa3) sediment (Qe) One Conglomerat (OgMiC) n 25' to 50' valley Reservoir Gravel A 50' to 75' Complex Pit (Qa) deposit p Tw Fox o Hills SS Alluvium (Kfh) Lined Section A 75' to 100' One (Qgz) (Qai) > 100' 20 Pit Alluvium T Consulting Pit outlines; Goo le Earth Imagery 2021 � g g Y ( ), USGS DEM 10m; Milliken Quadrangle Geologic Map OF -18-02, Palkovic et al. (2018) Lined Monarch *Standing water per Google Pit Two (Qa2) Earth Image g June, 2021 Date: January 2024 cA4 - Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane �-. North, feet ,.,r.. 470 r 4.705 701 4705 4698 4681 46130 1361, ES/ 41551 ;78 44192 4698 4693 4703 4704 FIGURE A3 Bedrock Elevation Weld County, Colorado Sources: IT Consulting Pit outlines; Googte Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; COSS'ti11,''ell Database; Robson (2C 00) 46 68 441675 .- �_ 4684 t pal - 415511 4702 '4688 . 4737 Map Legend Study Area Model Area DWR Well with Bedrock Elevation Data Western Canal '' Eastern Slough' "“ Western Slough Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Gate: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NADg3/'Colora.do State Rune North, feet Page 31 of 58 EN. lb {all; 4frag Bedrocks Elevation Contour (revised from Robson [20001) *Standing water per Google Earth image June„ 2021 Page 32 of 58 4730 4 707 Aid 67W 1718 4 704 4740 4/2/ 4717 4'17 4701 4 70:, 4721. deli 47,21 _ 47 ZB 4711 472� 411-24 4731 471.5 o'a 0 4725 4737 431 477 4732__ 4738 z 489 - 47413. 4145 5 41.47471111 4N 46,99 4707*, 4 710 4709 4714 4715 471'.0 4/1.2 4728 4715 4724 4714 �� 472 4735 4728 473,9r 4729 473 4), 41/5 4 738 472A 47x:91 4.739 4740 4739 e,, 4748 4748: 444 4737 4746 474f 4734 41S-4‘4149.. 4759 x511 4151 ail 7,261 4750 -4771 4i3-4 4714 4720 47'1' 4721 4715 4726 1 4719 4119 4 473 4'18 4737 4731 47391 4'47 Ort-, F -v 476,8 4700 "1.7 2 2 4121 �aagn N4713 4102 N 4/13 441 47'31 • nest N. FIGURE A4a Year 2000 Water Table Weld County, Colorado Sources: (1) Civil Resources LLCM October 14, 2022. Memo to Robert L+embke titled "Modification to Model in Response to DRMS Comments."; (2) Barkmann and Others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Survey Open File 1,3-06, Fig. 1.0; (3) J&T Consulting_ Monitoring Well Data; Robson, 200O; ESRI World Imagery (2021); USES DEM 10m 47x`0 .4 t•-. 1 4760, 4 - �N tSb. - 4778 4778 4784 /s 'tom 0 025 0.5 Mile Map Legend re :I Study Area Model Area Section 20 Pit Monitoring Well - Summer 2022 (ref. 1) Stream Paint E=levation' Meining Monitoring' Well - Observed November 023 (ref. 3) 0 DWR Well with S ►+'L Data Water Table Contour Western Canal 2.re Eastern Slough* "'se! Western Slough' Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit (revised fron-i Robson [2000]) interval = 2a' *Standing water per Google Earth image June, 2021 Cote. January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet 1.‘11s L _ _ .io • - 473' X4707 FIGURE A4b 4N 6iYil 471,7 4117 ' 4104 4.120 41720 4723 4713 706 441P7 47O4 4 b ; 47191 _ 47.00 +' 4704 4102 4722 4705. 4317 4705 17131 47(.1S 4707 1.. 4 70 6 470 470$ 47C 4708 4 4705 ' /Sr _ 47O1 4709 -,. 1/41,1'.10* s � � .„ � 4710 4714,471c 471 4709 4715 4714` il � F * * _4715 4733 4716 4/1b 4715 _47°6 4/2e 44728 4 715 4 724 471S S ,''T 14721 i:1:1'> yo 472 4711e 1 1m � 'Ill? _ d at r4'1(t20 s * * f lb* ..... - e . - 4114 4/19 471.9 j 4729 4718 tE ^u rt!`^Mai l _- : t- 1� �I 7r •� 4I 41)5 4725 .F4.13437-124; lir .4 7 2 a 7 4 nil 30 , �'�' `'41 . 41771 4737 _ 47415 47 3) : a 41711; 3 4739 479 4140 a 4732 : 473B 41737 4739 41608 4 748 4/39 F 4740 ''a'737 4732 4745 ... A 47S. Recent Water Table Weld County, Colorado of pa. .4.4 39 4734' it 4746 4746 4757 4755 4734 Sources: (1) Civil Resources LLC, October 14, 2022. memo to Robert Lembke titled "Modification to Model in Response to DBMS Comments,"; (2) Barkmann and Others, 2814, Colorado Geologic Survey Open File 13^06, Fig. 10; (3) .1&T Consulting Monitoring Well Data; (4) Barkmann, 2014, Table 2017TM-1 FSRI World Imagery (2021); USES DEM 10m 4760 Map Legend r , Studer Area Model Area Stream Point Elevation* Meining MW — Observed November 2023 (ref. 3)* Section 20 Pit MW - CI Observed December 2021* (ref. 1 ) 0 Well WL-M-001 (ref. 4) x'722 4745 f ,476 4719 Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NADR3/Colorado State Plane North, feet 1.250 2, 500 DWR Well With S L Data Western Canal Eastern Slough* Western Slough* Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir lets, Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Page 33 of 58 4702%4713 471.3 4725 4730 714. Ir0o0 Feet Water Table Contour - interval 10' (ref. 2) CGS (2012) Figure 10 nuf Spring 2012 WT Modified contour based on SVRC Dashed Where inferred (ref. 2) *Standing Water Per Google Earth Image June, 2021 Page 34 of 58 4-W le 64- 65„68 e 14523 -R -R. 1556B7 -A 279370 •96112-VE 83024 14524- 84.1-W G 2759;x8 12159 10045-R 100444-R 21864 A 13688.8 51636 87 268085 4 N 66W 538-B 12461-R �Y 15656a 487-111/CB I 2462 -R -R FIGURE A►5a Depth to Groundwater (north) Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Barkrnann, 2014; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; cDSS Well Database 1 3689 -R -R 23014 Flap Legend DWR Wells - by use type • Domestic/Stock Irrigation Dewatering/+ether/NA re _ 1 Study Area I'v''lodel ,area 10475"R u,u 7-F � a 10478-R 5934 7,27-9437 1622,E=R 1 X72 -R mho 11419 422411442 a 1 12006-R 12610-8-R 276183-A4 si13426_R 13427-R'=' F 61884 6794* • • 29924,-'F t 55 - 29,923.F 5544f `87458-A 3'998 279 740 2m97 aa�ryryqq � 321654 _6562-F 1369.6-R 13640-F 9111©1-V 1 36711 -F -R 1423 500 1,000 ,: � 00 �- 'western Cana 's Eastern Slough' siessee 'Western Slough Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarc=h Pit 293470-A .476 -R -R e 63753-F r 52, IR 2679199 17919-ATi 50-ThR .297336a Feet 11687-R•R 610 -WC -air Depth to Groundwater' (feet below ground surface) - 5' 5' to 10' 10' to 15' f 15` 'Standing water per Goggle A Revised from Barkrnann and Others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Earth Image June, 2021 Survey Open File 13-06,, Fig. 10 Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NADg3/Colorado State Plane North, feet _ ra,4.0 as- revike‘.;#1/4,...- cis �_. Page 35 of 58 J Po 1 1 V M AirCsat 2259341 279437 10223,8.10222-R 2794 • 3740 321 654 s 13540+ 13671sFa ern Canal n12 '[`if 260962' .267998 .267997 3470-A 251 _ 1167 ■ 1'20921$ X952 -R -R 24179 �eR ® 59956- ._: 12681-R r,' y 109 R -R 63,754-F ZUU41-LI 20031-v ■ ■ 20031-R 20031-S ri fJ 20031-T 50 -R -R 297336-A 59951 sif � " M� d� 52•R 130443a 63750-F 580-WCB 1r 1 044• R 267999 20,791€ 17919-� = - 51 -R -R 13®42 -R -R -- 5J 06F 41534- �e + 114141 11687 -R -R 5753-F e610= CB 209-R0 953_F 63758 -F -;13.959-111-R 63759.