Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEx 21 - PP Amend Reso 2012.80Exhibit 21 I Resolution No. 2012-80 Lake Springs Ranch Filing 2 Final Plat Application April 2018 X1211�i� �S�M�1�1' :�W�IM 1 �N�}d M�lli1111 Reeapt1Or 823748 09!05!2012 09:88:48 PM Jean RLberioo 1 of 79 Rec Fee:$6,014 Doo FiRe:0.00 GRRFIELO COUNTY CO STATE OF COLORADO )ss County of Garfield At a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Colorado, held in the Commissioners' Meeting Room, Garfield County Administration Building in Glenwood Springs on Monday, 16th of April A.D. 2012, there were present: John Martin , Commissioner Chairman Mike Samson , Commissioner Tom Jankovsky , Commissioner Andrew Gorgev , County Manager Carey Gagnon , Acting County Attorney Jean Alberico , Clerk of the Board when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: RESOLUTION NO. aVL - A RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH THE APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN AMENDMENT AND PUD AMENDMENT FOR LAKE SPRINGS RANCH PUD, ON A 459.38 ACRE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BERKELEY FAMILY LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 3.5 MILES SOUTHEAST OF GLENVVOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO IN SECTIONS 32, 33, AND 34, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST AND SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6T11P.M., GARFIELD COUNTY PARCEL Na,s # 2187-321-09-023; 2187-333-09-022; 2187-334-00-106; 2187-334-00-107 Recitals A. The Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado (Board) received a request from The Berkeley Family Limited Liability Limited Partnership for a Preliminary Plan Amendment for 118 single-family lots and 18 multi -family units, and for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to add the existing sod farm as a permitted use in the Residential/Single Family (R/SF) zone district and add a new zone district called Agricultural Preserve (AG/P) as further described in Exhibits A and B, Preliminary Plan and PUD Zone Map. B. The Lake Springs Ranch PUD is located within a 459.38 acre parcel of land owned by The Berkeley Family Limited Liability Limited Partnership. C. The subject property is located within unincorporated Garfield County in the PUD 1 1111 Wup1 IM1.7,1k alIgt tlittIN'+L 11111 09108/2012 2:38 484 PM Jean Alberlco 2 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO zone district! approximately 3.5 miles southeast of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. D. The Planning Commission opened a public hearing on the 14th day of, December, 2011 for consideration of whether the proposed Preliminary Plan and PUD Amendment should be approved, approved with conditions, or denied, during which hearing the public and interested persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding the request. E. The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on the 14th day of December, 2011 to make a final decision. The Planning Commission voted to recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve with conditions the Preliminary Plan and PUD Amendment. F. The Board of County Commissioners opened a public hearing on the 16th day of April, 2012 for consideration of whether the proposed Preliminary Plan and PUD Amendment should be approved, approved with conditions, or denied, during which hearing the public and interested persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions regarding the request. G. The Board of County Commissioners closed the public hearing on the le day of April, 2012 to make a final decision. I. The Board of County Commissioners on the basis of substantial competent evidence produced at the aforementioned hearing, has made the following determinations of fact: 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. 2. The hearing before the Planning Commission and Board of County Conunissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters, and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting. 3. The Preliminary Plan Amendment and PUD Amendment are in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030. 4. The following waivers from minimum standards contained in the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended (ULUR) have been granted and determined as appropriate for the health, safety, and welfare of the future residents and the general public: a. Section 7-108 and Section 7-307, Road Standards: i. Section 7-307 (A)(2) Requirement for Roadway Infrastructure: • Increase of the maximum grade for the Major Collector Road (CR 114) from 8% to 10% grade between Lake Springs Road and High Alpine Circle; 2 1111 reFaitliFA'r 111/111 't 11 Ill Reception#: 823748 08/06/2012 9 o&Fes:$0.09M0ooeFee 03.00iGARFIELO COUNTY CO • Increase of the minimum right-of-way width for Secondary Access Roads from 50 -foot to 60 -feet for all Secondary Access Roads in the subdivision; and, • Decrease of the minimum shoulder width for Secondary Access Roads from 4 -foot to 2 -feet for all Secondary Access Roads in the subdivision. ii. Section 7-307 (A)(7)(b) Continuation of Roads and Dead -End Roads: • Allowance of the following five cul-de-sacs to exceed 600 feet in length: Van Cleve Lane, High Alpine Circle, Hanging Lake Road, Water Tank Access Road, and Spring Valley Road. 5. The Preliminary Plan Amendment and PUD Amendment, subject to compliance with the conditions of approval set forth in this Resolution and except where waivers have been granted, meet the requirements, approval criteria, and standards set forth in the ULUR. 6. The proposed use is in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that: A. The forgoing Recitals are incorporated by this reference as part of the resolution. B. The approvals and conditions contained in this Resolution supersede all prior zone district designations and uses set forth in prior approvals, and supersedes in its entirety Resolution No. 02-109. C. The Preliminary Plan Amendment and PUD Amendment for Lake Springs Ranch PUD is hereby approved subject to compliance with the following conditions: Preliminary Plan 1. All representations of the Applicant made in the application and at the hearings before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners shall be considered conditions of' approval, unless approved otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners. Fees 2. The Applicant shall include 50% of the road impact fee with each fmal plat. The remaining 50% shall be collected at the time of issuance of a building permit. The cost of any improvements to County roads that are constructed by the Applicant and approved by the County may be deducted from the road impact fee. All future Subdivision Improvement Agreement(s) shall include any terms necessary to accomplish such deduction. riP11,110,11{414h14ru141101f Jf611Cfi'.kiIIIII Receepption#: 823748 48 of 790Rec0Fee;$0.09NDooeFee:0.001GARFIELD COUNTY CO 3. The Applicant shall pay a Cash -In -Lieu Payment for Schools as calculated in Section 7-405 (DX3) of the ULUR with each final plat. 4. Impact fees shall be paid to the Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District prior to the approval of the first final plat submitted for approval subsequent to this Resolution. Permits 5. Prior to the approval of each final plat, the Applicant shall obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit and air pollution permits from CDPHE. These permits shall be submitted to Garfield County for review. Agreements 6. Approval of the Preliminary Plan requires the Developer to complete the platting of all phases within 15 years of this Resolution and the first final plat must be recorded within one year of the fmal approval of the Preliminary Plan. Plat Notes 7. The following plat notes shall be placed on each final plat: a. Control of noxious weeds is the responsibility of the property owner in compliance with the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Garfield County Weed Management Plan. b. Colorado is a "Right -to -Farm" State pursuant to C.R.S. 35-3-101, et. seq. Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities, sights, sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a normal and necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rural character and a healthy ranching sector. Those with an urban sensitivity may perceive such activities, sights, sounds and smells only as inconvenience, eyesore, noise and odor. However, State law and County policy provide that ranching, farming or other agricultural activities and operations within Garfield County shall not be considered to be nuisances so long as operated in conformance with the law and in a non - negligent manner. Therefore, all must be prepared to encounter noises, odor, lights, mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, livestock on public roads, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or otherwise of chemical fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one or more of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non -negligent agricultural operations. c. No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defined by C.R.S. 25-7-401, et. seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit. All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances. d. All exterior lighting shall be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting shall be directed inward and downward, towards the interior of the lot. Provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries. 8. The Applicant shall adhere to the recommendations specified in the Hepworth-Pawlak Geotech's (HP Geotech) reports and attached as Exhibit C to this Resolution. Site specific 4 MI IA PiliFlalh111.111Itig IMIIALLYEARIii 11111 Reception8: 823748 09105/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberieo 5 of 79 Rao Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO studies shall be conducted for individual lot development. The need for site specific studies shall be disclosed in the covenants and on each final plat in the form of a plat note. Those recommendations include the following: a. Prospective building owners should be made aware of the potential low risk of evaporate deformation. If the low risk is not acceptable to building owners, it can be reduced by the use of heavily reinforced foundation system preferably without a basement. b. It is recommended that buildings not be located within 50 feet of the fault trace identified in Figure 1 of the HP Geotech report dated January I5, 2010 of which a Figure will be attached as Exhibit D to this Resolution. c. It is recommended that additional subsurface exploration be made in these areas to evaluate the engineering characteristics of the lake deposit. These areas include Lots 6, 7, and 8 of Block 2 and 200 feet of the western most portions of Spring Valley Road. d. The recommended foundation system will depend on the site specific expansion potential. Also, a structural floor system over a crawlspace may be warranted depending on the expansion potential at a specific building site. A site specific foundation study by the individual lot owners should be conducted for design level recommendations. e. More extensive grading should be evaluated on a site specific basis. As previously recommended, cut and fill should not exceed 10 feet deep and cut and fill slopes should be 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. A certified professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado should review the proposed grading plans when available and determine if addition subsurface exploration and analysis are needed. f. Occupied structures should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to collapse under stronger ground shaking. The region is in the Uniform Building Code, Seismic Site Class B. Water 9. The Applicant shall verify water requirements for automatic fire sprinkler systems are adequate at the time of each final plat. 10. At the first final plat submitted for approval subsequent to this Resolution, the Applicant shall obtain a new well permit for Well D and submit this information to Garfield County Planning staff for review. 