The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.2 Supplemental App InfoHEPWORTH. PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL Hepworth.Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 Counry Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax 970.945-8454 email: hpgeo@hpgeotech.com RECEI\TED ll|AR 0 3 2003 GARF]ELD COUNW tx*ott{G & Pt A}Stlt{ci PRELIMINARY GEOTECHMCAL STI]DY RANCH AT COI.JLTER CREEK COTJNTY ROAD 115 GARtr.IELD COuh[rY, coLoRADO JOB NO. r.03 115 FEBRUARY 28,2W3 PREPARED FOR: SNOWMASS LAND COMPAIYY ATTN; JOE ENZER P.O. BOX 6119 SNoIryMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO 81615 Parker 3A3-841-7L19 o Colorado Springs 719-633.5562 o Silverthome 9?0.468.1989 I f TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING SITE GEOLOGY FIELD EXPLORATION SUBSI.JRFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGICSITEASSESSMENT ..... PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATTONS . . FOUNDATIONS FLOOR SLABS UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM SITE GRADING SI.JRFACEDRAINAGE ... PAVEMENT SUBGRADE RADIATION POTENTIAL . LIMITATIONS . . REFERENCES . FIGURES 14, 18 AND 1C - GEOLOGY MAP AND BORING LOCATIONS FIGURES 2 through 4- LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGI]RE 5 . LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 6 through t1 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS EIGURE 12 - GRADATION TEST RESI.JLTS EIGURE 13 . HVEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESIJLTS TABLE I . SI.JMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESTJLTS TABLE 2 . PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS 1 2 2 3 5 6 7 10 10 11 11 t2 t2 L3 t3 13 l5 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STTIDY This report presetrts the results of a preliminary geotechnical snrdy for the proposed Ranch at Coulter Creek, Couaty Road 115, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Figs. 1A, 1B and lC. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the geologic and subsurface cond,itions and. tleir potential irnFacrc on the project. The study was conducted in accordance with our agf,eement for geotechnical engineering services to Snowmass Land Coupany, datedJantrary 10,20A3. A field exploration program consisting of a reconuaissance and exploratory borings and pits was conducted to obtain information on the site and subsuface conditions. Samples of the subsoils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification, compressibility or swell and other engineeriag characteristics. The results of the field exploration aud laboratory testitrg were analyzed to develop recoromendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusious aud recornmendations based ou the proposed development and the zubsurf;ace conditions eucountered. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed Ranch at Coulter Creek development consists of about 479 acrgs which will be dividd into 26 single family residential lots located adjacent to 305 acres of open space. The preliminary developnrent plan is shown on Figs. 1A, 1B aud lC. Ihe residential areas vitl mainly border the south aad west perimeter of the oper space. The individual lots will vary in size tlpically from about 4 to 6 acres with larger lots along the southwest perimeter. The lots will be accessed by several roads that connect to County Road 115 at two locations to form a loop. A chip seal road surfrce is proposed. The lots will be serviced with a central \f,ater system aud have individual septic disposal. The water plant will be located in &e area of Boring 3 (Fig. 18) and an above ground steel tank will be located in the area of Boring 4 (Fig. 1A). Grading for H-P GEOTECH 2 the development improvernents is generally proposed to be relatively minor with cut and fill depths up to about 6 to 10 feet. If development plans change significantly from those described above, we should, be contacted for review and additional analysis as needed. SITE COI\DITIONS The Ranch at Coulter Creek covers about 479 acres and is located on the northern side of the Missouri Heights upland to the west of the confluence of Cattle and Coulter Creeks. The upland is rolling terrai! that stands above and lies to the north of the Roaring Fork River valley. Topography in the area is shown by the contour lines on Figs. 1A, 18 and lC. Cattle Creek has eroded a deep canyon below the upland along the south side of the project area. Much of this canyon side is a large landslide complex. Slopes in the proposed 26 building envelopes on the upland to the north are moderate and typically do not exceed l1Vo. Major drainages do not cross through the project site. Much of the project site is irrigated hay fields and pasture. Vegetation outside the irrigated areas is mostly sage, oak and other brush with sorne juniper trees. At the time of this study, the property was an operating ranch. The only buildings on the property were the ranch headquarters near the northeastern corne{ of the property. Much of the ground had a shallow snow cover at the time of our field review. GEOLOGIC SETTING The project area is located in the northern part of Missouri Heights, a rolling uplaud in the central part of the Carbondale evaporite collapse center. The collapse center is a roughly circular region with a diameter of about 20 miles and an area of about 460 square miles (Kirlfiam and Others,2OO2). As much as 4,@0 feet of regional subsidence is believed to have occurred in the collapse center within the past l0 million years as the