Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMONTAVA - PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE - BDR240010 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 2 - Stormwater Management Plan M Erosion Control Report For Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure I A ,Yu .y November 6, 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 ■ TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS L - Y,} November 6, 2024 Mr. Andrew Crecca City of Fort Collins Environmental Regulatory Specialist City Hall W 300 Laporte Ave Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Fort Collins,CO 80525 Infrastructure was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, in accordance 970.226.0557 main with the 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure: 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.................................................................. 4 1.4 Existing Soil and Surface Conditions............................................................ 5 1.5 Wetlands and Receiving Waters..................................................................... 6 1.6 Erosion Control Administrator....................................................................... 7 1.7 Potential Pollutants......................................................................................... 7 2.0 - CONSTRUCTION CONTROL MEASURES ...........................................................8 2.1 Controls Overview........................................................................................... 8 2.2 Erosion and Sediment Controls..................................................................... 8 2.3 Materials Management...................................................................................14 2.4 Spill Management...........................................................................................17 2.5 Non-Storm Water Components of Discharge...............................................18 3.0 - MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS ...................................... 19 3.1 Inspection and Maintenance Overview.........................................................19 3.2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements..............................................................19 3.3 Reporting Requirements/ Inspection Reports.............................................20 3.4 Site Maps ........................................................................................................21 4.0 - FINAL VEGETATION AND STABILIZATION / CONCLUSION ...........................21 5.0 - REFERENCES......................................................................................................22 Page i %ii. .CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report List of Figures 1.1 Vicinity Map .....................................................................................................................3 Technical Appendix Appendix A— Final Subsurface Exploration Report Appendix B — USDA Soil Survey Information Appendix C— Urban Drainage and Flood Control District BMPs Appendix D — Erosion Control Plan Page ii TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure project site contains a total of approximately 290 acres, with an estimated 158 acres to be disturbed, and consists of the Single-Family, Multi- Family, Mixed-Use, and Open Space. Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure is currently zoned as PUD. No offsite disturbance is anticipated with this project. 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) and West Half (W1/2) of Section Thirty-three (33), 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 89°57'58" 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" 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 Point of Beginning; THENCE North 00°33'45" West a distance of 1287.02 feet; Page 1 TST,INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report THENCE North 89°59'26" West a distance of 119.98 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast a distance of 101.24 feet, having a Radius of 640.00 feet, a Delta of 09°03'47" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 85028'07" West a distance of 101.13 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southwest a distance of 83.27 feet, having a Radius of 305.00 feet, a Delta of 15038'36" and is subtended by a Chord that bears North 30058'17" West a distance of 83.01 feet to a Point of Tangency (PT); THENCE North 38°47'35" West a distance of 326.00 feet; THENCE North 51012'25" East a distance of 303.00 feet; THENCE South 38047'35" East a distance of 214.28 feet; THENCE North 51012'25" East a distance of 28.00 feet; THENCE North 00033'45" West a distance of 253.69 feet; THENCE North 51°12'25" East a distance of 7.00 feet; THENCE North 38047'35" West a distance of 56.00 feet; THENCE North 51°12'25" East a distance of 65.00 feet; THENCE North 38°47'35" West a distance of 328.71 feet; THENCE North 36058'24" East a distance of 26.91 feet; THENCE North 53001'36" West a distance of 342.00 feet; THENCE North 36058'24" East a distance of 503.12 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast a distance of 224.27 feet, having a Radius of 245.00 feet, a Delta of 52026'55" and is subtended by a Chord that bears North 63011'51" East a distance of 216.52 feet to a Point of Tangency (PT); THENCE North 89025'19" East a distance of 7.37 feet; THENCE North 00035'37" West a distance of 2205.63 feet; THENCE South 89°39'06" East a distance of 49.32 feet; THENCE South 89057'45" East a distance of 50.69 feet; Page 2 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS .. t y Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report THENCE South 00035'37" East a distance of 801.85 feet; THENCE North 35°00'49" West a distance of 14.15 feet; THENCE South 00°35'37" East a distance of 241.22 feet; THENCE North 89024'18" East a distance of 8.00 feet; THENCE South 00035'37" East a distance of 1551.53 feet; THENCE South 00°33'45" East a distance of 37.69 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Northeast a distance of 97.99 feet, having a Radius of 93.50 feet, a Delta of 60002'50" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 48°26'04" East a distance of 93.57 feet to a Point of Tangency (PT); THENCE South 77033'53" East a distance of 6.69 feet; THENCE South 00036'49" East a distance of 98.55 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast a distance of 84.65 feet, having a Radius of 83.50 feet, a Delta of 58005'14" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 41°31'26" West a distance of 81.07 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Northeast a distance of 86.25 feet, having a Radius of 105.50 feet, a Delta of 46050'24" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 10'56'23" East a distance of 83.87 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Northeast a distance of 46.85 feet, having a Radius of 63.50 feet, a Delta of 42016'30" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 55°29'50" East a distance of 45.80 feet; THENCE South 03029'03" East a distance of 90.70 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast a distance of 27.20 feet, having a Radius of 123.50 feet, a Delta of 12037'02" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 70°42'04" West a distance of 27.14 feet; THENCE South 64023'33" West a distance of 16.88 feet to a Point of Curvature (PC); Thence along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast a distance of 57.47 feet, having a Radius of 73.49 feet, a Delta of 44°48'24" and is subtended by a Chord that bears South 41°59'29" West a distance of 56.02 feet; THENCE South 00033'45" East a distance of 2075.45 feet; Page 3 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report THENCE South 89058'54" West a distance of 49.50 feet; THENCE North 89057'58" West a distance of 50.50 feet to the Point of Beginning. Which above described parcel contains 989,681 square feet or 22.72 acres, more or less (±). A vicinity map illustrating the project location is provided in Figure 1.1. CHARDS LAKE R JE LOCATION I � N I MOUNTAIN VISTA DR W z J W MNE DR V 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: Page 4 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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. 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 the final subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC, Page 5 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report dated April 22, 2024, groundwater depths range from 2 '/2 to 11 feet below existing grades throughout the Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure site. This 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure site consist of: Aquepts, loamy (5). V Caruso clay loam (22)— 0 to 1 percent slopes. V Fort Collins loam (35) —0 to 3 percent slopes. V 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: V 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 Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure site is located in undeveloped land west of the Page 6 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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. Phase D Infrastructure sheet flows southeast and eventually into the Upper Cooper Slough 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 proposed project will convey onsite drainage under the Larimer and Weld Canal through drainage infrastructure constructed with the Montava Phase D project which will ultimately outfall to the Upper Cooper Slough. 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) Page 7 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • 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) 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 — Page 8 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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. 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 Page 9 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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 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. Page 10 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • 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 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 Page 11 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report logs or silt fence. • Clearly delineate the boundary of the natural buffer area using construction or silt fencing 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. Page 12 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • 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 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 the City of Fort Collins Dust Prevention and 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. Page 13 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • 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. 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 FLATV ORK MOBILIZATICN DEM01-I110N GRADING INSTALLAMN INSTALLATION LANDSCAPE DEA BIUZATION BESTMANPGEMENTPRAGTICS(BMPs) SILTPENCEBNRRERS \/EHICLETPACWNGPAD FLCAN BAPR E;S(WAT RES) INLETPFUTEC11ON Any prior inlets that could use protecting. RPRAP C0LLE1C11NGA9PHALT/CONCFE ES4W CUTTING WASTE VEGErAIIVE TEv1PORAWSEEDING RA n NG Anytimethe site wil l sit dorment longer than 30 days. MULCHINGSEALPNT Anytimethe site will sit dorment longer than 30 days. PEWMENTSEEDING PLANTING SOD INSTALLATION FULLED PRODUCTS NETIINGBLANFETS/NIATS Anytimethe sitewill sit dorment longerthan 30 days. Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 Page 14 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 2. Vehicle tracking of sediments 3. Management of contaminated soils 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. Page 15 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report BMPs for most common construction materials and wastes with the greatest potential for adversely affecting water quality are as follows: 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. Page 16 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • 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. • 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. Page 17 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 3) At a minimum document the following: • Nature of spill • Quantity of spill • 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 Page 18 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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 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 V Inspections of the site shall be conducted by the contractor (or agent) every two weeks and after significant storm events. V 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. ':• 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: ':• Ensuring areas where significant runoff is occurring are identified on the site map. V Storm water outfall shall be observed to determine whether or not measurable quantities Page 19 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report 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 need of repair or maintenance. If the report describes deficiencies in pollution control structures or procedures, such deficiencies shall be corrected immediately. V A brief description of measures taken to correct deficiencies shall be recorded. Determine if additional controls will be needed to next week's activities. V 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 Page 20 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Erosion Control Report • Documentation of any needed changes • Training events • Uncontrolled releases of mud or muddy water or measurable amounts of 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 21 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure 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 22 TST. INC.CONSULTING ENGINEERS .. t y APPENDIX A FINAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT FINAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT-PHASE D APPROXIMATE 40-ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT NORTHWEST CORNER OF MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE AND NORTH GIDDINGS ROAD FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1172058 Prepared for: Montava Development, LLC 430 N College Avenue, Suite 410 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Attn: Mr. Max Moss (Max(c-r�,hf2m.com), and Mr. Forrest Hancock(forrestgmontava.com) Development Director Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, Colorado 80550 Z-1ip 2, 2024 Montava Development,LLC 430 N College Avenue, Suite 410 EARTH ENGINEERING Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 CONSULTANTS, LLC Attn: Mr. Max Moss (Max&hf2m.com), and Mr. Forrest Hancock(forrestgmontava.com) Development Director Re: Final Subsurface Exploration Report Montava Development—Phase D -Approximate 40+Acre Mixed Use Development Northwest Corner of Mountain Vista Drive and North Giddings Road Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado EEC Project No. 1172058 Mr. Moss and Mr. Hancock: Enclosed, herewith, are the results of