-F .14 n201341 64 -WCB 207-R 1A 2 12791 -R -R 287311 ` 8132-R FIGURE A5b Depth to Groundwater (east) 'Feld County, Colorado Sources: IT Consulting Pit outlines; Barkmann, 2014; Goo.gle Earth irra�igery (2021); USGS DEI'4+i 10m; CDSS Well Database f 630-R: 59952-F 1 4a ?'8.7- 15-WCB 581-R �AL X89" F 63757-E-1 1 99 12 14018 49286rt 63756-F Id19923=R. " 88567 1 -d 61 9 -R- ®11324- 98342- 11' E 0 P CB 213562- 515-0 59739- F 14968-R 13118-F 131 1 9-FYR 0 3165ni -F 0109 34 12390-R 3334_ 844-WC8 15'8311-A r 273605-A F 3- 47�04,°l 624-R fu 1213308-A. 10 t 1 d �� iLi 7 3.`J 7—A 217436=x, 801., NICB 1x939 -R 1.1150-F 12938-R 12931.R 12 36 -Re 592=P 20025 -R -R l 500-WCB 13056-;k° 500 1r000 / 2 000 13057-R 13058-1111.11 Feet Map Legend D R Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Municipal Dewatering/Other/NA :'I Study Area Model Area *Standing grater per Goggle Earth Image June, 2021 Western Canal Eastern Slough' Lined Section 20 Pit Depth to Groundwater.' (feet below ground surface) � 5' 5' to 10" 10' to 1.5" 15` ARevised from Barkmann and others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Survey Open File 13-06, Fig. 10 Date: January 2024 Datunn/Projection: N,AD83/Co orado State Plane North, feet Page 36 of 58 x6387 7154#8 7165#R 61411 a 136 r21336 aR 509584, s 126814R CI 631-R .306- -R 208693 y ,i 53948 0.252804. 81P;l711 257838, 11024-R ' 2403 -934 6 71 -R -R 88i 44 58 1 CS �I Et 30t 17474; 1.14 �k t 155113 725'CB 1 r- '_WC B 1997- a A 26"813 1746a.Ralft Li O 0747-'F x"7041 .F 0 2#R4R 84422 1710 7+274" 1 3419 -R -R u 446.57 1341 8-Ra R 44658-A 13420,8-R 13421.8-R `2 13115 -R -R 649'F .27764-A N. 1504 -R -R a its �' 4 as FF . FIGURE A► c Depth to Groundwater (south) Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Barkmann, 2014; Goo& Earth imagery (2021); IUSGS DEM 1Om; CDSSWelr Database IX0987TR 75614 8 637 X0031 .$34 20031:-' 2003 a � ' a200194 ,,200794 -ft _ 0079-R fits �494_F e, I I 1589#114 . 371 -CB 184146-A 01-R 38.-WCB 183874-A elf 5 sRa 21 0k -R 1 ' -R-R n ■ • .2613111 i 13132 632-R 48'-F 4- B 12191( MB4 93952 305023 12565#R e. 1,1158-F 22105 119199 / ` 120:5541 120534i 726-ViCEI a 5gdi,aao 250968-A / 12054-R C196'9 -A i 2,000 Feet Map Legend DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Dewatering/+ether/NA :I Study Area Model Area Linea Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Monarch Pit Depth to Groundwater's (feet below ground surface) t� 5 5' to 10" 10' to 1S" f 1 S' -*Standing water per Google A Revised from Barkmann and Others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Earth Image June, 2021 Survey Open File 13-06,, Fig. 10 Cate: January 2O24 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet ihroteasbx -"•_' Page 3 7of 58 Plate River 14050a 99-A W� 0 262sA 1)266636-A slain 2U4)5.13 1 049-R 14041a 0.270080 21288-A 61-'► 300729 2'932. 723 C B 17533 10746-R 10147,R. 14043, �9'� ■ a .f I FIGURE Ad ■ 114 3-R- 1 7584-A Depth to Groundwater (west) Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Barkmannr 2©14; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USES DEM 10m; CDSS Well [database a 13 SIR 232159 I00454R 1 9928 _1.87 1 4Q21- 1 1111441 11113 4 MI el 7426444 0387 � 08693 *Ft 225280.-A 818111 287838 955-UU' 0 500 1,000 „GOD e e 1 G5 -R 1 �1366l 54sI CB 58 -We B 3-101CB 1747-R iossuat tin, TR97 -f 84422 17101 76274-F Lk. 413 19 -R -R Map Legend DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Dewatering/Other/NA C/ ...71 Study Area Model Area s Western Canal C`%) western Slough* Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Fait Lined Monarch Ptt Depth to GroundwaterA (feet below ground surface) < 5' 5' to 10' 10' to 15' r 15.' r -*Standing water per Goggle A Revised from Barkmann and Others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Earth Image June, 2021 Survey Open File 13-06, Fig. 10 Date: January 024 Daturn/Projecdon: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet e. Page 38 of 58 4N 61W 4N 66 b 1 1. A IIr I1 ".Me �' i♦ .� Ali ' f N.._ .. 1 H 1 . + a.....441 . .. 4 _ "- . jpri Ilk. ..,,,s_ , ic,�` :3,0;I'd 30 �. 32 3 • 38 3,M * • _41 _ 7. _ �m '�� l � �r IS .� X 4_955I -- eI 5,8 _ _ LICA ' , * 45' a 73 . I .1 4Ih - ■,38 40 422,41 -. L.''' rill l; 1 pI irri 42 I— a 4s 42 45 • - r t J9 r41 �� 4 42 173 46 45 4,? 52 • if 1••1 lJl 04 -I _ _ 45 _ 46 48. I 49 49 49 , 76 49 b... l I. I� aiz �� 1 itality _ II 1 Z i � - am• n c••_• ss •- jr� _ - I { i Fr •' f 82 P 4 ap-iir-v,, s r , 0 r47 4 � 64 , �i . � y, t 1-) 41 ASPS ,. Al: 42 5iiii 63i til :It . i ' as _ III vie ■ ■ 47 i _ � � -- . A+46 �JII _ __ • fRi _ - - �i Ir i I r I I Sp; If I, 11 f I 1 b, _ " • ' is f r -411.4s 1 - � J - 15 I1 kr. w,- —, - i a -, _ , O c r .., - 1' co - - ..t. . - r r � ... , .r it 1 � - ;"landingwar fri Goo e E{� , ma g e ({ rye, 202 . i 5 �� .: r a ):::i la .' 'Saturated thickness calcc at o• ro iii rev is d '�cibsor7. e _ r ' 'L 4J'ro4+k YrrCJI andmodeled water table. - -- _ Feet -L. 1 FIGURE A6 Map Legend Q Model Area = DWR Well" - Western Canal Aquifer Saturated Thickness aft Eastern Slough* A Meining —Observed Monitoring November Well Thickness Aquifer Saturated (ft) se. Western Slough* 2023 (ref. 2) 20' to 30' Lined Sweet Valley Section 20 Pit Monitoring 30' to 40' Reservoir Complex Pit Well - Observed 40' to 50' Weld Count Colorado y' Lined Section 20 Pit December 2021 (ref. 1) 50' to 60' 60' to 86' Sources: Lined Monarch Pit (1) Civil Resources Lembke titled LLC, October 14, 2022. Memo to Robert "Modification to Model in Response to DRMS Comments."; (2) World Imagery J&T Consulting Monitoring Well Data; ESRI (2021) USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Databas Date: January 2024 le I ti'' �l �i - y,f I' Ir � - 7 Robson, 2000; Section 20 MW Final Report Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane = —, ,-- ,,•ii��i +r �,. ��' _ (12.02.2022) North, feet I si v tatal.1/4,:.1.4 a•� 4N 671IN 4N 66 g rI F ii,vdter 011, 4' I,a bill rad with ym id I as l loins per minute) FIGURE A7 Well Yield Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Database 5 600 400 = 1500 X119 - 1 O CI D gr 9,011) 'goo o r„ 1100 800 0 11 000 clajOi 4040 Map Legend Q Model Area Eastern Slough* Western Slough* Western Canal Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 39 of 58 12so_ I7 7;0 DWR with Yield Data ^ O Domestic/Stock (<15 gpm) LI Irrigation ( <15 gpm) O Domestic/Stock (15-250 gpm) 1 _ 1 Irrigation (15-250 gpm) !! Irrigation (250-1,000 gpm) O Other/NA (250-1,000 gpm) Irrigation (>1,000 gpm) Other/NA (>1,000 gpm) FIGURE A8 Transmissivity Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Database; SPDSS Map Legend Q Model Area ais Eastern Slough* '%be Western Slough* - Western Canal Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 40 of 58 GILERET Transmissivity Contour from SPDSS l [tgrid0309] (1,000's gpd/ft) Modeled Transmissivity (1,000's gpd/ft) *Standing water per Google Earth Image June, 2021. Page 41 of 58 FIGURE A9 Hydraulic Conductivity Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Database; SPDSS Map Legend a Model Area Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/day) as Eastern Slough* 75 200 "'\,a western Slough* 400 Western Canal 800 Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit *Standing water per Google Earth Image June, 2021. Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 42 of 58 .an gl �plImar _ s_ ra FIGURE A10 Pre -Pit Water Table and Calibration Residuals Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m; CDSS Well Database; (2) Barkmann and Others, 2014, Colorado Geologic Survey Open File 13-06, Fi 10 Map Legend r , Study Area Q Model Area Observed vs Modeled Residuals Observed Higher than Model Observed Lower than Model fr 4, j Modeled Water Table Elevation Contour Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Alm JP IR II It Western Canal Water Table Contour - Eastern Slough* interval = 10' (ref. 2) Western Slough* CGS (2012) Figure 10 Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir f\i Spring 2012 WT Modified contour Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit f%.; based on SVRC data Dashed where inferred (ref. 2) *Standing water per Google Earth Ima cle June, 2021 1 Page 43 of 58 4N 67W 7� 7165-R 206387 r 14042-R 22306 -F -R L 1208693 1453 R FIGURE A11 Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DE M 10m 225280-A Map Legend Western Slough* Eastern Slough* DWR Wells -- by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling Municipal o Dewateri n g/other/N A 1 1.d i.:j, `iYL, or, 23014 x'25- CB/ /20980 I_ J Study Area 0 Model Area Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Change in Water Level Contour^ Drawdown Mounding Western Canal *Standing water per Google Earth Image June, 2021 ^Contour interval = 0.5 ft Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 44 of 58 4N 67W 4N 66W — -r - - - -- - — - - I- 266245 - _ = :; 7:397 R -F 06794-F 94_R � Nrfr ,-.7643-F tr �8-R `.x27937:0 - - [� � 29924 F _ 55663-F ...I145234:19.'1 ,, 4-R 64 B-4"�'�� Ei ti 29923-F 55854-P 155597.x`' 71- �: '+ _�_ -. 15 �I _ 1 155687 A I . 287454TH •i - - _ uliLJl47 - 2821i-1998 Nitl 1�� •.. 1 '�'r c.F—_ J � =- - - 5,:':',8_08.:8 ]: A= 1 24�F �i i1c 14,1223-R 225934 2794a7 . 27,943-x, ay 1 if3'Yd' 2679,97 - "'��.-1 lc; - _� "-. ,� _. . . ��'1'7'Y� 10222,R 1`462-R rt - 1565641� i�•"i�M+lam Ft 32165.4 2I,��''�99 , 50�RR _ - - - 17g19 -Ai ti B 1 1 %, °� h •- -, ,... 6561-'F it L ~'L ■■11 1 _ 1 - • -�,¢j. r .,1 .,'��,yr _ -Y • re �'41 ye�1l ��>•ri i 1 \ I'IN / fir. v r! 1�`1 1004544. / ��r!' ll: -, :4-4;,,;,:1,---4[,ID1J1 i1'`I" .. ■ Mi'f'r d''•L41, _ -• - ® T Y R 10044,R '� 293470-A 411, 95-R- `� �,. + _ 11687 -R -R ,� z9_z i lR R L - .��'89 I53753rr � 425�19� -j - ' �-- 1136�10-F +\ NCB- - 2_�610-WCB i{ -R -R ,. t- �,., 13671 -F -R ,'' 11' r; - T= f Ili yy _ •. 1 .-; d / .t 49424 �r _ � x014 a � _ Y 1 L —� X123., , _r - 209-R 59953-F w0 �r'` - :, 15fifi"� �'' ��!'� r ' �' .'�� r . . '. - _19'9 �' +4- -FC 1 ' F - ,. 1399 _ r1 _7 �1 I -R -R r '.1 - r I i -tip, 19124-W � +�� 201_-R 208-I 63759-, � x.19924 ❑ x_ _ , .� \� a' b _! 8 �I _ T181425-.� �� :_ 1 1 .- , 3—_-._ _ `'z, . Lt 1I � - � 3 ,I A+�■ 2512:39., m . ti1.1+ 23 642-1NCB . - ! . Ih..j1 _ A. rtl � "i, �y 2609x1 120'91-F" i' .X 1X1.027- � 140,26-R1 !� 'I�5 `-3 , 14028=� � i_,125,5643 �i , � � la ,. _ i i 1 � 2 1=2° 1-f - - i .� . a- -r: ��„�:--1._ r T + ..1,_' t, '`' ._ 41050 _W c aS `T.-,1 ,I i 199221- t R :250982 952- R N 14049- R ^ � 24179- � 630-R L �- ' .. 1'111 ��'141425-Ar �-� 111 � [r 1 �`, �I s ��-R _ + ,►e ar =" ' � 951 R -R 1 � z -if .- - - --N,. _ , g Ir;1A IA 041-R 7.164-R 716S.R 'II1 13659-R ----4336 #� re '.. 12 1-li yI -R L � ❑ '-�-__ ❑ �� - a 4. X631 a U - - / i N`�I'Im 206387 13881-R �,1 R 3550-R �y� 045056-f I___ 6 ��I D 14042-R w-- - %� 0 1 0 -'ACS 300729 �-w, O �� 10988 ':..; -R-R 904-krti 63754-F CBS 632-R 4 6.11/46.,- 58 -WC l I 22306 -F -R - 299322 I 20031-U 2`0031-V L,' Y 15518.3-A 155183 .:_ 644 12791 -R -R Wt,B '10986- 20031- R 287311_ + 725-� iC8 R 2�i�i1� 4.8 6132-R 3607-F `1R41SS , ,., . 14539-R 199 I ' 7 R- R :_ - - r 1 ,�•��'7�L .. YY.'Y _�--j1589-R-R „� Fj 75712.-F - ♦' 10.87-R `-i Lei ■(�1 20 MI'314T (n 664 R R 00 F- _ i 1�_ r1746-11-W1m F i ;- 1, Ua�11r � ' , �C1+'Nr; e� 22 52.80 A 41001) 17471 - a ,637�'I,°� _ � 77041-F. t — 20079-T 1590 -R -R �+- FIGURE Scenario CCWCD Weld Count Al2 Pipeline 1- p SVRC v , Colorado Mitigation to Map Legend Western Slough* Water Lined Sweet Valley Change in Level Reservoir Complex Pit Contour^ Eastern Slough* * DWR Wells Domestic/Stock - by use type (N..) rt Drawdown Mounding Irrigation O *Standing ^Contour Dewatering/Other/NA water interval per = Google 0.5 ft Earth Image June, 2021 -- 0 Western Modeled Canal Dewatering Well Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DE M 10m Date: January 2024 . '��+iL�, i Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane =t.--. . t.,......." i atreit North, feet �.,r,• 11tic_ X136 —CAC arts , . Page 45 of 58 -r N -'Y 'S ww 1401 I •R 4N 67W "a5 -R- 42541- 1401111}, 204050 0101Witaing 275936 232169- 1407-R lJ 187425-A 14041-1:2 ' 11114NR 11113 -RD „ 187425-A 270080 :M0729 299322. -Y IL 7164-K h� 206387 14042-K 22306 -F -K 1208693 1841 3 14539-K 1,000 irOGU 1,.0011 Feet FIGURE A13 Scenario 1- SI/RC Mitigation to Drain Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 1Om 1.99MR R 1123- 185.166 A 199214a 4N 66W 7643 F x`38 -N •1 a0g4-R .848 -Vin 15340•a" ' 2-fi I1 g; 5. • - Hi-. 4460-R 26-630B6 -• E 51}4 KB n12461 -K 15656-K 487-WCB 12462 -K -K 61584-A 10044-R 23)0'4 199241-0 19924 V. 1336 13659-R. -13661-R. M .t. - J J4 - - ❑13688-K 225334 `, ¢ . RII22341 10222-I C 6562-F 136.90-R 13640-F 14028.R.,26081 12'5566-A 1992nrbiles 13660,-K 904-WCB 155183-A 15518:= 5-Wcn 10986-K O VI" 260980 € 747-F 7,'041-F Map Legend • `., Western Slough* `r Eastern Slough* DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock fD Irrigation 0 Dewatering/Other/NA 75712-F �rl 10987-K 75614- 12691-F 26109'62 2"9926.4 29923 F 287-1584 84 267 1 31:0? -91-4.;31152-R _r ' j�267 7 - 6794-Fti 66663NF ; 55664 F 2'67999 3218541;51,151-R-1 � r � .5�I-B-R r. 2934-10NA 91101 -VF _.. 