result of dissolution and flowage of evaporite from beneath the region. Much of the collapse appears to have occurred within the past 3 million years which H-P GEoTECH 3 also coffesponds to high incision rates along the Colorado River and its main tributaries such as the Roaring Fork River (Kirknam and Others ,2OOZ). If this is the case, the long-term average subsidence rate was between 0.04 and 0.1 inches per 100 years. There is some local evidence of evaporite deformation such as tilted river terraces and fault scarps as recetrt as the late Pleistocene, but there is no definitive evidence of deformation during post-glacial times, within about the past 15,000 years (Widmann and Others, 1998). The closest fault zones to the project area with kaown or zuspected post-glacial activity not associated with evaporite deformation and considered capable of generating large earthquakes are the southern section of the Sawatch fault zone located about 63 miles to the southeast and the Williams Fork Mountain fault zone located about 58 miles to the northeast (Widmann and Others, 1998). SITE GEOLOGY The main geologic features in the project area are shown on Figs. 1A, 18 and lC. Most of the project area is underlain by the sediments of Missouri Heights (QTm) with some Miocen.e-age volcanic rocks (Tvm) in the southeastern part of the project area. Regional geologic mapping indicates that the Eagle Valley Evaporite is present below these two geologic units at an unknown depth (Kirklam and Widmann, lgn). The evaporite is susceptible to solution in fresh water and the resulting subsurface voids can produce sinktroles. Sinl&oles are locally present in the region, but evidence of sinkholes \ryas not apparent in the project area. Surficial deposits locally present in the iuea are stream alluvium (Qal and Qa2) aloug the valley bottoms of Cattle and Coulter Creeks, local alluvial fans (Qafl and colluvium (Qc) below the hillsides. A large landslide complex (Qls) borders the property on the south and covers much of the north Cattle Creek canyon side. Several northwest trending, nortrtal faults are inferred to be present in the southeastern part of the property. H.P GEOTECH SEDIMENTS OF MISSOURI HEIGHTS The sediments of Missouri Heights (QTm) were deposited during the Iate Pliocene or early Pleistocene in a broad bowl shaped area of Cattle Creek. The bowl is an evaporite subsidence depression that is about 7 miles long in the east-west direction and about 2 miles wide in the north-south direction (Kirkham and Others ,2002). Ttre sediments were deposited by a west flowing stream in fluvial, deltaic and lake settings. The project area lies uear the western margin of the bowl and moderate to hig[ plasticity clays, probably deposited in a former lake, were etrcountered in most of our exploratory borings, see Figures.2,3, and 4. The lake clays have a moderate to high expansion potential and are greater than 20 to 30 feet thick at the boring sites. MIOCENE.AGE VOLCAMC ROCKS Miocene-age basalt flows (Tvm) that have been broken and deformed by evaporite subsidence are present below the prominent hill in the southeastern part of the project site and probably underlies the sediment of Missouri Heights elsewhere in the project area. Basalt locally crops out, but it is usually covered by thin colluvium. Broken and fractured basalt was etrcountered at the surface in Boring 11 near the top of the hill. The basalt is a black, very dense and hard rock. The evaporite deformation has broken the rock into large blocks that typically have soil in fillings between the blocks. FAULTS Three norrnal faults related to past evaporite deformation are inferred, based on aerial photograph lineations and local topographic expression, to be present in the southeastern part of the project area. The inferred faults lie along the trends of previously mapped faults to the south of Canle Creek (Kirkham and Widmann,1997). In places, steep escarpments in basalt that are about 10 feet high are present along the H.P GEOTECH 5 trend of some of rhe inferred faults and the western two faults form a graben on tle soutlwest side of the hill in the southeastern part of the project area. LANDSLIDE COMPLEX A large, deep seated rotational landslide complex (Qts) covers much of tne northern Cattle Creek canyon side to the southwest of the project area and locally extends onto the property. Iudging from the size of the individual rotational blocks, the basal shear surface may be over 100 feet deep and is probably in the Eagle Valley Evaporite or evaporite collapse debris that crops out down canyotr from the Iandslide complex. The landslide appears to have been dormant with respect to large scale movement for some time, but it could be undergoing seasonal creep. The present crown escarpment appears to be along the trend of the western most of the three inferred faults in the souttreastern part of the project area. .. FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was initiated on January 13, ZO03 when digging with a backhoe for four percolation tests was attempted. Due to the frost, only Pit I on Lot23 could be dug. The field exploration for the remaining project was conducted between Ianuary 30 and February 5,20A3. Twelve exploratory borings were drilled with a truck mounted CME-458 drill rig using 4 inch diameter power auger at the locations shown on Figs. 1A, 18 and lC to evaluate the zubsurface conditions. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 17a inch aad 2 inch I.D. spoon samplers. The samplers were driven into the subsoils at various depths with blows from a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to the standard peuetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The petretration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils and hardness of the bedrock. Depths at H-P Georecr 6 which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figures 2 through 4. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and testing. SUBSI,JRJACE COIYDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are showu on Figures 2 through 4. The subsoils generally consist of I to 2 feet of topsoil overlying very stiffsandy clay with scattered gravel layers. Relatively dense, silty to clayey sandy gravel with basalt cobbles and boulders wzrs encountered at various depths in Borings 4,6, l0 and 11 aud in Pit 1. Drilling and digging in the basalt materials was difficult due to the rock hardness and size and practical refusal was encountered in the deposits. Laboratory testing performed on sarnples obtained from the borings included natural moisture content and density, Atterberg limits, gradation analyses, unconfined compressive sffength and Hveem stabilometer 'R' value. Results of swell-consolidatiou testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples of the clay soils, presented on Figures 6 through 11, generally indicate low compressibility under sxisling low moisture conditions and light loading aud a low to high expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The clays with low expansive potential showed swelling pressures typically between about 3,000 to 5,000 psf, and the clays with mod,erate to high expansive poteftial showed swelling pressures typically between about 8,000 to 20,000 psf. Results of gxadation analyses performed on the more granular soils are presented on Figure 12, and the Hveem stabilometer test results are presented on Figure 13. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table 1. No free water was encountered in the. boriags or pit at the time of drilling or digging and the zubsoils were slightly moist to moist. H-P GEoTECH 7 GEOLOGIC SITE ASSESSMENT There are several conditions of a geologic nature that should be considered in future project planning and design. These conditions are not expected to have a major irnpact on general project feasibility, but some modificatioas to the currently proposed building locations would reduce potential risks associated with a major landslide reactivation. The geologic conditions that should be considered in planning and design and their potential risk are described below. E)(PANSIVE FOUNDATTON CONDITIONS Most of the proposed 26 building envelopes and proposed roads are underlain by the sediments of Missouri Heights (QTm). Our exploratory borings and laboratory testing shows that this geologic unit is mostly moderately to highly plastic clay that has an expansion potential. Octtctd:foundation recornmendgtions appropriate for the on-site expansive clays are discussed h the Prelimirury Design Recommendations scction of this report. EXCAVATION DIFFICULTIES DifEcult excavation conditions should be expected when excavating in the basalt (Tvm) in the southeastern part of the project area. Because of the fracnrred and broken nature of the basalt it can probably be ripped with heavy duty equipment in open excavations. Blasting or other rock excavating techniques may be needed to excavate the basalt in confined excavations such as utility trenches. Also, blasting may be needed in open excavations if large basalt blocks are present or if unbroken basalt is preseut. H-P Georecn LANDSLIDE REACTTVATION The landslide complex along the northeu Cattle Creek canyon side appears to have been dormant with respect to large scale moment for some time, but the landslide may be undergoing sea.sonal creep movements. Seasonal Iandslide creep should not affect areas beyond the mapped landslide boundary shown on Figs. 1A, lB and lc. Although active creqp may be o..orying, in our opinion, the likelihood of a major landslide reactivation during a reasonable exposure time for the project is low. In the unlikely event of a major landslide reactivation the large scale movements would probably be restricted to the mapped landslide boundary shown on Figs. lA, 1B and lC, but they could potentially extend fiuther to the northeast of the present landslide boundary. If a low risk of m4ior landslide reactivation is not acceptable, thetr buildings or other movement sensitive facilities should not be located within about 150 feet from the Iandslide boundary shown on Figs. 1A, 18 aad lC. arts'pfesently planned, ptifti dFW ptoposed building envelopes on Lots 11, 12, 13, 16 and 77 are within 150 feet of the preseil landslide boundary. The 150 foot setback is approximate and when specific building and other facility locations have been determined, their locatiou should be field review to determine that an appropriate setback has been considered. REGIONAL EVAPORITE DEFORMATION The project site is in the Carbondale evaporite collapse center where regional ground deformations have been associated with evaporite solution and flow in the geologic past. Evaporite deformation in the project area probably started about 10 million years ago, but it is uucertain if the deformation is still active or if deformation has stopped. If ., evaporite deformation is still active, it appears to be taking place at very slow rates and over broad areas with little risk of abrupt differential ground displacement except along evaporite reiated faults. We are