11. At first final plat, the Applicant shall conduct a 24 hour pump test on Well D and have the water tested for quality to ensure it meets the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's standards. This information shall be submitted to Garfield County Planning staff for review. 12. The Applicant shall plug and abandon the well (Permit No. 160677) when the existing residence located at 3961 County Road 114 connects to the central water system of the subdivision. 5 1111 Mil 10.k'kt t iiI'i' 1fit friliN I Pen N191 .III 823748 09/05//2212 03:38:48PPI Jean Rlbarioo 6 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO 13. Prior to approval of the first final plat, the Applicant shall consider additional water loop connections. 14. Prior to the approval of the fust final plat submitted for approval subsequent to this Resolution, the Applicant shall meet all applicable Colorado Department of Public Health (CDPHE) regulations for a non -transient, non -community water system. 15. Prior to the approval of the final plat for Block 3, the Applicant shall submit to the State of Colorado a Notice of Intent to impound water for the detention pond east and adjacent to County Road 114 and receive approval from the State. Well Monitoring 16. Lake Springs shall participate with Spring Valley and other land owners in the Spring Valley area in a ground water monitoring program to monitor water levels in the Spring Valley Aquifer, as described in the Memorandum dated December 6, 2000, authored by Anne Castle and Chris Thorne of Holland & Hart attached as Exhibit E to this Resolution. The data collected pursuant to the monitoring program shall be provided to and maintained by the Basalt Water Conservancy District (the `Basalt District"). If and when the monitoring program, or other reliable data and information, provide evidence of a long term trend that indicates an inability of the Spring Valley Aquifer to satisfy expected demand associated with decreed water rights owned by Lake Springs, Spring Valley, and the other parties participating in the monitoring program, the Applicant shall cooperate with the Basalt District to identify and implement necessary and appropriate corrective measures which may include: (a) implementation of water conservation measures and/or (b) evaluation of the opportunities for provision of a substitute water supply from a supplement source. Waste Water 17. The Applicant shall comply with the following Spring Valley Sanitation District's (District) conditions including: a. Prior to any final plat approval, the Applicant shall provide the Spring Valley Sanitation District a complete set of the sewer construction plans for review and approval. b. The Applicant shall adhere to the Spring Valley Sanitation District's service conditions as follows: i. Obtain approval by the District of all required Line Extension Agreements or Line Connection Agreements as required by the District's Rules and Regulations and/or the Pre -Inclusion and Wastewater Treatment Plan Treatment Agreement (PDA); ii. Comply with all of the terms and conditions of the PDA and the District's Rules and Regulations; and, iii. Reimburse the District for all costs incurred by the District regarding this project, including, but not limited to legal and engineering review, as stated in the District's Rules and Regulations and PDA. 6 1111 Pan:UNA 114 1411.114. Kid1001114 11111 Reception*: 823748 09(06/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Plberico 7 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Access Permits 18. The Applicant shall make application to the Colorado Department of Transportation for an access permit for improvements to the intersection of County Road 114 and State Highway 82. Such application and approved permit shall be tendered with each final plat document; and the intersection improvements shall be included as a public improvement in the subdivision improvements agreement for that final plat. In the event that the County secures a permit with CDOT and constructs improvements to the CR 114/SH 82 intersection prior to any homes being constructed at Lake Springs Ranch PUD, the Applicant will be responsible for a portion of those intersection improvements either equivalent to, or less than, the cost of the improvements that would have been required pursuant to the CDOT permit. For the purpose of determining the Applicant's fair share pursuant to the "equivalent to or less than" clause in the previous sentence, the Applicant will provide for the County's review and approval, an engineer's estimate for the cost of the improvements that would have been required, pursuant to the CDOT permit issued to the Applicant. The engineer's estimate will be provided as part of the final plat submission for the first final plat. 19. Prior to the approval of each final plat, the Applicant shall obtain Access Perlllit from the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department for all applicable Secondary Access roads that intersect County Roads 114 and 115. Roads 20. Roadways: The current preliminary plan application for Lake Springs Ranch PUD proposes five (5) separate accesses onto Garfield County Road 114, hereinafter "CR 114." Notwithstanding any future Board of County Commissioners amendments to current approvals which may be obtained for the currently proposed design of the roadway accesses for the Lake Springs Ranch PUD from CR 114 and the present design of improvements to CR 114 through the Lake Springs Ranch PUD, based on agreements and representations of the Applicant, the Applicant shall adhere to the following criteria. a. Grade of CR 114 at Intersections: At intersections with Lake Springs Ranch development roads, the vertical alignment of CR 114 shall have grades no greater than 5% for a minimum distance of 25 feet as measured from the centerline of the intersecting road. b. Grade of Intersection Road at Intersections: At intersections with CR 114, all Lake Springs Ranch development roads shall have grades no greater than 4% for a minimum distance of 62 feet as measured from the centerline of CR 114 and not to exceed 6% within 120 feet. c. Angle of Intersections: Intersections shall be designed as nearly to right angles as possible, with no intersecting angles of less than 85 degrees. The centerline of intersecting roads shall be designed with a tangent at the intersection with a minimum tangent length of 60 feet as measured from the centerline of CR 114 to the Point of Curvature (P.C.) on the intersecting road. d. Proximity of Adjacent Intersections: Where two Lake Springs Ranch development roads intersect CR 114, the intersecting centerlines shall be directly aligned, or shall be separated not Tess than 200 feet as measured between intersection centerlines. In the event that one or both of the intersecting streets requires that CR 114 be provided with auxiliary lanes (acceleration and/or deceleration lanes) as provided for herein, then the intersecting street 7 11111114111'41.7.1Lli(s IFICION,h6aNtlig i111111 Receptio09/06%2012 03;348:48PM Jean Rlberloo 8 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO centerlines shall be offset sufficient distances so that the minimum length of the auxiliary lanes, as required for herein, are provided and do not overlap. e. Requirement for Auxiliary Lanes: Intersections of all Lake Springs Ranch development roads shall be provided with auxiliary lanes (left deceleration lanes, right turn deceleration lanes, right turn acceleration lanes, and left turn acceleration lanes) applying criteria set forth in Section 3.9 of the most current version of the Colorado State Highway Access Code. f Design Criteria for Auxiliary Lanes: The design of all required auxiliary lanes shall be in accordance with then applicable Garfield County specifications, as applicable, and Section 4 - Design Standards and Specifications of the most current version of the Colorado State Highway Access Code. Intersection Sight Distance: At intersections of Lake Springs Ranch development roads and CR 114, clear zones shall be designed and maintained to provide sight distance for the vehicle on the intersecting road (stop or yield) to observe a moving vehicle on CR 114. The clear zone shall be maintained free of all vegetation and objects taller than 24 inches except for traffic signs. The sight distance shall be measured from a point on the interesting road (stop or yield) which is 10 feet from the edge of pavement on CR 114. The minimum intersection sight distance for intersections with CR 114 based on a 35 MPH design speed shall be 350 feet. g. h. Access Points: Direct accesses onto CR 114 by individual lots shall be prohibited. No individual lot shall access a Lake Springs Ranch development road within a distance of 100 feet from an intersection with CR 114, as measured from the nearest edge of pavement of CR 114. J• Utilities and Street Construction: Street and road construction shall not proceed beyond subgrade preparation until all utilities which are intended to be placed under any part of the street or road are complete, including all service lines, and all utility trenches are backfilled and compacted in accordance with the street or road construction specifications as provided by a certified professional geotechnical engineer registered in the State of Colorado. Other Design Criteria: Except as modified above, CR 114 shall be subject to the following design parameters: Garfield County Road 114 Design Criteria Design Capacity (Vehicles Per Day) 2500+ Minimum Right of Way Width 80 -feet Type of Surface for Driving Lanes and Shoulders Asphalt Pavement Design and Subgrade Stabilization Prepared by Registered Geotechnical Engineer Based On-site Specific Soil Analysis and Anticipated Traffic Volume for 20 -Year Design Life Minimum Driving Lane Width 12 -feet 8 viiir rii,It1,r1:1IIM,a1,41. p,w Nirtal IN 11111 Reception*: 823748 09gaf579 Rec0Fee:$0800NDeoeFee:0.001GARFIELD COUNTY CO Minimum Shoulder Width 6 -feet Ditch Width and Storm Drainage Culvert Designed by Professional Engineer to Provide Minimum Hydraulic Capacity to Convey Peak Flow From 100 -year Storm Event Cross Slope 2% to 8% Based on Superelevation Design of Roadway by Professional Engineer Shoulder Slope Identical to Cross Slope Min. Design Speed (Miles Per Hour) 35 MPH Minimum Centerline Radius (Feet) Rate of Superelevation: Varies with Superelevation 2% Crown Section 610 -feet 2% 470 -feet 4% 420 -feet 6% 380 -feet g% 350 -feet Minimum Percentage of Runout on Tangent 80% Minimum Runout Length (Feet) Varies with Change in Rate of Superelevation Change in Rate of Superelevation: 4% 84 -feet 6% 126 -feet 8% 168 -feet 10% 210 -feet 12% 252 -feet 14% 294 -feet 16% 336 -feet Maximum Centerline Grade 10% Minimum Centerline Grade 1% K -Value for Crest Vertical Curve 40 minimum K -Value for Sag Vertical Curve 50 minimum 21. A portion of CR 114 is to be re -aligned which is subject to the Garfield County Procedures for Vacating Public Roads and Rights -of -Way. The Applicant shall receive approval of this road vacation prior to recording of the applicable final plat. 22. Prior to first, final plat approval, the Applicant shall conduct a geotechnical investigation of CR 114 from mile marker 3.1 to 100 feet east of the intersection of CR 115 and High Alpine Drive. Based on this analysis, provide a pavement section design to the Garfield County Planning Department for review. Affordable Housing 23. If Tract A is to be subdivided into further separate interests, the Applicant shall tender an 9 110riterod PMlithillirl?KlinlEl i 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/06/2012 03:39:48 PM Jean Rlberico 10 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 DocFee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO application for the subdivision of the lot. 24. Affordable Housing: The location (on-site, off-site, or a combination of on-site or off-site) of the affordable housing, and an Affordable Housing Agreement reflecting these determinations shall be finalized prior to scheduling the first final plat application submitted subsequent to this Resolution for signature by the Board of County Commissioners. Revisions to the Preliminary Plan 25. The following changes below and redlines sent to the Applicant on 4/4/12 shall be made to the Preliminary Plan sheets