13671.1NR 251239-A ~_231161 120'92-F 952aR-R 24119- ' 953 -R -R 1268I -R 54456 F ri 1:0988- K- K 63754-F 20031-U EH 20031-V 20031-K 20031-S n 7 20031-T 1569-K-rL O20079 -T 1590 -R -R Study Area Model Area Lined Sweet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit *Standing water per Google Earth Image June, 2021 "Contour interval = 0.5 ft Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet 28'311 631-R 632-K 297.336-A w K -K 11687 -K -K 63753-F U 610 -WC B O 209-K� 59953-F 13939 -K -K 63758-F 63759-207=K n 642- 208-K 630- K ,f, .4.3.38-F 641 -`NC B 12191 -R -H n6132 -K 3607-F A_a_lo Change in Water Level Contour" (NJ Drawdown rNi Mounding Western Canal O Modeled Dewatering Well Exfiltration Drain SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 46 of 58 APPENDIX B -MODELING IMPACTS CAUSED BY OTHER PITS BACKGROUND In Appendix B, we evaluated four additional pit development scenarios including: • Pit Scenario 2 — Only Section 20 Pits (Run 2); • Pit Scenario 3 — Only Monarch Pits (Run 3); • Pit Scenario 4 - Both Section 20 and Monarch Pits (Run 4); and • Pit Scenario 5 - All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC) — Run 5. In each scenarios, we simulated pits by assigning pit cells as impermeable "no -flow" cells and then calculated the "change" compared to water levels from the Pre -pit Run. MITIGATION RUNS In the Mitigation Runs, we attempt to minimize the upgradient change by simulating dewatering wells and or infiltration drains upgradient of pits to reduce drawdown. For Scenario 1 (Only SVRC Pit), discussed in Appendix A, we used two dewatering wells. For the Section 20 Pit, the applicant plans to install both drains and wells to mitigate upgradient mounding, and simulate downgradient recharge through a pond located outside the center of the downgradient liner (Civil Resources, 2021 Sheet 6). To date, we are uncertain what Monarch's mitigation plan will entail, so we also simulate exfiltration drains in this analysis. Whether one or the other is used will depend on its cost effectiveness and regulatory approval. We believe that installing downgradient exfiltration drains will be more cost effective and require less maintenance and augmentation challenges than using recharge ponds, which is why we used them in this analysis. For Scenarios 2-5, we evaluated horizontal infiltration drains to alleviate mounding. Water level flow into a drain is controlled by the conductance term (COND) which is a function of the drain area, permeability of the gravel fill around the drain and depth below the water surface. We assume a 1 foot cross-sectional drain surrounded by gravel with a hydraulic conductivity (K) of 400 ft/day. Fora 100 foot long model cell, COND = 40,000 ft^2day (400 ft/day x 1 ft x 100 ft). COND is calculated internally by the model using the digitized length of drain across each model cell. We determined the depth of each upgradient drains using trial and error to achieve zero drawdown, and then iteratively "hard wired" that amount as recharge using the Modflow "Recharge" package. Using this approach to simulate exfiltration drains, we were able to spread the water out over a longer stretch than could be achieved through a real drain. We report the predicted drain flows under each scenario which will vary in reality depending on the drain design and site -specific aquifer properties. The modeling results should be refined through additional modeling and cost analyses prior to construction. Pit Scenario 2 — Only Section 20 Pits Figure A14 shows the impact of liners installed in Section 20 Pits under Scenario 2. The model predicts mounding in the range of +1 to + 6.2 feet in approximately 25 wells. Shadowing is McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: (303) 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 47 of 58 expected in the range of +1 to + 6.4 feet in approximately 87 wells. We did not tabulate the well owners affected since it is not the purpose of this evaluation. To mitigate upgradient mounding Figure A15 shows a dashed yellow line that represents the upgradient drain and a solid yellow line representing the exfiltration drain along the northern pit boundary. The simulated drain flow is approximately 1467 gpm which reduces water level changes to nearly zero. Pit Scenario 3 - Only Monarch Pits Under Scenario 3 only Monarch Pits are simulated. The change in water levels associated with just the liner (Run 3) show mounding is expected in the range of +1 to + 4.2 feet in approximately 4 wells (See Figure A16). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -3.7 feet in approximately 76 wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if an upgradient drain is installed in front of Cell 1 (elevation 4742 ft) and Cell 3 (elevation 4733 ft), and an exfiltration gallery is installed downgradient to reinfiltrate the groundwater (Figure A17). The simulated combined drain flow is approximately 1016 gpm. Pit Scenario 4 — Section 20 and Monarch Pits Under Scenario 4 both Section 20 Monarch Pits are simulated. Mounding is expected in the range of +1 to + 5.9 feet in approximately 27 wells (See Figure A18). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -6.4 feet in approximately 132 wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if upgradient and downgradient drains are installed at both pits (Figure A19). Model results show the infiltration and exfiltration drains will flow approximately 2373 gpm. Pit Scenario 5 — All Pits (Section 20, Monarch and SVRC) Under Scenario 5 only Monarch Pits are simulated together. The change in water levels associated with just the liners (Run 5), shows mounding in the range of +1 to + 5.9 feet in approximately 27 upgradient wells (Figure A20). Shadowing is expected in the range of -1 to -8.7 feet in approximately 133 downgradient wells. Most impacts can be reduced to below +/- 1 foot if upgradient and downgradient infiltration and exfiltration drains are installed at both the Section 20 and Monarch pits. At the SVRC, we simulated two upgradient wells, each pumping 225 gpm (450 gpm total). Using an exfiltration drain (Figure A21), the total drain inflow is approximately 2367 gpm and exfiltration drain outflow is 2817 which includes the amount pumped. In the preferred mitigation run for SVRC, where pumped water is exported off -site into the CCWCD pipeline (Figures A22), the infiltration and exfiltration drain flows are the same (2367 gpm). Both mitigation runs are equally effective at reducing shadowing downgradient which is why the applicant prefers to direct drain flow into the CCWCD drain. Table B 1 summarizes all pit impacts in terms of the number of wells with mounding and shadowing over 1 foot, and mitigation run well and drain discharge estimates to alleviate changes in the water table. CGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 48 of 58 Table B1 - Pit Run Summary Pit Scenario Run Description Without Mitigation With Upgradient Mitigation Downgradient Mitigation Fig. Number or Wells with Water Level Change Fig. Well Pumping (gpm) Infiltration Gallery (gpm) Exfiltration Drain (gpm) Number or Wells with Water Level Change Mounding >1ft Shadowing >1ft Mounding >1ft Shadowing >1ft 1 Only SVRC A11 2 4 Al2 400 no na 0 8 A13 400 na 400 0 0 2 Only Section 20 Pit A14 25 87 A15 na 1467 1467 0 0 3 Only Monarch Pit A16 4 76 A17 na 1016 1016 0 2 4 Section 20 and Monarch Pits A18 27 132 A19 na 2373 2373 0 0 5 Section 20, Monarch SVRC (All Pits) and A20 27 133 A21 450 2367 2817 0 0 A22 450 2367 2367 0 0 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com SVRC Groundwater Evaluation January 2024 Page 49 of 58 APPENDIX B FIGURES B1 - B8 cGrane Water Engineering, LLC 1669 Apple Valley Rd. • Lyons, CO 80540 • Phone: {303} 917-1247; email: dennis@mcgranewater.com Page 50 of 58 FIGURE B1 • • • • • • 1 r 0 0.25 0.5 at Mile Scenario 3 - Change Caused by Section 20 Pits Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m Flap Legend s% es Western Slough' as% Eastern Slough* DWR eII - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling 0 Municipal = Dewatering/Other/NA Study Area Model Area Lined Section 20 Pit Change in Water Level ContourA Inv Drawdown Mounding Western Canal *Standing water per Coogle Earth Image aurae, 2021 AContour interval = 0.S ft Cate: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet SiakekIctedo_t �. R i 140411-R -1 11 21100E,0 6.1 VEIS: B 300729 14E5(2A R R '279:370 I.5 -A 2 063;F 7 u 14042-F1 1841918 14539-R -= 215280-A 1,000 2,00 FIGURE B2 Scenario 3 - Section 20 Mitigation to Drain Weld County, Colorado ources: 11 Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021): i SGS DEM lOrn _ fti43-1- 738-R �■ 5094 -yet 848 -WC 13688-“ C� 1'3689 -RJR y 1992 4 -'R -R, 18 battkti-.A, •_ t442.4-V,R __ ` 9924-LI 23014 3559-R p,1336 13661-R 13500 R 5ai WC 1747-R 4334 CB Map Legend as Eastern Slough* DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock ❑ Irrigation De atering/other/NA 27'9437 10222-R 13690-R 13640LF 75712-F 10987-R 75614 11,968 R R 63754-F 20031-U _ 20031-V 20031-R 20031-S '20031-T 1589 -R -R 2007'9-T r Study Area Model Area Lined Section 20 Pit 'Standing water per Google Earth Image .tune, 2021 ''Contour interval = 0.5 ft Date January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 51 of 58 2.671 /94.35 3740 11681 -R -F?. 14179 t - 1 95 J -R-R 084 -R -R _ 6i55=R-'R. .sfr Change in Water Level ContourA Drawdown i Mounding Western Canal Modeled Drain Exfiltration Drain FIGURE B Scenario 3 Change Caused By Monarch Pits Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEMI 100 Map Legend st.re Western Slough* ana Eastern Slough* D R Wells - by use type Domestic/Stack Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling Municipal Dewatering/Other/IAA SEM �j _ Study Area Model Area Lined Monarch Pit Page 52 of 58 Change in Water Level ContourA Drawda n f\d, Mounding Western Canal *Standing grater per Google Earth Image June, 2021 AContour interval = 0.5 ft Date: January{ 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet "1N 67W e,11.1M D 16434 738a '150948 848 -WC 19924 -'R -R 11114-R 11113-R 181 2 306- r -E; 208$93 1,000 2,.000 FIGURE B4 Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); 58 -WC O 1,13659-R 13661-R, 1'997 -R -R 1746 -R -R 1747-Rjj..ttCB n J�n pp 433 MM Map Legend .2„,ta Eastern Slough* DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock ❑ Irrigation De atering/Other/NA ' 77041-F k225934 279437 102;41. R 102 2 222-h". 1369MR 13610-F 12091-1 2007'9-T r Study Area Model ,area Lined Monarch Pit 'Standing water per Goo le Earth Image June, 2021 I' Contour interval = 0.5 ft Date: January, 20,24 Datum/Projection: NAL783/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 53 of 58 29347 -A 91101-VE 13611 -F -R 267 2D9=R 59553,-F 251239 A 231167 1590 -R -R L„: uon-F 952 -R -R icy R 632-R 3.? -t -F 6434-WC6 127 1 -R: -R 664-R. -R 65�R-R Change in Water Level Contour- A Dr wdown (NJ Mounding -• Western Canal Modeled Drain Exfiltration Drain Page 54 of 58 FIGURE B5 Scenario 4 - Change Causes! by Section 20 and Monarch Pits 'Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USGS DEM 10m Map Legend i a s, i Western SIouahA las Eastern Slough* DWR Wells - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling Municipal Dewatering/Other/NA j Study Area Model Area Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Change in Water Level ContourA ir\j Drawdown Mounding VVesterrn Canal *Standing grater per Google Earth Image June,, 2021 AContour interval = 0.S ft Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NADg3/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 55 of 58 4N 67W i N 6.6 'i [I ,, i�. u,.J., _ _ .24_ _ . _ 29924 ,74�y �,g{ ,�, r_ it -R -IF -55663-F - `,, - .x'38 848-Wr_1 B 4 1 681 i / '5 ' 'w- _ ., 14b444; c' 6'b __ 'fi,c613-b6 M 2.t 26l3006 5094-R ! 8i i8,S { 29745a -A — i s - - _ 22 5�9 279437 2, 4 � 5 _ 1 sig_wcp 12461-R tom R a740 P _ iki art; 'R - . i l "r 1 'J5614-4E-Et I 56 �'E_ Y 1 -..WC:8 10222.-� ryJ 'L° 1I t �� , ry1 � '1"q ` 1, I� -..Y I. CS- In L 1ti, ' - - --- - �- -- Tvi- r -- - � _r .i3 '- V — i e'- .cq,_ cii *0 �1 Y - I- ." - -•J : i r� 297133.6-A y� a -gal F , 6562-1- . 1" tia 0 a •r t — Yu , �' 275938 41 I _. ""1"84 � .'i ; , _• ff% t 5G©i f'i "c7688- 4'1, t ILad R r — r - _ la t� s' d'� ,,-iL 3' 4 13044- 1 293470-A 1 {Lt ---R.. _ 8 13389 -R -R 13690-R136. 10- F `� 11 D1-VE ,& 476-R"R 1 isat4t-Ft • f -, x•251 9-F r � � a�'tre ;at X Yf r* - - - 199,24 -1i -H, 23014_,��. - 136?" 1123 1 -F -R 63753-F 610•�,CB i N ,' m 1: ii -�• �- it I. 1., — — [[�-r I t` _ ;. -4' `i c ■ I r �.f :G ,. °.,� _ • i 1- '+�: .iii rLq s ,.,„,;-;,FL:-e • r 1 r r 'r e - ` j l tl , b Lv • i I t , �I� I a ' 1. L.� � 5995. - -. A. �— to : ° �.1 ,�l ' � ,. _ _y :. _, _ tl . t L, —Itil a .1.8155-P �,! -VI -Ay 13959 R R 111 NNN ' •�''•~ I_ a I i ; 324-LI -- S— ?07-Rr 612-, i'49,4 —W 1' � Iso ' 1:87425-A ; --! , . ,: ,"t a ' d S ,` i `� � rN - 231167 � - 120151, r �— -a 14025a - � ' d a _ 1 R 28! � zy s 1i - I4027 -R :� �1a2a ', - -_ 25°'C239 � 1,2092-F _ - -A :,1004* �-' -iii �' :� 1 ' �Ito� r� 111 1 R 1111 = r " 1'49,x'4. -1-F tl w,2Cifa 2 -ks `'= 24179 j ~ 452 -R -,R - it -, `" 7 - '8 u \,.18742A 1 -A . i I Jr.577.H..,%045:talox silt • - - itertarr air- s` - , ro TICA-R 7165:R 1 -R 1336 12 :. 0314t .14041-R r13659 7r -c� �- „ �' 0 t,�r_, X87 -Qt 13661-R 13660 R , 59956-Fince 10988 IR R 3.