Eot aware of evaporaE related deformation problems tn &e region. In our opinion, the crrrreutly available information ou regional evaporite defori,nation would indicate that risks to the residential development at the project site H.P GEoTECH 9 are low. The low risk can be further reduced by not locating buildings or other movement sensitive facilities within 50 feet of the faults shown on Figs. 18 and lC. Faults are present in parts of the currently proposed building envelopes on Lots 18, 19, 20 and2l. SINKHOLES Evidence of sinkholes was not observed on the property in the field or on the aerial photographs reviewed. The sinkhole risk on the property is viewed to be low and uo gleatet than that present in other pa*s of Garfield County where the evaporite is near the surface. The potential for shallow subsurface voids that could develop into sin*fioles should be considered when planning site qpecific geotechnical stud.ies at building sites and other movement sensitive facilities. If conditions indicative of sinttole related problans are encounterd, the site should be abandoned or the feasibility of mitigation evaluated. Mitigation measures could include: . Stabilization by Grouting . Stabilization by Excavation and Backfilling . Degp Foundation Systems o Strucftual Bridging o Mat Fouudations o Set-back from the Potential Sinktole Area IYater features such as landscape ponds are not recommend near building sites rmless evaluated on a site specific basis. Home owners should be advised. of the sinlfiole potential, since early detection of foundation distress aud timely remedial actions are important in reducing the cost of remediation, should a sinkhole start to develop after construction. H.P GEoTECH 10 EARTHQUAKE CONSIDERATIONS The project area could experience earthquake related ground shaking. Modified Mercalli Intensity VI ground shaking should be expected during a reasonable exposure time for the development, but the probability for stronger ground shaking is low. Intensity VI grotrnd shaking is felt by most people and causes general alann, but results in negligible damage to structures of good desigo and constructiou. Occupied and other important structures should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to collapse under sfronger ground shaking. Ihe region is in the Uniform Building code, Seismic Risk Zone l. Based on our current uuderstanding of the earthquake hazard in this part of Colorado, we see no reasor to increase the cornmonly accepted seismic risk zone for the area. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the proposed development, zubsurface conditions eucountered in the exploratory borings aud pit, and our experience in the area. The recommendations are suitable for plenning and preliminary design but site specific studies should be couducted for the individual development facilities and for building on each lot. FOUNDATIONS Bearing conditions will vary depending on the specific location of the build.ing on the property. Most of the soils encounterd at shallow depth consist of expansiys clays. In general, we expect ligbtly loaded spread footings placed on the natural clay soils with lower expansion potential or on granular soils should be suiable for building support. TWe expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of 2,000 psf to 4,000 psf. Where clays with low expansive potential are encountered in building areas, the clay may need to be removed or the footings designed to impose a H-P Georecn 11 minimum dead load pressure to limit potentiai heave. Where the clays have moderate to high expansive potential, drilled piers or helicai piers that extend to below the expansive material will probably be needed. Boulders could result in irregular bearing conditions for spread footings and make pier installations difficult. Foundation walls should. be designed to span local anomalies aad to resist lateral earth loadings when acting as retainitrg strucfires. Expansive clays should not be used as backfill behind foundation walls that act ils retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure by use of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection. The subsoils encountered at the tank site (Boring 4 locatiou) appears suitable to suppoft an above ground steel structure placed on a prepared subgrade. FLOOR SLABS Slab-on-grade construction should be feasible for bearing on the natural soils with low to no expansion potential. There could be some post construction slab movemetrt at sites with expansive clays. Crawlspace constructiou should be used in moderately to highly expansive soil areas. Subexcavation ofthe clays to a depth ofat least 3 feet and replacement with non-expansive structural fill may be used in the garage areas with a risk of heave. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage ctacking. d minimum 4 inch thick layer of freedraining gravel should underlie basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. T]NDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered during our exploration, it has been our I experience in the area and where clay soils are present that local perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal nrnoff. An underdrain H-P Georecu 12 system should be provided to protect below-grade cotrstruction, such as retaining walls, crawlspace and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe surrouuded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least I foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum l% to a suitable gravity ouflet. sEE GHADTT{fi The risk of construction-induced slope i$tabiiity at the site appears low provided the buildings are located in the less steep parts of the property aud cut and fill depths are limited. Cut depths for the building pads and driveway access should not exceed about 10 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep and not encroach steep downtrill sloping areas. Stnrcnual fills should be compacted to at least 95% ofthe maximum standard Proctor density within 2% of optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetatioo and topsoil. The filI should be benched into slopes that exceed 20% grade. The on-site soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embankment fills. The highly plastic clays should not be used as structural fill beneath buildings and pavements. Pennanert trnretained cut and fiIl slopes should be graded at2hotizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock riprap or other means. This offrce should review site grading plans for the project prior to construction. SI,JRFACE DRAINAGE The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runofffrom uphill slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be concentrated and directed onto steep slopes or allowed to pond which could iurpact slope stability and foundations. To H-P Grorecx limit infiltration into the bearing soils next to buildings, exterior backfill should be well compacted and have a positive slope away from the building for a distance of 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be restricted. PAYEMENT SI.'BGRADE The subgrade soils etrcountered at the site consist primarily of medium 1e high plasticity clay. Silty to clayey sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders was encountered beneath the topsoil at some of the borings. The clay soils are considered a poor support for pavement materials. Based on the soil conditions encountered in the 6slings and the laboratory test results, a subgrade Hveem 'R' value of 5 is recommended for pavement design. The coarser soils encountered in several of the borings would have a higher 'R' value, on the order of 25. The acnral subgrade conditions should be evaluated at the time of constructiou. It rray be feasible to provide a subbase layer of the on-site gravelly soils to improve the subgrade support condition. With adequate subbase and base course material depths, a chip and seal roadway surface should be fbasible. RADIATION POTENTIAL The proposed development is not located in an area where geologic deposits are &|profftd,&"havo umsually high concentrations of radioactive minerals. However, there is a potential that radon gas could be present in the area. It is difficult to assess the potential for future radon gas concentrations in buildings before the buitdings are constmcted. Testing for radon gas can be done after construction of a residence or other occupied structure. New buildings are often designed with provisions for ventilation of lower euclosed spaces should post construction testing show uuacceptable radon gas concentrations. LIMITATTONS This sardy has been conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering priuciples and practices in this area at this tirne. We make no wruranty either express or 14 implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the field reconnaissance, review of published geologic reports, the exploratory borings and pit Iocated as shown on Figs. 14, 18 and 1C, the proposed. type of construction and our experience in the area. Orx findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and pit and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluatiou of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning and preliminary desrgn purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued conzultation, conduct additionai evaluations and review and monitor the implernentation of our recommendations. Significant design changes rnay require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend review of geologic conditions at the buildiug locations, and additional subsurface exploration and analysis for the individual building designs. Respecttully Submitted, INC. Steven L. Pa sLP/djb cc: Soori:Yancy Nichol H-P GrorecH 15 REFERENCES Kirlfiam, R. M. and widmann, B. L.,1997, Georogy Map of the carbondale Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File 97-3. Kirkharr R. M. and Others ,2002, Evaporite Tectonism in the Lower Roaring Fork River vallq, west-central colorado, in Khlfiam R. M., Scott, R. B. and Judkins, T. W. glg., Iate Cmozoic Evaporite Tectonism and Volcanism in West-Central Colorado: Geological Society of America Special Paper 366, Boulder, Colorado. widmann B. L. and others , !gg8, Prelimirary euaternary Fault and Fotd Map and Data Base of Colorado; Colorado Creological Survey Open Fite Report 98-8. H-P Georecu E:flanatlon: aJ tanfhced Flll Clc @llwlum Oef Allwhl Fan Qal Youngm Struanr Alltllum Cbz Oldcr8tuamAlluvlum Qls l"enddlde QTm Sedlmcntl of tbcoud llelghtrTW Pllocem'ageYolcanlcRoctg Tvm tlocenecgoVolcanlcRocks Contact: Apprordflfre bilrdey d rnp udtr. Ercarpment: Ta dhndetlde *carpment Normal Fault: lnEnEd nomd frult apptodmab l@Uot, d@dwheoconcoaled, U up{rrcwnd6, D dqvn.fircwnalCe. Borlng: Appmrdme bcalion of rybtmry botltU. Plt: Applffi locaton of ogtoraOry plt tIt S*:l f,r.=flI!fi.@nbulnbndt 2fr. ill'Ot l-t-t I . tnnr U - aaaaa D 81. 