The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20252361 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE: DATE RECEIVED: AMOUNT$ CASE#ASSIGNED: APPLICATION RECEIVED BY PLANNER ASSIGNED: PROPERTY INFORMATION Is the property currently in violation? ❑ No/ 4'es Violation Case Number: ZCV22-00217 Parcel Number: 1 0 5 3 _ 2 0 _ 1 _ 0 0 _ 0 3 2 Site Address: 20601 COUNTY ROAD 53 KERSEY, CO 806449113 Legal Description: PT NE4 20-4-64 LOT A REC EXEMPT RE-3209 EXC OG&M (.50R) a.. Section: �-te a , Township 4 N, Range 64 W Zoning District: A Acreage: 6.56 Within subdivision or townsite? to / ❑ Yes Name: Water (well permit# or water district tap #): No Changes, only residential use Sewer (On-site wastewater treatment system permit# or sewer account #): (SP-1700088) (SP-9600280) Floodplain D No / ❑ Yes Geological Hazard NoNo / ❑ Yes Airport Overlay CYNo / ❑ Yes PROJECT Change of Use - Horse Stall to Residential Garage, USR Use being applied for: Park some commercial vehicles on-site Name of proposed business: Still a residence, Duco Inc parks several commercial vehicles PROPERTY OWNER(S) (Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Name: Brian Rector Company: n/a Phone #: 970-629-1906 Email: brector1983@gmail.com Street Address: 20601 COUNTY ROAD 53 KERSEY,CO 806449113 City/State/Zip Code: APPLICANT/AUTHORIZED AGENT (Authorization Form must be included if there is an Authorized Agent) Name: David Huwa Company: Colorado Civil Group, Inc. Phone #: 970-278-0029 ext 107 Email: dhuwa@ccginc.us Street Address: 2204 Hoffman Drive City/State/Zip Code: Loveland, CO 80538 I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, and/or plans submitted with or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. All fee owners of the property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, an Authorization Form signed by all fee owners must be included with the application. If the fee owner is a corporation, evidence must be included indicating the signatory has the legal authority to sign for the corporation. /2- 2y' Signature Date Signature Date , i Print Prirt Departments of Planning i�6: '�- Building, Development Review and Environmental Health 7, 7� �j 1402 N 17TH Avenue 1 � P.O. Box 758 �' '' �"Jr /i _.' Greeley, CO 80632 L CC ti _Y Authorization Form �i 11 I, (We), /.�,.-i i,,,, /Z?c/car , give permission to D(�V \ ry l.6,0 D� (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: Zo(90 t CAL. 53 Legal Description: 1-.4-i (Let- E)cev-e of Section -° , Township y N, Range CAN W Subdivision Name: — Lot — Block - Property Owners Information: Address: 20(96t (-0- 53 Phone: 970- 6DA9 - I90(0 E-mail: btec..V-or 1ci 3@ 5r^�.1 • co ,ti. Authorized Agent/Applicant Contact Information: (Jav;A l t,..t.aa wl t!o l o rcJ O C ;o . ( (9 ro 1-kia, 1 r`c Address: a 2 O 4 k..0..,o,A Or;t►-e , Co v-e-, awn S. C 0 Rj5 3 Phone: 5 70 -a 5 0 - LI 3.2 S- E-Mail: A L,U'C LC_s ► (1 C. . 5 Correspondence to be sent to: Owner / Authorized Agent/Applicant by: Mail Email y Additional Info: 6)1."` < e-N- °-f, j\ C-o rrt 5 e oy"4e..l'ce .•)--o B r ;c• \ 4- °au�`i �� b r-e c_)uc- 1 R E-3 @ 91^---....1 - c o c,- AN t,i w g•-- e L L5 ;�C . LAJ I (We) hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and after carefully reading the entire contents of this document, that the information stated above is true and correct to the best of my(our) knowledge. /4.: Date/2-Z•0•-zy Date Owner Signature Owner Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this a3 day of '12g,L�M4j€,e_ , 20 a.4 by -1)gviCa HuwA My commission expires Ib •a.N• a.1:52.1-7 ` 'fl raQ, off, Notary Public 9ARCELLA OLSON NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 201 E-1u41578 My C.:ommissioa Expires:3doi sr 2.4,2027 .4 Use by Special Review (USR) Planning Questionnaire Answer the following questions per Section 23-2-260. A, B, C & E of the Weld County Code. Please type on a separate sheet. If a question does not pertain to your proposal, please respond with an explanation — do not leave questions blank. 1. Explain the proposed use and business name. 2. Explain the need for the proposed use. 3. Describe the current and previous use of the land. 4. Describe the proximity of the proposed use to residences. 5. Describe the surrounding land uses of the site and how the proposed use is compatible with them. 6. Describe the hours and days of operation (i.e. Monday thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). 7. Describe the number of employees including full-time, part-time and contractors. If shift work is proposed, detail number of employees, schedule and duration of shifts. 8. Describe the maximum number of users, patrons, members, buyers or other visitors that the site will accommodate at any one time. 9. List the types and maximum numbers of animals to be on the site at any one time (for dairies, livestock confinement operations, kennels, etc.). 10. List the types and number of operating and processing equipment. 11. List the types, number and uses of the existing and proposed structures. 12. Describe the size of any stockpile, storage or waste areas. 13. Describe the method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, junk and other wastes associated with the proposed use. 14. Include a timetable showing the periods of time required for the construction of the operation. 15. Describe the proposed and existing lot surface type and the square footage of each type (i.e. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings). 16. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicap-accessible parking spaces are proposed? 17. Describe the existing and proposed fencing and screening for the site including all parking and outdoor storage areas. 18. Describe the existing and proposed landscaping for the site. 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. 20. Describe the proposed fire protection measures. 21. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan per Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code. 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.) 23. Explain how this proposal will be compatible with future development of the surrounding area or adopted master plans of affected municipalities. 24. Explain how this proposal impacts 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. 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. 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. Weld County-Use By Special Review(USR) 12/31/2024 Planning Questionnaire 1. Property will remain a private residence. Applicant is requesting permission to park 10-15 commercial vehicles on-site within a fenced area. 2. The requested change of use is needed to be able to park 10-15 commercial vehicles on- site. This is primarily a security issue as theft of construction equipment is a significant concern and harms small businesses throughout the County. 3. The current landuse is a private residence and will remain so. The requested use of parking 10-15 commercial vehicles is the purpose for this USR. 4. There is one neighbor to the north, one to the west, one to the south, and one across WCR 53, each with homes of varying distances to the commercial vehicles to be parked within a screened/fenced area. The distances range from about 100 feet to 800 feet. 5. The surrounding properties are rural residential, acreage lots, some appear to be horse properties or are fenced for livestock. 6. Approximately 7-10 workers arrive by pickup truck around 7am during the week and depart over the next 1 1 hours. Workers that return do so around 6:30pm and generally leave the property by 7pm. 7. Generally, 7-10 workers arrive each day,these are full-time workers, but leave the property within 1 ' hours, and then return around 6:30pm. 8. There would not be any users, patrons, members, buyers or other visitors at the property. 9. No animals are currently at the property or planned to be brought to the property. 10. The only intent for having commercial vehicles on-site is to park them overnight for security, there is no operating or processing equipment planned on-site. 11. All existing structures on-site are associated with residential use. There are several livestock sheds that are not utilized for residential or commercial purposes. There is one residential home, one residential detached garage,two residential storage sheds, and five ag-exempt horse stalls that aren't in use. 12. There are no current or planned stockpiles, storage, or waste areas. 13. There are no current or planned needed waste removal processes. 14. No construction is planned at this time. 15. Refer to drainage letter for the property's existing surface makeup. There are no planned changes to the surfacing at the property. 16. No parking spaces or handicap-accessible parking spaces are proposed, customers or the public do not visit the property. 17. There currently is 5-foot 5-rail(metal tube)fence around all four sides of property. A smaller portion of the site(southwest corner)will be improved with 6-foot high cedar plank fencing to address screening concerns/requirements from the County. 18. Existing vegetation is dryland/native type grasses, sod and a few trees around residences. No changes are planned, screening of commercial equipment will be accomplished with cedar fence. 19. No reclamation of the site will be needed. 20. There are no planned changes to fire protection as this is a residential property and all existing structures are part of the residential/ag use. 21. The residential use and parking of a few commercial vehicles for security concerns is consistent with agricultural zoning. 22. The existing residential use of the property with the parking of a few commercial vehicles does not jeopardize or negatively impact agriculture in the area. 23. Unknown what future development in the area will be,this is a rural and agriculture area. Large scale ag operations with equipment and vehicles are in the area, acreage properties are in the area that are unlikely to further develop. 24. No impacts to health, safety, and welfare of surrounding citizens. Alternatively protecting one's livelihood by protecting small business reduces impact to the County and taxpayers. 25. No irrigation features are existing or proposed. 26. No districts impact the residential property,variance requests from the board of adjustments are not anticipated. 27. There are no known state/federal permits required for residential use and parking of a few commercial vehicles. Weld County-Use By Special Review(USR) 03/14/2025 Environmental Health Questionnaire 1. There are no planned changes to the existing public potable water source,which is Central Weld County Water District. A water bill is provided for review. 2. There are no planned changes to the existing private on-site septic system. The permit number is SP-9600280,SP-1700088. Workers at the property periodically(morning and evening primarily) utilize a porta-pot located near the detached residential garage. 3. No storage or warehousing is proposed, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 4. No storage is proposed, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 5. No fuel storage is proposed, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 6. No washing of vehicles is proposed, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 7. No floor drains are proposed, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 8. No air emissions are expected, only parking equipment on-site is proposed. 9. A design and operations plan is not applicable, only change of use is parking equipment on- site. 10. A nuisance management plan is not applicable, only change of use is parking equipment on-site. 11. Acknowledged. 