prior to the signing of the Resolution. These changes include: a. Add a cul-de-sac that meets ULUR standards to the end of Spring Valley and Rivendell Roads. This revision shall be documented on sheet PLAN -04 of the Preliminary Plan; b. Add the trail to sheets PLAN -01 — PLAN -07; c. Add an Affordable Housing label to Tract A on sheet PLAN -06; and, d. Identify any access easements to adjacent property owners. Revisions to the Construction Drawings 26. The following changes shall be made the Construction drawings prior to approval of Final Plat including: a. Modify the Typical Special County Road 114 Road Section on Sheet DET -3 to reflect an 80 foot right-of-way; b. Add the trail to the Secondary Access road cross section; c. Add trail detail to plan set d. Add to the legend on sheet PHASE the phasing sequence for the subdivision. e. Add notes to sheet CS2 reflecting that erosion control measures that shall be placed at culverts and along ditches. Add additional permanent erosion control blankets (SC250 or equivalent) to slopes along roadside ditches and ditches conveying water between lots or through open space parcels. These areas where the blankets are required shall be noted on the grading plans. Blankets will be placed where the major storm velocities exceed 5 feet/second. f. Revise the water line profiles in the plan and profile sheets to avoid low points. g. Provide a detail of a typical roadside ditch/driveway crossing on the detail sheet. h. Fire hydrant locations are shown in the roadside ditches or in steep slopes. The locations shall be modified or details for construction in these difficult locations developed. i. Manhole HARDSSMH-10 is nearly 20 -feet deep. This design shall be reviewed for 10 1111IYN'+6 IY111Itbt14irMI44:144147{111119111III Reception#: 823748 11 of 7788 2 Rea Fee:$0.00 DPM oor an :0.00cGARFIELD COUNTY CO J• constructability and redesigned. Add notes to the plan to make potential homeowners aware of shallow sewer line mains. Many of the proposed lots are below the roads and the sewer lines connections are going to be too low for gravity flow of lower levels. Evaluate the situations where the potential exists for issues with basement gravity sewer and add plat notes and noticing in the closing documents to clarify design limitations related to sewer line depth for potential purchasers of affected lots. k. Remove the high points in the water line proposed for Lakeside Lane and Rivendell Road. 1. Add the water line in the profile for Rivendell Road. m. Replace text on sheet MU -1 that references the "City with "sanitation district." n. Between Block 4, Lot 23 and 24 there is an 18 foot deep ditch and sewer line beneath the ditch. This is not practical for a sewer line and needs to be redesigned. o. Provide design information for the sewer line extension that is shown from the end of Lakeside Lane. P. 4. Provide design information for the sewer services for Block 3, Lots 17 and 18. No gas is shown in the utility trench detail but only one trench is shown on the plans. Include the proposed design for providing natural gas services. Vegetation 27. The improvements included with each final plat will include a revegetation provision for the disturbed areas associated with the improvements for the subdivision, along with security to guarantee that the revegetation has been successful. 28. Prior to the issuance of a building permit from the Garfield County Building Department 011 single family lots and the multi -family tract, an inventory of the existing vegetation and Harrington's penstemon shall be done by the lot owner and receive a statement of approval from the Development Review Committee prior to building. Historic Preservation 29. Prior to the approval of the final plat for Block 3, the Applicant shall conduct further evaluations of the sites that potentially contain the prehistoric "open camp hearth." This information shall be provided to the Garfield County Planning staff for review. 30. Prior to the approval of the final plat for Block 2, the Applicant shall further investigation the historic value of the structures on Lot 3. This information shall be provided to the Garfield County Planning staff for review. Revisions to the Draft Amended Declaration of Covenants 31. Prior to the signing of the Resolution, the Applicant shall amend the Draft Amended Declaration of Covenants. These amendments include: 11 VIII t '. R711i1JYiiiCI Ch vI v roc 411 iu Reception*: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberloo 12 of 79 Rep Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GFRFIELD COUNTY CO a. Prior to approval of the Amended Preliminary Plan, the Draft Amended Declaration of Covenants shall be further revised to reference, where appropriate, the existence and maintenance of the gravel pedestrian trail as a Common Element maintained by the Homeowner's Association. b. Create a section in this document that identifies the lots that might require pressure reducing values and/or booster pumps to increase or decrease interior water pressure. GIS 32. Once each final plat is approved, the Applicant shall provide the Garfield County Planning Department a digital copy of the final plat to a standard acceptable to the Garfield County Information Technology Department. PUD Amendment 1. Prior to the signing of the Resolution, the Applicant shall modify the Draft PUD Development Guide including but not limited to the following: a. Md design criteria for parks/open space, trails, road right-of-ways, and all other land held in common to Section VI. Construction and Alteration of Improvements. Dated this 4 - day of a�t aty,,.lou , A.D. 20 It— ATTEST: t . ATTEST: GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIS.1 RS, GARFIELD COUNTY 12 1111nctwzinciunitHrmannk 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:39:48 PM Jean Albertoo 13 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: COMMISSIONER CHAIR JOHN F. MARTIN COMMISSIONER MIKE SAMSON COMMISSIONER TOM JANKOVSKY STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield )ss , Aye , Aye , Aye I, County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing Resolution is truly copied from the Records of the Proceeding of the Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood Springs, this day of A.D. 20 . County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners 13 N1>•N1M oimoe m yw laaa a s wain e�iv.amanranann ONI ISNN39 NION. ANINIIO3 NDIH 13/ fa Ai II Q °I ! I`° ! 11 'g 53! 2 te 1d a Lrti N E so. aa� fl 0 56319 x 011118 0 gin io 1z zuzl a 6o- 4 mcg, amen �4c "am g W Y ��m 4 31 g •{ N . N • $ CC n 111 111 °=f a'i1lail ! a. l� :1111 41 1 I a ah1 1° qa 1, 011 int !I11ti i!pili1 -! h' a 5E1F1€ �etl'3:eiatl�3i@^S ..e 1111 SIeI1Ie11faaei3l4l6WI 111 1li II i st I1 III !pi ?;!'4 1 F II 11AIM! 00 Ern' p IIImuffin! 2121I!nn2l2 i°10sip...miming! II slslssslllisii ii IIIIIIIIIIIII! !!!!!!IsstmtsstItt 7isatiaiai5laaaig!!seSl91sss93s11 Haiti:°1111111x1 I 1110111014 O!011e11e1111111H011a111 110111111111111111111 e111111111111eltleelelaeee11e11RIK 1lUi111111lile11B1 !BB iiiMi???1? issi?? !O!!!!!!!!!!!! S!l:SI°laxj3p'1:BlSaei3 o1E a!! :east! " siMitilit111is111is;e11!?x!;111 tleegeel:eeset!le1g1 55555 555151 .1FI4i:;A5f55555555116x51659!l911 "PIrYi 2"--"2"6e"?291A55555¢5515iIS! c 15NG°51000.0011 .........! p.e sisiiii siiiliilliiiiiiii999sssli91999999l99isisisllsii 9lsls9l99ssstslslllsslsll!IUII!s!lB91Is111111111111111II MERE HEM SEE NIEINEE �90�D�EC�G9 iar,oval AO uva on Itla'0tiiOWAIMM 6-666-sWuniow NYldAWt8Wl3Yd tae' We' ku amme610 'Tird FLONVa 8ONIMIS Itl W'NtdoaFao n 'OM'91VR133N19N3 ANANN99 N9114 oaxalmAwnooamuev3 a ureanwnaaanwnliNva.ialeae aH n1, gay pa 4pn! _y 11 • 11 \l IEEE MEER-ER ! e! N IL Ug Mfte am a am F 0)00 aO a m0 ati -o s.Stoll yN YOO NOb9NJOHMY.M IM't�imametvcwa amMrmmf Isi ON tFH3HN I0N3 AMJIMOO HOIH NVId AEVNIW Vd 'and HONYN RONItld.,OIvI o taoo Awnooc� nv9 Ie 03JJnnA1IIwi.wn_I 9 V 1331 -IS al HDltl_W NES _ r ll �ti I N i.-�."�-T" 1 11 55 ���a LJ i J ar aorn eiasuoai` NOMIAlti Pretdd waaroxsax•aaix �w s .,auro MC IVA . ira cam's N DM SN1i138WOI�Atlldn00 H9IH 9 133HS 0.1. HOIVW NV1dThYNIH Iaud •O7FdHOrrcuaexroaoarl orrarcrraroatunoaamsarte Cp E133HS Ol HOltlW EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE@E EEEEE@EEEEEEEEEEEEREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE IEEEECEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EaEEEE€EEEE gEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEtEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE "Me .realr NYldd Yeaxlma NOO'9N3aMMMM me0O1W.,J'NMW001aX. Or "rik a 'DNI IDNIM33NI.N3 AkaNf100 HO1H EEELEEEEEELE ME ttEE EMEZEtEE E MELEE EEEEEE EEEEEE€EEE EEbEE t E E E;EEEE 1917 1.k k��� E � 711r7:1571 6 EAaEEE EEE: E € EE EEE EEE EE EEEEEEE EzEEzEE EEEEE EEEEE6EEEEEEEE E€ EEEs .E EEE EE EEttEttEEtEEEEEEEEEt IEEE EEEEMEttEEtEEEEEEEE EMtEEEEEEEEEMEEtE EitEEEEMMEEMEEMEEMEEMEEEMEE EMEMEEEMEMEEEEtEEMEEEEMEEHEE 99aa3aaaaaaGEaaaG3aaaaEmon aaaur mar ME EaZ EOLEEDENEEDEEEEOE ZZEZ NYIdA VNO L'fl'd HONYu O9NItid8 OH8WIYI MN1 Wd aAnWfp0OfllalViEr /391 d XWf3WiNI O911W11 AlM1Wtl A,IDIIpY i5 E f gggycI g CE 441 Jo Iie :2EMEEEZEREEENEE MEMEMEEM NYIdA VNO L'fl'd HONYu O9NItid8 OH8WIYI MN1 Wd aAnWfp0OfllalViEr /391 d XWf3WiNI O911W11 AlM1Wtl A,IDIIpY i5 E f gggycI g CE 441 Jo Iie IOOs.aowjAMM mea. Owe .ve.v,.a.raL Iog. 1arie 301Ls•aw VIii LIolGal 'OM 'ONR738MOIa AMLNflOO HOIH 0 •a•N4 UONwrbanagitnatdd V BONI NOM OOVNp10]'AWr! o U13W WD dws r Ivd OLIWIIAIIXVfA313n ZEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 'EDEEEEErEE laiNEE JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE HE€EEEEEEEEMEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEE NEEEE@EEEEEErEEEEEEEEEEE EMEEMEZEIMEEMEMEE EEE €EEEEEEEEEE EEEBEEEEEEEEEEE € EEEEEEEELEME@EEE EGOS EE0 a00EEE E=Tamtaim6 nta .0a E EECEE EMET;E; ;10E121 jCZNIESESSII L661-2L0uo8T� atva ON 134 019201,1107/A00IV0NI fl000OLI MOW Y9. 8 Ava °�[IIP011° aril SNIN33NION3 ANLNDOD NOIR 0NHONVU HYI S°E 'TT drellaINV EINWEH8MY1 o0VM010a •MN0m alItdev0 dOS NWVd 0311WIlAlMV4A39MY3B a: 5 �E€EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EE:EEEE�EEEEEEEEE EEMEEEEME @EEEEEEEEEE WB EEEE9EEEEEEEEEE€EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE€EEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEE EEEODE@EEEMET EMMEEMEEEEEEEEEZEEEEZIEEEEEEltaEBEmo:: FEE MEEMEIEEMESEWINEERM rjegla vaincanzateas, 04110.000,1 TDM3"Wl0007...:reant•ary R0011.010WMAIIII 101A11NOT0 avla Call moitINTUNSMON3 autism:m1.1am 3 _H -I . \ ii -o° cIVIVT1103340 IIVIdA100/001311d wrramonnosawardsmirt G3VIA°1riatff°3n0Ltilaa g Mv i g R i iltaValli nva 9 Ni IIIWORN 111 ; - - - - e f 'i: Baa M1rn Ie^v NmtN3JxmNM nueeaIemmmmeevex1yNiNN �woa�e..nonnN.N�e NYIliWI9Yxd NY1dA100I11Haxd vrcmdWoxoxweaxivae�In ¢ �a YY � bwwvID ciompa e P xmrw siva rov '0NI ONItlfNJONBAUANNQONDIN amsmuatlam02uynmrtJJrtan i 2 8 F- 0 0 0 W rr LL g" -011 CE LO ID• d' 1111 W+1111110 E !»IV IWC V4NICICali i 11111 Reeeplion#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean tilberlea 24 of 79 Rao Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:8.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Exhibit zoa 11997 HP Geotech Report Lake Springs Ranch Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment June 2011 iy.6M ail% 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PPI Jean Rlberloo 25 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 ORRFIELD COUNTY CO HEPWORT-PAWLMC GEOTEciiwiCu., INC. 5820 Reese 154 Glmwaed $poems, CO51B61 Fax Phoge9209454998 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED LASE SPRINGS RANCH P.U.D. COUNTY ROADS 114 AND 119, GARFlE[D COUNTY, COLORADO JOB NO. 197 30 AUGUST 29 ,1997 PREPARED FOR: MISE AND MACI =KE Y CIO LAND DESIGN PARTNERSHIP ATTN: RON LISTON 918 COOPER AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 1111Mi111n iiriltIRr tIIhI11111 Reception*: 823748 • 26/ofr91R3$00M Jean e:0267eoFee:.0 Doo Fe.00GARFIELD COUNTY CO August 29, 1997 Mike and Mani Berkeley c/o Land Design Partnership Attu: Ron Liston 918 Cooper Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Job No. 197 348 Subject Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Lake Springs P.U.D., County Roads 114 and 119, Garfield County, Colorado. • Dean Mr. and Mrs Berkeley: Asreom p� we have conducted a gemechnical study for the proposed residential develIt should he possible to develop the project as proposed without en severe constraints or hazards associated with the geology.: Evaporate related gro deformations at very slow rates may still be in the project area. Because of this butherri risk gftu bagelocated across duce part esigns property. o the risk of bail a can be reduced by special basalt may be at relatively shallow depths in many areas and difficult excavation conditions should be expected. Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings drilled throughout the proper development area are variable and generally conalst of sandy clay and gravel to boulder sae basalt fragments in a sandy clay mark. Groundwater was not encountered in the tennis and the soils are typically slightly moist. The clays are typically medium to plasticity and -ave when Spreadfoo s placed on the natural clay or basalt fragment subsoils and designed for an allowable bearmg pressure of 1,500 psf to 4,000 psf appear suitable for braiding support in moat of the development area. Expansive clay soils, mately found west of County Road 114 could require special designs to limit the deka foundation and floor slab heave. Concentrated load on spread footings, structural mats deep fotmdatjons such as drilled piers and crawlspace below floor are possible methods to mitigate expansion potential. The report which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and presents our recommendations suitable for planning and preliminary design. It is important that we provide consultation during design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the impleentation of the geotedmicat recommendations. Due to the expansive claysmencountered at the site, subsoil studies for each building area are recommended. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us. Shlwerely, HBPWORTH PAWLAS GBOTEdHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak P.E. Rev. RGM SLP/R M/kw 11011MAPICTIMINANINAINWili 1I III Rsc p/tion#: 823748 27 of 79�Reo3Fee:$0.00 Doe Jean GPRFIELD COUNTY CO TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1 SITE CONDITIONS 2 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING 2 PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY 4 LAKE DEPOSITS 4 ALLUVIAL FANS AND STREAM VALLEY ALLUVIUM 4 COLLUVIUM 4 BASALT FLOWS AND COLLAPSE DEBRIS 5 FAULTS 5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 6 GEOLOGIC SITE .ASSESSMENT 7 CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY 7 REGIONAL EVAPORITE DEFORMATION 7 EARTHQUAKES 8 EXCAVATION DIFFICULTIES 8 PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 8 FOUNDATIONS 8 FLOOR SLABS 9 UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM 10 SITE GRADING 10 SURFACE DRAINAGE 11 PAVEMENT SUBGRADE 11 LIMITATIONS • 11 FIGURE 1- GEOLOGY MAP FIGURES 2 & 3 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 4 - LEGEND AND NOTES FIGURES 5 -7 - SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 8 - GRADATION ANALYSES TEST RESULTS FIGURE 9 - RVEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS VIII r virwit irrsRnh Irriscriv .mi 1I III Reception*: 823748 28/of 791RecaFee:$0.00 DoceFee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical engineering study for the proposed development at Lake Springs Ranch, County Roads 114 and 119, Garfield County, Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the geologic and subsurface conditions and their potentlal impact on the project. The study was conducted in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical engineering services to Mike and Mani Berkeley. dated May 23, 1997. A field exploration program consisting of a geologic reconnaissance and exploratory borings was conducted to obtain information on the alt and subsurface conditions. Samples obtained daring the field ezploracbn were tested in the laboratory to determine classification, compressibility or swell and otherengineering characteristics of the on-site soils. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for project planning and preliminary design. This report summarizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed devebpment. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Lake Springs Ranch PUD will be a residential development consisting of 96 single family lots, a neighborhood commercial diem and open apace, see Fig. 1. The single family lots will be one acre or larger. A network of streets will be constructed to provide access to the lots. The development will be serviced by a community sewer and water system. Development will be on the valley side to the east of Spring Valley. The Rivendell Sod and Tree Farm presently operates on the valley floor and lower valley side. Much of this area will remain as an Agriculture Open SpaceDistrict If development plans change signifrcanty from those described, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommended= presented in this report. 11111 dill+ tTh115,111UI11h4+110111 114130Cliiii 1111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberlco 29 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO -2_ SITE CONDITIONS The Lake Springs Ranch PUD is located on the northeaster side of Spring Valley which is a broad, shallow valley on the basalt plateau to the east of the Roaring Fork River valley. The property covers parts of Sections 32, 33, and 34 T. 6 S., R 88 W. and part of Section 4, T. 7 S., R 88 W. The topography in the area is shown on Fig. 1. Slopes along the floor of Spring Valley are nearly leveL The valley side to the east is rolling. Slopes there range from 10 to W% and some of the steeper hillsides are 40%. Major drainages with perlxoaial streams are not present on the valley side where the single family lots are planned. This area is drained by small ephemeral streams which only have surface flow during Mods of heavy precipitation or snowpack melt. A small pond behind a low earth embankment is located just to the east of the existing ranch headquarters. Poorly drained ground anda small perennial stream are present on the floor of Spring Valley: At the time ofihis study development on the property consisted of the RlvendeI Sod and Tree Farm, a single family residence on Lot 1, and a small cabin to the southeast of the pond. The property was being used for grazing. Vegetation on the valley side. outside the cultivated areas consists of sage, oak and other brush. County Roads 114 and 119 cross through the property. REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING The project site is located on a basalt plateau to the east of theRoaring Fork valley. The basalt plateau at the site is a second -order, structural bench between the Grand Hogback Monocline to the west, the White River Uplift to the north and the Roaring Fork Syncline to the south and east (Tweto and Others, 1978). These regional structural features developed during the Latamide Orogeny about 40 to 70 million years HP nonce 1111rh{BMJ/rhilla, elfirII1'1*rNcIN'IL 11111 Receptiontt: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 30 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO •3 - ago. Recent studies by the Colorado Geological Survey (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997) chow that the structural bench is a complexly detbrmed collapse block of regional extent. The collapse block formes a regional topographic depression with has much as 4,000 feet of relief The regional collapse block is iughiy circular -shaped with a diameter of about 16 miles. The regional collapse block covers about 200square miles. Carbondale is located near its center. The geologic structure in the regional collapse block is complex The complex structure appears to result from shallow crustal deformations related to evaporite dissolution and flowage from beneath the area (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). The evaporate is in the Pennsylvanian -age, Eagle Valley Evaporite which lies at a relatively shallow depth below the suffice of the regional collapse blocs Much of tate deformation in the regional collapse block is younger than the basalt flows in the area. The basalt flows and other volcanic rocks in the area have been dated at 3.0 to 22.4 million year befbre the present (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). Some deformation has affected Pleistocene -age (10,000 to 1.8 million years old) deposits and landforms and possibly Holocene.age (less than I0,000 year old) depositsand landforms. The deformation sauce= include: (1) synclinal sags and bowl -like depressions, (2) short orthogonal faults, (3) large arc shaped, halfgrabens, and (4) collapse debris. Spring Valley is a half graben with a fault along its western side. The basalt flow along the eastern side of the Spring Valley consists mostly of collapse debris. The collapse debris appear to be the result of differential vertical regional subsidence resulting from evapotite disssoludon. The collapse debris along the eastern side of Spring Valley appears to also have a relatively high horizontal component of subsidence deformation. The collapse debris consists of highly frachued and locally bretxiated basalt flows intermixed with intact but strongly tilted blocks of basalt which range up to about 20 awes in size. H -P Gaonca VIII tri'.RARl NAI 11IIIGhMOWNI I tt 41I III Recepption#: 823748 09/08/2012 03:38:48 PW Jean R16erioo 31 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GRRFIFLD COUNTY CO - 4 - PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY Our interpretation of thegeologlc conditions in the project area is shown on Fig. 1. The principle geologic features in the area are described below. LAKE DBPOSTTS Spring Valley was the site of a former lake and lake deposits are present along the valley floor and lower valley sides. Two ages of lake deposits are present. The younger lake deposits (Qly) underlie the relatively level valley floor. The older lake deposits (Qla) underlie a low terrace which is about 20 to 40 feet above the valley floor. The lake deposits are interat atified silty clay, et, and fine to coarse-grained sand. ALLUVIAL FANS AND STREAM VALLEY ALLUVIUM Small alluvial fans (Qaf) are present locally in the lower parts of several of the ephemeral drainages on the eastern valley side. Stream valley alluvium (Qal) is present below the upland valley floor in the eastern part of the property. The fan and stream valley alluvium is a stratified sandy clay with scattered basalt fragments. The basalt fragments range from gravel to boulder -size. COLLUVIUM Colluvium (Qc) is present below the rolling twain that ibrme the eastern valley side. The colluvium consists of clay and gravel to boulder -size basalt fragments in a sandy clay matrix. The matrix makes up most of the deposit and there is usually little inter -grain contact between the basalt fragments. With depth the colluvium grades into highly fractured basalt with a sandy clay fracture filling. In the exploratory borings the upper colluvium was from 7 to greater than 20 feet thick. H -P GtorecK VIIIFs 16141)0 EHlit PiAriliii:N I41 44fII411III Reception#: 823748 329ooff 79 1Re03Fee:$0.00 DoeaFee:000 oc GARFIELD COUNTY CO -5- BASALT FLOWS AND COLLAPSE DEBRIS The colluvium on the eastern valley side is underlain by basalt flows (Tb) which have broken by differential subsidence to form collapse debris. The collapse debris consists of highly fractured and locally brecciated basalt bows intermixed with intact but strongly tilted blocks of basalt which range up to about 20 acres in size. Also present in this area are inter -flow sediments. FAULTS Two, high -angle normal faults are inferred to cross the eastern part of the property, see Fig. 1. The faults tread to the northeast and are down thrown on their western sides. The faults are part of a regional orthogonal fault system in the regional collapse block (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). The faults were produced by evaporate tectonics as discussed in the Regional Geologic Sertbrgsection above FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration for the project was conducted on June 30 and July 1,1997. Ten exploratory borings were drilled at the toatlons shown on Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with 4 inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51HD drill rig. The borings were logged by a representative of Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Access to the drill rig was limited to on or neer the trails and roads at the site due to the sloping terrain and vegetation cover. Samples of the subsoils were taken with 1% inch and 2 inch LD. 