103 115 HEPWORTH.PAW.AK GEOTECHNICAL. lnc. Ranch at Goulter Creek Geology Map - Northwestem Part Fig. 1A Explanatlon: st tanPhccd FlllOc Golluvlum Qaf Alluvlal FanQal YoungprStneamAllwlum Qaz Older8trcamAlluvlumQls landrllde QTm Sedlment! of tls.oud llehht Tvp Pllocene.ogB Volcanlc Roclc Twn tloccneqp Volcanlc Rocb Gontac't: Applorime Doundery of nnp unlb. Ercapnnrtt: Toe d hndsllde ecalpment ilonna! Fault: lnfuEd normal hult approDdlr6 lellon, dotbd rrutFre conceel€d, U t.rlhlown alb, D dowrfirown s6e. Borlng: u - aaaaa D &1. I , t nnfL npproxfnaO location of oogrormrybor[rg. I I I Plt Scrlc t h.=@0lt Appruimsblocafionawbrabryprt conbulttbd:2fr'aldoIL 103 115 HEPWORTH.PAW-AK GEOTECHNICAL. lnc. Ranch at Coulter Creek Geology Map - Northeastem Part Fig. 1B Explanilon: af f,anflaced Flll Qc Colluvlum Qaf Alluvlal FanQal YoungerStuamAlluvlum Qa2 Oder$tramAlluvlumQlo LandolHe QTm Scdltmnbotflrcoud HelghtsTW PlloocneageVoleanloRockr Tvm flocene<geVolcanlcRoch Gontact: Apprdrnab bornhry of map unftr. Ercarpnent: Toedbnddldeecarymnt Norma! Fault: lnErrcd mnnal frult approdrtab loca0on. dffid tfits€ corEal€d, U uptuown alCe, D dorYntrrowllEEe. Borlng: Applodmeb locdon d erybrabry bqlng. Ptt: epplofmab locaton d oploraOry dt trl Scab:1h.-flIlltCorttr lnbntd: 2 [. anl tO lL rT1-l &lo U - aaaaa D P-1 r I , t Gxpft. 103 115 HEPWORTH.PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. lnc. Ranch at Coulter Craek Geology Map - Souttmstem Part Fig. lC BORING 1 ELEV.=/1f,$' BORING 2 ELEY.=7140' tsORING 3 ?t FvELLV.=/ I50 EORING 4 ELEV.= 7-"60 BORING 5 ELEY.=7364' 2a/12 2+lt2 ItrF1L7 DDrll6 -2OO*87lI-36 Pl-20 18/12 23/12 ttlCr125 D0-101 fi/'tz llC-21.5 DD-l07 -200-99LL*59 Pt-40 s2/12 &/rz IISC=10.1 OD-ll7 12/12 SC-34.1'DD-EE -200-99LL-78 P].57 32/12 2+/12 lE/12 $e-15.5 DD-l12 -2fit62l,l-29 Pl-15 UC=7300 STORAG€ POilO WAIER PI-ANT WAIER TANK Note:Explonotion of symbols is shonn on Figure S. 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 2 BORING 5 ELEV.=7312' BORING 7 BLEY.=724O' BORING 8 ELEV-7358' BGRING 9 ELEV.:7358' BORING 1O ELEV.=7251' 23/12 IIC-I&8 0D-lCf iafiz I -2oo-goi $-eo 1s/12 lTCr16.7 DD=l10 -20O-8t,ll-59 Pl-4O u/12 23/A,1O/O 61/12 rc-6.0+bfi -2&-n 18/12 ItC-25.4 DDillOs ; A-42 I Ra5 N/12 lrcErzQ2 00-104 oola I o.o6 s1fiz 30/\2 WC-l8.1 OD-lO7 -2m=6Ell-45 Pl=28 26/12 0,oL I CLo(f 17/12 Note: Explonotion of synbols is shoryn on Figure S. 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Figure 3 BORING 11 ELEV.=7370' 8oRrNc 12 ELEV.-7176' PIT 1 ELEV.=7195' ooL. I o.oc) 20/12 ViC39.0 @-'105 -200a71ll.-37 Pl-21 32/12 o,f I qoo Note: Explonotion of symbols is shown on Figure S. 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PIT Figure 4 I t-Ecauo,I-I '(y $ H ToPSolL; orgonic sondy siit ond cloy, dork brown, frozen.I i^) I n CLAY (CL); sondy, scsttered grovet-.to graveily, very stif( slighily moist to moist, brown, stighilyi I 1 calcdreous, medium to high plcsticiiy. J L-J - ---- -t' tr n ci-{Y (CH); slighily sondy, stiff to very stiff, moist, motued brown ond grey, high ptosticity.I r-r !r- I b':t c.HY. AryD .s-Al,to (cL-Sc); grovelly, very allff/medium dense, stighfly rnoist to moist, mixed brown, I LJ slightly to highly colcoreous, low to medium plosticity. I m GRIFf AND.CLAY (Gc-Ct);..sond.y, bosolt cobbles ond gcotterEd boulders, mediurn dense, stighuyI il moist to moist, brown, slightly colcoreous. I I Hig GR4!€L (GM-cc); .silty to elopy, sondy, with cobbles ond boutders, medium dense to dense. srghtty I eEJ moist to moist, rnixed gre;rbrown. I F Relctively undlsturbcd drive somple; Z-inch t.0. Cotifornio tiner sampte. I f Drive somple; stondord penetrotion test (SPT), 1 S/linch l.D. sptit spoon scmpte, ASru D-1S86. |1rn no Drive scmple btow count; indicotes thqt 2O blows of c l4O pound hommer folting J0 incfies rvere lLv/ '1 required to drive the Colifornio or SFT sompler 12 inches. II i-, I l-, Disturbed bulk somple. I I T Procticol drilling or excovoting refusol in bosott boutders. II r,rores, I t. exptorctory borings were drilled on Jonuory 50 qnd 51 ond Februory 5, 2OO3 with o 4-inch diqmeter I continuous_ flig-ht_no!,{er_ou_ger. Pit 1 ond percolotion hole P-1 (Lot 23) were excovotcd with o bockhoe on I Jonuory 13, 2005. P-2, P-3 ond P-4 ore 8 inch diometer pdwer ouger dritled percolotion borings. I | 2- Locotions of .explorotory borings ond pit wers meosured opproximotely by poclng ftom the feotures' gnown on tne grte PIqn Provtoed. 5. Elcvotlons of explorotory borings ond pit were obtoined by interpolotion between contours *rown on thcsite plon. 1. Th" explorotory.boring .cnd. pit locotions ond elevotions should be considered sccurqte only to the degree implied by the method used. 5. the lines between moteriols shown on the-.explorotory boring ond pit logs represent the opproximoteboundsries between motcriql tlpcs ond tronsitions moy be greduol. 6. No free woter wos encountered in the borings or pit of the time of drilling or cxcorction. Fluctuotionin woter level moy occur with time. 7. Loborotory Testing Results: lt/C = Wqtcr Content (%) DD = Dry Dcnsity ( pcf )*4 = Percent retqined on No. 4 sicve. -2OO = Percent possing No. 200 sieve. LL-LiquidLimit(Z) Pl - Plosticitytndex (%) UC = Unconfined Compressirre Strength ( psf )R = Hveem Stobilometer "R' Volue 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.LEGEND AND NOTES Figure 5 N .9o oaxtd I .9a.noL4 Eo() 3 a, 1 0 1 2 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 100 N c .9o oqxlr, I coo @oa Eo() 0.1 1.O 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 Moisture Content = 16.2 perceni Dry Density = 112 pcf Scmple of: Sondy Cloy with Grovel From: Boring 5 of 1O Feet \ lExponsion I I upon Iwetting III \ \ Moisture Contcnt = 12.5 percent