12. Maintenance will not occur at this location,this USR is to allow vehicles to park overnight for an increased level of security. P.PqNWPWIll COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. Engineering Consultants December 31, 2024 Weld County Department of Planning and Zoning 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Drainage Narrative for 20601 WCR 53, Rector Property To whom it may concern, In May 2022 Mr. Brian Rector purchased the property a 20601 WCR 53 south of Kersey, Colorado, Parcel No. 105320100032. Mr. Rector began storing commercial vehicles on the property resulting in a Weld County code violation. In order to address the code violation a land use application is required. As part of the land use application a Drainage Narrative was requested by Weld County. Mr. Rector is requesting permission via the USR process to park 10-15 commercial vehicles on the property overnight to provide better security for the vehicles. The County is requiring that the commercial vehicles be screened and so the only planned improvement to the property is to install a 6-foot-high opaque privacy fence, which will be made of cedar planks. There are no planned surfacing changes to the parcel with this application. Therefore, there will not be any changes to the existing site imperviousness and drainage patterns. With no changes in impervious, no detention is required and no Exceptions to Weld County Code are requested. The existing topography shows that there is a slight ridge splitting the site runoff within the site. Approximately two- thirds of the site flows in the northeast direction, to the existing roadside swale along WCR 53, the western one- third flows in the westerly direction overland and offsite to adjacent open fields. The current landowner has not suggested that there are any drainage problems with the property. Exhibit A, attached, shows the property and the existing drainage patterns through the site. If there are any questions or concerns with the drainage narrative for Mr. Rector's property, please let us know. Sincerely, fc NP David Huwa, P.E. f0727 Colorado Civil Group, Inc. 970.278.0029 ,� ••••••• �a dhuwa(accdinc.us COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. • 2204 Hoffman Drive • Loveland, CO 80538 • 970-278-0029 EXHIBIT A ; \/ ...„ _ ,. _ / f / "` •/ , \_ I-. 5----- i , . /�- - - � � - - \—. - / _ - - / : .i C-' GILMORE DITCH — / \ ' � • J '' / • I „„, ----____, ____ ....—..—,ea.6----.=—_,.--. — - _ - '' -—‘1P111 WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 — _ _ — — ` : \ / < 1- - _ I I ' -� P \ 1 -�"j I / i/ ADDRESS:20601 WCR 53 V 'I/ ii "r / \ iilt 7\ ,, , , ,,,, __ „ 77, ) t. _____ _ , \ _7• 1,1_, , ,.. „ / „.. ..77,_ . , 1 , ,. ... ....,/ , .., , ,, / __, __„/ . , f ,.. _, _ _ __ ,_ - ,7\, _ __ - / , I . , // , 7 7 11 ._ • _ _ 1/ �/ SITE RIDGE LINE \11 \y,_ ,. • 1.-4:tr ,, I I I — - ii-_,- . — -- o N _ __ .s , _______ ____ '\ \ AL_ / (\ / .. � " / / I _ w� -__ - - \ \ / \ r w.'" ---,at ... ,,,— , _ i ,\ ' llp T 1 ) '...._ , \\ — — J _ � H FENCE SCREEN / - \ -F =ii _,. VIIX , T �' / T` \ \ fir / ( \ 7 /\ \V A II/ iiii iiii klinilpfre,_. .. 60 _ \— • • \) \ \\fee , 111Eimi jilt. �� .�+ 1 \ / / ti L ! +� \ - ".. 16i-1.17- V '� \ \ /• o 100 zoo ---- - \ \ �^ - \ / I scale 1"=100' feet Ault 4. FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR BRIAN RECTOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING 20601 COUNTY ROAD 53 COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO MARCH 2024 CCG Project #: 0108.0001.00 Weld County Case #: ZCV22-00217 USR COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. PWW"gill COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. Engineering Consultants March 14, 2025 Development Review Engineer Department of Planning Services Weld County 1402 N 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re: ZCV22-00217 BRIAN RECTOR COMMERCIAL PARKING - Final Drainage Report CCG Project No. 0108.0001.00 We are pleased to submit this Final Drainage Report for the Brian Rector Commercial Parking USR project. The property is owned by Mr. Brian Rector, it is his personal residence, but he is requesting permission to park 10-15 commercial vehicles overnight on the property for additional security measures. No change in surface material will occur with this project, however, minor site improvements are proposed such as no parking signage for commercial vehicles, locking of horse stall gates, installation of a 6-foot high screening fence and an earthen berm around the proposed parking area to prevent stormwater runoff from leaving the parking area. This report was prepared based on the current Weld County Drainage Criteria. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, ,i . _ e,,�� ce. .. i .AP .i I'd-5t1 N\.k.i_ . 1 ^"``` ¶t' 40727 ) `•� David A. Huwa, P.E. ' '•3/f fr `,/ COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. ook.""`. COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. • 2204 Hoffman Drive • Loveland, Colorado 80538 • 970-278-0029 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Objectives 1 2 General Location and Description 1 2.1 Location 1 2.2 Description of Property 2 2.2.1 Existing Site Description 2 2.2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2 2.2.1.2 Existing Soil Properties 2 2.2.1.3 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 3 2.2.1.4 Existing Drainage Properties 3 2.2.2 Proposed Site Description 3 3 Drainage Design Criteria 4 3.1 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 4 3.2 Hydrological Criteria 5 3.2.1 Rainfall Event, Frequency, and Duration 5 3.2.2 Calculation Methods 5 3.2.3 Detention Storage and Discharge Methods 6 3.3 Hydraulic Criteria 8 3.3.1 Street Capacity 8 3.3.2 Storm Sewer Capacity 8 3.3.3 Detention Pond Design 8 3.4 Stormwater Quality Criteria 8 3.5 Erosion Control Plan 10 4 Drainage Basins 10 4.1 Previous Drainage Reports and Regional Drainage Studies 10 4.2 Off-site Flow 10 4.3 Existing Drainage Analysis 10 4.3.1 Historic Basins Evaluation 11 4.4 Developed Drainage Analysis 12 4.4.1 Developed Basins 12 5 Drainage Facility Design 14 5.1 General Concept 14 5.2 Existing Drainage Features 15 5.3 Proposed Drainage Features 15 i Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 5.3.1 Detention Pond 15 5.3.2 Permanent Water Quality Control Measure 15 6 Conclusions 16 7 References 16 Appendix A: Existing Site Information A Appendix B: Existing& Proposed Site Hydrology& Exhibits B Appendix C: Water Quality Capture Volume for Sand Filter C ii Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 1 Introduction 1.1 Objectives The objective of this report is to provide a final drainage evaluation documenting the impact of parking commercial vehicles on a portion of Brian Rector's residential property. Existing peak runoff from these areas will be compared to proposed peak runoff. This report was prepared in accordance with the Weld County Drainage Criteria. 2 General Location and Description 2.1 Location The Brian Rector property (orange outline in Figure 2.1) is located approximately 2,000 feet south of Weld County Road (WCR) 44, and along the west side of WCR 53. The Rector property is in the Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 4 North, Range 64 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Weld, Colorado and comprises 6.56 acres +/- per the Weld County Assessor's property portal. The proposed commercial parking area occupies approximately 1 acre. See Figure 2.1 Vicinity Map below. Figure 2.1: Vicinity Map 25766 25876 , 20938 t 25660' �� s ti I 1: 140 • • yjnii 20705_ 1 Brian Rector Commercial Parking MARCH 2024 2.2 Description of Property 2.2.1 Existing Site Description 2.2.1.1 Existing Conditions The existing property is zoned Agricultural and consists of a residential home and detached garage, livestock shelters, livestock pens, a gravel driveway and yard, sandy horse stalls, and native grass vegetated areas. The existing property generally slopes from south to north at 2%, but a ridge directs a smaller portion of the site to the northwest and a larger portion of the site to the northeast. This parcel is not located within Weld County's MS4 area. See Figure 2.2 below showing an aerial image prior to the property being owned by Brian Rector. Figure 2.2: Pre-Commercial Parking Aerial Image i v1� • vra s 7� JJ la _... __= - - ��_. k �.�.-ram• 2.2.1.2 Existing Soil Properties Soil properties described in this section were determined from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website using the Web Soil Survey to compile and present the data, which is provided in Appendix 2 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 A. The soil found on-site can be classified as Group A Vona loamy sand per NRCS. See Appendix A. 2.2.1.3 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) This parcel is not located within the 100-year floodplain as indicated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Zone X, Map Number 08123C1775E, effective date January 20, 2016. The FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette is presented in Appendix A for reference. 2.2.1.4 Existing Drainage Properties Drainage properties described in this section were also determined using the NRCS Web Soil Survey website. The two Drainage properties evaluated for the soils observed on-site are hydrologic soil group and Drainage class. The four hydrologic soil groups identify Drainage properties such as infiltration rates, runoff potential, ability to Sewer, and rate of water transmission. Vona loamy sand is classified as Group A. Group A soils are defined by the NRCS as "Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission." 2.2.2 Proposed Site Description There are only a few changes proposed to the existing site to accommodate the requested commercial parking. Those improvements include physically closing horse stall gates and fastening No Parking Commercial Vehicles Prohibited signs at existing horse stall gates, and installing a 6-foot tall cedar fence for screening of the parking area. The property driveway and yard were previously surfaced with gravel (at least as far back as 2008) so no changes to the driveway and yard are proposed. The existing horse stall where commercial vehicles are to be parked is sandy, no changes are proposed to the parking area's surface material as it effectively prevents runoff and doesn't get muddy (great all-weather surface). An 3 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 earthen berm is proposed around the perimeter of the inside of the parking area to provide secondary containment to runoff, although stormwater runoff is not expected even during significant precipitation events due to the Group A soil found on-site. With no proposed changes to the surfacing of the entire property, no changes to stormwater runoff are expected. However, Weld County drainage criteria suggests that parking areas should be considered at a higher impervious percentage, so the proposed stormwater evaluation provided in this report will show minor changes to stormwater runoff. Figure 2.3 below shows the Brian Rector Property and identifies the proposed commercial vehicle parking area. Figure 2.3: Brian Rector Commercial Vehicle Parking I iummimllIl..:mumzmm......a.IMIEIMI CommercialParking .1k p ! 7i .. _._ ._ _. .... . _ . _,_ ___,. .. . . _____ __ 3 Drainage Design Criteria 3.1 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints The hydrologic and hydraulic design for the Brian Rector Commercial Vehicle Parking project was based on the Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria (WCECC), and Mile High Flood District (MHFD) recommendations. 4 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 3.2 Hydrological Criteria 3.2.1 Rainfall Event, Frequency, and Duration Rainfall values were taken from the NOAA Atlas 14 website and can be found in Appendix B. IDF data was developed using the 1-hour point rainfall values and Equation 5.4.1 from the WCECC. 