The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20190859.tiffUSE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES * 1555 N. 17TH AVENUE * GREELEY, CO 80631 www. weldqpv , com * 970-400-6100 * FAX 970-304-6498 FOR PlNNNG DEPARTMENT USE: AMOUNT APPLICATION RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED: CASE # ASSIGNED: PLANNER ASSIGNED: Parcel Number*: 1 3 1 _1 _ 1 5 0 0 0 - 0 2 6 Address of site: Northwest corner of WCR 20 and WC R 21 Legal Description SE4 15 -2N -67W Zone District: Ag Acreage: 158 FEE QWNER(S OF THE PRO PERT: Name: Dave DeHaan Company: Front Range Dairy, LLC Phone #: (970) 534-1047 Street Address: 9743 CR 16 City/State/Zip Code: Fort Lupton, CO 80621 Name: Company Phone #: (*A 12 digit number on Tax ID. information, obtainable at �rrww weldgov.com). Section: 15 Township: 2 N Range: 67 111 Floodplain: eological Hazard: YCN p Airport Overlay: YQN Email: • Street Address: • Email City/State/Zip Code: Name: Dom pony. Phone #: Street Address: Email City/State/Zip Code: APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT: Name: Shannon Toomey Company AGPROfessionals Phone #: (970) 535-9318 Email: stoomey@a9pros.com Street Address: 3060 67th Ave. City/State/Zip Code: Greeley, CO 80834 PROPOSED USE: (Soo below: Authorization must accompany all applications signed by Authorized Agents) Class I composting facility 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. Signatures of all fee owners of property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization from all fee owners must be included with the application. If a corporation is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be included indicating that the signatory has to legal aothoritY to s gnature:Owner orizet P 01 I Print Name Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date Print Name Rev 4/2016 AGPROfessionais DES/ELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE February 21, 2018 To Whom It May Concern: Dave DeHaan and Front Range Farms., are contracted with AGPROfessionals for all permitting, lapin engineering and regulatory work relating to Weld County (and use activities.. OP Ofcssiona1S is authorized to represent and request the release of all records necessary on behalf of David Del laan. We respectfully request that all correspondence be directed to A PRO f essionals. Sincerely, /, - 3 —G —r issi David flel:an Date ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING it REAL ESTATE 3050 67t Avenue a Suite 200 i Greeley, CO 80634 970.535.9318 0.535.9318 /office s 970335.9854 /fax • w'aanro5 corn • AGPRO fessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE Prepared for Front Range Dairy (Four D Farms) Planning Questions: 1. Explain, in detail, the proposed use of the property. This request is for a Use by Special Review (USR) permit to allow a Class I compost facility as classified under Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) Regulation 14.2.1(C). Located in the Southeast Quarter of Section 15, Township 2 North, Range 67 West of the 61h P.M., the subject property will house the Class I compost facility and associated appurtenances including an office/warehouse and material handling equipment. As required by CDPHE, the facility will register with the Solid Waste Division and provide Financial Assurance and a Composting Plan. As a Class I facility, the facility is not required to obtain a Certificate of Designation or provide an Engineered Design and Operation Plan. The facility will operate under and be regulated by the CDPHE. Compost feedstock types will include vegetative waste and other materials determined by CDPHE to pose a low risk to human health and the environment. Waste generated by Front Range Dairy and Eagle View Dairy will be composted at this facility. The compost facility will operate on agriculturally zoned property owned by the generator using agricultural waste generated by the associated dairy along with other compatible materials. Compost produced at this facility will be sold wholesale or will be used by the operator, as the area not occupied by the compost facility will be used for agricultural production. The site will also process and sell seed. A seed sorter and cleaner will be located in the 20,000 sq. ft. warehouse building, where the seed will also be stored. Up to 250 pallets of seed will be stored in this warehouse. Three (3) to seven (7) full-time employees are proposed. Employees will be on -site for eight (8) to nine (9) hours at a time. Parking is proposed on improved gravel surfaces. As the parking area is gravel, striping and specific spaces will not be specified. There may be minimal on -site fuel storage with appropriate containment. No painting or manufacturing is proposed. Minor vehicle maintenance, such as oil or tire changes, will take place in the proposed shop. No sign is proposed at this time. Outdoor lighting is expected to be wall -mounted, no light poles are proposed. All lights will be shielded and down directional as required in the Weld County Code. ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 ❑ Greeley, CO 80634 970.535.9318 /office ❑ 970.535.9854 / fax O w uw.agpros.com Page 2 of 7 2. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 22 of the Comprehensive Plan. This USR application has been prepared utilizing the process outlined in the Weld County Code and Procedural Guides. The Guiding Principles of the Comprehensive Plan found in Section 22-1-120 states, "Land use changes must afford flexibility based on the specific location and the particular circumstances encountered within the locality. It is also important to weigh the cumulative impacts that specific land use changes will have." This proposal is respectful of surrounding uses. The application is consistent with Section 22-2-20 G. A. Goa! 7. "County land use regulations should protect the individual property owner's right to request a land use change." and 2, A. Policy 7.2. "Con version of agricultural /and to nonurban residential, commercial and industrial uses should be accommodated when the subject site is in an area that can support such development, and should attempt to be compatible with the region." The site is in an area that can support the proposed use. This proposal is compatible with the surrounding area. Land uses in the surrounding area include USFBI -0084 for a dairy feedlot, SUP -118 for a turkey farm, D RI408 for an equine breeding, boarding and training facility, SUP -62 for a turkey farm, rural residential uses and oil and gas operations. 3. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23 (Zoning) and the zone district in which it is located. The proposal is for composting facility in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. This proposed use is allowed in the A Zone as a Use By Special Review as stated in Chapter 23, 23-3-40. 23-3-40-S. Any use permitted as a Use By Right, an accessory use, or a Use by special Review in the commercial or industrial zone districts, provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions, PUD development proposals shall not be permitted to use the special review permit process to develop. Adequate provision has been made to protect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. Operation Standards as found in Section 23-2-260 of the Weld County Code were consulted in preparing this application. 4. Describe what type of land uses surround the site. Explain how the proposed use is consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. Land uses in the surrounding area include USR12-0034 -0034 for a dairy feedlot, SUP -118 for a turkey farm, USR1408 for an equine breeding, boarding and training facility, SUP -62 for a turkey farm, rural residential uses and oil and gas operations. 5. What are the hours and days of operation? (e.g. Monday thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m) The facility will be operational 24 -hours a day, 7 days a week. The primary hours of operation will be 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Saturday. Occasional operations outside the primary hours may be required due to facility and market needs. Page 3 of 7 6. List the number of full time and/or part time employees proposed to work at this site. It is proposed that approximately nine (9) full time employees will be on -site and approximately five <6) to ten (10) drivers will use the site. Typically, drivers will be on site for less than one (1) hour at a time. 7. If shift work is proposed include the number of employees per shift. Shift work is not proposed, 8. List the number of people who will use this site. Include contractors, truck drivers, customers, volunteers, etc. It is proposed that approximately nine (9) full time employees will be on -site and approximately five (5) to ten (10) drivers will use the site. Full time employees include four (4) facility operators and five (5) office workers. Typically, drivers will be on site for less than one 01) hour at a time. 9. If this is a dairy, livestock confinement operation, kennel, etc., list the number and type of animals. N/A 10. Describe the type of lot surface and the square footage of each type. (e.g. asphalt, gravel, landscaping, dirt, grass, buildings) Lot surfaces will be graded surfaces for the compost areas with improved gravel surfaces for the road and parking area. 11. How many parking spaces are proposed? How many handicapped (ADA) parking spaces are proposed? Two (2) spaces for semi -truck parking and ten (10) passenger vehicle spaces are proposed. As the parking area is gravel, striping and specific spaces for personal vehicles are not specified. This facility is not open to the public. 12. Explain the existing and proposed landscaping for the site. Wood fencing with an interior deciduous tree line is proposed to screen sections of the property from neighbors. See the plat map for the fence and tree line location. 13. Describe the type of fence proposed for the site. (e.g. 6 -foot chain link with earth tone slats) A wood fence is proposed for the site. 14. Describe the proposed screening for all parking and outdoor storage areas. If the site is located in a floodplain l a i n outdoor storage is restricted. A wood fence with an interior deciduous tree line is proposed to screen sections of the operation from neighbors. See the plat map for the location of the fence and tree line. Page 4 of 7 The subject property is not located in a floodplain. 15. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Use by Special Review activity occurs. Reclamation plans and financial assurance is provided through the CDPHE Solid Waste permit. 16. Who will provide fire protection to the site? The Ft Lupton Fire Protection District will provide fire protection to the site. 17. List all proposed on -site and off -site improvements associated with the use (e.g. landscaping, fencing, buildings, drainage, turn lanes, etc.) and a timeline of when you will have each one of the improvements completed. No off -site improvements are proposed. On -site improvements include the operations area, a compost pond, fencing, some landscaping, and an approximately 20,000 sq. ft. building containing an office, shop, and warehouse. Engineering Questions: 1. Describe how many rou n dtri pslday are expected for each vehicle type: Passenger Cars/Pickups, Tandem Trucks, Semi-Truck/Trailer/RV (Roundtrip = I trip in and 'I trip out of site) Typical vehicles accessing this site include employee and owner vehicles and semi -trucks. The following numbers are expected for this facility: Semi -tractor trailers: 5 roundtripslday Tandem dump trucks: 5 roundtrips/day Pickups and cars: 10 trips/day 2. Describe the expected travel routes for site traffic. Semi -trucks will exit the site on WCR 20 and travel west to WCR 19 for north -south travel. The projected travel distribution along WCR 19 is expected to be 50% north and 50% south. 3. Describe the travel distribution along the routes (e.g. 50% of traffic will come from the north, 20% from the south, 30% from the east, etc.) Semi -trucks will exit the site on WCR 20 west to W R10 for north -south travel. It is projected that travel distribution along WCR 19 will be 60% to the north and 50% to the south. 4. Describe the time of day that you expect the highest traffic volumes from above. The highest traffic volumes will be generated during morning hours between 6:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. and during evening hours between 5:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. Page 5 of 7 5. Describe where the access to the site is planned. The existing access to this property is located on WCR 20 approximately 3,300 -feet east of WCR 19. This access will be closed and relocated to align with the existing access to the dairy facility. Weld County Road 20 is a local paved road. 6. Drainage Design: Detention pond summarized in a drainage report is required unless the project falls under an exception to storm water detention requirements per code section 23-12-30 F.1. A. Does your site qualify for an exception to storm water detention? If so, describe in a drainage narrative the following: 1. Which exception is being applied for and include supporting documentation. 2. Where the water originates if it flows onto the property from an offsite source 3. Where it flows to as it leaves the property 4. The direction of flow across the property 5. If there have been previous drainage problems with the property A drainage narrative is provided with this application addressing stormwater detention. Containment of liquid waste from the compost operation is addressed in the compost plan. B. Does your site require a storm water detention pond? If so, the following applies: 1. A drainage report summarizing the detention pond design with construction drawings and maintenance plan shall be completed by a Colorado Licensed Professional Engineer and adhere to the drainage related sections of the Weld County Code. 2. The drainage report must include a certification of compliance stamped and signed by the PE which can be found on the engineering website. 3. A general drainage report guidance checklist is available on the engineering website. More complete checklists are available upon request. Containment of liquid waste from the compost operation is addressed in the compost plan. Environmental Health Questions: 1. What is the drinking water source on the property? If utilizing a drinking water well include either the well permit or well permit application that was submitted to the State -Division of Water Resources. If utilizing a public water tap include a letter from the Water District, a tap or meter number, or a copy of the water bill. Water will be provided for employees through a proposed Central Weld County Water District tap. 2. What type of sewage disposal system is on the property? If utilizing an existing septic system provide the septic permit number. If there is no septic permit due to the age of the existing septic system, apply for a septic permit through the Department of Public Health and Environment prior to submitting this application. If a new septic system will be installed, please state "a new septic system Page 6 of 7 is proposed". Only propose portable toilets if the use is consistent with the Department of Public Health and Environment's portable toilet policy. A proposed ISDS septic system will be included in the office building. 3. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? Up to 250 pallets of seed will be the main item stored within the proposed warehouse. In the future, bagged compost may also be stored in the warehouse until it can be sold to retailers. 4. Describe where and how storage and/or stockpile of wastes, chemicals, and/or petroleum will occur on this site. No chemicals will be stored on site. Wastes stockpiled onsite include the materials used to create compost, including manure and vegetative wastes. They will be stored temporarily until they can be composted. Any fuel stored on site will be in appropriate containment. 5. If there will be fuel storage on site indicate the gallons and the secondary containment. State the number of tanks and gallons per tank. There will be minimal amounts of fuel storage with appropriate containment. 6. If there will be washing of vehicles or equipment on site indicate how the wash water will be contained. No vehicle washing is proposed on -site. 7. If there will be floor drains indicate how the fluids will be contained. No floor drains are proposed. 8. Indicate if there will be any air emissions. (e.g. painting, oil storage, etc.) No regulated air emissions are anticipated from this site. 9. Provide a design and operations plan if applicable. (e.g. composting, landfills, etc.) A compost plan is included with this application. 10. Provide a nuisance management plan if applicable. (e.g. dairies, feedlots, etc.) The facility Compost Plan addresses nuisance management. The facility will adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Agricultural Zone District. Fencing and deciduous tree lines will be used to visually shield sections of the operation from neighboring properties. Sources of light will be shielded so that light rays will not shine directly onto adjacent properties where such would cause a nuisance or interfere with the use on the adjacent Page 7 of 7 properties. Neither the direct, nor reflected, light from any light source will create a traffic hazard to operators of motor vehicles on public or private streets. No colored light will be used which may be confused with, or construed as, traffic control devices. The property owner or operator will be responsible for controlling noxious weeds on the site. Trash will be collected in a covered, confined trash dumpster and removed at least weekly by B&C Refuse or alternative trash removal company. All roadway, parking and operations areas will have improved gravel surfaces. Watering of surfaces will occur as necessary to suppress dust. 11. Additional information may be requested depending on type of land use requested. ILIA Building Questions: 1. List the type, size (square footage), and number of existing and proposed structures. Show and label all existing and proposed structures on the USR drawing. Label the use of the building and the square footage. A 20,000 sq. ft. building containing an office, shop, warehouse and restrooms is proposed. There are no existing structures. 2. Explain how the existing structures will be used for this USR? There are no existing structures. 3. List the proposed use(s) of each structure. The proposed structure will be used as an office with a shop, warehouse, and restroorns. AGPRO fessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Traffic Narrative Front Range Dairy, LLC (Four D Farms) Use By Special Review (USR) Application Traffic Narrative The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Weld County Road (WOR) 20 and WCR 21. The proposed class I composting facility will accommodate up to five (5) semi -trucks, five (5) tandem dump trucks, and ten (10) passenger cars visiting the site each day. The trucks will deliver manure from two nearby dairies, Front Range Dairy and Eagle View Dairy, and vegetative waste to the facility for composting. An additional one (1) to two (2) trucks will deliver and/or take away seed each week. Finished compost will be delivered to agricultural wholesale and retail markets in the area. Nine (9) full-time employees are proposed. Full-time employees include four (4) facility operators and five (5) office workers. Approximately five (5) to ten (10) drivers will use the site, Typically, drivers arrive at the site and remain for less than one (1) hour at a time. Full-time employees will be one -site for eight (8) to nine (9) hours per day. Parking is proposed on improved gravel surfaces. As the parking area is gravel, striping and specific spaces will not be specified. Parking on -site will primarily occur during hours of operation from 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Saturday. Occasional operations outside the primary hours may be required depending on facility and market needs. The facility is not open to the public. The existing access to the property is located on WCR 20 approximately 3,300 -feet east of WCR 19. This access will be closed and relocated to align with the existing access to the dairy facility. VV R 20 is a local paved road. Semi -trucks will exit the site on WCR 20 west to WCR 19 for north -south travel. The projected travel distribution along WCR 19 is expected to be 50% north and 50% south. The projected travel distribution along WCR 20 is expected to be 50% east and 50% west. Typical vehicles accessing this site include employee and owner vehicles, semi -trucks, and dump trucks. The following numbers are expected for this facility: Semi -tractor trailers: 5 raundtrips/day Tandem dump trucks: 5 roundtrips/day Passenger cars/pickups: 10 roundtrips/day The highest traffic volumes will be generated during morning hours between 6:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. and during evening hours between 5:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. ENGINEERING, PLANNING, CONSULTING & REAL ESTATE 3060 57th Avenue Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 970.5 5.9318 /office i 970.535.9854 / fax w�w.a ros cot Notice of Inquiry Development within a Coordinated Planning Agreement or Intergovernmental Agreement (CPA or ICA) Boundary 7/26/2018 Date of Inquiry Fort Lupton CPA Municipality with CPA or IGA Name of Person Inquiring Josh Hess Four D Farms Property Owner Planner Kim Ogle kogle@weldgov.com Legal Description SF4 Section 15, T2N, R67W of the 6th P.M Parcel Number 1311-15-0-00-026 Nearest Intersection NW corner of CR 20 and CR 21 Type of Inquiry USR for a Class I Compost Facility The above person inquired about developing a property inside your designated CPA or IGA boundary. This person has been referred to community by Weld County Planning to discuss development options on this site. Visit Chapter 19 of the Weld County Code for specifics on your agreement. Weld County Comments Applicant seeks to apply for a USR, does that municipality wish to enter into an annexation or pre -annexation agreement with applicant per Coordinated planning Agreement or release the applicant back to the County for permitting? Name/Title of Municipality Representative Municipality Comments Kim Ogle Digitally signed by Kim Ogle Date: 201B 09.02 06,29,54.06100' Signature of Weld County Planner Signature of Municipality Representative Plase return the signed form to: Weld County Planning Department 1555 N 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631 (970) 353-6100 x3540 as" (970)304-6498 fax From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good morning Todd, Shannon Toomey Friday, August 17, 2018 10:39 AM 'Todd Hodges' Alyssa Knutson; Tim Naylor; Kelsey Bruxvoort RE: Notice of Inquiry - Four D Farms USR After speaking with the property owner, he does not believe it is in his best interest to annex into Fort Lupton but he is interested to know the potential benefits that would come from annexation. Could you provide a written explanation as to why it would benefit a composting facility and dairy to become part of Fort Lupton? Thank you, Shannon Toomey Land Planning Technician AGPROfessionals 3050 67th Avenue Greeley, Co 80634 970-535-9318 office wwwdagpros.com AGPROfessiorials 1)FVk 1.OPEI S OF AC:kiCULi'URti: From: Todd Hodges <thodges@Fortluptonco.gov> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2018 7:54 AM To: Shannon Toomey<stoomey@agpros.com> Cc: Alyssa Knutson <AKnutson@Fortluptonco.gov>; Tim Naylor <tnaylor@agpros.com>; Kelsey Bruxvoort cKbruxvoort@agpros.com> Subject: Re: Notice of Inquiry - Four D Farms USR We usually have a conversation with the property owner concerning annexation options per our agreement with the County. If the applicant has no interest in even talking then we can sign the form however it could be in their best interest to look at the options. I'm not sure why Firestone is in your email Todd A. Hodges, Planning Director "Come Paint Your Future With Us" 303-994-3174 1 On Aug 15, 2018, at 3:16 PM, Shanr p i[ co > wrote Hi Todd, Because the proposed compost facility is associated with Front Range Dairy on the south side of Weld County R d . 