Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMONTAVA - PHASE D CORE AND IRRIGATION POND - BDR240006 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 3 - Erosion Control Letter/Report (3) M Erosion Control Report For r Montava Non-Pot Pump Station I •'fir'` • �• • °t s ---_ September 18, 2024 Owner: Montava Partners LLC 225 N.9`h St.Suite 350 Boise, ID 83702-5735 Developer: Montava Development&Construction LLC 430. N.College Ave,Suite 410 Fort Collins,CO 80524 (512)507-5570 Contractors: TBD Design Engineer: TST Inc.Consulting Engineers 748 Whalers Way,Suite 200 Fort Collins,CO 80525 (970)226-0557 TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1. ■ y , Wi,� .. TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS September 18, 2024 Mr. Andrew Crecca City of Fort Collins Environmental Regulatory Specialist City Hall W 300 Laporte Ave Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report Project No. 1230.0009.00 Dear Mr. Crecca: TST, Inc. Consulting Engineers (TST) is pleased to submit this Erosion Control Report for the Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project to the City of Fort Collins (City) for review and approval. The purpose of this erosion control report is to outline the anticipated construction practices and erosion pollution potential of the above-referenced proposed Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project, as well as to provide a living document and reference to coincide with any and all associated construction activities. Please review the attached report and provide any questions or comments at your earliest convenience. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to the city and look forward to receiving your comments and moving forward on this important project. Sincerely, TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS Brian R. Barker, E.I. Derek A. Patterson, P.E. BRB DAP 748 Whalers Way Suite 200 1 hereby attest that this erosion control report for the Montava Non-Pot Pump Fort Collins,Co 80525 Station was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, in accordance with the 970.226.0557 main provisions of the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual (FCSCM). 970.226.0204 fax ideas@tstinc.com www.tstinc.com Derek A. Patterson Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 48898 0 Table of Contents Montava Non-Pot Pump Station: Erosion Control Report 1.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION ......................... 1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Location and Description................................................................... 1 1.3 Proposed Construction Activities.................................................................. 3 1.4 Existing Soil and Surface Conditions............................................................ 4 1.5 Wetlands and Receiving Waters..................................................................... 5 1.6 Erosion Control Administrator....................................................................... 6 1.7 Potential Pollutants......................................................................................... 6 2.0 - CONSTRUCTION CONTROL MEASURES ...........................................................7 2.1 Controls Overview........................................................................................... 7 2.2 Erosion and Sediment Controls..................................................................... 7 2.3 Materials Management...................................................................................13 2.4 Spill Management...........................................................................................16 2.5 Non-Storm Water Components of Discharge...............................................17 3.0 - MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS ...................................... 18 3.1 Inspection and Maintenance Overview.........................................................18 3.2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements..............................................................18 3.3 Reporting Requirements/ Inspection Reports.............................................19 3.4 Site Maps ........................................................................................................20 4.0 - FINAL VEGETATION AND STABILIZATION / CONCLUSION ...........................20 5.0 - REFERENCES......................................................................................................21 Page i %ii. .CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report List of Figures 1.1 Vicinity Map .....................................................................................................................3 Technical Appendix Appendix A— Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report Appendix B — USDA Soil Survey Information Appendix C— Urban Drainage and Flood Control District BMPs Appendix D — City of Fort Collins Dust Prevention and Control Manual Appendix E — Erosion Control Plan Page ii TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 1 .0 - Project Description and Nature of Construction 1.1 Introduction The following Erosion Control Report has been prepared for use during the construction of the Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project. This plan describes recommended procedures and best management practices, BMP's, to assist the contractor in complying with the Colorado Water Quality Control Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The intent of this plan is to provide the contractor with a place to consolidate records, logs, permits, applications etc. as well as guidance on water quality protection. It is critical that the contractor understands that this plan is a living document that must be updated and maintained throughout the construction process. 1.2 Project Location and Description The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project site is located in Section 32, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, within the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado. The proposed site is bounded on the north by farmland, Future Montava Subdivision phases, and Richards Lake Road. On the east by farmland, N. Giddings Road, and Future Montava Subdivision phases. On the south by farmland and Mountain Vista Drive. On the west by farmland, the Number 8 Outlet Ditch, and Future Montava Subdivision phases. The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project contains approximately 15.5 acres and is within the Montava Subdivision Phase D parcel. The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project is currently zoned as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District Flexible Overlay Zone (LMN), and consists of Mixed-Use and Open Space. Approximately 2.4 acres are anticipated to be disturbed offsite in the unplatted parcel in the northeast corner of Section 32. The legal description of the project parcel is as follows: A parcel of land, situate in the East Half (E1/2) of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Eight North (T.8N.), Range Sixty-eight West (R.68W.) of the Sixth Principal Meridian (6th P.M.), City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Southeast corner of said Section 32 and assuming the South line of the Southeast Quarter (SE1/4) as bearing North 89057'58" West, a distance of 2639.84 feet, monumented by a #6 rebar with 2.5" aluminum cap stamped LS 17497 at the East end and by a 3.25" aluminum cap stamped LS 20123 at the West end and with all other bearings contained herein relative thereto; THENCE North 45015'52" West a distance of 71.08 feet to the North Right of Way (ROW) line of Mountain Vista Drive, dedicated as Parcel 2 in the Deed recorded September 14, 1984, as Book 2289, Page 1283 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder (LCCR), to a line parallel with and Page 1 %ill NC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 50.00 feet North of, as measured at a right angle, the South line of said SE1/4 and to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE North 89057'58" West, along said North line, a distance of 2514.83 feet to the East line of that parcel described in the Warranty Deed dated June 18, 1904, as Book 187, Page 163 of the LCCR and to a line parallel with and 75.00 feet East of, as measured at a right angle, the West line of said SE1/4; THENCE North 00033'32" West, along said East line, a distance of 2599.42 feet to the North line of the SE1/4, the East line of that parcel described in the Warranty Deed dated June 17, 1904, as Book 187, Page 178 of the LCCR and to a line parallel with and 75.00 feet East of, as measured at a right angle, the West line of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) of Section 32; THENCE North 00033'24" West, along said East line, a distance of 2590.24 feet to the South ROW line of Richards Lake Road, dedicated as Parcel 1 in said Book 2289, Page 1283 and to a line parallel with and 50.00 feet South of, as measured at a right angle, the North line NE1/4; THENCE South 89°39'06" East, along said South line, a distance of 1608.80 feet to the West line of that parcel described in the Warranty Deed dated May 15, 1886, as Book 44, Page 253 of the LCCR ; THENCE South 45007'27" East, along said West line, a distance of 1289.40 feet to the West ROW line of North Giddings Road, dedicated as Parcel 1 of Book 2289, Page 1283 and to a line parallel with and 50.00 feet West of, as measured at a right angle, the East line of the NE1/4; THENCE South 00035'37" East, along said West line, a distance of 1679.97 feet to the North line of the SE1/4, the West ROW line of North Giddings Road, dedicated as Parcel 2 of Book 2289, Page 1283 and to a line parallel with and 50.00 feet West of, as measured at a right angle, the East line of the SE1/4; THENCE South 00°33'45" East a distance of 2591.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said described parcel of land contains 12,621,362 Square Feet or 289.747 Acres, more or less W. A vicinity map illustrating the project location is provided in Figure 1.1. Page 2 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report Ism MOIRM RICHARD'S LAKE RD. ---J E �1 Id MMMMUM M1 M PROJECT LOCATION 0 ® W ® z VINE MOUNTAIN VISTA D . m N � o 0 z ol 0 m � N ®� VINE DR. Figure 1.1: Vicinity Map 1.3 Proposed Construction Activities The contractor is the Erosion Control Administrator and will be responsible for implementing and maintaining the erosion and sediment control, and pollution prevention measures described in this document and the accompanying construction drawings and specifications. The contractor may designate certain tasks as he sees fit, but the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the implementation of these controls and their proper function remains with the contractor. The order of major activities will be as follows: 1. Site Preparation: Confirm project disturbance limitations with those indicated on the Erosion Control Plan and install initial sediment and erosion control and pollution prevention BMP's. All BMP's must be shown on the Erosion Control Plan in the back pocket of this report. Some BMP locations must be determined by the contractor and marked on the plans in addition to the ones already shown. 2. Schedule pre-construction inspection of BMPs with the City of Fort Collins to ensure proper installation and functionality. Fill out an inspection report and file it in this report notebook. Page 3 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 3. The general site construction process will start with mobilization and clearing/stripping. 4. Grading activities will then be completed, which require the installation of inlet protection, surface roughing and erosion control blankets on slopes steeper than 3:1. 5. Utility installation will be the next phase where attention should be given to waste management, outdoor storage areas, dewatering requirements, and rip-rap installation. 6. With the completion of utilities, the hardscape will start, which will require that attention be given to items such as spill containment and concrete washout areas. 7. When the hardscape is completed, the buildings will start construction. Around each individual building, site perimeter protection, such as staked straw wattles, shall be installed for areas where sediment can run onto the hardscape. 8. As areas are completed the installation of permanent BMP's, such as seeding, mulching, spray-on matrix or rolled erosion control blankets on slopes shall be added. 9. Temporary seeding shall be added to areas that won't be stabilized within 30 days. 10. Remove all temporary BMPs upon establishment of sufficient vegetative cover or other permanent stabilization. If at any time construction ceases for a period expected to exceed 30 days, such as the project being split into multiple phases, temporary seeding of future phases shall be installed until construction of each future phase has begun. In the event that the project is split into phases or suspended, the permit may need to be inactivated or reassigned to the next administrator. Permits required for this project include the CDPHE Construction Activity Permit, CDPHE General Permit for Storm Water Discharge (COR400000), and CDPHE Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) Dewatering Permit. 1.4 Existing Soil and Surface Conditions According to a preliminary subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC, dated October 2, 2017, groundwater depths range from 2 to 36 '/2 feet below existing grades with an average of approximately 15 feet throughout the Montava Non-Pot Pump Station site. This preliminary report is included in Appendix A. The site is approximately 10% impervious area and has an estimated 70% vegetative cover. The types of soils found on the Montava Non-Pot Pump Station site consist of: ':• Aquepts, loamy (5). ':• Caruso clay loam (22)— 0 to 1 percent slopes. Page 4 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report ❖ Fort Collins loam (35)—0 to 3 percent slopes. ❖ Fort Collins loam (36)—3 to 5 percent slopes. ':• Satanta loam (95)— 1 to 3 percent slopes. ':• Satanta Variant clay loam (98) — 0 to 3 percent slopes. ❖ Stoneham loam (101) — 1 to 3 percent slopes. The characteristics of the soil found on the project site include: ':• Slow to very slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. ':• Slow to very slow rate of water transmission. ❖ Majority of the site has a wind erodibility rating of 5 and 6 (8 being the least susceptible) These soils consist of the following hydrologic soil groups as defined in the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Web Soil Survey: ':• Group B— 1.00% ❖ Group C— 37.00%. ':• Group D — 62.00%. These soil groups vary from a moderate to low wind erodibility and a majority of the site consists of Group D soils meaning there will likely be slower infiltration when thoroughly wet (high runoff potential). The USDA web soil survey report is included in Appendix B. Please refer to this appendix for further description of soil characteristics. 1.5 Wetlands and Receiving Waters The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station site is located in an undeveloped lot west of the Anheuser Busch property. The current land is being used for agricultural purposes and undeveloped land. The land currently consists of native grasses, bare ground, and crops. Runoff from the undeveloped site has one flow path that ends up in the Larimer and Weld Canal that is located south of the site. The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station site sheet flows southeast into an inadvertent detention area which will overtop Mountain Vista Drive, and eventually into the Larimer and Weld Canal through various drainage infrastructure. The existing site does not have any existing ponds or drainage facilities. The site has an inadvertent detention area near Giddings Road and Mountain Vista Drive. The major drainage way that is being utilized for this project is the Larimer and Weld Canal which is ultimately received by the Cache La Poudre River. Page 5 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report There are no jurisdictional wetlands on site, however, there are wetlands that the city will require to mitigate. A separate wetland mitigation document will be prepared. 1.6 Erosion Control Administrator shall be the designated Erosion Control Administrator for the Project. It will be his or her responsibility to ensure the Erosion Control Report's adequacy at all times in order to effectively manage potential storm water pollutants throughout the course of construction. 1.7 Potential Pollutants Below is a list of potential pollution sources that can occur during the construction of site improvements and potential remedies, or the appropriate section that should be referenced for controlling these pollution sources: • All disturbed and stored soils — (Surface roughening, reseeding, mulching and silt fence) • Vehicle tracking of sediments — (Vehicle tracking pads, street sweeping) • Management of contaminated soils — (See Section 2.3.2) • Loading and unloading operations — (See Section 2.2.3 - Stabilized Staging Area) • Outdoor storage activities (building materials, fertilizers, chemicals, etc.) — (See Section 2.3) • Vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling - (See Section 2.3.2) • Significant dust or particulate generating processes — (See Section 2.2.3 — Wind Erosion/Dust Control) • Routine maintenance activities involving fertilizers, pesticides, detergents, fuels, solvents, oils, etc. (See Section 2.3.2) • On-site waste management practices (waste piles, liquid wastes, dumpsters, etc.)— (See Section 2.3) • Concrete truck/equipment washing, including the concrete truck chute and associated fixtures and equipment- (Use concrete wash-out) • Dedicated asphalt and concrete batch plants — (Not used on this project) • Non-industrial waste sources such as worker trash and portable toilets — (See Section 2.3.2.- BMPs for San/Septic Waste) • Other areas or procedures where potential spills can occur (See Section 2.3) Page 6 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 2.0 - Construction Control Measures 2.1 Controls Overview During construction, several control measures shall be implemented under the direction of the contractor to prevent discharge of contaminated water. Specifications and details for specific control measures are included in Appendix C of this report for use on the project. In addition to those structural measures, other controls include non-structural practices, materials management, spill prevention and management, and other miscellaneous controls as described in the following sections. 2.2 Erosion and Sediment Controls The objective of erosion control is to limit the amount of erosion occurring on disturbed areas until stabilized. The objective of sediment control is to capture soil that has eroded before it leaves the construction site. Despite the use of both erosion and sediment control measures, it is recognized that some sediment could remain in runoff, especially during very large storm events. The contractor shall utilize the best management practices (BMP's) described in the following sections to minimize the above potential to the maximum extent practicable. During all phases of construction, the contractor should plan ahead of possible rainfall events and work to limit erosion from occurring where potential exists. Where potential does exist provide adequate conveyance, temporary or permanent, and direct runoff to BMP's that trap sediment. The erosion and sediment BMPs anticipated for use on the site include both structural and non-structural practices. 2.2.1 Structural Practices Structural BMPs are structures that limit erosion and sediment transport. Such practices include check dams, silt fence, inlet and outlet protection, water quality ponds, and grading techniques. The structural BMP's that will be utilized on the subject site are described in more detail as follows: Sediment Control Logs (Wattles) • A linear roll made of natural materials such as straw or coconut fiber and staked to the ground with a wooden stake. • To be used as a sediment barrier to intercept sheet flow from disturbed areas — as perimeter control around stockpiles, inlet protection, check dams for small drainage swales with low velocity. • To be installed along the contour. • Remove accumulated sediment once the depth is one half the height of the sediment log and repair damage. Page 7 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report Silt Fence • A temporary vertical barrier attached to and supported by posts entrenched in the ground. • Utilized to intercept sediment from disturbed areas during construction. • For use in areas of shallow flow, not concentrated runoff. • Typically used at the toe of fills and in transitions between cuts and fills and along streams. • Usually used as a perimeter control. • Installed prior to any land disturbing activity. • Shall be inspected periodically and after each rain or snowmelt event. • Not effective as a wind break. Water Quality Ponds • A small temporary or permanent ponding area with a hard-lined spillway. • Utilized to detain sediment laden storm water and allow particles to settle out. • Should be installed prior to other land disturbing activities upstream. • Best used with other erosion prevention practices to limit sediment load in pond. • During construction, sediment shall be removed when the wet storage is reduced by half. • Full capacity of ponds shall be re-established following stabilization. Grading Techniques • Soil surface roughening, terracing and rounding at tops of cuts, transitions and roadway ditches to facilitate vegetation and minimize erosion. • Disk surface to create ridges at least 6 inches deep following the land contour. • Used to temporarily stabilize disturbed areas immediately after grading. • After rainstorm events, rills that formed should be repaired immediately. Inlet Protection • Permeable barriers installed around an inlet to filter runoff and remove sediment prior to entering a storm drain inlet. • Constructed from rock socks, sediment control logs, silt fence, or other materials approved by the local jurisdiction. • Not a stand-alone BMP and should be used in conjunction with other upgradient BMPs. • When applying inlet protection in sump conditions, it is important that the inlet continues to function during larger runoff events in order to prevent localized flooding, public safety issues, and downstream erosion and damage from bypassed flows. • Inspect frequently for tears, improper installation, displacement, and sediment Page 8 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report accumulation. • Remove sediment accumulation from the area upstream of the inlet protection as needed to maintain BMP effectiveness. • Propriety inlet protection devices should be inspected and maintained in accordance with manufacturer specifications. • Inlet protection must be removed and properly disposed of when the drainage area for the inlet has reached final stabilization. Concrete Washout Area • Appropriate on all sites that will generate concrete wash water or liquid concrete waste from onsite concrete mixing or concrete delivery. • The use of the washout site should be temporary (less than 1 year). • Should not be located in an area where shallow groundwater may be present, such as near natural drainages, springs, or wetlands. • May be lined or unlined depending on site conditions. • Avoid natural drainage pathways, waterbodies, wells, and drinking water sources. • Ensure adequate signage is in place for identifying the location of the washout area. • Remove concrete waste in washout area as needed to maintain BMP function. • Collect concrete waste and deliver offsite to designated disposal location. Vehicle Tracking Control • Provide stabilized construction site access where vehicles exit the site onto paved public roads. • Helps remove sediment (mud or dirt) from vehicles, reducing tracking onto the paved surface. • Particularly important during wet weather periods when mud is easily tracked off site, dry weather periods where dust is a concern, and when poorly drained, clayey soils are present. • Wheel washes may be needed on particularly muddy sites. • Inspect the area for degradation and replace material as needed. • Removed sediment that is tracked onto the public right of way daily or more frequently as needed. • Excess sediment in the roadway indicates that maintenance is required. • Remove only when there is no longer the potential for vehicle tracking to occur. 2.2.2 Non-Structural Practices Non-structural BMPs are both temporary and permanent stabilization practices. Such practices may include surface roughening, temporary or permanent seeding, mulching, geotextiles and Page 9 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report maintaining existing vegetation. The non-structural BMPs that will be used on the site include the following: Surface Roughening • Tracking, scarifying, tilling a disturbed area to provide temporary stabilization and minimize wind and water erosion. • Not a stand-alone BMP and should be used with other BMP's. Temporary and Permanent Seeding • Soil preparation, disking, and soil amendments are necessary for proper seed bed establishment. • Seeded areas should be inspected regularly. Areas that fail to establish shall be re-seeded promptly. • Any area exposed for more than 30 days after construction has ceased shall be seeded and mulched. • Permanent landscape cover shall be installed according to the landscape plan. Mulching • Application of plant residues to the soil surface. Typical mulching materials include certified weed free hay or straw, certified under the Colorado Department of Agriculture Weed Free Forage Certification Program. • Utilized in combination with tackifier during high winds, steep slopes, or due to seasonal constraints. • Used to cover permanent and temporarily seeded areas. • Inspect frequently and reapply in areas where mulching has loosened or removed. Maintain Existing Vegetation — Vegetated Buffers • Preserved natural vegetation helps protect waterways and wetlands from land disturbing activities and improve stormwater runoff quality by straining sediment and promoting infiltration. • Concentrated flow should not be directed through a vegetated buffer, instead runoff should be in the form of sheet flow. • Used in conjunction with other perimeter control BMP's such as sediment control logs or silt fence. • Clearly delineate the boundary of the natural buffer area using construction or silt fencing. Page 10 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report Construction Fence • Used to restrict site access to designated entrances and exits and delineates construction site boundaries. • Used to protect natural areas or areas that should not be disturbed. • Construction fencing may be chain link or plastic mesh fencing. Rolled Erosion Control Products: • A special blanket or liner that prevents erosion while vegetation is established and aids in establishment by preserving moisture available to the seed. • The blankets need to cover the necessary area of the graded slope and bottom channel. • The blanket will be installed according to the manufacturer's instructions and specifications. The number of staples or fasteners is critical while vegetation is still germinating. • The erosion control blankets will be installed once the slopes of the vegetated swales have reached final grade or on areas where erosion is occurring during construction. • The erosion control blanket will be inspected weekly and immediately after storm events to determine if cracks, tears, or breaches have been formed in the fabric. If so, the blanket will be repaired or replaced immediately. • Good contact with the soil will be maintained and erosion will not occur under the blanket. Any areas where the blanket is not in close contact with the ground will be repaired or replaced. • Utilized as both temporary and permanent features depending on grade. 2.2.3 Other Controls Vehicle Tracking Control/Construction Entrance • A temporary stabilized layer of aggregate underlined with geotextile or gravel located where traffic enters or exits the construction site. • Should be installed prior to any construction and inspected daily. • Does not work well alone in muddy conditions — use tire washing when mud is present. Implementation of tire washing should include provisions for collecting wash water and directing it to a treatment pond. • Whenever possible locate the construction entrance as far from the disturbed area as possible to allow maximum travel time for sediment removal from tires. • Public and Private roadways shall be kept clear of accumulated sediment. • Cleaning sediment shall not be accomplished by flushing with water. Sediment should be shoveled or swept from the street and placed away from storm water improvements. • Consider limiting vehicles from entering the site when conditions are wet or Page 11 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report muddy. Wind Erosion/Dust Control • Dust from the site will be controlled using a mobile pressure-type distributor truck to apply portable water to disturbed areas. The mobile unit will apply water only as necessary to prevent runoff and ponding. • Dust control will be implemented as needed once site grading has been initiated and during windy conditions while site grading is occurring. • Spraying of portable water will be performed whenever the dryness of the soil warrants it. • At least one mobile unit will be available at all times to distribute portable water to control dust in the project area. • During high winds, limit traffic speeds to 12 mph or less in areas without gravel or pavement. • Gravel can be placed on construction roads, entrances, and construction staging areas. Stone/gravel provides an effective protective cover over the soil. • In areas where wind erosion is expected soil-binding tackifiers can be applied with high success. • Refer to Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins, Ordinance No. 044, 2016 for detailed requirements regarding fugitive dust. • Refer to Appendix D for the Fugitive Dust Control Manual. Stabilized Staging Area • A clearly designated area where construction equipment and vehicles, waste bins and other construction related materials are stored. • This area should be designated on the erosion control map. • Appropriate space to provide loading/unloading operations and parking. • A stabilized surface paved or covered in 3" diameter aggregate or larger. • Perimeter controls such as silt fence, sediment control logs or construction fencing • Vehicle Tracking Control pad to be used in conjunction with a Stabilized Staging Area if this area is adjacent to a public roadway. Dewatering Operations • Dewatering typically involves pumping water from an inundated area to a BMP and then downstream to a receiving waterway, sediment basin or vegetated area. Dewatering typically involves the use of several BMPs in sequence. • All dewatering discharges must be treated to remove sediment before discharging from a construction site. Discharging water into a sediment trap or basin or filter bag, series of straw bales or sediment logs are options. Page 12 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report Stockpile Management • Implement measures to minimize erosion and sediment transport from stockpiles. • Locate stockpiles away from all drainage system components. • Place BMPs around the perimeter of the stockpile such as sediment control logs, rock socks, silt fence, straw bales and sandbags • For active use stockpiles, provide a stabilized access point upgradient of the stockpile. • Surface roughening, temporary seeding and mulching, erosion control blankets may be needed for stockpiles older than 30 days. 2.2.4 Installation and Removal Sequence of Control Measures The following sequencing chart provides a general overview of the expected installation and removal of control measures for each phase of construction. UTILITIES FLATWOW MCULIZATION DEVICLITION GRADING INSTALIATION INSTALLATION LANDSCAPE DBVK)BIUZA-nON LESiMANACEIMEYTPRACTICS(BMPs) SILTFENCEBAFZR R.S \EIICLETRACI4NGPAD FLOW BA1:RErS(WATTLES) INLELPFUTECTION Any prior inlets that could use protecting. RPRAP COLLECTINGASPHALT/CONCFETESAW CUTTING WASTE VEGETATIVE TEVIPOWVRYSEEDINGPLANTING Anytimethesitewill sit dorment longerthan 30 days. MULCHINGSEALAM Anytimethesitewill sit dorment longer than 30 days. PEMMENTSEMING PLANTING SOD INSTALLATION TOLLED PRODUCTS:NETTING/BLA*FUMATS Anytimethe sitewill sit dorment longerthan 30 days. The Montava Non-Pot Pump Station project is to be constructed in a single phase, and it is the contractor's responsibility to ensure proper control measure practices for any disturbed areas of the site throughout the entire construction process. 2.3 Materials Management 2.3.1 Potential Pollution Sources Abnormal or especially hazardous materials are not expected to be utilized during the construction of the project, but like most construction projects, some materials or substances used have the potential to be hazardous when leaked into the storm water runoff. The following potential pollutant sources are to be evaluated on every project: 1. All disturbed and stored soils 2. Vehicle tracking of sediments 3. Management of contaminated soils Page 13 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 4. Loading and unloading operations 5. Outdoor storage of construction materials, building materials, fertilizers, and chemicals 6. Bulk storage materials 7. Vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling 8. Significant dust or particulate generating processes. It is important to reference the Fugitive Dust Control Ordinance No. 044, 2016, §12-150 - §12-160 and the projects requirements to be in compliance with that ordinance. 9. Routine maintenance activities involving fertilizers, pesticides, detergents, fuels, solvents, and oils 10. On-site waste management practices 11. Concrete truck/equipment washing, including the concrete truck chute and associated fixtures and equipment 12. Dedicated asphalt and concrete batch plants 13. Non-industrial waste sources such as worker trash and portable toilets 14. Saw cutting and grinding 15. Other non-stormwater discharges including construction dewatering not covered under the Construction Dewatering Discharges general permit and wash water that may potentially contribute pollutants to the MS4 16. Other areas or operations where spills can occur As construction progresses, specific areas shall be designated for the above-mentioned activities and materials management operations. The contractor is responsible for marking the location of these facilities on the site map and reporting on the condition, effectiveness and corrections or changes made and why. 2.3.2 Pollution Prevention Measures Pollution prevention measures should be utilized to prevent construction materials with the potential for polluting storm water from coming in contact with runoff. Measures include good housekeeping, proper disposal and storage, spill prevention, and secondary containment. BMPs for most common construction materials and wastes with the greatest potential for adversely affecting water quality are as follows: Page 14 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report BMPs for Construction Waste: • Select a designated waste collection area onsite. • Locate containers in level areas away from storm water conveyance structures. • Provide covers for containers that contain very hazardous or soluble chemicals. • Avoid putting paint/solvent containers in open dumpsters or allow them to dry completely before disposing. • If a container does spill, provide clean up immediately. • Make sure waste is disposed of at authorized disposal areas. BMPs for Hazardous Waste Disposal • Check with local waste management authorities with regard to requirements for disposing of hazardous materials. • Use entire product before disposing. • Dispose of containers with lids on and tightly sealed • Provide a separate dumpster for large amounts of chemical or hazardous material and maintain more stringent controls on that dumpster. • Do not remove the product label from containers, it contains important disposal information. BMPs for Sanitary/Septic Wastes • If self-contained, temporary sanitary facilities are used, the waste disposal company should service the facilities based on the number of workers anticipated to avoid overuse. • All facilities should be anchored to the ground to prevent overturning due to wind or accident. • Locate portable toilets away from curbs, swales or other locations where concentrated runoff may occur. • Do not dump any hazardous materials into the sanitary waste disposal systems. BMPs for pesticides/fertilizers • Store pesticides in a dry covered area and elevate above the ground. • Provide secondary containment barriers around areas where a lot of material is stored. Straw Wattles are NOT appropriate containment barriers! • Strictly follow recommended application rates and application methods • Apply fertilizer more frequently and at lower rates. • Reduce exposure of nutrients to storm events by working fertilizer deep into soil BMPs for petroleum products • Fueling operations shall occur in a designated area. Page 15 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS .. t y Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report • Store petroleum products in covered areas and away from areas where concentrated runoff occurs. • Provide secondary containment barriers around areas where a lot of material is stored. Straw Wattles are NOT appropriate containment barriers! • Schedule preventative maintenance for onsite equipment and fix any gas/oil leaks on a regular basis. • Follow procedures for proper handling of asphalt and sealers. • Secure fueling equipment and install valves to prevent vandalism/theft. 