3.2.2 Calculation Methods There are several different methods common with development that can be used to model or predict the amount of surface runoff generated from precipitation events. The Rational Formula Method was selected for the evaluation area of Brian Rector Property as the project area is less than 90 acres (MHFD recommended maximum). Percent Imperviousness values for different land use or surface characteristics were determined from WCECC Table 5-2. While the percent imperviousness (25%) for "Playgrounds" identified in Table 5-2 is a more appropriate percent impervious to describe the Vona loamy sand, Weld County has requested the proposed commercial parking area be considered "Packed Gravel" (described as Road Base and Compacted, Cleared, Earthen Areas typically used for Roads/Parking/Storage), with a percent imperviousness of 40%. The surface material isn't packed gravel, it doesn't include the fines to help the material bind together as found in an aggregate road base, nevertheless, 40% impervious will be assumed for the commercial parking area per Weld County's request. See a portion of WCECC Table 5-2 below. Parks,Cemeteries 10 Playgrounds 25 Schools 55 Railroad Yard Areas 50 Roofs 90 Undeveloped Areas: Historic Flow Analysis 2 Greenbelts,Agricultural 2 Streets: Paved 100 Packed Gravel(Includes Road Base and Compacted, 40 Cleared,Earthen Areas typically used for Roads/Parking/Storage) Recycled Asphalt Pavement 75 Drives and Walks 90 5 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Table 5-3 in the WCECC was used for runoff coefficients associated with different surface materials percent imperviousness. Table 3.1 below shows Percent Impervious values for the surface materials evaluated at the Brian Rector Property. Table 3.1: Impervious Values Land Use of Surface Characteristics Percent Impervious Horse Stalls 2% Undeveloped/Greenbelt 2% Roofs, Concrete Drives&Walks 90% Paved Streets 100% Road-Gravel 40% Horse Stalls "Compacted Sand" Parking 40% WCECC runoff coefficient formulas were taken from Table 5-3, overland and channelized flow equations Eq. 5.5.1.2 & 5.5.1.3 were used to develop time of concentration values, and Eq. 5.4.1 was used to determine the intensity. The runoff coefficient table can be found in Appendix B. 3.2.3 Detention Storage and Discharge Methods Detention storage and discharge were not evaluated for this project as it meets a qualifying exception to detention requirements as provided in Section 5.10.2.7 of the WCECC. The qualifying exception states `A parcel of land or project site where the "total developed stormwater runoff"from the 100-year, 1-hour storm is less than, or equal to, five (5) cfs. The "total developed stormwater runoff" includes cumulative runoff from the proposed project site plus runoff from any previously developed project site on the subject parcel. A project site is the area of land that lies within the project's limits of disturbance during construction. This exception shall be supported by calculations signed and stamped by a Colorado Licensed Professional Engineer" Supporting calculations and results are found in later sections of this report and Appendix B. 6 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Qualifying Exception requests must also describe the following criteria: • The exception being requested for consideration: this is stated in Section 3.2.3 Detention Storage and Discharge Methods. • Any existing and proposed improvements to the property: this is stated in Section 2.2.2 Proposed Site Description. • Where the water originates if it flows onto the property from offsite sources: topography shows storm water runoff may flow onto the property from the south only, however, the soils are considered Group A Vona loamy sand with low runoff potential per NRCS. • Where the water flows as it leaves the property: topography shows that water would leave the property to the northwest and primarily to the northeast. Again, since the soils are Group A, runoff is expected to be minimal. Additionally, with the addition of an earthen berm, if runoff does occur it would be contained by the 6-inch earthen berm and not allowed to leave the property. • The direction of flow across the property: topography shows that water would flow across the property to the northwest and primarily to the northeast. Again, since the soils are Group A, runoff is expected to be minimal. • Previous drainage problems with the property if any: the current landowner indicated he has not observed flowing water leaving the site and states there are no drainage problems he's aware of Weld County has not indicated a history of drainage problems at the property. • The location of any irrigation facilities adjacent to or near the property: no agricultural irrigation facilities are found on-site or immediately adjacent to the property. • Any additional information pertinent to the development: no additional information currently. 7 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 3.3 Hydraulic Criteria 3.3.1 Street Capacity Stormwater runoff from the proposed commercial parking area will likely be infiltrated within the Vona loamy sand. If stormwater runoff is sufficient enough to actually "run-off", the proposed 6-inch earthen berm will prevent runoff from reaching WCR 53, so street capacity has not been evaluated. 3.3.2 Storm Sewer Capacity No storm sewers are being designed as part of this project. 3.3.3 Detention Pond Design As previously mentioned, a qualified exception to stormwater detention is discussed in Section 3.2.3 of this report. 3.4 Stormwater Quality Criteria Weld County stated in an initial USR review that "Water Quality is required for commercial truck parking." CCG then asked the following question: Do you mean a water quality pond or a water quality BMP? I'd like to clarify as I'm used to seeing a water quality pond required with disturbances that exceed an acre, and possibly part of MS4 requirements. Is that what you are looking for or a BMP? The entire site is basically disconnected pervious areas, and there are a couple vegetated buffers from the parking area east to the WCR 53? Is that a valid approach or do you require something else? Weld County's response was: Commercial truck parking results in soil contamination from leaked oils, greases, hydraulic fluids, diesel fuel, etc. The appropriate permanent water quality control measures should be provided. Understanding that the request to park 10-15 commercial vehicles in one area of the site is a minor development or change to the site, CCG sought to utilize the existing natural site features to provide for a Permanent Water Quality Control Measure. Utilizing existing on-site grass buffers and a sand filters is a cost-effective approach and both permanent 8 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 water quality control measures are supported by Weld County and Mile High Flood District. CCG suggested that a Grass Buffer, which is already present along the eastern and northern boundaries of the site, is considered a Permanent Water Quality Control Measure as it provides primary, secondary, and incidental treatment processes according to Mile High Flood District Table 2-1, see table below. Table 2-1. Primary,Secondary and Incidental Treatment Process Provided by BMPs Hydrologic Processes Treatment Processes Peak Volume Physical Chemical Biological UDFCD BMP Flow Infiltration Evapo- Sedimentation Filtration Straining Adsorption Biological Attenuation transpiration Absorption Uptake Grass Swale I S 1 S S P S S Grass Buffer I S I S S P S S Constructed Wetland Channel I N A P P S P S P Green Roof P S P N A P N A I P Permeable Pavement Systems P P N/A S P N A N A WA Bioretention p p S P p S _ S' P Extended Detention Basin P 1 I P N A S S I Sand Filter P P I P P N:A S` N A Constructed Wetland Pond P I P P S S P P Retention Pond P I P P N/A N/A . P S Underground BMPs Variable N/A N/A Variable Variable Variable Variable N A Notes: P=Primary;S=Secondary,I=Incidental;N/A=Not Applicable t Depending on media A Grass Buffer provides Incidental Flow Attenuation and Evapotranspiration as well as Secondary Infiltration processes, which reduces runoff. This is further supported by the Group A Vona loamy sand soils found on-site. A Grass Buffer also provides Secondary Treatment via Sedimentation, Filtration, Adsorption / Absorption, and Biological Uptake. Adsorption and Absorption are treatment process that specifically addresses chemicals 9 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 such as oils, greases, fluids and fuels. A Grass Buffer also provides Primary Treatment of stormwater runoff via straining debris. Weld County indicated that a Grass Buffer is a Construction BMP, this is true, it can be effective during construction, but it is also considered a Permanent BMP according to Mile High Flood District Volume III, Chapter 2 BMP Selection. Additionally, a Grass Buffer is named as a Permanent Water Quality Control Measure in WCECC Section 6.2.6.2. Since a Grass Buffer provides secondary treatment for chemicals, CCG suggested that the property's Group A soils (Vona loamy sand) that have low runoff potential would provide effective primary treatment of fluids or liquids leaked from commercial vehicles. A 6-inch-high earthen berm is proposed around the commercial parking area to contain any runoff that does occur. 3.5 Erosion Control Plan The installation of a 6-inch-high earthen berm around the parking area will prevent runoff from leaving the parking area and ensure stormwater will infiltrate through the existing sand filter of the parking area. Erosion is not anticipated during any work required for the use of the horse stall as commercial vehicle parking. 4 Drainage Basins 4.1 Previous Drainage Reports and Regional Drainage Studies No site-specific drainage report or study was found for this property. 4.2 Off-site Flow Minimal to no off-site flow is anticipated for this project. Topography and sandy soils around the property significantly reduce the likelihood of off-site flow entering the property. 4.3 Existing Drainage Analysis The Rector property appears to drain to the northwest and northeast, based on LIDAR topography. The physical parameters and hydrologic calculations for the basins can be found in Appendix B. Drainage Plans showing existing and proposed conditions can be found in Appendix B. 10 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 4.3.1 Historic Basins Evaluation There is a ridge located along the western one-third of the property, dividing the property into two primary basins. For the existing evaluation, one basin is named H-NW (Historic Northwest) and the second basin is named H-NE (Historic Northeast). Existing impervious areas were divided into four categories, Greenbelt, Horse Stalls), Concrete & Roofs, and Paved (Gravel) for purposes of determining total impervious area. Two Historic Basin evaluations were performed, the first to determine the full property percent imperviousness (Table 4.1), the second to determine the horse stall only percent imperviousness (Table 4.2), as this is considered the "Project Site" where a change in imperviousness is evaluated. The total approximate property area is 6.56 acres, while the horse stall area evaluated is estimated at 0.98 acres. Exhibits B and B1 found in Appendix B show the historic condition percent imperviousness for the full property and horse stall only. Table 4.1: Historic Drainage Basin Imperviousness (Full Property) Historic Condition-PROPERTY Basin Categories and Areas(SF) 111 Percent Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Imp Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Classification 1... 2% 2% 90% 40% mmilli (%/100) (acres H-N W 20,037 30,281 4,205 15,905 0 15.8% A 1.62 H-NE 80,489 87,819 12,254 34,777 0 13.1% A 4.94 TOTAL(acres) 2.31 2.71 0.38 1.16 0.00 TOTAL 6.56 Table 4.2: Historic Drainage Basin Imperviousness (Horse Stall Only) Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Basin Categories and Areas(SF) Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Imp Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Classification 2% 2% 90% 40% (%/100) (acres H-NW-A 0 13,938 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.32 H-NE-B 0 28,562 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.66 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 0.98 Historic Basin Time of Concentration was then calculated for the full property and the horse stall only. Full property basin time of concentration is shown in Table 4.3 below. The horse stall only basin time of concentration is shown in Table 4.4 below. 