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 penetration test described by ASTM Method D-1586. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which H•P GEOTECH 1111N% til III Reesplion*; 823748 33Yof179i2 c3e$9 00e0oGf eFe:0.DJean e:.00ARFIELD COUNTY CO -6- the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Loge of Exploratory Borings, Figs. 2 and 3. Disturbed bulk samples of the upper soils were also taken for roadway subgrade analysis. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on Figs. 2 and 3. The subsoils were variable and generally consist of 1 to 2 feet of topsoil overlying very stiff to hard sandy clay and gravel to boulder size basalt fragments in a sandy clay matrix. The clays are generally medium to high plasticity. The subsoils are typically calcareous especially east of County Road 114. Drilling of the basalt fragments subsoils was difficult due to the rock size and hardness and refusal was encountered in the deposit. Laboratory testing performed on samples obtgined tom the borings included natural moisture content and density, Atterberg limbs, gradation analyses and Item stabilometer 'W values. Results al' swell -consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed drive samples, presented on Figs. 5, 6 and 7, indicate the clay soils have low compressibility under light loading. The samples from Barings 1-5 showed a low to high expansion potential when wetted under a constant light surcharge. The non expansive clays, Borings 6 and 8 samples, eshbited moderate compressibility upon increased loading after wetting. Results of gradation analyses performed on drive samples (mines 11/2 -inch fraction) of the basalt fragment subsoils are shown on Fig. 8. Atterberg limits tenting indicates the clay fraction of the subsoils is of medium to high plasticity. The live= stabilometer testing results had 'R' values of 5 and 29. The laboratory testing is summarized in Table L No free water was encountered in the borings at the the of drilling and the subsoils were slightly moist. H -P GEOTECH VIIIleitrhitkitn IM!PIACIIMIi tfSi u 11111 Reception#: 823748 9fo/79iRa$00 ean eo4f ea Fee:®.Doo F:0.00GRRFIELD COUNTY CO _7 GEOLOGIC'S=TE ASSESSMENT It should be possible to develop the property as proposed without encountering severe constraints or hazards emaciated with the geology. There are, however, some geologic conditions which should be considered in project Dianthus as described below. CONSTRUCTION RELATED SLOPE INSTABILITY We do not expect potential problems with construction related slope instability in the proposed development areas if construction is not considered on slopes steeper than about 30%. Recommendations for site grading are presented below in the Site aciing section of this report REGIONAL EVAPORTTE DEFORMATION The project area is located in a regional collapse block where regional ground deformations have been associated with evaporite dissolution and flowage from beneath the area. It is uncertain if this deformation is still an active geologic process or if deformation has stopped. If ground deformation is still occurring, it is likely that deformation rates are very slow and occur overreladveiy broad areas. Abrupt, differential fault creep could be localized along the inferred Faults in the eastern part of the project area A fault may cross through Lots 17, 18, 19, and 20. Because of this itis recommended that site specific studies be made on these lots to determine if a fault is actually present. X4 geologically young fault is present, then the building site should not be located across the fault Although the potential fbr grounddeformation problems appears to be low, the project area cannot be considered totally risk fret. The risk of building damage can be reduced by special foundation designs. These special foundation designs would be a heavily reinforced mat foundation without a basement. H•P GEOTECH 1111 W+IlliKr IV4 RIl lFil 110:11141111411rItilelilli 11 II I Receptlont$; 823748 OS/05 /72 1ReaaFeae$0.PM Doo ane e:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO _g_ EARTHQUAKES The project area could experience moderately strong earthquake related ground shaking. Modified Meroalli Intensity VI ground shaking should be expected during a reasonable service Life for the development, but the probability for stronger ground shaking is law. Intensity VI ground shaking is felt by most people and causes general alarm, but results in negligible damage to structures of good design and commotion. The faults in the study area, in our opinion, do not increase the seismic potentiaL All occupied structures in the development should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little Milo damage and not to collapse under stronger ground shaking: The region is in the Uniform Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone I. Based on our current understanding of the earthquake hazard in this part of Colorado, we see no • reason to increase the commonly accepted seismic risk zone for the Bret EXCAVATION DIPFICULTTBS Dense bard basalt should be expected at relatively shallow depths at many of the proposed building sites and along road and utility alignments. Excavations in the dense hard basalt in most areas will require ripping and blasting may be needed. PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented below are based on the proposed development, subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings, and our experience in the an Th&recommendations are saitable for planning and preliminary design but.site specific studies should be conducted for individual lot development. FOUNDATIONS H -P GEOTECH X1111 '+timotr l oMilltigliM IN1171 11114 11111 RecaptIon48 09/06/2012 043:38:48PM Jean Algerian 36 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO -9- Bearing conditions will vary depending on the specific location of the building on the property. Spread footings placed on the natural subsoils appear suitable for building support in most of the development area. We expect the footings can be sized for an allowable bearing pressure in the range of 1,500 pat to 4,000 psi. Expansive clays, mainly found westtof County Read 114, could require special design to limit the risk of foundation and floor slab heave. Concentrated loads and spread footings that impose a minimum dead load pressure should be feasible In low expansive clay areas. In areas of relatively deep and higher expansive clays, a skucmral mat or drilled pier foundation may be needed. Nested boulders and loose matrix soils nny need treatment such as placing compacted fill or concrete backfill. Foundation walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings when acting as retaining structures. Below grade areas and retaining walls should be protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading by use -of an underdrain system. The footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection. A graded pad cut into the natural soils appears suitable for support of an above ground tank at the proposed tank location (Boring 10). FLOOR SLABS Slab -on -grade construction should be feasible for bearing an the non -expansive natural soils. There could be some post construction slab movement at sites with hydrocompressive soils or expansive clays. 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 cracking, A minimum 4 -inch thick layer of free -draining gravel should underlie basement level slabs to facilitate drainage. In the more expansive clay areas, a structurally supported floor over a cnawlspate may be warranted to avoid distress to slabs caused by wetting of the expansive clay. H -P GEOTacH 1111 WIVIKAKalchfIaWliElle flWIH'i 11 II Receptlonti: 823748 09/05/2012 03:36:49 PM Jean Rlberioo 37 of 79 Rep Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO -10- UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Although free water was not encountered in the exploratory borings, it bas been our experience in the area and where there are stiff clays that k eal perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff. An underdrain system should be provided to protect below grade construction, such as retaining walls, crawlapace and basement areas from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup. The drains should consist of drainpipe surrounded above the invert level with free -draining granular material. The drain should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1% to a suitable gravity outlet. SITE GRADING The following criteria are rimed for site grading. If it is necessary to perform extensive grading, it should be evaluated on a site specific basis. Cut depths • for the building pads and driveway access should not exceed about 10 feet. Fills should be limited to about 10 feet deep, especially where they encroach strep downhill sloping areas. Deeper cut and fill sections may be feasible and should be studied on an individual basis. Structural fills should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placement, the subgrade should be carefully prepared by removing all vegetation and topsoil. The fill should be benched into the portions of the hillside exceeding 20% grade. The on-site basalt fragment soils excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embankment fills. The expansive clay soils may not be suitable for use beneath structures sensitive to differential settlement/heave. The clays could be difficult to work with due to their high plasticity. Permanent unstained cut and fill slopes should be graded at 2 horizontal to 1 vette! or natter and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock riprap or other means. We can review site grading plans for the project as needed. t6P GEOTEcI4 1111 ri t'rN 'IQ 1n14IM x1/241 11 II I Reception#: 823748 08/05/2012 03;38:48 PM Jean elberico 38 of 79 Roc Fee:$0.00 Doc Foe:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO SURFACE DRAINAGE The grading plan for the subdivision should consider runoff from steep uphill slopes through the project and at individual sites. Water should not be allowed to pond which could impact slope stability and foundations. Backfill next to buildings should be well compacted and have a positive slope away from the building for a distance of at least 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and landscape irrigation should be restricted. PAVEMENT SUBGRADE The clay aubgrade was found to have an Einem 'R' value of 5 to 29 and is considered a relatively poor material for support of pavements. The basalt fragment soil should be a fair support material. In clay aubgrade areas we recommend an 'R' value of 10 be assumed for.prelimmery pavement design. An 'R' value of 25 can be assume( for the more granular soils. The actual road aubgrade should be evaluated for pavement support at the time of construction. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted la this report are based upon the data obtained from the field reconnaissance, review of published geologic reports, the exploratory borings located as shown on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and oar experience in the area. Our findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings and variations in the subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction appear different H -P GeorecH 1111 r. c'Mii iD Icy 141/1011e101411111 11111 11111 Regiept1on#: 823748 09100/2012 03:38:48 PN Jean Albertan 39 of 79 Roo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO - 12 - from those described In this report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning and preliminary design purposes. We are not responsible for technical interpretatious by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued conultadon, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the Implementation of our recommendation. Signirnant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend site specific subsoil studies for the individual lot development, observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fiat by a representative of the geotechnical engin. RespectfUliy Submitted, 13EPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak. P.E. and by: Ralph G. Mock Engineering Geologist SLP/ro cc: Land lLand DesignPartnership - Atte: Ron Liston I'n$ OEe7ECH 1111 Mill IiKJ')iv141111N IriRtf#CWtreflini 11111 Receptlone: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberloo 40 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO - 13 - REFERENCES Kirkham R.M. and Widmann B. L; 1997, Geology Map oldie Carbon ale,Quadrmrgle, Garfield County, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File Report 97-3. Kirldlam R.M. and Rogers, W.F., 1981, Earthquake Potential in Colorado -A PrelieninaryEvaluation: Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 43. Tweto, and Others, 1978, Geology Map Vats toadying 1 °12"Quadratwks, Northwestern Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Map 1-999. H -P GEOTEOH 1111 nn cl41KJI lgintreilw':I4rrw.lerWli'i 11111 Reeepbienti: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioa 41 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO t,$' I! t u Qaf 1 . 1 Qlo % 13/4%\‘. lily 1! Oaf � '+ •re.._„ •,'{• Ski\ % it •� SOD dL reff ' 'L0 % {i r { oaf iii Clio •\ AGRICULTURE / ; 1.` Q OPEN SPACE { A 1p' N DISTRICT .ke \ 134.1 AC. 1 `..'� { 1 ” ~x' % Half Qlo • • �• to • 1 { t QIy • 1 .1 STREAM 1DILLEY ALLUVIUM: ALLLNMLRUB: COLU1VRJM OLDER LANE DEPOBRB: YOUNGER LAIR: DEPOSITS: BASALTPLOWSAND COLLAPSE DPsoam CONTACT: Apprmdmare boundary of map untie. ..a INFERRED FAULT. Apprmdmale Images effrt ed. eomral fw! Ball and bar an down - thrown block Doped Were aanaeakd bygw.a . 4 EXPLORATORYR0RR0: Appraisals bodes of ezpToramy hadag 96 SINGLE 1 ACRE P (Includes off SaNd . 508' S/1/9T EOLOGY MAP FIG. VIII IIpts MilitA�L�RIII� Pritlirli ISI 7NICIk��t II III O9/O8R/2012 03:38:48 48 M Jean Rlberloo 42 of 79 Reo Fee:$O.O0 Coo Fee:O.O0 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO Depth — Feat 1 1111l111IIl111111111 0 0 N N N 11.14 W 25 z 0 , a W t 11 e 1 8 & &S R2rCal R •Pl.♦, 1 0312 ..q Pig DIS a na Pe. m ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ a 0 N D^ b 0 LQ 11IIIIIII1111IIII11I11111 Depth — Feat 197 348 ceoTECH�v!CALA NcK I LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS I Fig. 2 1111rAmir.riEllICIN141411111.14111111111411 III Reception*: 823748 43/of /79iReo3Fee:$0.00 DooeFee: .00GARFIELD COUNTY CO 0 m , 0 Depth — Feet 0 m 1 - 0 L1 4ti74 Cit`cA w f w se 111 01 m m 1 h 03 m ZITE N 82 tdi .i.: C1 C l . .a' e � rib? rif• O O 0 2 rc g $ N 11 111111111111111111111111 Depth — Feet 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Fig. 3 1111111411111QPIAliiiIIPARICIWW1IWIiii 11111 Reeeptianti: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberico 44 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO LEGEND: ® TOPSOIL; organic sandy silty day: dry, dark broom, some scattered gravel. root zone. ©CLAY (CL); silty to sandy, medium to high plasticity, scattered gravel. way stiff to hard, slightly motet, brown to light brow and •white, •slightly to higldy calcareous. BASALT FRAGMENTS (CC); gravel. cobble and boulder she, calcareous sandy clay matrix. medium dense slightly moist, grey and white, low to medium plasticity tines. I] Relatively undisturbed drives sample; 2—inch I.D. California liner sample. M Drive sample; standard penetration test ( SPT), 1 3/8—inch I.D. split spoan sample. ASTM D — 1568. Drive sample blow count indicates that 22 blows of a 140—pound hammer falling 30 Inches were 22/12 required to drive the California or SPT sampler 12 inches. Practical rig retried. Where shown above bottom of boring, indicates that multiple attempte were made to. advance the baring. NOTES; 1. Exploratory borings were drilled on dune 30 and duly 1. 1997 with a 4—Inch diameter continucus tight power auger. 2. Locations of exploratory borings were -measured approximately by pacing from features shown on the site plan provided. 3. Elevations of exploratory borings were not measured and loge of mgslaratory borings are drown to depth. A The exploratory boring locations and elevation should be considered accurate only to the degree Implied by the method. used. 5. The lines, between materiels shown an the. exploratory boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between material types and transtticns may be gradual. 6. No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuation to water level may occur with time. 7. Laboratory Testing Results: WC — Water Content (% ) DD= Dry Density(pcf) +4 = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve. —200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve. LL = Liquid Limit (% ) pI = Plasticity Indent to R = theorem tan . l Value 187 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LEGEND AND NOTES Fig. 4 1111 WA PliiitriCA1 111 PAC 11111 Receptlont: 823748 09/06/2012 03:39:49 PN Jean nlbericc 46 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO 4 3 N 2 1 1 1 0 5 t 1 8 0 0 0 1 1 U Moisture Content MI 12.1 percent Dry Density = i11 per Sample of Sandy Clay •Fram:^Boring 1 at 10 Feat Eapanelon upon wetting 0.1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — ksf 100 Moisture Cadent = 17.6 percent Dry Density = 101 � pc? Sample of, Sandy Clay Fran Baring 2 at 2 Feat -‘NN Eapanston -won etting 01 1 0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — kat 100 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL. INC. SWELL—CONSOLIDATIONTEST RESULTS Fig. 5 �111ird.POh Jhli ifielLIPP.P /Ali liglr:11CI L11111 Reception*: 823748 09/06/2012 03:39:49 PM Jean Alberioo 46 Of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Dao Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO 7 1 4 F.. 3 2 1 0 Moisture Content as 18S portant Ory Density = 100 pet Sample 08 Sandy Clay From: Boring 4 at 5 Feet Expansion upon wetting 0.1 1.0 APPLIED PRESSURE 10 kef 100 Moisture Content = 13.7 percent tryteneity - 'BB pcf Sample aft Sandy Clay From Boring 5 at 10 Feet Expando upon wetting 0 �1 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — leaf 100 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL., INC. SWELL—CONSOLIDATIONTEST RESULTS FTg. 6 1111 %C /h1 Ia FAMINItrie.lirlig1114 11 111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean nlberico 47 of 79 Rao Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO 0 le 1 e 2 3 4 5 1S 2 Moisture Content = 19.7 percent Dry Density = 86 pat Sample of: Calcareous Sandy Clay From: Borhg 8 of 3 Feet Compression upon• wetting 01 10 10 APPLIED PRESSURE — Ref 100 Moisture Content = 21.5 percent •Ory.Denstty = 400 •pcf Sample of:Calcoreous Sandy Clay From: Baring 8 at 3 Feet No movement upon. Wetting 01 10 10 - APPLIED -PRESSURE — tmf 100 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. SWc1L—CONSOLIDATlONTEST RESULTS Ilg. 7 1111 ira 1111011,11TAUiti AINS W&' I tiLC#+L 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/0512012 03:38:48 PM Jean A1berioo 48 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO 1402 tae! ONa.Yae INC RFAaNaa MIS elat 46 HO ae A 00 as 14 18 aa. M Naas lal. {Ia1 1 l 4210.p00 SIS Sala SIM a sow meat I VA MEMO WM I amine=a1Bace WW SI w• wal a WI St MN a Wa WNW W whoa SOS SO a NS a os a .m1 .am .004.aaa at .1147 OAT 14 ST MN a w m 10 ea 14 MO ae An .ssa . * AMC 1.0 RR ell ae�ay*1 ars na up MOM DIAtE1ER OF PAR1TCLES IN MILLIMETERS MUNE I C4aaYs GRAVEL 49 X SAND 28 X SU AND CLAY 23 X LIQUID UNIT X PLASICITY INDEX SAMPLE an Clayey Sandy Gravel FROM: Boring 10 at 5 and 10 Feet Combined 1 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 8 VIII riC1101:170VrilaitIFILINIPHICIerffilli 11111 Reception4: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberloo 49 of 79 Reo Fes:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GPRFIELD COUNTY CO TEST SPECIMEN 1 2 3 4 MOISTURE CONTENT (X) 18.6 20.4 22.2 DENSITY (pdf) 11033 ' 106.3 105.9 "R" VALUE/EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) 37/456 31/321 22/220 100 90 " 80. V 70 A L U 50 • *0 30 '20 10 "R" VALUE AT 300 psi = 29 0 100 200 308 400 500 800 700 800 EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) SOIL TYPE: Silty Clay SAMPLE LOCATION: Boring 1 at 1 to 5 Feet GRAVEL X SAND X SILT AND CLAY 90 X LIQUID LIMIT 35 X PLASTICITY INDDC 21 X 197 348 HEPWORTH — PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. HVEEM STABILOMETER TEST RESULTS Fig. 9 11011111611WANA411,111AithOlChihrICIRMIli 11101 Receptionii: 823748 50/ off /79f Reo0Fee:$$00. PM Coo Jean GARFIELD COUNTY CO JOB No.197 348 _ _ •v o« m to.] 19 28 23 II com6lnetl _ .. ... CIaYeY Bandy Gravel S8 1 3a 1 1 io 10 PA 18 4 14 n. 78 83 27 I . u IIC 1111 P*IIRF+ INIVIAIN I4WINiii 11 III Reception#: 823748 09/06/2012 08:88:48 PM Jean Rlberleo 61 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CD Exhibit zob 12002 HP Geotech Report Lake Springs Ranch dune zo+, Subdivision Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment Ge~aech September 9, 2002 Mike and Mac! Berkeley c/o Land Design Partnership Attention: Mr. Ron Liston 918 Cooper Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Hepworth-PawInk Geotechnkat, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Spann Colorado 81601 Phone: 45-7988 Fax: 9704458454 hpgeo@hpgeoterh.com Job No. 197 348 Subject: Geotechnical Review of the Lake Springs Ranch PUP, County Roads 114 and 119, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Liston: As requested, we have reviewed the current preliminary developtient plan for the proposed Lake Springs Ranch PUD with respect to potential geologic and geatecbnical engineering constraints. We previously submitted a prelinimtry geotechnical engineering report for a similar but smaller PUD at the project site (HepwarthPawlak Geotechnical, 1997). Also, we have reviewed two letters concerning the project submitted to the Garfield County Planning Department by the Colorado Geological Survey (Colorado Geological Survey, 2001 and 2002). This letter summarizes the fording of our review and presents recommendations pertaining to the current preliminary development Plan. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT It is our understanding that the project is in the preliminary planning stages. Project information available for our review was a preliminary plan showing the proposed lots, building envelopes and street locations. Grading plans showing the extent of grading for the streets have been prepared by High Country E_ngi_r�^-�, but were not included in this review. The currently proposed PUD will be a 193 lot single family residential development with 4 cluster home tracts, and 6 areas zoned agricultural/open space. The single family lots are typically about one acre in size with a 15,000 square foot building envelope. The cluster housing tracts cover about 4 to 10 acres each. The agriculture/open space areas are located on the Spring Valley floor and in the steeper parts of the property. A street system will provide primary access to the lots. On lot driveways and grading for building sites will be the responsibility of individual lot owners. Water will be supplied by a central water system and the development will be serviced by the Spring Valley Sanitation system. It appears that the preliminary plan we reviewed differs somewhat from the plans reviewed by the Colorado Geological Survey. The current PUD differs from the proposed development at the time of our previous geotechnical study (Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, 1997). The lot density has increased, new development areas have been am i au o -at man +Maw Ndi Mary! _-fan waro shy - 010 Mike and Maei Berkeley September 9, 2002 Page 2 ■III Eh 1111.1W3 NINA hi fill C irV41111L 11111 ReceptIonit: 823748 53/o5ff791 2 ec03Fee,$0.00M Al0be.0r 00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO added, some deleted and the street pattern has changed. FINDINGS OF REVIEW Although the currently proposed development has substantially changed since our August 1997 preliminary geotechnical study, the conclusions and recommendations presented in that study are applicable to the currently proposed PUD. There are several