2.4 Spill Management Construction site supervisors should create and adopt a spill control plan that includes measures and procedures to stop the source of the spill, contain the spill, clean up, and dispose of contaminated materials. Key personnel should be identified and trained to be responsible for spill prevention and control. The following measures would be appropriate for a spill prevention response plan: Store and handle materials to prevent spills • Tightly seal containers. • Make sure all containers are neatly labeled. • Stack containers carefully for stability to avoid spills. • Limit the height of stacks of stored materials. • Whenever possible store materials on covered pallets or in trailers with adequate ventilation. • Eliminate storm water contact if there is a spill. • Have cleanup procedures clearly posted. • Have cleanup materials readily available and posted. • Immediately contain any liquid. • Stop the source of the spill. • Cover spill with absorbent material and dispose of properly. Additionally, records of spills, leaks, or overflows that result in the discharge of pollutants must be documented and maintained. When any spill occurs: 1) Notify the controlling operator of the site immediately following a hazardous spill. 2) Document the spill and its clean-up procedures whether reporting is required or not. 3) At a minimum document the following: • Nature of spill • Quantity of spill Page 16 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report • Date/time spill occurred • Agency notification if necessary • Clean-up procedures used • Daily monitoring (7 days) after clean-up • Photographs • Interview(s) with any witnesses of the event Some spills will need to be reported to the Division of Water Quality immediately including the following: • Over 25 gallons of petroleum • 5 CCs of mercury • a release of any chemical, oil, petroleum product which entered waters of the State of Colorado (which include surface water, groundwater, dry gullies or storm sewers leading to surface water). • Any spill or release of raw sewage If any of the above criteria is met or exceeded, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Local Emergency Planning committee, downstream users and other agencies (MS4s) will be notified. The CDPHE will be notified by telephone within 24 hours. In addition, written notification describing the spill and the cleanup procedures used will be sent to the agencies 5 days following the spill. If a spill does not meet the above criteria, reporting is not mandatory. The Division's 24-hour environmental emergency spill reporting line is 1-877-518- 5608. 2.5 Non-Storm Water Components of Discharge Non-storm water discharges must be avoided or reduced to the maximum extent possible. This Erosion Control Report assumes construction dewatering will be required. Pumping or draining groundwater, even groundwater that has infiltrated an excavation, requires a separate permit from the State. Storm water that mixes with groundwater is also subject to the controls in the general permit for Construction Dewatering. The permit requirements and application for Construction dewatering is available at: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit/construction.htm1. No materials shall be discharged in quantities that may impact storm water runoff. Possible discharge sources that need to be contained include: ':• Locations where water tanks are being filled. Seal all leaks and avoid over filling. Any leaks should be directed to a water quality pond or protected to prevent erosion. Contain excess water during fire hydrant blow off, water system cleaning or other Page 17 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report instances where potable water is discharged onto the surface. Convey any discharge to a water quality pond and avoid causing erosion by avoiding steep slopes, disturbed areas, etc. ':• Monitor irrigation systems and fix leaks promptly. Avoid over-irritating areas where vegetation is not yet established. 3.0 - Maintenance and Inspection Requirements 3.1 Inspection and Maintenance Overview A site inspection of all erosion control facilities shall be conducted at least once every two weeks and immediately following any significant storm event, including snowmelt that can cause surface erosion and at least every 30 days for inactive projects. The inspection must determine if there is any evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system. BMPs should be inspected to see if they meet the design and operation criteria in the Erosion Control Report and that they are adequately controlling potential pollutants. Any defects shall be corrected promptly. Where spill kits have been used, or storage areas moved, supplies shall be restocked and re-protected. The site shall be inspected by the Erosion Control Administrator or someone with adequate training who should monitor and follow the procedures outlined below: 3.2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements ':• Inspections of the site shall be conducted by the contractor (or agent) every two weeks and after significant storm events. ❖ Inspections are required at least every 30 days and after measurable storm events for sites that are no longer under construction, but do not have 70% established ground cover. V A qualified superintendent familiar with this report and BMPs shall perform the inspections. ':• The contractor shall certify that the site is in compliance with the permit by: V Ensuring areas where significant runoff is occurring are identified on the site map. ❖ Storm water outfall shall be observed to determine whether or not measurable quantities of sediment or other pollutants have been or are being transported offsite. ❖ BMPs shall be addressed to determine if they are functioning properly or if they are in Page 18 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report need of repair or maintenance. If the report describes deficiencies in pollution control structures or procedures, such deficiencies shall be corrected immediately. A brief description of measures taken to correct deficiencies shall be recorded. ❖ Determine if additional controls will be needed to next week's activities. •:' When an inspection does not identify any incidents of non-compliance, the report shall contain a certification that the site is in compliance with the Erosion Control Report and this permit. V The date and inspector identity shall also be recorded. This record shall be signed and made available to the State or City upon request. Based on the results of the inspection, the description of potential pollutant sources, and the control measures used should be updated on the Erosion Control Report and Site Maps as soon as possible. Typically, corrective action shall commence immediately when a deficiency is observed. Erosion Control Report and Map updates shall be completed within 72 hours. Another inspection should follow up and include the date, corrective action taken, and initials of who certified the work. For more information regarding installation, maintenance, and removal for each control measure, see Appendix C. 3.3 Reporting Requirements / Inspection Reports The contractor is responsible for reporting all BMP inspections and maintaining records of reports and maps throughout the project. The record shall be retained onsite and/or readily available until the inactivation notice has been filed. All inspection reports shall be submitted to the owner when the permit becomes inactive. At a minimum, the inspection reports shall contain the following: • Dates • Name(s) of inspectors • Purpose of inspection e.g. spill event, leakage of materials, storm event, bi- weekly inspection, etc. • When a bi-weekly report, an assessment of the entire property as related to erosion control issues • An estimated area of currently disturbed area. • Evaluation of all active BMPs • Actions needed to assure continued compliance with erosion control guidelines • Document all areas of potential pollution sources and how they are protected • Documentation of any needed changes • Training events • Uncontrolled releases of mud or muddy water or measurable amounts of Page 19 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report sediment • An estimated amount of precipitation. An onsite rain gauge is suggested. 3.4 Site Maps In the back pocket of this report notebook there is an Erosion Control Plan for use during construction. The purpose of this plan is to provide the contractor with a place to document and plan BMPs used during construction. Because the placement of individual BMP's will depend on the condition of the site and the contractor's judgment, not all BMPs are shown on the plans. It is the contractor's duty as site administrator to determine the need for and placement of BMPs and mark them on the map. 4.0 - Final Vegetation and Stabilization / Conclusion Permanent stabilization will be achieved by establishing vegetative or permanent surface cover on all disturbed areas. The final vegetative cover is specified on the Erosion Control Plan. The contractor is responsible for using approved landscape plans according to the City Landscape Standards (LUC 3.2.1). Soil shall be prepared in accordance with Fort Collins Municipal Code §12-132. The City of Fort Collins considers vegetative cover complete when the plant density reaches 70 percent. The contractor shall remove all temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs after stabilization is achieved or after temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment (including within pipes) will be removed by the contractor or stabilized onsite. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal of BMPs, or the contractor will permanently stabilize vegetation as soon as possible. Again, this plan is a living document that will need to be updated and maintained throughout the construction process and until all areas of the site have been stabilized. This permit will remain active until an inactivation notice has been filed with the State. Additionally, this permit may be transferred to another party in the event that the contractor or sub-contractor responsible for its implementation leaves the site before stabilization has occurred. Page 20 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Non-Pot Pump Station Erosion Control Report 5.0 - References 1. CDOT Erosion Control and Storm Water Quality Guide, Colorado Department of Transportation, 2002 2. Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (Rev. July 2001) 3. Storm Water Risk Management, LLC; April 11, 2008; Pre-Construction & Engineering Training for Construction Storm Water Management Manual. 4. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control — National Menu of best practices, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999 Page 21 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS .. t y APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF LCR 52 AND WEST OF ANHEUSER BUSCH FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1172058 Prepared for: Chase Merritt 1637 Pearl Street Suite 204 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Attn: Mr. Max Moss (max(a chasemerritt.com) Prepared by: Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 41 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC October 2, 2017 Chase Merritt 1637 Pearl Street Suite 204 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Attn: Mr. Max Moss (maxgchasemerritt.com) Re: Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report 800 Acre Mixed Use Development South of LCR 52 and West of Anheuser Busch Windsor, Colorado EEC Project No. 1172058 Mr. Moss: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the preliminary subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC personnel for the referenced project. A total of thirty (30) preliminary soil borings were drilled from August 14 through 30, 2017, at the approximate locations as indicated on the enclosed Figure 1: Boring Location Diagram included with this report. The borings were extended to depths of approximately 25 to 40 feet below existing site grades. Individual boring logs, including groundwater observations, depth to bedrock, and results of laboratory testing are included as a part of the attached report. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated June 26, 2017. In summary, the subsurface soils encountered in the preliminary test borings generally consisted of cohesive lean clay with varying amounts of sand subsoils. The cohesive soils were generally soft to very stiff and exhibited low to high swell potential at current moisture and density conditions. The lean clay subsoils were underlain by sand/gravel with varying amounts of silt soils at depths of approximately 7 to 39 feet. The sand/gravel subsoils extended to the depths explored, approximately 25 to 40 feet, or to the underlying bedrock. The sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered in seven (7) of the thirty (30)preliminary test borings at depths ranging from approximately 24 to 27 feet below existing site grades and 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 2 extended to the depths explored. The bedrock formation was highly weathered and became more competent/harder with increased depth. Groundwater was observed in the majority of the preliminary test borings at depths ranging from approximately 2 to 36'/2 feet below existing site grades. Based on the materials observed within the preliminary boring locations and the anticipated foundation loads, we believe the proposed lightly to moderately loaded structures, either commercial/retail building and/or residential structures with possible basements, could be supported by conventional spread footings bearing on either suitable native subsoils or on a zone of engineered/controlled fill material placed and compacted as described within this report. Due to the variable depth to groundwater across the site, moderate to high swells at various locations, and occasional areas with lower bearing capacities, ground modifications may be necessary in these areas, as described within this report. Groundwater was encountered across the site within the majority of the preliminary borings at approximate depths of 2 to 36'/2 feet below existing site grades. If lower level construction or full-depth basements are being considered for the site, we would suggest that the lower level subgrade(s) be placed a minimum of 3 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels, or a combination exterior and interior perimeter drainage system(s) be installed. Foundations for slab-on-grade buildings should also be placed at least 3 feet above maximum groundwater levels or have proper drainage in areas with extremely shallow groundwater. Additional drainage system recommendations are provided within the text portion of this report. In general, it appears the in-situ site materials could be used for support of interior slab-on- grades, exterior flatwork, and site pavements; however, ground modification procedures such as over-excavation and replacement of existing fill materials as approved engineered fill and placement of an approved imported fill material may be required to reduce post-construction movement in some areas. Post-construction movement can be reduced but cannot be eliminated. Additionally, the cohesive subsoil materials may be subject to strength loss and instability when wetted. Close monitoring and evaluation during the construction phase should be performed to reduce post-construction movement. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 3 Preliminary geotechnical recommendations concerning design and construction of foundations and support of floor slabs and pavements are provided within the text of the enclosed report. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed report, or if we can be of further service to you in any other way, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC Reviewed b : o�o�p00 LICE,y .o 27712 ; : 9�FFSSIONA����� Erin Dunn, E.I.T. David A. Richer, P.E. Project Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF LCR 52 AND WEST OF ANHEUSER BUSCH FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1172058 October 2, 2017 INTRODUCTION The preliminary subsurface exploration for the proposed 800-acre mixed use development located southeast of Larimer County Road (LCR) 52 and LCR 50E in Fort Collins, Colorado has been completed. A total of thirty(30) soil borings were drilled from August 14 through 30, 2017 at the approximate locations as indicated on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams included with this report. The thirty(30)preliminary soil borings were advanced to depths of approximately 25 to 40 feet below existing site grades across the proposed development property to obtain information on existing subsurface conditions. Individual boring logs and site diagrams indicating the approximate boring locations are included with this report. The 800-acre development property is located southeast of Larimer County Road(LCR)52 and LCR 50E and generally extends east to the existing Budweiser property and Interstate 25 and south to LCR 50 and Canal Access Road in Fort Collins, Colorado. The property will be developed for residential, commercial, and industrial use, including utility and interior roadway infrastructure. Foundation loads for the proposed residential,commercial,and industrial structures are anticipated to be light to moderate with continuous wall loads less than 4 kips per lineal foot and individual column loads less than 250 kips. Floor loads are expected to be light. Those structures are expected to include slab-on-grade,below grade construction such as crawl spaces, garden-level and/or full- depth basements where applicable. We anticipate maximum cuts and fills on the order of 5 feet(+/-) will be completed to develop the site grades. Overall site development will include construction of interior roadway designed in general accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS)Pavement Design Criteria. The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the preliminary borings,analyze and evaluate the test data and provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations concerning site development including foundations, floor slabs, pavement sections and the possibility for an area underdrain system to support basement construction. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The boring locations were established in the field by a representative of Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features. Those locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. Photographs of the site taken at the time of drilling are provided with this report. The borings were performed using either a truck-mounted CME-55 drill rig equipped with a hydraulic head employed in drilling and sampling operations. The boreholes were advanced using 4-inch nominal diameter continuous flight augers. Samples of the subsurface materials encountered were obtained using split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures in general accordance with ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550, respectively. In the split-barrel and California barrel sampling procedures, standard sampling spoons are driven into the ground by means of a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the samplers is recorded and is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure,relatively undisturbed samples are obtained in brass liners.All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to the laboratory for further examination, classification and testing. Laboratory moisture content tests were performed on each of the recovered samples. In addition, selected samples were tested for fines content and plasticity by washed sieve analysis and Atterberg limits tests. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on selected samples to evaluate the subgrade materials'tendency to change volume with variation in moisture content and load. Several samples were obtained from borings for Hveem Stabilometer/R-Value(ASTM Specification D2844)testing analyses to determine the in-situ subgrade strength characteristics. The quantity of water soluble sulfates was determined on select samples to evaluate the risk of sulfate attack on site concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 3 As a part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory and classified in general accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System, based on the sample's texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is shown on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with this report. Classification of the bedrock was based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings.Coring and/or petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The 800-acre development is located southeast of LCR 52 and LCR 50E in Fort Collins,Colorado. The project site is generally undeveloped farmland with a few existing structures scattered throughout. Surface water drainage across the site is generally to the south and to the east. Estimated relief across the site from northwest to southeast is approximately 25 to 30 feet (±). An EEC field engineer was on-site during drilling to direct the drilling activities and evaluate the subsurface materials encountered. Field descriptions of the materials encountered were based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The boring logs included with this report may contain modifications to the field logs based on results of laboratory testing and engineering evaluation. Based on results of field and laboratory evaluation, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. Sparse vegetation and topsoil were encountered at the surface of each boring. The topsoil and/or agricultural/vegetation layers were underlain by brown lean clay with varying amounts of sand subsoils. Some zones of clayey sand were encountered in a few of the borings. The lean clay subsoils were generally soft to very stiff,exhibited low to moderate plasticity and low to high swell potential at current moisture and density conditions. The lean clay subsoils were underlain by sand/gravel with varying amounts of silt soils at depths of approximately 7 to 39 feet. The sands/gravels extended to the depths explored, approximately 25 to 40 feet, or to the underlying bedrock formation in a few borings. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 4 The overburden soils were underlain by bedrock consisting of interbedded layers of sandstone, siltstone,and claystone. The sandstone/siltstone/claystone bedrock was encountered in seven(7)of the thirty (30) preliminary test borings at depths ranging from approximately 24 to 29 feet below existing site grades,was highly weathered and became more competent/harder with increased depth. The bedrock formation exhibited moderate swell potential at current moisture and density conditions.As presented herein,bedrock was encountered in borings B-4,B-6,13-19,B-20,B-24,13- 25 and B-30. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil and rock types; in-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS Observations were made while drilling and after the completion of drilling to detect the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was observed in the majority of the preliminary test borings at depths ranging from approximately 2 to 31 feet below existing site grades. Temporary field slotted piezometers were installed in fifteen(15) of the test borings at the time of drilling and subsequent groundwater measurements were taken on August 28 and September 8. At the time of the subsequent measurements,groundwater was observed at depths ranging from approximately 4V2 to 33 feet and 6V2 to 36t/2 feet,respectively. As presented herein,groundwater was not encountered to maximum depths of exploration in borings B-2 and B-8.The remaining fifteen(15)borings without piezometers were backfilled upon completion,and therefore subsequent groundwater measurements were not made. A diagram outlining approximate areas with relatively shallow groundwater measurements has been provided along with a groundwater contour map,(please refer to Figure Nos. 2 and 3), included in the appendix of this report. Groundwater measurements provided with this report are indicative of groundwater levels at the locations and at the time the borings/groundwater measurements were completed. In general, the groundwater piezometric flow is in the south direction. Perched and/or trapped water may be encountered in more permeable zones in the subgrade soils at times throughout the year. Perched water is commonly encountered in soils immediately overlying less permeable bedrock materials. Fluctuations in ground water levels and in the location and Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 5 amount of perched water may occur over time depending on variations in hydrologic conditions, irrigation activities on surrounding properties and other conditions not apparent at the time of this report. SOIL/GEOLOGIC REVIEW The site geology presented in this report is based upon review of listed literature and maps, and previous experience with similar geologic conditions in this area.The locations of geologic features are approximate and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to identify those features. The surficial soils at the project site are described as eolian deposits(Pleistocene and Holocene)and valley fill deposits (Pleistocene and Holocene), the eolian deposits are described as fine grained sand, silt and clay and the valley fill deposits are described as arkosic gravel and sand deposit. The upper soil is overlying the Pierre Shale Formation (Upper Cretaceous), described as a claystone shale containing beds of sandstone and siltstone, as illustrated on the Geologic of the Lower Cache La Poudre River Basin,North-Central Colorado by Lloyd A.Hershey and Paul A. Schneider, Jr., 1972. No seismic faults are reported within approximately twenty-five miles of the site. The Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) reports potentially active faults at least 25 miles west-southwest of the project site. The Fort Collins/Wellington Anticline, a small fold set, is described in the literature immediately west of the project location. The axis of the fold is described as trending north- northwest with asymmetrical limbs.The bedrock strata nearest to the axis is described as dipping at approximately 10 to 15 degrees east-northeast. The dip of the bedrock strata lessens with increased distance from the axis. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 6 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SwelUConsolidation Test Results Swell/consolidation testing is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soil or bedrock to assist in determining/evaluating foundation, floor slab and/or pavement design criteria. In the swell/consolidation test, relatively undisturbed samples obtained directly from the California barrel sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a pre-established load. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse under the initial loading condition expressed as a percent of the sample's initial thickness. After the inundation period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate swell pressure and/or consolidation. As a part of our laboratory testing, we conducted twenty-nine (29) swell/consolidation tests on samples of the overburden cohesive subsoils and underlying claystone bedrock. The swell index values for the samples analyzed revealed low to high swell characteristics of approximately(+)0.0 to (+) 7.6% for the overburden lean clays and approximately (+) 3.7% for the bedrock when inundated with water and pre-loaded at 150 psf and 500 psf. Results of the laboratory swell tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and the enclosed summary sheets. A diagram outlining approximate areas with swell indices higher than 3% has been included with this report as an indication of locations where swell mitigation should be considered,(please refer to Figure No.4)in the appendix of this report The Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers (CAGE) uses the following information to provide uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation risk performance to measured swell. "The representative percent swell values are not necessarily measured values; rather,they are a judgment of the swell of the soil and/or bedrock profile likely to influence slab performance." Geotechnical engineers use this information to also evaluate the swell potential risks for foundation performance based on the risk categories. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 7 TABLE I:Recommended Representative Swell Potential Descriptions and Corresponding Slab Performance Risk Categories Slab Performance Risk Category Representative Percent Swell Representative Percent Swell (500 psf Surcharge) (1000 psf Surcharge) Low 0to<3 0<2 Moderate 3 to<5 2 to<4 High 5 to<8 4 to<6 Very High >8 >6 Based on the laboratory test results,the samples of overburden subsoils and the underlying bedrock formation analyzed ranged from low to high risk. General Considerations If lower level construction or full-depth basements are being considered for the site, we would suggest that the lower level subgrade(s) be placed a minimum of 3 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels, or a combination exterior and interior perimeter drainage system(s)be installed in areas with shallow groundwater,as shown on the attached diagram. Also, consideration could be given to 1)either designing and installing an area underdrain system to lower the groundwater levels provided a gravity discharge point can be established. If a gravity outlet/system cannot be designed another consideration would be to design and install a mechanical sump pump system to discharge the collected groundwater within the underdrain system, or 2) elevate/raise the site grades to establish the minimum suggested 3-foot separation to the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater. Foundations for buildings that are constructed slab-on-grade(no basement)should also be placed a minimum of 3 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels. During our subsurface exploration groundwater was found at depths as shallow as 2 feet in some areas, as shown on the attached diagram. Consideration should be given to the implementing a drainage or grading plan, as listed above, in these areas. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 8 Site Preparation All existing vegetation and/or topsoil should be removed from beneath site fills, roadways or building subgrade areas. Care should be taken to ensure that the foundations associated with any of the existing structures in the new building areas are completely removed. Stripping depths should be expected to vary,depending,in part,on past agricultural activities. In addition,any soft/loose native soils or any existing fill materials without documentation of controlled fill placement should be removed from improvement and/or new fill areas. After stripping and completing all cuts,any over excavation,and prior to placement of any fill,floor slabs or pavements,we recommend the exposed soils be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 inches, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95%of the material's maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698,the standard Proctor procedure. The moisture content of the scarified materials should be adjusted to be within a range of±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture at the time of compaction. In general, fill materials required to develop the building areas or site pavement subgrades should consist of approved, low-volume change materials which are free from organic matter and debris. The near surface lean clay soils with low swell potential and/or the sand/gravel soils could be used as fill in these areas. The claystone bedrock should not be used for fill in site improvement areas. We recommend the fill soils be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's maximum dry density as determined in accordance with the standard Proctor procedure. The moisture content of predominately clay soils should be adjusted to be within the range of±2% of optimum moisture content at the time of placement. Granular soil should be adjusted to a workable moisture content. Specific explorations should be completed for each building/individual residential lot to develop recommendations specific to the proposed structure and owner/builder and for specific pavement sections. Care should be taken after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from structures and across and away from pavement Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 9 edges to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials allowed to become wetted subsequent to construction of the residences and/or pavements can result in unacceptable performance of those improvements. Areas of greater fills overlying areas with soft/compressible subsoils, especially within the deeper utility alignments,may experience settlement due to the soft/compressible subsoils below and within the zone of placed fill materials. Settlement on the order of 1-inch or more per each 10 feet of fill depth would be estimated. The rate of settlement will be dependent on the type of fill material placed and construction methods. Granular soils will consolidate essentially immediately upon placement of overlying loads. Cohesive soils will consolidate at a slower rate. Preloading and/or surcharging the fill areas could be considered to induce additional settlement in these areas prior to construction of improvements in or on the fills. Unless positive steps are taken to pre-consolidate the fill materials and/or underlying soft subgrades, special care will be needed for construction of improvements supported on or within these areas. Foundation Svstems—General Considerations The cohesive subsoils will require particular attention in the design and construction to reduce the amount of movement due to moderate to high swell potential and in-situ soft/compressible characteristics in some areas. Groundwater was also encountered at relatively shallow depths in a few areas which will require special attention in the overall design and construction of the project. As previously mentioned consideration could be given to the installation of an area underdrain system. Conventional type spread footings bearing on native subsoils or engineered controlled fill material were evaluated for use on the site; however final subsurface explorations should be performed after building footprints and elevations have been better defined and actual design loads determined. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 10 Preliminary Spread Footing Foundation Recommendations We anticipate use of conventional footing foundations could be considered for lightly to moderately loaded structures at this site.We expect footing foundations would be supported either on the native soils or on newly placed and compacted fills. A few soft zones were observed in the near surface clay soils;therefore, care should be taken to see that foundations are not supported directly on soft materials. Mitigation for swelling of the lean clay should be expected in the general areas shown on the attached diagram and mitigation for soft subgrade soils should be expected in a few areas. In areas where the cohesive subsoils exhibited elevated moisture contents near and/or encroaching the groundwater levels and/or where relatively low SPT N-Blows/ft were recorded,indicating"soft soils" we would expect these soft zones could require particular attention/ground modification procedures to develop increased support capacity characteristics.We expect enhancing/stiffening of the subgrade/bearing soils could be accomplished by incorporating into the soft/compressible subsoils a layer granular rock(i.e., 1-1/2 inches minus crushed concrete aggregate)into the top 12 to 18 inches (+/-) of the subgrades as an initial means and method. Depending on the proximity to groundwater and/or severity of the soft soils,overexcavation and backfill with an approved imported structural fill material placed and compacted as outlined herein could also be considered. We suggest an over excavation and backfill procedure be considered in areas with moderate to high swell potential and/or soft/compressible subsoils to reduce the potential for post construction movement. Over excavation depths should be expected to vary across the site, based on builder/owner requirements and lot-specific conditions. After completing a site-specific/lot-specific geotechnical exploration study,a thorough"open-hole/foundation excavation"observation should be performed prior to foundation formwork placement to determine the extent of any over excavation and replacement procedure. Deeper over excavation depths may be necessary depending upon the observed subsoils at the time of the foundation excavation observation. In general, the over excavation area would extend 8 inches laterally beyond the building perimeter for every 12 inches of overexcavation depth. We anticipate backfill materials would consist of an approved imported granular structural fill material such as a CDOT Class 7 aggregate base course(ABC)either native and/or recycled concrete oriented and/or equivalent, which is placed in uniforms lifts, properly Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 11 adjusted in moisture content and mechanically compacted to at least 95%of the material's Standard Proctor Density(ASTM D698)results. For design of footing foundations bearing on approved native subsoils, (i.e.,the native subsoils in which expansive and/or soft/compressible conditions are not encountered),or on properly placed and compacted fill materials as outlined above,maximum net allowable total load soil bearing pressures on the order of 1,500 to 2,500 psf could be considered depending upon the specific backfill material used. Footing foundations should maintain separation above maximum anticipated rise in groundwater elevation of at least 3 feet as indicated earlier. The net bearing pressure refers to the pressure at foundation bearing level in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure. Total load would include full dead and live loads. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas are typically located at least 30 inches below adjacent exterior grade to provide frost protection. Formed continuous footings would have minimum widths of 12 to 16 inches and isolated column foundations would have a minimum width of 24 to 30 inches. Trenched foundations could probably be used in the near surface soils. If used, trenched foundations would have a minimum width of 12 inches and formed continuous foundations a minimum width of 8 inches. Care should be taken to avoid placement of structures partly on native soils and partly on newly placed fill materials to avoid differential settlement. In these areas, mitigation approaches could include surcharging of the fill materials, overexcavation of the native soils or use of alternative foundations, such as drilled piers, along with structural floors. Mitigation approaches may vary between structures depending, in part, on the extent and depth of new fill placement. Specific approaches could be established at the time of exploration for the individual structures. Care should be taken on the site to fully document the horizontal and vertical extent of fill placement on the site, including benching the fill into native slopes. Preliminary Floor Slab/Exterior Flatwork Subarades We recommend all existing vegetation/topsoil be removed from beneath the floor slab and exterior flatwork areas as outlined in the section titled Site Preparation. Due to the moderate to high swell Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 12 potential in areas across the site, as shown on the attached diagram, an over excavation procedure should be considered in those areas. The over excavation should be expected to extend to depths of 2 to 3 feet, and should be done in accordance with the recommendations for foundation over excavations.After stripping and completing all cuts and any over excavation,and prior to placement of any flatwork concrete or fill, the exposed subgrades should be scarified, adjusted in moisture content and compacted. If the subgrades become dry and desiccated prior to floor slab construction, it may be necessary to rework the subgrades prior to floor slab placement. Fill soils required to develop the floor slab subgrades should consist of approved, low-volume change materials which are free from organic matter and debris. Those fill materials should be placed as previously described in the section Site Preparation and surcharged/preloaded and/or monitored as necessary to limit total and differential movement after construction of overlying improvements. Preliminary Basement Design and Construction Groundwater was encountered across the site within the preliminary soil borings at approximate depths of 2 to 361/2 feet below existing site grades. If lower level construction for either garden-level or full-depth basements is being considered for the site, we would suggest that the lower level subgrade(s)be placed a minimum of 3 feet above maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels, or a combination exterior and interior perimeter drainage system(s)be installed in areas with shallow groundwater as indicated on the attached diagram. Consideration could be given to 1) either designing and installing an area underdrain system to lower the groundwater levels provided a gravity discharge point can be established. If a gravity outlet/system cannot be designed another consideration would be to design and install a mechanical sump pump system to discharge the collected groundwater within the underdrain system, or 2) elevate/raise the site grades to establish the minimum required 3-foot separation to the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater EEC is available to assist in the underdrain design if requested. For each individual building with a garden level or full-depth basement located less than 3 feet above maximum groundwater levels,the dewatering system should,at a minimum,include an under- Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 13 slab gravel drainage layer sloped to an interior perimeter drainage system. Considerations for the preliminary design of the combination exterior and interior perimeter drainage system are as follows: The under-slab drainage system should consist of a properly sized perforated pipe, embedded in free-draining gravel,placed in a trench at least 12 inches in width. The trench should be inset from the interior edge of the nearest foundation a minimum of 12 inches. In addition,the trench should be located such that an imaginary line extending downward at a 45-degree angle from the foundation does not intersect the nearest edge of the trench. Gravel should extend a minimum of 3 inches beneath the bottom of the pipe. The underslab drainage system should be sloped at a minimum 1/8 inch per foot to a suitable outlet, such as a sump and pump system. The underslab drainage layer should consist of a minimum 6-inch thickness of free-draining gravel meeting the specifications of ASTM C33, Size No. 57 or 67 or equivalent. Cross-connecting drainage pipes should be provided beneath the slab at minimum 15-foot intervals, and should discharge to the perimeter drainage system. Sizing of drainage pipe will be dependent upon groundwater flow into the dewatering system. Groundwater flow rates will fluctuate with permeability of the soils to be dewatered and the depth to which groundwater may rise in the future. Pump tests to determine groundwater flow rates are recommended in order to properly design the system. For preliminary design purposes,the drainage pipe, sump and pump system should be sized for a projected flow of 0.5 x 10-3 cubic feet per second (cfs) per lineal foot of drainage pipe. Additional recommendations can be provided upon request and should be presented in final subsurface exploration reports for each residential/commercial lot. The exterior drainage system should be constructed around the exterior perimeter of the lower level/below grade foundation system,and sloped at a minimum 1/8 inch per foot to a suitable outlet, such as a sump and pump system. The exterior drainage system should consist of a properly sized perforated pipe, embedded in free- draining gravel,placed in a trench at least 12 inches in width. Gravel should extend a minimum of 3 inches beneath the bottom of the pipe, and at least 2 feet above the bottom of the foundation wall. The system should be underlain with a polyethylene moisture barrier,sealed to the foundation walls, Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 14 and extended at least to the edge of the backfill zone. The gravel should be covered with drainage fabric prior to placement of foundation backfill. Preliminary Pavement Subgrades The average swell index for the preliminary test borings is above the LCUASS pavement design standard maximum value of 2%. Therefore, a swell mitigation plan consisting of a 2 to 3 foot over excavation and replacement concept or fly ash treatment of the subgrades should be considered within roadway alignments in areas with swell indices above 2%. All existing vegetation and/or topsoil and any soft or loose materials should be removed from pavement areas. After stripping, completing all cuts, and any over excavation, and prior to placement of any fill or pavements, we recommend the exposed soils be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 inches, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM Specification D698, the standard Proctor procedure. The moisture content of the scarified soils should be adjusted to be within the range of±2% of standard Proctor optimum moisture. Fill materials required to develop the pavement subgrades should consist of approved,low-volume change materials,free from organic matter and debris. The near surface lean clay and/or clayey sand soils could be used for fill in these areas. We recommend those fill soils be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 9 inches thick, adjusted in moisture content and compacted to at least 95% of the material's standard Proctor maximum dry density. Settlement in the fill areas should be expected as previously outlined with possible mitigation including surcharging or preloading. After completion of the pavement subgrades, care should be taken to prevent disturbance of those materials prior to placement of the overlying pavements. Soils which are disturbed by construction activities should be reworked in-place or,if necessary,removed and replaced prior to placement of overlying fill or pavements. Depending on final site grading and/or weather conditions at the time of pavement construction, stabilization of a portion of the site pavement subgrades may be required to develop suitable Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 15 pavement subgrades. The site clayey soils could be subject to instability at higher moisture contents. Stabilization could also be considered as part of the pavement design, although prior to finalizing those sections, a stabilization mix design would be required. Preliminary Site Pavements Pavement sections are based on traffic volumes and subgrade strength characteristics. Based on the results of our laboratory testing,an R-value of 14 would be appropriate for design of the pavements supported on the subgrade soils. Suggested preliminary pavement sections for the local residential and minor collector roadways are provided below in Table II. Thicker pavement sections may be required for roadways classified as major collectors. A final pavement design thickness evaluation will be determined when a pavement design exploration is completed(after subgrades are developed to f 6 inches of design and wet utilities installed in the roadways). The projected traffic may vary from the traffic assumed from the roadway classification based on a site-specific traffic study. TABLE II—PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT SECTIONS Local Residential Minor Collectors Roadways Roadways EDLA—assume local residential roadways 10 25 Reliability 75%0 85% Resilient Modulus 4060 4060 PSI Loss—(Initial 4.5,Terminal 2.0 and 2.5 respectively) 2.5 2.2 Design Structure Number 2.49 3.01 Composite Section without Fly Ash—Alternative A Hot Mix Asphalt(HMA)Grading S(75)PG 58-28 4" 5" Aggregate Base Course ABC—CDOT Class 5 or 6 7" 8" Design Structure Number (2.53) (3.08) Composite Section with Fly Ash—Alternative.B Hot Mix Asphalt(HMA)Grading S(75)PG 58-28 4" 4" Aggregate Base Course ABC—CDOT Class 5 or 6 6" 6" Fly Ash Treated Subgrade 12" 12" Design Structure Number (3.02) (3.02) PCC(Non-reinforced)—placed on an approved subgrade 5-1/2" 7" Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 16 Asphalt surfacing should consist of grading S-75 or SX-75 hot bituminous pavement with PG 64-22 or PG 58-28 binder in accordance with Town of Windsor requirements. Aggregate base should be consistent with CDOT requirements for Class 5 or Class 6 aggregate base.A suggested specification for stabilization of the subgrades with class C fly ash is included with this report. As previously mentioned a final subgrade investigation and pavement design should be performed in general accordance with the LCUASS Pavement Design Criteria prior to placement of any pavement sections,to determine the required pavement section after design configurations,roadway utilities have been installed and roadway have been prepared to "rough" subgrade elevations have been completed. Detention Ponds It is expected that various detention ponds may be designed/constructed throughout the site. Detention ponds are generally designed to collect surface water and/or roof runoff for the project as a temporary "holding basin" over time and eventually discharge the water into the storm sewer drainage system. Depending upon the final design depth of the detention ponds, and due to the potential for groundwater fluctuations to become elevated and enter the ponds, as well as the permeability characteristics of the on-site cohesive materials,consideration could be given to lining the pond bottom of the ponds with the on-site clay soils and/or approved imported cohesive soils,to prevent groundwater intrusion from entering the pond. Sand and gravel generally exhibit high soil percolation/permeability characteristics allowing for an increase in infiltration, not conducive for containing water. In general, the bottom of any unlined detention pond should be at least 3-feet above the maximum anticipate rise in groundwater. After site configurations and detention pond elevations have been more defined we can provide additional geotechnical exploration activities, laboratory testing and lining recommendations upon request. Underground Utility Systems All piping should be adequately bedded for proper load distribution. It is suggested that clean,graded gravel compacted to 70 percent of Relative Density ASTM D4253 be used as bedding. Where utilities are excavated below groundwater, temporary dewatering will be required during excavation, pipe Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 17 placement and backfilling operations for proper construction. Utility trenches should be excavated on safe and stable slopes in accordance with OSHA regulations as further discussed herein. Backfill should consist of the on-site soils or approved imported materials. The pipe backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density ASTM D698. Water Soluble Sulfates—(SO4) The water soluble sulfate (SO4) testing of the on-site subgrade material collected during our subsurface exploration is provided in the following table below. Based on the reported sulfate contents test results,this report includes a recommendation for the CLASS or TYPE of cement for use for contact in association with the on-site subsoils. TABLE III-Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Soluble Sulfate Content Soluble Sulfate Content Sample Location Description (mg/kg) (oho) 13-1 S-1 at 2' Clayey Sand/Sandy Lean 5,600 0.56 Clay(SC/CL) B-5,S-1,at 2' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 880 0.09 B-5,S-3,at 9' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 880 0.09 B-11,S-1,at 4' Sandy Lean Clay(CL) 14,600 1.46 B-18,S-1,at 4' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 14,800 1.48 B-21,S-1,at 4' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 12,200 1.22 B-25,S-2,at 4' Sandy Lean Clay(CL) 13,200 1.32 B-29,S-1,at 4' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 7,930 0.79 Based on the results as presented in Table VI above, ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site overburden soils have a severe risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete.Therefore Class 2 or Type V cement should be used for concrete on and below site grade within the on-site overburden soils. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4. These results are being compared to the following table. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 18 TABLE IV Requirements to Protect Against Damage to Concrete by Sulfate Attack from External Sources of Sulfate Severity of Sulfate Water-soluble sulfate(SO4) Water-cement ratio, Cementitious material exposure in dry soil,percent maximum Requirements Class 0 0.00 to 0.10%0 0.45 Class 0 Class 1 0.11 to 0.20% 0.45 Class 1 Class 2 0.21 to 2.00% 0.45 Class 2 Class 3 2.01 of greater 0.45 Class 3 Other Considerations and Recommendations Groundwater was observed at depths of approximately 2 to 361/z feet below present site grades. Excavations extending to the wetter soils could create difficulties for backfilling of the sewer trenches with drying of the subgrade soils required to use those materials as backfill. In general,the subgrade soils could be used as overlot fill and backfill soils although care will be necessary to maintain sufficient moisture to reduce potential for post-construction movement. Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks,cesspools,basements,and utilities was not observed during the site reconnaissance,such features could be encountered during construction. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered, such features should be removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction. Excavations into the on-site soils will encounter a variety of conditions. Excavations into the clays and bedrock can be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes during construction; however, caving soils may also be encountered especially in close proximity to the groundwater table, as well as in the sand/gravel zones below the overlying clay soils. Groundwater seepage should also be anticipated for utility excavations. Pumping from sumps may be utilized to control water within the excavations. Well points may be required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater to a significant depth. The individual contractor(s)should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 19 Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavement areas with a minimum slope of 1 inch per foot for the first 10 feet away from the improvements in landscape areas. Care should be taken in planning of landscaping (if required) adjacent to the buildings to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the foundations or stemwalls. Placement of plants which require irrigation systems or could result in fluctuations of the moisture content of the subgrade material should be avoided adjacent to site improvements. Irrigation systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the buildings and parking areas. Spray heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structures or site pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structures and away from the pavement areas. GENERAL COMMENTS The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between borings or across the site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. Site specific explorations will be necessary for the proposed site buildings. It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications so that comments can be made regarding the interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained for testing and observations during earthwork and foundation construction phases to help determine that the design requirements are fulfilled. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Chase Merritt for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 October 2,2017 Page 20 reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical engineer. DRILLING AND EXPLORATION DRILLING &SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon- 13/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PS: Piston Sample ST: Thin-Walled Tube-2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS: Wash Sample R: Ring Barrel Sampler-2.42" I.D.,3" O.D. unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger FT: Fish Tail Bit HA: Hand Auger RB: Rock Bit DB: Diamond Bit=4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample AS: Auger Sample PM: Pressure Meter HS: Hollow Stem Auger WB: Wash Bore Standard"N"Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch O.D.split spoon,except where noted. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling WCI: Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR: After Casting Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils,the indicated levels may reflect the location of ground water. In low permeability soils,the accurate determination of ground water levels is not possible with only short term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification system and the ASTM Designations D-2488. Coarse Grained DEGREE OF WEATHERING: Soils have move than 50% of their dry weight retained on a Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on #200 sieve;they are described as: boulders,cobbles,gravel or joints. May be color change. sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight Moderate Some decomposition and color change retained on a#200 sieve;they are described as : clays, if they throughout. are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor broken. constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION: coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in- Limestone and Dolomite: place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their Hard Difficult to scratch with knife. consistency. Example: Lean clay with sand,trace gravel, stiff (CL);silty sand,trace gravel, medium dense(SM). Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail. Unconfined Compressive Soft Can be scratched with fingernail. Strength,Qu, psf Consistency Shale,Siltstone and Claystone: < 500 Very Soft Hard Can be scratched easily with knife,cannot be 500- 1,000 Soft scratched with fingernail. 1,001- 2,000 Medium Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail. 2,001- 4,000 Stiff Hard 4,001- 8,000 Very Stiff Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with 8,001-16,000 Very Hard fingers. Sandstone and Conglomerate: RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS: Well Capable of scratching a knife blade. N-Blows/ft Relative Density Cemented 0-3 Very Loose Cemented Can be scratched with knife. 4-9 Loose 10-29 Medium Dense Poorly Can be broken apart easily with fingers. 30-49 Dense Cemented 50-80 Very Dense 80+ Extremely Dense Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Group Group Name Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Symbol Coarse-Grained Soils Gravels more than Clean Gravels Less Cu24 and 1<Cc<3E GW Well-graded gravel F more than 50% 50%of coarse than 5%fines retained on No.200 fraction retained on Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3E GP Poorly-graded gravel F sieve No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel G'" more than 12% fines Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey Gravel F'G'" Sands 50%or more Clean Sands Less Cu>_6 and 1<Cc53E SW Well-graded sand coarse fraction than 5%fines passes No.4 sieve Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3E SP Poorly-graded sand Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G'"'l more than 12% fines Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G'"'l Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A"Line CL Lean clay K,L,M 50%or more passes Liquid Limit less the No.200 sieve than 50 PI<4 or plots below"A"Line ML Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,N <0.75 OL Liquid Limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above"A"Line CH Fat clay K,L,M Liquid Limit 50 or more PI plots below"A"Line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M organic Liquid Limit-oven dried Organic clay K,L,M,P <0.75 OH Liquid Limit-not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat ABased on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm) Cu=D60/Dlo Cc= (DBO)z Kif soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand" sieve D10 x D60 or"with gravel",whichever is predominant. BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or Llf soil contains 2 30%plus No.200 predominantly sand, both,add"with cobbles or boulders,or both"to add"sandy"to group name. group name. IF Ifsoil contains>_15%sand,add"with sand"to MY soil contains>_30%plus No.200 predominantly gravel, cGravels with 5 to 12%fines required dual symbols: GIf fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC- add"gravelly"to group name. GW-GM well graded gravel with silt CM,or SC-SM. NP124 and plots on or above"A"line. GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay "If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to 0PI54 or plots below"A"line. GP-GM poorly-graded gravel with silt group name PPI plots on or above"A"line. GP-GC poorly-graded gravel with clay If soil contains>15%gravel,add"with gravel"to °PI plots below"A"line. OSands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: group name SW-SM well-graded sand with silt 'If Atterberg limits plots shaded area,soil is a CL- SW-SC well-graded sand with clay ML,Silty clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay 60 For Classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained 50 soils. Equation of"A"-line 40 Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5 x then PI-0.73(LL-20) o Equation of"U"-fine z � 30 Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7, then PI=0.9(LI-8) a 20 p� MH o OH 10 MLciiOL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 480 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC I �I PHOTO « 1 PHOTO � 2 FORT COLLINS, • .. .. E E C • •fir,.._ 1 y 1 PHOTO » 4 FORT COLLINS,EEC PROJECT No. 1172058 • 3EEC G pccr'0�lav 25 v13�I'S a l L Q - r 0 5 0. eo a � R Chesapeake-Di- = J . 1 FrrarrTruck' 's f •1 ow Dr_ r�J 18-MI an Ct.. Ked-on Ct B6o`Rd 50� — 444• i am gig] i LegendApproximate Boring [OMMI I • • ♦ Gana em. • - �N+ C_eltle Lam, T ti ac (Photos taken in approximateI � r, location,indirection of arrow) +• y _> u denw'aIILr�JM I Google EarSite Photos iLie th' 7—- .. IFigure 1: Boring Location Diagram i Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, ProjectNorth EEC •' i Date:July 2017 Not to Scale sA y r_ •lN7F_ - _ - -�- -JSS I \ Oi A l ( 5C26 J�i��_ — — ,• •y�1 '"�-.. Cam- / - - _ r '•` ,.\- ,; I .0 �5:.:li` .�. .3D22i n, •i l 4 j r 50 I • \ I ?5 b ' I I / t` �Wik{ life Area i., •` -- �•. - I iddini 44 s � �` �s: �1 .� i I✓ SOOS A` j �' 5000 I �+ ,°6„��`. 311"1& 34- i�, 01 AS i 34 r 4 995 4 995 / \ it c• 4990 4990-' '�'�:••� ,:� �• `� \� 4985 -- .}.' . •_ 1 7 4975D. i � _ -\ M• a c __99 `\ ��u 4985 _ Vim• - - ` •: i •'�_ i I`sv 1�}�° a%� �0 l t`` ! ��i I. I I Itl ;x. n'a'r•,r.••J•,p t _ % 4975 ,Y' `s ` `*rr�t €��1.1 =L, l �. ,' �..• 000 `.� r, ,�. hU e.r,,.,'Fy+`.•y I , �� ', + F •alb.' - --- -• �,t+ - - 3 - fir i l` Legend n,Approximate Groundwater Contours Figure 2: Groundwater Contour Diagram 800-Acre Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado North EEC Project Number: 1172058 Date: September 2017 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC B-2 sn.s' B-4 B-1 j Z21.6' B-3 fi:�• B-7 B-9: �i.o• B-G j� B-1 1 19.0' 13-14 3-13 i1z. .B-20 /B-15 Yf /B-17 B-1 G B-18 B-19 B-30 B-29 13-21 B-22 B-23 Legend G.S' 13.5' 9.0' Approximate Boring Locations ® Depth to B-25 /B-2G s.6, Groundwater 0-6 ft B-28 f4.6 = ® Depth to / iiii �/r .°7//%%�� Groundwater 6-10 ft Depth to Groundwater 10+ ft Note:Approximate depths to groundwater. Variations may occur across the site. Figure 3: Depth to Groundwater Diagram 800-Acre Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado North EEC Project Number: 1172058 Date: September 2017 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC S 1 @ 2' B-2 (+) 1.2% B-4 S1@4' / /r S 1 @ z' (+)4.8% �} B-7 i�B-9 B 5 S 1 @ Z' B_8 S3 @ 9' r o S3 @ 9 (+)4.4oh S i @ 4' (+)0.8/o None B 64, �(+)3.3% None -r B-10 $ B-12 S1 @2' B-14 B-13 (+)2.4% S1 @4' •S3@9' (+)0.4% None 181-20; ,. 53 @ 4' /B-1 None �(+)7.6% -16 S1@4' #B 18 B-19# S1@2' S1@4 o None 30 B-29 B-21 B-22 B-23- / .13 4 S 1@ z' (+J1 1 B-25 "13 Legend B-2G �'S1 @2' /B-28 /13-27 jSl @ Z` (+)4.3o/a $Approximate Boring s,@ 2 ,(+)3.6% Locations (+)4.1% Swell Indices 0-3% Note.-Approximate swell-index values as measured in the laboratory. Variations Swell Indices 3%+ may occur across the site. Figure 4: Swell Diagram 800-Acre Mixed Use Development Fort Collins, Colorado North EEC Project Number: 1172058 Date: September 2017 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-1 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 21.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 22.7' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 21.5' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 CLAYEY SAND/SANDY LEAN CLAY(SC/CL) 2 brown _ medium dense to very loose/stiff to very stiff to soft 3 with calcareous deposits _ with organics 4 Fc—s 5 18 1 6500 6.9 93.7 31 1 19 49.4 1 1200 psf 1.7% 6 7 8 9 -- Ess 10 19 9000+ 9.9 11 12 13 14 brown/gray/rust _ [Cs 15 11 4000 17.5 108.0 16 17 18 19 E 20 10 4000 18.4 21 22 23 24 Fc—s 25 2 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-1 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/14/2017 WHILE DRILLING 21.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/14/2017 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 22.7' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 21.5' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD ILIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 CLAYEY SAND/SANDY LEAN CLAY(SC/CL) _ brown 28 medium dense with calcareous deposits 29 with organics sand/gravel seams Ess 30 23 11.4 31 32 33 34 auger cuttings 35 15.1 36 37 38 39 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) _ brown/gray/rust SS 40 9 9.3 loose to medium dense BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.5' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-2 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to hard CS 3 18 9000+ 9.1 103.4 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Ess 5 23 9000+ 9.9 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 18 9000+ 9.2 107.7 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 21 9000+ 10.0 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 23 9000+ 9.6 111.9 21 22 23 24 SS 25 13 9000+ 11.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B.3 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 24.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 23.4' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 22.7' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 Psf very stiff to stiff [Cs 3 24 9000+ 7.9 104.3 33 19 71 1400 psf 4.8% with calcareous deposits _ with organics 4 Ess 5 18 9000+ 9.2 6 7 8 9 'SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)Lens Fc—s 10 13 9000+ 13.2 111.0 32 15 60.8 1400 psf 0.7% 11 12 13 14 brown/gray/rust _ SS 15 13 5500 16.6 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 11 3000 19.6 106.7 21 22 23 24 SS 25 20 4000 17.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-4 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 17.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 PSf medium stiff to stiff [Cs 3 10 9000+ 13.7 113.0 30 23 54.3 1800 psf 1.2% 4 with calcareous deposits _ SS 5 6 6500 15.3 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 15 7500 19.5 105.9 1400 psf 0.7% 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 8 5000 21.1 16 17 18 SAND/GRAVEL(SPIGP) 19 brown _ very loose to medium dense [Cs 20 2 11.8 114.2 21 22 23 24 SS 25 17 0.2 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-4 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 17.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/18/2017 AFTER DRILLING NIA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR NIA SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSI) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) _ brown 28 medium dense to dense 29 CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE CS 30 33 9000+ 19.5 107.4 brown/gray/rust _ moderately hard to hard 31 32 33 gray 34 Ess 35 5014" 6000 19.8 36 37 38 auger cuttings 39 28.0 40 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.0' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-5 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 2.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 6.3' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 4.6' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 gray/brown/rust _ soft to medium stiff [Cs 3 6 1500 26.6 94.8 with organics _ 4 gray/rust _ Ess 5 2 44.3 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 6 1000 26.0 97.8 33 19 81.3 <500 psf none 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 7 1000 29.2 16 17 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL(SM/GM) 18 brown/rust/gray loose to medium dense 19 Fc—s 20 15 21 22 23 24 intermittent clay seams _ SS 25 8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-6 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 4.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 gray/rust _ soft to medium stiff 3 4 Fc_s 5 4 1500 21.3 103.2 34 20 58.2 <500 psf none 6 7 8 9 brown/rust/gray _ SS 10 14 1000 27.1 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) 11 brown/rust/gray _ loose 12 13 14 Fc—s 15 5 16 17 18 19 ESS 20 8 10.6 21 22 23 24 SANDSTONE ISILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE _ gray/brown/rust CS 25 37 3500 17.8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-7 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 18.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 Psf very stiff CS 3 27 9000+ 5.8 107.2 1600 psf 4.4% with calcareous deposits _ with organics 4 Ess 5 17 7.6 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 21 9000+ 13.2 118.3 11 12 13 14 brown/rust/gray _ SS 15 10 4500 17.5 16 17 18 19 CS 20 24 4000 13.2 119.7 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) brown/rust/gray 21 medium dense 22 23 24 SS 25 21 8.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-8 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 None SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 None SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ stiff to very stiff to medium stiff 3 4 Fc—s 5 24 1 9000+ 6.7 1103.9 1 34 1 19 65.2 1 1800 PSf 3.3% 6 7 8 9 -- Ess 10 11 9000+ 12.4 11 12 13 14 Fc—s 15 14 9000+ 13.1 110.7 16 17 18 19 with calcareous deposits _ SS 20 14 7000 18.3 E 21 22 23 24 CS 25 7 3000 25.2 96.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-9 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 18.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to stiff CS 3 7 9000+ 14.2 112.8 4 with calcareous deposits Ess --5 6 7500 16.8 6 7 8 9 brown/rust _ [Cs 10 16 8500 20.2 104.3 1600PSI` 0.8% 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 6 2000 26.4 16 17 18 SAND/GRAVEL(SPIGP) 19 brown _ medium dense [Cs 20 19 12.5 112.1 21 22 23 24 SS 25 31 9.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-10 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 19.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 22.7' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 22.3' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 psf very stiff to stiff [Cs 3 8 8500 16.4 107.5 2000 psf 2.4% with calcareous deposits _ 4 Ess 5 7 8000 15.9 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 11 9000+ 14.5 112.4 30 16 52.1 2000 psf 0.9% 11 12 13 14 brown/tan/rust _ SS 15 9 3500 22.9 16 17 18 19 rust/brown/gray _ [Cs 20 10 25.1 95.5 21 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 22 brown medium dense 23 24 SS 25 13 9.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-11 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 15.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 14.8' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 14.0' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to stiff 3 4 Fc—s 5 11 1 7000 16.4 111.5 1 32 1 20 63.1 6 7 8 9 tan/gray/rust _ SS 10 8 4000 14.9 11 12 13 14 brown/rust/gray _ CS 15 9 2000 17.6 115.3 16 SAND/GRAVEL(SPIGP) 17 brown/rust/gray _ medium dense 18 19 E 20 18 23.0 21 22 23 24 CS 25 15 27.6 108.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-12 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 14.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 16.5' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 15.0' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff [Cs 3 8 6500 16.5 98.6 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Ess 5 9 6000 15.3 6 7 8 9 brown/tan _ [Cs 10 4 6000 20.7 100.2 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 9 6000 18.1 16 17 18 19 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) CS 20 20 10.1 132.6 brown/tan _ medium dense 21 with cobbles and clay seams _ 22 23 24 SS 25 10 7.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-13 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 10.