Dry Density : 1O1 pcf Somple of: Sondy Cloy From: Boring 4 of 5 Feet Exponsion upon wettinq \ 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS . Figure 6 4 3 5S c, atroo.Xqtrj I I qOn'a o Eo. olo 2 0.1 1.0 .10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 N clo6 q,50 I Or vloo o. oz() 0.1 1.0 ,l 0 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 100 Moisture Content = iO.1 percent Ory Density = 117 pcf Somple of: Y*y Scndy Cloy with Grovel From: Boring 4 of l0 Feet \ Exponsion uPon wetting \ \ \ Moisture Content = 21.6 percent Dry Density = 1OT pcf Somple of: Sondy Cloy From: Boring 5 of 8 Feet Exponsion upon wetting \ \ \ 115103 HEFWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 7 2 N o.o I I CLx LrJ t0 tr .9orol{,e Eoo2 4 N "E3@ oo.X4trJ z I O{ to{,Lo.Ebo() 1 2 0.1 o.1 1.0 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 Moisture Conteni = 20.6 percent Dry Density = fi7 pcf Somple of: Sondy Cloy From: Boring 6 of I Feet Expension \r uPon wetting Moisture Content = 1B.B perc€nt Dry Density = 106 pcf Somple of: Sondy CIoy From: Boring 7 qt 3 Feet \ I \ Exponsion uPon wettinE \ \ \ J I + 100 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDAT]ON TEST RESULTS 6 N oZ4oGxtdrg ooEz CL tsoo 1 o 1 0.1 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf 100 Moisture Content = 20.2 percent Dry Density = 104 pcf Scrnple of, Sondy Cloy From: Boring I of S Feet \ Exponsion upon wetting l \ \ 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 9 2 N 51q o ct 'i0 I O. qt o,o C o1o 2 N c1oaqo CL6o I cOi 6 Uto CL oz() 0.1 0-1 1.0 1.0 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 100 Moistura Content = 1E.J percent Dry Density = 111 pcf Somple of Sondy Cloy Frorn: Boring 9 of 1O Feet { ( Exoonsion\ upon wettinq Moisture Content = 23,4 p€rcent Dry Density = 103 pcf Scmple of Sondy Cloy From: Boring 1O of 1O Fect + \ \ Exponsion uPon wettinq 103 1f5 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 1O Moisture Content = 9.0 perceni Dry Density : 1O5 pcf Somple of: Scndy Cloy Frorn: Boring 12 ci J Feet )\( Exoonsion\ upon wettinq \ N o ,t oa.x UJ I -9o0tt, q Eoo 0.1 1.0 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 N c .oacgexlrJ I "eaq,g o. EoC) 4 5 2 1 o 1 2 0.1 1.0 10 APPUED PRESSURE - ksf 100 MoiEture Content = 15.8 percent Dry Density = 117 pcf Scmple of: Slightly Sondy Cloy From: Boring 12 st 13 Feet \ Expcnsion uPon \ \ 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 11 24HR. 7HR TIIIE REA&HCS U.3 STANDAFD SES 45 HlN. t5 $H. icLtt{, ,el||rt. + tarN. tJ Z lrl z-IJu r!o- 0 t0 b 30 40 to 60 7! 80 90 eo 80 o70= U,a..6: F*zlrj C)sffi to 20 10 t@ .00t .0o! -009 .ore ,6, ,qt+ J5o .too .400 l.tt 2-3,c +73 DIAME1ER OF PARNCLES IN MILUMETERS 9.5125 fl'o 7e2 rla 20lttn a Y10ELl GRAIEL 40 %SAND 39 % SILT ANID CLAY 21 PLAS]ICITY INDEX %UQUID UMIT % SAMPLE oF: cloyey silty Send ond Grovet FROM: Boring 10 ot s Feet 21 4E 0 to 10 7ltR lrE RElr{Cs 15 Ht{, lotilt lff{. 4 r$t I sil. us SnroAeo SEBES CIEAN SIII'ATE ffiDIOS ,/f tr/v !|,'!/t oLl I f IJ 1lrl() IJ E- 30 40 30 Gt. ,0 80 ix, too r0o 00 80 70 (,z6 U, o- F 1t!ou,Irlo- €o 50 ,o g0 20 10 0 .009 .Oot .ot9 .0:r7 ,@1 .t6O .S0O .too 1.1! ZU a.7i DIAME]ER OF PARIICLES IN MILUMETERS 9,5rzs tt 0 n2 r6it 20:t 127 CI.AY IO SLT GRA\EL 29 %SAND 34 % SILT AND CLAY 37 % PLASTICTTY INDEX 14 %UQUID UMIT 39 % SAMPLE OF: Cloyey Sllty Sond ond Grovel FROM: Boring 11 ot 1 thru 5 Feet 103 115 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.GRADATION TEST RESULTS Figure 12 TEST SPECIMEN 1 2 5 MCTSTURE CONTENT (2.)15.5 14.9 14-3 DENSITY (pcf)111 117 119 "R" VALUEIEXUDAION PRESSURE (psi)20/215 2E/358 40/477 "R" VALUE AT 3O0 PSi: 24 ,,.!n,,100 90 'R' go V 70 A L60 U 50 E 4A 50 2A 10 o too 2oo Joo 4oo soo 600 7oo Eoo EXUDATTON PRESSURE (psi) SOIL TYPE: Clopy Sitty Sond ond Grovet. SAMPLE LOCATION: Boring t1 ot 1 thru S Feet GRA\EL 29 % SAND 54 % SILT AND CLAY 37 % LIQUID UMIT ss % PLASTIoW TNDEX 14 % .F 115103 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.HVEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS Figure 13 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNTCAL, rNc. suMMARy o. ,-oJ#otiJ*" ,r* RESULT' Page 1 of 2 JOB NO.103 115 SAUPLE TOCANOTI ilAIUNAL IIOISTURE OONIENT l%, ilAruBAL DRY DEt{sttY he0 GRAOATION EOIIU{G DEPTH lt€GO PEAC€I{T PASSlltlc ilo. axl ETCVE ATTERBEBS UM|TS UNG:ONFIIED COMPRESSTVE STREi|CIIH IPSFI HVEEM STASILOTEIER .B' VALUE 80lL oR BEONOCX TYPE GNAVEL {!rt 6AtrD t%t LIOUID LNTT 196' FtAST|C ffTD€X l%, 1 5 12.7 116 87 36 20 sandy clay1534.1 88 99 78 57 clay 2 10 21.6 107 99 59 40 clav 3 10 16.2 112 sandy clay with gravet2015.5 112 62 .29 15 7300 sandy clay with gravel 4 5 12.5 101 sandy clay1010.1 117 very sandy clay with gravel 5 8 21.6 107 sandy clay 6 8 20.6 107 sandy clay 7 3 18.8 106 sandy clayI18.1 107 88 46 28 sandy clay 8 2-5 90 60 42 5 slightly sandy clay520.2 10,4 sandy clay HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, rNc. suMMARy or '-oJ$fiiJ*" ,.r, RESULT' Page 2 ot 2 JOB NO. 103 115 SAUPLE LOCANOTT XAruRAL irolsruBE OOITTENT t96t ilATUNAL DBV IlElrlSlTy lpcO GRADANOTI FERCEI{T PASstils 1{O.2(x) 8!EVE ATTEREERG UI/UTSBOIIITIODEPTH lf3atl t ilcoflnilcD ooilPnESSlVE ETREilGTH IPSFI HVEE[I sTASll.OtETm 'n' VAtt,E sotl oR BEDROC( TYPE GBAVEL l(u 8AI\ID t%t UOUID utffT l%t PLA]gNC lt{DEX (%t I 2 16.7 110 89 59 40 l,gltly sandy ctay1018.3 111 sandy clay 10 5 6.0 40 39 21 clayey silty sand and gravel1023.4 103 sandy clay 11 1-5 29 34 37 39 14 24 clayey silty sand and gravel 371239.0 105 71 21 sandy clay1313.8 117 slightly sandy clay HEPWORTH.PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TABLE 2 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOBNO.103 115 Note: Percolation test hole P-l was hand dug in the bottom of a backhoe pit and soaked 1 dayprior to testing on January 77,2oo3. Percoiation tests p-2, p-3 and p-4 were performed in g-inch diameter powor auger borings and soaked 1 day prior to testing on January 31,2oo3. Theaverage percolation rates were based on the tast three readings oieach t""i.tirr" p"r"olationtest holes were covered with 2-inch rigid foam insulation to- protect the hole from freezingovernight. HOIE NO.HOIE DEPTH (rNcHES) LENGTH OF INTERVAL (MIN} WATER DEPTH AT START OF INTERVAT flNCt{Fsl WATER DEPTH AT END OF INTERVAL DROP IN WATER TEVEL (INCHES} AVERAGE PERCOLAT]ON RATE (MlN./ltrtcHtP-1 Lot 23 15 refill 6%3!