the supplemental preliminary (FINAL) subsurface exploration completed by Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC personnel for the referenced project. A total of seventeen(17)preliminary soil borings were drilled on April 2 and 5,2024 at the approximate locations as indicated on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams included with this report. The borings were extended to depths of approximately 151/2 to 25'/2 feet below existing site grades. Individual boring logs, including groundwater observations, and results of laboratory testing are included as a part of the attached report. It should be noted that in 2017, Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC (EEC) conducted a preliminary subsurface exploration for the overall 800-acre site by drilling a series of thirty (30) test borings throughout the property and preparing a report with our findings. For further information and preliminary recommendations based on the 2017 subsurface exploration,please refer to our Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report dated October 2, 2017, EEC Project No. 1172058. Three (3) borings during the initial preliminary subsurface exploration, (borings B-6, B-12, and B-13) were generally located within the Phase D development as indicated with blue color on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams. This exploration was completed in general accordance with our proposal dated March 13, 2024. In summary, the subgrades underlying the surficial vegetation/topsoil generally consisted of cohesive soils classified as lean clay with varying amounts of sand extending to the bottom of the completed borings at borings B-13 and B-17, approximately 15 and 151/2, respectively, below the existing ground surface or to the underlying granular materials at approximate depths of 7 to 16 feet below the ground surface at the remining borings. The lean clay to sandy lean clay soils were generally dry to moist to wet, very soft to very stiff, and exhibited nil to low swell potential with a slight tendency to hydro- 4396 GREENFIELD DRIVE WINDSOR, COLORADO 80550 (970) 545-3908 FAX (970) 663-0282 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 2 compact at current moisture and density conditions. Silty sand/sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel was encountered below the upper cohesive soils and extended to the bottom of the completed borings,approximately 15 to 25%2 feet below existing ground surface. The granular soils were generally loose to dense and are expected to have nil to low swell potential. Groundwater was observed in all borings except boring B-17 at depths ranging from approximately 2%2 to 11 feet below existing site grades. Based on the materials observed within the supplemental preliminary boring locations and the anticipated foundation loads,we believe the proposed lightly to moderately loaded structures, 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. Interior slab- on-grades,exterior flatwork,and site pavements could be supported on a zone of approved fill materials to reduce the potential for post-construction movement. 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 D�pD0 LICFN Ali Khorasani David A. Richer,P.E. Project Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer Cc: TST, Inc. Consulting Engineers Jonathan Sweet(jsweet@tstinc.com) Derek Patterson (dpattersonatstinc.com) FINAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION REPORT MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT-PHASE D APPROXIMATE 40-ACRE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT NWC OF MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE AND NORTH GIDDINGS ROAD FORT COLLINS, COLORADO EEC PROJECT NO. 1172058 April 22, 2024 INTRODUCTION The supplemental preliminary(FINAL) subsurface exploration for the proposed approximate 40- acre mixed used—Montava Development, Phase D, located at the northwest corner of Mountain Vista Drive and North Giddings Road, in north Fort Collins, Colorado has been completed. For this exploration, a total of seventeen (17) supplemental preliminary soil borings were drilled on April 2 and April 5, 2024, at the approximate locations as indicated on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams included with this report. The seventeen (17) supplemental preliminary soil borings were advanced to depths of approximately 15 to 25%feet below existing site grades across the proposed development property to obtain information on existing subsurface conditions. Upon completion of the drilling operations, six (6) of the open bore holes were converted to temporary PVC cased piezometers. Additionally, information from a preliminary subsurface exploration completed by EEC dated October 2, 2017, EEC Project No. 1172058, was available to us which was referenced for preparation of this report. Three (3) borings during the initial preliminary subsurface exploration, (boring B-6 B-12 and B-13) were generally located within the Phase D development as indicated with blue color on the enclosed Boring Location Diagrams. Individual boring logs and site diagrams indicating the approximate boring locations of the three(3) October 2017 and current borings, are included with this report. We understand Phase D of the overall Montava Development is currently in the planning/design process for single-family residential, duplex,townhomes, and mixed-use development as depicted on the enclosed site plans provided to us by Montava Development, LLC personnel on March 11, 2024. Foundation loads for the proposed 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. We anticipate maximum cuts and fills on the order of approximately 5 feet(+/-)in general site areas. Overall site development will include construction of associated pavements designed in general accordance with the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS)Pavement Design Criteria. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 2 The purpose of this report is to describe the subsurface conditions encountered in the supplemental preliminary borings, analyze and evaluate the test data and provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations concerning site development including foundations,interior floor slabs,exterior flatworks as well as pavement sections and the possibility for an area underdrain system to support basement/underpass construction. EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES The preliminary boring locations were established in the field by representatives from EEC by pacing and estimating angles from identifiable site features with the aid of a hand-held GPS unit using appropriate Google Earth Coordinates. Those approximate boring locations are indicated on the attached "Boring Location Diagrams. " The location of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used to make the field measurements. The borings were performed using 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 techniques in general accordance with ASTM Specifications D1586 and D3550,respectively. In the split-barrel and California barrel sampling techniques, 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 materials and, to a lesser degree of accuracy, the consistency of cohesive soils and hardness of weathered bedrock. In the California barrel sampling procedure, samples of the subsurface soils are obtained in removable brass liners. All samples obtained in the field were sealed and returned to our laboratory for further examination, classification and testing. Laboratory moisture content tests were performed on each of the recovered samples. In addition, the unconfined strength of appropriate samples was estimated using a calibrated hand penetrometer. Washed sieve analysis and Atterberg limits tests were completed on select samples to evaluate the quantity and plasticity of the fines in the subgrade soils. Swell/consolidation tests were completed on select samples to evaluate the potential for subgrade materials to change volume with variation in moisture content and load. Water-soluble sulfate tests were performed Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 3 on select samples to evaluate potential adverse reactions to site-cast concrete. Results of the outlined tests are indicated on the attached boring logs and summary sheets. As 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 soil's texture and plasticity. The estimated group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is indicated on the boring logs and a brief description of that classification system is included with this report. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The proposed improvement area is generally located at the northwest corner of Mountain Vista Drive and North Giddings Road in north Fort Collins, Colorado. Topsoil and vegetation/weeds were encountered at the surface of the completed test borings. The proposed improvement areas were relatively flat with an approximate relief of 10 feet across the site. Photographs of the site taken at the time of drilling are provided with this report. An EEC field engineer was on site during drilling to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered and direct the drilling activities. Field logs prepared by EEC site personnel were based on visual and tactual observation of disturbed samples and auger cuttings. The final boring logs included with this report may contain modifications to the field logs based on the results of laboratory testing and evaluation. Based on the results of the field borings and laboratory evaluation, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows. In summary, the subgrades underlying the surficial vegetation/topsoil generally consisted of cohesive soils classified as lean clay with varying amounts of sand extending to the bottom of the completed borings at borings B-13 and B-17, approximately 15 and 15 Y2, respectively, below the existing ground surface or to the underlying granular materials at approximate depths of 7 to 16 feet below the ground surface at the remining borings. The lean clay to sandy lean clay soils were generally dry to moist to wet, very soft to very stiff, and exhibited nil to low swell potential with a slight tendency to hydro-compact at current moisture and density conditions. Silty sand /sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel was encountered below the upper cohesive soils and extended to the bottom of the completed borings, approximately 15 to 25'/2 feet below existing Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 4 ground surface. The granular soils were generally loose to dense and are expected to have nil to low swell potential. The stratification boundaries indicated on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil types. In-situ, the transition of materials may be gradual and indistinct. GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Observations were made while drilling, after drilling and on April 9 and 22, 2024, within the installed temporary piezometers, to detect the presence and level of groundwater. At the time of drilling and on follow up dates mentioned, groundwater was observed in all of the preliminary test borings except boring B-17 at depths ranging from approximately 2%Z to 11 feet below the existing ground surface. The measured depths to groundwater are recorded near the upper right-hand corner of each boring log included with this report. The groundwater measurements provided with this report are indicative of groundwater levels at the location and at the time the measurements were completed. The groundwater directional flow is generally 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 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. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Swell—Consolidation Test Results The swell-consolidation test is performed to evaluate the swell or collapse potential of soils to help determine foundation, floor slab and pavement design criteria. In this test, relatively undisturbed samples obtained directly from the California sampler are placed in a laboratory apparatus and inundated with water under a predetermined load. The swell-index is the resulting amount of swell or collapse after the inundation period expressed as a percent of the sample's preload/initial Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 5 thickness. After the inundation period, additional incremental loads are applied to evaluate the swell pressure and/or consolidation. For this analysis, we conducted eighteen (18) swell-consolidation tests. The (+) test result indicates the material's swell potential while the (-) test result indicates the material's slight collapse potential when inundated with water. The following table summarizes the swell- consolidation laboratory test results. Table I—Laboratory Swell-Consolidation Test Results Building and Pavement Borings In-Situ Characteristics Pre-Load/ Range of Range of Swell—Index No of Inundation Moisture Range of Dry Densities, Test Results Samples Pressure, Contents, /o Description of Material o PCF Tested PSF Low High Low End, High End, Low End High End,. End, End, PCF PCF (+/-)% (+/-) % % 4 150 Lean Clay(CL) 24.8 45.6 76.2 1 98.0 (-)1.9 (+)0.3 14 500 Lean Clay/Sandy Lean Clay(CL) 16.8 41.0 79.7 106.4 (-)1.1 0.0 Or Silty Sand(SC) Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers(CAGE)uses the following information to provide uniformity in terminology between geotechnical engineers to provide a relative correlation of slab performance risk 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. TABLE 11-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 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 6 Based on the laboratory test results, samples of the overburden subsoils analyzed were within the nil to low range of swell risk category with a tendency to hydro-compact when inundated with water, and a tendency to consolidate with increased loads. General Considerations General guidelines are provided below for the site subgrade preparation. However, it should be noted that compaction and moisture requirements vary between builders/owners and, consequently, between geotechnical engineering companies. If the development lots will be marketed to a target group of builders, fill placement criteria should be obtained from those builders and/or their geotechnical engineering consultants prior to beginning earthwork activities on the site. Representatives from those entities should verify that the fill is being placed consistent with the home builders' guidelines. The near surface cohesive soils were generally dry to wet, very soft to very stiff, exhibited nil to low plasticity and nil to low swell characteristics along with a tendency to hydro-compact at current moisture and density conditions. If the overburden soils were to become wetted subsequent to construction of overlying improvements, settlements caused by soft/compressible overburden soils could result in significant total and differential movement of site improvements. Therefore, preliminary considerations and/or recommendations for an over excavation and replacement concept to reduce the potential movement of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements, are included herein. However, specific over-excavation depths and methods of reducing the potential for movement are to be determined by the individual/lot-specific builder. Groundwater was observed at depths of 21/2 to 16 feet below the ground surface in the borings. Depending on final site grades, we suggest that floor slab subgrade(s) be placed a minimum of 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels. If final site grading consists of cuts extending footings and floor slabs to less than 4 feet above the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater, consideration could be given to designing and installing interior perimeter drainage systems and/or elevating/raising the site grades to establish the minimum required 4-foot separation to the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 7 Site Preparation All existing vegetation and/or topsoil should be removed from beneath site fills, roadways or building subgrade areas. Stripping depths should be expected to vary, depending on current surface elevations. In addition, any soft/compressible 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 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 and/or sand/silty sand soils could be used as fill in these 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. The near surface clay soils will be subject to strength loss and instability when wet. Pumping of the subgrades should be expected if the subgrades become wet before placement of overlying pavements. In addition, the site soils may be subject to frost heaving with available moisture and freezing temperatures. Positive drainage to prevent ponding of water in the site,including ponding of snow melt, should be developed to reduce the potential for post construction frost heaving. Care should be exercised after preparation of the subgrades to avoid disturbing the subgrade materials. Positive drainage should be developed away from the structures and pavements to avoid wetting of subgrade materials. Subgrade materials becoming wet subsequent to construction of the site improvements can result in unacceptable performance. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 8 Foundation Systems—Preliminary General Considerations The overburden soils require particular attention in the design and construction to reduce the amount of movement/differential movement due to the in-situ characteristics. The following foundation system was 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 and better determine the depth of over-excavation: • Spread Footing foundations bearing on approved fill material. If spread footings are chosen, the depth of any required over excavation and replacement or improvement of the cohesive soils should be considered below the bottom of the footings during the supplemental/lot- specific subsurface exploration phase. If greater potential for movement cannot be tolerated, alternative foundation systems such as drilled pier foundations could be used. All footings should bear on a uniform zone of material to minimize the potential of differential movement of dissimilar soils. Should other alternative foundation systems be considered, we would be pleased to provide additional recommendations upon request. Preliminary Floor Slab/Exterior Flatwork Subgrades We recommend all existing vegetation/topsoil be removed from beneath the floor slab and exterior flatwork areas as previously outlined. After stripping and completing all cuts 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 outlined and surcharged/preloaded and/or monitored as necessary to limit total and differential movement after construction of overlying improvements. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 9 Preliminary Basement Design and Construction With the exception of boring B-17, groundwater was encountered across the site within the supplemental preliminary soil borings at approximate depths of 2-1/2 to 11 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 4 feet above maximum anticipated rise in groundwater levels, and a combination exterior and interior perimeter drainage system(s)be installed. Consideration could be given to 1) either designing and installing an area wide 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 designing and installing 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 four(4)foot separation to the maximum anticipated rise in groundwater. EEC is available to assist in the underdrain design if requested. The following information should also be considered, as previously mentioned, and would be to install an interior and exterior perimeter drainage system for each individual residence. To reduce the potential for groundwater to enter the lower level/basement area of the structure(s), installation of a dewatering system is recommended. The dewatering system should, at a minimum, include an under-slab gravel drainage layer sloped to an interior perimeter drainage system. The following provides preliminary design recommendations for interior and exterior perimeter drainage systems. 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 under-slab drainage system should be sloped at a minimum of 1/8 inch per foot to a suitable outlet, such as a sump and pump system. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 10 The under-slab 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 lot. Preliminary Pavement Subgrades Fill materials required to develop the pavement subgrades should consist of approved,low-volume change materials, free from organic matter and debris. Imported structural fill materials similar to CDOT Class 5, 6 or 7 base course material could be used in these areas. We recommend those fill soils be placed as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this report. The essentially cohesive soils may show strength loss and instability when wetted. Stabilization of those subgrades could be necessary at the time of construction to develop a stable platform for subsequent paving. Stabilization could be predesigned into the subgrades to mitigate swell, and the stabilized subgrades would be considered a part of the pavement section. Consideration could be given to a fly ash treatment concept for swell mitigation and/or stabilization, should pumping conditions develop. If a subgrade stabilization concept is chosen/required, consideration could be given to incorporating Portland cement/ Class C fly ash within the upper 12-inches of the site pavements prior to construction of the overlying pavement structure. Stabilization should consist of blending 4% and 13% by dry weight of Portland cement and Class C fly ash, respectively, in the top 12 inches of the subgrades. The blended materials should be adjusted in moisture content to slightly dry of standard Proctor optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95%of the material's Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 11 maximum dry density as determined in accordance with the standard Proctor procedure. Compaction of the subgrade should be completed within two hours after initial blending of the Class C fly ash. Pavement sections are based on assumed traffic volumes and subgrade strength characteristics. Based on the materials encountered, we believe an estimated R-value of 10 would be appropriate for design of the pavements supported on the subgrade soils. Suggested preliminary pavement sections for the light duty and heavy-duty on-site pavement improvement sections are provided below in Table III. A final pavement design thickness evaluation will be determined when a pavement design exploration is completed (after subgrades are developed to± 6 inches of design and wet utilities installed). Hot mix asphalt (HMA) underlain by aggregate base course, or a non-reinforced concrete pavement may be feasible options for the proposed on-site paved sections. HMA pavements may show rutting and distress in areas of heavy truck traffic or in truck loading and turning areas. Concrete pavements should be considered in those areas. Table III—Preliminary Pavement Sections Local Residential Minor Collectors Roadways Roadways EDLA—assume local residential roadways 10 25 Reliability 75% 85% Resilient Modulus 3562 3562 PSI Loss—(Initial 4.5,Terminal 2.0 and 2.5 respectively) 2.2 2.2 Design Structure Number 2.63 3.25 Composite Section without Fly Ash—Alternative A Hot Mix Asphalt(HMA)Grading S(75)PG 58-28 4" 5-1/2" Aggregate Base Course ABC—CDOT Class 5 or 6 8" 8" Design Structure Number (2.64) (3.30) 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 " 8" Fly Ash Treated Subgrade 12" 12" Design Structure Number (3.02) (3.24) PCC(Non-reinforced)—placed on an approved subgrade 5-1/2" 7" Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 12 Asphalt surfacing should consist of grading 5-75 or SX-75 hot bituminous pavement with PG 64- 22 or PG 58-28 binder in accordance with Larimer County Urban Area Street Standard(LCUASS). Aggregate base should be consistent with CDOT requirements for Class 5 or Class 6 aggregate base. As previously mentioned,a final subgrade investigation and pavement design should be performed in general accordance with LCUASS standards 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. Water Soluble Sulfates The water-soluble sulfate (SO4)testing of the on-site overburden soils taken during our subsurface exploration at varying depths are provided in the table below. Based on the reported sulfate content test results, this report includes a recommendation for the CLASS of cement for use for contact in association with the on-site subsoils. Table IV:Water Soluble Sulfate Test Results Sample Location Description Soluble Sulfate Content(%) B-3 S-1 4' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 0.3 B-9 S-1 4' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 1.63 B-13 S-2 9' Lean Clay with Sand(CL) 0.18 Based on the results as presented in table above,ACI 318, Section 4.2 indicates the site overburden soils have a severe risk of sulfate attack on Portland cement concrete. Therefore, ACI Class S2 requirements should be used for concrete on and below site grade within the overburden soils and bedrock. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 5. Utilities Excavations into the on-site subsurface soils may encounter a variety of conditions. Shallow cuts in the very near surface soils would be expected to stand on relatively steep temporary slopes; however, cuts extending to greater depths could expose soft/loose unstable soils and groundwater. Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 13 The wet and non-cohesive granular soils may be unstable in the trench excavations. Stabilization of the sides and bottoms of some of the trenches and at least some dewatering should be anticipated for deeper utilities. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation's 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. Other Considerations 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 adjacent to the buildings and parking and drive areas to avoid features which would pond water adjacent to the pavement, foundations or stem walls. 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. Lawn watering systems should not be placed within 5 feet of the perimeter of the building and parking areas. Spray heads should be designed not to spray water on or immediately adjacent to the structure or site pavements. Roof drains should be designed to discharge at least 5 feet away from the structure 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. It is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be retained to review the plans and specifications so 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 Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC EEC Project No. 1172058 April 22,2024 Page 14 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 Montava Development for the 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 reviewed and the conclusions of this report are 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 ML OL CL- L' i 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 410 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) Earth Engineering Consultants,LLC \ \` l" / I \ / ` ' r` ' ! \J ,y `� B-3110 = IIB-1 > d 3 - - - ---- �;� B-G n B-9 z � B-11 �. B-4 z B-1I 2 B- I 1 10 e / B-7 B-14 B-13 r B-13 B-16 B-15 17 Legend f $Approximate Boring t �- Locations Approx. Locations of 2017 Preliminary Borings �•.� a { � Site Photos /Photos taken in approximate . location,in direction of arrow) Figure 1: Boring Location Diagram Montava Development-Tract D Fort Collins, Colorado North EEC Project #: 1172058 Date: April 2024 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC B-G B-1 v , I II 3 I \ ---- 4 — B-2 I ! I III II — — B-G j II I t y B-9 - / r ' 1> B-5 AB\1 q a \o ( B-12 X. it I - ? - B-8 B-10 % O ` f O \ ` B-13 , \ \\y 13-13 B-1 G 'I B-15 ;v / \ ;< Legend , / it III $Approximate Boring Locations \ ;' Approx. Locations of 2017 Preliminary Borings , O Site Photos (Photos taken in approximate ` 0i location,in direction ofarrow Ji�' Figure 2: Boring Location Diagram Montava Development-Tract D Fort Collins, Colorado North EEC Project #: 1172058 Date: April 2024 Not to Scale EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC I - a Tyr A t. e+ . NO MONTAVA TRACT D FORT COLLINS,COLORADO EEC PROJECT No. 1172058 APRIL 2024 4p' PHOTO 4 3 4 r 5. r, Y k .i. .. . , . .� . .. EEC . , I , MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-1 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/4/2024 WHILE DRILLING 4' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/4/2024 4/9/2024 5' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4997' 4/22/2024 4'9" SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). I%) (PCF) ILL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/brown/rust,moist 2 very soft/compressible to medium stiff 3 4 [CS 5 WOH 1500 40.6 81.1 44 26 80.9 WOH-Denotes:Weight of Hammer,soft compressible zone at groundwater level 6 7 8 9 Ess 10 7 1500 24.1 11 12 13 14 FC—S 15 9 26.2 102.2 16 17 SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL(SW-SM) 18 tan,gray,moist,medium dense loose 19 ISS 20 9 12.7 1 7.5 21 22 23 24 'wet cave-in ICS 25 21.8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-2 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 2.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4995' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS .200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) �BLOWSIFT� (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 very soft to medium stiff Fc _S 3 2 1500 35.3 87.5 <500 psf None 4 ESS 5 4 1500 25.5 6 7 8 9 CS 10 8 21.4 1 106.9 1 8.5 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT(SW-SM) red/brown 11 loose 12 13 14 Fss 15 9 14.