20, we feel it is in the best interest of Four D Farms to remain in Weld County. While we appreciate the offer, as Firestone is often easier to work with than Weld County, it makes more sense right now for the composting facility to remain outside of city limits. Please let me know if you'd like to discuss this further Thanks a lot, Shannon Toomey Land Planning Technician AGPROfessionals 3050 67th Avenue Greeley, Co 80634 970-535-9318 office www.agpros.com AGPROfessionals (_?V}:RS Of AGRICIL1L.E U'F& -. From: Todd l EoL. rt uptoncgo.. Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 2:32 PM To: Shannon TliporitvriApros, c� Cc: Alyssa ICAMigormfrprtluptoncolpv Brux o Vec!rt a ros-coal > Subject: RE: Notice of Inquiry - Four ID Farms USR tnayloI}ayilor c >, Kelsey Shannon, We are interested in meeting with the property owner to discuss the option of annexation vs. going through the County process. You can call me on my cell number below to set that up with me. Todd A. Hodges Planning Director City of Fort Lupton 303-994-3174 From: ShannonfiTpritey of slit a , u-os,COM Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2018 3:16 PM To: Todd Ft n'cReSsit �,�i _� � I > Cc: Alyssa Kfttntgars@Fortlutatorp.gov trovioi*Tlirrtilstaylor C >di Kelsey Bruxvaart<Kbruxvoort agrires.com> Subject: Notice of Inquiry - Four 0 Farms USR Hi Todd, Please find the attached Notice of Inquiry along with the pre -application documents for a Use by Special Review application in Weld County. Please respond with any comments or concerns you may have. If we do not receive a response, the County requires us to wait for a period of 21 days before we can submit the application. If you have no comments, we'd appreciate your help in expediting the process by responding with a statement that you have no comments. Thanks a lot, Shannon Toomey Land Planning Technician AG PROfessi o nai s 3050 57th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 970-535-9318 office www.agpros.com AGPROfessionals I}}-:VE I ()PERS ()I- AGF,R; _ Li This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit htt://wv_Annavisanteceloud.com w anteecloud. com This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information pi; .■ ' p'k+ `rtrante ac uclico This email has been scanned by the Symantec Erna il.Security.cloud service For more inforrrrationMejseNvp,,s, naftecctu. QI 1 This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information pl ti rit , 7 '.Lt celr uc _i, ort Shannon Tourney From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hi Tracy, Shannon Toomey Thursday, August 2, 2018 2:57 PM itcase@firestoneco.gov' Tim Naylor (tnaylor@agpros.com); Kelsey Bruxvoort (Kbruxvoort@agpros.com) Notice of Inquiry - Four D Farms USR Notice of Inquiry Hess - Firestone.pdf; PreApplication Request Form.pdfr Pre -Application Questionnaire.pdf Please find the attached Notice of Inquiry along with the pre -application documents for a Use by Special Review application in Weld County. Please respond with any comments or concerns you may have. If we do not receive a response, the County requires us to wait for a period of 21 days before we can submit the application. If you have no comments, we'd appreciate your help in expediting the process by responding with a statement that you have no comments. Thanks a lot, Shannon Toomey Land Planning Technician AGPROfessionals 3050 67th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 970-535-9318 office www.a pros.com AGPROfessionals 1T F:LOPFRS O1- AC:KR: E.1 I RE 1. Drainag Narratie ve For Four D Farms, LLC USR Southeast % of Section 15, Township 2N, Range 67W of the 6th P.M. AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE AGPROfessionals 3050 67th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 (970) 535-9318 7/24/2018 Four D Farms, LW Table of Contents Certifications .ms6-iaea.A x66666 sitisa*eieben•rr • no 3 Summary66.66 sews •w s 66666 we ea••ur•rs a• 6 it i nen e■ ■ Introduction... 66 UI 4,1419111041• roa Si .tilt it I iM +1444 004.4 +-fainillatil *pNy 1• •, 1. Location ........M••ssssa•r,ir„tend •f•r6i6iiiq•F#•P_ _ _ 44a5 ••..6..s64�d1666...61iiw 2. Property Description ...III -TriIt*t*it&+Il H1stonc Drainage n... ..,..r.ifii6649+......aara.ass•asaa•.....no...„...6.6tagr....n 5 1. Overall Basin Descr1ptiori..4Be4d..,tt...a.... -al • a• ... .d.. .6666Itb.4040 si.m■■7.asi.•mik1le1■ 5 2. Drainage Patterns Through Property ..n a.....sss.s.at••ri..................O!4!.4ey......aa..6 3. Off -site Drainage Flow Patterns *mit 66ii6.i..+i a e.4...W owe Conclusions 044....a Oil I i II rtes+TerT9•err6663TE4i•ap!••. List of References Obi, ..*mrre•.etan 4 i.rcrc4aaaaaa•i••iii6.i*it6..6...•1..e4116a•••aa. se ■ Appendices i . 11. we Fnur ID Farms. T T r C ertifications I hereby certify that this drainage narrative for the Four D Farms, LLC proposed USR was prepared under my direct supervision in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County storm drainage criteria for the owners thereof Chad TeVelde, P.E. AGPROfessionals 7/2412018 Drainage Narrative Page 3 of 7 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley ' `6&tt 7O-535-9318 * Four D Farms, LW Summary The project site for the proposed USR is currently an agricultural property with existing oil and gas structures. The applicant is proposing a class 1 composting facility on the proposed Lot D of RE 18-1070. The proposed improvements will consist of gravel similar to what is on the existing drives as well as a 2,400 square foot building with a 400 square foot office. The proposed site has an imperviousness of 2.36 percent which is less than the equivalent imperviousness of a 2,000 square foot building on a 5 -acre parcel. Therefore, the site is exempt from stormwater detention per Article XII, Storm Drainage Criteria, Section 2342-30 Drainage Policy. '. Exceptions. .I. Exceptions to stormwater detention shall not jeopardize the public health, safety, and welfare of public and private property and shall be limited to the following: a. No stormwater detention will be required for sites that meet any of the following conditions. Requirements of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (4) areas remain applicable. 14) A parcel greater than 5 gross acres in size is allowed a onetime exception for a new 2,000 sq. ft. building or equivalent imperviousness. 7/24/2018 Drainage Narrative AGPROfessionals, 3050 67°' Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www_ag ro Ac m Page 4 of 7 Four D Farms LLC Introduction 1. Location The proposed site is located in Lot D of RECX 1 -11)70 being part of the southeast 1/4 of Section 15, T2 N. R67W, of the 6 " PM. This site s located west of Highway 85 and northwest of the City of Fort Lupton, CO. The properties surrounding the site are primarily undeveloped, agricultural farm land. The property is bordered on the south side by Weld County Road (WCR) 20, The nearest road to the east is WCR 23, to the north is WCR 22 and to the west is WCR 19. A vicinity map is shown in Appendix A. 2. Property Description The applicant is proposing a composting facility with a 2,400 square foot building and a 400 square foot office with gravel roads and parking. Lot D is approximately 122.91 acres of the 157.8 -acre property. The proposed site is currently an urbanizing, agricultural property with existing oil and gas structures. There are four types of soil: Loup-Boel loamy sands (0% to 3% slopes), Olney loamy sand (1% to 3% slopes), Valent sand (0% to 9% slopes), and Vona loamy sand (0% to 9% slopes). The majority of the soil is well drained, hydrologic soil group B (see USDA- NRCS soil report in Appendix B) . The Coal Ridge Ditch is located in the northeast corner of the site. There are no major open channels within or adjacent to the proposed property. historic Drainage 1. Overall Basin Description The site has a relatively flat topography with slopes from 0 to 9 percent predominately towards the northeastern side of the property. A topographic map was downloaded from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) website and are shown in Appendix C. A Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) map of the project area is included in Appendix D. The property is located on panels 0$123 1595E and 08123C1915E 1915E and is not currently located within a 100 -year floodplain. The overall percentage of imperviousness for the proposed site is approximately 2.36 percent using the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) and the Weld County Engineering and Construction Guidelines WE) manual recommended values. The equivalent imperviousness of a 2,000 square foot building on a 5 -acre parcel was calculated to be 2.81 percent (see percentage of imperviousness calculations in Appendix E) . This was estimated using the area of proposed roof space and gravel road. Historically, there have been no previous drainage issues with the property. 7/24/2018 Drainage Narrative Page 5 of 7 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * VI I Four I Fes,. Lit 2. Drainage Patterns Through Property The site is located in rural Weld County and is primarily surrounded by undeveloped, agricultural land. A Master Plan for the site area is not currently available. The site is mostly northeast sloping and has a generally flat topoicaphy. Historically, the basin drainage flows towards the northeast and ultimately flows towards the Coal Ridge Waste Reservoir. 3. Off -site Drainage Flow Patterns Offsite flows from the north and east should continue to flow northeast, away from the site. Offsite flows from the west primarily flow north-northeast and are routed around the site. Offsite flows from the south are intercepted by CR. 20. Therefore, an increase in runoff is not expected. Conclusions This drainage narrative is consistent with the Weld County Engineering and Construction Guidelines and the UDFCD Criteria Manual. An increased risk of damage from storm runoff is not expected since the site has a proposed percentage of imperviousness that is less than the equivalent of a 2,000 square foot building on a 5 -acre parcel. We recommend that the site is exempt from stormwater detention per Article XII, Storm Drainage Criteria, Section 23-12-30 Drainage Policy. 7/24/2018 Drainage Narrative Page 6 of 7 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * t%rwW.cf )lift)S COil) Four [ Farms. U List of References Federal Emergency Management Agency. "FEMA Flood Map Service Center." FEMA Flood Map Service Center. FEMA, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <https://msc.fema.gov/porta1>. United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service. "Web Soil Survey." Web Soil Survey. USDA - NRCS, 2006. Web. 6 Jul. 2018 <http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>. United States Geological Survey. "Maps." Overview a Maps, United States Geological Survey. USGS, 2016. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <Www.usgs.gov/products/maps/tope-maps . Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1." USDCM: : Volume I Management, Hydrology and Hydraulics. UDFCD, , Mar. 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. http://udfed. org/volume-one>. Weld County. "Property Portal - Map Search." Property Portal - Map Search. Weld County, 19 Dec. 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. https://www.eo.weld.eo.us/maps 1/propertportal/?acct =P" 1779500>. Weld County. "Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria Guidelines." Weld County Engineering, July 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <www weld ov. eomlt.JserFiles/ ewers/ erver 6/File/Departments/Publie% 0Works/En gineering/W E G% 0-% O8-3-17.pdf. 7/24/2018 Drainage Narrative Page 7 of 7 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-931S * www.agrrostc ital Four a Farm,_ LLC Appendices A. Vicinity Map B. USDA Web Soil Survey Report C. USGUSGS Topographic Map D. FEMA Flood Plain Map E. Percentage of Imperviousness Calculations Four D Farms. LW APPENDIX A Vicinity Map I —A 4 G -co vons Ca. Z tt r ^i Co C fp Z C a 1w ' �eI al rl 'ar ffllulla v1 r. _ r• • ;hi alit a , Mi 114014.1'. ilri 1 • r '03/46 Ilk_ •! 11 1, :1 l:i.11 I •� Il llllle!wl .4t _1I NH t' I 0 F, ,1 c Y 1-• 1 Y I IL* I w • . •1'.. • i) { , `' i ..•1 111 a-. I' -hr :�i i!:1�••1111„•41Y 1b.bbEi119--• attLatttrt*LL:f it I Ii I I I y1 1, 1 11 11,24 • • 4 il•I • I rI 'Y ' - I 'l µ I III ar • I• 1I I II . 1 •' _�e_ lr 1 II f_ • 'R '• A • I . •.,1 1. ,► as a III lniilui:li*Ye:::iiiiila,i11Vi11i1 i 19P...vainaura- 4 I 011. 111 Y•j 1 _'� r, I., 1 SIII' t..1 14 1 aalsaara I • 1 I 11,11 ;.I ,1. 1111 1 ! • 3 • r . '1 ‘sh�•.r. ` Ii. I'••• ti 1 I i. , Y« ;\ Ulf/1:+ I y •�a 1 4 • I. .: .. : 1 .:: :.......... �. r • I' , •1 IpL, ; • ;I JR n 1 ■ I 1 I fi L'r 1111 r.i,,r•pgerrr , I alSI te I II lls �'" -1a 'B;Ea:.:HI:Il1' i i •m, f.• .. 'Ir, .� ill p. .. ,r I� •r 1 IJ �)i(r f, I i,_ 1 , I ( 1�• 1 • �L•I ! J M pP I�1.114 ir4P " 1 I.r �Y•�+1 i I i i S .-,,1 r Al -1 ' 1 e •w •al' /t1 0 I Frrr'�I . attI �r .�9� p'"1� • I11 liCh 414 AC' - L. I 1 Ij 1.4 • II M Y 1 I'I 'Ir1.1, r h rw 11l:�;,1. Y� ifilI1Ittt1,1II, 111III Iir;t';i ill' , 1I; 1111Ip'a hl •I • • •I • 1. 1 I , 14 -I • 1 Pi I cornirn •' I 1 •111111'1,..•• r. 11. 1 tit •1111011. .:1:1;' I•Ycrrrrrrr,Itrrrrrl•Incrloii. SSL.IIrP.1I 11 11 II 1 1 , di A N. -mama 14 Li0 1• 1.11 Jra 1.•t I Yll ... i 11: II ra- . I,.I, .•,.,.1 .I,,.1 ..... ....... .. 1i. ,.n...•. Ir.,^•,..1� 1 i+ier •r.. I • I 1 . II - '1 :rot • r jfi- ' Pit" I f _1h 'g 1Mj • 1I , ft I) { 1 .y I • • tisss 441 A err idal'irL.t.,p 1 1.01 rim Ir Fl 1111 • I pie • • O CO 4-1 0 411 en It_ ocs cu -44 C 4•rd E O co Ea .11 CL m ra Cri 45 Ca MI O CL c aj sit st rig II T'll= E USE ' E#1' N!i'1I Tl O! a CP as rico cup- tep Four D Farms_ LLC APPENDIX B USDA Web Soil Survey Report USDA United States air. Department of Agriculture \CS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the Natal iltusto S01 esou rce Cooperativ Soil Survey, a joint effo�fthe Kited epo for States DeP��ate Ariculture County � Federal age agencies in��uttado Agricultural Stations, and local participants Part 1...•:C illilliiiillllli'lllralll Ir,1rr7�lPCJ1:'•' ift g""illf'"iiirill4'li"1 kilit i!iiill ''1fi I1 ,t. 1 . Y....... . , , �°4�� n.M r`ra7rt�arrr.N7�i►Au.F� :ei:::l:pc=6::ui:::::.M�'is3T::35'�i[IIen1��1�1111t1114111441iA1Q��u�:. July 6, 2018 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'llww.nres.usda.govl psl portallnreslmainlsoils/healthf) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.govllacatorlapp?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http:llwmv.nres.usda,govlwpslportallnresldetaillsoilslcorrtactusl? cid=nresl 42p2_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 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 (TOD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface...... ■ ■ Surveys Soil Surveys Are Made...-. .....a.fi744,...,...Fai7..Prar..YrYr.... a ... .....Mr. 1...Tu..i15 SoilMap..al I•• I. iYF.t..Pia..a P..4....■■ Soil Map Jlf 1/�J `Legend ..shlu.srr.a.a...oa...1i,.s..s�.•ri...mif.rtimu7er.l...:..-,r..0 I 0 MapUnit Legend .........._:t.ii..+.s..s........•......'P 1 .... tle.sre'r9esst..raw ..ii.,iWi.e.,..1• .a4: 11 Map Unit Descriptions.. V"Ield County, Colorado, Southern Fart.. T,;rr_ .;••_iiat.4P......*...t.-.s iii...ac 13 35 —Loup Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes .ra.a.abell .........t.Ill lel•• 13 44 Olney loamy sand, 1 to 3 percent slopes....,..... t...................r 69 Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes•.••r.....at.•••.t..irn.rrtst.rt a na.41..415 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopest.rt.0elve}4+i.Ai.Oaft.ft.,17 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopesr.,t,.,.v-f""i1..1 r.19 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes ai}..P 74 —Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes... .. II ....... f .. t I t e t t• r i* r F.... 4 L P e 4 4, P t a 4 .......... floAALApt ..... r•.. �....r.m.rr■ta•t!Ur.- m4r...n • -� .t.v4rTs.ef... r ..i4tiiAa..ii LP mots. References . • ....... .... .. .... • i i ... e i 7 - .. .. . . sigma.* .. 4 a W.... .. I Omit P't@ SW r r. . ... • _ v m. r• I.-• t. r•• r.. n. Y W, rt i 2 . . . .....*r.. r aiu ..... t . r rItt . . . V. . I .. . . . c .. .. • . . . l , e .. r e ■ ...,... .. 7 rs ... ■ P . t .. ■ t . Y 23 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, s, 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 Ian dforms and lan dform 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 mast years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 641 Aal r1-^,Irc', I �;,,,„ Resource Report Custom So a 0 0 u_ 0_ MAP LEGEND were mapped at d) 0) a E 3 415 C cv E to ich C a mc (1) Very Stony Spot at 40 e O 4a 4 15 v 21 cc U, C a Ca C U- (1) di a) r __ o ,� a 8 4.f t L ceu,�, 03 2 o VII =E , 3` o E �,it ci ol= E 5 �- 2 c {° o c a Jo 2 ' S ' CL _it, �. }, LO .C as to 07 ar CIO CcCO ill fn cag o • 0-o ro 0 c a a d. -0 C.I3 3 co CO c co a c .0c a ca C r.r (ti f +-' C > C c 4� O) E c `� CO M o c 0 o ; 0) C} C � al1-R 112 9.2 0 CU E dCli = 2 ca U E ya C- i3 ai SO v ra O o ID Cm G! O w LLj .Ecm 4/9 c 8 2 E E to 0 b. a9 oa -0 cin CC Jo_ t2ri.J CD �°• ma _c ZEE �� Special Line Features i' VI C C C 2 i 6 Water Features LIJ C ca U C m 1,2 �d w CL ti a ra U] 0 '5 3 '3 W m ii a 11 Ca x ttt Closed Depression Major Roads I 2 ch CD Aerial Photography Marsh or swamp Mine or ❑ uarry CQ Ct -a t 8 a z C 3 W a 0_a m o 7thc o ra C 15.0E I 06 co a 4 I— aLI aneous Water Perennial Water 0 CG cu a C 0 -o C Ci C C a cu KG o to Go Rock Outer° CU U a E C 4.) a U, ''G ci 0 a, L C � d CL Mi CI E LP ., D 443 a a CO CO -13 � En 4 i a 4 Severely Eroded Spot Sep 20, 2015 —Oct images were photographed: (a In C7 it Cid Zia; WI - d � ai e eik U) va a) E'c c Q, O ea E CI, JD Q C) o a W S 0 Oa Jo o C E ≥ cfl co IC _Cl2 c co 0 0 N c a a c a O - CQ - - 4 ▪ E c 8.E Q cn CLO M M Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In AOl Percent of AOI 35 44 69 Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Olney loamy sand, 1 to 3 percent slopes 7.2 4.4% Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 70 72 73 74 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes Totals for Area of interest 74.1 45.5% 4.4 2.7% 13.2 8.1% 34;9 21.4% 15.5 11.4% 10.4 6.4% 162.7 100.O% 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 landforrn 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. 