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 CLAYEY SAND(SC) 2 gray _ loose to very loose CS 3 8 4000 24.8 86.5 4 -- Ess 5 2 1000 36.2 6 7 8 9 SILTY SAND(SM) CS 10 6 21.6 104.2 NL NP 30.3 <500 psf none brown/rust/gray _ loose to medium dense 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 12 1500 22.9 16 SAND/GRAVEL(SPIGP) 17 rust/brown medium dense 18 19 Fc—s 20 22 1 1000 8.0 130.3 21 22 23 24 SS 25 10 9.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-14 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/1 412 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 12.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 412 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/20117 18.2' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR 14.7' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to medium stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Fc—s 5 10 1 6000 15.1 1107.4 1 36 1 19 51.8 1 1600 PSf 0.4% 6 7 8 9 __ Ess 10 8 4500 18.3 11 12 13 14 Fc—s 15 10 2500 18.6 110.0 16 17 18 19 brown/rust _ with intermittent silty sand lenses SS 20 14 1500 23.5 21 22 23 24 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) _ brown/rust,loose,with intermittent clay seams CS 25 7 10.4 117.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-15 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 31.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 36.5' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 33.0' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 Psf very stiff to medium stiff [Cs 3 30 9000+ 8.0 111.1 3500 psf 7.6% with calcareous deposits _ 4 Ess 5 15 9000+ 7.6 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 25 9000+ 9.4 109.0 40 25 81.2 3500 psf 4.4% 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 35 9000+ 10.9 16 17 18 19 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL)Lens Fc—s 20 17 9000+ 15.2 113.4 24 11 67.9 1600 psf 0.7% 21 22 23 24 SS 25 18 3000 18.7 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-15 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 31.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/18/2017 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 36.5' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 33.0' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSI) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) _ brown 28 very stiff to medium stiff _ with calcareous deposits 29 re-S 30 14 7000 17.0 112.8 31 32 33 34 SS 35 18 2000 19.2 36 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) _ brown/gray/rust 37 medium dense 38 39 Fc—s 40 29 4.0 128.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.0' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-16 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 12.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 CLAYEY SAND(SC) 2 brown _ medium dense to loose 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Fc—s 5 15 8000 15.5 112.3 1 25 1 11 43.8 1 800psf 0.1% 6 7 8 9 -- Ess 10 4 21.9 11 12 13 14 brown/rust _ CS 15 8 21.0 112.7 16 17 18 19 brown/gray/rust SS 20 8 19.2 21 22 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) 23 brown/gray/rust medium dense 24 CS 25 17 -- 10.6 123.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-17 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/18/2017 WHILE DRILLING 12.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/1 812 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 16.9' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 15.3' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to medium stiff [Cs 3 13 8000 18.3 102.4 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Ess 5 12 6000 19.1 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 8 3500 34.2 95.6 11 12 13 14 brown/rust/gray _ SS 15 8 2000 19.6 16 17 18 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) brown/rust/gray 19 medium dense [Cs 20 17 9.3 124.3 21 22 23 24 SS 25 20 6.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-18 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 812 512 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 13.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 512 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to stiff to medium stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Fc—s 5 12 1 9000+ 19.0 101.E 1 29 1 16 69.2 1 800 PSf 0.3% 6 7 8 9 -- Ess 10 7 2500 22.7 11 12 13 14 Fc—s 15 8 3500 19.9 108.0 16 17 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) 18 brown _ medium dense 19 ESS 20 15 11.4 21 22 23 24 CS 25 22 13.1 120.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-19 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 812 512 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown/red _ very stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Fc—s 5 10 1 6500 20.5 100.E 1 27 1 13 68 1 <500 PSf none 6 7 8 9 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) SS 10 17 5.4 brown/red _ -- medium dense 11 12 13 14 Fc—,, 15 28 10.2 127.7 NL NP 2 16 17 18 19 intermittent clay seams _ SS 20 14 7.9 E 21 22 23 24 Fc—s 25 23 11.4 129.6 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-19 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/25/2017 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING NIA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR NIA SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 SANDSTONE/SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE _ brown/gray/rust 28 moderately hard to hard _ 29 Ess 30 30 9000+ 22.8 __ 31 32 33 34 Fc—s 35 50/11" 9000+ 22.6 107.0 36 37 38 39 SS 40 41 7000 24.4 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.5' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-20 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 812 512 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 9.5 AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 512 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 12.0' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A CHECKED ON 8/28/2017 10.7 SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff to stiff [Cs 3 10 5500 20.7 101.6 with calcareous deposits _ with gypsum crystals 4 Ess 5 6 3000 21.8 6 7 8 9 SILT(ML) CS 10 8 1000 19.6 109.7 23 6 64.7 <500 psf none brown/rust _ soft 11 12 13 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 14 brown/rust _ loose to medium dense SS 15 8 5.5 NL NP 3.4 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 17 10.2 118.1 21 22 23 24 SANDSTONE ISILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE _ brown/gray/rust,moderately hard SS 25 38 3500 17.3 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5. Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-21 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 812 512 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 9.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 512 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 psf very stiff to medium stiff CS 3 12 9000+ 16.1 110.0 34 22 83.2 2000 psf 2.4% with calcareous deposits _ 4 brown/red/gray _ with silty seams Ess 5 9 2000 23.5 6 7 8 9 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) CS 10 19 8.2 124.6 brown/red/gray _ dense to medium dense 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 43 6.5 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 22 8.6 134.4 21 22 23 24 auger cuttings 25 10.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-22 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 812 512 01 7 WHILE DRILLING 8.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 512 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF VEGETATION&TOPSOIL _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 %Q 150 psf Fc—s 5 6 1 7000 16.4 97.0 1 1 1 1200 psf 1.1% 6 7 8 SAND/GRAVEL with SILT(SP-SM/GP- GM) 9 brown _ medium dense SS 10 23 8.2 11 12 13 14 Fc—s 15 15 9.0 122.8 NL NP 9.2 16 17 18 19 Ess 20 22 9.9 21 22 23 24 CS 25 16 6.8 148.4 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-23 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/28/2017 WHILE DRILLING 13.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 12.3' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ stiff rcs 3 7 4000 12.7 100.1 with calcareous deposits _ 4 red/brown _ Ess 5 6 2000 26.8 6 7 8 9 brown/gray I rust _ CS 10 8 3500 29.4 90.0 11 12 13 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 14 brown/gray/rust _ medium dense to dense SS 15 23 8.0 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 32 13.3 119.5 21 22 23 24 SS 25 17 6.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-24 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/28/2017 WHILE DRILLING 11.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ medium stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 Fc—s 5 6 1 4000 25.5 89.6 6 7 8 9 gray/brown/rust _ SS 10 7 2500 31.4 11 12 13 CLAYEY SAND(SC) 14 gray/brown/rust _ loose to medium dense CS 15 10 8.7 16 17 18 19 with gray silty Icay seams _ SS 20 9 19.3 26 10 "A E 21 22 23 24 Fc—s 25 18 9.0 107.9 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-24 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/28/2017 WHILE DRILLING 11.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING NIA SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR NIA SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSI) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 CLAYSTONE 28 gray/rust _ highly weathered to moderately hard to hard 29 Fc—s 30 12 3000 29.5 91.5 31 32 33 34 Ess 35 28 9000+ 20.8 36 37 38 39 CS 40 5016" 9000+ 17.2 114.6 46 27 58.9 6500 psf 3.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.5' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-25 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/28/2017 WHILE DRILLING 8.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/2 812 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown/red _ %@ 150 psf very stiff [Cs 3 19 9000+ 17.6 99.2 3500 psf 4.3% with calcareous deposits _ with gypsum crystals 4 Ess 5 11 9000+ 21.0 6 7 8 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 9 brown/red _ medium dense [Cs 10 26 10.7 124.6 11 12 13 14 intermittent silty clay seams _ SS 15 19 23.9 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 24 12.7 110.6 21 22 23 24 SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE at 25' gray/rust SS 25 27 2000 11.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-26 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 14.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 15.2' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR NIA SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF ALFALFA _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 brown %@ 150 psf _ very stiff rcs 3 19 6000 9.6 101.5 37 10 81.3 1600 psf 3.6% 4 Ess 5 19 9000+ 8.6 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 15 9000+ 16.7 109.1 39 22 78.6 2000 psf 1.5% 11 12 13 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) 14 brown _ medium dense SS 15 19 8.1 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 24 8.6 129.7 21 22 23 24 SS 25 13 4.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-27 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 14.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF ALFALFA _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ with organics 4 Fc—s 5 21 1 5500 10.1 91.1 6 7 8 9 with gypsum crystals _ SS 10 11 8500 13.2 11 12 13 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 14 brown _ medium dense to dense [Cs 15 24 13.1 107.6 16 17 18 19 ESS 20 27 6.0 21 22 23 24 CS 25 35 9.4 132.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-28 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 30.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/20117 27.8 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF ALFALFA _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 brown _ %@ 150 Psf very stiff [Cs 3 20 9000+ 9.1 96.3 1200 psf 4.1% 4 with organics _ SS 5 12 4000 8.3 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 20 9000+ 11.7 98.8 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 17 9000+ 14.8 16 17 18 19 Fc—s 20 16 7000 19.6 103.8 21 22 23 24 with gravel _ SS 25 9 4000 18.6 Continued on Sheet 2 of 2 _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-28 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 2 OF 2 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 30.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/2017 27.8 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR NIA SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSI) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF Continued from Sheet 1 of 2 26 27 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) _ brown 28 very stiff _ 29 rc-S 30 9 4000 21.3 106.6 31 32 33 34 Ess 35 10 1000 21.1 36 37 38 39 SILTY SAND(SM) _ brown,very loose CS 40 1 17.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 40.0' 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-29 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 13.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD -LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@.500 PSF ALFALFA _ 1 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 2 brown _ very stiff 3 with calcareous deposits _ 4 FC—S 5 19 1 9000+ 12.5 103.4 1 35 1 20 73.8 1 3500 psf 3.3% 6 7 8 9 -- brown/rust/gray Ess 10 9 4000 21.4 11 12 13 14 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL ISM/GM) SS 15 20 17.7 brown _ -- medium dense 16 17 18 19 Ess 20 27 8.6 21 22 23 24 intermittent clay seams _ CS 25 11 ,- 17.7 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.0' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 800 ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FORT COLLINS,COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-30 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/30/2017 WHILE DRILLING 6.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/3 012 01 7 CHECKED ON 9/8/20117 7.7' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DO A•LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWSIFT) (PSF) (%) (PCE) IL PI (%) PRESSURE %�.500 PSF ALFALFA _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) 2 gray _ stiff to medium stiff [Cs 3 4 4000 26.7 90.9 with calcareous deposits _ 4 gray/rust _ Ess 5 2 1000 37.0 6 7 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 8 gray/rust medium dense to loose 9 Fc—s 10 14 12.0 112.1 11 12 13 14 -- Ess 15 9 8.3 NL NP 5.2 16 17 18 19 intermittent clay seams _ [Cs 20 6 10.9 21 22 CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE 23 gray 24 SS 25 5017" 8500 17.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Clayey Sand/Sandy Lean Clay(SC/CL) Sample Location: Boring 1, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 31 IPlasticity Index: 19 % Passing#200: 49.4% Beginning Moisture: 6.9% JDry Density: 99.9 pcf JEnding Moisture: 23.3% Swell Pressure: 1200 psf %Swell @ 500: 1.7% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d > 0.0 c m L m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 33 IPlasticity Index: 19 % Passing#200: 71.0% Beginning Moisture: 7.9% Dry Density: 102.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 20.8% Swell Pressure: 1400 psf %Swell @ 150: 4.8% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 c 2.0 m E d 0.0 c m aWater Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 32 IPlasticity Index: 15 % Passing#200: 60.8% Beginning Moisture: 13.2% JDry Density: 117.9 pcf JEnding Moisture: 16.9% Swell Pressure: 1400 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.7% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 30 IPlasticity Index: 23 % Passing#200: 54.3% Beginning Moisture: 13.7% JDry Density: 119.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.0% Swell Pressure: 1800 psf %Swell @ 150: 1.2% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 2 0 U) a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- IPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 19.5% JDry Density: 107.4 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.1% Swell Pressure: 1400 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.7% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 7T m L d a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Gray/Brown/Rust Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 33 IPlasticity Index: 19 % Passing#200: 81.3% Beginning Moisture: 26.0% JDry Density: 107 pcf JEnding Moisture: 25.2% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L d a -2.0 Water Added - -4.0 — 0 0 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Gray/Rust Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 6, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 34 IPlasticity Index: 20 % Passing#200: 58.2% Beginning Moisture: 21.3% JDry Density: 106.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 22.3% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 [T7 m (L Water Added -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- IPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 5.8% JDry Density: 112.1 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.9% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 150: 4.4% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m `m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 8, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 34 IPlasticity Index: 19 % Passing#200: 65.2% Beginning Moisture: 6.7% JDry Density: 107.9 pcf JEnding Moisture: 23.5% Swell Pressure: 1800 psf %Swell @ 500: 3.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 IT7m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- IPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 20.2% JDry Density: 107.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.0% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.8% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - (D 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0 T-4Z I I I 2 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- IPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 16.4% JDry Density: 107.4 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.0% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf %Swell @ 150: 2.4% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 10, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 30 IPlasticity Index: 16 % Passing#200: 52.1% Beginning Moisture: 14.5% JDry Density: 116.3 pcf JEnding Moisture: 16.4% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.9% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d > 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Rust/Gray Silty Sand (SM) Sample Location: Boring 13, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 25 IPlasticity Index: NP % Passing#200: 30.3% Beginning Moisture: 21.6% JDry Density: 109.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 20.2% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L d (L -2.0 Water Added -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 36 IPlasticity Index: 19 % Passing#200: 51.8% Beginning Moisture: 15.1% JDry Density: 116.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.5% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.4% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 cT77 m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- JPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 8.0% JDry Density: 118.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.9% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf %Swell @ 150: 7.6% 10.0 8.0 6.0 m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m `m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 2 0 a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 40 IPlasticity Index: 25 % Passing#200: 81.2% Beginning Moisture: 9.4% JDry Density: 109 pcf JEnding Moisture: 21.3% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf %Swell @ 500: 4.4% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 5, Depth 19' Liquid Limit: 24 1 Plasticity Index: 11 % Passing#200: 67.9% Beginning Moisture: 15.2% JDry Density: 116.6 pcf JEnding Moisture: 17.4% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.7% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 25 Plasticity Index: 11 % Passing#200: 43.8% Beginning Moisture: 15.5% JDry Density: 117.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 16.5% Swell Pressure: 800 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.1% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Rust Clayey Sand (SC) Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 3, Depth 14' Liquid Limit: -- JPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 21.0% JDry Density: 109.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.2% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 18, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 29 IPlasticity Index: 16 % Passing#200: 69.2% Beginning Moisture: 19.6% JDry Density: 102.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 20.3% Swell Pressure: 800 psf %Swell @ 500: 0.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c L d (L -2.0 -Water Added -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Red Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 19, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 27 IPlasticity Index: 13 % Passing#200: 68.0% Beginning Moisture: 20.4% JDry Density: 103.3 pcf JEnding Moisture: 22.8% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L d a -2.0 Water Added -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 10 Load(TSF) 1 Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Rust Silt(ML) Sample Location: Boring 20, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 23 IPlasticity Index: 6 % Passing#200: 64.7% Beginning Moisture: 19.6% JDry Density: 110.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.7% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L d a -2.0 Water Added -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 21, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 34 IPlasticity Index: 22 % Passing#200: 83.2% Beginning Moisture: 16.1% Dry Density: 110 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.7% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf %Swell @ 150: 2.4% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 22, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- JPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 16.4% JDry Density: 112.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 15.0% Swell Pressure: 1200 psf %Swell @ 150: 1.1% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d > 0.0 c m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Gray/Rust Claystone Sample Location: Boring 24, Sample 8, Depth 39' Liquid Limit: 46 IPlasticity Index: 27 % Passing#200: 58.9% Beginning Moisture: 17.2% JDry Density: 115.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.9% Swell Pressure: 6500 psf %Swell @ 500: 3.7% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown/Red Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 25, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- JPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 17.6% Dry Density: 110 pcf JEnding Moisture: 22.4% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf %Swell @ 150: 4.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 2 0 Cn a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 26, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 37 IPlasticity Index: 10 % Passing#200: 81.3% Beginning Moisture: 9.6% Dry Density: 104.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 29.4% Swell Pressure: 1600 psf %Swell @ 150: 3.6% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 c m L °1 Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 2 0 U) a -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 26, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 39 IPlasticity Index: 22 % Passing#200: 78.6% Beginning Moisture: 16.7% JDry Density: 106.9 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.3% Swell Pressure: 2000 psf %Swell @ 500: 1.5% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c (D E d 0.0 7T m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 U) 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Sandy Lean Clay(CL) Sample Location: Boring 28, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- JPlasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 9.1% JDry Density: 100 pcf JEnding Moisture: 25.0% Swell Pressure: 1200 psf %Swell @ 150: 4.1% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m Water Added a -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Brown Lean Clay with Sand (CL) Sample Location: Boring 29, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 35 IPlasticity Index: 20 % Passing#200: 73.8% Beginning Moisture: 12.5% Dry Density: 111.6 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.6% Swell Pressure: 3500 psf %Swell @ 500: 3.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 - m 3 4.0 2.0 c m E d 0.0 c m L a Water Added -2.0 -4.0 0 0 Cn 0 -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load(TSF) Project: 800 Acre Mixed Use Development Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: Sep-17 RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL - ASTM D2844 4gw PROJECT: 800 Acre Retail Development PROJECT NO. 1172058 LOCATION: Fort Collins, Colorado DATE Sep-17 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Sandy Lean Clay(CL) SAMPLE LOCATION: Composite Sample Boring B-2 Upper 2' LIQUID LIMIT: 34 PLASTICITY INDEX: 20 1 %PASSING #200: 63.2 R-VALUE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 125 150 175 DENSITY (PCF) 108.8 112.9 111.1 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 17.6 17.4 16.5 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.00 0.00 0.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 128 125 124 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.56 2.55 2.55 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 261.2 362.6 462.9 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 12.6 14.6 15.4 CORRECTED R-VALUE 12.9 14.6 15.4 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 14 RESILIENT MODULUS, PSI = 4,060 100 90 80 70 60 m m 50 o: 40 30 20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Exudation Pressure, PSF RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL - ASTM D2844 4gw PROJECT: 800 Acre Retail Development PROJECT NO. 1172058 LOCATION: Fort Collins, Colorado DATE Sep-17 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Sandy Lean Clay(CL) SAMPLE LOCATION: Composite Sample Boring B-4 Upper 2' LIQUID LIMIT: PLASTICITY INDEX: I %PASSING #200: 58.9 R-VALUE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 250 225 200 DENSITY (PCF) 115.7 113.7 114.5 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 15.5 16.2 17.1 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.00 0.00 0.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 111 110 116 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.54 2.55 2.56 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 530.5 389.9 263.6 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 25.9 25.6 20.8 CORRECTED R-VALUE 25.9 25.6 21.3 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 25 RESILIENT MODULUS, PSI = 5,816 100 90 80 70 60 m m 50 o: 40 30 20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Exudation Pressure, PSF RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL - ASTM D2844 4gw PROJECT: 800 Acre Retail Development PROJECT NO. 1172058 LOCATION: Fort Collins, Colorado DATE Sep-17 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Sandy Lean Clay(CL) SAMPLE LOCATION: Composite Sample Boring B-15 Upper 2' LIQUID LIMIT: 33 PLASTICITY INDEX: 20 1 %PASSING #200: 56.0 R-VALUE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 175 150 125 DENSITY (PCF) 111.6 112.8 111.7 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 17.0 17.6 18.2 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.00 0.00 0.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 123 125 130 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.54 2.45 2.48 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 425.0 340.1 263.4 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 17.8 15.8 13.0 CORRECTED R-VALUE 17.8 15.8 13.0 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 15 RESILIENT MODULUS, PSI = 4,195 100 90 80 70 60 m m 50 o: 40 30 20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Exudation Pressure, PSF RESISTANCE R-VALUE & EXPANSION PRESSURE OF COMPACTED SOIL - ASTM D2844 4gw PROJECT: 800 Acre Retail Development PROJECT NO. 1172058 LOCATION: Fort Collins, Colorado DATE Sep-17 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Lean Clay with Sand (CL) SAMPLE LOCATION: Composite Sample Boring B-23 Upper 2' LIQUID LIMIT: --- PLASTICITY INDEX: --- I %PASSING #200: 73.3 R-VALUE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 COMPACTION PRESSURE (PSI) 250 225 200 DENSITY (PCF) 117.1 115.2 111.3 MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 14.2 15.4 15.9 EXPANSION PRESSURE (PSI) 0.00 0.00 0.00 HORIZONTAL PRESSURE @ 160 PSI 101 115 123 SAMPLE HEIGHT (INCHES) 2.50 2.55 2.50 EXUDATION PRESSURE (PSI) 660.7 426.1 262.7 UNCORRECTED R-VALUE 30.0 22.0 16.9 CORRECTED R-VALUE 30.0 22.0 16.9 R-VALUE @ 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE = 18 RESILIENT MODULUS, PSI = 4,627 100 90 80 70 60 m m 50 o: 40 30 20 10 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Exudation Pressure, PSF APPENDIX B USDA SOIL SURVEY INFORMATION USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil_ Survey,Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for N States Department of RCS Agriculture and other Larimer County Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Area, Colorado Conservation Stations, and local Service participants s; • �111� i111 �!I { f 'R ,t r1'l�'Jr�•1 w' 1 p July 9, 2024 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/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 NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice)or(202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8 SoilMap................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................ 11 MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Larimer County Area, Colorado...................................................................... 13 5—Aquepts, loamy......................................................................................13 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope............................................... 14 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.............................................. 15 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes.............................................. 16 95—Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes.................................................... 18 98—Satanta Variant clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.................................19 101—Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes..............................................20 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................23 Soil Properties and Qualities..............................................................................23 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................23 HydrologicSoil Group................................................................................. 23 References............................................................................................................28 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map F 0 0 497500 4976M 497700 4978M 497900 49M 498100 498200 49M 498400 40°37 15"N I 400 37 18"N it µ 14 It �r r. 36 95 t 98 "7v- g a F iLL 1County Road 1 - - _ _ - a 5� l'Flap m y not be valid at this s ale. 400 36 33"N 40°36'33"N 497500 49. 497700 4978M 497900 498000 491100 496200 49M 498400 Map Scale:1:6,260 T printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. N Meters o 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 300 600 1200 1800 Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 13N WGS84 9 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000. Q Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot I Soil Map Unit Polygons � Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 1. Wet Spot �s Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil ® Soil Map Unit Points g pp g y Special Line Features line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed V Blowout Water Features scale. Streams and Canals Borrow Pit Clay Spot Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map x .+. Rails measurements. J Closed Depression ti Interstate Highways Gravel Pit Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service US Routes Web Soil Survey URL: Gravelly Spot Major Roads Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) O Landfill Local Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator A Lava Flow Background projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Marsh or swamp . Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required. O Miscellaneous Water This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as O Perennial Water of the version date(s)listed below. V Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area,Colorado + Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 18,Aug 24,2023 Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger. 0 Sinkhole Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jul 2,2021—Aug 25, Slide or Slip 2021 Sodic Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 10 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 5 Aquepts,loamy 0.4 0.4% 22 Caruso clay loam,0 to 1 0.1 0.1% percent slope 35 Fort Collins loam,0 to 3 percent 34.3 31.2% slopes 36 Fort Collins loam,3 to 5 percent 4.4 4.0% slopes 95 Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent 2.1 1.9% slopes 98 Satanta Variant clay loam,0 to 67.7 61.5% 3 percent slopes 101 Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 percent 1.1 1.0% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 110.1 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor 11 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 Larimer County Area, Colorado 5—Aquepts, loamy Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpws Elevation: 4,500 to 6,700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 80 to 140 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Aquepts and similar soils:80 percent Minor components:20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Aquepts Setting Landform: Depressions, draws, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread, dip Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile H1 -0 to 60 inches: variable Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Very poorly drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to very high (0.60 to 99.90 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 6 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 5w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D Ecological site: R067BY038CO -Wet Meadow Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Kim Percent of map unit: 5 percent 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Stoneham Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Fort collins Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 22—Caruso clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slope Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpvt Elevation: 4,800 to 5,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Caruso and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Caruso Setting Landform: Flood-plain steps, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 35 inches: clay loam H2-35 to 44 inches: fine sandy loam H3-44 to 60 inches: gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 24 to 48 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R067BY036CO - Overflow Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Loveland Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform:Terraces Ecological site: R067BY036CO- Overflow Hydric soil rating: Yes Fluvaquents Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform:Terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tlnc Elevation: 4,020 to 6,730 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 160 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform: Interfluves, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene or older alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 4 inches: loam 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Bt1 -4 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2-9 to 16 inches: clay loam Bk1 - 16 to 29 inches: loam Bk2-29 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 12 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interfluves Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY024CO- Sandy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2ygpg Elevation: 4,800 to 5,900 feet 16 Custom Soil Resource Report Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Fort collins and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components:20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fort Collins Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape: Linear, convex Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Pleistocene or older alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Ap - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt1 -5 to 8 inches: clay loam Bt2- 8 to 18 inches: clay loam Bk1 - 18 to 24 inches: loam Bk2-24 to 80 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 12 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.1 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Table mountain Percent of map unit: 15 percent Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY036CO- Overflow Hydric soil rating: No 17 Custom Soil Resource Report Larim Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform:Alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY063CO- Gravel Breaks Hydric soil rating: No 95—Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2w5f3 Elevation: 3,650 to 5,350 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 115 to 155 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Satanta and similar soils:90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Satanta Setting Landform: Paleoterraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Head slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Eolian sands Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: loam Bt-9 to 18 inches: clay loam C- 18 to 79 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very high (about 12.