11 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Table 4.3: Historic Drainage Basin TOC (Full Property) Historic Condition-PROPERTY Percent _MUBasin Parameters Soil Overland Flow Concentrated Flow Basin I.D. Imperviousness 'Area t, Final tr Classification C, C50 Ciao Length Slope t, Length Slope t, Type of Land Surface (%/100) s) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (min) (min) ® 15.8% 0� 0.18 1®�®® 24.8 ®1 1 1 Short Pasture and Lawns ®®i ®MEZI=0 0.09 ERSE= 4.94 =MEEMENEMIMMENIMEM Short Pasture and Lawns ®®i. Table 4.4: Historic Drainage Basin TOC (Horse Stall Only) Historic Condition-HORSE STALL p. Percent r Imperviousness Basin Parameters Soil Area Overland Flow Concentrated Flow 4 Final t, Classification C, C3o Cm) Length Slope t; Length Slope ti Type of Land Surface (%/100) (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (min) (min) ®u 2.0% ©' 1 1 1 1 EFEEMIEMI 11 1 1 MEMf 1 1 Short Pasture and Lawns =EN=EMMEN ITIEM 2.0% IMD=WIRIFICEEEM 0.66 METEMEZEMMEMEMZE Short Pasture and Lawns MEM MEERMan Historic Basin Hydrology was then calculated for the full property and the horse stall only. Full property basin hydrology is shown in Table 4.5 below. The horse stall only basin hydrology is shown in Table 4.6 below. Table 4.5: Historic Drainage Basin Hydrology (Full Property) Historic Condition-PROPERTY Basin Percent Time of Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 11911 Area Impervious Concentration 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Is lit Iwo Qs Qio Qtoo (acres) (minutes) Cs C. C100 (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) H-NW 1.62 15.8% A 30.1 0.11 0.18 0.31 1.80 2.23 4.20 0.31 0.64 2.10 H-NE 4.94 13.1% A 30.6 0.09 0.16 0.29 1.77 2.19 4.12 0.76 1.72 6.00 Table 4.6: Historic Drainage Basin Hydrology (Horse Stall Only) Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Basin Percent Time of Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Area Impervious Concentration 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Is lit Imo Qs Qio Quo (acres) (minutes) Cs Cto Ctoo (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) H-NW-A 0.32 2.0% A 20.9 0.0 0.07 0.22 2.20 2.72 5.14 0.0 0.06 0.36 H-NE-B 0.66 2.0% A 25.6 0.0 0.07 0.22 1.96 2.42 4.57 0.0 0.11 0.65 The results show that for the "Project Site" of approximately 0.98 acres, the total 100-year historic discharge is 1.01 cfs, which is less than 5 cfs. 4.4 Developed Drainage Analysis 4.4.1 Developed Basins The existing ridge will remain with the use of the horse stall for commercial vehicle parking and is still located along the western one-third of the property, dividing the property into two primary basins. For the developed evaluation, one basin is named D-NW (Developed Northwest) and the second basin is named D-NE (Developed Northeast). Developed impervious areas were divided into five categories, Greenbelt, 12 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Horse Stalls, Concrete & Roofs, Paved (Gravel), and Horse Stalls Parking (Packed Sand) for purposes of determining total impervious area. Two Developed Basin evaluations were performed, the first to determine the full property percent imperviousness (Table 4.7), the second to determine the horse stall only percent imperviousness (Table 4.8), as this is considered the "Project Site" where a change in imperviousness is evaluated. The total approximate property area is 6.56 acres, while the horse stall area evaluated is estimated at 0.98 acres. Exhibits C and C1 found in Appendix B show the developed condition percent imperviousness for the full property and horse stall only. Table 4.7: Developed Drainage Basin Imperviousness (Full Property) Developed Condition-PROPERTY Basin Categories and Areas(SF) Horse Stalls Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Parking Imp, Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Classification (Compacted) y 2% 2% 90% 40% 40% (%/100) (acres) D-NW 20,037 16,343 4,205 15,905 13,938 23.4% A 1.62 - D-NE 80,489 59,257 12,254 34,777 28,562 18.2% A 4.94 TOTAL(acres) 2.31 1.74 0.38 1.16 0.98 TOTAL 6.56 Table 4.8: Developed Drainage Basin Imperviousness (Horse Stall Only) Developed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Basin Categories and Areas(SF)ME i Percent Concrete& Paved Horse Stalls Soil Basin Area Greenbelt Horse Stalls Imp. Roofs Gravel Parking Classification 2% 2% 90% 40% 40% (%/100) (acres) D-NW-A 0 0 0 0 13,938 40.0% A 0.32 D-NE-B 0 0 0 0 28,562 40.0% A 0.66 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 TOTAL 0.98 Developed Basin Time of Concentration was then calculated for the full property and the horse stall only. Full property basin time of concentration is shown in Table 4.9 below. The horse stall only basin time of concentration is shown in Table 4.10 below. 13 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Table 4.9: Developed Drainage Basin TOC (Full Property) Develo•ed Condition-PROPERTY Percent iia_ Basin Parameters Soil Overland Flow Concentrated Flow Basin I.D. Imperviousness 'Area t, Final tr Classification Cs CI, Ciao Length Slope t, Length Slope tr Type of Land Surface (%/100) s) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (min) (min) 23.4% Mn=.31ff.KM EXIMMOIMEMICEMMEM MIN®i r r Short Pasture and Lawns ® 28.9 MICE MEM 18.2% 0ffnil Elign ENE 4.94 , r r MEEN MEM r r Short Pasture and Lawns ®MFAMMEM Table 4.10: Developed Drainage Basin TOC (Horse Stall Only) Develo•ed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Percent r oncentrated Flow D. Imperviousness Soil Area Overland Flow Basin Parameters 4 Final t� Classification Cs C3o CumLength Slope t; Length Slope ti Type of Land Surface (%/100) (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (min) (min) CIIMEI 40.0% 0EMIN WEN CCM NIMIMIMMMICEMMEENfi r r Short Pasture and Lawns =IN MIEIMMIM D-NE-B 40.0% 0MEM KEN MIR IMIEMMETIEMBEE Mr. ;::EMMEIM Short Pasture and Lawns MEM 19.8 19.8 Developed Basin Hydrology was then calculated for the full property and the horse stall only. Full property basin hydrology is shown in Table 4.11 below. The horse stall only basin hydrology is shown in Table 4.12 below. Table 4.11: Developed Drainage Basin Hydrology (Full Property) Develo•ed Condition-PROPERTY ii Basin Percent Time of Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Mr Area Impervious Concentration 5-Year 100-Year 10-Year Cm C lino Ito 1100 Qtoo Q. Qtoo (acres) (minutes) Ctoo too (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) D-NW 1.62 23.4% A 28.9 0.15 0.22 0.34 1.84 2.27 4.29 0.46 0.81 2.39 D-NE 4.94 18.2% A 29.7 0.12 0.19 0.32 1.80 2.23 4.20 1.09 2.11 6.68 Table 4.12: Developed Drainage Basin Hydrology (Horse Stall Only) Developed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Basin Percent Time of - Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Yea 10-Year 100-Year F Area Impervious Concentration 5-Year 100-Year 10-YearClo lino Ito lion goo Clio Qioo (acres) (minutes) C. Ciao (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) D-NW-A 0.32 40.0% A 16.1 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.53 3.13 5.90 0.20 0.30 0.77 D-NE-B 0.66 40.0% A 19.8 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.26 2.79 5.27 0.36 0.55 1.41 The results show that for the "Project Site" of approximately 0.98 acres, the total 100-year developed discharge is 2.18 cfs, approximately 1.17 cfs more than prior to commercial vehicle parking. It should also be noted that the total 100-year developed discharge from the Project Site is less than 5 cfs, which qualifies this project for an Exception to Detention Requirements per WCECC Section 5.10.2.7. 5 Drainage Facility Design 5.1 General Concept No drainage facilities exist within the project area and none are proposed. 14 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 5.2 Existing Drainage Features Existing site topography is the only drainage feature on-site. 5.3 Proposed Drainage Features 5.3.1 Detention Pond A detention pond is not proposed as the site and change in use results in a 100- year developed stormwater discharge of less than 5 cfs, and meets the exception found in WCECC Section 5.10.2.7. 5.3.2 Permanent Water Quality Control Measure As previously discussed, the existing site characteristics and surface material are proposed as the Permanent Water Quality Control Measure required by Weld County for Commercial Vehicle Parking. The first existing Permanent Water Quality Control Measure utilizes the grass buffer located along the east and north property lines. This water quality control measures provides both hydrologic and treatment processes per Mile High Flood District. Existing grass buffers range in width from 30 feet along the east property line to nearly 200 feet at the northeast corner of the property. , .- I. ji j. w A 1y 41, 011 1� V 100' • "-ay- lilt...7 1 . " • a -tc-JA ,___:__,''r--LLui Ilii 'TV'. --r -"oxicza 200' 7 ____Aiew...,,...=..._,_.:.::_. ......_. .... 30' •- - , - . -, .:::_„. - `---- _:-..------=-__ .--..z_:, 15 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 The second existing Permanent Water Quality Control Measure utilizes the existing Vona loamy sand found across the entire property and within the horse stall to be used for commercial vehicle parking. In order to ensure containment of stormwater runoff that does occur, a 6-inch-high earthen berm will be placed around the inside perimeter of the horse stall parking area. Since Weld County requires that the 1- hour point rainfall amount be used for the 100-year storm event, a 6-inch-high earthen berm should fully contain the 100-year 1-hour storm event with a 1-hour depth of 2.69 inches per NOAA Atlas 14. The Mile High Flood District Detention v4-06 spreadsheet was used to determine the Water Quality Capture Volume for the horse stall parking area. Based on the results presented in Appendix C of this report, the WQCV is 0.012 acre-feet. While it is believed that this volume of water will be infiltrated into the Group A Vona loamy sand without running off, the earthen berm placed around the perimeter of the parking area provides sufficient volume. An area as small as 600 square feet on each side of the ridge ponding to a depth of 6 inches would contain more than 0.012 acre-feet of water. 6 Conclusions Based on the historic and developed conditions at Brian Rector's property, results show only minor changes in stormwater discharge due to the property's Group A Vona loamy sand soils with low runoff potential. Both the historic and developed condition within the horse stall parking area (Project Site) show 100-year stormwater discharges far less than 5 cfs. As a result, this project qualifies for a detention exception per WCECC Section 5.10.2.7. Per Weld County's request, two Permanent Water Quality Control Measures will be utilized on the property and within the horse stall parking area, those are a grass buffer and a sand filter. A 6-inch-high berm installed within the inside perimeter of the horse stall will ensure stormwater runoff does not leave the parking area and utilizes the sand filter. 7 References "Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria" January 2021. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual;" Mile High Flood District; (current) 16 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Appendix A: Existing Site Information A National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette r7 FEMA Legend 104°34'15"W 40°18'10"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT — • Il j Without Base Flood Elevation(BFE) Zone A.V.A99 SPECIAL FLOOD With BFE or Depth Zone AE.AO,AH.VE,AR HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway h I/ .