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 proport on 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 35—Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362f Elevation: 4,550 to 4,750 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Loup and similar soils: 55 percent Boo! and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the m apun it. Description of Loup Setting Landform: Swales, drain ageways, streams Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy alluvium Typical profile HI - 0 to 16 inches: loamy sand 1-12 - 16 to 40 inches: loamy sand H3 - 40 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 inthr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (n onirrigate d): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: AND Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R0676Y029CO) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Boel Setting Landform: Swales, drainageways, streams Down -slope shape: Linear Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Stratified sandy alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: loamy sand H2 - 14 to 60 inches: loamy sand properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigatod): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R057BY029CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Osgood Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 44 —Olney loamy sand, I to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 54 degrees F Frost -free period: 125 to 175 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Olney and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the map unit. Description of Olney Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed deposit outwash Typical profile HI - 0 to 10 inches: H2 - 10 to 20 inches: H3 - 20 to 25 inches: H4 - 25 to 60 inches loamy sand sandy clay loam sandy clay loam : fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 rrimho sicm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigate d): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Vona Percent of map unit: 8 Hydric soil rating: No Zigweid Percent of map unit: 7 Hydric soil rating: No percent percent 69 Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczd 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Elevation: 3,000 to 5,210 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 166 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: sand AC-5to12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 infh r) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.9 mmhoslcm) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (norsirr gated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (R0676Y015CO), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (8072 AO21 S) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional) : Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (RO67BYQ 15CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (R072)(A022K5) Hydric soil rating: No Julesburg Percont of map unit: 5 percent Land/form: Imerdunes Land/form position (two-dimensional): Toeslo pe Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (RD72 o22KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Lary dforrn: I me rd u n es Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope pe Land/form position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape; Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R0678Y024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (8072 A022 B) Hydric soil rating: No 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczf Elevation: 3,050 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipita tion: 12 to 1B inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: BO percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Hills, dunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslo pe, shoulder, footslope, summit Landform position (Three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, crest Down -slope shape: Linear, convex Across -slope shape: Linear, convex 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A-0to5inches: sand Ac-5tol2 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Very low capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of pon ding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 mmhoslcrn) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated) : 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (RO67BY0I500), Rolling Sands (8072 Y1 09KS) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landforrn: Interdunes u ne s Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY015CO), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (8072 A021 KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landforrrr position (two-dimensional): Footslope, backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (RO72 AO22K ) Hydric soil rating: No Haxtun Percent of map unit 5 percent Landform: Imerdunes 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (two-dimensional): Fo otslope, toeslope pe Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Sandy Plains (ROG7BYO2400), Sandy Plains (RO72 Y111 S) Hydr+c soil rating: No 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit om pos iti o n 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: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent materi'ai: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile lit - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam 1-13 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.95 to 6.00 i nlhr) Depth to water table: More than 50 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhosicm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Land capability classification (nonirrigatec): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024C0) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent ent Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363s Elevation: 4,800 to 5:200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 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 Landforrr : Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eclian deposits Typical profile i-1 - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6,00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than $0 inches 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of poncIing: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhoslcm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 7 percent Hydric soil rating: No 74 —Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363t Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature.' 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 86 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam 21 Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhosicm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): Be Land capability classification (nonirrigated): Se Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Valent Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Remmit Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AA S HTO). 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 D2487-99. 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.E. 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/rips/portal! nres/detaiIinationaltsoilal?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:// wvvw.nres.usda.govlwps/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:f/ wvvw.nres.usda.govlwpslportal/nresldetaillnational/soils/ cid=nres142p2_053580 Tiner, R.1 ., 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:/fwww.nres.usda.govlwpslportal/nresldetaillsoilsi home/?cid=nres14 p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http:/lwww,nres.usda.govlwps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuselrangepasture/'acid=stelprdb1943084 23 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430 -VI. http://www,nres.usda,govlwps/portal/ nresfdetail/soils/scientists/ cid nres142p2_O54242 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://"wvw.nres.usda.govfwpslportal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/InternetiFSE DOCUM E NTS/nres 142 p2_052290.pdf 24 Four D Farms, LLC APPENDIX C USGS Topographic Map in int 'V* tl 5 dEPAltTloti'AI or THE IMTEtttott C6L f�i atlimmr bra amply inif tie -1 yt N *1W C - •.•{t••vs4. 01 4 161 Min • -1- .1�.v -.. .t --..........."-w ems__ Cre. ►` s 11. ••../11--"11 •-. � ....{.i_ .4 .�.,,lii..... ......E t eta A ." a.. v .41.11., , 'I. i i y • r� 1 'N kl pry* / •1 1. 1 II I w 1 US Topo MI i i�ttiitm • ..2212 11gii..L..4_ i l ........ antra et bs Y ..+'I- - .. NRwr Y. • vI t' r 4 .41`, I • Nl 1 1480110111 Ilk PfbdUdad by Oft Ufladr, S'ii in Gentling M'lh iaear tea N 1I I I •4'21I MIS rna le Wok w' 561 ^Chi11 •ttO,C ISA 4Fr elu tit. tfd/Tirr Trrtark Maarraird, tail M 41444444 f0 G rant C44444rica MAP Pr SW ara alai 111f/aY ea Nola slarlat ia. katrtrlarrr warm• tr�rrr�5,rw �r M• amatte al lllwmi 1121 Mr ads 414. w eirq I'tltN1)Y4• ..A I MILii4141 Ot4tR rar. J -- ✓ are groan wgasrai*.a 404,44'614 41444 fqr,. rie altaIWIII I J- 44.04 NSA YYd rr t a • 'P! WI :I a • I a 1 e ode 'Bin '41341 ylq{,rggll p....tv.......t..S T1 —T- I t iambic . 1 t••.. ,.•....Tr• "I— ., n.•T.q• •Tr fJ. if 4 MP, .....�•uokiS a..+a S . if. a •ss - Ain .; is_ •U •••_•rlail.gitttxetltl•:'r,111r<t •-ea....i/1t/ ' • i Iq 1+. 4 444 -•n w....... IP 111•81••••••Iii, Ijir �.l iv "# LS IN Sat 44 1 rO _a R go, aim mat TI• a me Ian sa o rtr' 0*1 A OLIN LW nrr p '4 n is 1655 L.i IK 6F IfU Ti S* oast '� Oa that ial4s allal rd Odra nil iweU t6U rbe rYtiNir rte eplitall 11- 1-.IP Barn tl t r J l„erN. •r 2ra imam 11111-_151 Lamar ire, IS I Ins e1 3) on Un 4 Nei 4054174 Waste Yein l Ur SKI 4 ClWI Men Ilrt west Fa ri5era Pt -At TEVILLE QUADRANGLE caLok1IDc4 Ettl cl ? 0 -MIN U'fl Was ins nil Li Asir _ rintwins PiATPE'1AL .E, CO 2016 0 5iata SA% Four D Farms, ILC APPENDIX D FEMA Flood Plain Map 0 ter Cc 0 8 w te ti Et re W W Ln 120 a) n tat 2 go - 0 IP L L cs � 14 3 � trni ral rc c L i 0 05 00 40 t0 C a� CC N Or CD 0 8 La - ft LL C 2 a a 8 Ix 41 Levee. See Notes. Zane} x • Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Lane D • a Cr CC r LSI W O r U- p 4 N N tv 2 Area of Minima ENO SCREEN Effective LOMRs Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard zpnE E 42 a • a OTHER AREAS lij C CC 17X W Cr a) 115 Cross Sections with 1% Annua C rideL �I n LL O co 1 Water Surface Elevation Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Profile Baseline im Lp x a RS C I. O. rti c o Liv Au2Lk) 0 n MP 0_ S0 .0135 — J �7 a� L,1 J Cd a E I.!9 8 t2.4 Li �'. 46 eki 2 TOxi aP ; r`-; �.7.7 C E tic 0 ▪ L ` Y a 1. ca ILO c C A ca 0J C 5 ta. OJ 2 C Z 0 MAP PANELS tug 8 td c ` E r.1 c ,Q4E �4 O C� c 10ti1. 1t.1414' h t dfd�rr. rid it, eio 00104Loctild c� N (6 I -C3 O O co 5.74 crt Z. bisti Nsi 1i��!��I�I��I��I�I��III�RIIIRdI III I I F!!III� it I Mrrrtl-.-...0 .. Is'I'pry t9hr111111111IIIIIIIIIIirnf1111rirJ1111111111111111111111iwitittittllllllltttiti tPPrhrttiicr`t'titrrnittT-t-••1"tltillflrrrrrrrrurrrrrrIrrI1Trrrrrtlliiititi 1111111111IIIIrIIIIIIIIrtItIIIIIIIItrrrrrrrrirrrRtrrrrrIIIIIInIIIIIIF!Il!IIII11111Ifi17f L.00 .E1N aim C E to f LL c 8 ▪ a� E E a c 'V 'MD�$03ca ).Cz CL 0 C ni C .4:4J IE Q J ti t 14 - -- 4 =FE GJ a E To m t la. 10 1+6 E• ny E O a CU• E � -n — (13 s0 c E -u a c ▪ E L w 9J • E1:1 cu -0 EL Qi E Tad Q E t C o I or u � 3] �J 12 4gso e • U c CS 9; .- 0 f0 c a - a c de m tal c C C Q v C L( r C T C �C Li L( C ii ?LA, -7n `flt Four D Farms, LW APPENDIX E Percentage of Imperviousness Calculations AGPRO b1CV 111 {)k'ERS OF Ac;MCI" :E ( I KE fessionals 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, Co 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 yrurynr . agp ras. co rn User Entry Salving for the Permit ImaervIous III: Project Number: 1601-01-14 Designed By: AGPROfessionals Date 7/9/18 2:33 PM Sheet: of Checked By: CTV subject: Impervious Area Calculation Proposed Lot D Description per UDFCD Tab': - ' . Impe io s Total Sq a Roofs Gravel Agriculture None None None None None None None None None None None None None //-++�� r Road I' hi1;, Ii II Gil[ '1 MOIL II[ilII Ai IIII II 'h !IIIII i[l lII:Ohl, Nlil IIIIII MIDI ��[6. lillill P I L A l 0 +5 15' S Arm re Feel ' 126, 5,353, Total Total Impervious Development Acres Acres jififfiffiffiM 1 ' WAWA I A•9 „' 03 60 +960 2.90 122.91 Development Design %l Actual Acres Impervious 0.06 0.41 144 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.00 2.90 2.36% AGPRO I1 EVE I G)PERS `lY ACCs fessionals 'curry RE: 3050 67th Avenue; Suite 200 Greeley, Co 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 ww_v .a gpros, corn Project Number: 1601-01-14 Date: 7/6/18 4:20 PM Designed By: AGPROfessionaIs Sheet: of Checked By: CTV Subject: 2,000 SqFt Equivalent Imperviousness Calculation IIIIIIII = User Entry Sorins for the Percent Impervious Ol:1 Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Inpervio is Total SqFt I 1 i llllll`11!c; 2 0% U 0 0 i !`a a v i 2,000 215,8 0 Roofs Greenbelts None None None None None None None None None None None None None None i s II,;L:III: *, Total Impervious Acres Total Development Acres., _ 1 800 ACUS re Feet 16 0.14 00 5.00 II Development %l Actual Design FI Acres Impervious 0,04 0,10 0,00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 2.81% Preliminary Drainage Report For Four D Farms, LLC USR Southeast ¼ of Section 15, Township 2N, Range 67W of the 6th P.M. AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE AGPROfessionals 3050 67t1 Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 (970) 535-9318 10/18/2018 Four D Farms, LLC Table of Contents Certifications . Ili f NI i f4444...i4444555.5 , 5555. it 3 Weld County Certification of Compliance 4 ■ e ■trodirRction ... a ... 1. Location •.......... ***** .............. 2. I escry'tion of Property. ......................f..s.s...aia..........!..#f 6sf...ief 4444.. i.t!i!1 5 Drainage Basin and Sub -Basins 1. Major Basin Description... ....................... 2. Sub -Basin Description ................. Drainage Design Criteria ......1......... .ii.555. ................454.........55.....54...4 6i 6 ..aia......................0....000....... .. 1. De1eIo ment Iiit.eria.....!M .....b....i •44 4555 i. 5.55.15..... ....4154......5....1 2. Hydrological Criteria DOB 5544 4444...4555.4.4......:5554.x.555. f 3. Hydraulic Criteria - - ..............1...........4..5.......17 Drainage Facility Design 9 1. General Concept 4.s..5555...5555.5.4555.5455554.4.4..5555.5.555.55.45...545......... 605....5...tst.......9 2. Specific Details....4................................................................... 9 Conclusions 11 1. Compliance with Weld County Code .ii 2. Drainage Concept 11 List of References 12 Appendices Four L1 Farms. LLC Certifications I hereby certify that this preliminary drainage report for the Four D Farms, LI USR was prepared under my direct supervision in accordance with the provis Weld County storm drainage criteria for the owners thereof. Chad e e1de, P.E. AGPROfessionals bl� Mary Carlson, EIT tC proposed ons of the 10/18/2018 Preliminary Drainage Report AGPROfessionals, 3050 67th Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * w rw.agpros.con Page 3 of 12 CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE ENGINEERING DESIGNED TO WELD COUNTY CODE STANDARDS AND CRITERIA I Chad le eide Consultant Engineer for Foul C Farms LLC ("Applicant"), understand and acknowledge that Applicant is seeking land use approval of Use by Special Review ("Application") for the property described in the attached Exhibit "A." I have designed or reviewed the design ("Design") for the proposed land use set forth in t le Application. I hereby certify, on behalf of Applicant that the Design will meet all applicable drainage requirements o' the Weld County Code with the exception of variance(s) described below. This certification is not a guarantee or warranty either expressed or implied. {Engineer's St I(("'rfn . 0 waaa..■.a fi Ifir,k7te, T E 01. 2 2 * P 4 04 : 13i — a, a 4 • i il a. 1i1 _ El% le 94 Niri-- 4 of Record Signatue VARIANCE REQUEST 1) Describe the 2) Describe why 3) Describe the Weld County it is not possible proposed alternative Code criteria of which a variance is being requested, to meet the Weld County Code. with engineering rational which supports the inte I understand and properties and the specific constraints. agree that the intention public. I understand of the Code is to reduce impacts of developmc if this variance request is approved it is not preeec Planning Director Approval indicated when signed by director or appointee: Planning Director N Signature appm & Date of t of the Weld County Code, rat on ent se me eighboring downstream ing and is based on site iNi atm! lamp Emile J 4 !-311 Fri-grAomunan lige 441 Four D Farms, LLC Introduction 1. Locationn. The proposed site is located in Lot D of RLC 1 -1070 being part of the southeast / of Section 15, T2N, R67W, of the 6th PM. This site is located west of Highway 85 and northwest of the City of Fort Lupton, CO. The properties surrounding the site are primarily undeveloped, agricultural farm land. The property is bordered on the south side by Weld County Road (WCR) 20. The nearest road to the east is WCR 23, to the north is WCR 22 and to the west is WCR 19. No other major road ways are located within or adjacent to the property (see vicinity map in Appendix A). 2. Description of ! roperty The area draining towards the proposed pond is approximately 9.41 -acres of the 122.91 acre proposed Lot D property. The proposed site is currently an urbanizing, agricultural property with existing oil and gas structures. There are four types of soil: Loup-Boel loamy sands (0% to 3% slopes), Olney loamy sand (1% to 3% slopes), Valent sand (0% to 9% slopes), and Vona loamy sand (0% to 9% slopes). The majority of the soil is well drained, hydrologic soil group B (see USDA- NRCS soil report in Appendix A). Front Range Dairy, LLC is the owner of the property upstream and to the south of the proposed site. Paradize, LLC is the owner of the adjacent parcel that is upstream and to the west of the proposed site. Front Range Dairy, LLC is the owner of the adjacent proposed lots A, B and C that are downstream and to the east of the proposed site. No other properties are adjacent to the site. The Coal Ridge Ditch is located in the northeast corner of the site and is owned by the Coal Ridge Ditch Company. There are no major open channels within or adjacent to the proposed property. The applicant is proposing a composting facility with a storage building, a parking lot and gravel roads. The composting facility will be a Class I facility and will be pursuant to the Colorado Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities 6-CCR 1007-2, Section 14. 10/18/2018 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 5 of 12 AGPRofessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Drainage Basin and Sub -Basins 1. Major Basin Description The proposed site is urbanizing and is located in rural Weld County. A Master Plan for the site area is not currently available. The proposed site was considered as one major drainage basin for this report. Historically, the basin drainage flows towards the northeast and ultimately flows towards the Coal Ridge Waste Reservoir. The site is mostly northeast sloping and has a generally flat topography with slopes from zero to nine percent predominately towards the northeastern side of the property. Contours of the project location and the surrounding properties are shown on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map in Appendix A. A Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) map of the project area is included in Appendix A. The property is located on panels 08123C 1895E and 08123C1915E and is not currently located within a 100 -year floodplain. Potential offsite flows from the north and east should continue to flow northeast, away from the site. Offsite flows from the west primarily flow north-northeast and are routed around the site. Offsite flows from the south are intercepted by WCR 20. Therefore, an increase in runoff is not expected. 2. Sub -Basin Description The site was evaluated with four subbasins labeled Subbasin A, B, C and D. Stormwater runoff will be directed to a proposed detention pond on the northeastern corner of the site. 10/18/2048 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 6 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Drainage Design Criteria 1. Development Criteria The proposed site runoff was evaluated using the criteria set forth in the UDFCD Criteria Manual Volumes 1, 2 and 3 and the WCECG manual. 