�0 29 56-WCB 904 I; 63154-F -WC ail Ft F 1 2979322 ❑ ;10031-U U 2 t1031 V I . ,A `' 2230�r-R, �� Y 155'183.1 i � �, 12791 -R 6 4u"r CIBI - -R 20!031-R 725..wcB 10986-R 20031-S 6132-R 3607-F -1 75712-F � z� 31-T 1997 -R -P, 2�6098a I � l -1 9 s7 -R , 184198 14530-R 1589 -R -R 664 -R -R 665 -R -R -,, 1748, — - '63747-F = 75fi14 225280-A -R -R _; 1,000 2,000 4,000 1747-R 77'041-F 2'007'9-T 1590 -R n1 -R t _tart : Feet 1,�,+(� B All FIGURE Scenario Monarch Drains Weld County, B6 4 - Section Pits Colorado Mitigation 20 and to Map Legend •u, Western Slough* _ : Study Area Change in Water Level A an Eastern Slough* 'Nadel Area Cantour Draw,rdouun D1NRWells - by use type �i Lined Section 20 Pit ert Mounding 0 Domestic/Stock Line! i'v9or��rch Pit — Western Canal 0 'Standing "%Contour Irrigation Dewatering/Other/NA interval water per a Google 0..5 ft Earth Image June, 2021 Modelled Exfiltration Drain Drain Sources,: JT Consulting t_JSGS DENT Pit outlines; 10 Google Earth Imagery (2021); [date: January 2024 _ - t- .. ni Datum,IProjeCtiOn: NAD83/Colorado State Plane'— ` r;- _y �_ North, feet - e , FIGURE B7 Scenario 5 - Change Caused by All Pits Weld County, Colorado Sources: JT Consulting Pit outlines; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USES DELI 10m Map Legend se, Western Slough' ark Eastern Slough* DWR - by use type Domestic/Stock Irrigation Monitoring/Sampling Municipal Dewatering/Other/NA j Studer Area Model Area Lined Svveet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit Page 56 of 58 Change in Water Level ContourA Drawdown Mounding Western Canal *Standing grater- per Google Earth Image June, 2021 AContour interval = 0.5 ft Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet Page 57 of 58 85 -R -R (643- 738-R 1411.115094-R 848=WC B IN 260D87 2t Bog5 yino R 266086 1 4V'CB; a 518-,1NC F1 1.2461-R x a.r 1565 cas 14 -487., �a i , 1246211/414-R •� 2759,8 14027-R aA• _ ovW 2041150 r r- ain r� 2111180 61 Vii,CB 300729 n- 299322 2322 1.874254 r 14026-R 11114-R 11113-R' L -1'.1 11924-LI Fjf ;`' � --14028-R- 1 1 1, ,125566-A 126'51 i F -- - r �' - "ti 5' - Pi ter'4 ‘14 1112"4-W 5 279431 10221-14. 13690-R. 13640ar 91101-VL "1 ,367"1 -F -R , 1123 a 5 t i 71644 7165-R 206387 14042-R X2306 -r -R _I208693 E r, 4 - W C 8 s � r' 9� 13659-R 13661-R tit 19424 - - 1334 i 13660-R �azia- k ii o904-VIC B 155,183.,A 1-� .. F.'155183 J .a1 AicS re , C‘Ii5 - _ 24179 1 PPM -,R l— '' -.-) 59956-F 10988 R R kit 63754-F 20h031 -U 21�I)31-V 67971 yr 29921-F C .55663-F . -F r_-_i 55664-x= • 287458.-.A. 2194 3740 321654 767g9s 1..6787 267999 293470-A . aF-r� 1 1 681- • in 52, Fil off'' aNtd 23'1167 :„; 12O2 -F 953-Ra1I. 6375347 1010-WCB 1 � 209-R 59'9 53-F L! 1,x95'9 R R � r� T.ri, .+,yp-, 63.a 58-F Rr 642w .d�f 208_-R 631-8 .432=13 0107144 12791 -R: -R iL1J ! tl 1 i Iii 61O R 644-WCBI 184198 14539-R i a 225280-A 0 - 1,000 1000 r4, i� 0 Feet FIGURE B8 Scenario - All Pits with Mitigation to Grains Feld County, Colorado Sources: IT (consulting Fait outline's; Google Earth Imagery (2021); x'25-'�'�JCB 10986-R -t 75712-F '1997 -R -1R 26Q98a � 110987-R 174641-R�R�R � = -�._��63747-F 75614 r ' 77'041-F 1747-R 433-WCB ,20031-R 20031-S -j20031-T 1589 -R -R 20079-T 15190 -R -R 1- I 5132-R 3607-F 684 -R -R _ 0G5 -R -R u 4F Flap Legend Western Slough* Eastern Slough* D1J11'RWells - by use type Domestic/Stock irrigation Lewaterir g/Other/i` A r _� Study Area Model Area Lined Sheet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit 'Standing eater per Google Earth Image June, 20211 AContoUr interval = 0.5 ft Change in Water Level Contour^ Dradowun (NJ Mounding - Western Canal O Modeled Dewatering Well Modeled Drain Extlltration [rain Gate: January 2024 NI:um/Projection: NAD83/Colorado State Plane North, feet � Ibbme 4r�i1 • r t - t � 6714 .8 -R—R 1142519-F 239322 14b241. S41 D Haig 19924 -;R -R 11114-R -0i:5-- 1t113-R 58-Wal - 18419i8 14539-R 0 4 225280-A 1,000 2 000 - FIGURE B9 Scenario 5 - All Pits with Mitigation to Drams with SRVC to CVIICB Pipeline Weld County, Colorado Sources: 11 Consulting Pit outline's; Google Earth Imagery (2021); USES DEM lOrn tiM924.0 13659-R fa! 13661-fit NI 66 216-A r -#f 1 ` 689 -R -ft r - 279437 6562-F 14022-Ft 1336 13660 R. 136884C Iy] Page 58 of 58 267148, 32161:741, -293470-A 91101-VE x x153753 -r 510 -WCS "". - .. 12-55 ]6-A 1209)-F �y � -4\411 ' i�� -�' t4 t i1.F �P+1'SiTt. R 125-WcB 10985-R i ni "4 # 75712-F 1997=R-RH r.)260980 cii 1,987-R 1746 -R -R re Oi63747-F = 75614 fr, r 77041-F 1747-R 433MC Map Legend a Western Slough* ar .Eastern Slough* DWR Wells - by use type (2) Domestic/Stock Irrigation 0 DeWatering/other/NIA 20031-R 20031-S J 20031-T 1589 -R -R 20079- 1590 -R -R r Study Area Model ,area Lined Sheet Valley Reservoir Complex Pit Lined Section 20 Pit Lined Monarch Pit 'Standing eater per Google Earth Image June, 2021 "%Contour interval = 0,5 ft Date: January 2024 Datum/Projection: NAD83/Colorado Stake Plane Borth, feet - 12692-F s,��'' 952 -R -R 241i9. 'x.1; 9„� 00 a -J 95341rR 632.8 4838-F 644-1INCB 28731L L 6132-R 3607-F 604 -R -R 665 -R -R r ar Change in Water Level ContourA ti Drawdown rt Mounding Western Canal O Modeled Dewatering'Jell Modeled Drain Exfiltration [rain CERTIFICATION RE: NOTIFICATION OF MINERAL INTEREST OWNERS AND LESSEES The undersigned Applicant certifies compliance with the provisions of C.R.S. § 24-65.5- 103(1), and in support thereof, states and certifies as follows: 1. That Applicant has provided notice, (a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"), containing the time and place of the initial public hearing on its application for Case Number USR25-0002, the nature of the initial public hearing, the legal description by section, township and range of the property which is the subject of the initial public hearing, and the name of the applicant; 2. That said notice was provided thirty (30) days prior to the scheduled public hearing, that it was provided by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized overnight courier; 3. That said Exhibit A includes the list of the names and addresses of the surface owners, mineral estate owners and lessees of mineral interests to whom the notice was sent, including those persons who have requested receipt of such notices, pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-65.5-103(3). STATE OF C010O19; COUNTY OF tAitlA APPLICANT: Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Subscribed and sworn to before me this . day of 1111,410A. , 2011 by Pub • Note: This Certification must be received by the Weld County Department of Planning Services prior to or at the initial public hearing. If the Certification is not received by that time, the hearing will be rescheduled to a later date, and Applicant must re -notify all owners of mineral interests. ALISON DONOVAN FORRER Notary Public State of Colorado Notary ID # 20234022964 My Commission Expires 06-20-2027 U.S. Postal Service' CERTIFIED MAIL° RECEIPT Domestic Mail Only cr to r -R C3 I' ru ru C7 Certified Mail Fee sit- n85 5 For delivery information, visit our website at www_usps.com®. 