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-3 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 6' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 AFTER DRILLING 4'8" SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4998, SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS .200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) �BLOWSIFT� (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown/gray/rust,moist 2 medium stiff 3 4 Water Soluble Sulfate Content=0.3% [CS 5 5 2500 19.8 105.9 <500 psf None 6 7 SILTY/CLAYEY SAND(SM/SC)) 8 brown/rust veryloose 9 Ess 10 2 31.4 11 12 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 13 tan,gray medium dense 14 FC­S 15 19 9.1 1 116.4 16 17 18 19 'wet cave-in Ess 20 11.9 21 22 23 24 'wet cave-in FCS 25 1 6.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-4 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 8' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4997' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). I%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 medium stiff to stiff 3 4 Ic— 5 5 4 2500 28.6 93.9 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 Ess 10 4 2000 22.2 11 12 13 14 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) CS 15 10 19.3 105.8 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-5 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 7' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 4'10" SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4995' 4/22/2024 4'9" SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) �BLOWSIFT� (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 stiff 3 4 [CS 5 10 2000 26.9 99.2 42 29 77.4 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 Ess 10 10 2500 18.4 11 12 13 14 CS 15 15 2500 24.0 1 101.3 16 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 17 tan,gray dense 18 19 SS 20 35 8.0 E 21 22 23 24 clay zone SS 25 9 500 33.6 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-6 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 4- AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 AFTER DRILLING 5- SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4998, SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). I%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY(CL) gray,moist 2 very soft to stiff _ _ with gypsum crystals Ics 3 4 2000 41.0 76.2 49 10 87.5 <500 psf None 4 LSS 5 2 1500 28.5 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 10 12500 22.8 1 105.1 11 12 13 14 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) _ _ tan,gray SS 15 5 21.2 dense BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-7 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 7' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4996' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). I%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown,moist 2 medium stiff with gypsum crystals ICS 3 7 4000 22.9 <500 psf None 4 LSS 5 7 3500 20.0 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 4 3000 24.8 1 103.1 11 12 13 14 SS 15 9 3500 23.0 F 16 SILTY SAND(SM) tan,gray 17 medium dense 18 19 CS 20 18 12.7 119.7 21 22 23 24 'wet cave-in SS 25 17.5 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-8 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 6' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4995' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS .200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) �BLOWSIFT� (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI I%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY(CL) brown/gray/rust,moist 2 medium stiff to stiff Fc S 3 9 2500 24.7 101.7 44 32 75.3 <500 psf None 4 Ess 5 5 25.3 6 7 8 9 Fc-S 10 9 4000 28.1 1 98.8 11 12 13 14 SS 15 13 18.0 SAND/SILTY SAND(SP/SM) tan,gray 16 medium dense to dense 17 18 19 rc—S 20 30 10.6 1 119.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 20' 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-9 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 9' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 6'1" SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4997' 4/22/2024 6' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 moist,stiff to medium stiff 3 4 Water Soluble Sulfate Content=1.63% CS 5 14 3500 27.2 98.7 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 Ess 10 11 2000 20.8 11 WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL(SW) 12 tan,gray medium dense 13 14 Fc—S 15 15 13.9 124.8 4.1 16 17 18 19 ISS 20 24 6.7 21 22 23 24 Ic— S 25 1 10 1 10.1 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-10 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 5.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 6' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4996' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS .200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PS (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 stiff 3 4 [CS 5 13 4000 29.0 98.0 40 25 83.4 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 SILTY SAND(SM) SS 10 15 25.2 42.7 tan,gray _ _ medium dense 11 12 13 14 CS 15 16 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-11 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 8' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4998' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). I%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY(CL) brown/gray,moist 2 Stiff _ _ %@ 150 psf CS 3 10 6500 37.9 81.9 43 8 85.3 <150 psf None 4 LSS 5 8 3500 19.2 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 13 4000 20.0 109.4 1 1 <500 psf None 11 12 SAND(SP) 13 tan,gray medium dense 14 SS 15 18 9.6 F BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-12 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 7' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 6'9" SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4995' 4/22/2024 6'8-1/2" SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown/gray,moist 2 very stiff to stiff _ _ %@ 150 psf CS 3 17 5000 28.5 89.0 <150 psf None 4 [CS 5 10 3500 28.1 6 7 8 9 Fc— S 10 9 3000 27.9 1 96.7 11 12 13 14 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) CS 15 14 2500 24.3 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-13 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 8.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4995' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) gray/rust,moist 2 stiff to very stiff 3 4 [CS 5 14 4000 16.8 107.8 28 15 72.7 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 Water Soluble Sulfate Content=0.18% ESs 10 12 2500 20.6 11 12 13 14 Fc—S 15 18 5000 25.8 105.0 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-14 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING 9.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4997' SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS .200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PS (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown/tan/rust 2 moist,medium stiff 3 4 [CS 5 10 3500 23.3 101.8 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 Ess 10 7 2500 22.2 11 12 SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL(SW-SM) 13 tan,gray,moist medium dense 14 Fc_s 15 10 11.3 1 110.1 1 6.2 16 17 18 19 SS 20 15 13.6 E 21 22 23 24 *wet cave-in FCS 25 1 14.3 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-15 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 10, AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 11' SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4999, 4/22/2024 1011" SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION AND TOPSOIL 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown,moist 2 very stiff to stiff with gypsum crystals 3 4 [CS 5 22 7000 21.3 106.3 <500 psf None 6 7 8 9 -- ESS 10 14 5000 19.3 106.8 11 12 13 14 FC—S 15 25 6000 19.1 16 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) tan,gay 17 medium dense to dense 18 19 1SS 20 14 11.7 101.6 21 22 23 24 SS 25 39 6.4 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-16 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/2/2024 WHILE DRILLING 8.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/2/2024 4/9/2024 6'7" SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4994' 4/22/2024 6'7-3/4" SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF SPARSE VEGETATION 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL) tan/gray,moist 2 medium stiff to stiff _ _ %@ 150 psf CS 3 15 1500 45.6 77.1 <150 psf None 4 LSS 5 9 2000 26.5 6 7 8 9 Fc—s 10 9 5000 20.9 105.1 11 12 13 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 14 tan,gray medium dense to dense Ess 15 20 11.3 16 17 18 19 Ic— S 20 11 500 12.3 119.9 21 22 23 24 SS 25 45 7.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC MONTAVA DEVELOPMENT -TRACT D FORT COLLINS, COLORADO PROJECT NO: 1172058 LOG OF BORING B-17 DATE: APRIL 2024 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 4/5/2024 WHILE DRILLING None AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 4/5/2024 SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV 4999, SOIL DESCRIPTION D N QU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) BLOWSIFT (PSF). (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 1 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND(CL) brown,moist 2 stiff to medium stiff _ _ %@ 150 psf with calcareous deposits and gypsum crystals ICS 3 9 3500 24.8 99.5 200 psf 0.3% 4 LSS 5 8 3500 21.8 6 7 8 9 Fc—S 10 6 2500 22.9 1 101.5 1 1 <500 psf None 11 12 13 14 FSS 15 9 4000 21.9 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 15.5' 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 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 8/18/2017 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N oU MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) 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 C500 psf none 6 7 8 9 brown/rust/gray _ FSS - 10 14 1000 27.1 SILTY SAND/GRAVEL(SM/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/SILTSTONE/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-12 DATE: SEPTEMBER 2017 RIG TYPE: CME55 SHEET 1 OF 1 WATER DEPTH FOREMAN: DG START DATE 8/14/2017 WHILE DRILLING 14.5' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/14/2017 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 DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (YO) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF 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 FSS 15 9 6000 18.1 16 17 18 19 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) ECS 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 8/14/2017 WHILE DRILLING 10.0' AUGER TYPE: 4"CFA FINISH DATE 8/14/2017 AFTER DRILLING N/A SPT HAMMER: AUTOMATIC SURFACE ELEV N/A 24 HOUR N/A SOIL DESCRIPTION D N ou MC DD A-LIMITS -200 SWELL TYPE (FEET) (BLOWS/FT) (PSF) (%) (PCF) LL PI (%) PRESSURE %@ 500 PSF VEGETATION&TOPSOIL 1 CLAYEY SAND(SC) 2 gray _ _ loose to very loose Fcs 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 NIL NP 30.3 e500 psf none brown/rust/gray _ loose to medium dense 11 12 13 14 FSS 15 12 1500 22.9 16 SAND/GRAVEL(SP/GP) 17 rust/brown medium dense 18 19 FC—S 20 22 1000 8.0 130.3 21 22 23 24 SS 25 10 -- 9.2 BOTTOM OF BORING DEPTH 25.5' _ _ Earth Engineering Consultants, LLC SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 2, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 35.3% 1 Dry Density: 87.6 pcf JEnding Moisture: 26.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 EEC I Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 3, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 19.8% 1 Dry Density: 104.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added C -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 4, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 28.6% 1 Dry Density: 92.4 pcf JEnding Moisture: 25.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added C -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 5, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 42 Plasticity Index: 29 % Passing#200: 77.4% Beginning Moisture: 26.9% JDry Density: 98.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 20.2% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay Sample Location: Boring 6, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 49 IPlasticity Index: 10 % Passing#200: 87.5% Beginning Moisture: 41.0% 1 Dry Density: 79.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 29.3% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 7, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 24.8% Dry Density: 100 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 aD 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 8, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: 44 IPlasticity Index: 32 % Passing#200: 75.3% Beginning Moisture: 28.1% 1 Dry Density: 95.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 21.1% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 aD 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 9, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 27.2% 1 Dry Density: 95.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 24.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U L a Water Added -2.0 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 10, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 40 IPlasticity Index: 25 % Passing#200: 83.4% Beginning Moisture: 29.0% 1 Dry Density: 93.7 pcf JEnding Moisture: 22.6% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U L a -2.0 W ater Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay Sample Location: Boring 11, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: 43 IPlasticity Index: 8 % Passing#200: 85.3% Beginning Moisture: 37.9% Dry Density: 81.1 pcf JEnding Moisture: 42.1% Swell Pressure: <150 psf %Swell @ 150: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ L a Water Added -2.0 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 11, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 20.0% 1 Dry Density: 106.3 pcf JEnding Moisture: 33.8% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added C -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 12, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 28.5% 1 Dry Density: 89.