2. Hydrological Criteria From the NOAA Atlas 14 Fort Lupton, CO precipitation station, the estimated rainfall from the 10 -year, 1 -hour precipitation is 1.39 inches and the 100 -year, 1 -hour precipitation is 2.69 inches (see NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Maps in Appendix A). These values were used for runoff calculations and to estimate the required detention volume. Percentage of imperviousness was determined using the recommended values from UDFCD Table 6-3. A percentage of imperviousness of two percent was used for the historic site. The overall percentage of imperviousness for the proposed site was estimated to be 13 percent. The percentage of imperviousness for Subbasin A is approximately 22 percent, for Subbasin B is approximately six percent, for Subbasin C is approximately 17 percent and for Subbasin D is approximately two percent (see percentage of imperviousness calculations in Appendix A). Using the percentage of imperviousness, the design storms and the UDFCD Detention Basin Volume Estimating spreadsheet, the historic and proposed peak runoff flowrates were estimated for the basin (see Table 1 and LDFCD Runoff Calculations in Appendix A). Peak runoff flowrates for each subbasin were calculated with the rational method using the time of concentration, runoff coefficients, and the precipitation depths from the CD Rational spreadsheet (see UD Rational Runoff Calculations in Appendix A) . Table 1: Peak Runoff Flowrates Peak Runoff 10 Year Peak Flowrate (cfs) 100 Flowrate Year Peak (cfs) Historic 5.53 22.66 Proposed 7.81 26.44 cfs = cubic feet per second 3. Hydraulic Criteria The 5 -year historic release rate was determined using the area of the proposed site and an estimated two percent historic imperviousness (see Historic Release Rate calculation in Appendix B). The volume required was calculated to be 0.92 acre-feet and the release rate was calculated to be 2.08 cubic feet per second. The required detention volume was calculated using the Modified FAA method from the UDFCD Detention Basin Volume Estimating Workbook (see UDFCD Detention Volume calculation in Appendix B). The proposed detention pond will have a capacity greater than the required 0.92 acre-feet at the 100 -year water surface elevation with an additional 1 feet of freeboard. A spillway will be proposed that will be designed to release the 100 -year storm event. The spillway 10/18/2048 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 7 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC crest will be at or above the invert of the freeboard elevation and the depth of the flow should be less than six inches. Calculations for the spillway and stage storage for the pond will be included in Appendix : in the Final rainage Report. Grass lined channels will be proposed on the site to convey stormwater runoff towards the detention pond. The drainage channels will be sized using the 100 -year, 1 -hour design storm peak flowrate per the WCECG. A Manning's n of 0.035 will be used in calculations for a grass lined channel per the WCECG. The channels will have 4:1 side slopes and will be designed with one foot of freeboard for the 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event. The Froude numbers for the channels will be less than the maximum of 0.8 from WCECG. Calculations for the channel capacities will be included in Appendix B in the Final Drainage Report. Culverts will also be proposed to convey stormwater on the site. Culverts will be sized to convey the 10 -year, 1 -hour design storm per the WCECG using the UDFCD Culvert spreadsheet. A Manning' s n of 0.013 will be used in calculations for a concrete pipe per the WCECG. Minimum slopes of 0.3% will be used in the design and rip rap sizes will be determined using the UDFCD Culvert spreadsheet. Calculations for the culvert capacity and rip rap sizing will be included in Appendix B in the Final Drainage Report. The headwater to diameter ratio will be less than one for the 10 -year design storm and less than 1.5 for the 100 -year design storm for each culvert. 10/18/2018 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 8 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Drainage Facility Design 1. General Concept A detention pond is proposed in the northeastern corner of the site. Runoff should generally sheet flow towards the pond. The pond is designed to detain the 100 -year storm event and release at the 5 -year historic rate. The site should not significantly alter the historic drainage pattern. A general drainage plan, drainage plan and erosion details are shown in Appendix C. 2. Specific Details Maintenance access will be provided for the pond. A. Scheduled Maintenance of Proposed Facilities Scheduled maintenance will occur during daylight, weekday hours. Routine maintenance will include but should not be limited to the following: • Mowing of the bank slopes and area around the pond on a monthly basis during the growing season and as needed during the cooler months. • The outfall structure from the pond and other areas will be inspected monthly for debris which could inhibit the proper flow of discharge. Any debris will be removed immediately and disposed of or placed in a location to prevent future maintenance and to not cause impact up or downstream of the structure. • Trash will be removed from around the pond to prevent entering the pond. Generally, the site should be kept free of loose trash which could be carried off site by wind or rain. • Inspect the pond and outfall structure for non -routine maintenance need. B. Periodic or Non -Scheduled Maintenance of Proposed Facility Periodic or non-scheduled maintenance includes routine inspection of the pond area and discharge/outfall structures to identify needed repairs and non -routine maintenance. These items may include but should not be limited to the following: • Pond area and outfall structure should be inspected after significant storm events. • Re -growth of trees on or around the pond bank. These should be cut and removed from the pond area. • Sediment from the site may accumulate in the pond bottom and reduce the pond to below design volume requirements. The pond should be excavated if the pond bottom elevation reached a level that allows excessive aquatic growth or reduces the pond efficiency such that the sediments are passing the discharge structure and release off site. 10/18/2048 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 9 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`1t Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Stabilization or re -grading of side slopes may be required periodically or after excessive rain events. Any disturbance of slopes should be reseeded or may require installation of erosion control materials until seeding can reestablish adequate grasses to prevent future erosion. • Any other maintenance or repairs which would minimize other maintenance to the pond or outfall structure. If the pond is significantly impaired such that the pond is incapable of properly functioning to meet the Weld County stormwater discharge requirements, the owner should assess the corrective action needed and have the pond restored by properly trained personnel. 10/18/2018 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 10 of 12 AGPRofessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Conclusions 1. Compliance with Weld County Code The drainage design of the Four D Farms, LLC USR is consistent with the Weld County Engineering and Construction Guidelines and the Weld County Code. A detention pond is proposed in the northeastern corner of the property. 2. Drainage Concept Historical flow patterns and run-off amounts should be maintained in such a manner that should reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off for the 100 -year storm event. The drainage design included in this report should be effective in controlling damage from the design storm runoff by detaining the 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event and releasing at the 5 -year historic rate. No irrigation companies or property owners should be affected by the proposed development. Master Drainage recommendations are not available in the area of this project. If a Master Plan is developed for this area, the design allows for flexibility and potential for allowing additional flows through the detention area by utilizing infiltration. 10/18/2048 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 11 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley CO 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC List of References Federal Emergency Management Agency. "FEMA Flood Map Service Center." FEMA Flood Map Service Center. FEMA, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. http 1/ms c . fema. ov/p ortal> . United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service. "Web Soil Survey." Web Soil Survey. USDA - NRCS, 2006. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <http:// ebsoilsurvey. sc.egov.usda. gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx . United States Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "NOAA's National Weather Service." Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates. USDC - NOAA NationalWeather Service. Web. 2 Oct. 2018. https://hdsc.n s.noaa.govlhdsc/pfds/pfds_pr-intpage.html?last=40.1347&ion=- 104.8729 .data=depth&units=english&series=pds>. United States Geological Survey. "Maps." Overview - Maps, United States Geological Survey. USGS, 2016. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <w .usgs.gov/productsimaps/topo-maps>. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Detention Basin Volume Estimating, Workbook. Computer software. Software. Vers. 2.34. <http://udfcd.org/software>. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Peak Runoff Prediction by the Rational Method. Computer software. Software. Vers. 2.00. http://udfcd.org/software>. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1." USDCM: Volume 1 Management, Hydrology and Hydraulics. UDFCD, Mar. 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. http:'/udfcd. org/volume-one>. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volumes 2." USDCM: Volume 2 Structures, Storage and Recreation. UDFCD, Sep. 2017. Web. 2 Oct. 2018. <http://udfcd. org/volume-one>. Weld County. "Property Portal - Map Search." Property Portal - Map Search. Weld County, 19 Dec. 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <https://www.co. weld.co.us/maps 1/propertyportal/?acct=P1779500>. Weld County. "Weld County Engineering and Construction Criteria Guidelines." Weld County Engineering, July 2017. Web. 6 Jul. 2018. <www. we ldgov. com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 6/Fil e/D epartments/Public%2OWorks/En gineering/W E %20-%208-3-17.pdf.> 10/18/2018 Preliminary Drainage Report Page 12 of 12 AGPROfessionals, 3050 67`}` Avenue, Greeley Co 80634 * 970-535-9318 * www.agpros.com Four D Farms, LLC Appendices A. Hydrologic Computations a. Vicinity Map b. SDA-NRCS Soil Report c. USGS Topographic Map d. FEMA FIRAilette Map e. NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Maps t. Percentage of Imperviousness g. UDFCD Runoff Calculations h UD Rational Runoff Calculations B. Hydraulic Computations a. 5 -year historic release Rate b. UDFCD Detention Volume C. 24 x 36 Maps a. General Drainage Plan b. Drainage Plan c. Erosion Details Four D Farms, LLC APPENDIX A Hydrologic Computations 0 z C U 21 C a) U) County Boundar Property Boundar • C z a. SS a .ms a. a a a a r a I &A 1 a isr le Sas- - -a a as a !t a a- • .1 arsine -y=i - ■ as • m • ar a u la 4aar ar ii■ � Yf�• • ate =▪ ^a • as I. a' M a i aZ _ i� • - � Y 1 I r 'SAL *. S a 1 aaa a IS. • 1• ♦ • r 'O a S f a a. al IN -a 4 a ■ r ••••- - r • — -!-. les Fi -.1 ",� f - a I A a z ''ffy�� ■ �• cam' ... - • — • • • - f a 1 s • - IP • • •J• r aaaas sma a »a — fl a. ya 4 cam_ --- a laaar a L ••• a an •a- rat '-a s f a Ls - U . t• es ■--� •••••.„ a aas 4 lama _ - - ▪ i Ma aLa— a r n /p 1 -w g • _ er ,L • alt a •▪ s IL • • ■ • ■ • s a� V A p a ..a a • •■ • r r a t a ▪ r L T. ` • a aaa at- a: a C • a r as a s 1'i .• r • - t 1. ._ N.ILL y - �,:.-a 1 a _ - a a a ...Ls_ .ai le Ar a as l a aW aaa -�— ---- pia- a - .s . ua ur aar 1 3 a - a-. -la -'� a a I s■aaw al-• _ as t _ a ;ar s - s it a nr a. - a -s . r - a a _ • - • ..ar - fr- • a. a Y : S a a jt • i 1 u 'Jr ra. sJ • a a as _5 . �? rheia a - 7 _� --•— a Jar a It IL I , • •r E 1 � � 1 •`� ? "sob I - II a■ - at�s_a e _ as 4...7s ir" • • — =r • a • T t d ` -L >d' s.- yLyL, x in 1 as di i• L —S a a s ` . L R i sier ea i r ■ ▪ ▪ • • ▪ •••N • ✓ r .ir- le t • .174• Z t. • ALL r ainia. s T a. r me j disa - _ jrf. r eeaFas,.f 1= s r i.T —rear arm a. -..SA — a— 1 ■■U- - • a .;-•&•.• ' T J a • i 1 ear a • a aaar'r •t - -- it t ain �•r- - _ tea n. - - `�• - it to .� r a •a 6;I • a t - - . ia r ait • lat POI aver �' A t• i‘•S • • P Si ar I al a. s uses a • sMYtie ti11MW� r a - a I • a ale flat a a a t • 1� {aa a • ..- ) • al a. a. ▪ a al▪ l Tap ir • • E • f. 4 St Jars -311.1 SA'S • • • I I as W I IR • 217 le... al a fill:A:laniliallraintAH: oar: *2 .7117 Ira rt • ail as tie It • tri CD CD it CD 0 0 0 Gra 31 re al 4 O IC al EMMA IMO a 115 e ale MT O CO U Cn cc t.D rtr IN a -a • • USDA United States Department of Agriculture NR,s Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part July 6, 2018 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.gav/wps/ portal/nres/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=nres) or your N RCS State Soil Scientist (h ttp ://www. n res . u sd a . g ov/wps/portal/n res/d etai I /so i I s/co nta ctu s/? cid =n res 142 p2_0539 51). 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 N RCS 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 35—Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes 13 44- -Olney loamy sand, 1 to 3 percent slopes 14 69—Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 15 70—Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes 17 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 19 73 —Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes 20 74 —Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes 21 References 23 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 Resource Report Custom Soi z 0 O z a a z w C, w J 0. 4 were mapped at O a a tr- E r r cu C a (I (I) -o CO o 4) CD C 0 co a. CO co E 12 E acE 6 - ' a -C o _ �0 cif) ti' a3 C3 C 0 2 o S 0 E [f0 _a >co ,to O c im 4) _a -amoto -43 C 4) w a = >,.c al 0it a c r co ECG~' - 3 '3 a • }d i 4) 00 0 • E lm a'0 -D L CO C '0 C w —SL. Very Stony Spot Em C nterest (A0l) 0 • 0 C 4- 4 U) .5 0, Map Unit Polygons Map Unit Lines Map Unit Points C/) O) ti3 a Line Features a Co I Point Features A. 0 Co 0 C Water Features E C- CIO co as c 6 L 0 E Transportation tu 1.72 43) CC 0 .F Resources Conservation Service US Routes so CV C +31 a) in co co c a c (1) -3 to) 0 w o C6 2 Q C4 ocs a_' 0 2 ala WI o � U) a7o- 0 2 O c '(2 M U) Co 0 0 IZ rx L 5 CLI C73. 0 M J a a5 aco -0— — — - o >, 0 > > �o Z5 al ra UI CO CC U C 0 0 J J a) L CI? co0 Co w v 2 a -C C c � 0 'tU Q 4- a 'E < C U) cC 2 2 0 no. cio r co CT CD ft's L 3 - mm < 1V a 0 a C Marsh or swamp 0 .0 co 0 Co C) co C) C Mine or Quarry Ca co c3 -o -a co 0 Z O D Q 2 -c v CD 0 CO 52, C CU C? 3 ` 0 as ato I— aneous Water Ca L a) C N - v N CD F L o o r o o im c • r 0 .o j_ '- 0 Co .31 co c o Co C) Rock Outcrop Lo CU a E L a co co 12 C) U C 3 C a0 tv Q O CO r Sep 20, 2015 —Oct images were photographed: vJ CO L6 N a) C _o O 01) -5E -a O 0 a>3 L CO Q >1 ED E>I CO Cl) co _ct Q o N 0 _, °C)Q= 0 TS c>64 o -a vo L 07 H o._ a6 a <0 V C ,. cu o 0 > a O >. 2 O C w 4) o 0 c 73 a C!) { C/) CI) LI) C!) 1 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 35 Loup-Boel percent loamy slopes sands, 0 to 3 7.2 4.4% 44 Olney loamy percent slopes sand, 1 to 3 74.1 45.5% 69 Valent slopes sand, 0 to 3 percent 4.4 2.7% 70 Valent slopes sand, 3 to 9 percent 13.2 8.1% 72 Vona Foamy sand, percent slopes 0 to 3 34.9 21.4% 73 Vona loamy sand, percent slopes 3 to 5 18.5 11.4% 74 Vona loamy sand, percent slopes 5 to 9 10.4 6.4% Totals for Area of Interest 162.7 100.0% 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 11 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 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 35 Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362f Elevation: 4,550 to 4,756 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Loup and similar soils: 55 percent Boel and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transepts of the mapunit. Description of Loup Setting Landform: Swales, drainageways, streams Down slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy alluvium Typical profile - 0 to 16 inches: loamy sand H2 - 16 to 40 inches: loamy sand H3 - 40 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: AID Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R067BY029CO) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Boel Setting Landform: Swales, drainageways, streams Down -slope shape: Linear 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material.- Stratified sandy alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: loamy sand H2 - 14 to 60 inches: loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.2 inches) interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R06TBYO29CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Osgood Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 44 Olney loamy sand, -I to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 54 degrees F Frost -free period: 125 to 175 days Farmland classification Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Olney and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Custom Soil Resource Report Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit Description of Olney Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed deposit outwash Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loamy sand H2 - 10 to 20 inches: sandy clay loam H3 - 20 to 25 inches: sandy clay loam H4 - 25 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 inihr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhoslcm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Sandy Plains (RO67BYO24CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Vona Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Zigweid Percent of map unit: 7 percent Hydric soil rating: No 69 Valent e nt sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczd 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Elevation: 3,000 to 5,210 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 166 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: I nterd un es Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A-Oto5inches: sand AC -5 to 12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat) High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.1 to 1.9 mmhosldrn) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification 'nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY015CO), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (1 072XA021 KS ) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY015CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (RQ72XAa22KS) Hydric soil rating: No Julesburg Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (RQ72XAQ22KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (R072XA022 KS) Hydric soil rating: No 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczf Elevation: 3,050 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Hills, dunes Landform position 'two-dimensional9: Backslope, shoulder, footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, crest Down -slope shape: Linear, convex Across -slope shape: Linear, convex Custom Soil Resource Report Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: sand AC - 5 to 12 inches: sand Cl - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 i nlh r) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 innhoslcr ) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY015CO), Rolling Sands (R0Y2 Y1o9K ) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position 'two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (RO67B'Y015CO), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (R072 A021 KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (RO67BY024CO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (8072 AO22 K ) Hydric soil rating: No Haxtun Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy Plains (R0T2 Y111 K ) Hydric soil rating: No 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol.: 363r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map UnitComposition 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: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material.- Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile l - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam h3 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification ('irrigated): 3e 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) O) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363s Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 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: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High (1.98 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 rnnnhoslcm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): Se Land capability classification (non irrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) O) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Kerman it Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 7 percent Hydric soil rating: No 74 Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363t Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 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: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian deposits Typical profile HI 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 26 to 60 inches: sandy loam Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water'Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent salinity; maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhoslcrn) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6e Land capability classification (non irrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Valent Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Remmit Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. 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.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ n res/d etai I/natio na I/so i l s/?cid =nres 142 p2_0542 62 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.gav/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_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=nres 142p2_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.