4a1f_C Extra Services & Fees (check box, add fee l erTf ete) ❑ Return Receipt (hardcopy} $ o ❑ Return Receipt (electronic) $ ❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery $ ❑ Adult Signature Required $ ❑ Adult Signature Restricted Delivery $ $ 0 00 30 • 00 40 I0C Postage $0 3 T t Pgo gage and Fees 0392 :Snit) 9 '1 f .%t• / mark � mere N A` Sent To 3tre t and . No.Ws' or �t� boxg a/V) _� arty, Sfa e, ZIP+4 -- f 4~40, " v AP • lSo0 Z PS Form 3800, April 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9047 See Reverse for Instructions IaT inrr'n1it; re es Inn J ax A NisAV11►J till 11.111.6' illte• March 31, 2025 PDC Energy, Inc. 1099 1811" Street, Suite 1500 Denver, CO 80202 Subject: USR25-0002 (Sweet Valley Pit) — Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the A (Agricultural) Zone District on a parcel of land described as Part of the NE 1/4 of Section 30, T4N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado (Parcel No. 105730100042 and 105730100039) Dear Mineral Leasehold Owner: As per Colorado Revised Statute, C.R.S. 24-65.5-103(1) (adopted as part of H.B.01-1088) we are required to notify all mineral estate owners 30 days prior to any public hearing. Please accept this notice as having been notified that a public hearing will be scheduled on the above referenced USR25-0002 - Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review from the A (Agricultural) Zone District by the Department of Planning Services, Weld County, Colorado. The Weld County Planning Commission hearing for USR25-0002 is scheduled for May 6, 2025 at 1:30 PM. This meeting will take place in the Hearing Room, Weld County Administration Building, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. For additional information or comments, please contact: Weld County Department of Planning Services Mr. Maxwell Nader 1402 N. 17th Avenue P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 Office: (970) 400-6100 Fax: (970) 304-6498 Sincerely, e J.C. York, P.E., Principal 305 Denver Avenue — Suite D • Fort Lupton CO 80621 • Ph: 303-857-6222 Gilerealow,T jNA Fa Wily 4 December 11, 2023 Kim Ogle Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 " -- Re: Weld County Referral Case Number PRE23-0271 USR for Water Storage prior to Request to Mine Dear Mr. Ogle, PO Box 128 304 8t' Street Gilcrest, CO 80623 (970) 737-2426 (970) 737-2427 fax www. townofgilcrest org The Town of Gilcrest received a Notice of Inquiry for a Use by Special Review (USR) for a slurry walled water storage reservoir prior to submitting a USR for mining by a public agency - Central Colorado Water Conservancy District. The site is approximately 146 acres east of the South Platte River located west of Highway 60 south of County Road 42. The water storage facility would have a slurry wall installed on the north side of the Western Mutual Ditch and a slurry wall on the south side of the ditch consisting of two cells to be used to store water. A DRMS mining permit would be applied for to conduct mining in the future. The Town of Gilcrest appreciates the opportunity to comment on land development proposals at the time of pre -application. The proposed water storage facility and future mining operation is located within the Town's Urban Growth Boundary and the Platteville-Gilcrest Coordination Area as depicted in the 2011 Intergovernmental Agreement between the Towns of Gilcrest and Platteville. As such, the Town of Gilcrest is submitting this formal referral response in coordination with the Town of Platteville. The Town of Gilcrest and Platteville have shared concerns with the proposed water storage and future gravel mine stemming from potential negative impacts to the South Platte River Corridor, wildlife habitats, and overall increased traffic generation in the area. The Town of Gilcrest has additional concerns related to the lack of conformance with the Gilcrest Comprehensive Plan, noise, air quality, aesthetics, and the potential detrimental impact on local groundwater levels. In particular, any increase in groundwater level will have a disastrous impact on the Town of Gilcrest and its residents. Additionally, the development of two additional proposed mining operations, namely the 790 -acre Monarch-Denm gravel mine and the 596.55 -acre Section 20 Gravel Mine (formerly known as Red Tierra), within the Town of Gilcrest's Urban Growth Boundary, along with a substantial portion of the Monarch-Denm gravel mine falling within the Platteville and Gilcrest Coordination area, highlights the cumulative impact of over 1,532 acres dedicated to water storage and gravel mining in close proximity of our towns. These developments raise significant concerns Page 1 A Fnm/ice A PQ Box 128 304 8'h Street Gilcrest, CO 80623 (970) 737-2426 (970) 737-2427 fax www. towno}gikrest. org encompassing environmental and transportation impacts, adverse impacts on Gilcrest's groundwater levels, and the loss of land area designated for future development in alignment with our community's vision for the future. As such, the Town of Gilcrest requests the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District and applicants of the Monarch-Denm and Section 20 gravel mines proceed with annexation of their property into the Town of Gilcrest. On behalf of the Towns of Gilcrest and Platteville, we appreciate the County's continued support of the Coordinated Planning Agreements that accomplish the type of development within our urban growth boundaries and coordinated planning area that best protect the health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of our town residents and achieve maximum efficiency and economy in the process of development. Sincerely, Steve Nothem, Mayor, Town of Gilcrest Cc: Dan Dean, Gilcrest Town Administrator Troy Renken, Platteville Town Manager Adrienne Sandoval, 't I�y�or, Town of Platteville Page 2 Notice of Inquiry Weld County Department of Planning Services Pre -application Case # PRE23-0271 Date of Inquiry November 9, 2023 Municipality Gilcrest IGA Name of Person Inquiring w Randy Ray / JC York Property Owner Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Planner Kim Ogle Planner Phone Number 970 400 3549 Planner Email Address kogle@weld.gov Legal Description Part NE4 Section 30, T 4N, R 66W Parcel Number 1057-30-1-00-042 Nearest Intersection West of State Highway 