+2Yt 17 3!"27/a 7/a 27h 2 7/a 47h 3?h 1 37h 3 7/a 2 zrb 7/a 2rb t%7h ?.4 Lot 15 30 10 10 0 240 10 g7/g Ya g7/a 9Va % 9%9%th P-3 Lot 11 33 30 10 8%1lt a%7%1 7Y4 6V+Yz 6%6%%P4 Lot 6 33 30 10 10 0 no perc. 10 10 o 10 10 0 10 10 o ACKNOWLTDGEMENT OF FINAL SATISFACTION OFSUBDTVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENi KNOW ALL MEN By TIIESE PRESENT rtrat: WHEREAS' slC-I:^urence, LLC, a colorado limitedliability company, enrered into a subdivisionImprovemenrs Agreement ("sIA,') ;rtil;;;;"il"ilrv co"*issioneis oicarfier<I county, cororado(hercinafler "Board'l dated Marctrl5,2004.;;;; ol"iunes,2ooain Book 1595, atpage l r9 asReceprionNo' 653767 of the Gar'eld co*ty;;;'i;;il;;;#-*ts of rhc Ranch at coulir creek; and WHEREAS' in acc9r.da1l.with tbe provisions of the SIA-SLC-[aureirce posted uo irrcvocabrcstandby l*rer of credit issucd.by Alpir,. s-k iil'ilrt.""roun, or$762,376.gg which was the cstimatcd;i:tr#l|::i$!| #,,o};,,o"*'**i"'n.ii*"r,atcourtercre*wii"ii-""r"o,prctcdar - . - - WHEREAS' slc-Laur€oce, LLC has-presentcd a certification fiom sopris Eugrncering, LLc dated*nrmxgr*;m"m'*r;"1#sxslliril:r,fi;iltrr,l;ffiffi ;jtincomplete at thc timc of execurion-"r,n" sro, -a"ri'"*i* *, o"r* o*n saio "ertincau; the arnourt ofthe original letter ofcredit in rhe emount of$762,376.it U"liau""a ,o a total amount of$0.00 as a rcsult ofallffiH,.la,",:l1*tions required in th" s'ua'"*r" r,rp[""-eor A,r€cment being comprcted as detailed in NowTHEREFO*,'jl-r"rrrrt of slC-Lawrence, Lr cand in consideration ofthcpremrscsandpnor agreemcnts, the Board herebv ackrowhages-,r,"'r"1rr..,g"-;i;.-Tfiiilril.'*rroror.n,,Asreernent entrcd into bv slC-lawrcn.";ii;;;;;io'i.a r* rn" n *i";;;;;"*k, and hercbyauthorizes the rclease of tie securitv fr"* ih.;;; itl#,io.oroin, Bank lettcr of crcdii in rhe amount of$762,376.88 which wil resurt in " t"r*-i"infu"r""ili:.Iio.log of credit in rne amount of $0.00 andconstituting a full and fnal releasc orsaia uL oic..aif riita. soard further authoi-rcs th" chri.rao tosign a Reduction certificate for Th" R r"h;; c;;;;f il.or*_uoirfavebpmeot, icopy orwhich isl?*"l*t" ts Exhibit A" and deri'*,r," "igir.i,r,#?t src-r.^rr*"", L-i6*,?i*r,* derivery to *:ffi f:,Hffiffi*:ri:?j:y,nT1.:Fhar satisfactior of Suuivision rrnprovementsA8'eem€nt shalt ue recordcdl thc;;fiHffi,ftT,frl- uar uatrstbction of SuMivision Lnprovements notice &at SfC-L**""]fic haq satic6-r 6,r ^c.L^ .-_: , ColoT9, ,nd suoh recording shait constiturcill'ffJ'"Tfffij'*c^r,**ir.r,J-"ji"-i,r,"ffi ilifi tr;l"itHrffi ?,'H'I':HI:coatained in rhe aforcsaid 3I,A for the*'lhi.;;;il;;;;I[ffiffi :Y5;:T:,:1XT.r1_'1o.qi,ni*iexceprrorthoscand still valid lencr ofcredit.4(d) of said SIA ana Uricn are securea by a difcrent H?qli,ttul$y#tll$llH#i,t4gL[] REDUCTION CERTIFICATE THE RANCII AT COULTER CREEK PLANNED T'NTT DEVELOPMENT TO: Alprne Bank Aspen 600 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO 816l I Re: Alpine Bank Lettet of Credit No., dated March 15, 2004 Original Letter of Crcdit Amount: $762,376.88 Gentlemen: The undersigrd a duly authorizcd ofticial of the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, hereby acknowledges that the improvemants required by the Subdivision Improvernents Agreement, datd March 15, 2004, between SlC-Laurcnce, LLC and the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, have been certified as complcte by the project engineer and, therefore, the amount ofthe above-referenced Letter ofcredit shall be reduced by: usD s762,376.88 To a new total of: usD $0.00 Lllluu ulllllll]lr ll]r illlltill ilt ffi lilt6s919O @l$s/2o04 tt:13o BtB2o plxrs I at'aDoha't of 1 R O,@ O O.oo GiRFIELD cOt {Ty co 6+5 li I 1 lr ,l l Lot 26 $- )zo O.glrl 6L-il t\2'1il "d l' to oUI (r) N t't I (, n :.1 e uto o)\o rul lFl ffiI:lI G I t t il I I il t I I I ru I I E I xr,MtBotrrr CENIEnI,INB C'OI,NTY R(X.D ll!BARI TY Y,I]TII BARI.AZT Y, LTD.CENTERIINE COIJI{TY ROAD II5 TEST WELL#5 slm]&1\1!::r.' (lqlufraq d 39',27'V 1333.97', BLM PROPERTY Legend Common Open Space Lot Area (outside envelope) Building Envelopes Roads and Driveways - w wNtDa0Etalw a@4 '{4.(rrjaa.-&MMruWW.WMw@4 - wEll|lllllllll|ll|llllllrutBSdaS/lta a aur-wwudwwMam&:ffi -aEEreawwuSNue'm.DII@UTMEDMq@W. -BUNrun''l .-rc@mBffiWMilM A-mmm o-mGuar#4s14wa -rc@48 -aEErclmtaw i.-Mmru4 o{r--m@wwfiN.lb MWUM-. . - -@4 i-we. @-mrrc A-**.*aureww B[,MPROPERTY ;ir;',-c;',.i ; 'v 148.02', - ll,t,t?.t'33'v 6073 5400, N00'0a3:rE rc0.00' 8 McMRo.l -Vl6ddtuLLh. BINTPROPERIY Lot 25 1g- ASPEI{ BLI,iE SKY XOLDINGS, LLC. l.,,i.Lli:i'L., ":: ' nov@c gATER I,Efr-CMLqGL MBE dRI!D UMTRROS EmoNM rRanch at Coulter Creek Land Use Map Date: September,2OO2 Prqnrcd By: TG Malloy Consulting, LLC EINTPROPERTT Lot 20 'Na il:n:r'. Scale: l"=450' \5 Fioure 4