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres 142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ d etai I /n atio n al /I a nd use/rang ep astu re/?cid = ste l prd b 10430 84 23 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/ n res/d etai I/soils/scientists/?cid =nres 142 p2_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 2 96 . http: //www. n res . u sd a. gov/wps/porta I/nres/deta i I/nation al/soils/? cid =nres 142 p2_Or53624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/InternetiFSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2 052290.pdf 24 • 55',:1'y 'O' Approximate Location at Project Site '153 II4 an 414e 444 1.43 USGS 5u1e11c.: air isrIwupiliot •arid U.S_ DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL 5UPVE'r :19 '' 5 Tne •UK -km.91 61pp USTopo 117 .:cr I v'S:c:•kk '19 PLATTEV1ILLE QUADRANGLE COLORADO -WELD CD. 7 -5 —MINUTE SERIES rju 5 L 1■1-r —rj ` CS ice. 11 I 1 . � -R ES _ 1j7II \1 `�' , r '� ` `- IC ,fir--� c, mil r.""ti - •-••-......r v \ V `" \\fit r 1e�1 3 t 1 Ii I 4}} -� a r- - /1 t' I •• .:+-'-9 �i h'I Yt \ } f • k' a• 1_ ` f - •r -_'•. I I 1� 1 -ii-iii- iii 4 l ' �i L' ' . LE - 4y " 4•J r - .r 'E.\ / i...3, \ r `r "•-.=_„._ri—-.• L+` M 1 z 1 k cP` - 2] Nom._ • Ij I \ ��I'rr%� _ II' �I��':. I I r%NS11.\-, -_. i.1 �' ,j tie ac PA ref ' 4 "...yak; ��7`�illll�l�1� \ ( 4.----A 'C 1 ter 41 h 5 .h \ J ti ti.Lf! ,/'� •. _' Jr i. Jrf 7------\\,)' ��.�,n :it: f1 S .- r� .. 0 IIr .r-�_- ... `r d f JI$ • 111 `\ \ ih Z- N. - "'�3f51,1:. Il �` r _ _�. ti. — _ 0 f - s Z{ _ 1 1 }\ \rn.'‘Ik..11 4 \�•��\ , r 111 \ \ L ,rr•may \ riff 'NI L~ jL iF .. ‘t \ C:6,.____. ---n,. l \\.r). 1 • 1 i1:7.rnli Zs ..."� �..� �� 1 ��'\ w-' •yl r r.-.. •'-y ,'I 11111 •T _ I % ) r"-' 5 �` • 1.,ti� \ ''' -..) \ ,e,"--....„_Lp \\\\ -, "h1- 4',.. -'� l jl h1 g \ 7 '•T•� N.r r.. - ,1C1 ,1 ti ... --"..-%.,N I I ) `y �ir IIF - ;1 ■� IJ�IIIIIIIIS �. . -� L>♦!� = 1 •f 1 \\----N___ ( \I _ w �� l Iy alga /K ( J. :-I [ r ,!J 1 '.Uteri % r r: til t•, : Il 4 Cili ' J 1:: nil H . fit (4:1-1-.� + I :l tip. r II l •�.. tins:,:: ti4 Lt y 1 ti .:ti F9 ,4 di- �' _., P.O iI \ 11 J }r5 �� II - /J 7ft i J L+YT: ttf Jett - y trr I R ' \Nc'' �i1 �_- 5 .. y.r • l� i 4-----i •\\C...\-- . 'I' ' .__rte - — T v:/ r h _ --�-- w.. J _.•., // 7-- ters--- r ! Le its ififr. / -.1 u / ill I l troll in V f- • \ k1i. r lL 4�yi;. 1f\ \ )16. call \ \ .1 \ I .% 70I C i •IdE \\C:::\ r, `r. r r f at -I'. NN\ r 1t cf si9 rrr.1 _C Produced by the United States GeolinficalSuIvey h:r:l : .r: .. 1.111- -i id3 144.33 "Ca ; G:c::4c's1:4a- or I9. ?POEM. r.uI:cLb-].d 1 :iii rtrl YI'1: iii lwl ,.L IId,\41,r , iII.:Li 11111 13 lU nno-r.lri i s,•• r.l.l d: .l rr.11l•'I. t, +.raFt .II I1'la I•I.Iltl :re) I PI .rr PL.1-dclr.. -- 4' .r u,-ar:Lrtd rip V'-:i7:Li ir. "I-:Lr I:r' es v- LI'I''.9o'en.nn, 'I leeratoere -ay be 'Jrlrr rer' yr re--r•e ”Lora r veLr bode . ... . . . . di. :rr al. 41r r.11 ::15 • ::Ih hire:. . _ U'll, iris ............h.r1,II.l Lc. -a. .:13 rcriull. .......LIA'dr.I• LAtc,r, ?1.! 70.11C.1; ;rrl- LithI.3 rl` ill! • :ZI4 LA li :IL.r.Vy :y,rn ... .. ..... ... .. AL:1, ::I I .t':il7,ds• _._-f•A15 FGi9'yl , :hilrrL II11trI[ITI 1=]i - r:I 5i3 0' ' HEN afln 1Xr:7nl e. 91MIETIC PI METH rt rum ]H iT rEHTER OF SHEET 43.H01.4.10 .Y% 4 a ::I .., . IjT gi SC' 515 5c4LE 1;24 UUU ELS 97 ha: :.s n .E-: -Hu u 10:'1 :rut' ,r' -u '01' e''uu ru11- :G0 •• uu -Lie '.: 50 LU lr;&1r IYTE•hk I0 F=E - OD% I ;:Y:Ir;II'CI Iris `r. tiv {11 IDM Mit r Irby bhe4le i ➢ 3 :C -01- IMP C! °iop.d- LL-. I.0.s °'AL :t:Aar I as! NI I- -.IGdai1' •H9 i':]'r11ISe t-.Ir,` rtl.li+'�Vr.L1: �ralr. t'.I-av- I 4.1/ a1S r A. -M 1.L • I P I S I h s ' a •. Frederik FclL -Writ ! Hat• IViol. .11.).... 14. �J.4 519 '1•r,Lr rce—..or Lon p c?in> w''r:-teat/ Itllr ".rl, 'Ok0 CI ks;lfl[� I,rl -k•.9.:Ic °]L1 r. ..u.14 et;J -PSI' 'r}S •W1 ,-C-"" V_ —T 19 .52 I9 B8 sin 'v '146 r3 .1;4 47 -;7 mod'#5 j tr I` f,L:1: rata PLATTEVILLE, Co 2016 03 N CO CO O O LL C O co Z SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT 40'8'20.07"N W U - CO O W a LL 1m to 4.4 { 4.4 .C t N 4C let let as hi C a. O W CO 0 LO } U. re -J o w ex ix tin O. 0.2% Annua cu CG >c 2 CO ca N_ E o5 3'1 •� L 5Y ,o a m � V #n '• a is N 43 0 al cn 00 0 — Q al CU 2 13 03 6 all of 1% annua Future Conditions 1% Annua Chance Flood Hazard zone X cc 4n V 0 0 LL U 4.1 43 i 4 Levee. See Notes. zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Leveezone b e\t O ix w 4 < lO w e I- IS O N O V 43 V 0 Lt. Area of Minima NO SCREEN Effective LOMRs 0 a a o N V N L 43 ca O 0 4 E -_ m ao O 0 7 E e W C > O Q,1 C a S a c QS ca c co O J i OTHER AREAS CC W n ccD LAJ -0 Cross Sections with 1% Annua N O N 17.5 Water Surface Elevation G! C — Coasta Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary C Transept Base • • C Profile Base i Hydrographic Feature CC W W IX u. fl � 4a Rs '7 + .O i c V a E a E -c •- p O to +-, .0 c c a I a C G E • 4) in s= 0 — E c 0 L V' cG , IWL 14 > i. a 4y t? >,, G ++ d52 in i .a I3 _c> c 4a ;•ad a il. 3 0, 4 c 0 a 0 a it4) c1 +� 5 IT Tom. tf! •- a 173. ri 4}.040in .+ 4aa. Tit�Al 'OE CL R5 -c y .� •§ -0 N tom- iC 3 as to)_ £ ti •a ti 13 L tr. . } ri d) .. to +a C a 0 i s w z 2 E a6.2 4} c tG , 4! 1 d! in 4i f� Sa2 Rs to Ns._ to E c a �1 a O. ._ �i c za4in a) 4} r'' LL a 0 c> a O Sc 4) N c� a b a ea INC a+ —cc03 °ate Lum''-�a0 a o 0 •s curb -i-1.o L '- V; 4? 4! r f 4.3 N M �E bit ) Si a. ITS ID 4? C 0 -a C 0 it 03 s�E a43- 41, o 13 3 4! RTC 2 4 'lie et Li - 104'52'1.44"W Data refreshed October 2017. O) 03 S =..r_� -•-•-•S-- a—mi. - —r a a 3 a aS. ara-p r asa -a a •�_ =a n �l s' — 1! _ a r - a -w Si •w a' 1 a MEM 411S- • • . f Nit Sala I I S. a. i A. S '-�_--� SW - r aT — , "r a f _3 tom- ai T • 113 i kaPi e�r V ly F a Wth a CC i 4} .c 4} E t4 a c 'A a v EL 0 .S L 40°7'52.56"N 0 C ;c71.) O LL O w i i O O ors r 0 In Ian 3 J 1 YI0Y• £ L?S-JVO I NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2 Location name: Fort Lupton, Colorado, USA* Latitude: 40.1347°, Longitude: -104.8729° Elevation: 4976.6 ft** * source: ESRI Maps l source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES r{� 11Cti ifi s'" Sanja Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Michael Yekta, Geoffery Bonnin NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration 5 -min 10 -min 15 -min 30 -min 60 -min 2 -hr 3 -hr 6 -hr 12 -hr 24 -hr 2 -day 3 -day 4 -day 7 -day 10 -day 20 -day 30 -day 45 -day 60 -day Average recurrence interval (years) 1 0.231 (0.179-0299) 0.338 (0.262-0.438) 0.412 (0.319-0.534) 0.559 (0.432-0.723) 0.683 (0.529-0.884) 0.807 (0.631-1.03) 0.876 (0.689-1.11) 1.04 (0.825-1.30) 1.27 (1.02-1.57) 1.51 (1.22-1.84) 1.72 (1.41-2,07) 1.87 (1.55-225) 2.00 (1.66-239) 2.30 (1.93-211) 2.55 (2.15-2.99) 3.26 (2.78-3.77) 3.82 (3.28-4.39) 4.50 (3.89-512) 5.05 (4.39-5.72) 2 0.281 (0.217-0.364) 0.411 (0.318-0.532) 0.501 (0.387-0.649) 0.677 (0.523-0.877) 0.825 (0.638-1.07) 0.974 (0.760-1.25) 1.05 (0.827-1.34) 1.23 (0.978-1.55) 1.49 (1.20-1.85) 1.79 (1.45-2.19) 2.09 (1.71-2.52) 2.25 (1.86-2.70) 2.38 (1.97-2.84) 2.69 (2.25-3.18) 2.96 (2.50-3.48) 3.74 (3.194.33) 4.37 (3.75-5.02) 5.15 (4.45-5.87) 5.81 (5.04-6.59) 5 0.377 (0.291-0.490) 0.553 (0.426-0.718) 0.674 (0.519-0.876) 0.907 (0.699-1.18) 1.11 (0.852-1.44) 1.31 (1.02-1.68) 1.41 (1.10-1.79) 1.62 (1.28-2.04) 1.92 (1.53-2.38) 2.30 (1.86-2.82) 2.71 (2.22-3.29) 2.89 (2.38-3.48) 3.01 (2.49-3.61) 3.35 (2.80-3.97) 3.66 (3.07-4.31) 4.52 (3.84-5.25) 5.25 (4.49-6.05) 6.20 (5.34-7.08) 7.02 (6.07-7.98) 10 0.472 (0.362-0.617) 0.692 (0.530-0.903) 0.844 (0.646-1.10) 1.13 (0.869-1.48) 1.39 (1.06-1.81) 1.64 (1.27-2.11) 1.76 (1.37-2.26) 2.01 (1.58-2.54) 2.33 (1.86-2.91) 2.77 (2.23-3.41) 3.25 (2.65-3.96) 3.44 (2.82-4.16) 3.56 (2.93.4.28) 3.92 (3.26-4.66) 4.25 (3.55-5.02) 5.18 (4.37-6.03) 5.98 (5.09-6.92) 7.04 (6.03-8.08) 7.99 (6.87-9.11) 25 0.625 (0.473-0.873) 0.915 (0.693-1.28) 1.12 (0.846-1.56) 1.50 (1.14-2.10) 1.84 (1.40-2.58) 2.18 (1.67-3.02) 2.34 (1.81-3.22) 2.64 (2.06-3.58) 3.00 (2.36-3.98) 3.48 (2.74-4.51) 4.03 (3.18-5.10) 4.23 (3.36-5.30) 4.35 (3.48-5.43) 4.73 (3.81-5.82) 5.08 (411-6.20) 6.08 (4.97-7.29) 6.97 (5.73-8.27) 8.18 (6.76-9.60) 9.27 (7.69-10.8) 50 0.760 (0.558-1.07) 1.11 (0,.817-1.56) 1.36 (0.996-1.91) 1.82 (1.34-2.57) 2.24 (1.65-3.16) 2.66 (1.98-3.70) 2.86 (2.14-3.95) 3.20 (2.42.4.36) 3.58 (2.73.4.79) 4.08 (3.13-5.34) 4.65 (3.59-5.96) 4.86 (3.77-6.16) 4.99 (3.89-6.29) 5.38 (4.23-6.70) 5.74 (4.54-7.09) 6.78 (5.42-8.24) 7.73 (6.22-9.30) 9.04 (7.31-10.8) 10.2 (8.31-12.1) 100 0.909 (0.645-1.31) 1.33 (0.944-1.92) 1.62 (1.15-2.34) 2.19 (1.55-3.15) 2.69 (1.91-3.88) 3.20 (2.30-4.56) 3.44 (2,49-4.87) 3.84 (2.80-5.34) 4.23 (3.12-5.79) 4.72 (3,.50-6.33) 5.29 (3.95-6.94) 5.51 (4.14-7.16) 5.64 (4.26-7.29) 6.04 (4.60-7.71) 6.41 (4,91-8.10) 7.48 (5.79-9.30) 8.48 (6.60-10.4) 9.87 (7.73-12.0) 11.1 (8.76-13.5) 200 1.08 (0.733-1.59) 1.58 (1.07-2.33) 1.92 (1.31-2.84) 2.59 (1.76-3.83) 3.20 (2.184.73) 3.81 (2.62-5.56) 4.10 (2.84-5.94) 4.55 (3.19-6.49) 4.96 (3.50-6.95) 5.43 (3.87-7.47) 5.97 (4.28-8.03) 6.18 (4.46-8.25) 6.33 (4.59-8.39) 6.73 (4.93-8.81) 7.10 (5.22-9.21) 8.20 (6.10-10.5) 9.24 (6.91-11.7) 10.7 (8.04-13.3) 12.0 (9.09-14.9) 500 1.32 (0.865-2.00) 1.93 (1.27-2.93) 2.36 (1.54-3.57) 3.18 (2.08-4.82) 3.94 (2.58-5.98) 4.70 (3.11-7.04) 5.06 (3.38-7.52) 5.59 (3.77-8.18) 6.01 (4.09-8.65) 6.43 (4.41-9.07) 6.89 (4.76-9.53) 7.11 (4.94-9.74) 7.27 (5.08-9.90) 7.68 (5.41-10.3) 8.04 (5.70-10.7) 9.15 (6.55-12.0) 10.2 (7.36-13.2) 11.8 (8.51-15.0) 13.2 (9.58-16.7) 1000 1.52 (0.964-2.31) 2.23 (1.41-3.39) 2.72 (1.72-4.13) 3.67 (2.32-5.57) 4.56 (2.89-6.92) 5.45 (3.48-8.15) 5.87 (3.78-8.71) 6.47 (4.21-9.46) 6.88 (4.53-9.93) 7.25 (4.82-10.3) 7.61 (5.12-10.7) 7.84 (5.31-10.9) 8.01 (5.45-11.0) 8.42 (5.78-11.5) 8.77 (6.05-11.8) 9.88 (6.90-13.1) 11.0 (7.71-14.4) 12.5 (8.87-16.3) 14.0 (9.95-18.1) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top PF graphical PDS-based deplth-duratio —frequency{Da F curies Latitude: 4Q_LW4P°r Longitude: -144..8729' 14 am I. • 1 1. 1 ■ e • I I I .. L a 1 L a I r • 1 r r ■ 1 e .•••: 0....e r. 1•. Y •.+.4••i•.• -♦Mil 1•Y.I'M e. • r••1..1 i-••— r r I P I r I . e . I I i aa ■ 1 a a • e I P e '! p 1 G I I i G 1 I I : es 9 •e •... w.y ... e. .. I•- •e!l •-p--• ••• e . • _es e e I _nn I e t n • I I 1 r I o I I . I I I I I. I I L 1 • 1 a 1 1 , a 1 1} L : er .:,••••:.••••11.• e r r e • ..— I .�.. .. I ... . I•...... I.. . ... •: I..•.... •:I. • �• • •. I • . .'rl • r! • e r. r • I r . I • • I r• • e i r e e - - 1..:r••`! e Y'Y 'I' 1 .. • •icr a •+p a a 1 I I l I - rill. -1 a ams5.041r 1 Y i�• Flat. I I I. a i 1 i __alt a i • I P - r J1�4y ! J niarl,_mot I,1sac C C EE ri r.c" r a N Duration 4 VV 13 tatii 'Q V NI RI Ir, 4 ti 16 6 6 �6 u-, 04 in 't 1 2 5 19 3 50 10 200 500 1000 P'JOAA Atlas 14rVolume 8, 'Version 2 .age recurrence interval (years) Created (GMTI: Tue Oct 21122:21 201:8 Back to Top Maps & aerials Small scale terrain Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 r 50 100 200 500 1000 I 1 BLit r i i 11 100km d 6Dmi li 1imnl»rrinui 1d aoihun!slh^l?!mP!1r fire Back to Top 1 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 AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Project Number: 1601-01-14 Date: 10/11/18 11:43 AM 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 wvvw.agpros.com Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Sheet: of Subject: Impervious Area Calculation Four D Farms = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total Sq Ft Acres Impervious Roofs 90% 20,000 0.41 Paved Streets 100% 18,223 0.42 Gravel Road 40% 26,314 0.24 Agriculture 2% 345,521 0.16 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 Square Feet 410,058 Acres 1.23 Total Impervious Acres 53,659 1.23 Total Development Acres 410,058 9.41 Development %I Actual Design I 13% AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Project Number: 1601-01-14 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 wvvw.agpros.corn Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Date: 10/11/18 11:40 AM Sheet: of Subject: Impervious Area Calculation Four D Farms Sub. A = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total Sq Ft Acres Impervious Roofs 90% 9,943 0.21 Paved Streets 100% 9,511 0.22 Gravel Road 40% 0 0.00 Agriculture 2% 71,316 0.03 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 90,770 0.46 Square Feet Acres Total Impervious Acres 19,885 0.46 I Total Development Acres 90,770 2.08 Development %I Actual Design I 22% AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Project Number: 1601-01-14 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 wvvw.agpros.com Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Date: 10/11/18 11:43 AM Sheet: of Subject: Impervious Area Calculation Four D Farms Sub. B = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total Sq Ft Acres Impervious Roofs 90% 0 0.00 Paved Streets 100% 0 0.00 Gravel Road 40% 7,245 0.07 Agriculture 2% 65,557 0.03 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 72,802 0.10 Square Feet Acres Total Impervious Acres 4,209 I 0.10 Total Development Acres 72,802 1.67 Development %I Actual Design I 6% AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 wvvw.agpros.com Project Number: Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Subject: Impervious Area Calculation Four D Farms Sub. C 1601-01-14 Date: 10/11/18 11:42 AM Sheet: of = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total Sq Ft Acres Impervious Roofs 90% 10,057 0.21 Paved Streets 100% 8,712 0.20 Gravel Road 40% 18,431 0.17 Agriculture 2% 128,308 0.06 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 165,508 0.64 Square Feet Acres Total Impervious Acres 27,702 I 0.64 I Total Development Acres 165,508 3.80 Development %I Actual Design I 17% AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE Project Number: 1601-01-14 3050 67th Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 Telephone (970) 535-9318 wvvw.agpros.com Designed By: AGPROfessionals Checked By: CTV Date: 10/11/18 11:41 AM Sheet: of Subject: Impervious Area Calculation Four D Farms Sub. D = User Entry Solving for the Percent Impervious (I): Description per UDFCD Table 6-3 % Impervious Total Sq Ft Acres Impervious Roofs 90% 0 0.00 Paved Streets 100% 0 0.00 Gravel Road 40% 638 0.01 Agriculture 2% 80,340 0.04 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 None 0% 0.00 80,978 0.04 Square Feet Acres Total Impervious Acres 1,862 0.04 I Total Development Acres 80,978 1.86 Development %I Actual Design I 2% 0 0 W E 1 LL 0 W U 0 0 E W `_ ♦y W W 2 D 0 Z 0 r Z W W Ci Project: Four D Farms Site D: Historic Runoff C ns IIn ill a 4, E a) 0 0. 1 0 3 td C, 1. C, 0) L a 0L L C 0 L r Cu eis al +i� C, E U C) 8 u. Ca: W E E 1 2 cz S st 43 2 03 Es 0 ea O. r O e L {.} Ct cm C Ct ice.+ L cs C, L 2 to E JC ) um t L 31 iii I — z Zi 0 .C 03 2 I ma V 2 a . ; m w W E 0 C 0 C 0.1 ei ce a 0 ii - . 0 C0.1 C a) a) O csi to Li o 0 T ci A, B, C, or D CO 4 0 r 4 O to L7 N O L w c C_ E- C CI r CNI r II II II II II La ~ I — r tO iC0 c 0 C nformation C at O E co 0 i• ci ct Catchment Drainage Area O_ O O 15 U) eK z 4-C 0_ 0 a) 2 0 Return Period for Detention Contro Time of Concentration of Watershed 92 -63 a ors a) r a c di Nico II II O- r 0- a) r iv a3 Et a) it 0 One -hour Precipitation ii 0 ▪ Cl 6 a. r O II ._ DF Formula O in 03 O.1 a co O II II II U (.3 t Coefficient One 0 se 0) 2 1 15 ci E co . C N It E O C O C ID CI ce a 2 Determination of M 4-I n Information a; O C 0 ict co w co A,B,C,orD Sit C C in inn C`J an r Lt'J - a) cf] aS' 0 C ._ E 0 N 'tt ay CO 1::1 C 0 o • r II II II II II II II D3 < a 1— I_ cr0 I— Catchment Drainage Imperviousness Catchment Drainage Area Predevelopment MRCS Soil Group Return Period for Detention Contra Time of Concentration of Watershed cu N re 4) (I) CC a} a) it a D a) a cu One -hour Precipitation o tp co CV 0 II II II 0 0 U -) 4 1—u 1- 64 Or O gerT II DF Formula Ca W 61 C .C W C I IF t3 0 O O 0 Coefficient Two Coefficient Three Determination of Avera Runoff Coefficient 0 V O 0 1,111 CD CD 04 04 O 6 I O I. CO UP 14 ±13 Q 4 W CA a 0 2 2 nflow Peak Runoff r In 6. U, CD T LL LL ti -id ao2 2 co 0 0 0 11 a CO C ■ U. ow from the Basin ABS O c Determination of Avera I- 4 I I Runoff Coefficient 0, In Iii I I C a a ID( 4) 0_ Q C O a a 4-, 4- .3 O C) tc I lb ✓ It 03 esi II II II 9 E E CL Z M 0 a 0 O 0 CO RS a 8 i i LL LL - -6 co 2 2 cc 4 gek M 0 S CD a} a a) co 0 C 10/11/2018, 8:44 AM udfcd spreadsheet_historic runoff, Modified FAA O x w 0 U C 0 W ♦y� W W 2 0 z 0 I- z W W C Project: Four D Farms Site D: Proposed Runoff C Ii E (s2 0. 1 0 3 Qin C, O) L a OL L 00c L r Cu #- W C, E U C) l.LL. Cs: C E rE V 2 O) Ect C 432 0 sc 0. O C, L {.} Ct C, C Ct L C, L 2 it W noE W O z Zi .C dt 2 I w� W E C 0 C 0 q, O .0 C0.1 C nformation iT at O 0 cvi CD 0 ci A, B, C, or D 00 4 O r 4 O Ir7 166 w az ao E C CN II II II II II < a ~ H 0 a 12 E /C O Catchment Drainage Area a 0 0 z C a 0 Return Period for Detention Contro Time of Concentration of Watershed co C) Cn 43 C N O ca II II c- r O_ One -hour Precipitation ._ DF Formula C CD O I i 03 0 co O II II II (3- Coefficient One I— H v a) d3 LE 144 o 0 t3 0 0) 2 ist .C N E O 0 ce 0 a 2 Determination of M 4-I n Information a; O C CD a to L CD A,B,C,orD C LCT C LCJ C`J O r Lt'J a) ) co a O C3 Ch a 2 't ai co O C 4 d P) r - II II II II II II II a ~ 0- 0 Catchment Drainage Imperviousness Catchment Drainage Area Predevelopment MRCS Soil Group Return Period for Detention Contra Time of Concentration of Watershed C 03 0) co 0} a 0 One -hour Precipitation o inp a, co CV 0 II II II O O DF Formula c 6 C re C 05 z1)E 0 O O Coefficient Two Coefficient Three 0) as C 6 L .C ca I- 0 0 a, Determination of Avera C �1y L. 1. 4.a V 0 O LU 1,111 CD 03 C cesi CNI d CN C) II II II II II ocIBMD Li ea co 0 I. O 2 2 Runoff Coefficient nflow Peak Runoff CO 0 C LL S tQ O a i 6 W 4 E 0 O Sirs 0 ID Lb Ct L C 03 c T 3. h. Runoff Coefficient II C a a O_ Q 4-, C O gal 0 LI. w C a O E E CL 0 a 0 en L L tn * to50 16 8 LL LL "G ro 2 2 4 gek 0 CD a 03 CO 0 C 10/11/2018, 12:01 PM udfcd spreadsheet_Proposed runoff, Modified FAA •T •1 V O -C rW} Calculation of Peak Runoff using Rational S L •i 1 4S L -Y C V C •E ' II CC 7 CC• I 'a I C V r_; Peak FIcjW. 4 (si51 1n :D Y R• L S CC ., .1. t C L p ll r- r. •J :9 r H I._ .: i.. R rd r-' CT'•- ' H v L 4 t• S• • P.- :•] -.l T• •t L 1"4 v. - C, C _h m L f, C 44 .m. L S ❑: : • i _ rt•77 P., r i r I C. -J P. 4C. •J r v: J ,J I r: L 1 lY ; i ah -: aV r a . L. • 4 T y ..7..)Z •y a: L VJ -- •I. r-. - S r a y • t. r- - •n 0 •r, t, •:' y c IT TJ C E. 1.0) q Cr.`. :r v .T: • v r.Ou it .. - c m E_ . + `--_. if: P. r.) •i rJ _ r .7,1C. I V: Computed tJminl - i? 77 :v - • :•i r ,.• =r r.r Cl G y U - Y. ~_. N N :. ri SP a -;1. 'E s LL a : d v u c' 'V :1 c o a C LL G Pi .c > r CL - .- ti :V ! .l i�: -: r. u c CA n CC id 7 v L C "- J r • 41. Ghannelized Flow Slope Sr iit'ft1 :7J :Jr_: C.• N _ - C 4 W rA ❑ _ n `1 r x - u a W ` o. Cm p. 7 r L . rJ Cl G Y m C -. G J J .O J LL _ ` v: _ :V J �� f 1. F-' 1 a C G m = } 2 G E LL r-. .1 z a w m C' 4 - cc. '' G OJ M a. i . 1_ :.J .J r-- Ct t i,- r: t_ c a 9 n u X .= W a O C V I. W ' /LI 5 • c ailand Flow Longth L t1 t: CJ :J l .7 ,: J ll i[ _: CC +1 U I V Lti L1 U J G O CC :.-. O_ • In I 11 _ :❑ _ -» _ J o C- ,i C. v r. _a rr.K '.. ry .T: _: 1C: Lh I-- t 1 R V. W C ix. V •m d• Ur rl Z 0, E :I r 0 u` a 0 Ce - CC Y fJ _ 3 'F s. 2 N L :il 6 I u u 4 IICti L: F. i r V_ _ Suk•cotchrncnt 14 a mc _ - - C.': 31 � n Ci Yl ._ ,' C: (fa u (`, Four D Farms, LLC APPENDIX B Hydraulic Computations aoH ): 5 -Year Historic Release Rate (For catchments less than 160 acres only. For larger catchments, use hydrograph routing method) (NOTE: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method r-. 0 b 1 la 0 U-, a ` id O Q) " � a m 2 w o 0_ ›, E t c Runoff Coefficient C = 0.36 Inflow Peak Runoff Op -in = 22.66 cfti Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Op -out = 0.00 oft. Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 50,591 cu Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 1.16 at 0 9I o a; m o r O o o C5) co CSI o u7 Co 0 r w ono a Catchment Drainage Imperviousness = Catchment Drainage Area A = Predevelopment N RCS Soil Group Type = Return Period for Detention Control T Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = Allowable Unit Release Rate q = One -hour Precipitation Pi= Design Rainfall IDF Formula i = C1* P1/(C2+Tj^C3 Coefficient One = Coefficient Two O2 = Coefficient Three O3 = LL O w MODII I H /' CO W Determination of MINOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method a 0 in in o 6 L cv a ❑ 1- 1- i 0 t 0 N ,,_ co 8 L �.d . cfs cfs cubic feet acre -ft I l 'OLI a t ai pa kn o a r T- CI o CC .in (Calculate CO o ' 0 cri 0 c _ IIIni w O Design Information (Input) : Catchment Drainage Imperviousness = Catchment Drainage Area A = Predevelopnient N RCS Soil Group Type = Return Period for Detention Control T = Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = Allowable Unit Release Rate q = One -hour Precipitation Pi= Design Rainfall IDF Formula i = C1* P1/(C2+Tj"C3 Coefficient One Cl = Coefficient Two O2 = Coefficient Three O3 = Determination of Average Outflow from the Bas Runoff Coefficient C = Inflow Peak Runoff Op -in = Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Op -out = Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume = Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume 10/11/2018, 8:43 AM udfcd spreadsheet_5 yr rate, Modified FAA DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Four D Farms Site Basin ID: Prolosed Detention Pond (For catchments less than 160 acres only. For larger catchments, use hydrograph routing method) (NOTE: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CUHP hydrograph and routing are recommended) Determination of MINOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Determination of MAJOR Detention Volume Using Modified FAA Method Design Information (Input): Design Information (Input): Catchment Drainage Imperviousness la = 13.00 percent Catchment Drainage Imperviousness 1a = 13.00 percent Catchment Drainage Area A = 9.41 acres Catchment Drainage Area A = 9.410 acres Predeveloprnent NRCS Soil Group Type = B A, 8, C. or D Predeveloprnent N RCS Soil Group Type = B A, B, C, or D Return Period for Detention Control T = 10 years (2, 5. 