conditions of a geologic and geowel:Weal nature that should be considered in project planning and design as discussed below. Evaporite Deformation: The project site is located in the Carbondale evaporite collapse center, a roughly circular region with a diameter of about 16 miles centered near Carbondale and covering about 200 square miles (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). The towns of Carbondale, Glenwood Springs and EI Jebel are located in the collapse center. As mach as 4,000 feet of regional subsidence is believed to have occurred in the collapse center as the result of dissolution and flowage of evaporate from beneath the region. Much of this subsidence may have occurred within the past 10 million years (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). If this is the case, the long-term average subsidence rate was about 0.5 inch per 100 years. There is some local evidence of evaporate defoas;ton as recently as the late Pleistocene in the Carbondale collapse center, but no definitive evidence of deformation during the Holocene, within about the past 10,000 years (Widmann and Others, 1993). Regional geologic mapping shows that the gradational contacts between (1) the "Spring Valley landslide", (2) evaporite collapse debris, and (3) basalt flows deformed by regional evaporite subsidence are present in the project area (Kirkham and Widmann, 1997). They described the "Spring Valley Landslide" as collapse debris with a horizontal component of movement. The "Spring Valley landslide" was not mapper separately on the geology neap accompanying our August 1997 study because we were not able to find definitive field criteria for separating the "Spring Valley landslide" from adjacent areas shown as collapse debris and deformed basalt flow on the regional geology map. In our opinion, all three features appear to have a common geologic origin and the "Spring Valley landslide" does not present a greater deformation hazard than the collapse debris and deformed basalt flows shown on the regional map. It is uncertain if evaporite deformation is still active in the Carbondale collapse center, or if deformation has stopped. If evaporite deformation is still active, it appears to be taking place over a broad area, except possibly along faults, and there is no evidence of rapid deformation rates in the modern landscape. Because of this, the risk of evaporate associated problems with typical residential building at the project site appears to be low and no greater than other areas in the collapse center. We are not aware of evaporite deformation related problems in the region. Prospective building owners should be 1111 WI1INIP iw b,w:41111.1&101117'Isi11 41114 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/05f2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberlco 64 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Deo Fee:0,00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Mike and Maci Berkeley September 9, 2002 Page 3 made aware of the potential low risk of evaporite deformation. It the low risk is not acceptable to brulding owners, it can be reduced by the use of heavily reinforced ibundation system preferably without a basement. Faults; We concur with the regional mapping by the Colorado Geological Survey that two faults Rely cross through the eastern part of the project area (Kirkham and Widmama, 1997). If evaporite deformation is still active, then there is potential for localized differential movement along the faults. Development 1s not planned near the eastern one of the two faults, but 8 single family lots are proposed near the western one of the two faults. It is recommend that buildings not be located within 50 feet of the mapped fault trace unless site specific studies show that a fault is not present or, if present, the fault is not geologically young. Foundations Conditions: The general foundation conditions in the project area were evaluated by drilling 9 exploratory borings in August 1997. At that time, buildings were not proposed in areas where lake deposits are present. As presently planned, several building areas will be underlain by lake deposits. It is recommended that additional subsurface exploration be made in these areas to evaluate the engineering characteristics of the lake deposits. Our August 1997 preliminary study concluded that spread footing foundations appear suitable in areas where evasive soil conditions are not present. Spread footings with minimum dead load pressure, a structural mat or drilled piers were considered feasible foundation systems in areas with expansive soil conditions are present. The recommended foundation system will depend on the site specific expansion potential. Also, a structural floor system over a crawlspace may be warranted depending on the expansion potential at a specific building site. A site specific foundation study by the individual lot owners should be conducted for design level recommendations. Construction Related Slope Instability: We do not anticipate major problems with construction related slope instability if our August 1997 grading recommendations are followed. More extensive grading should be evaluated on a site specific basis. As previously recommended, cut and fill should not exceed 10 feet deep and: cut and. fill slopes should be 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. We should review the proposed grading plans when available and determine if addition subsurface exploration and analysis are needed. Storm Water Management: Drainages in the project area are ephemeral and their streams only have surface flow following heavy precipitation and snow melt. We did not find geologic conditions that should be considered by the hydrologic study in developing an appropriate storm water management plan for the project. The only 1111 I rilgiY'1470 111al4 ilglInl(I 1I 11 t 11111 Recepption#:823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberioo 55 of 79 Rio Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GPRFIELD COUNTY CO Mike and Maci Berkeley September 9, 2002 Page 4 stream channel in the project area with a relatively large off site drainage basin is located in the northern part of the project site in the vicinity of proposed Lots 11,12 and 13. Access to Lot 12 from the proposed cul-de-sac will require a stream channel crossing. The channel crossing should be designed for the appropriate flood discharge and include provisions for a high sediment concentration flooding. Hydrologic analysis in this area should also consider flood flow velocities and the need for channel erosion stabilization to protect proposed Lots 11,12 and 13. Earthquake Considerations: The project area could experience earthquake related ground shaldng. Modified Mercailii Intensity VI ground shaking should be mg:acted during a reasonable service life for the development, but the probability for stronger ground shaking is lo*. Intensity VI ground shaking is felt by most people and causes general alarm, but results in ndgiigible damage to structures of good design and construction. Occupied structures should be designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to collapse under strorger ground shaking. The region is in the Uniform Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone 1. Based on our current nnderstanding'of the earthquake hazard in this part of Colorado, we sec no reason to increase the commonly accepted seismic risk zone for the area. MUTATIONS This study was conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area, at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this review is based on the currently proposed development and information.in our August 1997 preliminary geotechnical. study. Our findings in this report and our previous study include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions identified at the exploratory borings 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 our previous preliminary geotechincal report, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made. This report has been prepared exclusively for our client and is a review of the current development plans with respect to our previous preliminary geotechnical study. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein and in our previous preliminary geotechincal report. We recommend site specific subsoil studies for individual lot development, .observation of excavations and foundation hearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. 1111 W+NhK NIN'API l%Ng lnh.r+icI#CNihclilli 11111 Reception*: 823748 09/05/2212 03:39:48 PM Jean Rlberloo 66 of 79 Rea Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Mike and Maci Berkeley September 9, 2002 Page 5 Respectfully submitted, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, rerc. Steven L. Pawlak, P.E. • and by: Ralph G. Mock Engineering Geologist RGM/djb cc: High Country Engineering - Attn: Deric Walter REEKRENCES Colorado Geological Survey, 2001, Lake•Springs Ranch PUD, Garfield County, Colorado: Prepared for the Garfield Planting Department (CGS Case No. GA - 02 -0004, November 5, 2001). Colorado Geological Survey, 2002, Lake Springs Ranch PUD Preliminary Plan: Prepared for the Garfield Planning Department (CGS Review No. GA -03-002, July 31, 2002). • Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, 1997, Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Seudy, Proposed Lake Springs Ranch PVD, Corauy Roads 114 and 119, Garfield Comity, Colorado: Prepared for Mike and Maci Berkely c/o Land Design Partnership, Glenwood Springs, Colorado (Job No. 197 348, August 29, 1997). Kirkham, R.M. and Widmann, B.L., 1997, Geology Map of the Carbondale Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open File 97-3. Widmann B. L. and Others, 1998, Preliminary Quaternary Fault and Fold Map and Data Base of Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Open Pile Report 98-8. ■111 APrfiChtI{Ii9Cif+f11111 Reception*: 823748 09/06/2012 7 of f79fReo Fee:$0.00 DoceFee:0.00GARFIELD COUNTY CO Exhibit 20c 1 1/15/2010 HP Geotech Report Lake Springs Ranch Subdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment June 2011 1111 ri MIMIC+ INtInhiglreilifilr114CIti 11111 Reception*: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberto° 58 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO HEPWORTH- PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL ittpwe.teh,PiwIsk tic,,ttdmic,ii. int W1Vr:noncv Road NI Cikifiniod-Spriugi, Colcankkv 81601 Phone: 01(1.943.--M8 (070A45-4454 hpy,sornfirgeunech.cuin ADDITIONAL FAULT STUDY PROPOSED LAKE SPRINGS RANCH PALA COUNTY ROADS 114 AND 119, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO. JOB Na, 109433A JANUARY 15, 2010 PREPARED FOL. MIKE AND MAO BERKELEY de TGMAILOY CONSULTING, LLC ATTNt TIMIVIALLOY 402 PARK AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 01601 441.71 )9 Colorachr Springs 71'1•0;-iri6.2 * Silvtithbrne 970..466-PS9. 111 Fp+lflirJ'Jil�'i thH' 1� OihrldrIMI CIfCIN411111 03:38 48 PM Jean Alberloo 09/06/2012 69 of 79 Rep Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO TABIZ OF CONTF,NTS: PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY • 1 - SITE CONDITIONS -1- FIELD EXPLORATION -1- SUBSURFACE AND POSSIBLE FAULT CONDITIONS - 2 _ TRENCH L -2- TRENCH 2 -2- TRENCH 3 - 3 - RECOMMENDATIONS . . -3._ LAMIITATIONS - 3 - REFERENCES -4- FIGURE 1°- LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY TRENCHES: FIGURE 2 - LOG OF SOUTH WALL OF TRENCH 1; 0 TO SORBET - FIGURE 3 - LOG OF SOU rFI WALL OF TRENCH 1, 30'.T0:200103E . • FIGURE 4- LOG OF SOUTH WALL OF•TRENC H 2,-0 TO 140 FEET FIGURE 5 - LOG OF SOUTH WALL OF TRENCH 3, 0 TO 290FEETT FIGURE 6 - LOG OP SOUTH WALL, INSET OF TRENCH'S,. 30 TO 60 FEET FIGURE 7- PHOTOS =TRENCH 1 OVERVIEW AND FAULT ZONE FIGURE 8 -PHOTOS -TRENCH 2 UPPER AND LOWER. FAULT ZONES FIGURE 9 - PHOTOS.