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 18.4% Swell Pressure: <150 psf %Swell @ 150: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U L Water Added a -2.0 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 13, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: 28 Plasticity Index: 15 % Passing#200: 72.7% Beginning Moisture: 16.8% JDry Density: 106.4 pcf JEnding Moisture: 19.4% Swell Pressure: <500 psf % Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 14, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 23.3% 1 Dry Density: 98.5 pcf JEnding Moisture: 17.3% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 aD 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 15, Sample 1, Depth 4' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 21.3% 1 Dry Density: 101.8 pcf JEnding Moisture: 21.7% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 (D 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U L a) a _2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 - -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 16, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 45.6% 1 Dry Density: 76.2 pcf JEnding Moisture: 45.1% Swell Pressure: <150 psf %Swell @ 150: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 aD 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U L a -2.0 Water Added C -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 17, Sample 1, Depth 2' Liquid Limit: -- Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 24.8% JDry Density: 98 pcf JEnding Moisture: 25.1% Swell Pressure: 200 psf % Swell @ 150: 0.3% 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ u U `y Water Added a -2.0 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 SWELL / CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Material Description: Lean Clay with Sand Sample Location: Boring 17, Sample 3, Depth 9' Liquid Limit: -- I Plasticity Index: -- % Passing#200: -- Beginning Moisture: 22.9% 1 Dry Density: 100.4 pcf JEnding Moisture: 21.9% Swell Pressure: <500 psf %Swell @ 500: None 10.0 8.0 6.0 a� 3 4.0 _ 2.0 m E m 0 0.0 Y _ U U L a -2.0 Water Added 0 -4.0 0 M 0 C o -6.0 U -8.0 -10.0 0.01 0.1 1 10 Load (TSF) Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins, Colorado Project#: 1172058 Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis(AASHTO T 11&T 27/ASTM C 117&C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 1/2" (63 mm) 100 2" (50 mm) 100 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 100 1" (25 mm) 100 3/4" (19 mm) 100 1/2" (12.5 mm) 97 3/8" (9.5 mm) 93 No.4 (4.75 mm) 73 No.8 (2.36 mm) 54 No.10 (2 mm) 51 No. 16 (1.18 mm) 41 No.30 (0.6 mm) 28 No.40 (0.425 mm) 23 No.50 (0.3 mm) 19 No.100 (0.15 mm) 13 No.200 (0.075 mm) 7.5 Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: 131 S4 19 Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SW-SM Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Standard Sieve Size 5" 3" 2" 1" 1/2" No.4 No.10 No.30 No.50 No.200 6" 4" 2.5" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" No.8 No.16 No.40 No.100 100 90 80 70 60 0 50 Q) 40 I_L 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grain Size (mm) Gravel Sand Cobble Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado �100 �60 �50 �30 �10 Cu CC Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: B1 S4 19 19.00 3.08 1.91 0.68 0.11 27.70 1.35 i - Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel(SW-SM ,, Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis(AASHTO T 11&T 27/ASTM C 117&C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 1/2" (63 mm) 100 2" (50 mm) 100 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 100 1" (25 mm) 100 3/4" (19 mm) 100 1/2" (12.5 mm) 99 3/8" (9.5 mm) 99 No.4 (4.75 mm) 94 No.8 (2.36 mm) 88 No.10 (2 mm) 87 No. 16 (1.18 mm) 81 No.30 (0.6 mm) 77 No.40 (0.425 mm) 74 No.50 (0.3 mm) 58 No.100 (0.15 mm) 20 No.200 (0.075 mm) 8.5 Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: B2 S3 9 Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Silt(SW-SM) Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Standard Sieve Size 5" 3" 2" 1" 1/2" No.4 No.10 No.30 No.50 No.200 6" 4" 2.5" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" No.8 No.16 No.40 No.100 100 90 80 70 60 0 50 LM Q) 40 L I_L 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grain Size (mm) Gravel Sand Cobble Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado �100 �60 �50 �30 �10 Cu CC Project No: 1172058 4 Sample ID: B2 S3 9 19.00 0.32 0.27 0.19 0.08 3.76 1.35 - Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Silt(SW-SM) ,; .. Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis(AASHTO T 11&T 27/ASTM C 117&C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 1/2" (63 mm) 100 2" (50 mm) 100 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 100 1" (25 mm) 100 3/4" (19 mm) 100 1/2" (12.5 mm) 98 3/8" (9.5 mm) 93 No.4 (4.75 mm) 74 No.8 (2.36 mm) 56 No.10 (2 mm) 52 No. 16 (1.18 mm) 40 No.30 (0.6 mm) 24 No.40 (0.425 mm) 18 No.50 (0.3 mm) 13 No.100 (0.15 mm) 7 No.200 (0.075 mm) 4.1 Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: 139 S3 14 Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel(SW) Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Standard Sieve Size 5" 3" 2" 1" 1/2" No.4 No.10 No.30 No.50 No.200 6" 4" 2.5" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" No.8 No.16 No.40 No.100 100 90 Ni Hil I M 80 70 60 0 50 Q) 40 L I_L 30 20 10 0 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grain Size (mm) Gravel Sand Cobble Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado �100 �60 �50 �30 �10 Cu CC Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: B9 S3 14 19.00 2.89 1.84 0.81 0.23 12.68 0.99 - Sample Desc.: Well Graded Sand with Gravel(SW) Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Sieve Analysis(AASHTO T 11&T 27/ASTM C 117&C 136) Sieve Size Percent Passing 2 1/2" (63 mm) 100 2" (50 mm) 100 1 1/2" (37.5 mm) 100 1" (25 mm) 100 3/4" (19 mm) 100 1/2" (12.5 mm) 100 3/8" (9.5 mm) 98 No.4 (4.75 mm) 94 No.8 (2.36 mm) 88 No.10 (2 mm) 86 No. 16 (1.18 mm) 83 No.30 (0.6 mm) 79 No.40 (0.425 mm) 77 No.50 (0.3 mm) 74 No.100 (0.15 mm) 64 No.200 (0.075 mm) 42.7 Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado Project No: 1172058 Sample ID: B10 S2 9 Sample Desc.: Silty Sand(SM) Date: April2024 EARTH ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LLC Summary of Washed Sieve Analysis Tests (ASTM C117 & C136) Standard Sieve Size 5" 3" 2" 1" 1/2" No.4 No.10 No.30 No.50 No.200 6" 4" 2.5" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" No.8 No.16 No.40 No.100 100 90 80 70 60 0 50 LM Q) 40 L I_L 30 20 10 0 ILL 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 Grain Size (mm) Gravel Sand Cobble Silt or Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Project: Montava Development-Tract D Location: Fort Collins,Colorado �100 �60 �50 �30 �10 Cu CC Project No: 1172058 12.50 0.14 0.10 --- --- --- --- -- Sample ID: B10 S2 9 Sample Desc.: Silty Sand(SM) Date: April 2024 - ' 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 0 900 ft July 24, 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 35—Fort Collins loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.............................................. 13 36—Fort Collins loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes.............................................. 14 95—Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes.................................................... 15 98—Satanta Variant clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes.................................17 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................19 Soil Properties and Qualities.............................................................................. 19 Soil Qualities and Features.............................................................................19 HydrologicSoil Group................................................................................. 19 References............................................................................................................24 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 M Soil Map 3 0 0 497890 497W 498070 498160 498250 498340 498430 40°3714"N 40°3714"N 0 0 CL 36 Soil Map m y not be v�l,d at this s al-. 40°36 49"N �' 400 36'49"N 497890 4979M 498070 498160 498250 498340 498430 in 3 3 0 Map Scale:1:3,780 T printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. Meters o N 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 150 300 600 900 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 Soil Map Unit Polygons Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Wet Spot �i 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 0 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 .+. 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 4W Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger. 0 Sinkhole Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Jul 2,2021—Aug 25, 3) 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 35 Fort Collins loam,0 to 3 percent 6.0 23.6% slopes 36 Fort Collins loam,3 to 5 percent 1.9 7.6% slopes 95 Satanta loam, 1 to 3 percent 0.4 1.7% slopes 98 Satanta Variant clay loam,0 to 17.2 67.1% 3 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 25.6 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 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 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 13 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 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 14 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 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 15 Custom Soil Resource Report 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) 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 16 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 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) 17 Custom Soil Resource Report 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 18 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. 19 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. 20 Custom Soil Resource Report M Map—Hydrologic Soil Group o 497M 497W 4W70 498160 498250 498.340 498430 40°3714"N �.—— 40°3714"N 0 0 CL 71 IN I I I wr I Soil MEP may not hm at this scale. 40°36'49"N 400 36'49"N 497890 497%1 49170 4111 49810 411. 498430 3 3 o Map Scale:1:3,780 if printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11')sheet. Meters o N 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 150 300 600 900 Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 13N WGS84 21 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. 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) A Aerial Photography Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator .,. A/D projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts ..i B distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more .v B/D accurate calculations of distance or area are required. . • C This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as .,, C/o of the version date(s)listed below. .� D Soil Survey Area: Larimer County Area,Colorado . Not rated or not available Survey Area Data: Version 18,Aug 24,2023 Soil Rating Points A Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. 0 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. 22 Custom Soil Resource Report Table—Hydrologic Soil Group Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 35 Fort Collins loam,0 to 3 C 6.0 23.6% percent slopes 36 Fort Collins loam,3 to 5 C 1.9 7.6% percent slopes 95 Satanta loam, 1 to 3 C 0.4 1.7% percent slopes 98 Satanta Variant clay D 17.2 67.1% loam,0 to 3 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 25.6 100.0% Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff.- None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher 23 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 24 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 25 APPENDIX C URBAN DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BMPs Surface Roughening (SR) EC-I Description Surface roughening is an erosion control A 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 technique used, surface roughening may also help establish conditions favorable to establishment of vegetation. F 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 applications. 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 _ - .� Stockpile management should be used RR-� when soils or other erodible materials are stored at the construction site. Special attention should be given to 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 d 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 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. a 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 straw, coconut fiber, or other fibrous max" i material trenched into the ground andf held with a wooden stake. Sediment t control logs are also often referred to as "straw wattles." They are used as a sediment barrier to intercept sheet flow W, 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 s 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 71 the paved surface. Appropriate UsesOWR 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 - 4 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 _ AN 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 , frequently as needed. Excess sediment ,' yfµ: 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) STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT INSTALLATION NOTES 1. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR —LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES)/EXIT(S). —TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES)/EXITS(S) (WITH/WITHOUT WHEEL WASH, CONSTRUCTION MAT OR TRM). 2. CONSTRUCTION MAT OR TRM STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES ARE ONLY TO BE USED ON SHORT DURATION PROJECTS (TYPICALLY RANGING FROM A WEEK TO A MONTH) WHERE THERE WILL BE LIMITED VEHICULAR ACCESS. 3. A STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL ACCESS POINTS WHERE VEHICLES ACCESS THE CONSTRUCTION SITE FROM PAVED RIGHT—OF—WAYS. 4. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. 5. A NON—WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED UNDER THE STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF ROCK. 6. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY LOCAL JURISDICTION, ROCK SHALL CONSIST OF DOT SECT. #703, AASHTO #3 COARSE AGGREGATE OR 6" (MINUS) ROCK. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT 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. ROCK SHALL BE REAPPLIED OR REGRADED AS NECESSARY TO THE STABILIZED ENTRANCE/EXIT TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT DEPTH. 5. SEDIMENT TRACKED ONTO PAVED ROADS IS TO BE REMOVED THROUGHOUT THE DAY AND AT THE END OF THE DAY BY SHOVELING OR SWEEPING. SEDIMENT MAY NOT BE WASHED DOWN STORM SEWER DRAINS. 