10.25.50. or 100) Return Period for Detention Control T = 100 years (2, 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100) Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = 12 minutes Time of Concentration of Watershed Tc = 12 minutes Allowable Unit Release Rate q = 0.22 cfslacre Allowable Unit Release Rate q 2 0.00 cfslacre One -hour Precipitation P1 = 1.39 inches One -hour Precipitation P1 = 2.69 inches Design Rainfall IDF Formula I = C,* P,l(C2+TJAC3 Coefficient One C1 = 28.50 Design Rainfall IDF Formula i = Cl* P,1(C2+TJ C3 Coefficient One C1 = 28.50 Coefficient Two C2 2 10 Coefficient Two C2 = 10 Coefficient Three C3 = 0.789 Coefficient Three C3 2 0.789 Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Calculated): Determination of Average Outflow from the Basin (Calculated): Runoff Coefficient C = 0.42 Runoff Coefficient C = 0.24 Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in = 7.81 cfs Inflow Peak Runoff Qp-in = 26.44 cfs Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out = 0.00 cfs Allowable Peak Outflow Rate Qp-out = 2-.08 cfs Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 40,290 cubic feet Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume = 17,428 cubic feet Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume = 0.40 acre -ft Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume = 0.92 acre -ft 5 =- Enter Rainfall Duratobn Incremental Increase Value Here (e.g 5 for 5 -Minutes) Rainfall Duration minutes (input) Rainfall Intensity inches l hr (output) Inflow Volume acre-feet (output) Adjustment Factor "m" (output) Average Outflow cfs (output) Outflow Volume acre-feet (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) Rainfall Duration minutes (input) Rainfall Intensity inches i hr (output) Inflow Volume acre-feet ( uiput) Adjustment Factor "m" (output) Average Outflow cfs (output) Outflow Volume acre-feet (output) Storage Volume acre-feet (output) 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 5 4.68 0.073 1.00 0.00 0.000 0.473 5 9.05 0.248 1.00 2.08 0.014 4.232 10 3.73 0.118 1.00 0.00 0.000 0.118 10 7.21 0.393 1.00 2.08 0.029 0.384 1.5 3.13 0146 0.90 0.00 0.000 0.146 15 6.06 0.004 0.90 1.87 0.039 0.455 20 2:71 0.108 0.80 0.00 0.000 0:168 20 5.24 0.570 0.60 1.67 0.046 4.524 25 2.40 0188 0.74 0.00 0.000 0.186 25 4.64 0.631 0.74 1.64 0.053 0.578 30 35 216 1'.97 0201 0.70 4.04 0.000 0.201 30 4.17 0.682 0.70 1.46 0.060 01821 0.214 0.67 0.00 0.000 0.214 35 3.80 0.725 0.67 1.40 0.067 0.857 40 3.50 0.782 0.65 1.35 0.075 0.888 40 1.81 0225 0.65 0.00 0.000 D.225 45 1..68 0235 0.63 0.00 O.00O 0.236 45 3.25 0.795 0.63 1.32 0.082 0.714 50 1.57 0.244 0.62 4.00 0.000 0,244 50 303 0.825 0.62 1.29 0.089 0.736 55 1.47 0252 0.61 0.00 0.000 0.252 55 2.85 0.852 0.61 1.27 0.096 0.756 60 1.39 0259 0:60 0.00 0.000 0.259 60 .2.68 0.877 0.60 1.25 0.103 0.773 65 1.31 0266 0.59 0.00 0.000 0.268 85 2.54 0.899 0.59 1.23 0.110 0.789 70 75 1.25 1.19 0272 0.59 0.00 0.000 0.272 70 2.42 0.921 0.59 1.22 0.118 0.803 0278 0.58 0.00 0.000 0.278 75 2.30 0.940 0.58 1.21 0.125 0.816 80 1.14 I 0.283 0:58 0.00 0.000 0.283 80 2.20 0.959 0.58 1.20 0.132 0.827 85 2.11 0.976 0.57 1.19 0.139 0.837 86 1.09 0288 0.57 0.00 0.000 0.288 90 1.05 0.293 0:57 0.00 0.000 0.293 90 .2.03 4,993 a 57 1.18 0.146 0.846 95 1.01 0.298 0.56 0.00 0.000 0.298 95 1.95 1.008 0.56 1.17 0.153, 0.855 100 0.97 0302 0.56 0.00 0.000 0.302 100 1.88 1.023 0.56 1.17 D.161 0,862 105 0.94 0.306 0.56 0.00 0.000 0.306 105 1.81 1.037 0:56 1.16 0.168 0.869 110 0.91 0.310 0.55 0:00 0.000 0.310 110 1.75 1.051 0.55 1.15 0.175 0:876 115 0.88 0.314 0.55 0.00 0.000 0.314 115 1.70 1.063 0.55 1.15 0.182 03.881 120 0.86 0.318 0.55 0.00 0.400 4.318 120 1.65 1.076 0.55 1.15 0.189 0.887 12'5 0.83 0.321 0.55 0.00 0.000 0.321 125 1.60 1.088 0.55 1.14 0.196 0.891 130 0.80 0.325 0.55 0.00 0.000 0.325 130 1.55 1.099 0.55 1.14 D.204 0.896 135 0.78 0.328 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.328 135 1.61 1.110 0.54 1.13 0.211 0.900 140 0.76 0.331 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.331 140 1.47 1.121 0.54 1.13 0.218 0:903 145 1.43 1.132 0.54 1.13 0.225 0.908 145 0.74 0.334 0.54 0.00 0.000 D.334 150 012 0.337 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.337 150 1.40 1.142 0.54 1.12 0.232 0.909 155 0.71 0.340 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.340 155 1.36 1.151 0.54 1.12 0.239 0.912 160 1.33 1.161 0.54 1.12 D.247 0.914 160 0.69 0.343 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.343 165 0.67 0.346 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.346 165 1.30 1.170 0.54 1.12 0.254 0.916 170 0.66 0.348 0.54 0.00 0.000 0.348 170 1.27 1.179 0.54 1.11 0,261 0.918 175 0.64 0.351 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.351 175 1.25 1.168 0.53 1.11 0.288 0.920 180 0.63 0.353 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.353 180 1.22 1.196 0.53 1.11 0.275 0.921 185 0.62 0.358 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.356 185 1.20 1.205 0.53 1.11 0.282 0.922 190 0.61 0.358 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.358 190 1.17 1.213 0.53 1.11 0.290 0.923 196 200 0.59 0.58 0.360 0.363 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.360 195 1.15 1.221 0.53 1.11 0.297 0.924 0.363 200 1.13 1.228 0.53 1.10 0.304 0:924 205 0.57 0.385 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.365 205 1.11 1.238 0.53 1.10 0.311. 0.925 210 0.56 0.387 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.367 210 1.09 1.243 0.53 1.10 0.318 0.925 215 0.55 0.3599 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.369 215 1.07 1.250 0.53 1.10 0.326 4.925 220 1.05 1.258 0.53 1.10 0.333 0.925 220 0.54 0.371 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.371 225 0.53 0.373 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.373 226 1.03 1.264 0.53 1.10 0.3+40 0.925 230 0.52 0.375 0.53 0:00 0.000 0.376 230 1.02 1.271 0.53 1.10 0.347 0.924 235 0.52 0.377 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.377 235 1.00 1.: +ifs 0.53 1.09 0.354 0.924 240 0.51 0.379 0.53 0.00 0.000 0.379 240 0.98 1.285 0.53 1.09 0.361 0.923 246 0.50 0.381 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.381 245 0.97E 1.291 0.52 1.09 0.369 0.922 250 0.49 0.383 0.52 0.00 0.000 0383 250 0.95 1.297 0.52 1.09 0.376 0.922 255 0.49 0.385 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.385 256 0.94 1.303 0.52 1.09 0.383 0.921 260 0.48 0.387 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.387 260 0.93 1.310 0.52 1.09 0.390 0.920 265 0.47 0388 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.388 265 D.91 1.316 0.52 1.09 0.397 0.918 270 0.46 0.390 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.390 270 0.90 1.321 0.52 1.09 0.404 0.917 2.75 0.46 0.392 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.392 275 0.89 1.327 0.52 1.09 0.412 0.916 280 0.45 D.394 0.52 0.00 D.OOO 0.394 280 0,87 1.333 0.52 1.09 0.419 0.914 285 0.45 0.395 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.396 285 0.86 1.339 0.52 1.08 0.426 0.913 290 0.:85 1.344 0.52 1.08 0.433 0.911 290 0.44 0.397 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.397 295 0.43 0.399 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.399 295 D.84 1.350 0.52 1.08 0.440 0.909 300 0.43 0.400 0.52 0.00 0.000 0.400 300 0.83 1.355 0.52 1.08 0.447 0.908 Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume (cubic ft) = 17,428 Mod. FAA Minor Storage Volume (acre -ft) = 0.4001 LID FUJI DEIENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34. Released November 2013 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (cubic ft) = 40,290 Mod. FAA Major Storage Volume (acre -ft) = 0.9249 udfcd spreadsheet, Modified FAA 10/11.2018, 11:58 AM DETENTION VOLUME BY THE MODIFIED FAA METHOD Project: Four D Farms Site Basin ID: Proposed Detention Pond K Inflow and Outflow Volumes vs. Rainfall Duration 1.6 1A 1.2 0 4- 0 c.) 0.8 rt E J 0 • S _ o • we o• •• _ • .46 lie 10 s 41-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-8-0-0-0 -8_'•-0-• • • • • • 4D ! • dp • . 250 300 100 150 200 Duration (Minutes) —e— Minor Storm Inflows Wawa Mina *Wm ClatftwVplpe,g c Mina r Storm Sloreje Vo fume T Major Slam. Inflow Vol unue Major 51cm. Os how Volu me • Major Storm Storage Volume • 350 J UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.34. Released November 2013 udfcd spreadsheet, Modified FAA 10/11,2018, 11:56 AM Four D Farms, LLC APPENDIX C 24 x 36 Maps • "'F ` S l<G 6:. SEG i';::;3Ub' VD ' EUOISSaJ (ULr) :Al - f3 LCE Sr 9 (,ULf) IdWWJ 'CJ? 3! is ':;riJ9A\f t•iI: 9 S213d4"1311� NCIOVP .1(=UE: �.71�Y lY ��TT� r+^� V l� � (X) `:l1.Vi tti.)u'Id,tn TT IICE +�17�r� 1 IV L � r{� X17 V hQjti EMTh � li l Y V ;1 N Try r Y1. (� v V�1>� ,�I�+ i� 0 .• . II '�__ _ .- I I :; 1 I I r --•-v-• 'NEC Z:- i tramway J41•I.-It-LW_l[flh:r ICY LLYICV VJ 2 r - 1.0 NM 24111IOW- Ilf}UIIV;Call WSJ - MIL •_'.ttmP E., .. I j ii . i• 1. JJI-C III 1&1L L'OUNJAI-07 DIRECT OF, �I ii •I Ii II i J �ks� ti'Y •"� :f 1 d' ' , Ili et,,E Y I I i 1• writ—.rl ,AI nr a I . II ,- - VICINI I Y MAP y i f'' iiii fi-# r ;' 1 % S y' tea Li J% 1 F J N/ / I Fs fc y r t i 4 lif .- It 7 �. %I iiii 2 ..i.,► ..._ r,. J�,_ 1 'I V I_ 1 4.. . ^ S: .. L ` 1 T I.J. 5 S 11111. i I I.;.y 4 i1 _ I:.: Ir u Fr Y 111111 "IP- • . .. lihilielram a dr ._, V ir - f f ,J J (OH—, 1::"IIl 9� _ P. fY tJ iff C tomtit 71 (1 1- il air 'Itt V ` f '' I le 10. 4. T 1 1 Ii :1; .� I G f t t ' IM ,,11 ir 1 R. itiht4b\i II IS ji Z NO C': i - 1111111111111111 II f �! C N M t u O el 121 O14 lilltii it ill A. Y. I 1. f: 4 J. b 7. zooptur;_ CIII I c I I L. i r :\I" • ,6S9 I,0[CLLyFi :x1?I • fi I -4:f -S 9 I.(ILFJ b ct {' d 1 I. Jd l lr 490Q VV ' �I ~•IL: ' r2 Ii I..rl 15\1 I c) rof:`y {y.] `.�.1.\i 'wits' um I`�I7T}� e( �' T [?�T l 'l }' id 3 �J V N I t' L CE 1J3II>III'I r-+1 ``^,\T1(Jl CNI W co y { �j�n1 1 -sr- ,_�•.,r : a `"-''•. s::°Ji_ ` ('UIIT3I1 . f "',a: II I I' d I ��IIO!S .`3 3t€f1.I'In0111 0 30 S4t3d0i3A3Q Sara; . f --;I• I :1.1 OITJ C cE,•'1911v.:_a ...•, •r <••, •.: ?1"9V a,tllfF_L_GMufL-10- <OlIltlalF1')'IVIJ_1I=IA%_IOIILI1PVIJu r - Yes illf0 ZIPPN &KU - l:iS'Y19?UMW 1MLJ - I[1O,Y®I1'J I -1 Itl I I 1) et - 11 - ,-ter- _ ... _ r - W LL U — I IL I �- H LL II 'I u c II5 J L'I LL G7 G'I LC K r'l — II H L' me; .1 sir - C - L� .y r- f-, I1 L z ', i-' .rL III i r U 1 •I.I. ..t C C - :ti L' L i"1 :� 1 J :i: LL_ 1 " D G7 O - 11 O I •- .'r: O I :- '_ t` . C _I. L' ? O OO Z Z Z Z Z l Z E C i- I L I- - i- I- - I- I- - +: ' :i- c* i O L co ': w �cc- _f: c.• �"J cc- .`: C J .l . ) II II, Cl r •J Iil ii i 1 II ii i 1 II st �I ii I I 1 t i��=f �, tiar `` •. S 1 _I — .:• Si . r-, L O 77 `- Li r I i -J . - -i- rJ C :; `'' c (.9 L r ,� J -Li - O I `^ LL is H r,• J LL iii 1' - O II I I I LLJ V \ i Ik � it \ ill' 1 i G Y �° 5 i ;GE LE L Y r II 1 1 II r i ' I LLJ W I rV LJ as C J 1 1L I 1 I I 11 iI 'I `, : f{ / ' 1, I. I v.' i 'I •' I I I S 1 I �� ;IT .I 1� , •' ', 5 I I - II I, \ '`, 'I 'I ; I, II 'I 11 'I •I '. I 'y11 '.1 �, �, '. ,• II �, �1 '', ', ', I �, S I. II I tI, ‘I ;, t \\:.4-u: II }, I I ! 15 lL I �5 ', 1' 1 ' II1 , '. y M1 c �] \ �l W �1 tl ', / 11/4 I. '1 ',, I I IJ _ ,. ')•1 ' ', i I / CZ!• •, f/ L I 'I a i 1 ' r.`l - f a {t = 1J 1 l ' '5 y 1;..- J' L1 — J 1 I L "moo •� 1,, »\ \\\ /, . -� III 4\ } l r ` `� ^ k I\/• .2.: � I, 1 •� t 'I S II 1 I' '1t 1, 11 ti ti ' 1 I I 1 l 1 \ 'I •' '',\ .� I, ',t �,t1 ` �. I, \ I IS I '1 ' \ III •\ 1 1 I' , ,1' 1 I ' I , 1 I ; l \ •1 ��• I III ti k ti \ S I 'I 1' "�I�V,aP '1 I �1 ', 1 , I • II li I I k I , I y, I ', LL ' 1 1. S 1 \ , - I' 1 , I, I }• ' , I ..l 1 1 t r t 'I \II k t:_ ' ' I 1 'k I 1 •St II S y r S k / f ti 5 I r! 5 I \ \IVS' ;�k '',. I I I 1 't. \\ ./' t \ •555 4 k 1 I\ ,(''' '•.\ ,•• •"C r 1,� iIr • 1t I ,tL l'!tt G1 I 1sj 1 . '\ 1 , '`CJ \ • \` I '` 1 • '4 — -� A. •• I I \ ' -- y o W I II I I I I ' i I \ •/ �� rel t -ti 1,' `� '.%1 I� re u . Fr_.•.S� /• ,� : b .' t1\ ``,` \ •. \ r i••t ` L 5 rr• k ‘ •5^1 `1, / ` -I N. kky tk II \ \�t5 r �r �\ \�� \ �. '. \ tt t` / 1 \ 4\ •l• r \ 1` ; \ '\ \ , ! \ I.. , \ 5• r 51, , id ••',1 \� '''\ •\55 \ ` '',•t 4y "\, •5`` .i. I ,\ I I I � ,• \ \ �tl -X 1 l'J �'-• , \ t IL I ' SI '�%1 I/ `., •. II � 111 '�1 - ?I III II111 'I. � 5 ` , ty Y� ,,5 \\♦ 4.5 \5 �f i- � �' ` r ` • ., /r y4 '. 1t •,. •L. \ L .` ..,` u �!''.M11 f• tv� l__1 5't s.,S.. - f 1r.. _- , �a�1lJ1 _. _ .r 4 4 --\ i •' � n ',I, % y , '• ' -----L---,- 1 '1 - - -"— I, �^ y- II 1 I :. -,-,_,.-.7--C --- '`%. rCI- I'1-1 ' p.1 �, ' I 3 ti . g k .ti -J f,} i # , VNf l 8' , L r t � y f + ,, 5 E ` I' , I I , .r i 1 I 1 , I 1 rrf.1ll� .• I•1 I .5 %, 1 '� ' '••f1 f \I 1 I IfII, ..,I .t I l 1 'I II 4 II!, 1 , I I Ii' 1 ,'I{I 'JJJ) 11 I I ' I I b'l11 t II I I 11 ry I :' Y. I ! 1 Z - I• t',• ji, III I' 1 '} i . t /J I +d I , ff1 '1 CE I �.' I r c r III' , •`+ H • "�' ,• 5-� •S -• J. : i I I. S \ l ,.I I. -�: I y I .T ' I 4 I I• 1. I 4 1 55 '+ f 1 ,• 47 1, ) 1 I i / _ _ 1 I (f 'ti , I .� 1 I ( i I r � f r I — e.A. , l I I 1� 'i 'is ti I; f! I 16 n r 1I 1 I I' , I'�—:,'�' I. _ sAc^ i , I I i I I ti 'I I firs S I 1 --i I I 7 I I' I.,II, 'I l r Y i il 11 I i I I / 1' I11 •:....y�� , .1 . II �I I f`f ' I i' ``I �4p' ( II I r' '- r C. tf, i 1 I I I ' I I r- : yi'1 r'1 + _J __ I 11 I 1 I I I ' 11 j ,I / 1 I 441 ld CI • ' Iti r f _ • II yt• ii Ii ll it • f I I y 11,5 F' � r7-"--. "- - - 1 r I 1, � .II 1 �, 11, l I H C r. • 3 i,1 I'1 1 il�. I f'' r \1 ` ` L m 1 I '5 5 L . }�5'i -r - ._ I. J. I I 1 VI To •r I r �I f r ti , r i + ;rlr Z% /r. I \ V VVV ( I it I� _ - I - -� I i ii X1111 I 1 , I I , 1 I I r r Pe r ?i i f r + 1I ` u 5' r I. JJ;1 I I r 1 r I ^•�� •q I i' . I _ I 1Y� r 1 r f� e _ I r' , - x� ,� I r ii . II IN,; _ _ 'I I, ,• 5 i r - 1' r i '. - I •', 1 1il I f' /JfJ i i '�' - -- ;' / i' / I \ I , { I I I 4 /{` rr , i . ,. • ii i \ I , :II I % ' r i•' f I j ' ' I • - I •�P a l J 1 a a� , - r / le i r /1 r � "�'^ _'t ___`- — s)43 +.58 �I— C �'4Lf c.v.., •i)-' ,J,. ` - n n t 1 y.,1- / •. .Z t _;,:r St'J St•.r I.7;i4 " } _ a� _ - . V4+� .- -'$:1 s,0 ;:?l s10 cla c•''1' 5-a^ +_ I .,-1 I -: I I o •: ,I I,SRt?-Sf.9 !.SDLC :WD; • 13l£:t?-Sf:S I.t1LfO t.S r r)''‘..149.70e ' I1.,.fl A + . f` }:)`:41hi1y�y.}{t'Ijri5 S•ZIWSlla �Ay� 1 I ley■ I..i �7y 1 I RIVJ a UllOd AMVU NOISO}I[ r� � �{7f t},� ...LDN T Il IliOlld I �7 7� f i _ ce U;.0 - e{ . •_- •_-� _, r•J �ti) •• ) n• Crff nri n annv AO StN 3 c1 -13 A 3 0 JIG�OjSajW ■ �+ I 6.1.011.1.1 [MU 1L.-,1 Cr =all =I lift Wf.11.4M1 2/111 NMI - 41sWWI 2MY1NLJ - If/l'.YKIDI 1 -1 1 i I n _� .. s + } - on i el ne 1 I ' isa iri p ��n� 9 at it ige � ii lam - `* 1 10 moral2 .b r_ r°1 .� . - s i! a : u b �. t A. I :e . li. bi 11 i i il I Cr Iiirtillirr sit: HJI! ii MOM MI g I L.- PI : R laill! t IH.t.4 I is! :119ylIt }l..�: >* P4 !° " Iy� G • 1 aI u 'Au"' y 33 qr E c 7 4 'Q� �` E p 1 4I z C II ili q iy-ta Ni • 116 "Tzi 2 -" 1l r GA 1L a• i r v illI iY f sr ■yam ;ill i V ® �• _ 1 i s —:� • I' H. el ii d. • - �,y - - i kr ii'��@�` C51 1 d 1,, li 14 3 4--7e.r �w •�_r„ A_ (p�y� y 71_ 99 f 1 t ii A.':1W�fI:F pi a 4.; t s! � d� r ,1. rp i . Cite yk 7• i-! .'8ia. !f li i L3r.fa+' if. gi J,`~ T ig et IS l + d it �I I 'C�fr'•. '• `vR>,+.1, r..• . 7711 �i ii «[ � i. ri 1 g 26 1 .�. F» 1 _ �tif _ , - + �. D III EAO m I ' t Q • ma�P. I : . _: _ /4F. � �e'''� 0 �s�I'I is 15 rr if Z a� ' r AlII a rf: s •, :, ! _t I. p- _ 0 51 is f.a 1 � ill le s,. e ft !,.., li O 1; 4 -- s ° 1 1 51 `-. SH I 4 .-�' itill - a ti1„� .1 t S ••r +� CLASS I M €O POST NG PLAN for FOUR O FARMS - PARKER SITE SOUTHEAST 114 OF SECTION 15 T2N R67W Prepared by AGPROfessionals DEVE[,Oi ERS OF AGRICULTURE AGPROFESSIONALS 3050 67th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 (970) 535-9318 office (970) 535-9854 fax www.agpros.com August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan Table of Contents 1.0 introduction * • ■ ■ • • • • r • • • • • • ■ . ■ .. ■ a r r ■ ■ . ■ . • ■ ■ ■n . . ■ e • ■ ■ ■ m f m • ■ e ■ •r e e e r e ■ e r e r n r e r r + +� 1.1 General Overview of the Operation 3 1.2 Class I Composting Facility .. a r. a . a ■ ■. ■ , . A r 3 2.0 Requirements for Class I..aaraa■ar■.airr�4itr��r••••••+ ■ 1 Contact Information 2.2 Location, Address, Legal Description 2.3 General Requirements 2.4 Facility Operations Requirement r .. a a .... Appendices Appendix A: Registration with CDPHE Appendix B: Site Maps Appendix C: Closure Plan and Financial Assurance Appendix D: Sampling Plan AUPROfessionals ii August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan 1.0 Introduction This Class I Composting Plan (Plan) is prepared for Four D Farms, LLC (Four D Farms) pursuant to the Colorado Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities 6-CCR 1007-2 (Regulations), Section 14 for a Class I compost facility. Class I composting regulations allow a facility to: compost at the site of generation or on agriculturally zoned property owned by the generator using only agricultural waste generated onsite together with other compatible materials as defined in Section 1 of these regulations and does not meet one of the general exemptions or conditional exemptions in Sections 14.1.3 or 14.1.4. The plan was prepared for protection of the public health and environment by describing the design control and operational management measures to protect ground and surface waters, and prevent nuisance conditions. The plan will be maintained at the facility and available for review when warranted by the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (Department) or the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. 1.1 General Overview of the operation Four D Farms operates as a Class I facility under Section 14.2.1(C) of the Solid Waste Composting Regulations. A map of the facility location with respect to county roads is found in Appendix B (Figure 1). The composting operations encumber approximately 25 acres and are located in the western portion of the site (Figure 2). Four D Farms imports compatible materials necessary for effective carbon to nitrogen ratios from known sources outside of the facility. Agricultural waste (manure) is imported from two nearby dairies under the same ownership as Four D Farms property. The manure from Eagle View Dairy and Front Range Dairy (dairies) is stockpiled onsite and then mixed with the compatible materials and moisture conditioned and aerated in windrows in the designated compost area (Figure 2). 1.2 Class I Composting Facility S • • Four D Farms conducts compost operations at Four D Farms — Parker Site. The site of agricultural waste generation is at nearby commonly owned dairies. Four D Farms compost includes agricultural wastes generated at dairies and Type I feedstocks, The finished compost will be sold commercially and publicly. Four D Farms operates within the facility boundaries of the Four D Farms — Parker Site, which meets the engineering and operational requirements for a Class I composting facility to include properly sized, engineered, and monitored storm water containment. AOPRofessionals 3 August 29, 2018 Four D Fauns Composting Plan 2.0 Requirements for Class I Four D Farms is registered with the Department as a Class I composting facility. A copy of the registration is provided. as Appendix A. Pertinent information within the registration is provided for reference below: 2.1 Contact Information Site Owner: Front Range Dairy, LLC 9743 Weld. County Road 16 Fort Lupton, CO 80621 (970) 534-1047 Operator: Four D Farms 9743 Weld County Road 16 Fort Lupton, CO 80621 (970) 420-5613 Emergency: Josh Hess, Operations Manager (970) 420-5613 2.2 Location, Legal Description Four D Farms Southeast / Section 15, T2N, R67W This facility is located approximately 43 miles northwest of the town of Fort Lupton, CO. 2.3 General Requirements a. Site Maps Appendix B includes Maps: Figure 1 - Vicinity Map showing facility location with respect to County Roads Figure 2 -- Compost Area Site Map, engineer scaled b. Facility Capacity Estimated quantities of feed stocks and bulking agents: The volumes of feedstock, in process, and bulking material on site at any one time will not exceed 3 5, 000 cubic yards as noted in the individual categories of materials estimated below. The volume of any one category may vary above or below those noted, but the total volumes of all feed stocks and bulking agents shall be managed to maintain the aggregate to total of approximately 3 5, 000 cubic yards. Estimated max quantity of feed stocks (manure) onsite: 15,000 cu yd Estimated max quantity of bulk material (yard waste) onsite: 7,500 cu yd Estimated max quantity of in -process material (windrow) onsite: 7,500 cu yd Estimated max quantity of finished product (compost) onsite: 5,000 cu yd Total estimated maximum quantity: 35,000 cu yd AGPROfessionals 4 August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan c. Evaluation to Determine Mix The standard compost recipe is approximately 80% manure mixed with 20% bulking agents (triticale straw, corn stalks, yard waste or wood waste). Water from onsite surface impoundments may be added, as needed, to maintain the appropriate moisture content. d. Detailed Description of Operation Manure is removed from animal storage buildings at commonly owned dairies to the Four D Farms facilities designated area for composting with other agricultural wastes. Additional compatible material consisting of yard -type wastes or other wood wastes are also imported to Four D Farms for integration with agricultural wastes. Production activities consist of mixing or blending the feedstocks, bulking agents, and wetting agents at the processing area, and formation of windrows. A typical compost mixture has a carbon to nitrogen ratio of between 0-40 to 1, and moisture content of around 40 to 60 percent. No input of heat or energy is required. The final compost produced contains humus, stabilized organic matter, micro and macronutrients, and beneficial soil bacteria. It contains significant levels of organic nitrogen, phosphorus, and potash. The following overview is intended to provide an overall concept of how the facility will operate. Changes in operational procedures will occur based on experience and actual conditions encountered. Four D Farms utilizes triticale straw, corn stalks, and other vegetative wastes that are hauled in and ground if needed. Dairy manure is generated at the dairies. As the dairy barns are cleaned, the manure is hauled to the facility's compost area. Within 24 hours, the manure is placed in windrows. A typical windrow will consist of bulking agents mixed with manure. Additional Type I feedstocks such as wood chips, small branches, grass clippings and other landscape materials may be added for various mixes. Carbon or organic material helps in the composting process as it promotes higher temperatures which produce better compost. The organic material is completely absorbed into the composting process. Compost will be considered finished compost when it has been at or above 131 degrees Fahrenheit for at least 15 days and has been turned a minimum of five times. Finished Compost is screened and stockpiled for marketing. Compost will be marketed to agricultural, wholesale and retail markets to meet market demands Four D Farms may also bring in topsoil, sand, perlite, vermiculite, biochar, and other soil amendments to make soil/compost mixes and planting mixes. 