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform:Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Fort collins Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform:Alluvial fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Head slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 98—Satanta Variant clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jpyh Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period. 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Satanta variant and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Satanta Variant Setting Landform:Terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear 19 Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam H2-9 to 22 inches: clay loam H3-22 to 60 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 24 to 48 inches Frequency of flooding: Occasional Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Gypsum, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity:Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R067BY036CO - Overflow Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Caruso Percent of map unit: 3 percent Ecological site: R067BY036CO- Overflow Hydric soil rating: No Loveland Percent of map unit:2 percent Ecological site: R067BY036CO- Overflow Hydric soil rating: No 101—Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: jptt Elevation: 4,800 to 5,600 feet 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 135 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Stoneham and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Stoneham Setting Landform: Benches, terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: loam H2-4 to 10 inches: sandy clay loam H3- 10 to 60 inches: clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches 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 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R067BY002CO - Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Fort collins Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No Kim Percent of map unit: 5 percent Ecological site: R067BY002CO- Loamy Plains Hydric soil rating: No 21 Custom Soil Resource Report 22 Soil Information for All Uses Soil Properties and Qualities The Soil Properties and Qualities section includes various soil properties and qualities displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each property or quality. Soil Qualities and Features Soil qualities are behavior and performance attributes that are not directly measured, but are inferred from observations of dynamic conditions and from soil properties. Example soil qualities include natural drainage, and frost action. Soil features are attributes that are not directly part of the soil. Example soil features include slope and depth to restrictive layer. These features can greatly impact the use and management of the soil. Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. 23 Custom Soil Resource Report Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. 24 Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydrologic Soil Group F 0 0 497500 497600 497700 497800 497900 49M 498100 498200 498300 498400 40°37 15"N 400 37 15"N •f, l;' µ l � 14 / \ y� S, _ fl i _S g g g 5� l'Flap m y not be valid at this s ale. 400 36 33"N 40°36'33"N 497500 497600 497700 4978M 497900 498000 498100 498200 49M 498400 Map Scale:1:6,260 T printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. N Meters o 0 50 101 210 300 Feet 0 300 600 1200 1800 Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 13N WGS84 25 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) 0 C The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) C/D 1:24,000. A Soils D Soil Rating Polygons Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. A [3 Not rated or not available Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Water Features 0 AID misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil B Streams and Canals line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of Q Transportation contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed 0 B/D Rails scale. � 0 C ti Interstate Highways Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map 0 C/D US Routes measurements. 0 D Major Roads Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service 0 Not rated or not available Local Roads Web Soil Survey URL: Soil Rating Lines Background Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) N A Aerial Photography Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator ,y A/D projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts B distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more •�/ B/D accurate calculations of distance or area are required. py C This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as �y C/o of the version date(s)listed below. O%o D Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area,Colorado . • Not rated or not available Survey Area Data: Version 18,Aug 24,2023 Soil Rating Points G A Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. A/D B Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jul 2,2021—Aug 25, 2021 B/D The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. 26 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 5 Aquepts,loamy A/D 0.4 0.4% 22 Caruso clay loam,0 to 1 D 0.1 0.1% percent slope 35 Fort Collins loam,0 to 3 C 34.3 31.2% percent slopes 36 Fort Collins loam,3 to 5 C 4.4 4.0% percent slopes 95 Satanta loam, 1 to 3 C 2.1 1.9% percent slopes 98 Satanta Variant clay D 67.7 61.5%1 loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 101 Stoneham loam, 1 to 3 B 1.1 1.0% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 110.1 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff.- None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher 27 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_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=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 28 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=n res 142 p 2_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/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl42p2_052290.pdf 29 APPENDIX C URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BMPs Surface Roughening (SR) EC-I Description Surface roughening is an erosion control practice that involves tracking, scarifying, imprinting,or tilling a disturbed area to provide temporary _ stabilization of disturbed areas. Surface roughening creates variations in the soil surface that help to minimize wind and water erosion. Depending on the f technique used, surface roughening may also help establish conditions favorable to establishment of vegetation. " _ . Appropriate Uses Surface roughening can be used to Photograph SR-1. Surface roughening via imprinting for temporary provide temporary stabilization of stabilization. disturbed areas, such as when revegetation cannot be immediately established due to seasonal planting limitations. Surface roughening is not a stand-alone BMP,and should be used in conjunction with other erosion and sediment controls. Surface roughening is often implemented in conjunction with grading and is typically performed using heavy construction equipment to track the surface. Be aware that tracking with heavy equipment will also compact soils,which is not desirable in areas that will be revegetated. Scarifying,tilling, or ripping are better surface roughening techniques in locations where revegetation is planned. Roughening is not effective in very sandy soils and cannot be effectively performed in rocky soil. Design and Installation Typical design details for surfacing roughening on steep and mild slopes are provided in Details SR-1 and SR-2,respectively. Surface roughening should be performed either after final grading or to temporarily stabilize an area during active construction that may be inactive for a short time period. Surface roughening should create depressions 2 to 6 inches deep and approximately 6 inches apart. The surface of exposed soil can be roughened by a number of techniques and equipment. Horizontal grooves(running parallel to the contours of the land) can be made using tracks from equipment treads, stair-step grading,ripping, or tilling. Fill slopes can be constructed with a roughened surface. Cut slopes that have been smooth graded can be roughened as a subsequent operation. Roughening should follow along the contours of the slope. The tracks left by truck mounted equipment working perpendicular to the contour can leave acceptable horizontal depressions; Surface Roughening however,the equipment will also compact the soil. Functions Erosion Control Yes Sediment Control No Site/Material Management No November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SR-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-1 Surface Roughening (SR) Maintenance and Removal Care should be taken not to drive vehicles or equipment over areas that have been surface roughened. Tire tracks will smooth the roughened surface and may cause runoff to collect into rills and gullies. Because surface roughening is only a temporary control, additional treatments may be necessary to maintain the soil surface in a roughened condition. Areas should be inspected for signs of erosion. Surface roughening is a temporary measure, and will not provide long-term erosion control. SR-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Surface Roughening (SR) EC-1 SR TRACKING OR IMPRINTING 1� 6" MAX FURROWS 2" TO 4" DEEP 2" TO WITH 6" MAXIMUM SPACING 4" DEEP PARALLEL TO CONTOURS SR- 1 . SURFACE ROUGHENING FOR STEEP SLOPES (3:1 OR STEEPER) SCARIFYING OR TILLING / / ROUGHENED ROWS SHALL BE 4" TO 6" 4" TO 6" DEEP WITH 6" MAXIMUM SPACING PARALLEL DEEP TO CONTOURS SR-2. SURFACE ROUGHENING FOR LOW SLOPES (LESS THAN 3:1) November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SR-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-1 Surface Roughening (SR) SURFACE ROUGHENING INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR: —LOCATION(S) OF SURFACE ROUGHENING. 2. SURFACE ROUGHENING SHALL BE PROVIDED PROMPTLY AFTER COMPLETION OF FINISHED GRADING (FOR AREAS NOT RECEIVING TOPSOIL) OR PRIOR TO TOPSOIL PLACEMENT OR ANY FORECASTED RAIN EVENT. 3. AREAS WHERE BUILDING FOUNDATIONS, PAVEMENT, OR SOD WILL BE PLACED WITHOUT DELAY IN THE CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE, SURFACE ROUGHENING IS NOT REQUIRED. 4. DISTURBED SURFACES SHALL BE ROUGHENED USING RIPPING OR TILLING EQUIPMENT ON THE CONTOUR OR TRACKING UP AND DOWN A SLOPE USING EQUIPMENT TREADS. 5. A FARMING DISK SHALL NOT BE USED FOR SURFACE ROUGHENING. SURFACE ROUGHENING MAINTENANCE NOTES 1. INSPECT BMPs EACH WORKDAY, AND MAINTAIN THEM IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. MAINTENANCE OF BMPs SHOULD BE PROACTIVE, NOT REACTIVE. INSPECT BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AND ALWAYS WITHIN 24 HOURS) FOLLOWING A STORM THAT CAUSES SURFACE EROSION, AND PERFORM NECESSARY MAINTENANCE. 2. FREQUENT OBSERVATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BMPs IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. INSPECTIONS AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED THOROUGHLY. 3. WHERE BMPs HAVE FAILED, REPAIR OR REPLACE UPON DISCOVERY OF THE FAILURE. 4. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE DRIVEN OVER AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN SURFACE ROUGHENED. 5. IN NON—TURF GRASS FINISHED AREAS, SEEDING AND MULCHING SHALL TAKE PLACE DIRECTLY OVER SURFACE ROUGHENED AREAS WITHOUT FIRST SMOOTHING OUT THE SURFACE. 6. IN AREAS NOT SEEDED AND MULCHED AFTER SURFACE ROUGHENING, SURFACES SHALL BE RE—ROUGHENED AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN GROOVE DEPTH AND SMOOTH OVER RILL EROSION. (DETAILS ADAPTED FROM TOWN OF PARKER, COLORADO, NOT AVAILABLE IN ALITOCAO) NOTE: MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE BMP DETAILS THAT VARY FROM UDFCD STANDARD DETAILS. CONSULT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS TO WHICH DETAIL SHOULD BE USED WHEN DIFFERENCES ARE NOTED. SR-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) EC-2 Description Temporary seeding can be used to stabilize disturbed areas that will be inactive for an extended period. Permanent seeding should be used to stabilize areas at final grade that will not be otherwise stabilized. Effective seeding includes preparation of a seedbed, selection of an appropriate seed mixture, proper planting techniques, and protection of the seeded area with mulch, geotextiles, or other appropriate measures. Appropriate Uses When the soil surface is disturbed and Photograph TS/PS-1. Equipment used to drill seed. Photo courtesy of will remain inactive for an extended Douglas County. period(typically 30 days or longer), proactive stabilization measures should be implemented. If the inactive period is short-lived(on the order of two weeks),techniques such as surface roughening may be appropriate. For longer periods of inactivity,temporary seeding and mulching can provide effective erosion control. Permanent seeding should be used on finished areas that have not been otherwise stabilized. Typically,local governments have their own seed mixes and timelines for seeding. Check jurisdictional requirements for seeding and temporary stabilization. Design and Installation Effective seeding requires proper seedbed preparation,selection of an appropriate seed mixture,use of appropriate seeding equipment to ensure proper coverage and density, and protection with mulch or fabric until plants are established. The USDCM Volume 2 Revegetation Chapter contains detailed seed mix, soil preparations, and seeding and mulching recommendations that may be referenced to supplement this Fact Sheet. Drill seeding is the preferred seeding method. Hydroseeding is not recommended except in areas where steep slopes prevent use of drill seeding equipment,and even in these instances it is preferable to hand seed and mulch. Some jurisdictions do not allow hydroseeding or hydromulching. Seedbed Preparation Prior to seeding, ensure that areas to be revegetated have soil conditions capable of supporting vegetation. Overlot Temporary and Permanent Seeding grading can result in loss of topsoil,resulting in poor quality subsoils at the ground surface that have low nutrient value, Functions little organic matter content, few soil microorganisms, Erosion Control Yes rooting restrictions, and conditions less conducive to Sediment Control No infiltration of precipitation. As a result, it is typically Site/Material Management No necessary to provide stockpiled topsoil, compost, or other June 2012 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District TS/PS-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-2 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) soil amendments and rototill them into the soil to a depth of 6 inches or more. Topsoil should be salvaged during grading operations for use and spread on areas to be revegetated later. Topsoil should be viewed as an important resource to be utilized for vegetation establishment, due to its water-holding capacity, structure,texture, organic matter content,biological activity, and nutrient content. The rooting depth of most native grasses in the semi-arid Denver metropolitan area is 6 to 18 inches. At a minimum,the upper 6 inches of topsoil should be stripped, stockpiled, and ultimately respread across areas that will be revegetated. Where topsoil is not available, subsoils should be amended to provide an appropriate plant-growth medium. Organic matter, such as well digested compost,can be added to improve soil characteristics conducive to plant growth. Other treatments can be used to adjust soil pH conditions when needed. Soil testing,which is typically inexpensive, should be completed to determine and optimize the types and amounts of amendments that are required. If the disturbed ground surface is compacted,rip or rototill the surface prior to placing topsoil. If adding compost to the existing soil surface,rototilling is necessary. Surface roughening will assist in placement of a stable topsoil layer on steeper slopes,and allow infiltration and root penetration to greater depth. Prior to seeding,the soil surface should be rough and the seedbed should be firm,but neither too loose nor compacted. The upper layer of soil should be in a condition suitable for seeding at the proper depth and conducive to plant growth. Seed-to-soil contact is the key to good germination. Seed Mix for Temporary Vegetation To provide temporary vegetative cover on disturbed areas which will not be paved,built upon, or fully landscaped or worked for an extended period(typically 30 days or more),plant an annual grass appropriate for the time of planting and mulch the planted areas. Annual grasses suitable for the Denver metropolitan area are listed in Table TS/PS-l. These are to be considered only as general recommendations when specific design guidance for a particular site is not available. Local governments typically specify seed mixes appropriate for their jurisdiction. Seed Mix for Permanent Revegetation To provide vegetative cover on disturbed areas that have reached final grade,a perennial grass mix should be established. Permanent seeding should be performed promptly(typically within 14 days) after reaching final grade. Each site will have different characteristics and a landscape professional or the local jurisdiction should be contacted to determine the most suitable seed mix for a specific site. In lieu of a specific recommendation, one of the perennial grass mixes appropriate for site conditions and growth season listed in Table TS/PS-2 can be used. The pure live seed(PLS)rates of application recommended in these tables are considered to be absolute minimum rates for seed applied using proper drill-seeding equipment. If desired for wildlife habitat or landscape diversity, shrubs such as rubber rabbitbrush(Chrysothamnus nauseosus), fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens)and skunkbrush sumac (Rhus trilobata) could be added to the upland seedmixes at 0.25, 0.5 and 1 pound PLS/acre,respectively. In riparian zones, planting root stock of such species as American plum(Prunus americana),woods rose(Rosa woodsii), plains cottonwood(Populus sargenth), and willow(Populus spp.)may be considered. On non-topsoiled upland sites, a legume such as Ladak alfalfa at 1 pound PLS/acre can be included as a source of nitrogen for perennial grasses. TS/PS-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District June 2012 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) EC-2 Seeding dates for the highest success probability of perennial species along the Front Range are generally in the spring from April through early May and in the fall after the first of September until the ground freezes. If the area is irrigated, seeding may occur in summer months, as well. See Table TS/PS-3 for appropriate seeding dates. Table TS/PS-1. Minimum Drill Seeding Rates for Various Temporary Annual Grasses Pounds of Planting Species' Growth Pure Live Seed Depth (Common name) Season (PLS)/acre (inches) 1. Oats Cool 35 - 50 1 -2 2. Spring wheat Cool 25 -35 1 -2 3. Spring barley Cool 25 -35 1 -2 4. Annual ryegrass Cool 10- 15 '/2 5. Millet Warm 3 - 15 '/2-3/4 6. Sudangrass Warm 5-10 '/2-3/4 7. Sorghum Warm 5-10 '/2 -3/4 8. Winter wheat Cool 20-35 1 -2 9. Winter barley Cool 20-35 1 -2 10. Winter rye Cool 20-35 1 -2 11. Triticale Cool 25-40 1 -2 a Successful seeding of annual grass resulting in adequate plant growth will usually produce enough dead-plant residue to provide protection from wind and water erosion for an additional year. This assumes that the cover is not disturbed or mowed closer than 8 inches. Hydraulic seeding may be substituted for drilling only where slopes are steeper than 3:1 or where access limitations exist. When hydraulic seeding is used, hydraulic mulching should be applied as a separate operation,when practical,to prevent the seeds from being encapsulated in the mulch. See Table TS/PS-3 for seeding dates. Irrigation, if consistently applied, may extend the use of cool season species during the summer months. Seeding rates should be doubled if seed is broadcast,or increased by 50 percent if done using a Brillion Drill or by hydraulic seeding. June 2012 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District TS/PS-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-2 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) Table TS/PS-2. Minimum Drill Seeding Rates for Perennial Grasses Commona Botanical Growth Growth Seeds/ Pounds of Name Name Season Form Pound PLS/acre Alakali Soil Seed Mix Alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides Cool Bunch 1,750,000 0.25 Basin wildrye Elymus cinereus Cool Bunch 165,000 2.5 Sodar streambank wheatgrass Agropyron riparium 'Sodar' Cool Sod 170,000 2.5 Jose tall wheatgrass Agropyron elongatum 'Jose' Cool Bunch 79,000 7.0 Arriba western wheatgrass Agropyron smithii'Arriba' Cool Sod 110,000 5.5 Total 17.75 Fertile Loamy Soil Seed Mix Ephriam crested wheatgrass Agropyron cristatum Cool Sod 175,000 2.0 Ephriam' Dural hard fescue Festuca ovina 'duriuscula' Cool Bunch 565,000 1.0 Lincoln smooth brome Bromus inermis leyss Cool Sod 130,000 3.0 Lincoln' Sodar streambank wheatgrass Agropyron riparium'Sodar' Cool Sod 170,000 2.5 Arriba western wheatgrass Agropyron smithii'Arriba' Cool Sod 110,000 7.0 Total 15.5 High Water Table Soil Seed Mix Meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis Cool Sod 900,000 0.5 Redtop Agrostis alba Warm Open sod 5,000,000 0.25 Reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea Cool Sod 68,000 0.5 Lincoln smooth brome Bromus inermis leyss Cool Sod 130,000 3.0 Lincoln' Pathfinder switchgrass Panicum virgatum Warm Sod 389,000 1.0 Pathfinder' Alkar tall wheatgrass Agropyron elongatum Cool Bunch 79,000 5.5 Alkar' Total 10.75 Transition Turf Seed Mix` Ruebens Canadian bluegrass Poa compressa 'Ruebens' Cool Sod 2,500,000 0.5 Dural hard fescue Festuca ovina 'duriuscula' Cool Bunch 565,000 1.0 Citation perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne'Citation' Cool Sod 247,000 3.0 Lincoln smooth brome Bromus inermis leyss Cool Sod 130,000 3.0 Lincoln' Total 7.5 TS/PS-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District June 2012 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) EC-2 Table TS/PS-2. Minimum Drill Seeding Rates for Perennial Grasses (cont.) Common Botanical Growth Growth Seeds/ Pounds of Name Name Season Form Pound PLS/acre Sandy Soil Seed Mix Blue grama Bouteloua gracilis Warm Sod-forming 825,000 0.5 bunchgrass Camper little bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium Warm Bunch 240,000 1.0 'Camper' Prairie sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia Warm Open sod 274,000 1.0 Sand dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus Cool Bunch 5,298,000 0.25 Vaughn sideoats grama Bouteloua curtipendula Warm Sod 191,000 2.0 'Vaughn' Arriba western wheatgrass Agropyron smithii'Arriba' Cool Sod 110,000 5.5 Total 10.25 Heavy Clay,Rocky Foothill Seed Mix Ephriam crested wheatgrass Agropyron cristatumEphriam' Cool Sod 175,000 1.5 Oahe Intermediate wheatgrass Agropyron intermedium Cool Sod 115,000 5.5 'Oahe' Vaughn sideoats grama' Bouteloua curtipendula Warm Sod 191,000 2.0 'Vaughn' Lincoln smooth brome Bromus inermis leyss Cool Sod 130,000 3.0 'Lincoln' Arriba western wheatgrass Agropyron smithii'Arriba' Cool Sod 110,000 5.5 Total 17.5 a All of the above seeding mixes and rates are based on drill seeding followed by crimped straw mulch. These rates should be doubled if seed is broadcast and should be increased by 50 percent if the seeding is done using a Brillion Drill or is applied through hydraulic seeding. Hydraulic seeding may be substituted for drilling only where slopes are steeper than 3:1. If hydraulic seeding is used,hydraulic mulching should be done as a separate operation. b See Table TS/PS-3 for seeding dates. If site is to be irrigated,the transition turf seed rates should be doubled. d Crested wheatgrass should not be used on slopes steeper than 6H to IV. Can substitute 0.5 lbs PLS of blue grama for the 2.0 lbs PLS of Vaughn sideoats grama. June 2012 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District TS/PS-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-2 Temporary and Permanent Seeding (TS/PS) Table TS/PS-3. Seeding Dates for Annual and Perennial Grasses Annual Grasses Perennial Grasses (Numbers in table reference species in Table TS/PS-1) Seeding Dates Warm Cool Warm Cool January 1—March 15 ✓ ✓ March 16—April 30 4 1,2,3 ✓ ✓ May 1—May 15 4 ✓ May 16—June 30 4,5,6,7 July 1—July 15 5,6,7 July 16—August 31 September 1—September 30 8,9,10,11 October 1—December 31 ✓ Mulch Cover seeded areas with mulch or an appropriate rolled erosion control product to promote establishment of vegetation. Anchor mulch by crimping,netting or use of a non-toxic tackifier. See the Mulching BMP Fact Sheet for additional guidance. Maintenance and Removal Monitor and observe seeded areas to identify areas of poor growth or areas that fail to germinate. Reseed and mulch these areas, as needed. An area that has been permanently seeded should have a good stand of vegetation within one growing season if irrigated and within three growing seasons without irrigation in Colorado. Reseed portions of the site that fail to germinate or remain bare after the first growing season. Seeded areas may require irrigation,particularly during extended dry periods. Targeted weed control may also be necessary. Protect seeded areas from construction equipment and vehicle access. TS/PS-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District June 2012 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Soil Binders (SB) EC-3 Description Soil binders include a broad range of treatments that can be applied to exposed soils for temporary stabilization to reduce wind and water erosion. Soil binders may be applied alone or as tackifiers in conjunction with mulching and seeding f applications. — i Acknowledgement: This BMP Fact Sheet - has been adapted from the 2003 California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA)Stormwater BMP Handbook: Construction (www.cabmphandbooks.com). Photograph SB-1. Tackifier being applied to provide temporary soil Appropriate Uses stabilization. Photo courtesy of Douglas County. Soil binders can be used for short-term,temporary stabilization of soils on both mild and steep slopes. Soil binders are often used in areas where work has temporarily stopped,but is expected to resume before revegetation can become established. Binders are also useful on stockpiled soils or where temporary or permanent seeding has occurred. Prior to selecting a soil binder, check with the state and local jurisdiction to ensure that the chemicals used in the soil binders are allowed. The water quality impacts of some types of soil binders are relatively unknown and may not be allowed due to concerns about potential environmental impacts. Soil binders must be environmentally benign(non-toxic to plant and animal life), easy to apply,easy to maintain, economical, and should not stain paved or painted surfaces. Soil binders should not be used in vehicle or pedestrian high traffic areas, due to loss in effectiveness under these conditions. Site soil type will dictate appropriate soil binders to be used. Be aware that soil binders may not function effectively on silt or clay soils or highly compacted areas. Check manufacturer's recommendations for appropriateness with regard to soil conditions. Some binders may not be suitable for areas with existing vegetation. Design and Installation Properties of common soil binders used for erosion control are provided in Table SB-I. Design and installation Soil Binders guidance below are provided for general reference. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for application rates and Functions procedures. Erosion Control Yes Sediment Control No Site/Material Management Moderate November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SB-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-3 Soil Binders (SB) Table SB-I. Properties of Soil Binders for Erosion Control(Source: CASQA 2003) Binder Type Evaluation Criteria Plant Material Plant Material Polymeric Cementitious- Based Based Emulsion Blends Based Binders (short lived) (long lived) Resistance to Leaching High High Low to Moderate Moderate Resistance to Abrasion Moderate Low Moderate to High Moderate to High Longevity Short to Medium Medium Medium to Long Medium Minimum Curing Time 9 to 18 hours 19 to 24 hours 0 to 24 hours 4 to 8 hours before Rain Compatibility with Good Poor Poor Poor Existing Vegetation Photodegradable/ Photodegradable/ Mode of Degradation Biodegradable Biodegradable Chemically Chemically Degradable Degradable Specialized Application Water Truck or Water Truck or Water Truck or Water Truck or Equipment Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Mulcher Hydraulic Mulcher Mulcher Mulcher Liquid/Powder Powder Liquid Liquid/Powder Powder Yes,but Ye Yes,but dissolves on Surface Crusting dissolves on rewetting Yes rewetting Clean Up Water Water Water Water Erosion Control Varies Varies Varies 4,000 to 12,000 Application Rate lbs/acre Typ. SB-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Soil Binders (SB) EC-3 Factors to consider when selecting a soil binder generally include: ■ Suitability to situation: Consider where the soil binder will be applied,if it needs a high resistance to leaching or abrasion, and whether it needs to be compatible with existing vegetation. Determine the length of time soil stabilization will be needed, and if the soil binder will be placed in an area where it will degrade rapidly. In general, slope steepness is not a discriminating factor. ■ Soil types and surface materials: Fines and moisture content are key properties of surface materials. Consider a soil binder's ability to penetrate,likelihood of leaching, and ability to form a surface crust on the surface materials. ■ Frequency of application: The frequency of application can be affected by subgrade conditions, surface type, climate, and maintenance schedule. Frequent applications could lead to high costs. Application frequency may be minimized if the soil binder has good penetration,low evaporation, and good longevity. Consider also that frequent application will require frequent equipment clean up. An overview of major categories of soil binders, corresponding to the types included in Table S13-1 follows. Plant-Material Based (Short Lived)Binders ■ Guar: A non-toxic,biodegradable,natural galactomannan-based hydrocolloid treated with dispersant agents for easy field mixing. It should be mixed with water at the rate of 11 to 15 lbs per 1,000 gallons. Recommended minimum application rates are provided in Table S13-2. Table SB-2. Application Rates for Guar Soil Stabilizer Slo a(H:V) Flat 4:1 3:1 2:1 1:1 Application Rate(lb/acre) 40 45 50 60 70 ■ Psyllium: Composed of the finely ground muciloid coating of plantago seeds that is applied as a wet slurry to the surface of the soil. It dries to form a firm but rewettable membrane that binds soil particles together but permits germination and growth of seed. Psyllium requires 12 to 18 hours drying time. Application rates should be from 80 to 200 lbs/acre,with enough water in solution to allow for a uniform slurry flow. ■ Starch: Non-ionic,cold-water soluble(pre-gelatinized)granular cornstarch. The material is mixed with water and applied at the rate of 150 lb/acre. Approximate drying time is 9 to 12 hours. Plant-Material Based (Long Lived) Binders ■ Pitch and Rosin Emulsion: Generally, a non-ionic pitch and rosin emulsion has a minimum solids content of 48 percent. The rosin should be a minimum of 26 percent of the total solids content. The soil stabilizer should be a non-corrosive,water dilutable emulsion that upon application cures to a water insoluble binding and cementing agent. For soil erosion control applications,the emulsion is diluted and should be applied as follows: o For clayey soil: 5 parts water to I part emulsion November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S13-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-3 Soil Binders (SB) o For sandy soil: 10 parts water to 1 part emulsion Application can be by water truck or hydraulic seeder with the emulsion and product mixture applied at the rate specified by the manufacturer. Polymeric Emulsion Blend Binders ■ Acrylic Copolymers and Polymers: Polymeric soil stabilizers should consist of a liquid or solid polymer or copolymer with an acrylic base that contains a minimum of 55 percent solids. The polymeric compound should be handled and mixed in a manner that will not cause foaming or should contain an anti-foaming agent. The polymeric emulsion should not exceed its shelf life or expiration date; manufacturers should provide the expiration date. Polymeric soil stabilizer should be readily miscible in water,non-injurious to seed or animal life,non-flammable, should provide surface soil stabilization for various soil types without inhibiting water infiltration, and should not re-emulsify when cured. The applied compound should air cure within a maximum of 36 to 48 hours. Liquid copolymer should be diluted at a rate of 10 parts water to 1 part polymer and the mixture applied to soil at a rate of 1,175 gallons/acre. ■ Liquid Polymers of Methacrylates and Acrylates: This material consists of a tackifier/sealer that is aliquid polymer of methacrylates and acrylates. It is an aqueous 100 percent acrylic emulsion blend of 40 percent solids by volume that is free from styrene, acetate,vinyl, ethoxylated surfactants or silicates. For soil stabilization applications,it is diluted with water in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations,and applied with a hydraulic seeder at the rate of 20 gallons/acre. Drying time is 12 to 18 hours after application. ■ Copolymers of Sodium Acrylates and Acrylamides: These materials are non-toxic,dry powders that are copolymers of sodium acrylate and acrylamide. They are mixed with water and applied to the soil surface for erosion control at rates that are determined by slope gradient, as summarized in Table SB-3. Table SB-3. Application Rates for Copolymers of Sodium Acrylates and Acrylamides Slope H: Flat to 5:1 5:1 to 3:1 2:2 to 1:1 Application Rate lb/acre 3.0-5.0 5.0-10.0 10.0-20.0 ■ Polyacrylamide and Copolymer of Acrylamide: Linear copolymer polyacrylamide is packaged as a dry flowable solid. When used as a stand-alone stabilizer, it is diluted at a rate of 11 lb/1,000 gal. of water and applied at the rate of 5.0 lb/acre. ■ Hydrocolloid Polymers: Hydrocolloid Polymers are various combinations of dry flowable polyacrylamides,copolymers, and hydrocolloid polymers that are mixed with water and applied to the soil surface at rates of 55 to 60 lb/acre. Drying times are 0 to 4 hours. Cementitious-Based Binders ■ Gypsum: This formulated gypsum based product readily mixes with water and mulch to form a thin protective crust on the soil surface. It is composed of high purity gypsum that is ground, calcined and processed into calcium sulfate hemihydrate with a minimum purity of 86 percent. It is mixed in a hydraulic seeder and applied at rates 4,000 to 12,000 lb/acre. Drying time is 4 to 8 hours. S13-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Soil Binders (SB) EC-3 Installation After selecting an appropriate soil binder,the untreated soil surface must be prepared before applying the soil binder. The untreated soil surface must contain sufficient moisture to assist the agent in achieving uniform distribution. In general,the following steps should be followed: ■ Follow manufacturer's written recommendations for application rates,pre-wetting of application area, and cleaning of equipment after use. ■ Prior to application,roughen embankment and fill areas. ■ Consider the drying time for the selected soil binder and apply with sufficient time before anticipated rainfall. Soil binders should not be applied during or immediately before rainfall. ■ Avoid over spray onto roads, sidewalks, drainage channels,sound walls, existing vegetation, etc. ■ Soil binders should not be applied to frozen soil,areas with standing water,under freezing or rainy conditions, or when the temperature is below 40°F during the curing period. ■ More than one treatment is often necessary, although the second treatment may be diluted or have a lower application rate. ■ Generally, soil binders require a minimum curing time of 24 hours before they are fully effective. Refer to manufacturer's instructions for specific cure time. ■ For liquid agents: o Crown or slope ground to avoid ponding. o Uniformly pre-wet ground at 0.03 to 0.3 ga11yd2 or according to manufacturer's recommendations. o Apply solution under pressure. Overlap solution 6 to 12 in. o Allow treated area to cure for the time recommended by the manufacturer,typically at least 24 hours. o Apply second treatment before first treatment becomes ineffective,using 50 percent application rate. o In low humidity,reactivate chemicals by re-wetting with water at 0.1 to 0.2 gal/ydz. Maintenance and Removal Soil binders tend to break down due to natural weathering. Weathering rates depend on a variety of site- specific and product characteristics. Consult the manufacturer for recommended reapplication rates and reapply the selected soil binder as needed to maintain effectiveness. Soil binders can fail after heavy rainfall events and may require reapplication. In particular, soil binders will generally experience spot failures during heavy rainfall events. If runoff penetrates the soil at the top of a slope treated with a soil binder,it is likely that the runoff will undercut the stabilized soil layer and discharge at a point further down slope. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District S13-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 EC-3 Soil Binders (SB) Areas where erosion is evident should be repaired and soil binder or other stabilization reapplied, as needed. Care should be exercised to minimise the damage to protected areas while making repairs. Most binders biodegrade after exposure to sun, oxidation,heat and biological organisms;therefore, removal of the soil binder is not typically required. SB-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Wind Erosion/Dust Control (DC) EC-14 Description Wind erosion and dust control BMPs help to keep soil particles from entering tocola the air as a result of land disturbing construction activities. These BMPs - include a variety of practices generally T - focused on either graded disturbed areas or construction roadways. For graded areas,practices such as seeding and mulching,use of soil binders, site - watering, or other practices that provide prompt surface cover should be used. For construction roadways,road watering and stabilized surfaces should be considered. Photograph DC-1. Water truck used for dust suppression. Photo courtesy of Douglas County. Appropriate Uses Dust control measures should be used on any site where dust poses a problem to air quality. Dust control is important to control for the health of construction workers and surrounding waterbodies. Design and Installation The following construction BMPs can be used for dust control: ■ An irrigation/sprinkler system can be used to wet the top layer of disturbed soil to help keep dry soil particles from becoming airborne. ■ Seeding and mulching can be used to stabilize disturbed surfaces and reduce dust emissions. ■ Protecting existing vegetation can help to slow wind velocities across the ground surface,thereby limiting the likelihood of soil particles to become airborne. ■ Spray-on soil binders form a bond between soil particles keeping them grounded. Chemical treatments may require additional permitting requirements. Potential impacts to surrounding waterways and habitat must be considered prior to use. ■ Placing rock on construction roadways and entrances will help keep dust to a minimum across the construction site. ■ Wind fences can be installed on site to reduce wind speeds. Install fences perpendicular to the prevailing Wind Erosion Control/ wind direction for maximum effectiveness. Dust Control Functions Maintenance and Removal Erosion Control Yes When using an irrigation/sprinkler control system to aid in Sediment Control No dust control,be careful not to overwater. Overwatering will Site/Material Management Moderate cause construction vehicles to track mud off-site. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District DC-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Stockpile Management (SP) MM-2 Description Stockpile management includes measures to minimise erosion and sediment transport from soil stockpiles. Appropriate Uses e r Stockpile management should be used -, when soils or other erodible materials are stored at the construction site. ;, ` Special attention should be given to _ ti stockpiles in close proximity to natural or manmade storm systems. Photograph SP-1. A topsoil stockpile that has been partially Design and Installation revegetated and is protected by silt fence perimeter control. Locate stockpiles away from all drainage system components including storm sewer inlets. Where practical,choose stockpile locations that that will remain undisturbed for the longest period of time as the phases of construction progress. Place sediment control BMPs around the perimeter of the stockpile, such as sediment control logs,rock socks, silt fence, straw bales and sand bags. See Detail SP-1 for guidance on proper establishment of perimeter controls around a stockpile. For stockpiles in active use,provide a stabilized designated access point on the upgradient side of the stockpile. Stabilize the stockpile surface with surface roughening,temporary seeding and mulching, erosion control blankets,or soil binders. Soils stockpiled for an extended period(typically for more than 60 days)should be seeded and mulched with a temporary grass cover once the stockpile is placed(typically within 14 days). Use of mulch only or a soil binder is acceptable if the stockpile will be in place for a more limited time period(typically 30-60 days). Timeframes for stabilization of stockpiles noted in this fact sheet are "typical" guidelines. Check permit requirements for specific federal, state,and/or local requirements that may be more prescriptive. Stockpiles should not be placed in streets or paved areas unless no other practical alternative exists. See the Stabilized Staging Area Fact Sheet for guidance when staging in roadways is unavoidable due to space or right-of-way constraints. For paved areas,rock socks must be used for perimeter control and all inlets with the potential to receive sediment from the stockpile(even from vehicle tracking)must be protected. Maintenance and Removal Inspect perimeter controls and inlet protection in accordance with their respective BMP Fact Sheets. Where seeding,mulch and/or soil binders are used,reseeding or reapplication of soil binder may be necessary. When temporary removal of a perimeter BMP is necessary Stockpile Management to access a stockpile, ensure BMPs are reinstalled in Functions accordance with their respective design detail section. Erosion Control Yes Sediment Control Yes Site/Material Management Yes November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SP-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-2 Stockpile Management (SM) When the stockpile is no longer needed,properly dispose of excess materials and revegetate or otherwise stabilize the ground surface where the stockpile was located. SP-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Stockpile Management (SP) MM-2 v� l S P 3.0' MIN STOCKPILE l A 1 / SILT FENCE (SEE SF DETAIL FOR \ / INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS) STOCKPILE PROTECTION PLAN MAXIMUM 2 SILT FENCE (SEE SF DETAIL FOR INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS) SECTION A SP- 1 . STOCKPILE PROTECTION STOCKPILE PROTECTION INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR: -LOCATION OF STOCKPILES. -TYPE OF STOCKPILE PROTECTION. 2. INSTALL PERIMETER CONTROLS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE DESIGN DETAILS. SILT FENCE IS SHOWN IN THE STOCKPILE PROTECTION DETAILS; HOWEVER, OTHER TYPES OF PERIMETER CONTROLS INCLUDING SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS OR ROCK SOCKS MAY BE SUITABLE IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES. CONSIDERATIONS FOR DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE TYPE OF PERIMETER CONTROL FOR A STOCKPILE INCLUDE WHETHER THE STOCKPILE IS LOCATED ON A PERVIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, THE RELATIVE HEIGHTS OF THE PERIMETER CONTROL AND STOCKPILE, THE ABILITY OF THE PERIMETER CONTROL TO CONTAIN THE STOCKPILE WITHOUT FAILING IN THE EVENT THAT MATERIAL FROM THE STOCKPILE SHIFTS OR SLUMPS AGAINST THE PERIMETER, AND OTHER FACTORS. 3. STABILIZE THE STOCKPILE SURFACE WITH SURFACE ROUGHENING, TEMPORARY SEEDING AND MULCHING, EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS, OR SOIL BINDERS. SOILS STOCKPILED FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD (TYPICALLY FOR MORE THAN 60 DAYS) SHOULD BE SEEDED AND MULCHED WITH A TEMPORARY GRASS COVER ONCE THE STOCKPILE IS PLACED (TYPICALLY WITHIN 14 DAYS). USE OF MULCH ONLY OR A SOIL BINDER IS ACCEPTABLE IF THE STOCKPILE WILL BE IN PLACE FOR A MORE LIMITED TIME PERIOD (TYPICALLY 30-60 DAYS). 4. FOR TEMPORARY STOCKPILES ON THE INTERIOR PORTION OF A CONSTRUCTION SITE, WHERE OTHER OOWNGRADIENT CONTROLS, INCLUDING PERIMETER CONTROL, ARE IN PLACE, STOCKPILE PERIMETER CONTROLS MAY NOT BE REQUIRED. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SP-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-2 Stockpile Management (SM) STOCKPILE PROTECTION MAINTENANCE NOTES 1. INSPECT BMPs EACH WORKDAY, AND MAINTAIN THEM IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. MAINTENANCE OF BMPs SHOULD BE PROACTIVE, NOT REACTIVE. INSPECT BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AND ALWAYS WITHIN 24 HOURS) FOLLOWING A STORM THAT CAUSES SURFACE EROSION, AND PERFORM NECESSARY MAINTENANCE. 2. FREQUENT OBSERVATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BMPs IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. INSPECTIONS AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED THOROUGHLY. 3. WHERE BMPs HAVE FAILED, REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE INITIATED UPON DISCOVERY OF THE FAILURE. STOCKPILE PROTECTION MAINTENANCE NOTES 4. IF PERIMETER PROTECTION MUST BE MOVED TO ACCESS SOIL STOCKPILE, REPLACE PERIMETER CONTROLS BY THE END OF THE WORKDAY. 5. STOCKPILE PERIMETER CONTROLS CAN BE REMOVED ONCE ALL THE MATERIAL FROM THE STOCKPILE HAS BEEN USED. (DETAILS ADAPTED FROM PARKER, COLORADO, NOT AVAILABLE IN AUTOCAD) NOTE: MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE BMP DETAILS THAT VARY FROM UDFCD STANDARD DETAILS. CONSULT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS TO WHICH DETAIL SHOULD BE USED WHEN DIFFERENCES ARE NOTED. SP-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Stockpile Management (SP) MM-2 A POLY LINER SA ® R BERM ORANGE SAFETY CONE 501E/LANDSCAPE MATERIAL a) m m POLY TARP 3 TARP ANCHOR 6" PVC PIPE FOR DRAINAGE IN FLOWLINE ® CURB LINE ROAD CL L TARP ANCHOR (CINDER POLY TARP BLOCK, OR 5 GALLON BUCKET OF WATER) ROADWAY I 6' MAX. /\\j POLY LINER BERM MATERIAL (TRIANGULAR SILT DIKE, 6"MIN. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG, 1 6' MAX., MUST NOT 1 6" PVC PIPE ROCK SOCK, OR OTHER I BE LOCATED WITHIN WRAPPED MATERIAL) A DRIVE LANE SP-2. MATERIALS STAGING IN ROADWAY MATERIALS STAGING IN ROADWAYS INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR -LOCATION OF MATERIAL STAGING AREA(S). -CONTRACTOR MAY ADJUST LOCATION AND SIZE OF STAGING AREA WITH APPROVAL FROM THE LOCAL JURISDICTION. 2. FEATURE MUST BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION, EARTHWORK OR DELIVERY OF MATERIALS. 3. MATERIALS MUST BE STATIONED ON THE POLY LINER. ANY INCIDENTAL MATERIALS DEPOSITED ON PAVED SECTION OR ALONG CURB LINE MUST BE CLEANED UP PROMPTLY. 4. POLY LINER AND TARP COVER SHOULD BE OF SIGNIFICANT THICKNESS TO PREVENT DAMAGE OR LOSS OF INTEGRITY. 5. SAND BAGS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED TO ANCHOR THE COVER TARP OR PROVIDE BERMING UNDER THE BASE LINER. 6. FEATURE IS NOT INTENDED FOR USE WITH WET MATERIAL THAT WILL BE DRAINING AND/OR SPREADING OUT ON THE POLY LINER OR FOR DEMOLITION MATERIALS. 7. THIS FEATURE CAN BE USED FOR: -UTILITY REPAIRS. -WHEN OTHER STAGING LOCATIONS AND OPTIONS ARE LIMITED. -OTHER LIMITED APPLICATION AND SHORT DURATION STAGING. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SP-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-2 Stockpile Management (SM) MATERIALS STAGING IN ROADWAY MAINTENANCE NOTES 1. INSPECT BMPs EACH WORKDAY, AND MAINTAIN THEM IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. MAINTENANCE OF BMPs SHOULD BE PROACTIVE, NOT REACTIVE. INSPECT BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AND ALWAYS WITHIN 24 HOURS) FOLLOWING A STORM THAT CAUSES SURFACE EROSION, AND PERFORM NECESSARY MAINTENANCE. 2. FREQUENT OBSERVATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BMPs IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. INSPECTIONS AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED THOROUGHLY. 3. WHERE BMPs HAVE FAILED, REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE INITIATED UPON DISCOVERY OF THE FAILURE. 4. INSPECT PVC PIPE ALONG CURB LINE FOR CLOGGING AND DEBRIS. REMOVE OBSTRUCTIONS PROMPTLY. 5. CLEAN MATERIAL FROM PAVED SURFACES BY SWEEPING OR VACUUMING. NOTE: MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE BMP DETAILS THAT VARY FROM UDFCD STANDARD DETAILS. CONSULT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS TO WHICH DETAIL SHOULD BE USED WHEN DIFFERENCES ARE NOTED. (DETAILS ADAPTED FROM AURORA, COLORADO) SP-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) MM-3 Description =.. Implement construction site good housekeeping practices to _ prevent pollution associated with solid, liquid and hazardous construction-related materials and wastes. Stormwater Management Plans (SWMPs)should clearly specify BMPs ' including these good housekeeping practices: ■ Provide for waste management. ■ Establish proper building material staging areas. ■ Designate paint and concrete washout areas. ■ Establish proper equipment/vehicle fueling and maintenance practices. ■ Control equipment/vehicle washing and allowable non- stormwater discharges. ■ Develop a spill prevention and response plan. Acknowledgement: This Fact Sheet is based directly on EPA guidance provided in Developing Your Stormwater Photographs GH-1 and GH-2. Proper materials Pollution Prevent Plan(EPA 2007). storage and secondary containment for fuel tanks are important good housekeeping practices. Photos Appropriate Uses courtesy of CDOT and City of Aurora. Good housekeeping practices are necessary at all construction sites. Design and Installation The following principles and actions should be addressed in SWMPs: ■ Provide for Waste Management. Implement management procedures and practices to prevent or reduce the exposure and transport of pollutants in stormwater from solid, liquid and sanitary wastes that will be generated at the site. Practices such as trash disposal,recycling,proper material handling, and cleanup measures can reduce the potential for stormwater runoff to pick up construction site wastes and discharge them to surface waters. Implement a comprehensive set of waste-management practices for hazardous or toxic materials, such as paints, solvents,petroleum products,pesticides, wood preservatives, acids,roofing tar, and other materials. Practices should include storage, handling, inventory,and cleanup procedures,in case of spills. Specific practices that should be considered include: Solid or Construction Waste Good Housekeeping o Designate trash and bulk waste-collection areas on- Functions site. Erosion Control No Sediment Control No Site/Material Management Yes November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District GH-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) o Recycle materials whenever possible(e.g.,paper,wood, concrete, oil). o Segregate and provide proper disposal options for hazardous material wastes. o Clean up litter and debris from the construction site daily. o Locate waste-collection areas away from streets, gutters,watercourses, and storm drams. Waste- collection areas(dumpsters, and such)are often best located near construction site entrances to minimize traffic on disturbed soils. Consider secondary containment around waste collection areas to minimize the likelihood of contaminated discharges. o Empty waste containers before they are full and overflowing. Sanitary and Septic Waste o Provide convenient,well-maintained, and properly located toilet facilities on-site. o Locate toilet facilities away from storm drain inlets and waterways to prevent accidental spills and contamination of stormwater. o Maintain clean restroom facilities and empty portable toilets regularly. o Where possible,provide secondary containment pans under portable toilets. o Provide tie-downs or stake-downs for portable toilets. o Educate employees, subcontractors,and suppliers on locations of facilities. o Treat or dispose of sanitary and septic waste in accordance with state or local regulations. Do not discharge or bury wastewater at the construction site. o Inspect facilities for leaks. If found,repair or replace immediately. o Special care is necessary during maintenance(pump out)to ensure that waste and/or biocide are not spilled on the ground. Hazardous Materials and Wastes o Develop and implement employee and subcontractor education, as needed, on hazardous and toxic waste handling, storage, disposal,and cleanup. , o Designate hazardous waste-collection j areas on-site. o Place all hazardous and toxic material wastes in secondary containment. Photograph GH-3. Locate portable toilet facilities on level surfaces away from waterways and storm drains. Photo courtesy of WWE. GH-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) MM-3 o Hazardous waste containers should be inspected to ensure that all containers are labeled properly and that no leaks are present. ■ Establish Proper Building Material Handling and Staging Areas. The SWMP should include comprehensive handling and management procedures for building materials,especially those that are hazardous or toxic. Paints, solvents,pesticides,fuels and oils, other hazardous materials or building materials that have the potential to contaminate stormwater should be stored indoors or under cover whenever possible or in areas with secondary containment. Secondary containment measures prevent a spill from spreading across the site and may include dikes,berms, curbing, or other containment methods. Secondary containment techniques should also ensure the protection of groundwater. Designate staging areas for activities such as fueling vehicles,mixing paints,plaster,mortar,and other potential pollutants. Designated staging areas enable easier monitoring of the use of materials and clean up of spills. Training employees and subcontractors is essential to the success of this pollution prevention principle. Consider the following specific materials handling and staging practices: o Train employees and subcontractors in proper handling and storage practices. o Clearly designate site areas for staging and storage with signs and on construction drawings. Staging areas should be located in areas central to the construction site. Segment the staging area into sub-areas designated for vehicles, equipment, or stockpiles. Construction entrances and exits should be clearly marked so that delivery vehicles enter/exit through stabilized areas with vehicle tracking controls(See Vehicle Tracking Control Fact Sheet). o Provide storage in accordance with Spill Protection, Control and Countermeasures(SPCC) requirements and plans and provide cover and impermeable perimeter control, as necessary, for hazardous materials and contaminated soils that must be stored on site. o Ensure that storage containers are regularly inspected for leaks, corrosion, support or foundation failure, or other signs of deterioration and tested for soundness. o Reuse and recycle construction materials when possible. ■ Designate Concrete Washout Areas. Concrete contractors should be encouraged to use the washout facilities at their own plants or dispatch facilities when feasible;however, concrete washout commonly occurs on construction sites. If it is necessary to provide for concrete washout areas on- site, designate specific washout areas and design facilities to handle anticipated washout water. Washout areas should also be provided for paint and stucco operations. Because washout areas can be a source of pollutants from leaks or spills, care must be taken with regard to their placement and proper use. See the Concrete Washout Area Fact Sheet for detailed guidance. Both self-constructed and prefabricated washout containers can fill up quickly when concrete,paint, and stucco work are occurring on large portions of the site. Be sure to check for evidence that contractors are using the washout areas and not dumping materials onto the ground or into drainage facilities. If the washout areas are not being used regularly, consider posting additional signage, relocating the facilities to more convenient locations,or providing training to workers and contractors. When concrete,paint,or stucco is part of the construction process, consider these practices which will help prevent contamination of stormwater. Include the locations of these areas and the maintenance and inspection procedures in the SWMP. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District GH-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) o Do not washout concrete trucks or equipment into storm drains, streets, gutters,uncontained areas, or streams. Only use designated washout areas. o Establish washout areas and advertise their locations with signs. Ensure that signage remains in good repair. o Provide adequate containment for the amount of wash water that will be used. o Inspect washout structures daily to detect leaks or tears and to identify when materials need to be removed. o Dispose of materials properly. The preferred method is to allow the water to evaporate and to recycle the hardened concrete. Full service companies may provide dewatering services and should dispose of wastewater properly. Concrete wash water can be highly polluted. It should not be discharged to any surface water,storm sewer system, or allowed to infiltrate into the ground in the vicinity of waterbodies. Washwater should not be discharged to a sanitary sewer system without first receiving written permission from the system operator. ■ Establish Proper Equipment/Vehicle Fueling and Maintenance Practices. Create a clearly designated on-site fueling and maintenance area that is clean and dry. The on-site fueling area should have a spill kit,and staff should know how to use it. If possible, conduct vehicle fueling and maintenance activities in a covered area. Consider the following practices to help prevent the discharge of pollutants to stormwater from equipment/vehicle fueling and maintenance. Include the locations of designated fueling and maintenance areas and inspection and maintenance procedures in the SWMP. o Train employees and subcontractors in proper fueling procedures(stay with vehicles during fueling,proper use of pumps, emergency shutoff valves, etc.). o Inspect on-site vehicles and equipment regularly for leaks, equipment damage,and other service problems. o Clearly designate vehicle/equipment service areas away from drainage facilities and watercourses to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff. o Use drip pans,drip cloths,or absorbent pads when replacing spent fluids. o Collect all spent fluids, store in appropriate labeled containers in the proper storage areas, and recycle fluids whenever possible. ■ Control Equipment/Vehicle Washing and Allowable Non-Stormwater Discharges. Implement practices to prevent contamination of surface and groundwater from equipment and vehicle wash water. Representative practices include: o Educate employees and subcontractors on proper washing procedures. o Use off-site washing facilities,when available. o Clearly mark the washing areas and inform workers that all washing must occur in this area. o Contain wash water and treat it using BMPs. Infiltrate washwater when possible,but maintain separation from drainage paths and waterbodies. GH-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) MM-3 o Use high-pressure water spray at vehicle washing facilities without detergents. Water alone can remove most dirt adequately. o Do not conduct other activities, such as vehicle repairs,in the wash area. o Include the location of the washing facilities and the inspection and maintenance procedures in the SWMP. ■ Develop a Spill Prevention and Response Plan. Spill prevention and response procedures must be identified in the SWMP. Representative procedures include identifying ways to reduce the chance of spills, stop the source of spills,contain and clean up spills, dispose of materials contaminated by spills,and train personnel responsible for spill prevention and response. The plan should also specify material handling procedures and storage requirements and ensure that clear and concise spill cleanup procedures are provided and posted for areas in which spills may potentially occur. When developing a spill prevention plan, include the following: o Note the locations of chemical storage areas,storm drains,tributary drainage areas, surface waterbodies on or near the site, and measures to stop spills from leaving the site. o Provide proper handling and safety procedures for each type of waste. Keep Material Safety Data Sheets(MSDSs)for chemical used on site with the SWMP. o Establish an education program for employees and subcontractors on the potential hazards to humans and the environment from spills and leaks. o Specify how to notify appropriate authorities, such as police and fire departments,hospitals, or municipal sewage treatment facilities to request assistance. Emergency procedures and contact numbers should be provided in the SWMP and posted at storage locations. o Describe the procedures, equipment and materials for immediate cleanup of spills and proper disposal. o Identify personnel responsible for implementing the plan in the event of a spill. Update the spill prevention plan and clean up materials as changes occur to the types of chemicals stored and used at the facility. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District GH-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 MM-3 Good Housekeeping Practices (GH) Spill Prevention, Control,and Countermeasure(SPCC)Plan Construction sites may be subject to 40 CFR Part 112 regulations that require the preparation and implementation of a SPCC Plan to prevent oil spills from aboveground and underground storage tanks. The facility is subject to this rule if it is a non-transportation-related facility that: ■ Has a total storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons or a completely buried storage capacity greater than 42,000 gallons. ■ Could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in quantities that may be harmful to navigable waters of the United States and adjoining shorelines. Furthermore, if the facility is subject to 40 CFR Part 112, the SWAP should reference the SPCC Plan. To find out more about SPCC Plans,see EPA's website on SPPC at www.cpa. ovg /oilspiu/spce.htm. Reporting Oil Spills In the event of an oil spill,contact the National Response Center toll free at 1-800-424-8802 for assistance, or for more details,visit their website: www.nrc.uscg.mil. Maintenance and Removal Effective implementation of good housekeeping practices is dependent on clear designation of personnel responsible for supervising and implementing good housekeeping programs, such as site cleanup and disposal of trash and debris,hazardous material management and disposal,vehicle and equipment maintenance, and other practices. Emergency response "drills"may aid in emergency preparedness. Checklists may be helpful in good housekeeping efforts. Staging and storage areas require permanent stabilization when the areas are no longer being used for construction-related activities. Construction-related materials, debris and waste must be removed from the construction site once construction is complete. Design Details See the following Fact Sheets for related Design Details: MM-1 Concrete Washout Area MM-2 Stockpile Management SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control Design details are not necessary for other good housekeeping practices;however,be sure to designate where specific practices will occur on the appropriate construction drawings. GH-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Silt Fence (SF) SC-1 Description A silt fence is a woven geotextile fabric attached to wooden posts and trenched into the ground. It is designed as a sediment barrier to intercept sheet flow runoff from disturbed areas. Appropriate Uses ` - - - A silt fence can be used where runoff is conveyed from a disturbed area as sheet flow. Silt fence is not designed to receive concentrated flow or to be used as a filter fabric. Typical uses include: ■ Down slope of a disturbed area to accept sheet flow. Photograph SF-1. Silt fence creates a sediment barrier,forcing sheet flow runoff to evaporate or infiltrate. ■ Along the perimeter of a receiving water such as a stream,pond or wetland. ■ At the perimeter of a construction site. Design and Installation Silt fence should be installed along the contour of slopes so that it intercepts sheet flow. The maximum recommended tributary drainage area per 100 lineal feet of silt fence,installed along the contour,is approximately 0.25 acres with a disturbed slope length of up to 150 feet and a tributary slope gradient no steeper than 3:1. Longer and steeper slopes require additional measures. This recommendation only applies to silt fence installed along the contour. Silt fence installed for other uses, such as perimeter control, should be installed in a way that will not produce concentrated flows. For example,a"J-hook" installation may be appropriate to force runoff to pond and evaporate or infiltrate in multiple areas rather than concentrate and cause erosive conditions parallel to the silt fence. See Detail SF-1 for proper silt fence installation,which involves proper trenching, staking, securing the fabric to the stakes, and backfilling the silt fence. Properly installed silt fence should not be easily pulled out by hand and there should be no gaps between the ground and the fabric. Silt fence must meet the minimum allowable strength requirements, depth of installation requirement,and other specifications in the design details. Improper installation of silt fence is a common reason for silt fence failure;however, Silt Fence when properly installed and used for the appropriate purposes, it Functions can be highly effective. Erosion Control No Sediment Control Yes Site/Material Management No November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SF-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SC-1 Silt Fence (SF) Maintenance and Removal Inspection of silt fence includes observing the material for tears or holes and checking for slumping fence and undercut areas bypassing flows. Repair of silt fence typically involves replacing the damaged section with a new section. Sediment accumulated behind silt fence should be removed,as needed to maintain BMP effectiveness,typically before it reaches a depth of 6 inches. Silt fence may be removed when the upstream area has reached final stabilization. ,.: Photograph SF-2. When silt fence is not installed along the contour,a"J-hook"installation may be appropriate to ensure that the BMP does not create concentrated flow parallel to the silt fence. Photo courtesy of Tom Gore. SF-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Silt Fence (SF) SC-1 SF SF -SF 1 Y2" X i i2u SF 'RECOMMENDED, WOODEN FENCE POST WITH 10' MAX SPACING SILT FENCE GEOTEXTILE A COMPACTED BACKFI LL FEW 36 5 T'r,F' EXISTING GROUND 6" MIN _1/1 =j 18" AT LEAST 10" MIN OF SILT FENCE "TAIL" SHALL BE 4" MIN BURIED SILT FENCE POSTS SHALL OVERLAP AT JOINTS SO THAT NO GAPS JOIN EXIST IN SILT FENCE FIRST ROTATE SECOND CZ=Z=Ell POSTS SHALL BE JOINED AS SHOWN, THEN ROTATED 180 DEG. THICKNESS OF GEOTEXTILE HAS IN DIRECTION SHOWN AND DRIVEN BEEN EXAGGERATED, TYP INTO THE GROUND SECTION A SF- 1 . SILT FENCE November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SF-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SC-1 Silt Fence (SF) SILT FENCE INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SILT FENCE MUST BE PLACED AWAY FROM THE TOE OF THE SLOPE TO ALLOW FOR WATER PONDING. SILT FENCE AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE SHOULD BE INSTALLED IN A FLAT LOCATION AT LEAST SEVERAL FEET (2-5 FT) FROM THE TOE OF THE SLOPE TO ALLOW ROOM FOR PONDING AND DEPOSITION. 2. A UNIFORM 6" X 4" ANCHOR TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED USING TRENCHER OR SILT FENCE INSTALLATION DEVICE. NO ROAD GRADERS, BACKHOES, OR SIMILAR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED. 3. COMPACT ANCHOR TRENCH BY HAND WITH A "JUMPING JACK" OR BY WHEEL ROLLING. COMPACTION SHALL BE SUCH THAT SILT FENCE RESISTS BEING PULLED OUT OF ANCHOR TRENCH BY HAND. 4. SILT FENCE SHALL BE PULLED TIGHT AS IT IS ANCHORED TO THE STAKES. THERE SHOULD BE NO NOTICEABLE SAG BETWEEN STAKES AFTER IT HAS BEEN ANCHORED TO THE STAKES. 5. SILT FENCE FABRIC SHALL BE ANCHORED TO THE STAKES USING 1" HEAVY DUTY STAPLES OR NAILS WITH 1" HEADS. STAPLES AND NAILS SHOULD BE PLACED 3" ALONG THE FABRIC DOWN THE STAKE. 6. AT THE END OF A RUN OF SILT FENCE ALONG A CONTOUR, THE SILT FENCE SHOULD BE TURNED PERPENDICULAR TO THE CONTOUR TO CREATE A "J—HOOK." THE "J—HOOK" EXTENDING PERPENDICULAR TO THE CONTOUR SHOULD BE OF SUFFICIENT LENGTH TO KEEP RUNOFF FROM FLOWING AROUND THE END OF THE SILT FENCE (TYPICALLY 10' — 20'). 7. SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE NOTES 1. INSPECT BMPs EACH WORKDAY, AND MAINTAIN THEM IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. MAINTENANCE OF BMPs SHOULD BE PROACTIVE, NOT REACTIVE. INSPECT BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AND ALWAYS WITHIN 24 HOURS) FOLLOWING A STORM THAT CAUSES SURFACE EROSION, AND PERFORM NECESSARY MAINTENANCE. 2. FREQUENT OBSERVATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BMPs IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. INSPECTIONS AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED THOROUGHLY. 3. WHERE BMPs HAVE FAILED, REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE INITIATED UPON DISCOVERY OF THE FAILURE. 4. SEDIMENT ACCUMULATED UPSTREAM OF THE SILT FENCE SHALL BE REMOVED AS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE BMP, TYPICALLY WHEN DEPTH OF ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTS IS APPROXIMATELY 6". 5. REPAIR OR REPLACE SILT FENCE WHEN THERE ARE SIGNS OF WEAR, SUCH AS SAGGING, TEARING, OR COLLAPSE. 6. SILT FENCE IS TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL THE UPSTREAM DISTURBED AREA IS STABILIZED AND APPROVED BY THE LOCAL JURISDICTION, OR IS REPLACED BY AN EQUIVALENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP. 7. WHEN SILT FENCE IS REMOVED, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TOPSOIL, SEEDED AND MULCHED OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED AS APPROVED BY LOCAL JURISDICTION. (DETAIL ADAPTED FROM TOWN OF PARKER, COLORADO AND CITY OF AURORA, NOT AVAILABLE IN AUTOCAD) NOTE: MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE BMP DETAILS THAT VARY FROM UDFCD STANDARD DETAILS. CONSULT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS TO WHICH DETAIL SHOULD BE USED WHEN DIFFERENCES ARE NOTED. SF-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Sediment Control Log (SCL) SC-2 Description A sediment control log is a linear roll made of natural materials such as so straw, coconut fiber, or other fibrous material trenched into the ground and held with a wooden stake. Sediment control logs are also often referred to as "straw wattles." They are used as a 4 - sediment barrier to intercept sheet flow runoff from disturbed areas. Appropriate Uses Sediment control logs can be used in the following applications to trap _ sediment: ■ As perimeter control for stockpiles and the site. ■ As part of inlet protection designs. ■ As check dams in small drainage ditches. (Sediment control logs are not intended for use in channels with high flow velocities.) Photographs SCL-1 and SCL-2. Sediment control logs used as 1)a perimeter control around a soil stockpile;and,2)as a'Thook" ■ On disturbed slopes to shorten flow perimeter control at the comer of a construction site. lengths(as an erosion control). ■ As part of multi-layered perimeter control along a receiving water such as a stream,pond or wetland. Sediment control logs work well in combination with other layers of erosion and sediment controls. Design and Installation Sediment control logs should be installed along the contour to avoid concentrating flows. The maximum allowable tributary drainage area per 100 lineal feet of sediment control log, installed along the contour,is approximately 0.25 acres with a disturbed slope length of up to 150 feet and a tributary slope gradient no steeper than 3:1. Longer and steeper slopes require additional measures. This recommendation only applies to sediment control logs installed along the contour. When installed for other uses, such as perimeter control,it should be installed in a way that will not produce concentrated flows. For example, a"J-hook" Sediment Control Lo installation may be appropriate to force runoff to pond and Functions evaporate or infiltrate in multiple areas rather than concentrate Erosion Control Moderate and cause erosive conditions parallel to the BMP. Sediment Control Yes Site/Material Management No November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SCL-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SC-2 Sediment Control Log (SCL) Although sediment control logs initially allow runoff to flow through the BMP,they can quickly become a barrier and should be installed is if they are impermeable. Design details and notes for sediment control logs are provided in Detail SCL-1. Sediment logs must be properly trenched and staked into the ground to prevent undercutting,bypassing and displacement. When installed on slopes, sediment control logs should be installed along the contours (i.e.,perpendicular to flow). Improper installation can lead to poor performance. Be sure that sediment control logs are properly trenched,anchored and tightly jointed. Maintenance and Removal Be aware that sediment control logs will eventually degrade. Remove accumulated sediment before the depth is one-half the height of the sediment log and repair damage to the sediment log,typically by replacing the damaged section. Once the upstream area is stabilized,remove and properly dispose of the logs. Areas disturbed beneath the logs may need to be seeded and mulched. Sediment control logs that are biodegradable may occasionally be left in place(e.g.,when logs are used in conjunction with erosion control blankets as permanent slope breaks). However,removal of sediment control logs after final stabilization is typically recommended when used in perimeter control,inlet protection and check dam applications. SCL-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Sediment Control Log (SCL) SC-2 SCL A 1Y2" x 1Yz" x 18" {MIN) WOODEN STAKE 9" DIAMETER (MIN) } SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG L 3 4' MAX. CENTER 6" Ys DIAM. �\������j� FLOW OF SCL {TYP j�/ `y�j � . y\\\0\\�\v�� NOTE: LARGER DIAM. SC /�\ DIAMETER SEDIMENT x/ � ���� CONTROL LOGS MAY NEED BE EMBEDDED DEEPER. 