„6, S 0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard,Areas - _�- of 1%annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile zone x Future Conditions 1%Annual Chance Flood Hazard zonex ow Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to OTHER AREAS OF Levee.See Notes.zone x $, FLOOD HAZARD Area with Flood Risk due to Leveezone D - • 11. i - NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zone x rI Effective LOMRs OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D — GENERAL -—-- Channel,Culvert,or Storm Sewer i rmaimirmiLm- - Weld County y' STRUCTURES ill 1 l l 1 Levee,Dike,or Floodwall Unincorporated Areas 080266 O 20.2 Cross Sections with 1%Annual Chance ��s Water Surface Elevation AREA OF MINIMAL FL 0 0 I HAZARD a- - - Coastal Transect z 'Tj _stagy Base Flood Elevation Line(BFE) Limit of Study T4N R64yy S20 Jurisdiction Boundary I — Coastal Transect Baseline T4N R64W S21 OTHER - — Profile Baseline a� • FEATURES Hydrographic Feature Jl► M �F' 1Digital Data Available N r No Digital Data Available MAP PANELS Unmapped 0 ,� The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent _ an authoritative property location. y. This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap Iliaccuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA.This map _ was exported on 3/16/2025 at 7:49 PM and does not - reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time.The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear:basemap imagery,flood zone labels, - - _ legend,scale bar,map creation date,community identifiers, 104°33'38"W 40°17'43"N FIRM panel number,and FIRM effective date.Map images for Feet 1:6,000 V 00o unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 regulatory purposes. Basemap Imagery Source:USGS National Map 2023 USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of RCS Agriculture and other We I d County Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Colorado, Resources Agricultural Experiment Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Southern Part • -- 1 r _ . _ _� -_ r �. t - . LL 1 _ .z . •...• , , , , , _ it„..,,I, 1 en i•ttl _ j MI- • � _ 4 s It ,. ---1..,Ir..1,,H : S t 1 P /1 'r r 1 � ,� i ,.... r.I : 1111 -I:.*- T A 'I 1 =� -,'JU ft I i— �-- r J April 22, 2024 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs)or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice)or(202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made 5 Soil Map 8 Soil Map 9 Legend 10 Map Unit Legend 11 Map Unit Descriptions 11 Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 13 73—Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes 13 Soil Information for All Uses 15 Soil Properties and Qualities 15 Soil Erosion Factors 15 Wind Erodibility Group 15 Wind Erodibility Index 18 Soil Qualities and Features 21 Drainage Class 21 Hydrologic Soil Group 24 References 29 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map - 536803 526830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 40°18'0"N . . I- 40°18'0"N a - a Rr v. 4 ogp ' , - �; r 1 { t � .k, _-_s I 3- job y, II I ' ' lilt I° I I Q it Iiir .: i M Lo .1 .-, •# ' e r H i11 illi 1 11 1 1 1. . , 1 11111r: l_ j . _ I i ;y ''" Soil.M=ap,rnal"rngf be valid {t @• 1C1G. =; # 40°17 51"N ---- - - I • 40°17'51"N 536800 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 A Map Scale:1:1,290 if prii dtcl on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. - $ N rq Meters 0 15 30 60 90 S Feet A 0 50 100 co 200 300 Map project on:Web Mercator Comer o dinates:WGSS4 Edge tics:lrfM Zone 13N WG584 9 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. - Stony Spot Soils • Very Stony Spot Map may Soil Map Unit Polygons Warning:Soil not be valid at this scale. •• Wet Spot • • Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other misunderstandingof the detail of mapping and accuracyof soil 0 Soil Map Unit Points Pp 9 •. Special Line Features line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed V Blowout Water Features scale. Streams and Canals Borrow Pit Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Clay Spot 4-4-« Rails measurements. V Closed Depression Interstate Highways • Gravel Pit Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service US Routes Web Soil Survey URL: Gravelly Spot Major Roads Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) Landfill Local Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator A. Lava Flow Background projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the a Marsh or swamp II Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more * Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required. O Miscellaneous Water This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as O Perennial Water of the version date(s)listed below. v Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part + Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 22,Aug 24,2023 . . Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 4. Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger. O Sinkhole Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jun 8,2021—Jun 12, 3) Slide or Slip 2021 oa Sodic Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand,3 to 5 6.9 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 6.9 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 73—Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2x0j8 Elevation: 4,100 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 17 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 130 to 155 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Hills, hillslopes Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Convex, linear Parent material: Eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: loamy sand Bt1 - 7 to 14 inches: sandy loam Bt2- 14 to 20 inches: sandy loam Bk-20 to 45 inches: sandy loam C-45 to 80 inches: loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R067BY015CO - Deep Sand Hydric soil rating: No 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Ascalon Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: I nterfl uves Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY024C0- Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Manter Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills, interfluves Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, interfluve Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Convex, linear Ecological site: R067BY024C0- Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Olnest Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Interfluves, hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, base slope Down-slope shape: Linear, concave Across-slope shape: Linear, concave Ecological site: R067BY024C0-Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Dunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, side slope, crest Down-slope shape: Convex, linear Across-slope shape: Convex, linear Ecological site: R067BY015C0- Deep Sand Hydric soil rating: No 14 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Erosion Factors Soil Erosion Factors are soil properties and interpretations used in evaluating the soil for potential erosion. Example soil erosion factors can include K factor for the whole soil or on a rock free basis, T factor, wind erodibility group and wind erodibility index. Wind Erodibility Group A wind erodibility group (WEG) consists of soils that have similar properties affecting their susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group 1 are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group 8 are the least susceptible. 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Wind Erodibility Group 12, 538900 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 40°18'0"N . ,I - -- 40°18'0"N ry 1,1 Ar ,,I I may, 1 I y� 7 ,i , ._.__ ._. , . , • , • ^4- ✓ M _ice .'•� rl') 1 i - f s -a i O w t i i = W 4 i ilI- - ' I • '•- Soil,M=ap,rnay` ho be valid {tM 1CIG. ale =; 40°17 51"N - - _ ' I 40°17'51"N 536800 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536880 A Map Scale:1:1,290 if prii dtcl on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. $ N Meters 0 15 30 60 90 S Feet A 0 50 100 co 200 300 Map project on:Web Mercator Comer o dinates:WGSS4 Edge tics:lrfM Zone 13N WG584 16 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) 1 The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. 0 2 Soils 3 Soil Rating Polygons 0 Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 1 4 Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause n 2 4L misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil 11 3 El 5 line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed n 4 0 6 scale. n 4L ■ 7 5 8 Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. El 6 ❑ Not rated or not available 11 7 Water Features Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Streams and Canals Web Soil Survey URL: 0 8 Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) Transportation n Not rated or not available ++« Rails Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Soil Rating Lines projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts ,..i Interstate Highways distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the — 1 US Routes Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more • • 2 accurate calculations of distance or area are required. Major Roads • • 3 Local Roads This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as • • 4 of the version date(s)listed below. Background • 4L Aerial Photography Soil Survey Area: Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part • • 5 Survey Area Data: Version 22,Aug 24,2023 • • 6 Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales •.� 7 1:50,000 or larger. •v 8 Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jun 8,2021—Jun 12, • • Not rated or not available 2021 Soil Rating Points The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Wind Erodibility Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand,3 to 5 2 6.9 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 6.9 100.0% Rating Options—Wind Erodibility Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Wind Erodibility Index The wind erodibility index is a numerical value indicating the susceptibility of soil to wind erosion, or the tons per acre per year that can be expected to be lost to wind erosion. There is a close correlation between wind erosion and the texture of the surface layer, the size and durability of surface clods, rock fragments, organic matter, and a calcareous reaction. Soil moisture and frozen soil layers also influence wind erosion. 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Wind Erodibility Index - 536803 528830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 40°18'0"N I - -- 40°18'0"N Ei a a W ..: '. i W • '1111* P z I 7-.- 1 § ,- • - pp 1 f 4 M $ o f. n I w +1. 'i A' § RR R , d 1 1 • ., . t i iiiir 1 . - �__ 4 -p -- _ O , I -tr,_ ' Soil,NM p,rnayPho• be valid tthi@- a[IG. Ali =; 40°17 51"N - - - ' 40°17'51"N 536800 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 A Map Scale:1:1,290 if pi!dtcl on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. - $ N rq Meters 0 15 30 60 90 S Feet A 0 50 100 co 200 300 Map project on:Web Mercator Comer o dinates:WGSS4 Edge tics:lrfM Zone 13N WG584 19 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) 250 The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. — 310 Soils Not rated or not available Map may Soil Rating Polygons Warning:Soil not be valid at this scale. 