2.4 Facility Operations Requirements a. Material Acceptance Four D Farms operations utilize agricultural wastes and other compatible materials from the dairies. Type 1 compatible materials are vegetative waste, and other materials determined by the Department to pose a low risk to human health and the AGPROfessionals 5 August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan environment. Vegetative waste and other materials may consist of grass clippings, crop stalks, wood chips, tree branches, sawdust, leaves or untreated lumber. The facility accepts bulking agents only from known, vetted suppliers. Compatible materials are pre-screened by trained facility staff to prohibit asbestos containing materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste, PCB wastes, or lead -acid batteries from entering the waste stream. No prohibited wastes are accepted at Four D Farms for composting operations. b. Engineering and Surface Water Control The Composting Area is engineered for proper drainage and stormwater controls in accordance with Section 14.2, 3 of the composting regulations. The surface drainage from the composting area drains directly into the receiving pond to the northeast for collection. The pond is sized to capture the 25 year, 24 hour storm event for the compost area. The pond will be dewatered to agricultural cropland to the east of the compost area. c. Access Control Composting operations are secure from casual entry. The facility has wood fencing with one entry point to the facility on County Road 20. All traffic to the compost facility must pass by the office and active composting areas. d. Nuisance Conditions Nuisance conditions including odor and/or flies are managed by applying best management practices in the composting area and to the compost piles as described in this document. Noise The facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Agricultural Zone District. Dust Dust control will be accomplished by wetting down the access roads and facility roads as necessary to minimize fugitive dust at the site and migrating fugitive dust off -site. Management of the compost operations area surface usually controls dust from surfaces by maintaining moisture and removing material susceptible to dust. The purpose of intensive surface management is twofold; to mix dry and moist surfaces and to reduce pest habitat. Odors Odors will be managed in accordance with the Odor Management Plan as provided in Section H of this document. Vectors The presence of flies and other disease carrying insects will be minimized by frequently turning the windrows as necessary to avoid anaerobic conditions which AGPRDfcssionals 6 August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan tends to produce pockets of decayed wastes which, in turn, attracts flies. Additionally, the fly population may be controlled through the use of spray/mist equipment to treat the surface areas of the site where flies are observed to congregate. When flies are observed to be originating at the subject site fly bait traps may be placed along the perimeter of the site to minimize off -site migration. Insects inhabit areas that, 1) have an adequate to good food supply and 2) foster habitat prime for breeding and living, such as standing water or tall weeds and grass. Additional key practices Four D Farms will use to manage are to first eliminate possible habitat, and then reduce the available food supply, windblown debris Feedstocks at the Four D Farms facility does not contain typical wastes known to be wind carried other than dust. The migration of wind-blown debris off -site will be minimized by the installation of wood fencing along the perimeter of the facility in the down wind direction of the prevailing winds. Should windblown debris escape the facility it will be recovered, as needed. e* Sign age The signage is at the facility entrance_ f. Contingency Plan (1) Feedstock deliveries to the site is only from known sources. Should an unapproved waste be inadvertently brought to the site, the deliverer will notbe allowed to unload and will be required to leave the premises. Should an unapproved waste be delivered and unloaded, the material will be isolated and the generator notified to either return to pick up the material, or in the event the generator cannot be identified or contacted, the materials will be removed in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and ordinances to an approved land fill. (2) Four D Farms is responsible for the management of surface runoff and protection of surface and ground waters. Four D Farms manages the liquid levels and final use of wastewater in the pond. The protection of any surface water or shallow ground water is accomplished by operating within the composting designated area of the facility. The composting area is properly sloped to drain directly to the storm water retention area (Compost Pond, Figure 2, Appendix B). In the unlikely event of a release of fluid from the liquid waste storage area that could potentially impact local surface water and/or groundwater quality, Four D Farms will respond immediately upon release discovery, The facility has sufficient earth moving equipment on site at all times to aid in the containment of a release. Therefore, immediately upon discovery, any potential release will be contained with earthen materials. An assessment of any potential environmental impact will be completed, and corrective action will be implemented as soon as possible. AGPROfessionals 7 August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan g. Fire Protection Fire protection regionally, is provided by the Fort Lupton Fire Protection District. They will be called as necessary. There is one office and warehouse building on - site, but no other auxiliary structures in the compost area. The best method for extinguishing a compost fire is to smother the fire with soil. Soil or compost will be obtained from areas within the site. Equipment necessary for moving large quantities of soil and capable of smothering the typical compost fire are maintained on -site at all times. This equipment typically consists of a large, rubber -tire loader. Guidance for compost fire suppression: 'Segregate burning material to reduce the threat of fire spreading. 'Excavate soil from the site with a loader or multiple loaders, as necessary. 'Completely cover the burning compost with soil sufficient to smother the fire and eliminate oxygen to the fire. 'When smoke stops, spread the pile and re-cover or mix with soil to eliminate potential hot -spots. 'Add in fresh feedstock and re -work the windrow and start the composting process over to completion. h, Odor Management Plan Manure is incorporated into windrows as soon as site area allows (unless restricted by weather) to minimize odor. If excessive odor complaints or notification of off- site odor is received, the operator will act immediately to determine the source of the odor and take remedial action. Remediation activities may consist of aeration, additional capping of materials, application of de-odorizing materials at the source, removal of materials from the site, or a combination of these items, 1. Personnel Training Employees involved with the compost process, from drivers to operators are trained through a company training process that includes instruction on the following: composting processes, compost analysis, acceptable feedstocks, identifying hazardous or inappropriate materials, contingency actions, equipment operation, site layout and material mixing and logistics for material flow and operations. There may be one or more employees involved with the operation. j Closure Plan and Financial Assurance The Closure Plan and Financial Assurance is located in Appendix C. k. Pathogen Reduction Pathogens will be managed through windrow composting 14.2.4(L)(1). The density of the fecal coliform present in the finished compostis maintained at less than 1000 Most Probable Number per gram of total solids (dry weight basis) OR the density of Salmonella sp. Bacteria in the compost is maintained at less than three (3) Most Probable Number per four (4) grams of total solids (dry weight basis) at the time the compost is to be sold or otherwise distributed for use. AGPROfessionals 8 August 29, 2018 Four D Farms Composting Plan Pathogens and disease vectors will be reduced by maintaining the in -process compost pile at a temperature of 55 degrees Celsius (131 degrees Fahrenheit) or higher for 15 days or longer. The fifteen days do not need to be consecutive. During the period when the compost is maintained at 55 degrees Celsius or higher, there are a minimum of five (5) turnings of the windrow. Recordkeeping The following records, at a minimum, are maintained on -site: 1. Windrow/pile aeration data 2. Financial Assurance documentation 3. Operational monitoring data, including time and temperature readings 4. Facility Personnel training records 5. Compost analytical data 6. Feedstock analytical data NA) These records are maintained at the facility .d are available to the local governing authority and the Department to review during normal business hours when warranted. m. Reporting Four D Farms will submit an annual report by March 1 of each calendar year to the Department and Weld County. The annual report includes: 1. The types of materials received for composting; 2. Amount in tons or cubic yards of each material received for composting; 3. Amount of unprocessed feedstock and feedstock in process onsite at the beginning of the previous calendar year; 4. Amount of unprocessed feedstock and feedstock in process onsite at the end of the previous calendar year; and 5. Amount of compost distributed the previous calendar year The annual report will be submitted to: Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment Solid Waste Management Unit - Compliance Program 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80246-1530 Weld County Dept. of Public Health & Environment 1555 N 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 n. Sampling Plan The sampling plan provides an outline of how Four D Farms will test the compost that is being generated onsite. The sampling plan is located in Appendix 1:). AUPROfessionals 9 August 29, 2018 Appendix A: Registration with CDPHE Four D Farms Composting Plan sf1 MINN N FO HERE P9 tr..-�tpi d••,i•." rr•.r i•' • s."!rrhr•rrt"-rrrrr rrrrrrrrrrr rrrtrrtrrr �nrrr•• r I L r4 p • .... t e . i r.. 144t—FC4144410144110444 t1. I',Kirk 1/f=MIiKY@YU1d.1.1AJ}41.F41.1at rrre t I Pr. ' J� J Four D Farms Composting Plan Figure 2 — Four D Farms Facility �j iii 10i�JiDJ A CI N.VriII� 'a�..LISI ImLIX:1O47. Ali .t"+a�1 NM ti ,�5,14.Q�'? III t"'d +Y lii�''.Li'r` 311111.1R3113. , I I C4: 11' I i. a., . JO all a. P► „* ad ..' .IYt}IS iha*Saio! arse% ■ratan • • Or re'1 . T , • W '7 -r ..e yr S 1 - mil', • y a I 1 u C U or o o W a 6 a G7 E 1 i 1 I Sim> fir J , 1 ' a t OUSTING FENCE EN1311NG UNDERGROUND ELEC Ex1S1lNG STRUCTURE N� ExisTING U itirr POLE It\ —aF a— a— —adellIP la a Lnsya,. r %d WohirZelirrici r , w w 5 • c,i b I w 4:113 VNIIIATIrlandel gONVII IMQ dd AIL F2ur ITC wI a 0, OI PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN Four I) Farms Composting Plan Appendix C: Closure Plan and Financial Assurance Final Closure of the Site The closure requirements, estimates and final financial assurance instruments will be submitted, reviewed and approved as a separate document subsequent to CDPHE approval. Closure Plans In the event that it becomes necessary to close the composting facility including the discontinued receipt, processing and sale of materials for more than 180 days, or otherwise approved by the CDPHE, the site will be returned to its original condition. Weld County and CDPHE will be notified of closure activities and when closure is complete. Closure activities at the facility will not exceed 90 days without prior written extensions granted by Weld County and CIS PHE. All gates, fences, and signs will be removed. The following closure tasks are expected to be completed: removal of any material on the surface of the ground, including raw materials, in -process and finished compost. The existing surface area of compacted soil shall be removed and handled accordingly. The stormwater containment structure shall be dewatered, cleaned, backfilled with dirt and leveled to grade. The entire site shall be graded to its original grade. The site shall be seeded into a grass mix. Specific details on these steps are as follows. Removal of Residual Materials from Facility: The Four D Farms site is capable of containing a maximum of 35,000 cubic yards of total material. At any given time there may be up to 5,000 cubic yards of finished material on site and 30,000 cubic yards of raw materials. The raw materials will be utilized to make finished compost on -site within 90 days unless prior written authorization is given by Weld County and CDPHE. of the finished material shall be sold and marketed until removed and/or land applied to fields owned by Four D Farms or other local farmers at agronomic rates according to Colorado State University' s Cooperative Extension fertilizer recommendations using best management practices. Removal of Compost Debris from Surface Soils in Windrow Areas: After the site has been cleared, the surface area of the facility's 25 acres will be ripped once to loosen the soil and then disked once to break up clods and smooth the surface to produce a seed bed. Those procedures overall are to remove the "hard pan" layer, a thick, compacted layer of soil that develops and hardens over time. The loosened soil shall either be used for re -vegetation of the site or incorporated into adjacent fields by plow cultivation, similar to paragraph one above. Stormwater and Containment Structures: Any stormwater accumulation (rainfall runoff) in the pond will be used in the remaining composting process or, after testing and agency approval shall be dewatered onto adjacent fields owned by Four D Farms in an agronomic manner. Compost should be kept at a 40- 60 % moisture level, so applying stormwater on top of the windrows is a useful way to re- Four L Farms Composting Plan use water. If reused as irrigation water, the crop will utilize the nutrients available in the water. After being de -watered., the pond will be cleaned, leveled, backfilled with soil and the ground returned to a natural grade to prevent ponding. Re -contouring of Subject Site: The site shall be regraded by leveling ditches, berms, and holes. Re -Seeding of Disturbed Surface Area: Depending on future planned land use and for estimating purposes, the surface area will be disked to produce a seedbed. A dryland grass mix, including winter rye or oats cover crop seed, will be cross -drilled into the seedbed. Cross drilling is a method used to incorporate the seed in which the seeds are drilled into the soil in two different directions. Buildings and Other Structures: There is an office and warehouse building at the site. Closure of the site at the conclusion of composting operations will consist of removing all compost and bulk materials from the site; disking of the surface areas used for composting, and re -seeding of the impacted site with a dry land pasture grass mix to be drilled in, Additionally, compost and a straw - mulch will be lightly disked into the seedbed along with a separate seeding of the area with a cover crop of winter rye or oats to minimize soil erosion during the grass germination maturation stage. Concrete or other impermeable mixing pad areas and wash areas will be cleaned and re -used or broken up and disposed of at a permitted solid waste facility or at a recycling center, as appropriate. Notification: It is not anticipated that the site will experience some interim period of non-use. However, in the event that it becomes necessary to close the composting facility including the discontinued receipt, processing and sale of materials for more than 180 days, or otherwise approved by the Weld County and CDPHE; Weld County and CDPHE will be notified in writing in 14 days of closure activities and within 30 days when closure is complete. Closure activities at the facility will not exceed 90 days without prior written extensions granted by Weld County and CDPHE. Following closure of the facility, a notation will be placed on the deed notifying any potential purchaser that the property has been used as a composting facility. Four D Farms Composting Plan Post Closure Care and Maintenance The post closure care and maintenance shall consist of: 1. The continued monitoring and maintenance. 2. Inspection and maintenance of any cover material or vegetation. 