0/10 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG CENTER STAKE IN CONTROL LOG COMPACTED EXCAVATED 3 9" DIAMETER (MIN) TRENCH SOIL SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG FLOW Ys DIAM. SCL (TYP.) 6" SECTION A 12" OVERLAP 1Y2" x 1Y" x 18" (MIN) WOODEN STAKE i 9" DIAMETER (MIN) SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG JOINTS SCL- 1 . SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SCL-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SC-2 Sediment Control Log (SCL) COMPACTED EXCAVATED 3" � � CENTER STAKE IN CONTROL LOG TRENCH SOIL 9" DIAMETER (MIN) SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG FLOW ---� PLACE LOG AGAINST BACK OF CURB Y3 DIAM. SCL (TYP.) 6" MIN. SCL-2. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG AT BACK OF CURB CENTER STAKE IN CONTROL LOG 3 9" DIAMETER (MIN) SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TREE LAWN (TYPICAL) Ya DIAM. SCL (TYP.) CURB FLOW / Rq SCL-3. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG AT SIDEWALK WITH TREE LAWN STAKING AT 4' MAX. ON CENTER (TYP.} VERTICAL SPACING VARIES DEPENDING ON SLOPE CONTINUOUS SCL AT PERIMETER OF CONSTRUCTION SITE SCL-4. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS TO CONTROL SLOPE LENGTH SCL-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Sediment Control Log (SCL) SC-2 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR LOCATION AND LENGTH OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS. 2. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS THAT ACT AS A PERIMETER CONTROL SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY UPGRADIENT LAND—DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. 3. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS SHALL CONSIST OF STRAW, COMPOST, EXCELSIOR OR COCONUT FIBER, AND SHALL BE FREE OF ANY NOXIOUS WEED SEEDS OR DEFECTS INCLUDING RIPS, HOLES AND OBVIOUS WEAR. 4. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS MAY BE USED AS SMALL CHECK DAMS IN DITCHES AND SWALES. HOWEVER, THEY SHOULD NOT BE USED IN PERENNIAL STREAMS OR HIGH VELOCITY DRAINAGE WAYS. 5. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT SEDIMENT CONTROL LOGS BE TRENCHED INTO THE GROUND TO A DEPTH OF APPROXIMATELY Y3 OF THE DIAMETER OF THE LOG. IF TRENCHING TO THIS DEPTH IS NOT FEASIBLE AND/OR DESIRABLE (SHORT TERM INSTALLATION WITH DESIRE NOT TO DAMAGE LANDSCAPE) A LESSER TRENCHING DEPTH MAY BE ACCEPTABLE WITH MORE ROBUST STAKING 6. THE UPHILL SIDE OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH SOIL THAT IS FREE OF ROCKS AND DEBRIS. THE SOIL SHALL BE TIGHTLY COMPACTED INTO THE SHAPE OF A RIGHT TRIANGLE USING A SHOVEL OR WEIGHTED LAWN ROLLER. 7. FOLLOW MANUFACTURERS' GUIDANCE FOR STAKING. IF MANUFACTURERS' INSTRUCTIONS DO NOT SPECIFY SPACING, STAKES SHALL BE PLACED ON 4' CENTERS AND EMBEDDED A MINIMUM OF 6" INTO THE GROUND. 3" OF THE STAKE SHALL PROTRUDE FROM THE TOP OF THE LOG. STAKES THAT ARE BROKEN PRIOR TO INSTALLATION SHALL BE REPLACED. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG MAINTENANCE NOTES 1. INSPECT BMPs EACH WORKDAY, AND MAINTAIN THEM IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. MAINTENANCE OF BMPs SHOULD BE PROACTIVE, NOT REACTIVE. INSPECT BMPs AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (AND ALWAYS WITHIN 24 HOURS) FOLLOWING A STORM THAT CAUSES SURFACE EROSION, AND PERFORM NECESSARY MAINTENANCE. 2. FREQUENT OBSERVATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BMPS IN EFFECTIVE OPERATING CONDITION. INSPECTIONS AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED THOROUGHLY. 3. WHERE BMPs HAVE FAILED, REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE INITIATED UPON DISCOVERY OF THE FAILURE. 4. SEDIMENT ACCUMULATED UPSTREAM OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG SHALL BE REMOVED AS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN FUNCTIONALITY OF THE BMP, TYPICALLY WHEN DEPTH OF ACCUMULATED SEDIMENTS IS APPROXIMATELY h OF THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG. 5. SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION. IF DISTURBED AREAS EXIST AFTER REMOVAL, THEY SHALL BE COVERED WITH TOP SOIL, SEEDED AND MULCHED OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED IN A MANNER APPROVED BY THE LOCAL JURISDICTION. (DETAILS ADAPTED FROM TOWN OF PARKER, COLORADO. AFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO, DOUGLAS COUNTY, COLORADO, AND CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, NOT AVAILABLE IN AUTOCAD) NOTE: MANY JURISDICTIONS HAVE BMP DETAILS THAT VARY FROM UDFCD STANDARD DETAILS. CONSULT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AS TO WHICH DETAIL SHOULD BE USED WHEN DIFFERENCES ARE NOTED. November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District SCL-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) SM-4 Description - Vehicle tracking controls provide stabilized construction site access where vehicles exit the site onto paved public roads. An effective vehicle tracking control helps remove sediment(mud or -� dirt)from vehicles,reducing tracking onto the paved surface. - Appropriate Uses `�� Implement a stabilized construction entrance or vehicle tracking control where Photograph VTC-1. A vehicle tracking control pad constructed with frequent heavy vehicle traffic exits the properly sized rock reduces off-site sediment tracking. construction site onto a paved roadway. An effective vehicle tracking control is particularly important during the following conditions: ■ Wet weather periods when mud is easily tracked off site. ■ During dry weather periods where dust is a concern. ■ When poorly drained,clayey soils are present on site. Although wheel washes are not required in designs of vehicle tracking controls,they may be needed at particularly muddy sites. Design and Installation Construct the vehicle tracking control on a level surface. Where feasible, grade the tracking control towards the construction site to reduce off-site runoff. Place signage, as needed,to direct construction vehicles to the designated exit through the vehicle tracking control. There are several different types of stabilized construction entrances including: VTC-1. Aggregate Vehicle Tracking Control. This is a coarse-aggregate surfaced pad underlain by a geotextile. This is the most common vehicle tracking control,and when properly maintained can be effective at removing sediment from vehicle tires. VTC-2. Vehicle Tracking Control with Construction Mat or Turf Reinforcement Mat. This type of control may be appropriate for site access at very small construction sites with low traffic volume over vegetated areas. Although this application does not typically remove sediment from vehicles,it helps protect existing vegetation and provides a stabilized entrance. Vehicle Tracking Control Functions Erosion Control Moderate Sediment Control Yes Site/Material Management Yes November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District VTC-1 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) VTC-3. Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit with Wheel Wash. This is an aggregate pad, similar to VTC-1,but includes equipment for tire washing. The wheel wash equipment may be as simple as hand-held power washing equipment to more advance proprietary systems. When a wheel wash is provided,it is important to direct wash water to a sediment trap prior to discharge from the site. Vehicle tracking controls are sometimes installed in combination with a sediment trap to treat runoff. Maintenance and Removal Inspect the area for degradation and replace aggregate or material used fora ,_ stabilized entrance/exit as needed. If the area becomes clogged and ponds water, remove and dispose of excess sediment or replace material with a fresh layer of aggregate as necessary. With aggregate vehicle tracking controls, ensure rock and debris from this area do not enter the public right-of-way. Remove sediment that is tracked onto the public right of way daily or more y frequently as needed. Excess sedimentIry in the roadway indicates that the stabilized construction entrance needs maintenance. Photograph VTC-2. A vehicle tracking control pad with wheel wash facility. Photo courtesy of Tom Gore. Ensure that drainage ditches at the entrance/exit area remain clear. A stabilized entrance should be removed only when there is no longer the potential for vehicle tracking to occur. This is typically after the site has been stabilized. When wheel wash equipment is used,be sure that the wash water is discharged to a sediment trap prior to discharge. Also inspect channels conveying the water from the wash area to the sediment trap and stabilize areas that may be eroding. When a construction entrance/exit is removed, excess sediment from the aggregate should be removed and disposed of appropriately. The entrance should be promptly stabilized with a permanent surface following removal,typically by paving. VTC-2 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) SM-4 t: VTC 20 FOOT (WIDTH CAN BE LESS IF CONST. VEHICLES ARE PHYSICALLY CONFINED ON BOTH SIDES) SIDEWALK OR OTHER 50 FOOT (MIN.) PAVED SURFACE u 9" (MIN.) f PUBLIC UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED ROADWAY BY LOCAL JURISDICTION, USE CDOT SECT. #703, AASHTO #3 COARSE AGGREGATE OR 6" MINUS ROCK NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY LOCAL INSTALL ROCK FLUSH WITH JURISDICTION, USE CDOT SECT. #703, AASHTO OR BELOW TOP OF PAVEMENT #3 COARSE AGGREGATE OR 6" MINUS ROCK F 9„ (MIN.) i I 7 - NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC COMPACTED SUBGRADE SECTION A VTC- 1 . AGGREGATE VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District VTC-3 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) TC { WW DITCH TO CARRY WASH WATER TO SEDIMENT TRAP OR BASIN i A / PUBLIC ROADWAY t / n NOTE: WASH WATER MAY NOT CONTAIN CHEMICALS OR SOAPS WITHOUT OBTAINING A SEPARATE PERMIT WASH RACK 6'7" MIN. REINFORCED CONCRETE RA K r (MAY SUBSTITUTE STEEL CATTLE DRAIN SPACE GUARD FOR CONCRETE RACK) SECTION A VTC-2. AGGREGATE VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL WITH WAS H RAC K VTC-4 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) SM-4 VTC/ VTC/ CM TR DISTURBED AREA, CONSTRUCTION SITE, STABILIZED STORAGE AREA 10% MAX, OR STAGING AREA O O O EXISTING 12' MIN PAVED CONSTRUCTION MATS, WOVEN OR TRM ROADWAY 50' MIN I S" MIN (No SPIKES OR c� STAKES `L;�����'�Z TRM END OVERLAP WITH } �p�JpJ��O SPIKES OR STAKES 3 Q,OJc���G��� CONSTRUCTION MATS, WOVEN OR TURF REINFORCEMENT STRAP MAT (TRM) CONNECTORS CONSTRUCTION MAT END n¢ RESTRICT CONST. VEHICLE OVERLAP INTERLOCK WITH c� ACCESS TO SIDES OF MAT STRAP CONNECTORS z 20' OR AS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC (WIDTH CAN BE LESS IF CONST. VEHICLES ARE PHYSICALLY CONFINED ON BOTH SIDES) VTC-3. VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL WZ CONSTRUCTION MAT OR TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT (TRM) November 2010 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District VTC-5 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control (VTC) VTC-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 APPENDIX D CITY OF FORT COLLINS DUST PREVENTION AND CONTROL MANUAL Adopted by Ordinance No. 44, 2016 Dust Prevention and Control Manual Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page i CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Title 1 1.2 Purpose of Manual 1 1.3 Applicability 1 1.4 Definitions 2 2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes 5 2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally? 5 2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust? 5 2.3 Health and Environmental Effects 6 2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics 6 2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility 6 3.0 Best Management Practices 7 3.1 Earthmoving Activities 8 3.2 Demolition and Renovation 10 3.3 Stockpiles 12 3.4 Street Sweeping 14 3.5 Track-out / Carry-out 15 3.6 Bulk Materials Transport 16 3.7 Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads 18 3.8 Parking Lots 19 3.9 Open Areas and Vacant Lots 21 3.10 Saw Cutting and Grinding 22 3.11 Abrasive Blasting 24 3.12 Mechanical Blowing 26 4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres 28 Dust Prevention and Control Checklist 31 5.0 Resources 32 5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies 32 5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies 35 5.3 References for Dust Control 35 Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 1 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Title The contents of this document shall be known as the Dust Prevention and Control Manual (“the Manual”). 1.2 Purpose of Manual The purpose of the Manual is to establish minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized best management practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions and to describe applicable best management practices to prevent, minimize, and mitigate off-property transport or off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions pursuant to Chapter 12, Article X of the Fort Collins City Code (§§12-150 et. seq) for specific dust generating activities and sources. The purpose of Chapter 12, Article X of the Code is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including prevention of adverse impacts to human health, property, sensitive vegetation and areas, waters of the state, and other adverse environmental impacts and to prevent visibility impairment and safety hazards caused by emissions of particulate matter into the air from human activities. 1.3 Applicability This Manual applies to any person who conducts, or is an owner or operator of, a dust generating activity or source, as defined in the Code and described in this Manual, within the City of Fort Collins, subject to the exclusion set forth in Code §12-150(b)(3). Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 2 1.4 Definitions Abrasive blasting shall mean a process to smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth surfaces; and remove paint, dirt, grease, and other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or other materials. Additional best management practice shall mean using at least one additional measure if the required best management practices are ineffective at preventing off-property transport of particulate matter. Additional requirements shall mean when applicable, any measure that is required, e.g., a dust control plan when project sites are over 5 acres in size. Best management practice shall mean any action or process that is used to prevent or mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the air. Bulk materials transport shall mean the carrying, moving, or conveying of loose materials including, but not limited to, earth, rock, silt, sediment, sand, gravel, soil, fill, aggregate, dirt, mud, construction or demolition debris, and other organic or inorganic material containing particulate matter onto a public road or right-of-way in an unenclosed trailer, truck bed, bin, or other container. Code shall mean the Fort Collins City Code, as amended from time to time. Cover shall mean the installation of a temporary cover material on top of disturbed soil surfaces or stockpiles, such as netting, mulch, wood chips, gravel or other materials capable of preventing wind erosion. Dust control measure shall mean any action or process that is used to prevent or mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the air, including but not limited to the best management practices identified in this Manual. Dust generating activity or source shall mean a process, operation, action, or land use that creates emissions of fugitive dust or causes off-property or off-vehicle transport. Dust generating activity or source shall include a paved parking lot containing an area of more than one half (1/2) acre. Earthmoving shall mean any process that involves land clearing, disturbing soil surfaces, or moving, loading, or handling of earth, dirt, soil, sand, aggregate, or similar materials. Fugitive dust shall mean solid particulate matter emitted into the air by mechanical processes or natural forces but is not emitted through a stack, chimney, or vent Local wind speed shall mean the current or forecasted wind speed for the Fort Collins area as measured at the surface weather observation station KFNL located at the Fort Collins Loveland Municipal Airport or at Colorado State University’s Fort Collins or Christman Field weather stations or as measured onsite with a portable or hand-held anemometer. The City will use anemometers whenever practicable. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 3 Maximum speed limit shall mean the speed limit on public rights-of-way adopted by the City pursuant to Fort Collins Traffic Code adopted pursuant to City Code Section 28-16 for private roadways, a speed limit shall be established as appropriate to minimize off-site transportation of. Mechanical blower shall mean any portable machine powered with an internal combustion or electric-powered engine used to blow leaves, clippings, dirt or other debris off sidewalks, driveways, lawns, medians, and other surfaces including, but not limited to, hand-held, back- pack and walk-behind units, as well as blower- vacuum units. Off-property transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust beyond the property line of the property on which the emission originates or the project boundary when the emission originates in the public right-of-way or on public property. Off-vehicle transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust from a vehicle that is transporting dust generating materials on a public road or right-of-way. On-tool local exhaust ventilation shall mean a vacuum dust collection system attached to a construction tool that includes a dust collector (hood or shroud), tubing, vacuum, and a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. On-tool wet dust suppression shall mean the operation of nozzles or sprayers attached to a construction tool that continuously apply water or other liquid to the grinding or cutting area by a pressurized container or other water source. Open area shall mean any area of undeveloped land greater than one-half acre that contains less than 70 percent vegetation. This includes undeveloped lots, vacant or idle lots, natural areas, parks, or other non-agricultural areas. Recreational and multi-use trails maintained by the City are not included as an open area. Operator or owner shall mean any person who has control over a dust generating source either by operating, supervising, controlling, or maintaining ownership of the activity or source including, but not limited to, a contractor, lessee, or other responsible party of an activity, operation, or land use that is a dust generating activity or source. Particulate matter shall mean any material that is emitted into the air as finely divided solid or liquid particles, other than uncombined water, and includes dust, smoke, soot, fumes, aerosols and mists. Required best management practices shall mean specific measures that are required to be implemented if a dust generating activity is occurring. Sensitive area shall mean a specific area that warrants special protection from adverse impacts due to the deposition of fugitive dust, such as natural areas (excluding buffer zones), sources of water supply, wetlands, critical wildlife habitat, or wild and scenic river corridors. Soil retention shall mean the stabilization of disturbed surface areas that will remain exposed and inactive for 30 days or more or while vegetation is being established using mulch, compost, soil mats, or other methods. Stockpile shall mean any accumulation of bulk materials that contain particulate matter being stored for future use or disposal. This includes backfill materials and storage piles for soil, sand, dirt, mulch, aggregate, straw, chaff, or other materials that produce dust. Storm drainage facility shall mean those improvements designed, constructed or used to convey or control stormwater runoff and to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff after precipitation. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 4 Surface roughening shall mean to modify the soil surface to resist wind action and reduce dust emissions from wind erosion by creating grooves, depressions, ridges or furrows perpendicular to the predominant wind direction using tilling, ripping, discing, or other method. Track-out shall mean the carrying of mud, dirt, soil, or debris on vehicle wheels, sides, or undercarriages from a private, commercial, or industrial site onto a public road or right-of- way. Vegetation shall mean the planting or seeding of appropriate grasses, plants, bushes, or trees to hold soil or to create a wind break. All seeded areas must be mulched, and the mulch should be adequately crimped and or tackified. If hydro-seeding is conducted, mulching must be conducted as a separate, second operation. All planted areas must be mulched within twenty- four (24) hours after planting. Wet suppression shall mean the application of water by spraying, sprinkling, or misting to maintain optimal moisture content or to form a crust in dust generating materials and applied at a rate that prevents runoff from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility or watercourse. Wind barrier shall mean an obstruction at least five feet high erected to assist in preventing the blowing of fugitive dust, comprised of a solid board fence, chain link and fabric fence, vertical wooden slats, hay bales, earth berm, bushes, trees, or other materials installed perpendicular to the predominant wind direction or upwind of an adjacent residential, commercial, industrial, or sensitive area that would be negatively impacted by fugitive dust. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 5 2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes 2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally? Dust, also known as particulate matter, is made up of solid particles in the air that consist primarily of dirt and soil but can also contain ash, soot, salts, pollen, heavy metals, asbestos, pesticides, and other materials. “Fugitive” dust means particulate matter that has become airborne by wind or human activities and has not been emitted from a stack, chimney, or vent. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) estimates that more than 4,300 tons of particulate matter are emitted into the air in Larimer County annually. The primary sources of this particulate matter include construction activities, paved and unpaved roads, and agricultural operations. The quantity of dust emitted from a particular activity or area and the materials in it can depend on the soil type (sand, clay, silt), moisture content (dry or damp), local wind speed, and the current or past uses of the site (industrial, farming, construction). 2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust? Colorado state air regulations and Larimer County air quality standards generally require owners and operators of dust generating activities or sources to use all available and practical methods that are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to prevent fugitive dust emissions. However, state regulations and permitting requirements typically apply to larger stationary sources rather than to activities that generate dust. Larimer County fugitive dust standards apply only to land development. Although state and county requirements apply to many construction activities, they do not address many sources of dust emissions and City code compliance officers do not have authority to enforce state or county regulations. Fort Collins is experiencing rapid growth and development that has contributed to local man-made dust emissions. The City has established Chapter 12, Article X of the Code (§§12-150- 12-159) to address dust generating activities and sources that negatively impact citizens in Fort Collins. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 6 2.3 Health and Environmental Effects Dust particles are very small and can be easily inhaled. They can enter the respiratory system and increase susceptibility to respiratory infections, and aggravate cardio-pulmonary disease. Even short-term exposure to dust can cause wheezing, asthma attacks and allergic reactions, and may cause increases in hospital admissions and emergency department visits for heart and lung related diseases. Fugitive dust emissions can cause significant environmental impacts as well as health effects. When dust from wind erosion or human activity deposits out of the air, it may impact vegetation, adversely affect nearby soils and waterways, and cause damage to cultural resources. Wind erosion can result in the loss of valuable top soil, reduce crop yields, and stunt plant growth. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), studies have linked particulate matter exposure to health problems and environmental impacts such as: •Health Impacts: o Irritation of the airways, coughing, and difficulty breathing o Reduced lung function and lung cancer o Aggravated asthma and chronic bronchitis o Irregular heartbeat and increases in heart attacks •Environmental Impacts: o Haze and reduced visibility o Reduced levels of nutrients in soil 2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics Dust, dirt and debris that become airborne eventually settle back down to the surface. How far it travels and where it gets deposited depends on the size and type of the particles as well as wind speed and direction. When this material settles, it can be deposited on homes, cars, lawns, pools and ponds, and other property. The small particles can get trapped in machinery and electronics causing abrasion, corrosion, and malfunctions. The deposited dust can damage painted surfaces, clog filtration systems, stain materials and cause other expensive clean-up projects. 2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility Blowing dust can be a safety hazard at construction sites and on roads and highways. Dust can obstruct visibility and can cause accidents between vehicles and bikes, pedestrians, or site workers. Dust plumes can also decrease visibility across a natural area or scenic vistas. The “brown cloud”, often visible along the Front Range during the winter months, and the brilliant red sunsets that occur are often caused by particulate matter and other pollutants in the air. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 7 3.0 Best Management Practices This Manual describes established best management practices for controlling dust emissions that are practical and used in common practice to prevent or mitigate impacts to air quality from dust generating activities and sources occurring within Fort Collins. The objective of the dust control measures included in this Manual is to reduce dust emissions from human activities and to prevent those emissions from impacting others and is based on the following principles: Prevent – avoid creating dust emissions through good project planning and modifying or replacing dust generating activities. Minimize – reduce dust emissions with methods that capture, collect, or contain emissions. Mitigate – when preventing fugitive dust or minimizing the impacts are not feasible, the Manual provides specific measures to mitigate dust. More specifically, the Manual establishes the following procedures for each dust generating activity outlined in this Chapter: 1. Required Best Management Practices – this section includes the specific measures that are required to be implemented if the dust generating activity is occurring. For example, high wind restrictions (temporarily halting work when wind speeds exceed 30 mph) are required best management practices for earthmoving, demolition/renovation, saw cutting or grind, abrasive blasting, and leaf blowing. 2. Additional Best Management Practices – this section includes additional measures if the required best management practices are ineffective at preventing off-property transport of particulate matter. At least one of the additional best management practices outlined in the Manual must be implemented on the site to be in compliance with the Manual and Code. 3. Additional Requirements – When applicable, additional measures are also required, e.g., a dust control plan when project sites are over 5 acres in size. The Dust Prevention and Control Checklist included on page 31 of this Manual provides a “quick guide” to dust control BMPs covered in the following sections of the Manual. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 8 3.1 Earthmoving Activities Above: This figure illustrates earthmoving, which is an activity that can generate dust. Dust emissions from earthmoving activities depend on the type and extent of activity being conducted, the amount of exposed surface area, wind conditions, and soil type and moisture content, including:  Site preparation (clearing, grubbing, scraping)  Road construction  Grading and overlot grading  Excavating, trenching, backfilling and compacting  Loading and unloading dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials  Dumping of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials into trucks, piles, or receptacles  Screening of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Minimize disturbed area: plan the project or activity so that the minimum amount of disturbed soil or surface area is exposed to wind or vehicle traffic at any one time. (ii) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate to mitigate off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (iii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. (iv) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (v) Restrict access: restrict access to the work area to only authorized vehicles and personnel. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 9 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.1(a)(i)-(v) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces, backfill materials, screenings, and other dust generating operations as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, stormwater drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top soils. (iii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (iv) Surface roughening: stabilize an active construction area during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. (v) Cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and properly anchor the cover. (vi) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more than 30 days or while vegetation is being established. (c) Additional requirements: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving that is a dust generating activity or source at a construction site or land development project with a lot size equal to or greater than five (5) acres also shall implement the following measures: (i) Dust Control Plan: submit a plan that describes all potential sources of fugitive dust and methods that will be employed to control dust emissions with the development construction permit application or development review application (see Chapter 4 of this Manual). A copy of the Dust Control Plan must be onsite at all times and one copy must be provided to all contractors and operators engaged in dust generating activities at the site. (ii) Construction sequencing: include sequencing or phasing in the project plan to minimize the amount of disturbed area at any one time. Sites greater than 25 acres in size may be asked to provide additional justification, revise the sequencing plan, or include additional best management practices. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 10 3.2 Demolition and Renovation Above: This photo illustrates restricting access (a required best management practice) and a wind barrier (an additional best management practice) for demolition and renovation activities. Dust generated from demolition activities may contain significant levels of silica, lead, asbestos, and particulate matter. Inhalation of silica and asbestos is known to cause lung cancer, and exposure to even small quantities of lead dust can result in harm to children and the unborn. In addition to complying with the dust control measures below, any person engaged in demolition or renovation projects must comply with applicable state and federal regulations for asbestos and lead containing materials and notification and inspection requirements under the State of Colorado Air Quality Control Commission's Regulation No. 8, Part B Control of Hazardous Air pollutants. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts demolition or renovation that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Asbestos and lead containing materials: demolition and renovation activities that involve asbestos or lead containing materials must be conducted in accordance with 2012 International Building Code (IBC), as adopted by the Code Sec. 5-26 and amended by Code Sec. 5-27 (59) (amending IBC §3602.1.1) and all other state and local regulations; (ii) Restrict access: restrict access to the demolition area to only authorized vehicles and personnel; (iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport; and (iv) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 11 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.2(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to demolished materials or pre-wet materials to be demolished as necessary. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of- way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent onsite dust generating materials from blowing offsite. (c) Additional requirements: (i) Building permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any building required pursuant to the Code and/or the Land Use Code. Above: This photo illustrates reducing drop height, a required best management practice. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 12 3.3 Stockpiles Above: This photo illustrates wet suppression, an additional best management practice for stockpiles. Stockpiles are used for both temporary and long-term storage of soil, fill dirt, sand, aggregate, woodchips, mulch, asphalt and other industrial feedstock, construction and landscaping materials. Fugitive dust can be emitted from stockpiles while working the active face of the pile or when wind blows across the pile. The quantity of emissions depends on pile height and exposure to wind, moisture content and particle size of the pile material, surface roughness of the pile, and frequency of pile disturbance. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a stockpile that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.3(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off-property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: Apply water to the active face when working the pile or to the entire pile during periods of inactivity. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right- of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and anchor the cover. (iii) Surface roughening: stabilize a stockpile during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 13 (iv) Stockpile location: locate stockpile at a distance equal to ten times the pile height from property boundaries that abut residential areas. (v) Vegetation: seed and mulch any stockpile that will remain inactive for 30 days or more. (vi) Enclosure: construct a three-sided structure equal to or greater than the height of the pile to shelter the pile from the predominant winds. (c) Additional requirements: (i) Stockpile permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any stockpile permit required under the Code or the Land Use Code. (ii) Erosion control plan compliance: implement and comply with all conditions and requirements of the “Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, as adopted in Code Sec. §26-500; specifically, Volume 3 Chapter 7 “Construction BMPs”. The Stormwater Criteria Manual may require the use of Erosion Control Materials, soil stockpile height limit of ten feet, watering, surface roughening, vegetation, silt fence and other control measures. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 14 3.4 Street Sweeping Left: This figure illustrates the use of a wet suppression and vacuum system, an additional best management practice for street sweeping. Street sweeping is an effective method for removing dirt and debris from streets and preventing it from entering storm drains or becoming airborne. Regenerative air sweepers and mechanical sweepers with water spray can also be effective at removing particulate matter from hard surfaces. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator that conducts sweeping operations or services on paved or concrete roads, parking lots, rights-of-way, pedestrian ways, plazas or other solid surfaces, and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited: the use of rotary brushes, power brooms, or other mechanical sweeping for the removal of dust, dirt, mud, or other debris from a paved public road, right-of-way, or parking lot without the use of water, vacuum system with filtration, or other equivalent dust control method is prohibited. Mechanical or manual sweeping that occurs between lifts of asphalt paving operations or due to preparation for pavement markings are excluded from this prohibition, due to engineering requirements associated with these operations. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.4(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off-property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water or wetting agent applied directly to work area or use equipment with water spray system while operating sweeper or power broom. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any storm drainage facility or watercourse. (ii) Vacuum system: use sweeper or power broom equipped with a vacuum collection and filtration system. (iii) Other method: use any other method to control dust emissions that has a demonstrated particulate matter control efficiency of 80 percent or more. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 15 3.5 Track-out / Carry-out Above: This figure illustrates an installed grate (left) and a gravel bed (right), both of which are additional best management practices associated with track-out/carry-out. Mud, dirt, and other debris can be carried from a site on the wheels or undercarriage of equipment and vehicles onto public roads. When this material dries, it can become airborne by wind activity or when other vehicles travel on it. This is a health concern and can cause visibility issues and safety hazards. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of any operation that has the potential to result in track-out of mud, dirt, dust, or debris on public roads and rights-of-way and whose operation is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Contracts and standards: comply with track-out prevention requirements and construction best management practices as set forth in the Code, City regulations or policies, as specified in applicable contract documents, and as set forth in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. (ii) Remove deposition: promptly remove any deposition that occurs on public roads or rights- of-way as a result of the owner’s or operator’s operations. Avoid over-watering and prevent runoff into any storm drainage facility or watercourse. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.5(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Install rails, pipes, grate, or similar track-out control device. (ii) Install a gravel bed track-out apron that extends at least 50 feet from the intersection with a public road or right-of-way. (iii) Install gravel bed track-out apron with steel cattle guard or concrete wash rack. (iv) Install and utilize on-site vehicle and equipment washing station. (v) Install a paved surface that extends at least 100 feet from the intersection with a public road or right-of-way. (vi) Manually remove mud, dirt, and debris from equipment and vehicle wheels, tires and undercarriage. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 16 3.6 Bulk Materials Transport Above: This figure illustrates covered loads, a required best management practice for bulk materials transport. Haul trucks are used to move bulk materials, such as dirt, rock, demolition debris, or mulch to and from construction sites, material suppliers and storage yards. Dust emissions from haul trucks, if uncontrolled, can be a safety hazard by impairing visibility or by depositing debris on roads, pedestrians, bicyclists, or other vehicles. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a dust generating activity or source for which vehicles used to transport bulk materials to and from a site within the City on a public or private road or on a public right-of-way shall prevent off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions. To prevent off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust to and from the site, the owner or operator shall implement the following measures: (i) Cover Loads: Loads shall be completely covered or all material enclosed in a manner that prevents the material from blowing, dropping, sifting, leaking, or otherwise escaping from the vehicle. This includes the covering of hot asphalt and asphalt patching material with a tarp or other impermeable material. (ii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall load and unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 17 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.6(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- vehicle transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to bulk materials loaded for transport as necessary to prevent fugitive dust emissions and deposition of materials on roadways. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Other technology: use other equivalent technology that effectively eliminates off-vehicle transport, such as limiting the load size to provide at least three inches of freeboard to prevent spillage. Above: This figure illustrates minimizing drop heights, a required best management practice for bulk materials transport. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 18 3.7 Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads Left: This figure illustrates surface improvements on an unpaved road, an additional best management practice. Road dust from unpaved roads is caused by particles lifted by and dropped from rolling wheels traveling on the road surface and from wind blowing across the road surface. Road dust can aggravate heart and lung conditions as well as cause safety issues such as decreased driver visibility and other safety hazards. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of an unpaved road located on a construction site greater than five acres on private property or an unpaved road used as a public right- of-way shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (ii) Restrict access: restrict travel on unpaved roads by limiting access to only authorized vehicle use. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.7(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to unpaved road surface as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust or pave high traffic areas. (iii) Access road location: locate site access roads away from residential or other populated areas. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 19 3.8 Parking Lots Above: This figure illustrates an unpaved parking lot in Fort Collins. This section applies to paved and unpaved areas where vehicles are parked or stored on a routine basis and includes parking areas for shopping, recreation, or events; automobile or vehicle storage yards; and animal staging areas. Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Unpaved Parking Lots (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owners or operator of an unpaved parking lot greater than one-half acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions (i) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust or pave high traffic areas. (ii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (iii) Wet suppression: apply water as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (iv) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier. (v) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (vi) Restrict access: restrict travel in parking lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and limit access to hours of operation or specific events. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 20 Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Paved Parking Lots (a) Required Best Management Practices: An owner or operator of a paved parking lot greater than one-half acre and shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions. (i) Maintenance: repair potholes and cracks and maintain surface improvements. (ii) Mechanical sweeping: Sweep lot with a vacuum sweeper and light water spray as necessary to remove dirt and debris. Avoid overwatering and prevent runoff from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (iii) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (iv) Restrict access: restrict travel in parking lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and limit access to hours of operation or specific events. Above: This photo represents improving the surface of a parking area, which is one measure to comply with the Manual. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 21 3.9 Open Areas and Vacant Lots Left: This photo represents adding vegetation by hydroseeding, which is one measure to comply with the Manual. Open areas are typically not a significant source of wind-blown dust emissions if the coverage of vegetation is sufficient or soil crusts are intact. However, if soils in open areas are disturbed by vehicle traffic, off-highway vehicle use, bicycling or grazing, or if they have become overpopulated by prairie dogs, dust emissions can become a problem. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of an open area greater than one-half acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that are intended to or remain exposed for 30 days or more and to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (ii) Cover: install cover materials over exposed areas during periods of inactivity and properly anchor the cover. (iii) Surface roughening: stabilize an exposed area during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. (iv) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more than 30 days or while vegetation is being established, using mulch, compost, soil mats, or other methods. (v) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces as necessary and appropriate considering current weather to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (vi) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top soils. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 22 3.10 Saw Cutting and Grinding Above: This photo illustrates concrete cutting and how the activity can generate dust. Cutting and grinding of asphalt, concrete and other masonry materials can be a significant short-term source of fugitive dust that may expose workers and the public to crystalline silica. Inhalation of silica can cause lung disease known as silicosis and has been linked to other diseases such as tuberculosis and lung cancer. Using additional best management practices during cutting and grinding operations can significantly reduce dust emissions. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator that cuts or grinds asphalt, concrete, brick, tile, stone, or other masonry materials and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall use the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur. (ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne during clean up. (iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming, absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment materials properly. Follow additional procedures prescribed in the Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual or contract documents and specifications. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 23 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.10(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) On-tool local exhaust ventilation: use a tool-mounted dust capture and collection system. (ii) On-tool wet suppression: use a tool-mounted water application system. (iii) Vacuuming: use a vacuum equipped with a HEPA filter simultaneously with cutting or grinding operations. (iv) Wet suppression: use a water sprayer or hose simultaneously with cutting or grinding operations. (v) Enclosure: conduct cutting or grinding within an enclosure with a dust collection system or temporary tenting over the work area. Above: These photos illustrate how dust generated from cutting can be minimized by applying on-tool wet suppression, an additional best management practice associated with saw cutting and grinding. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 24 3.11 Abrasive Blasting Above: This photo illustrates abrasive blasting without dust mitigation in place. Abrasive blasting is used to smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth surfaces; and remove paint, dirt, grease, and other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or other materials. Abrasive blasting typically generates a significant amount of fugitive dust if not controlled. The material removed during abrasive blasting can become airborne and may contain silica, lead, cadmium or other byproducts removed from the surface being blasted.* Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts outdoor abrasive blasting or indoor abrasive blasting with uncontrolled emissions vented to the outside and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur. (ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne during clean up. (iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming, absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment materials properly. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Enclosure: conduct abrasive blasting within an enclosure with a dust collection system or temporary tenting over the work area. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 25 (ii) Wet suppression blasting: use one of several available methods that mix water with the abrasive media or air during blasting operations. (iii) Vacuum blasting: conduct air-based blasting that uses a nozzle attachment with negative air pressure to capture dust. (iv) Abrasive media: select less toxic, lower dust-generating blasting media. * Blasting on surfaces that contain lead paint or wastes from sand blasting that contain hazardous materials may be subject to additional state and federal requirements. Above: This photo illustrates wet suppression blasting, an additional best management practice. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 26 3.12 Mechanical Blowing Above: This photo illustrates mechanical blowing without dust mitigation in place. Mechanical blowers are commonly used to move dirt, sand, leaves, grass clippings and other landscaping debris to a central location for easier pick-up and removal. Mechanical blowing with a leaf blower can be a significant source of fugitive dust in some situations and can create nuisance conditions and cause health effects for sensitive individuals. Mechanical blowing can re-suspend dust particles that contain allergens, pollens, and molds, as well as pesticides, fecal contaminants, and toxic metals causing allergic reactions, asthma attacks and exacerbating other respiratory illnesses. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who operates a mechanical leaf blower (gas, electric, or battery-powered) in a manner that is a dust generating activity or source shall use the following best management practices as necessary to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions (i) Low speed: use the lowest speed appropriate for the task and equipment. (ii) Operation: use the full length of the blow tube and place the nozzle as close to the ground as possible. (iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Alternative method: use an alternative such as a rake, broom, shovel, manually push sweeper or a vacuum machine equipped with a filtration system. (ii) Prevent impact: do not blow dust and debris off-property or in close proximity to people, animals, open windows, air intakes, or onto adjacent property, public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 27 (iii) Minimize use on dirt: minimize the use of mechanical blower on unpaved surfaces, road shoulders, or loose dirt. (iv) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water, as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, to dampen dusty work areas. Prevent water, dirt, and debris from entering any storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (v) Remove debris: remove and properly dispose of blown material immediately. Above: These photos illustrate alternative methods to mechanical blowing that can minimize dust generation. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 28 4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres A dust control plan is required for all development projects or construction sites with greater than five (5) acres in size. If the project is required to obtain a development construction permit, then the dust control plan shall be submitted with the development review application or the development construction permit application. A copy of the dust control plan shall be available onsite at all times for compliance and inspection purposes. For dust control plans associated with a Development Construction Permit (DCP) issued by the City, applications for the DCP are available online at www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php. The dust control plan may be submitted on the Dust Control Plan Form included in Chapter 4 of this Manual or other equivalent format and shall include the following information:  Project name and location.  Name and contact information of property owner.  Project start and completion dates.  Name and contact information of the developer, general contractor, and each contractor or operator that will be engaged in an earthmoving activity.  Total size of the development project or construction site in acres.  A description of the project phasing or sequencing of the project to minimize the amount of disturbed surface area at any one time during the project.  A list of each dust generating activity or source associated with the project.  A list of each best management practice and engineering control that will be implemented for each dust generating activity or source.  A list of additional best management practices that will be implemented if initial controls are ineffective.  A signed statement from the property owner, developer, general contractor, and each contractor or operator engaged in an earthmoving activity acknowledging receipt of the Dust Control Plan and an understanding of and ability to comply with the best management practices in the plan. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 29 DUST CONTROL PLAN PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name Project Location Start and Completion Dates Total Size of Project Site (acres) Maximum disturbed surface area at any one time (acres) Property Owner name, address, phone, e-mail Developer name, address, phone, e-mail General Contractor name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail PROJECT PHASING OR SEQUENCING Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 30 Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 31 Dust Prevention and Control Checklist Instructions: For projects over 5 acres, in addition to developing a Dust Control Plan (see chapter 4 of the manual), place an X in each box indicating all best management practices (BMPs) that will be implemented for each activity. Fully shaded boxes are required BMPs, hatched boxes are additional BMPs. For projects less than 5 acres, the BMPs for bulk materials transport and saw cutting/grinding are required; other BMPs are listed for use as a guide for preventing and controlling dust. Dust Generating Activity  /Best Management Practice  Ea r t h m o v i n g De m o l i t i o n / Re n o v a t i o n St o c k p i l e St r e e t S w e e p i n g Tr a c k -ou t / Ca r r y -ou t Bu l k M a t e r i a l s Tr a n s p o r t Un p a v e d R o a d s an d H a u l R o a d s Un p a v e d Pa r k i n g Lo t * Pa v e d P a r k i n g L o t * Op e n A r e a * Sa w C u t t i n g o r Gr i n d i n g Ab r a s i v e B l a s t i n g Me c h a n i c a l Bl o w i n g Abrasive media Asbestos or lead materials Construction sequencing Cover Cover Load Enclosure Equipment & work area clean up Erosion control plan High winds restriction Location Mechanical blowing techniques Minimize disturbed area Minimize drop height On-tool local exhaust ventilation On-tool wet suppression Other method Reduce vehicle speeds Remove deposition Restrict access Slurry clean up Soil retention Stockpile permit Surface improvements Surface roughening Sweeping Track-out prevention system Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited Vacuum Vegetation Wet suppression Wind barrier *Note that in the parking lot and open area standards, only select one of the required BMPs to be in compliance. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 32 5.0 Resources 5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies Earthmoving Activities Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking. Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.1(N) Standards for Protection During Construction. Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.2 Air Quality. Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1 Building demolitions. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 23 Public Property §23-16. Permit required; exception in case of emergency. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.5. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-1 Construction Phasing/Sequencing and Fact Sheet EC-1 Surface Roughening. Larimer County Land Use Code §8.11.4. Fugitive dust during construction. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.b Construction Activities. OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction 29 CFR Part 1926.55 Gases, vapors, fumes, dusts, and mists. Demolition and Renovation Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.7 Building Permits §2.7.1 Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1 Building demolitions. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 33 Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, Regulation Number 8, Part B Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants, 5 CCR 1001-10. Stockpiles Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.6 Stockpiling Permits and Development Construction Permits §2.6.2. Fort Collins Land Use Code §2.6.3 (K) Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review Procedures. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.7. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet MM-2 Stockpile Management. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.c Storage and Handling of Materials. Street Sweeping Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming. Track-out/Carry-out Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Fort Collins Land Use Code §5.2.1 Definitions Maintenance (of a newly constructed street). Fort Collins City Code: Chapter 20 – Nuisances, Article V - Dirt, Debris and Construction Waste, §Sec. 20-62. Depositing on streets prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.8. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 34 Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a.(ii).(B) General Requirements. Bulk Materials Transport Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.f Haul Trucks. Colorado Revised Statutes. 42-4-1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a Roadways and §III.D.2.e Haul Roads. Parking Lots Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Open Areas and Vacant Lots Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Saw Cutting and Grinding Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-12 Paving and Grinding Operations. Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 35 Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Section 208.04 Best Management Practices for Stormwater. Abrasive Blasting Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Mechanical (Leaf) Blowing Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. 5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and- developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Environmental Best Management Practices Manual 2011, Chapter Four: Best Management Practices for Construction http://www.fcgov.com/parks/pdf/bmp.pdf City of Fort Collins Building Design and Construction Standards, Oct. 2013 http://www.fcgov.com/opserv/pdf/building-design-standards2.pdf?1390850442 City of Fort Collins, Recommended Species and Application Rates of Perennial Native Upland Grass Seed for Fort Collins, Colorado. City of Fort Collins Plant List, April 2011. 5.3 References for Dust Control Leaf Blowing A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf Blowers, California Environmental Protection Agency – Air Resources Board, Feb. 2000. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/mailouts/msc0005/msc0005.pdf Abrasive Blasting Sandblasting and Other Air-based Blasting Fact Sheet, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Dec. 2011. Protecting Workers from the Hazards of Abrasive Blasting Materials, OSHA Fact Sheet. California Air Resources Board, Abrasive Blasting Program. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ba/certabr/certabr.htm Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 36 Saw Cutting OSHA Fact Sheet on Crystalline Silica Exposure https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/crystalline-factsheet.pdf State of New Jersey – Dry Cutting and Grinding Fact Sheet http://www.state.nj.us/health/surv/documents/dry_cutting.pdf Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Engineering Controls for Silica in Construction http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/silica/cutoffsaws.html Shepherd-S; Woskie-S, Controlling Dust from Concrete Saw Cutting. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 2013 Feb; 10(2):64-70. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nioshtic-2/20042808.html Akbar-Khanzadeh F, Milz SA, Wagner CD, Bisesi MS, Ames AL, Khuder S, Susi P, Akbar-Khanzadeh M, Effectiveness of dust control methods for crystalline silica and respirable suspended particulate matter exposure during manual concrete surface grinding. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 2010 Dec;7(12):700-11. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058155 HSE, On-Tool Controls to Reduce Exposure to Respirable Dusts in the Construction Industry – A Review. Health and Safety Executive, RR926, 2012, Derbyshire, U.K. http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr926.pdf Croteau G, Guffey S, Flanagan ME, Seixas N, The Effect of Local Exhaust Ventilation Controls on Dust Exposures During Concrete Cutting and Grinding Activities. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 2002 63:458–467 http://deohs.washington.edu/sites/default/files/images/general/CroteauThesis.pdf Unpaved Roads, Parking Lots, and Open Areas Dust Control from Unpaved Roads and Surfaces, Code 373, USDA-NRCS, April 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025946.pdf CPWA, 2005, Dust Control for Unpaved Roads, A Best Practice by the National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure, Canadian Public Works Association. Colorado Forest Road Field Handbook, Colorado State Forest, Editor: Richard M. Edwards, CF; CSFS Assistant Staff Forester, July 2011. Fay L., Kociolek A., Road Dust Management and Future Needs: 2008 Conference Proceedings, Western Transportation Institute, March 2009. Chemical Stabilizers Interim Guidelines on Dust Palliative Use in Clark County, Nevada. Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Feb. 2001. http://ndep.nv.gov/admin/dustpa1.pdf Bolander, Peter, ed. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. Project Report. 9977-1207- SDTDC. San Dimas, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. http://www.fs.fed.us/eng/pubs/html/99771207/99771207.html Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 37 Techniques for Fugitive Dust Control – Chemical Suppressants, City of Albuquerque NM, website last accessed on Oct. 25, 2014. http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/business-programs-permits/ordinances/fugitive-dust/fugitive-dust- control USDA BioPreferred Catalog: Dust Suppressants http://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/faces/catalog/Catalog.xhtml USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center Project: Environmental Effects of Dust Suppressant Chemicals on Roadside Plant and Animal Communities, http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Projects.aspx?ProjectId=77 Street Sweeping U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Stormwater Best Management Practices: Street Sweeper Fact Sheet. http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ecosystems/ultraurb/3fs16.asp Agriculture and Livestock Agricultural Air Quality Conservation Measures - Reference Guide for Cropping Systems and General Land Management, USDA-NRCS, Oct. 2012. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1049502.pdf Dust Control from Animal Activity on Open Lot Surfaces, Code 375, USDA-NRCS, Sept. 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025821.pdf Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till, Code 345, USDA-NRCS, Dec. 2013. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1251402.pdf Herbaceous Wind Barriers, Code 603, USDA-NRCS, Jan. 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025927.pdf Michalewicz, D. A., J. D. Wanjura, B. W. Shaw, and C. B. Parnell. 2005. Evaluation of sources and controls of fugitive dust from agricultural operations. In Proc. 2005 Beltwide Cotton Conference. http://caaqes.tamu.edu/Publication-Particulate%20Matter.html Harner J., Maghirang R., Razote E., Water Requirements for Dust Control on Feedlots, from the proceedings of Mitigating Air Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations Conference, May 2008. http://www.extension.org/pages/23966/water-requirements-for-dust-control-on-feedlots California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Agriculture Clearinghouse http://www.capcoa.org/ag-clearinghouse/ U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service - Nevada, Fugitive Dust: A Guide to the Control of Windblown Dust on Agricultural Lands in Nevada. Jan. 2007. http://www.cdsn.org/images/FugitiveDustGuide_v7_201_.pdf Demolition and Renovation CDPHE, Demolition and Asbestos Abatement forms and information https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/asbestos-forms Dust Prevention and Control Manual Page 38 Earthmoving Activities CDPHE, An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development, August 2014 https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP_Land-Development-Guidance-Document_1.pdf Working With Dirt When the Wind Blows http://www.gradingandexcavation.com/GX/Articles/Working_With_Dirt_When_the_Wind_Blows_5455 .aspx EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Dust Control http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Dust-Control.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Wind Fences and Sand Fences http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Wind-Fences-and-Sand-Fences.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Construction Sequencing http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Sequencing.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Construction Entrances http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Entrances.cfm An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment – Air Pollution Control Division. https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP_Land-Development-Guidance-Document_1.pdf Health Effects of Particulate Matter U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter. EPA/600/R-08/139F Dec. 2009. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546#Download World Health Organization, Health Effects of Particulate Matter - Policy. 2013 http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/189051/Health-effects-of-particulate-matter- final-Eng.pdf Preventing Silicosis in Construction Workers, NIOSH http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/96-112/ General Dust Abatement Handbook, Maricopa County Air Quality Department, June 2013. http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/compliance/dust/docs/pdf/Rule%20310-Dust%20Handbook.pdf Fugitive Dust Control: Self Inspection Handbook, California Air Resources Board, 2007. http://www.arb.ca.gov/pm/fugitivedust_large.pdf WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook, Western Governors’ Association. Sept. 2006. Managing Fugitive Dust: A Guide for Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate Matter Generation, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. March 2014. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Rules and Regulations, Rule 805 Odors and Dust http://cogcc.state.co.us/ APPENDIX E EROSION CONTROL PLAN VA U L T VA U L T VA U L T · · Note: All materials furnished shall be free of Colorado State Noxious Weeds as defined in Article III, Section 21-40 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. This mix is based on 69 seeds/ft2 and is only calculated for one acre; contractor is responsible for calculating the appropriate seed amounts to purchase. This entire mix may be drill seeded to a depth of 1/4 to 1/2 inch deep. If hydroseeding occurs, seed must not be mixed with a mulch for application. They must be applied in two passes: first pass seed, second pass mulch. * PLS = Pure Live Seed. ** The 10 lb/ac mix is designed for drill seeding of grasses and forbs. If broadcast and harrow methods are used for grass seed distribution, the rate should be doubled. When hydroseeding methods are to be used, the rate should be raised to 1.5 times when using two passes. SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME PLS / lb. *Recommd. PLS lbs / Acre PLS / ft ²% of Seeds in Mix Sorghastrum nutans Indian grass 170,000 0.80 3.1 4.50% Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand dropseed 5,200,000 0.05 6.0 8.7% Sporobolus airoides Alkali sacaton 1,758,000 0.60 24.2 35.2% Distichilis stricta Inland saltgrass 520,000 1.50 17.9 26.0% Elymus elymoides Bottlebrush squirreltail 192,000 4.00 17.6 25.6% Pascopyrum smithii Western Wheatgrass 110,000 3.00 7.6 11.0% Total 9.95 68.8 NATIVE SEED - TYPE 2 RECOMMENDATIONS VAUL T VAUL T VAUL T VAU L T VA U L T VAUL T VAUL T VAU L T VAU L T VA U L T VAU L T VAUL T VAUL T VAUL T VA U L T · · Note: All materials furnished shall be free of Colorado State Noxious Weeds as defined in Article III, Section 21-40 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins. This mix is based on 69 seeds/ft2 and is only calculated for one acre; contractor is responsible for calculating the appropriate seed amounts to purchase. This entire mix may be drill seeded to a depth of 1/4 to 1/2 inch deep. If hydroseeding occurs, seed must not be mixed with a mulch for application. They must be applied in two passes: first pass seed, second pass mulch. * PLS = Pure Live Seed. ** The 10 lb/ac mix is designed for drill seeding of grasses and forbs. If broadcast and harrow methods are used for grass seed distribution, the rate should be doubled. When hydroseeding methods are to be used, the rate should be raised to 1.5 times when using two passes. SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME PLS / lb. *Recommd. PLS lbs / Acre PLS / ft ²% of Seeds in Mix Sorghastrum nutans Indian grass 170,000 0.80 3.1 4.50% Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand dropseed 5,200,000 0.05 6.0 8.7% Sporobolus airoides Alkali sacaton 1,758,000 0.60 24.2 35.2% Distichilis stricta Inland saltgrass 520,000 1.50 17.9 26.0% Elymus elymoides Bottlebrush squirreltail 192,000 4.00 17.6 25.6% Pascopyrum smithii Western Wheatgrass 110,000 3.00 7.6 11.0% Total 9.95 68.8 NATIVE SEED - TYPE 2 RECOMMENDATIONS