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 CITY OF BROOMFIELD. COLORADO. NOT AVAILABLE IN AUTOCAD) VTC-6 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District November 2010 Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 3 APPENDIX D EROSION CONTROL PLAN TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total "Onsite" Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres / Total "Offsite" Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A Total Haul Roads Area N/A Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% O Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam w Groundwater Depth 15 Feet / �� w Number of Phases w/ Project N/A Total Volume of Imported (+)/ / Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or \ / Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V I LU Distance from a Riparian Area or o Sensitive Area 400 Feet / DRAWN BRB CHECKED DAP DESIGNED KEY MAP BRB N .T.S. FILENAME i 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON III- L/c i I TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR � •••'�'' �P� "5012 _ _ _ — / I �\ , c� SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORESET PLANS DOCUMENTS N NEEDED.MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL ry INITIAL BMP'S: �OVt O• �4/ //yyam� QF, � STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY 007 ___ •• O _ WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION � / O :'` WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP — _ — — f f II — 5009 _ — _ — _ I I KITS) °� / — — +� cSr _ — — — — — O SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND —5008 / — — MOUNTAIN VISTA DR _ — — — � J/ III THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE � Gb7J 5007 / / / CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. --am i — —5006— INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: / --Coo // — — \ g3 / u f AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE — _ / �, i CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: �• /� / _ / TEMPORARY SEEDING h = i / MULCHING SURFACE ROUGHENING • ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE Q DR �::- W J f � � - � f � / I ����'••�•�� CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS 7. � I ' • FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE 0. RO T T� h I JJ UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL 0 STABILIZATION WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL - - - - - RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. yr - �� \� _ �� _ • F - - - - - - - - -` ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL moo 0p � T --- — - o - -I - - - MAPLE HILL D R - I STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED Z °� -T - - - - - - - - - - - - AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE L0D oos � ' 5002 - - - - - - OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY M� O // ! - AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W / — — _ \ / p / �' I 1 -1 _� USED. a THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED GRADING OPERATIONS. 5000 \ \ \ 'ter �- 5000 ,• — �- .. f /// / I REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF Z BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. co // // ` / M I i 1, \\ , `�.\� 8p' �- �' — Lop —L i a i i i i fir-- , _ _ ON \ � Ory —` y-. y I , --, , IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND 0 vv _ R I 4 t r — // A Vq 1/ ` , 1 y,� -���� L �� ' IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS y —` ✓��r ' '� PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Z W PAS 5000— E IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY W SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING 0 CO ROW �� — j I \ \L CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE a J f� — CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. CL z _ _ EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES Fr-- \ N , �l GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER�I BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. Z _ MONTAVA PHASED I LEGEND LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE Lop \ FLOW ARROWS < STABILIZED STAGING AREA SSA _ Ir / CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA/ - - - - - - r RWOOp VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL O f SILT FENCE sF SILT LL- TST, INC. /I lI O CONSULTING ENGINEERS \ /I / / I / I - _ / / 748 Whalers Way r� � Suite 200 Fort Collins CDColorado 80525 Phone: 970.226.0557 ^ \ 1\ �/� / / J I l JOB NO. RWOO �'I 0 �lV\ ti 1230.0009.00 I / 50 0 50 1 OO SCALE 1 p, = 50P I 00 scale 1 —50 feet DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 14of77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total Onsite Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres Total "Offsite" Area of Disturbance Total Storage/Staging Area N/A / \ Total Haul RoadsArea N/A y �� �A \ \ // \'�\ \ _� �� /� // \\\ 0 / \; i Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A � � \ � \ � � _, / � \ \ \ Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% '00 \\ LD Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density / \ / \ ' —� j LLJ Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam \ Groundwater Depth 15 Feet V \ \ V \ \ \ �� \ Number of Phases w/ Project N/A � AA ✓ A \� \ / \ VA A\ %'� �� �� �'��� Total Volume of Imported Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet / OV� %� \ ` \ / 'V A� \ �� V A \ / \ - ..� / i i'/// \� A\ LU Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V Distance from a Riparian Area or / \ Sensitive Area, 4001 Feet % \ \ / / / \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ / /\ P \\\\ / ( ��'� �\ \ / M DRAWN \ \ \ �`� V � ✓ \ V \ \ / / / / BRB \ \ � \ \ � �, � � A ..,A V A ��• \� // /% / /\ \\ � � � ��� �� � // CHECKED DAP N v \ y w KEY MAP BRB DESIGNED G ED FILENAME N •T.S. 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra I \ \ \ �/ \ L \ y v , /� � EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR \�/\ �7 / r l� l � PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON p,DO L/c \ TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR ��••'' '' �, SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE �P SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL Q DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. 00 / INITIAL BMP S: F ?; STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY S/ONAl- WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION / WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP 00 \ - ( / / KITS) SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND MOUNTAIN VISTA DR I \ \ V� \ ,�� '`�O� �' / / / THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. y I I I INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: `�- n- Tyr � 1- - r-r �� \ \ \ ✓ / \ \ i� \ I \ \\ \\ AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: / TEMPORARY SEEDING _ \ \\ �� so _ MULCHING Z oR � \ SURFACE ROUGHENING - Q T1 '� \ � � ` \ � 0 ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE III I T� TZ � II� 'fir TI �-I _T I -T I-�I T I V I � \\ \\ / - // \� \� r TT 1� TI -�I T I -T ,-r �r �� 1� TI T I T I T I rrrrr• ,� ,� T I—T T ' , \ \ \ \ CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS 11-IE SITE TRANSITIONS I"I"I ' II Ir / \ \ \ FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE T I T r-T 'r-r T� TI T I T i T I T r T-r TZ T7 T I _r I IT �T �T TT I � � -� \\\ �\I I I �.\. �r \\ \ \\�� I -� I T I T I-r 1-r -I-r Tl TI -�I -1- I-T 1 I J- I u \. ,\ >.` I r / I / UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SIZE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z J �(// I T IT �r TZ T T I T I T I T IT 1-T �f I r F•` -r I T ril ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL _ O 1■ � o� , _ — — — — __ — _ \ 1-- -------�---- STABILIZA11ON WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL U 001 RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. _ �- - —T F ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL I1r Z STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED 1� - 1 AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE Q F O OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY M CO liftI \ AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W USED. Q \ — N GIDDINGS RD ` N GIDDINGS R D '� ; °� _ /I THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED Z GRADING OPERATIONS. L O III T_I TI _��I T I T I 1�= — — — ——— ——— — = = \ �� '� REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF r BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. > CO /� \ --` ------------ --- i _ _ - - - - -- — - - - - - - - — _— _ - - - -� - - - - - - - - - - — - -006— — IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND um �� � �N, T - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \ 1 `' IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS LOD Z \ / PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE W � LOD ` \\ SF a, — — IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY 0) a \ SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING O CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE a J CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER F ` I I/ , BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO$ \ — — — — — — — — / / PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. 5000 � 4995 / S F y 4995 '� / / LEGEND SF SF LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE L Ills 5p00 —I—ll—s - --- - - -Ili- - - - - - ' TITS Ills Ills ll� FLOW ARROWS � - \ LAD mm=�/iao� �°°� �°°� i-°°� i-°°� ion� i-°°� �°°� wu� L°°� L°°=="/= L°° L°° i-°° W° L°° LW WD goo LoD STABILIZED STAGING AREA ssA CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA TWA n _ — \ ✓ / VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL SILT FENCE SF SILT / \ / TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 748 Whalers Way \ / Z Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525Phone: 970.226.026.0557 F' JOB NO. / \\ 1230.0009.00 50 100 SCALE 50 O 1" = 50' scale 1"=50' feet DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 1 \ 15 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total "Onsite" Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres Total Offsite Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A \\ \� / Total Haul Roads Area N/A �� '�\ i / \\ ��� �\ �Q // / / o Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A F z U Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% C \\ \\ , f / / / / / / 0_ Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density / / \ '` / j \ - LU Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam Groundwater Depth 15 Feet Number of Phases w/ Project N/A Total Volume of Imported Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or \\ / / / `/ \\\ �'� L-_/�( - / 7 Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet / LLJ I / ' Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V /� / / �� o Distance from a Riparian Area or / / %�% (�� Sensitive Area 400 Feet m � \� � \ �/ / /i / / / � \ �,, / � � � / / ..' •\„ � \ � � / \ � DRAWN BRB CHECKED DAP I / / / / .. .:.. .� \\ O'VG1� \\ \ I DESIGNED �/ I KEY MAP BRB I T O�� ` \ \ , / /// \ \ ��//F /� \\� // / ::' .:• / ,� OQ� - \ \ I . I .S. FILENAME N . 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER DEPENDING UPON p,DO On �. TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR \ \ \\\ //� / �,� i / / / �� / / / I °: ; /• .: .: �— — \ SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE ��'•• p�P� p� SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. INITIAL BMP'S: Q�� 0��' �O• <v� F \ A7 / CWA \ STABILIZED STAGING AREA INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARYS/0 G� �• \ / / / / \ \ WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION NAL WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP / KITS, SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND MOUNTAIN VISTA DR THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE / CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: co 2 AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE TEMTEMPORARY SEEDING PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: MULCHING Z \ / °o / � \ / _ l l 1 I / I\ / \ SURFACE ROUGHENING Q \/ ( \ I I ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE J CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS W0. FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z - - -- - - - \' — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL O — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I _ — \ _--_ \ STABILIZATION WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL CO - - d _ T -� RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED Z AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE Q O � y\ F OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY O MCO AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE F MULCH Y.1 U I — N GIDDINGS RD — �\ - USED. Q N GIDDINGS R D__ _ _ _ �� ' _ —_ _ _ L - — — — —— - THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED CI� Z - — — �— GRADING OPERATIONS. REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF \� Z T — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. CO ------ ------ - - - -� - - — - - - - - - - �� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — � — - - - _� — _ — — _ _ - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' � ����� IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND O - - /LOD — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — SF IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS \ / 1'►� 1 PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Z W OF THE PLANDO NOT W -'J11� / / / I / SHOW ALLOFOTHE B PS THAT WILDL BE NEEDED CDUR NGILY O CO \ \ ,' I / / I CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE J / �� \ J ' CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SF Q EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES I GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER _ BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO Z — — / PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. SF 4995 / I �• I / / I / 4995 � ` sF - I / / LEGEND SF LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE w� g000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — — - - — — — / I FLOW ARROWS LOD LOD LODLOD LOD�� LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LoD LM � XOD STABILIZED STAGING AREA ssA CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA cwA O VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL �c SILT FENCE sF SILT TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 748 Whalers Way Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525 Phone: 970.226.0557 JOB N0. 1230.0009.00 SCALE 50 0 50 100 1,. = 50' scale 1"=50' feet DATE OVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 16 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total "Onsite"Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres Total "Offsite"Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A Total Haul Roads Area N/A Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% / O Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density i Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam „y 0 w Groundwater Depth 15 Feet / / / I / w Number of Phases w/ Project N/A Total Volume of Imported (+)/ / / / Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V Distance from a Riparian Area or Sensitive Area 400 Feet 0 DRAWN BRB CHECKED DAP DESIGNED KEY MAP BRB N .T.S. FILENAME 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON p,D0 L/c TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR ��••' '' \, FE SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE Vim;' Q�p`�G�O� SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL PQ DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. .5012 — / — — - / / Ii / 6�v INITIAL BMP'S• STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY S/ONAIL WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION — —5011 — _ _ — WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP r007 — / _ — e — \\ i KITS) • —50A0 — _ _ �r o SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND O MOUNTAIN VISTA DR O _ THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE °� - 500g �rl , , — — — z CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS o / � •:• .•••�. . INTERIM AND FINAL BM 07 IP-3 _ _ / _ ` AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE - �� _ , h:. 6� CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE ' r J TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: 5006 -• SEEDING i I TEMPORARY Z MULCHING SURFACE ROUGHENING \ IP 3 � � III • - � ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE . ', ..... .. ems—•.'