3. An annual report submitted to the Department and local governing authority detailing post closure care activities during the prior year. The length of the post closure care period shall be for five years or may be: (A) Decreased by the Department after consultation with the local governing authority if the owner or operator demonstrates that the reduced period is sufficient to protect human health and the environment or (B) Increased by the Department after consultation with the local governing authority if it is determined that the lengthened period is necessary to protect human health and the environment. Following completion of the post closure care period the owner or operator will submit a certification signed by an independent Colorado registered professional engineer for approval by the Department and Weld County, verifying the post closure care has been completed in accordance with the post closure plan and has been placed in the operating record. Financial Assurance Must set up a financial assurance instrument 60 days prior to initial receipt of waste by the site. Four D Farms Composting Plan Appendix D: Sampling Plan The primary source of agricultural residuals is manure and other CAFO materials such as bedding, and waste feed generated by Eagle View and Front Range Dairy. Other feedstock include imported compatible materials. Each load of raw material imported at the compost site will be logged. The raw material will be stockpiled for blending with manure and creating windrows. a. Sampling Frequency Finished compost will be tested at a frequency of no less than once per every 10,000 cubic yards or once a year whichever is more frequent. b. Sampling Procedure Samples of the compost will be collected from either random windrows of finished compost or stockpiled finished compost approximately every 10,000 cy: • Sampling tools are cleaned and disinfected to avoid cross contamination • Samples are taken approximately every 25 linear feet the length of the windrow • Sample depth is approximately 2 feet inside the windrow • Grab samples consist of +1- ' 2 pound of sample material and placed in a clean plastic container where they are thoroughly blended A one -gallon Ziploc bag is filled with the composite sample for laboratory analysis The sample bag is placed on ice in an insulated cooler immediately The sampling technician completes the "chain of custody" document Sample is delivered (or shipped via an overnight delivery service) to the designated laboratory. S c. Analyses Sampling is conducted to confirm that: the pathogen destruction process is complete and control of solid waste addition minimizes introduction of =favorable inorganics. The analytes are listed in the following table: Four D Farms Composting Plan Sampling Analytes Maximum Constituent Concentration for Compost Sold or Distributed for Offsite Use (mg/kg dry weight basis) CONSTITUENTSI MAXIMUM LEVEL INORGANICS (mg/kg) Arsenic 41 Cadmium 39 Copper 1500 Lead 300 Mercury 17 Nickel 420 Selenium 100 Zinc 2800 BIOLOGICAL (either) Fecal coliform < 1,000 MPN Salmonella < 3 MPN / 4 grams Four D Farms, LLC Weld County, CO Preliminary Waste System Design Prepared by: AGPROfessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE 3050 67t'' Avenue, Suite 200 Greeley, CO 80634 970-535-9318 August 2018 Summary This analysis covers the preliminary design recommendations for a waste management system for Four D Farms, LLC (Four D Farms) in Weld County, Colorado. The proposed facility will be a Class I composting facility subject to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) regulations. This preliminary design meets the requirements set forth in those regulations. Project Description The site is located in Weld County approximately 4.5 miles northwest of the City of Fort Lupton, CO. The facility is located in Part of the Southeast Vi of Section 15, T2N, R67W, of the 6th Principle Meridian. The site, which is approximately 122.91 acres, will include approximately 25 acres of runoff containment area. The 25 acres is being considered as one (1) drainage basin., Design Objectives The waste management plan for Four D Farms will consist of constructing a compost pond for the drainage basin. The pond will be constructed to contain runoff from the composting area and the existing open lot arca within the drainage basin boundary. The pond will be dewatered to adjacent farm fields. Wastewater will be applied to cropped fields at agronomic rates as a fertilizer. Hydrology and Hydraulics The pond is designed to contain the 25 -year, 24 -hour storm event as determined from the NRCS weather data. The required capacities were determined using the spreadsheet 313Pond, L "RECTANGULAR WASTE STORAGE POND DESIGN COMPUTATIONS" developed by John Andrews, NRCS State Conservation Engineer for Colorado. The spreadsheet uses a monthly balance approach accounting for precipitation inputs, as well as evaporation and pumped draw -downs during the summer irrigation season for the outputs. Wastewater will be generated from the existing lot area and the composting area. All precipitation that does not fall directly on this area will be diverted away from the containment area and flow into natural depressions. The design storm is a 25 -year, 24 -hour storm event which corresponds to an amount of 3.40 inches of rainfall at the Greeley, CO weather station. The drainage area of 25 acres will produce a storm runoff volume of 3.18 -acre feet. AGPROfessionals Page 2 of 3 Four D Farms, LLC Storage Pond The compost pond will total approximately 5.41 acre-feet available storage. The pond will be lined with a liner to meet the requirements of 5 CCR 1002-81. Erosion protection will be installed in pond inlets to ensure that the flow of water into the pond does not erode and compromise the integrity of the pond liner. The system is designed to be dewatered frequently during the summer of each year and dewatered as low as possible prior to each winter. The pond has been designed to handle the normal runoff and still maintain capacity for the design storm. The water level must be kept below the working depth marked on the staff gauge to ensure adequate storage capacity for runoff from the design storm. The facility has over six (6) months of storage which prevents the need to land apply wastewater during the winter months. Diversions and Conveyances All diversions will be sized and constructed to handle flows from the design storm event, All conveyance structures will be sized to handle the projected flows. Geotechnical Recommendations The NRCS soil survey indicated that the site is underlain predominantly by loamy sand soils including Loup-Boel loamy sands, Olney loamy sand, Valent sand and Agolls and Vona loamy sand, in the area where the proposed ponds will be located. Subsurface explorations have been conducted. The subsurface exploration indicated that the groundwater level was 10 to 12 feet below ground surface. The pond will be constructed to meet the groundwater set back requirements in Regulation 5 CCR 1002- 81. Land Application The proposed waste storage pond wilt be dewatered to the adjacent fields. All wastewater to be land applied will be applied at agronomic rates. Using estimates generated from the spreadsheet 313Pond. L "RECTANGULAR WASTE STORAGE POND DESIGN COMPUTATIONS", 2 acre-feet of wastewater will be generated for land application in an average year. A ttachments • Pond Sizing Spreadsheet & Preliminary Stage Storage • Proposed Drawing • Soils Report A P ROfes s onais Page 3 of 3 Four D Farms, LLC I RECTANGULAR WASTE I 1 2 S U, a cc III I, Po'I Iii• _w cg cr) CD CN t o 18. VM W F1)L7a nn-aa �-- lz' c c 55 LU z Illy Cr'i PIP u • 0 E - UI + 1,1 1 LI ,� r. a I 1 y� I iI Ifl t\1 • I 'A 1 I IIY I • I to �/re / w i t' ! a • I r I ' IS / ■ litit �fl! I11 /I ,1I i) I i1 ;- III I Ir.• lr «i P 4 "no a. Irk I ...1 Ill ioU Il J II il r ; NM ■ yp `yr _ •'�iL7 I aE r al r a' I �I/ Mt"p,I�y.� ro 1C C711 ui le Ark Cr N ,n I• ill 11 g?Iali0 1 JO . • •id I IY I 1 1 1 1 1 • -I 'f0 ti IV 3 I w Y}" • red PI'tailt It / 1 nA I I nYSdb/ . ' , a a r >.� . a • at .� �• ... .6/ I -_ v f I I I J• .• a ./ i _ A C I a CD. EC . ; • III • a • a a ■ 1 I i I I ' I•� • r r 1 a a Ir. I, •ital II ;I A r pig 1 ' oof Ip. LLJ G r•9 .11 cjI ci li _. • P 4In I I 1 , 1 1 1 �1 �1 II AI 1 I I Is . I 7 Imit ! vi•o goiP n a r I . i a, • ' I a a y' ci4 ci ■P• se- II II • • • acc fiX7!i .. =1 a ■ tl I Lr • r ' ! t _ •== Cr, Lin CNy c'1,1Q © 0 �'`r r a r...1'a Cl%1 04 1D O 0 O Q *- tri i. W a) 4 d C'ld III C oI is C ad.P' L Q ni L+ Y C) C3 N 0 8 Ki f LI O O 0 J 8 yam. yr © cs ` •r tit A- oy Cal risw GIG 2 Sf c+1 d a ci d d d O CD {0 0 0 2Q.g L7 a Cl CI 4 C3ciC3 a] O In A U) Q U1 r as f•-• Itaalse FR I�r O O 0 O I•ti .a B 0 S B O IC! O r O Q 0 O f a 1 1 V L a 1]n��K5i LL- • Y r ICI r i a ausa a 9 _• ' / A.M1 A nfYAn 1 - QI D D • I•�j'ea a a s a .a. e I f , S I ...'.t * 1 ...8. -1• Llb lirCi tii Z.0 AI aP� I+� • 's. l , • _Se ; a .... .. . �•' aC I *+Jcr#1r /,j Zi. _ a C v p c+: C "I! I csigHttni r,,,� r- T yy } .J CI C a -f 1 I I!q I , to i . '+ 4 CNA., I>i Im a aD e i yy Ill 1 r •i = L a ahI 8' t, WI 4.:t. .'_' I- IP P: j c C � In . I • a a •• c c c 1 c NJ .. - 1�y 1f i 4'%1 t� SJS? s+� Ile r ' R• f I - I n - _t 0 O F- ' ill o t Tr a o cal 0 a 0 1i �( /O o ,-/ tV o O r tee 0n C C tti 41) Gel '— 9 o re) ro CP W CLes I a CO Nr vs.! 6 °auunglOj 23 2 Kt: Cl LN 2 I� •, 82 /t3 V ce. Ln kr E c � 5a ett CI 4 c Lf, c till F hr - a 4p 8 EU c2 8 ct 6,2 8 c c o e Q w- 11 75 Indies Ccg •c' c, . c n. C a arah ig oci n +cl co3t3pondxls jea 81'3112401 AGPRO fessionals DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE F m SttCs, Compost Pond ..ea : _�`�_* CC SliceVolu ' 1 e G ( 2 Ifl • 14 0 0.0 947.8 0,2 9,824 84 F • 948+0 • 948.5 0.7 44,076 13,• 75 949.0 1.2 85,501 32,17 • • 949.5 1.7 89,037 43,07 • 850,0 2.2 92,815 451 i i 13 • 950.5 2.7 96,045 47, 15 • 951.0 3.2 99,328 48, ,, 43 951.5 3.7 102,083 50, 88 • 951.8 I 4.0 104,362 31,'54 • , 4.2 106,050 21,+41 952.0 • 952.5 4.7 108,832 53, 46 953.0 5.2 111,850 96 55, • 953.5 5.7 114.804 55, m.64 • 953.8 6,0 118,593 00 ulative lume 0 984 14,459 46,876 00,583 136,296 183,511 232,354 282,852 313,905 334,946 388,692 443,888 500,551 535,261 Cumulative Volume 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.1 2.1 3.1 Pump Down Level 4.2 5,3 6.5 7.2 7.7 FB 8.9 10.2 11.5 12.3 TOES 4 ll',^ ••i a 0 � GAS GAS JJ K E a a�5 M 2 17\---/Ain\b/N POND DEPTH —a � _„. ,f. rT 1 �� 7 r COMPOST AREA (+25 ACRES) COMPOST POND PLAN VI EV Alignment HORIZ. 'ERT. -A SCALE SCALE 49C0 I TO} F BE V1 495 I .8 R f = F SRC 49 - _ .c NON If r �• i � � rik :id I a°°...ji"Pli -1--- -4940 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+X00 3+50 44-0 CUEMP STPONCROS TION % 111 °ni •! F Iii! PUMP DOWN �► E DE rir A+ 4 4 AT6C' ARK AT 4.2' MARK AT 22 TAIL GALE N.T.S. 50' J 4 a - - IP a it Gin PaTimiz Q a ct, yiy O V itel iett4Z za O w SHEET P-1 USDA United States issin Department of Agriculture \RCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the Natimal Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint efFortlar tl� L�ited States Dep- n of Agriculture . � CountyFederal agencie te agencies in .•'tektado Agricultural Stations, and local participantsS�n�Vuther1� Part1 1444 0 d i I4 4 Y..••Yil°\t•..�1.��.n��..u4n.Ji�.�.�.+nni.�Yn.n °1...�ne A.\•�\\�\\ll.�\ T (11nAlltitU!t it l•0.Y.......,.:. I l i . EMMONS dull/YPIII IIIIIII$ �i1111/e1A186i111I6�HkliillYPPa`PaaYaaY=PPaPa°• l.� PCCCRaCAPPIYdiM°IPYYIC2. I 81000 n JI Ii,ti r • I f IF ilitusto So esource e o for 5 July 6, 2018 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.goviwpsi portal/nresfnnain/soilsfhealth/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.so.egov.usda.govllocator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http : //www. n res. u sda. g ov/wps/portalf n resldetai l/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 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.D. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface i ..'...2 How Soil Surveys Are Made .....I...5 Soil Map 8 SoilMap 1 61 .. ....FI ...r■M4J..■■..11 4.... Legend ... 1 ...10 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Descriptions 1........ 11 Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part.13 35 Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes ...... r.. , . 13 44 Olney loamy sand, dl to 3 percent slopes ..14 69 ale nt sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes . r . . I r . a r r .... ■ 15 70 Valent sand, to 9 percent slopes µ .... a .. c l a n. .... r. e .. r r.. a r. a r l.. ,... 17 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes ,....1 .....19 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes ...........,...,.Y,ro...YYs •... • 20 7�—Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes 21 Reference ,...1..r123 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 rn i scel laneo u s area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units) . Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various rrretadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 avxnrrpaaraniv�n�prod:: rai tf .ua44 niinna••:"•tW#ildaldhtlYs$*flS diSi SSM•Wri'W41.:'..1&" "l+"� " Spacial Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spat Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous. Water Perennial Water 'V Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot e Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spat Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND Area of Intarsst CACI) Area of Interest (AOl) Sella 0 Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Si 0 A. 44 4164 O . • 0 0 C a tW Spoil Area Stony Spat Very Stony Spot Wel Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation f-i-t Rails asr Interstate Highways .+6+0 US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000 Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting sails that could have been shown at a more detailed scale Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSC:3857) Maps from the Wbb Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required This product is generated from the USDA -MRCS certified data as of the version ciate(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 20, 2016 —Oct 15, 2016 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed an these maps As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries maybe evident 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In Aol Percent of Aol 35 44 69 70 72 73 74 Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes 7.2 Olney loamy sand, 1 to 3 percent slopes 74.1 Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes 4.4 13.2 34 9 18.5 10.4 Totals for Area of Interest 1621 4.4% 45.5% 2.7% 8.1% 21.4%: 114% 6.4% 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 11 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 site investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 35—Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362f Elevation: 4,550 to 4,750 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland • Map Unit Composition Loup and similar soils: 55 percent Soo/ and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptlonsr and transects of the rnapunit. Description of Loup Selling Landform: Swales, drainageways, streams Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy alluvium Typical profile HI - 0 to 16 inches: loamy sand H2 - 16 to 40 inches: loamy sand H3 - 40 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High (2.00 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (non irrigated): Ow Hydrologic Soil Group: AID Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R0E7SY029CO) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Boel Setting Landform: Swales, drainageways, streams Down -slope shape: Linear 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Stratified sandy alluvium Typical profile HI - 0 to 14 inches: loamy sand H2 - 14 to 60 inches: loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: o to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff Mass: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of pondirg: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive g ro u ps Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Meadow (R067BY02Q O) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Osgood Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No 44 —Olney loamy sand, P1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 54 degrees F Frost -free period: 125 to 175 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Olney and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the map unit. Description of Olney Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed deposit outwash h Typical profile HI - 0 to 10 inches: loamy sand H2 - 10 to 20 inches: sandy clay loam H3 - 20 to 25 inches: sandy clay loam H4 - 25 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: We l l drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hi) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhosicm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 40 Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Vona Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydr c soil rating. No Zigweid Percent of map unit: 7 percent 1-lydric soil rating: No 69 Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczd 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Elevation: 3,000 to 5,210 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period. 130 to 166 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunif Description of Valent Setting Landform: I me rd u n es Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landforrn position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Noncalcareous eclian sands Typical profile A-0to5inches: sand AC - 5 to 12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand 02 - 30 to 80 inches: sand properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 inlhr) Depth to water table.: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent salinity maximum in profile: Nonsal i ne (0.1 to 1.9 min h oslcrn ) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (non irrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY015 0), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (8072 A021 KS) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landforrn: I nterdunes ryes Landforrn position (two-dimensional): Toes lope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Across-siopo shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (R067BY01 SCO), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (R07 XA022KS) Hydric soil rating: No ,Julesburg Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067RY024C0), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (RO72XAO22KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY02400), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (R072XA022KS) Hydric soil rating: No 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczf Elevation: 3,050 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 50 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates aro based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Hills, dunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Backsiope, shoulder, foots lope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, crest Down -slope shape: Linear, convex Across -slope shape: Linear, convex 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: sand AC - 5 to 12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class. Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat). High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 inch r) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep Sand (ROG7BYO15C0), Rolling Sands (Ro72 Y1 09KS) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep Sand (ROB7BYo1 SCO), Sands (North) (PE 16-20) (8072 A021 KS) Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landforrn position (two-dimensional): Footslope, backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy Plains (8067 BY02400), Sandy (North) Draft (April 2010) (PE 16-20) (Ro72 A022 S) Hydric soil rating: No Haxtun Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Imerdunes 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (two-dimensional): Foots lope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO), Sandy Plains (RO72 Y 111 S) Hydrtc soil rating: No 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Selling National map unit symbol: 363r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period. 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance 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: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eoliari deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches. sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table; More than BO inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsal me to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 m mhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) o) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components -Remmit Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating; No Valent Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soli rating; No 73 Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 363s Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 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 transacts of the mapuriit. Description of Vona Setting Landfor : Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam 1-13 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature; More than 80 inches Natural drainage class; Well drained Runoff class: Very low capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nionsa I i ne to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 min h osicrn) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrgated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (8067 8Y024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Remmit it Percent of map unit: 8 percent Hydric soil rating: No Valent Percent of map unit: 7 percent Hydric soil rating: No 74 —Vona loamy sand, 5 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363t Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 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 mapuriit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eo l ian deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Custom Soil Resource Report Properties and qualities Slope: 5 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 i rilh r) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of pondirxg: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0,0 to 4,0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): Oe Land capability classification (non irrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy Plains (R067BY024CO) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Valent Percent of map unit: 10 percent Hydric soil rating: No Remmit Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004, Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00, Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, FD. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWSIOBS-79131. 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://ww . nres. usda.govlwpslportall nresldetaillnatioryalfsoilsl?cid=nres142p _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:ll www.nres.usda.govlwpslportaIlnres/detail/natianaIlsoiIsl?cid=nresl42p2j 53577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.govlwps/portallnresldetaillnationailsoilsPcid=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. U nited States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. U nited States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. N ational forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.govlwps/portallnresldetaiitsoils/ home/'acid=n res142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http:llwww.nres.usda.govlwpslportalfnresf detailinationallland uselrangepastu rel?cid=stele rdbl 043084 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430 -VI. http:Jl rvww.nres.usda.govlwpslportall n resldeta i Ilsoi Islsc ientistsf?cid=n res 142 p2_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/detaillnational/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.govilnternet/FSE DDD U M E NT /nres 142 p2_0522 g0. pdf 24 Hello