60 South of County Road 42 Type of Inquiry USR for water storage prior to request to mine The above person met with County Planning staff about developing a parcel of land inside your designated lnttergovern mental Agreement/Coordinated Planning Agreement Boundary. County ,an ner's signature Would you like to pursue annexation of this property? NO x YES Date of Contact February 2024 Comments: The Town had originally proposed to them that they annex. They indicated that they were not interested As an alternative they offered to inter into an IGA. The Town sent a proposal to them and they rejected most of the conditions. The Board directed the Mayor and the Administrator to respond to the USR at the appropriate time. While annexation would be ideal, an IGA protecting the Town's interest is imperative. Vae. Z7ea Town Administrator Signature of Municipality Representative Title January 17, 2025 Date Please sign and date to acknowledge that the applicant has contacted you and return this signed form to Weld County Department of Planning Services Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Ave, PO Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 970-400-6100 1 www.weld.gov 20230310 Notice of Inquiry Weld County Department of Planning Services Pre -application Case # PRE23-0271 Date of Inquiry November 9, 2023 Municipality Milliken CPA Name of Person Inquiring Randy Ray / JC York Property Owner Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Planner Kim Ogle Planner Phone Number 970 400 3549 Planner Email Address kogle@weld.gov Legal Description Part NE4 Section 30, T 4N, R 66W ii Parcel Number 1057-30-1-00-042 Nearest Intersection West of State Highway 60 South of County Road 42 ' Type of Inquiry USR for water storage prior to request to mine The above person met with County Planning staff about developing a parcel of land inside your designated Intergovernmental Agreement/Coordinated Planning Agreement Boundary. Liensboval4 County F�IaHrier's signature Would you like to pursue annexation of this property? X YES Date of Contact: November 13 2024 Comments: Milliken may be interested in learning if there are opportunities for the water storage. Pr Comm Dev. Director February 21 2024 Signature of Municipality Representative Title Date Please sign and date to acknowledge that the applicant has contacted you and return this signed form to Weld County Department of Planning Services Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Ave, PO Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 97O-4OO-61OO I www.weld.gov 20230310 Notice of Inquiry Weld County Department of Planning Services Pre -application Case It PRE23-027I Date of Inquiry November 9, 2023 Municipality Platteville CPA Name of Person Inquiring Randy Ray f JC York Property Owner Central Colorado Water Conservancy District � Planner Kim Ogle Planner Phone Number 9?0 400 3549 Planner Email Address kogle@werd.gov Legal Description Part NE4 Section 36, T 4N, R 66ti1'ti! Parcel Dumber 1057-30,1-00-042 Nearest Intersection 'Vest of State Highway 60 South of County Road 42 Type of Inquiry USR for water storage prier to request to mine The above person met with County Planning staff about developing a parcel of land inside your designated Intergovernmental Agreement/Coordinated Planning Agreement Boundary. �\ , A-- Coun Plainer°s signature t Would you like to pursue annexation of this property? NO y„--- YES Date of Contact // • '-j -- .� ? Comments: 37tUi `/ ��o-e/744' "Zit i(C--5S WIGS fde aSSie(f C-`" (/�-t y 7 .-.S ___;:= d;Pcce.577-71 .d 4 ,c- G A! /t , r' �-L?Se i 1// -v--f-,23 1-�----e1 /r,44) q-/ / s Signature of Municipality Representative Title Date ____ Please sign and date to acknowledge that the applicant has contacted you and return this signed form to Weld County Department of Planning Services. Department Of Planning Services 1402 N . 7th Ave, Pty Sax .758, Greeley, CO 80632 97O-4OO-61OO I wwwwweld.gov 20230310 Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R1751502 Assessed To Parcel 105730100039 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT 3209 W 28TH ST GREELEY. CO 80634-7554 Legal Description PT NE4 30-4-66 LOT A REC EXEMPT RE -31441.41 Rl Year Grand Total Due as of 12/03/2024 Tax Interest Fees Situs Address WELD Payments Balance $0.00 Tax Billed at 2023 Rates for Tax Area 3001 - 3001 Authority WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DIST RE 1-GILCREST NORTHERN COLORADO WATER (NC CENTRAL COLORADO WATER (CCW CENTRAL COLO WATER WELL (CC PLATTEVILLE-GILCREST FIRE AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE HIGH PLAINS LIBRARY Taxes Billed 2023 * Credit Levy Mill Levy 12.0240000` 13.3020000* 1,0000000 0,8910000 9,1530000 6.7820000 6.3360000 3.1960000 Amount Values $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 52.6840000 $0.00 EXEMPT- POLITICAL NON REST DEN TI AL LAND- AG Total Actual Assessed $4,489 $1,190 $4,489 $1,190 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. 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631 or PO Box 458, Greeley, CO 80632. (970) 400-3290 Page 1 of 1 Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R8977674 Assessed To Parcel 105730100042 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT 3209 W 28TH ST GREELEY, CO 80634-7554 Legal Description Situs Address PT NE4 30-4-66 BEG N4 SEC COR TH S89D59E 1437 47 S01 D34W 1184 17 N46D41 E 141 08 N38D55E 101 05 N32D32E 91 98 N21 D5 l E 100 04 N 19D 13E 146 21 N24D57E 338 87 N25D 15E 133 11 N27D58E 161 23 N06D3 5E 130 68 S89D59E 626 06 S00D40E 2652 41 S89D44W 2624 9 N00D37W 25 57 N89D22E 368 24 N00D37W 591 14 S89D22W 368 31 N00D37W 2048 16 TO POB 19529 HIGHWAY 60 WELD Year Tax Interest Fees Grand Total Due as of 12/03/2024 Tax Billed at 2023 Rates for Tax Area 3001 - 3001 Authority WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DIST RE 1-GILCREST NORTHERN COLORADO WATER (NC CENTRAL COLORADO WATER (CCW CENTRAL COLO WATER WELL (CC PLATTEVILLE-GILCREST TIRE AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE HIGH PLAINS LIBRARY Taxes Billed 2023 * Credit Levy Mill Levy 12.0240000* 13 3020000* 1.0000000 0.8910000 9.1530000 6.7820000 6.3360000 3.1960000 Amount Values $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 52.6840000 $0.00 Payments EXEMPT- POLITICAL NON RESIDENTIAL LAND- AG RES IMP EXEMPT - POL SUB EXEMPT -POLITICAL NON RESIDENTIAL IMPS - AG Total .Balance Actual $129,444 $565,301 $31,740 $0.00 Assessed $34,170 $37,880 $8,380 $726,485 $80,430 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. 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631 or PO Box 458, Greeley, CO 80632. (970) 400-3290 Page 1 of 1 Hello