0 Soil Rating Points • 0 Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause n 38 misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil 48 ▪ 38 line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of ▪ 48 contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed n 56 scale. n 86 O 56 134 ▪ 86 Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map 134 measurements. n 160 n 180 0 160 Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service p 180 Web Soil Survey URL: 220 Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) 220 250 Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator 250 fl 310 projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts ▪ 310 distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the n Not rated or not available Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more O Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines accurate calculations of distance or area are required. M 0 Water Features Streams and Canals This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as • • 38 of the version date(s)listed below. Transportation • 48 4-4 Rails Soil Survey Area: Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part • 56 SurveyArea Data: Version 22,Aug4,2023 ti Interstate Highways 9 • • 86 US Routes Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales • • 134 Major Roads 1:50,000 or larger. • • 160 Local Roads Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jun 8,2021—Jun 12, . • 180 Background 2021 • • 220 ® Aerial Photography The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Wind Erodibility Index Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating(tons per acre Acres in AOI Percent of AOI per year) 73 Vona loamy sand,3 to 5 134 6.9 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 6.9 100.0% Rating Options—Wind Erodibility Index Units of Measure:tons per acre per year Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Drainage Class "Drainage class (natural)" refers to the frequency and duration of wet periods under conditions similar to those under which the soil formed. Alterations of the water regime by human activities, either through drainage or irrigation, are not a consideration unless they have significantly changed the morphology of the soil. Seven classes of natural soil drainage are recognized-excessively drained, somewhat excessively drained, well drained, moderately well drained, somewhat poorly drained, poorly drained, and very poorly drained. These classes are defined in the "Soil Survey Manual." 21 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Drainage Class 536900 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 40°18'0"N 40°18'0"N a -4 :0111 `w ' I W4 yr* •. j 1_.- i I '----`.-s 4 ;t - ► i = �' 0 + v • 1 i I i - , O '-" Soil,NM p,rnaNPrve,1 be valid tt @. -0g5L. =; 40°17 51"N - - _ ' - 40°17'51"N 536800 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536880 A Map Scale:1:1,290 if pp!dtcl on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. $ N Meters 0 15 30 60 90 S Feet A 0 50 100 co 200 300 Map project on:Web Mercator Comer o dinates:WGS84 Edge tics:lrfM Zone 13N WGS84 22 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) • Excessively drained The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. ❑ Somewhat excessively Soils drained Soil Rating Polygons ❑ Well drained Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. n Excessively drained ❑ Moderately well drained Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause n Somewhat excessively ❑ Somewhat poorly drained misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil drained line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of n Well drained ❑ Poorly drained contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed n Moderately well drained • Very poorly drained scale. 0 Somewhat poorly drained Subaqueous Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map n Poorly drained ❑ Not rated or not available measurements. n Very poorly drained Water Features Streams and Canals Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Li Subaqueous Web Soil Survey URL: Transportation Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) n Not rated or not available 4-4-+ Rails Soil Rating Lines Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator ti Interstate Highways Excessively drained projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts US Routes distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the . . Somewhat excessively Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more drained Major Roads accurate calculations of distance or area are required. • . Well drained Local Roads . • Moderately well drained Background This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s)listed below. . . Somewhat poorly drained in Aerial Photography • • Poorly drained Soil Survey Area: Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 22,Aug 24,2023 ti Very poorly drained ow Subaqueous Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. • • Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jun 8,2021—Jun 12, 2021 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 23 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Drainage Class Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand,3 to 5 Well drained 6.9 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 6.9 100.0% Rating Options—Drainage Class Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D)and three dual classes (ND, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. 24 Custom Soil Resource Report If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (ND, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. 25 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group 12 536803 526830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 40°18'0"N ,I - 40°18'0"N Ei •. a • r a • k. *11 / .RIrk 1 §_ 4 ' � e Fes`---i ilk CU 411hr: ---,....... 4 re 1% ill,— .7! i 3 .4".1§ • i I11 ; III r ' ,,- t fa _ j 1 -- - I =-_-_____ i Alii•- Soil,Mrap,rnal"rrgt be valid {t li1G. =; Aiii 40°17 51"N - - _ ' - I 40°17'51"N 536800 536830 536860 536890 536920 536950 536980 A Map Scale:1:1,290 if prii dtcl on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. $ N Meters 0 15 30 60 90 S Feet A 0 50 100 co 200 3W Map project on:Web Mercator Comer o dinates:WGSS4 Edge tics:lrfM Zone 13N WG584 26 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) El c The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. C/D Soils D Soil Rating Polygons Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. n A ❑ Not rated or not available Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause n A/D Water Features misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil Streams and Canals line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of B Transportation contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed n B/D scale. }-4-+ Rails nC ti Interstate Highways Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map 0 CID US Routes measurements. D Major Roads n Not rated or not available Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Local Roads Web Soil Survey URL: Soil Rating Lines Background Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) AIII Aerial Photography Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator • • A/D projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts •.• B distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more s.i B/D accurate calculations of distance or area are required. • • C This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as • • CID of the version date(s)listed below. •.• D Soil Survey Area: Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part • • Not rated or not available Survey Area Data: Version 22,Aug 24,2023 Soil Rating Points A Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. 0 ND • B Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jun 8,2021—Jun 12, 2021 • B/D The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 27 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 73 Vona loamy sand,3 to 5 A 6.9 100.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 6.9 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher 28 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 29 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=n res 142 p 2_05 3624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf 30 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Appendix B: Existing & Proposed Site Hydrology & Exhibits B 3/16/25,2:47 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server NOAA Atlas 14,Volume 8,Version 2 etc.N. Location name: Kersey,Colorado,USA* �"� ' i V Latitude:40.2988°,Longitude: -104.566° € nonn , • `, 1• "'' Elevation:4724 ft** �a *source:ESRI Maps'17w .1 ES a. *source:USGS ""`" POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES Sanja Perica,Deborah Martin,Sandra Pavlovic,Ishani Roy,Michael St.Laurent,Carl Trypaluk,Dale Unruh,Michael Yekta,Geoffery Bonnin NOAA,National Weather Service,Silver Spring,Maryland PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Average recurrence interval(years) Duration 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 - 200 500 1000 5-min 0.244 0.295 0.393 0.486 0.633 0.761 0.902 1.06 1.28 1.47 (0.198-0.303) (0.239-0.367) (0.317-0.490) (0.390-0.610) (0.496-0.847) (0.576-1.03) (0.655-1.25) (0.732-1.50) (0.848-1.88) (0.937-2.16) 10-min 0.357 0.432 0.575 0.711 0.927 1.11 1.32 1.55 1.88 2.15 (0.290-0.444) (0.350-0.538) (0.464-0.718 (0.570-0.893) (0.726-1.24) (0.844-1.50) (0.959-1.83) (1.07-2.20) (1.24-2.75) (1.37-3.16) 15-min 0.435 0.527 0.701 0.868 1.13 1.36 1.61 1.89 2.29 2.63 (0.353-0.541) (0.427-0.656) (0.566-0.875) (0.696-1.09) (0.885-1.51) (1.03-1.83) (1.17-2.23) (1.31-2.69) (1.52-3.35) (1.67-3.86) 30-min 0.584 0.706 0.938 1.16 1.52 1.82 2.16 2.54 3.09 3.55 (0.474-0.727) (0.572-0.879) (0.757-1.17) (0.931-1.46) (1.19-2.03) (1.38-2.46) (1.57-3.00) (1.76-3.62) (2.04-4.53) (2.26-5.21) 60-min 0.725 0.863 1.14 1.41 1.86 2.25 2.69 3.19 3.92 4.53 (0.588-0.901) (0.699-1.07) (0.918-1.42) (1.13-1.77) (1.46-2.50) (1.71-3.05) (1.96-3.74) (2.21-4.55) (2.59-5.74) (2.88-6.65) 2-hr 0.865 1.02 1.34 1.66 2.19 2.68 3.22 3.83 4.74 5.50 (0.707-1.07) (0.833-1.26) (1.09-1.66) (1.34-2.06) (1.75-2.94) (2.05-3.60) (2.37-4.44) (2.69-5.43) (3.17-6.89), (3.54-8.00) 3-hr 0.947 1.10 1.44 1.78 2.36 2.89 3.49 4.17 5.19 6.04 (0.778-1.16) (0.906-1.36) (1.17-1.77) (1.44-2.20) (1.89-3.16) (2.23-3.88) (2.58-4.80) (2.94-5.88) (3.49-7.50) (3.91-8.73) 6-hr 1.09 1.28 1.66 2.05 2.68 3.26 3.90 4.63 5.70 6.60 (0.904-1.33) (1.06-1.56) (1.37-2.03) (1.67-2.51) (2.16-3.54) (2.53-4.32) (2.91-5.29) (3.29-6.45) (3.87-8.16) (4.31-9.44) 12-hr 1.28 1.51 1.96 2.38 3.05 3.62 4.26 4.96 5.97 6.81 (1.06-1.54) (1.26-1.82) (1.62-2.37) (1.96-2.90) (2.46-3.93) (2.83-4.72) (3.19-5.68) (3.55-6.80) (4.08-8.42) (4.49-9.64) 24-hr 1.51 1.78 2.27 2.72 3.42 4.01 4.65 5.35 6.35 7.16 (1.27-1.81) (1.49-2.13) (1.90-2.72) (2.26-3.28) (2.76-4.34) (3.15-5.14) (3.51-6.12) (3.85-7.24) (4.38-8.83) (4.78-10.0) 2-day 1.74 2.06 2.62 3.12 3.85 4.45 5.08 5.76 6.71 7.46 (1.47-2.06) (1.74-2.44) (2.21-3.11) (2.61-3.72) (3.12-4.80) (3.51-5.62) (3.86-6.59) (4.18-7.68) (4.66-9.20) (5.03-10.3) 3-day 1.90 2.23 2.79 3.29 4.03 4.64 5.28 5.96 6.92 7.68 (1.62-2.24) (1.89-2.62) (2.36-3.30) (2.77-3.91) (3.29-5.00) (3.68-5.82) (4.03-6.80) (4.35-7.90) (4.84-9.42) (5.21-10.6) 4-day 2.03 2.36 2.93 3.44 4.18 4.79 5.43 6.12 7.07 7.84 (1.73-2.38) (2.01-2.77) (2.49-3.45) (2.90-4.06) (3.42-5.16) (3.81-5.99) (4.16-6.96) (4.48-8.06) (4.97-9.59) (5.33-10.7) 7-day 2.31 2.69 3.33 3.87 4.65 5.27 5.90 6.56 7.47 8.17 (1.98-2.69) (2.31-3.14) (2.84-3.89) (3.29-4.55) (3.82-5.66) (4.21-6.50) (4.55-7.47) (4.84-8.55) (5.28-10.0) (5.61-11.1) 10-day 2.55 2.98 3.67 4.25 5.06 5.69 6.32 6.97 7.83 8.48 (2.20-2.96) (2.56-3.45) (3.15-4.27) (3.63-4.97) (4.16-6.11) (4.56-6.96) (4.89-7.94) (5.15-9.00) (5.55-10.4) (5.86-11.5) 20-day 3.27 3.77 4.58 5.23 6.12 6.80 7.46 8.12 8.97 9.60 (2.84-3.75) (3.27-4.33) (3.96-5.27) (4.50-6.06) (5.07-7.28) (5.49-8.21) (5.81-9.24) (6.05-10.3) (6.42-11.8) (6.70-12.8) 30-day 3.85 4.41 5.32 6.05 7.02 7.75 8.46 9.15 10.0 10.7 (3.36-4.39) (3.85-5.04) (4.62-6.09) (5.23-6.96) (5.83-8.29) (6.29-9.29) (6.62-10.4) (6.86-11.6) (7.22-13.1) (7.50-14.2) 45-day 4.55 5.22 6.27 7.12 8.22 9.04 9.82 10.6 11.5 12.2 (3.99-5.16) (4.58-5.93) (5.48-7.15) (6.18-8.15) (6.86-9.63) (7.37-10.8) (7.72-12.0) (7.96-13.3) (8.32-14.9) (8.60-16.1) 60-day 5.12 5.89 7.11 8.06 9.31 10.2 11.0 11.9 12.8 13.5 (4.51-5.79) (5.19-6.67) (6.23-8.07) (7.03-9.20) (7.78-10.8) (8.35-12.1) (8.72-13.4) (8.96-14.8) (9.32-16.5) (9.59-17.8) 1 Precipitation frequency(PF)estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series(PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90%confidence interval.The probability that precipitation frequency estimates(for a given duration and average recurrence interval)will be greater than the upper bound(or less than the lower bound)is 5%.Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation(PMP)estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.2988&Ion=-104.5660&data=depth&units=english&series=pds#table 1/4 3/16/25,2:47 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server PDS-based depth-duration-frequency (DDF) curves Latitude: 40.2988°, Longitude: -104.5660° 14 —' Average recurrence interval 12 {years} 110 — 5 cll $ — 10 o — 25 .w 6 ollIllIlIlSillirllIllWipp. ro — 50 4 J — 100 a E 200 — 500 2 .. -__ y 1 . � — 1000 c_ c c c TT 1- 6- ›, >.>, 5, >, >, >, ›.›,s E cc E E r,, ni Lb N tt -a az-a 7 as 7 7 75 o Duration "J A Av r mi o rsi a 14 12 0°11 'E- 1111111 011 t 10 Duration — 5-min — 2-day mpor•pA-00,000Te„....-- , ,y 6 15-min — 4-day 4 — 60-min — 10-day — 2fir — 20 aay _ 1 3-hr — 30-day 2imi — 6-hr — 45-day • • — 12-hr — 60-day 0 1=� 24-hr 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 Average recurrence interval (years) NIOAA Atlas 14,Volume S,Version 2 Created(GMT}_Sun Mar 16 20:46:37 2025 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?tat=40.2988&Ion=-104.5660&data=depth&units=english&series=pds#table 2/4 3/16/25,2:47 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server FAST 1N °TALI EY VIEW ;f51RPORi r I + a 3km I r r 2mi Large scale terrain i y z y rnT -7_-, 7 'C�7 }renne �Rw 1 r6" YTS Fol't-Coil ins • •Feeley L��ns:i Peak: 1 .:I343 in •L.ongm1nt - Boulder • •Denver U + r 100km HIM 60mi Large scale map Chkeyerpne Fort CollirIs releyi Longmor f Boulder d eny er ,,,•r, + 100km 60mi Large scale aerial https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.2988&Ion=-104.5660&data=depth&units=english&series=pds#table 3/4 3/16/25,2:47 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server r .. r s Fort Collir . '; .. 1Lreel • 2 Lou2..met E,,i-It'JL'r -4\ - ± 4, s i O 100km f !�C 60mi Back to Top US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service National Water Center 1325 East West Highway Silver Spring,MD 20910 Questions?:HDSC.Questions@noaa.gov Disclaimer https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=40.2988&Ion=-104.5660&data=depth&units=english&series=pds#table 4/4 Table 5-3 Runoff Coefficient Equations for Weld County/2007 MHFD (HSG-A) Hydrologic Soil Group A 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Equation Cs=(-0.08i+0.09)+ Co=(-0.14i+0.17)+ Coo=(-0.25i+0.32)+ (1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i (1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i (1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i -0.12) -0.12) -0.12) 2% 0.00 0.07 0.22 5% 0.02 0.10 0.24 10% 0.06 0.14 0.28 15% 0.10 0.17 0.30 20% 0.13 0.20 0.33 25% 0.16 0.23 0.35 30% 0.19 0.25 0.37 35% 0.22 0.28 0.39 40% 0.25 0.30 0.41 45% 0.27 0.33 0.43 50% 0.30 0.35 0.45 55% 0.33 0.38 0.47 60% 0.37 0.41 0.50 65% 0.41 0.45 0.53 70% 0.45 0.49 0.56 75% 0.50 0.54 0.61 80% 0.56 0.60 0.66 85% 0.63 0.66 0.72 90% 0.71 0.73 0.79 95% 0.80 0.82 0.86 100% 0.90 0.92 0.96 WELD COUNTY ENGINEERING&CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA PAGE 141 RECTOR PROPERTY BASIN INFORMATION Historic Condition-PROPERTY 1 Basin Categories and Areas(SF) '1= Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Imp Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Classification Vi 2% 90% 40% (%/100) (acres, H-NW 20,037 30,281 4,205 15,905 0 15.8% A 1.62 H-NE 80,489 87,819 12,254 34,777 0 13.1% A 4.94 TOTAL(acres) 2.31 2.71 0.38 1.16 0.00 TOTAL 6.56 Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Basin Categories and Areas(SF) Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Imp Soil Basin Ar. Roofs Gravel Classification I 2%i„ 2% 90% 40% m (%/100) IIII (acres)' H-NW-A 0 13,938 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.32 H-NE-B 0 28,562 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.66 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 0.98 Developed Condition-PROPERTY Basin Categories and Areas(SF) 'UM 1, 1 Horse Stalls Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Parking Imp. Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Classification Compacted) 40 2%_IMI_ 2% 90% 40% a 40% (%/100) (acres) D-NW 20,037 16,343 4,205 15,905 13,938 23.4% A 1.62 D-NE 80,489 59,257 12,254 34,777 28,562 18.2% A 4.94 TOTAL(acres) 2.31 1.74 0.38 1.16 0.98 TOTAL 6.56 Developed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Basin Categories and Areas(SF) I 7 Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved • Horse Stalls Imp Soil Basin Area Roofs Gravel Parking Classification 2% _IL 2% 90% 40% 40% - (%/100) (acres) D-NW-A 0 0 0 0 13,938 40.0% A 0.32 D-NE-B 0 0 0 0 28,562 40.0% A 0.66 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 TOTAL 0.98 0110.0003.00_HYDROLOGY-WELD COUNTY.xlsx 1 of 1 3/16/2025 RECTOR PROPERTY BASIN TIME OF CONCENTRATION Historic Condition-PROPERTY P • Basin Parameters Percent Soil I Overland Flow Concentrated Flow Basin I.D. Imperviousness Area t, Final t, Classificati io NW Length Slope t; Length Slope tt (%/100) (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) Type of Land Surface (min) (min) (min) H-NW 15.8% A 0.11 0.18 0.31 1.62 350 0.025 24.8 350 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 5.3 30.1 30.1 H-NE 13.1% A 0.09 0.16 0.29 4.94 350 0.025 25.3 350 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 5.3 30.6 30.6 Historic Condition-HORSE STALL rPercent ill Basin Parameters Soil Overland Flow Concentrated FlowIIMMIMr Basin I.D. Imperviousness Area c Final t, Classification C5 CoC100 Length Slope t; Length Slope tt (%/100) _ (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) Type of Land Surface (min) (min) (min) H-NW-A 2.0% A 0.0 0.07 0.22 0.32 200 0.025 20.9 0 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 0.0 20.9 20.9 H-NE-B 2.0% A 0.0 0.07 0.22 0.66 300 0.025 25.6 0 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 0.0 25.6 25.6 Developed Condition-PROPERTY Percent Basin Parameters alliL Soil Overland Flow =Mr Concentrated Flow asin I.D. Imperviousness Area Final t Classification C5 C10 C100 Length Slope t; Ingirngth Slope tt (%/100),_ (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) Type of Land Surface (min) (min) (min) D-NW 23.4% A 0.15 0.22 0.34 1.62 350 0.025 23.6 350 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 5.3 28.9 28.9 D-NE 18.2% A 0.12 0.19 0.32 4.94 350 0.025 24.4 350 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 5.3 29.7 29.7 Develo.ed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING _ Percent Basin Parameters Basin I.D. Imperviousness Soil Area Overland Flow Concentrated Flow t Final t Classification C5 Co C100 Length Slope t; Length Slope tt (%/100) (acres) (feet) (ft/ft) (min) (feet) (ft/ft) Type of Land Surface (min) (min) (min) D-NW-A 40.0% A 0.25 0.30 0.41 ME' 200 0.025 16.1 0 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 0.0 16.1 16.1 D-NE-B 40.0% A 0.25 0.30 0.41 0.32 300 0.025 19.8 0 0.025 Short Pasture and Lawns 0.0 19.8 19.8 0110.0003.00_HYDROLOGY-WELD COUNTY.xlsx 1 of 1 3/16/2025 RECTOR PROPERTY BASIN HYDROLOGY Historic Condition-PROPERTY Percent Time of ill Basin Area Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Basin I.D. Impervious Concentration1•_ 1CJ1 5-Year 30-Year 00-YearIIII ' �` (minutes) io C100 (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) H-NW 1.62 15.8% A 30.1 0.11 0.18 0.31 1.80 2.23 4.20 0.31 0.64 2.10 H-NE 4.94 13.1% A 30.6 0.09 0.16 0.29 1.77 2.19 4.12 0.76 1.72 6.00 Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Percent Time of 3 ` Basin Area Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Basin �� Impervious Concentration 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year is lio lino Cls Clio Clioo (acres) (minutes) Cs Cio Cioo (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) H-NW-A 0.32 2.0% A 20.9 0.0 0.07 0.22 2.20 2.72 5.14 0.0 0.06 0.36 H-NE-B 0.66 2.0% A 25.6 0.0 0.07 0.22 1.96 2.42 4.57 0.0 0.11 0.65 Developed Condition-PROPERTY Percent Time of asin Area Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Basin I.D. Impervious Concentration 5-Year 10 Year C 100-Year I I I Q i Iwo io Iwo ioo Clio Q3oo acres) i (minutes) Ciao Cioo (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) D-NW 1.62 23.4% A 28.9 0.15 0.22 0.34 1.84 2.27 4.29 0.46 0.81 2.39 D-NE 4.94 18.2% A 29.7 0.12 0.19 0.32 1.80 2.23 4.20 1.09 2.11 6.68 Developed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Percent Time of Basin Area Soil Class. 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Basin I.D. Impervious Concentration 5-Year LYear 10-Year C Iioo Iio Iwo Qioo Clio ClioaCioo ioioo(acres) (minutes) (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) D-NW-A 0.32 40.0% A 16.1 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.53 3.13 5.90 0.20 0.30 0.77 D-NE-B 0.66 40.0% A 19.8 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.26 2.79 5.27 0.36 0.55 1.41 0110.0003.00_HYDROLOGY-WELD COUNTY.xlsx 1 of 1 3/16/2025 EXHIBIT A - SITE TOPOGRAPHY x /\ J _ -,., _ r \ I\J � � 1 \ I/----� i / ' /� \ / / C, ,f C\ --\ - _ GILMORE DITCH r z. !�' / • I I//�; - - - - - -_ - ` WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 — -- t _ i �/ 1 Ian r ` �t \ I I -l 11 I �' \ / � < ` _ K -, f lailik: \ . / i/ ADDRESS,20601 WCR 53 \ �� I • / 1111' MI , i \->o,c, � '°/ i / / - ( ____ _ „ i� / I / /_ - - / I \ l / - - i.......,.,41— SITERIDGELINE I I h 4%, — . ,- / f_ _/ • \ , cY :IL: 0 Aleciv • h 1 _ `. \ 110—\ — 1 J \ �` r -- I 5 G \ t I � � �, \ - _ 0 100 200 I r,_ I scale 1"=100' feet \ I A / EXHIBIT B - HISTORIC CONDITION (FULL PROPERTY) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS • a -y i i ., —f....►___. _ _/ _ - - `. - WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 \- N _- — — I \ \ \ i \ GREENBELT ICI --— I 1 - \\ �1. / N. H -NE / I ; I ' / t �/ r / — GREENBELT I I// // /' ADDRESS: 20601 WCR 53 1 I / / GRAVEL \ ; // // / ; \ /- i HORSE STALL / / / / / 1 ) / / \ . ';;I / / / I ' \ � // �/ �` I /� _ ROOF/GONG - t\ \\�\ �-� r I III lI I / / 1 ` ROOF/CONC SITE RIDGE LINE i �1 \ -I r i , ,I / lv I 1 1 i � I ; \ \ ' II I \\ II II • s l� 1 \ \ - \ \� \\ \ I \ \ - - - -- � — - - �' IJ \ \ /�'�,, ) \ \ 1 ' ` HORSE STALL \ \ 1'. .' /� HORSE STALL I iii--\._ � 1 ROOF/CONC % 7 \I l �� \C / II \ \1GRAVEL H -N\/\f / \ I GREENBELT] HORSE STALL /\ / - / \ I / .� - --— --- ---- Historic Condition - PROPERTY V/ I / / Basin Categories and Areas (SF) * I\ / I, / r Percent I I / I r Concrete & Paved Soil Basin Area - 1.Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Imp. I, /�I / Roofs Gravel Classification , \ \ ) {/°' 2% 2% 90% 40% IIIIII (%/100) (acres) ` - -� \ / \ / / /;. H-NW 20,037 30,281 4,205 15,905 0 15.8% A 1.62 60 120 H-NE 80,489 87,819 12,254 34,777 0 13.1% A 4.94 TOTAL(acres) 2.31 2.71 0.38 1.16 0.00 TOTAL 6.56 scaled 7"=60' feet x - 1- . / 1/ 1 EXHIBIT B-1 - HISTORIC CONDITION (HORSE STALL ONLY) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS • = i .. / i 7 ; WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 \ I GREENBELT / II I - I I i _ -, I rJ I / - I / 7 / 1 H_N E I GREENBELT `, / I , / / r ADDRESS: 20601 WCR 53 GRAVEL // // /. - / \ / / /, • HORSE STALL I . \ // // I i P-�� / / II _ \ , - / ( // 1 / / ROOF/CONC \\ \ \\ \ I 1 J SITE RIDGE LINE \ ROOF/CONC � I \ \ �\_ I I r / I I / _\\ - \ \ I illki 1 I I I I I II --- / -- \ \ . \ II - \ \ \ \ II � � - - - \ \ :, \ I \ \ ` HORSE STALL \ // \ \ \ \ HORSE STALL I '•• \I \ \I \\ \ ROOF/CONC .'L I \Iist / \ - GRAVEL H NW F �� \ / II \ \ i N w \ I H-N\JV Il I ) ,/ GREENBELT -a HORSE STALL ` � /\ I \ / 1IL _ I \ �I I / / I >� I �I I r - -- - l 0 60 120 scale 1"=60' feet Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Historic Condition-HORSE STALL Basin Categories and Areas(SF) -mimpr- Concrete& Paved Percent soil BasinAr Basi Perce Time of ik Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Imp. Soil Class. r 5-Y 0-Ye Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Roofs Gravel Classificati asin I.D. Area mpervious Concentration 5-Year ,0-Year 100-Year 2% 2% 90% 40% (%/100) Cs Cia Ciao is l><v lino Qs Cho Q>oo H-NW-A 0 13,938 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.32 (acres) (minutes) (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) fft3/s) H-NE-B 0 28,562 0 0 0 2.0% A 0.66 H-NW-A 0.32 2.0% A 20.9 0.0 0.07 0.22 2.20 2.72 5.14 0.0 0.06 0.36 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 0.98 H-N E-B 0.66 2.0% A 25.6 0.0 0.07 0.22 1.96 2.42 4.57 0.0 0.11 0.65 EXHIBIT C - DEVELOPED CONDITION (FULL PROPERTY) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS -_-- _ -y WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 ` - `. - - i sir r I 1 ---- \ f I I y 1 \ Y tGREENBELT 1 \ 11 1 I 1 hI I - i 2 / - I �� D-NE 1/ �. / // // / GREENBELT 1 I / / � / ADDRESS: 20601 WCR 53 // /, - I_. , / / i \ 41 / - GRAVEL \ ^��,r;.