. ,/ .. ... IP . JI• o -° ' �'. ' ' ::.. IP-3 ' '` • �.` ';:: . • .:.'•. .• CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS FROM ONE s„ MAPLE `� — / \ .. UPDATED AND FIELDECHANG D AS SITE COND TIO SL CHANGE. Z TO ANOTHER AND THEY J 500 Q 5 ; . _ O IP 3 ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL ' I OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL — g SCL �� \ ^ � •' ---, _ --_ _ . � ' ' •. I .� ./• STABILIZA110N WITHIN 2 WEEKS R ,� IP 3 , RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. CO III . . \ Gan Gon W. ` ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL Z — \ ooc ... : . .. I P 3 .. ;. I .-�. ,' •}°.: •., - STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED SCL - — AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE y OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY IP 3 Q / ! _ So SCL .. AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W CO i \ USED. _ �0-� _ _ �� }. ,� - MAPLE HILL DR Z — , , / R. .. , . l - \ s0o — — - ��` ! ' \` I P-3 — — 5002 — — — — — — — — — — THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED CO — — — — — GRADING OPERATIONS. 0 R A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF I �- BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. / r / i I � \ \ \\ , • , ..,::. . :'•',. ' -, ' 5000 , �- IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND SCL 1 ? IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS F_ / Q / I / �) r `�`�\\ � � \� �$ , . ,� ,. :.:_.,_. •. SCL T -- -{ III / I � � s PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Z W W // I / �" \ \ 8 d I I �� SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING � A A \\ IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY O '►il _ f / l / CO _ � \ ONTq ��I��\`� � ROw� '�•"� � �����"�'�`� __�__ �---1 � y�—�• L0Dyy � i r i �� � ih i iI � � � i ' ���� CONSTRUC110N. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE �� N CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. qs y5000- - ll E 51' \�� THER � I ,J EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES W ° i / �- — I/ ' I/ l 1; r� y/ ROW BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE THAN 3:1. D WOVEN NETTING, SHALL OR BE USED TO ``` _ \ / � l �\l l l �5005� \\��y y _ - f �� —`�-' _� � � � ��`-— _ PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT.77 Z / / 1 � . LEGEND l � ,'l \— ✓ Ill l\ \ \ �\_ \_ � ` � \ \ l l I Il II l �\� � � � I , i I ' I II I q I I MONTAVA PHASE D I I LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE wo Il ) ° I FLOW ARROWS \ _ STABILIZED STAGING AREA SSA / � ' CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA cwA VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL vrc —/ I \ — — — — — — — — L � - - - - - - - SILT FENCE SF SILT OD Nam, INC. S , � / ! � TST, INC Q \ \ \ CONSULTING ENGINEER / I / // / / / I/ ` `� I ` \ I` / / // Q \`� / \ J \ 748 Whalers Way = / / / / / / 1 / ` \ _ ` I /I / Q Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525 Phone: 970.226.0557 JOB N0. 1230.0009.00 50 0 50 100 SCALE „ _ , HA w � _ � � � l � ;� � /l � � 1 50 W7- / \ / R ti „ , / , scale 1 =50 feet DATE NOVEMBER 6 2024 \ / SHEET 17 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total 'IOnsite" Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres Total "Offsite" Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A \��� Total Haul Roads Area N/A Y '�Z/ X / I -- � 1y / // \\ ) v0 Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A � AEst. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% Ld Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density / \ \ —� jLLJ Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam \ � /Groundwater Depth 15 Feet Number of Phases w/Project N/A A� A � ✓ / V � � \ / / / �' \ VA ��/ %'/ �/ �� " r�'��� Total Volume of Imported (+)/ � � � �vv ' A \ � � �� A / \ � V �\A��� Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or \,VA� 'VA / Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet Q / \ \\ / '\ / / // \ \ A / / / / A\ Q \\ SCL / LLI Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V > Distance from a Riparian Area or Sensitive Area 400 Feet / m DRAWN I BRB SCL CHECKED DAP KEY MAP DESIGNED \ \ l \ / \ \ J r' BRB N .T.S. 0009FILENAME Erosion ControlJnfra \ \ / 0/� / \ y� \ / ;/ \ \\/ /�/ �/- % h'/ f EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR O PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON �p.D �/C 11MING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR ••' '' �, SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE F/ SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL ,0 \ \ \ `/ \ \ \ j / ,� IP-3 / >.. / DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. P / INITIAL BMP S• SCL '/ S / / STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY S�ONAL \ \ \ \ \ \ \ WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP // I KITS) SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND MOUNTAIN VISTA DR \ \ \ \ , �`�O �' r' 1 r l l THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE\� MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.INSTALLED BEFORE THE r► �• � \ \ , � ��, � SCL —r- T I �_ �— \ \ \ \ \ �' \ \ ` l / I I 3"� • I I I INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: \ \ \ I I \' \ \ \ \\ ✓ i \ \ ' � J I ~. \\ \ I AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE \ \ �' \ \ \ \ ,� f �,: '.: \ 1 / CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS. TEMPORARY SEEDING Z — 1 '-" SURFACE ROUGHENING r� 1 _ ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE r' T 1 —T J I I_r I�r I \ \ ,! !: `•♦ :.�• T I I T I � �'\ _ � — � CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS Uj T T \ Ir r T-r J rT TT r T ' r I T I T I T I-r �f- �� 1� TI T I T I T I 1—r' T� T� I -r I T I -�7 TI I 7 \ — T IT r---r- 'fir T� TI TI T i T IT IT TT T� TI T IT , _ _ _� ♦ _ - � \\Y': FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE /j TI TI T I •'�- ' �•• / -r r-r' T—� _� TI T I TT I -r 1-7— I—r- 1—r �r Tl TI T I T I_T I �_ I�� T.� - - k - . �— l -/ >' \ UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SIZE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z J I f , III`' � I T IT r TZ T T I T I T I T IT 1-T �r T1 T I T I / •r ' " C�•` '.T IT I -�\+ :.`_,•�...� '...,. /' \ .:...`..: L� - I lJ ' •'.�i `•— Ian• < P:i` T\ O v` , I _1- I - I I_1- .�'- -� ��� - - I I J— �—I J-- I �, — — �--I � �1=L —,_,— — — �-- � —_ ,':.�.• =— — -� - � - �': : ,d- - � ♦� .;" ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL O I bOrl�1i � o� � � F � — — \ L-- -- \d--- -- '\ STABILIZA11ON WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL �1 — =1� I i i _ I 1— —jam— — — = — ... , I / f [ RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. yr ... r :' --•� -� :% sue:: y �F. \ ANY i T' ISTURBED CH REACHED FINAL .-� : ..: .._•::. ... :.: :. •::.... '. . ..... ..'\a , , .'. .; �,' ' III,:.. . �. I ... .• ... . . . : ." >,..�.�.�: . . .. .. •._.�-_-... . .... .. . . .. . . . .. STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 I DAYS ASHALL TBE TEMPORARILY SEEDED y, y, _ _ — — — _ — 1, � Y �` / :�•.�� � AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE 0 / ✓ - r i� OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCHCO W =' — — X USED. Q - —c N GIDDINGS RD_ THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED 05 00� N GIDDINGS RD ��' i �\ _ '. . :' `.4:. :_ ..: ,— — - 0 GRADING OPERATIONS. - .. ..... • ... [. ,. 1 x ..... ... . :. r .• .' Lam•`. i may,. � .�y..♦� / REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF f co T' •�i +'.- ... . ..:.. ... '. .ems-. . . ... ,..., _ — — — MANAGEMENT S. .. ,. BEST MANA EME T PRACTICE ---- -- - - / RESPONSIBILITY RE - - - - - - - - /—f - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - — — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - — — — - - - - -�OrO— —/.: — — - - - - - - - - - - - - T — CONTRACTOR'S LOD� LOD :- — - - - — - - - - - - - - . . .� . TY TO AD AND - -. .. ... - ,/.:'::I:i , IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. PTHESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS - — — — — — — - - - - - LDD� 1�D- - - � - --- � - - � � � fit:.::' - -'� — �� LOD / > ; :.:': / .�',. / PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Uj SF c, IMPLEMENTAl10N OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY aim SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING O CO a � � �' � ,�• / CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES W GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER / —� / ` SCL \\ // — — — — — I / / BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO I I / $ — — — — — — — — — — — 5000— PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. Z SCL Mu SCL 4995 4995 SCL SF sF MU - LEGEND _ _ SF h I I LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE Lao °a� °°i �aoi 1lIS 5p00 —11IS 1�IS 1 1lIS 1lIS FLOW ARROWS � ICYJ�r LODE LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD L0� LOD LOD LOD LOD�■ LOD LOD LW 1 LW STABILIZED STAGING AREA SSA CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA cwA O _ _ — J =— ✓ \ / /��/ / \\ VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL SILT FENCE sF SILT TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS lers Way Suite 8200oFo t Collins Colorado 26.0 / Phone: 970.226.0557 JOB NO. 1230.0009.00 50 0 50 100 SCALE 1" = 50' / scale 1"=50' feet DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 18 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total Onsite Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres a Total Offsite Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A \// Total Haul Roads Area N/A � � �\ � � ��� , /' / \\ \ ) I \\ / � �Q // / / / / \ o / f / / Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A � z h\V // / � / / A � �� � f / / /�— _ am o IL Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% < \\ \ ✓ / / / / / / — w Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density \ j / \ \� �/ / / / / j LLI Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam Groundwater Depth 15 Feet Number of Phases w/Project N/A Total Volume of Imported Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or \\ // / \\ \ /% Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet >� / / �. / \\ \\ / SCLLd Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V Distance from a Riparian Area or �/ // ��% // \ / / Sensitive Area 400 Feet / � \ � \\�\ � / /� � J � �• // DRAWN BRB \ CHECKED DAP \ l \ \ ` \ // \\ O /'/ / DESIGNED KEY MAP Sao \ / � / \ / � ,l` �� - / / / . . .. �. , ,: .• �. ... . :. � . � . .'\, °oa � BRB ` \ \ / \ \ / / . J / +' / / :: \ Q \ \ \ I V . I .J. FILENAME 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra 80. EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR TIMING�� ROVALS, CONTRACTOR SCL PHASE DFINFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON \ \� :::' - .. ::... •.:'• �— SHOULD COORDINATE EALL ROSIONN AND PCONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE V";• �O�P.�O� SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL .• .. . ' I �, / ION QQ G DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED • SET PLANS AND MODIFY S INITIAL BMP'S: Q O �•� w Z> J / / .; IP-3 / /— .. .. .:: CWA I \ \ �. •....• �G SCL / �\ \ STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY /ONAL / \ \ \ WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION V I WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP o- , / // I / / ��\ \ KITS) / � / I / / SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND MOUNTAIN VISTA DR THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE , �\ � \ MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. QD I INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE \ MTEMPORARY SEEDING EROSION EVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: z I .,+ \ soo _ / � •�,+' ___l MULCHING Q SURFACE ROUGHENING ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE J CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITION I"u �. FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE J UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z r \^ \? I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - �- -I — ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL . , F BEING DISTURBED SHALL a1 • — d STABILIZATION WITHIN 2 WEEKS 0 V �� RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. t 'y °'..'ter_'^ "..•, 1+; - i, ~ — S • CO Lam. .,. :. ..., .. •'.. — — Z_ _ ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL Z STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE O OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY —- —— — AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W USED. N GIDDINGS RD N GIDDIN l — GS RD_ '' -- — _— THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED co — °• r — : _ —� _ GRADING OPERATIONS. IL, I• .,:. T REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF r. " _ ... ,. . . '•..• . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. i ----- ---- - — — — - - _ �::'';: — — T... — — — — — — 06— — — — — — — — — — — ���m����� IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND 0 — - - - - - - - � _ / 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ' w' _r. . \ 50 SF \ '�"' '� LODE IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS - - \ I 1 PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Z WLU -► / / / IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY \ '+ SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING O Co Y \\\ rn� i "• \ ,' / / / / l I CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE Q CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. SCL \ 8 / / / / 1 EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES W v I / GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO / / / / ., � I / / / PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. Mu SCL SF 4995 / 4995 Mu SCL ,� c!,> I ` / / / LEGEND 5000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE / —Ills FLOW ARROWS Ills —1TIS 1 Ills LOD LOD LOD LOD `o LOD LOD LOD Loup LOD ion `� � � / / / � STABILIZED STAGING AREA ssA 0 CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA O VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL 2� SILT FENCE sF SILT / I TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 748 Whalers Way Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525 Phone: 970.226.0557 / JOB N0.N\ / / I / / / 1230.0009.00 / 50 0 50 100 SCALE 1» — 50' scale 1"=50' feet DATE OVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 19 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres I l \ Total "Onsite"Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres Total "Offsite" Area of Disturbance N/A Total Storage/Staging Area N/A Total Haul Roads Area N/A Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% Z Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam w Groundwater Depth 15 Feet / y - j LU Number of Phases w/Project N/A Total Volume of Imported � r Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V Distance from a Riparian Area or Sensitive Area 400 Feet �o/ DRAWN BRB CHECKED 1 / / —III'% \ I DAP � I KEY MAP DESIGNED BRB N .T.S. FILENAME / o^a _ 0009-Erosion ControlJnfra /`' � / � / ce � I / EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON �PDO L/c TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR � ••'�'' \, SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE Vim; SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. .5012 � J G — / I r INITIAL BMP'S• _ / \ 0 STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY S/ONAL WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION J — _ — _ WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP cA•` '`� — / ,5010� III/ KITS) SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND 0 MOUNTAIN VISTA DR alb / O _ 9 3 I r _ �— — 500 CD 1 I THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE• — ` i _ _ f / CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE z � \ \ ao> i _ — / — I' OJ MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. •. . 