„r / // // /A / / �� _ HORSE STALL 1 -- >; / / / I - \\ • I / / / . / / . 11111110 ROOF/GONG \� \ \\ \ I I / I \) iiiSITE RIDGE LINE _ , \� )( I / / -i , I ROOF/GONG _ _ — 1 \ 1 1 I I '` / / • 1 \ ✓ moo,,.-r 1 I I 1\ I I ` / D-NE-B I 1 \, -f 1. I I I 1 1 L-. • - j \ \\ 1111 \ I �� /Ilii_ ' /1 1 C �►� \ - \ \� 1 \ \ I D NW A ,, HORSE STALL I \\ 1 3\ • - / `�� / \ \ - N , PARKING / / \\ HORSE STALL MI 4 I ` I / I\ ) Il I I \ ROOF/CONC % 1lit / \ _ 1 �� 1 1 \ _ \ / GRAVEL ) I D-N\1\I HORSE STALL N. I I I I GREENBELT PARKING 4. / / \ I /� I \ -I /l .� Vt..... ...&....,,...,_,--. 7: ' / / ' 'z Develo•ed Condition- PROPERTY s \/ / / / ! asin Categories and Areas(SF) t ' / 'I - Horse Stalls Percent Concrete & Paved Soil Basin Area / I Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Parking Imp. „# / ` Roofs Gravel Classification . '- / (Compacted) �, _I1 , . -L_ 1 / / .- 2% 2% 90% 40% 40% (%/100) (acres) _ - , .. - ' - , I., \ i \ / // D-NW 20,037 16,343 4,205 15,905 13,938 23.36% A 1.62 -t `+ „ - 0 60 120 1 D-NE 80,489 59,257 12,254 34,777 28,562 18.18% A 4.94 ' TOTAL(acres) 2.31 1.74 0.38 1.16 0.98 TOTAL 6.56- scale 1"=60' feet '�/ ' / EXHIBIT C-1 - DEVELOPED CONDITION (HORSE STALL ONLY) BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS - - - -- - a_____ s ; / --- - `�_ WELD COUNTY ROAD 53 - \- - - _ �-- - _ _ \/I \ I \ GREENBELT / 1 1 11 1 11 i \ / J / �/� � / . I I i 1 \ \ /l GREENBELT DNE- 1 II 1 ( .dr / ADDRESS: 20601 WCR 53 \ I // /� `- �/ ( 1 / I GRAVEL // I \ , HORSE STALL C.// ( \ ., / � ^ / \ 4 K. / /i �� \ \ ROOF/GONG � �\ \\ \\\�� J� \� �l //// - _ \ \ �� i / I\ ROOF/CONC \ 0 SITE RIDGE LINE 11 \\ � I .. \ � - . / , , DNEB / \I \ , ,, , .ti ......., v. , , , , , _ ,I � _ / \I \-.../ \ NN HORSE STALL \ D-NW-F PARKING \"/ 1HORSE STALL I !rill-)(/\\ \ \i � ROOF/GONG �' / \ �I_ ___,,J \ / i \ I ‘ 1/4 .,._. z ( \ _ _ GRAVEL .._ �� HORSESTALLGREENBELT D-N\N PARKING �� / \ I�' I __ ,_ Irailire:// ) . 0 60 120 scale 1"=60' feet I 1 Develo.ed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Developed Condition-HORSE STALL PARKING Basin Categories and Areas(SF) gliMP Percent Basin I.D. Greenbelt Horse Stalls Concrete& Paved Horse Stalls Imp Soil Basin Are "�"" event Soil Class. Time of 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year 5-Year 10-Year 100-Year Roofs Gravel Parking Classification Basin I.D. Area Impervious Concentration 5-Year 100-Year 10-YearC10 Imo lio 1100 Q1oo Qto Qloo 2% 2% 90% 40% 40% (%/100) (acres) Caoa �,� D-NW-A 0 0 0 0 13 938 40.0% A 0.32 �jcres)_ (minutes) (in./hour) (in./hour) (in./hour) (ft3/s) Ift3/s) Ift3/s) D-NE-B 0 0 0 0 28,562 40.0% A 0.66 D-NW-A 0.32 40.0% A 16.1 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.53 3.13 5.90 0.20 0.30 0.77 TOTAL(acres) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 TOTAL 0.98 D-NE-B 0.66 40.0% A 19.8 0.25 0.30 0.41 2.26 2.79 5.27 0.36 0.55 1.41 Brian Rector Commercial Parking I MARCH 2024 Appendix C: Water Quality Capture Volume for Sand Filter c DETENTION BASIN STAGE-STORAGE TABLE BUILDER MHFD-Detention,Version 9.06(July 2022) Project:Brian Rector-Commercial Vehicle Parking Basin ID:Horse Stall Parking Area(D-NW-A,D-NE-B) �onnnxuRarrtes-xro ORIFICE Depth Increment= ft i Optional Optional PO01 Example Zone Configuration(Retention Pond) Stage-Storage Stage Override Length Width Area Override Area Volume Volume Description (ft) Stage(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft') Area(ft') (acre) (ft') (ac-ft) Watershed Information Media Surface Selected BMP Type= SF Watershed Area= 0.98 acres Watershed Length= 285 ft Watershed Length to Centroid= 150 ft Watershed Slope= 0.025 ft/ft Watershed Imperviousness= 40.00% percent Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group A= 100.0% percent Percentage Hydrologic Soil Group B= 0.0% percent Percentage Hydrologic Soil Groups C/D= 0.0% percent Target WQCV Drain Time= 12.0 hours Location for 1-hr Rainfall Depths=User Input After providing required inputs above including 1-hour rainfall depths,click Run CUHP to generate runoff hydrographs using the embedded Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure. Optional User Overrides Water Quality Capture Volume(WQCV)= 0.012 acre-feet acre-feet Excess Urban Runoff Volume(EURV)= 0.042 acre-feet acre-feet 2-yr Runoff Volume(P1=0.83 in.)= 0.020 acre-feet inches 5-yr Runoff Volume(P1=1.09 in.)= 0.027 acre-feet inches 10-yr Runoff Volume(PI=1.33 in.)= 0.035 acre-feet inches 25-yr Runoff Volume(P1=1.69 in.)= 0.049 acre-feet inches 50-yr Runoff Volume(P1=1.99 in.)= 0.065 acre-feet inches 1D0-yr Runoff Volume(P1=2.69 in.)= 0.113 acre-feet 2.69 inches 500-yr Runoff Volume(P1=3.14 in.)= 0.146 acre-feet inches Approximate 2-yr Detention Volume= 0.019 acre-feet Approximate 5-yr Detention Volume= 0.026 acre-feet Approximate 10-yr Detention Volume= 0.034 acre-feet Approximate 25-yr Detention Volume= 0.046 acre-feet Approximate 50-yr Detention Volume= 0.055 acre-feet Approximate 100-yr Detention Volume= 0.077 acre-feet Water Quality Define Zon AtMettillft Capture Volume Zone 1 Volume(WQCV)= 0.012 ace -t Select Zone .torage olume Optio. = acre- -t T,tal Select Zone 3 St...^Vo. -(r-...I)- -feet ♦..I-...e:�les tl.-.. Total Detention Basin Volume= 0.012 acre-feet 100 F-r.ek....e. Initial Surcharge Volume(ISV)= N/A ft' Initial Surcharge Depth(ISD)= N/A ft Total Available Detention Depth(Hopi)= ft Depth of Trickle Channel(Hu)= N/A ft Slope of Trickle Channel(Src)= N/A ft/ft Slopes of Main Basin Sides(Se-s::)= H:V Basin Length-to-Width Ratio(RSV)_ Initial Surcharge Area(Asv)= ft' Surcharge Volume Length(Lsv)= ft Surcharge Volume Width(Wsv)= ft Depth of Basin Floor(HBnot)= ft Length of Basin Floor(1,00)= ft Width of Basin Floor(Wetooe)= ft Area of Basin Floor(Arvooe)= ft' Volume of Basin Floor(Veers)= ft' Depth of Main Basin(HNAet)= ft Length of Main Basin(Leas)= ft Width of Main Basin(Wens)= ft Area of Main Basin(Aass)= ft' Volume of Main Basin(Vyas)= ft' Calculated Total Basin Volume(Vop:)= acre-feet MHFD-Detention_v4-06.xsm,Basin 3/16/2025,8:56 PM 4411401P t, COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. Molly Wright From: David Huwa <dhuwa@ccginc.us> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 12:16 PM To: Molly Wright Cc: David Huwa; Brian Recyor Subject: RE: UR25-0008 Planning Commission Presentation This Message Is From an External Sender This email was sent by someone outside Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Molly, I'm not sure anything is done currently. But based on conversations with Brian, he originally used a water truck to keep dust down but the neighbors to the west complained. The existing drives are a gravel/roadbase type material. Recycled asphalt would produce less dust than the current all-weather drive. Brian can respond if anything else is being done currently. David A. Huwa, P.E. Principal CCG Colorado Civil Group, Inc. 2204 Hoffman Drive Loveland, CO 80538 www.ccginc.us p: 970.278.0029 c: 970.290.4325 dhuwa@ccginc.us DRAWING DISCLAIMER Colorado Civil Group,Inc.(CCG)transmits this electronic file(s)for reference only.The enclosed file(s)shall not be modified,altered,copied,distributed to third parties,or used on any other project,without prior written permission from CCG.These file(s)are not to be used,in whole or in part,as Construction Documents or Shop Drawings,without CCGs'official seal and signature on each document.Any use of the enclosed file(s)other than that herewith expressed,will be prosecuted to the fullest extent permitted by law. From: Molly Wright<mrwright@weld.gov> Sent: Monday,July 21, 2025 11:59 AM To: David Huwa <dhuwa@ccginc.us> Subject: RE: UR25-0008 Planning Commission Presentation Good morning, Could you provide a brief description on how dust is mitigated on site (i.e.water trucks, crushed asphalt, etc.)? Best Regards, 1 P.PqNWPWIll COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. Engineering Consultants March 14, 2025 Weld County Department of Planning and Zoning 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Traffic Impact Letter for 20601 WCR 53, Rector Property To whom it may concern, In May 2022 Mr. Brian Rector purchased the property at 20601 WCR 53 south of Kersey, Colorado, Parcel No. 105320100032. Mr. Rector began storing commercial vehicles on the property due to security concerns, which then resulted in a Weld County code violation. To address the code violation a land use application is required, and as part of the land use application a Traffic Letter was requested by Weld County. Mr. Rector has indicated the following Traffic Information: • 7:00 AM: 7-10 Personal Vehicles Arrive at Property(70%arrive from North, 30%from South) • 8:30 AM: 10-15 Work Vehicles Leave Property(90% leave to North, 10%to south on WCR 53) • 6:30 PM: 10-15 Work Vehicles Return to Property (90% arrive from North, 10%from south on WCR 53) • 7:00 PM: 7-10 Personal Vehicles Leave Property(70%arrive from North, 30%from South) Requested commercial vehicles to be parked overnight due to security concerns includes: • 2-3 Pump Trucks • 2-3 Pod Trucks • 2-3 Semis with flatbed trailers • 6-9 Pickup Trucks Roundtrips per Day • Personal Vehicles—10 Rountrips • Pump Trucks—2 Roundtrips • Pod Trucks—2 Roundtrips • Semis w/Flatbed Trailers—2 Roundtrips • Pickup Trucks—8 Roundtrips • ESTIMATED TOTAL DAILY ROUNDTRIPS = 24 ROUNDTRIPS If there are any questions or concerns with the indicated traffic patterns for Mr. Rector's property, please let us know. Sincerely, . %OO Lam` NI David Huwa, P.E. wo• Colorado Civil Group, Inc. 0. .,3, / (1/10 s• 970.278.0029 Ot1IA1� dhuwa(a�ccginc.us ►� ,. COLORADO CIVIL GROUP, INC. • 2204 Hoffman Drive • Loveland, CO 80538 • 970-278-0029 Weld County Treasurer Statement of Taxes Due Account Number R1448702 Parcel 105320100032 Legal Description — Situs Address PT NE4 20-4-64 LOT A REC EXEMPT RE-3209 EXC OG&M(.50R) 20601 COUNTY ROAD 53 WELD Account: R1448702 RECTOR BRIAN 20601 COUNTY ROAD 53 KERSEY, CO 80644-9 1 1 3 Year Tax Interest Fees Payments Balance Tax Charge 2024 $1,491.42 $0.00 $0.00 ($745.71) $745.71 Total Tax Charge $745.71 First Half Due as of 03/14/2025 $0.00 Second Half Due as of 03/14/2025 $745.71 Tax Billed at 2024 Rates for Tax Area 0738-0738 Authority Mill Levy Amount Values Actual Assessed WELD COUNTY 15.9560000* $530.06 AG-GRAZING LAND $167 $40 SCHOOL DIST RE7-KERSEY 10.3520000 $343.90 FARM/RANCH $430,057 $28,810 NORTHERN COLORADO WATER 1.0000000 $33.22 RESIDENCE-IMPS (NC OTHER BLDGS.- $30,498 $8,050 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER 1.0170000 $33.79 AGRICULTURAL (CCW Total $460,722 $36,900 CENTRAL COLORADO WATER 1.5070000 $50.06 SUBD PLATTE VALLEY FIRE 5.1650000 $171.58 AIMS JUNIOR COLLEGE 6.3050000 $209.45 HIGH PLAINS LIBRARY 3.1790000 $105.61 WEST GREELEY CONSERVATION D 0.4140000 $13.75 1 Weld County Treasurer's Office s',..,is,i,._,,-,f; 1400 N 17th Avenue PO Box 458 —..-:-- Iit_ 1 Greeley, CO 80632 - Phone: 970-400-3290 Pursuant to the Weld County Subdivision Ordinance, the attached Statement of Taxes Due issued by the Weld County Treasurer, are evidence of the status as of this date of all property taxes, special assessments, and prior tax liens attached to this account. Current year's taxes are due but not delinquent. 47),..A,\Q_ Date: N g-,o a 5 1 „v.\Signed: +_ F-- r km_rsil„ Hello