007 / / — INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: \ - '' - AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE • — 5006— CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE /� J I \ TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: — 0 TEMPORARY -- -- - •. 3 �..— \ •.. •, . , -�:. — � SEEDING MULCHING I � \ SURFACE ROUGHENING p�• . •. . � ,...� - � ADDITIONA L SILT FENCE NS MAP o h _ \ C-�� ..•. .. � \ I `� CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSI110 a o / `�• ' ''.: : � � -.�� . � � i FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE r \� — / UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE D R _ ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL 0 •� * : �y T P ''. :.:..... F BEING DISTURBED SHALL �aa>I_� ' — — — — — — _ RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHEN NG. ° CO RP • \ � •.•.•• '• , �• : ' -� — ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL MU � 0 ' .'_gin•.�.:. \ , RP - STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED AND\� _ — — — — — — — — — — OF 2 TONS PER MACRE AND USHALL BET TACKED OR FASTENED BY M Z AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W 0 ��o � I� -'-'��, 5p00 R P � •'x :=� ,' _ /I:�4-T �• ---- _ �o I � 5002 MAPLE HILL D R � II - \ — USED. W \ •j � I � 5002 � THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED GRADING OPERATIONS. LLZ a Y r � � � � —_\ ' _ • :' .:•:. •' ' •° • N. REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF Z 0 — — — — — — — I — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. co > RP �` M RP '�, I MU IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND O . �T IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS 1 f // I' ��\ -t= � � / I I � I �I�. PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE Z W cr / / J / / MQ \\ �� '80, �` /1 \ y I I J IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY 1 _ l , , / / / N Tq /�� _ ROW, y �>� 1 y,� L0D � J I I i 4 I_ SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING 0 cf) W ,�� •, ���� ��r '\� CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED BY THE Q 5000_ _ y CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. J I ' \ - EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES \ fc\ \ , II / < �� may` y ROW \ — /- � GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER C Z \ \ / 5 ���� y — — ✓ \ _ _ /� \ _ BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO —500 — 1' - -- -'�� LPL � LL - I l / / � ` \ c` / \ / 1I \ `\ ,\�_/ � _ \-` ___ ✓ '� — r� , � \,\ — PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. qFI III I LEGEND • I M ON TAVA PH ASE D I LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE - L- FLOW ARROWS / f �w STABILIZED STAGING AREA ssA CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA cwA 0 � VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL vrc � /� \ / / % I m / \ \ \ \ \ / \ r % \ — — — — — — — SILT FENCE sF SILT ' -- AR WOOD l l / / / l l / / \ \ ( , i l LT � `• l _ � > W AV // � � / \ . \ — - _ �� ` / l / Il � \ a TST, INC. �l / / l I \ I ti' - _._ I I / l O \ i / I CONSULTING ENGINEERS 748 Whalers Way Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525 O Phone: 970.226.0557 JOB NO. 1230 0009 00 O� \ �� 0 )f SCALE - f WOOD _/ � \ J � J \ 50 50 100 1 - 50 I I / `� // �\ / // / /� n/� _ \ scale 1.=50 feet DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 20 of 77 --1 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS _ Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres Total "Onsite"Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres v A �� _ `� . _ �A Total "Offsite" Area of Disturbance N/A \, \ \ \ < // — Total Storage/Staging Area N/A Total Haul Roads Area N/A Y �� �A \ \'�V / -� / �\ � � o Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A \ \ Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% � � � \ �j � , � / \ Ld Est. Percent Vegetative Cover 90% Density j Existing Soil Type Group D Clay Loam Groundwater Depth 15 Feet Number of Phases w/Project N/A �� \ \ \ \ � ✓ / \� \ �/ / / '\\ \\�\\ Total Volume of Imported Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpiling of Fill or �,VA\� V� A V \ A II \ A� \� \\/ 'V� Borrow Areas Off Site 0 Sq. Feet ��Q / V ` \\ 'V �� �/ \ \ ..� LU Q Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V 1 r ;;.' o Distance from a Riparian Area or Sensitive Area 400 Feet \\ k\ // \ \ \ \ \ \ �/ \ \\ \� /// /I / �� / / m DRAWN BRB \ \ \ V � � V A V A �� \ / �/ / / � �� � '•�� CHECKED \ / \ / O� \\ DAP :\ �� /� / � �� � � � � �� � / DESIGNED KEY MAP BRB � N .T.S. FILENAME 0009_Erosion ControlJnfra 80, MU EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR / \ \ ` / \ \ / l/ ♦r l PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON p,DO On/ \ \ yv \ ✓ / / / / ��•..••••. TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR � �• � JQ` SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE V • �O .�0� SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. a / INITIAL BMP,S, QF. Dot �O. \ :J F STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY At- WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP �\ _,..' / KITS) / r / � / SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND \\ \ \ ( - /`� �. / t. / MOUNTAIN VISTA DR T ` \ \ \ \ \ / O� �' r' 1 r ` l l THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. INTERIM AND FINAL BMP'S: I I r� r \' \ \ \ \ \ ✓ / \ \ ' \ \%� I �'� \ \ '`` I AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE 7 ,: .. \ 1 CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE / \J I TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS. MUMCH NARY SEEDING SURFACE ROUGHENING / 'I 1 / \ Z / �IFr� \ \ ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE r� � W J I TI I T I I \ CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS T I 3 —T � IIr- T TT 1� TI T I T I T I—r -- T� 1� TI T I I —r ,T 1 -.�7 TI I \� J T ,T f—T 'fir T� TI TI T i T IT � r--r TT � Ti -T ,—T � � �� I , __ _ .�� -`��� �\\Y�: � FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE � Q I � TI TI T I '�- ' Ik —r 1—: �r -�I TI T 1 —� 1 —r— 1-7— 1—r 1—r �r Tl TI T I T I_T I �_ I L� T. _ — —. -I'�.• _ 1 � \ \ •� UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE. Z I T IT r TZ TI T I T I T I T IT 1—T �r T-I T T I T I T �r J I 1� lJ- R PI / MU \ .f " . I Lam- JJ IT f� —I — — I - Imo- L I� •` \ �— I.—L y I , '.Ly I—�—I' — � —I I / ` — — I I—� lam- �� :� _ ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT � � ai�� — — --� _ '� -- -- -- ----- ---- '\ r ST BIIILIZA11ON WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING EDISTURBED ASHALL o� l` jull °011� � ' — — — — — — — — RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. CO O - — — — — — _ — ANY REACHED FINAL + %-- L,—, -. I. .. , • ..4... . ♦. . �- . ,.�.: . ... . .. .. -�-,: . ...... . . . . . . ....: .• .. : '•_ �. ... — �;` • III,:.. -- . .. .. . _ . >, , ... . . .� .. . ... -.--- .:�. . .. . ... . -.. ..•.,. : .. .+. . : .-..� . .�• r � ST BIDLIZATION WITH NA 30 WHICH HAS ASHALOLT BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED .:. ... :.: : AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE Q Z � / ✓ : � I, - � OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY M '" AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH W USED. —� -- � RD_ � ,.f,.': ' ._' � �:� / ' ;�:' ;-' N GIDDINGS RD "` 5000� - ' � - LED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED CO ,�. i `� THESE MUST BE INSTAL _ - — GRADING OPERATIONS. L Z - : x ..... ... + , .. • • .• • . Lam•`. i • -• O -� REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF Z fir¢ ... . ... �: f . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . ... ''. ..�,=. . f T' a• BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. CO — — — — — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - —f — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - — O — ` ��`—'` IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND � O TOD� LODE LW L;:� rnn - - - - - - - - - — - - — - - - — i- '( ' /.'; S — � � — — ion - -- — — — ` IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLAN - — — — — — - - - - - — — 1�D— - LW - a. T '� ,. �� �' :.. �. \ /� �•'•:. / PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE SF I' '4'' RP '' ` `` IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY Z W - 0 JL 4 A�.i...• \ / VVV i aim \ `- SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING O W '• CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. < J EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER Z / / � I _ � � ,. _ i •':` BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO --" — — — -5000- — — — — — ! / PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. S 4995 / / y 4995 / t/ SF SF _ , LEGEND _ _ _ SF h I I LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE LW l I W, am �aoi 1lIS 5p00 —11IS - - - - - - - - - - - - j11S 1�IS 1 Ills 1lIS \ FLOW ARROWS UYD Er LODE LAD Lou LIM Lon Lon LOD LOD Lou LOD L0� LOD mmw�r LOD LAD LOD LoD LOD LOD \LOD STABILIZED STAGING AREA SSA CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA cwA n _ _ — J =— ✓ \ / /��/ / \\ VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL SILT FENCE sF SILT TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS lers Way Suite 8200oFo t Collins Colorado 80525/ Phone: 970.226.026.0557 JOB NO. 1230.0009.00 50 0 50 100 SCALE 1" = 50' / scale 1"=50' feet DATE NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 21 of 77 TABLE OF CALCULATIONS Total Disturbed Project Area 21.10 Acres > Total "Onsite"Area of Disturbance 21.10 Acres z 111P Total "Offsite"Area of Disturbance N/A X Total Storage/Staging Area N/A N, z Total Haul Roads Area N/A Q> 0 Construction Vehicle Traffic Area N/A V) a- U Est. Percent of Project Area Exposed 100% Cn -over V) Ld 5; Est. Percent Vegetative 90% Density LU Group D Clay Loam Existing Soil Type /10 Groundwater Depth 15 Feet N/A Numberof Phasesw/Project Total Volume of Imported Exported (-) Materials N/A Total Area of Stockpi I i ng of Fill or \\ / / �/ \\ �I�' -�( - / \ / / I / 1 Ld 0 Sq. Feet Borrow Areas Off Site Steepest Slope 3:1 H:V /z // / / Q\ / // / / / / I Distance from a Riparian Area or Area 400,Feet mu > Sensitive M DRAWN BRB \ \\ \ \ \ / / ��'j �� � / / /� 1 y / // / \ CHECKED 1b> DAP (5A7 'Vo DESIGNED X KEY MAP BRB x 0 FILENAME N .T.S. 0009-Erosion Control-Jnfra CIO EROSION CONTROL CURRENTLY SHOWN IS STAND ALONE FOR L PHASE D INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS. HOWEVER, DEPENDING UPON TIMING OF IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVALS, CONTRACTOR k� RE V4, 13* \� /// / /`,� / / � / / I / �— \ SHOULD COORDINATE ALL EROSION CONTROL ITEMS WITH CORE SET PLANS AND MODIFY SWMP AND EROSION CONTROL \ \ \ \ \ J `�/, \ \ \ \/ j �" / / �� / / �, "' / II I \ \\ \ DOCUMENTS AS NEEDED. b> INITIAL BMPS: w RP ell • STABILIZED STAGING AREA (INCLUDES SOLID AND SANITARY DNAI- WASTE DISPOSAL AREAS, FUELING AND CONSTRUCTION WATER FILLING AREAS, AND LOCATION OF SPILL CLEAN UP am KITS) (17 F� SILT FENCE INSTALLATION ADJACENT TO TIMBERLINE RD AND MOUNTAIN VISTA DR THESE AND ANY OTHER CONTROLS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CONTRACTOR ARE INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. Q INTERIM AND FINAL BMPS. 0, \ \ I / / \ AFTER THE INITIAL FILLING AND GRADING OF THE SITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MARK ON THIS PLAN THE TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION CONTROLS SUCH AS: > 0 TEMPORARY SEEDING 0 MULCHING z 0 SURFACE ROUGHENING 0 ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE LU - ` CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AS THE SITE TRANSITIONS RP FROM ONE SEQUENCE TO ANOTHER AND THEY SHALL BE 0. UPDATED AND FIELD CHANGED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE. d. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL 4, • - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - 1177- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - STABILIZATION WITHIN 2 WEEKS OF BEING DISTURBED SHALL RECEIVE SURFACE ROUGHENING. ---------------- ANY DISTURBED AREA WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINAL Iz- STABILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS SHALL BE TEMPORARILY SEEDED AND MULCHED. MULCH SHOULD BE SPREAD EVENLY AT A RATE z OF 2 TONS PER ACRE AND SHALL BE TACKED OR FASTENED BY CO 0 AN APPROVED METHOD SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE OF MULCH USED. Q N GIDDINGS RD N GIDDINGS R THESE MUST BE INSTALLED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF COMPLETED co GRADING OPERATIONS. F IL, 7— REFER TO THE SWMP REPORT FOR A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF z IL - - - - - - - - - BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. > 4,- -j- - - - -- co - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IMMMMM 0 - - — - - - -7-- - - - - - - - Lw IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND - - - - - - - - SF LW nomom LW IMPLEMENT THE SWMP PLAN. THESE EROSION CONTROL PLANS RP ► PROVIDE A PLACE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO DOCUMENT THE z LU cr IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY Cj) LU SHOW ALL OF THE BMPS THAT WILL BE NEEDED DURING 0) CONSTRUCTION. THESE PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED, BY THE CONTRACTOR, THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCnON. SF EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. PROPEX LANDLOK CS2, OR OTHER 0. Z BLANKET MADE OF LOOSE, WOVEN NETTING, SHALL BE USED TO — — — — — - SF PREVENT ANIMAL ENTRAPMENT. U. 4995 —4995 LEGEND SF SIF 5000 - - - - - - - - Ills LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE 1 . / FLOW ARROWS ion ion goo ion `"y LOD �w� LOD LOD Lou LOD LOD STABILIZED STAGING AREA / ��/ / \ \ v J I / / CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA / /�/ / / `\ / I / / / / VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL (E�) SILT FENCE ( SE:) —SILT— TST, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 748 Whalers Way Suite 200 Fort Collins Colorado 80525 Phone: 970.226.0557 JOB NO. 1230.0009.00 0 SCALE 50 50 100 1 st = 50' scale 1"=50' feet DATE 00or NOVEMBER 6, 2024 SHEET 22 of 77