- TRENCHES 2 AND 3 OVERVIEW FIGURE 10- PHOTO -TRENCH 3 FAULT ZONE VIIIFW♦� KJ/I'Stf1II PECIOVEICW1119111III Receptian#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 60 of 79 Roo Fee:$0.00 Don Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY Ilia report presents theresults of an additional fault study sling the eastern edge ofthe - proposed Lake Springs Ranch,. County Rads 114 and 119, in Garfield County; Colorado: The study area is shown on Figure 1. The purpose oft study was to lather evaluate if evaporite detonation has. matured near the laced= oftbe inferred fault along the - eastaa sectibnofthe proposed development and amens lithe fauk is geologically young. The study was conducted in accordance with owproposal for a supplemental geological. study to Mice and Maui Berkely dated sure 26, 200L Previously, preliminary • geotechtricat engineering studies were pafiimled'and results -were given in reports.dated August 29, 1997 and September 9, 2002; Job No.:.19734a . A field expbration program consisting ofexploratorytrenches wasconduetedto look for. Aeneas ofthe inferred fink mapped -00th= and Wittman 1997) along t e.eactem - boundary of the proposed development. This report suxmneris thedata obtained daring the study and presents ow condo:done.. • sat CONDITIONS' The Lake Springs Ranch PUD islocated-on thenortheisterit side ofSprmgVailepwideh. is a broad, shallow vsileyon the basalt plateau to the east of theRoadng Podiner valley. The property covers parts of Sections 32; 33, and 34 T. 6S; Rat We ap partof Section 4, T. 7 S.; B SS W. Theatudy arra is atongthe eastern border °tantrum= property about 5 mile east of County Road 114: Omtlt.e cainent.developeankgarkseven lots are in the vicinity ofthe inferred fbult-mapped.byKirkltetnandt . The topographyfn tliestudy area consists ofnoxth tone with gently slopping drainages to the east and west at a3 5to lOpe:ggrad knoll about 50 es 1000 fatHigher m elevation thea the Auk Setts boated to. The inferred fault mapped, by Kirkham aid Widmann (1997) Hasa ties ttaf15E and was drawatorunthroughthecenter ofavalley and aoirespondingxwrhea 0±, drainages. Vegetation in the study area consisted ofpeak. weeds, acatteaedsigg.and oak . brash. About2 feet of snow covered the. site at the timeof Our vsik • FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration fir the tiroject was contacted on January 5, 6 and 7, 2010. Three. exploratory trenches were excavated at, the locations shown on Figure 1 to evaluate the location of the inferred fault mapped byKrkham and Widmann (1997) in the an The tranches were dug using a Komatsu PC -320 excavator with a 3 bot wide bucltet Two trenches were dug at the north and south eras and fimumd evidence of fault movement to the east ofthe previously inferred fault: A third trench was added to further writ the fimlt location. The three trenches were dug fiom east to west etvarying lengths of 130,. 190, and 290 feet and the southern wall Was mapped by a representative of Hepworth Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. Jab No, 109 433A 1111 miceIr1aPbnm p I O Cii1,L 11111 Re tiontk: a2a748 09/0512012 03:38:48 PM Jean RIberioo 61 of 79 Rao Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO _2_ SUBSURFACE AND FAULT COMMONS Graphic lags of the subsoil= conditions encountered in the trenches ere shown on Figures 2 to 6. The subsoils generally consist of about 12 to 18 inches oftopsoit. overlying layers of clay,. clayey gravelly sand,: and sandy gravels cobblessarid boulders. Digging in the dense grannies soils was difficult at times due to the basaitrock and • boulders. and digging refusal was encountered in some areas often trenches: TRENCH I Trench I is located abont20afestsouth ofthe northern propestybouodayant about 150 fietnorth ofthe drainage divide in the north -trending valley in the area A possible suriicial fault scarp wen observed along the eastambillaide and.tbe east and o€the trench. was located uphill ofthepoatble scarp Fault features were observedwithin the first 10 to 20 feet of the trench (see Figures 2, 3 and 7). The best evidencoo€farkthevoment in Trench 1 is the column oftrambeetedloose :': , �Pp�-� result of Dula econi during movement,. or.. the dragg g of from dieplaccdshaft ortheia- g.ofsedireentintortinsio commonly rotates'clasts•alongaplaneparagelt0tit Sidi whfah the basalt cobble at a distance of4 feet end an *vatioaof7238 along of Trench1. which appears to have beefaotated Suck that its king axis dipaifrairtithewest. This cobble Is also located along the eastern: edge ofa mixed :nne:offfivai is the shape oft wedga. hall* ofeediirisrdaalba movement elongaIkultcs niy¢•i a wedgesbapeoffner,boss•rnateszsithan tlie:surmundingatrdei There' " shaped Mixed arable thelirat30 feet off** E mappe&aa (4) w now 2). 1St .10oseme is,00na ' to d e and often his amine!burrows aeethos**Pigo%a2 Y orgamcsmalataaMitLTranebl evidence movemeag'down and totbewaeti. No a r thar"subsoet encountered hi the rennin'rMg180 ThetOfpatch to the weat to movement inthearea Moverint itaturat at the weat end ofthejs" both sides ofthetrenchsuggesting the fault continua to the =that ittrend of$T I2 E. The fault located, in •Trench I is geologically young and located farther esstt. previously mapped as iddit ated anFigurel. TRENCH 2 Trench 2 is the additional trench added just south of the drainage divide to vs*Ihe fault location between Trenches 1 and 3. Apossible surioial fault soap was bicate hong the eastern hillside and the east and of.Trench 2'was Iocated about 40 fent uphill faun feature. Digging reheat was: encountered along the first 40 feet ofTtenck 2 itt beak m*. and boulders just below 12 to 18 inches oftopsoil< At a diataruse eta 45: feet digging became somewhat easier and bench depths of 6 to 10 feet were excavated: Although no soft: soils were encountered at this area of the trench, a Bok can also be inferred at this location fromthe appease. =float scarp. Digging refusal continued alongdiabaseof Trench 2 to a distance of 1,03 feet, see Figure 9. At 105 feet en area ofloose soda in the shape of a wedge was encountered above a near vertical shear zone, see Figure & This lower soft zone is probably the best evidence of tanking in Trench 2. However, the visible scarp and thin buried organic layer at 50 fret may also indicate movement despite Job No. ta9433A 1111 r, IPAIVIM1117 IIImV1dIEliI riKIiC IN',t 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 62 of 79 Roc Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO -3- not finding a shear zone. Both possible tilt locations are mapped on Figure 1 and described in Figure 4. The lower Ikuk location was. ftintly represented on the north well and the fault continuation iarepresented by a dashed line in Figure 1. TRENCH 3 Trench 3 is located about 200 feet north ofthe southern propeety boundary in the area. A faint surficial scarp. was located along the eastern hillside and the east end ofthe trench was begun approximately 40 *et nphlilto the east; Al about40 feet abngtrench 3 a. • roughlywedge shaped zone of soft soils was encounteretat an elevation of about 7210 to the depth ofthe trench, seeP%es 5,. 6; 9 and 10. The very dense layet °thank gavels, cobbles and boulders she seems to drop down to themest at this. location... Fosatble . animal burrows in born material are frond between 32 and 52 feet in Trench 3 as shown in Figures 6 and It This area contains. the beat evidence Ser fatrltingwitbia Timeh 3 and . is mapped on Figure 1. These Sutures ware alae tbutnd on the northwall a$ the Sink continues: aorthfvatd ata trend ofN 8 E Trench 3 was coeniaue i.west titathevalley bottom end up the westernhillade to determine if ary evidence Of fliatineWiernd where the fault was previously mapped No other evidence offiukmgwasobaeaveils' No free water was mceuetered lathe trenches at the the of digging and the.aub8orls were slightly moist to motet. RECOMMENDATIONS Inour opinion, evidence ofevaporierelated fault deformation was. three trenches along the eastern edge oftbeproposed, &Webpi deformation octanes dhahnce.totira.eaat.kiomthelip by Kirkham and Widmann (1997), as shown onPigure 1 NO related Duk detbramtton°was finmd in the area of Kiiitheineneigr inferredfisnit. Movement along the fault plana appearsto beret ed th enapo . deformation andnot large scale ground ruptures associttetwitkeertfittiakeieWed faulting. This diatmbencedins not extend into thleowelyleg cautriatunithintmgy be related to infhlingoftensionalground cracks that were later covereedby ihcoverlying. colluvial units. Thii indicates that the cracking was pest gjaet4lwathra.1.5,000 years, but has been dormant the sant unceartaitt.tare. Thitis.kof fame t eMentalong. the mapped that is considered to be low within the lifetime expectancy ofpreposed Structures in the area: However, we recommend thetbuIld hgs not be locatetwitlila 50 feet ofthe fhult trace detecrnined fioni our trenches. Foundation recommendationsfar lots adjacent to the fault ahould be developed on a site specific basis and could inciode a mat fermdation alternative es previously discussed. Fault Iocations were staked in the field and surveyed into the existing plan by High.Country Engineering. Other. recommendations from our previous reports should also be followed. LIMITATIONS This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted engineering geological principles and practice in this area at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are IobNo. 109433A NW Ws PQWJ E'UmIN4' Nl#10;1Nr 41111f N" 11111 Reception#• 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 Fe:0aG3af ReaFe:0.0Doe e.00ARFIELD COUNTY CO -4- based upon the data obtained from the exploratory trenches excavated at the Orations indicated on; Figure 1. Our findings include interpolation; and astrapolationotto subsurt`aee.conditions identified at the exploratory trenches and so:utast. If conditions are encountered during.constrvcSn which may evidence inking diflretettt from those dann1,ed ht this:report, we should be notified so that Wavelet/etiolate recommendations maybe made nit report has been prepared fol the exclusive use by our client tordesignieposes,. we are not responsible for technics/ interpretations by otheis ofoarntmatioa .As the pr4ject evolves, we sheen providie:cont nued consultatiertBei fielitservieesd construction to review and"monitorfite implementation of our recommSflg suite verify that therecommendatitns have beet interjected:. Respectfidly 3itbmittedr HEP WORTH - PaLAKK GE OTIl'Ch$F:CAL.,. INC. Scott W. R3eliaeds,,E.1„ Reviewed by: Daoiell SWR, co: High Cottony E . , •':- Sec* Oteg.osy � High Country Engineering Danfienniseni ';. REFERENCES H P GBOTECH 997) Preliminary geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed -Lake Springs Ranch; P.LJ D , County Roads 114 and 119, Garfield County, Calmat; Job No 197 348 dated August 29,1997. Prepared fir MV ike and Mad Eedceley. H P OEOTECH (1997) GeoteclmicalReview of the Lake Springs Ranch, P:Ll.D County Roads 114 and 119, Garfield. Count% Colorado. Job No 197 348 dated September 9; 2002. Prepared ibr Mike and Maui Berkeley. Kirkham R. M. and Widmann; B. L.,1997 Geologic Map of the Carbondale Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado. Colorado Geological Survey, Open File Report. 97-1 Jab No. 109433A VIIIrillECIh'. PIRIV iw i w' li11III Reception#: 823748 09/06/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberioo 84 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO n7va JV fume 109 433A GLIZtech HECWOmIFPAWIAN GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATORY TRENCH AND FAULT LOCATIONS FIGURE 1 VIII frdlI VJ'JiM'".114I4u71101eNITNfCIN4 11111 Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 85 0 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO TRENCH.1 T Inch ="5 feet Distance - Feet:• 0 1011 (TS); Sandy clay rbotione, dark broom (OL); Buried organics, dark brown (SM); Clayey gravely sand with scattered cobbles, brown (CL); Sandy Clay with scattered gravels, red (GC -GM); .Sandy gravels with silt and clay, cobbles and boulders, basalt rook ($M); Fault scour ions of loose silty sand with gravels • Basalt boulder 109 433A HEPWONIH•PAWaK Ort LOG OF SOUTH WALL OF TRENCH 1, 0 TO 30 FEET Figure 2 1 rC vw I41n11111 • 0 k Jean _._ - • ,79Rao _aaDoe _*__: _r= • 190 170 § ; § § P.:■ ■ nnRn&unhndnnhud • so nnp4gwngnH 1yp , E 0 f 1111ralViSahrirallX111,1iEldrainiNTWIN11111 Reeeptlon#: 823748 67/of 791Ree0Fee:$0.00 DeoaFee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO LU !LI y R 2 S 0 T. o. 2 1111111111111111111111111'11111111 8 r oil • Basalt boulder LI CO 0 CU 2 U W E5 ZZ 1- ZDO UD LLcl. 0 O J • • 1 c gal ?A r: 111111/2/Iirhi14141CW.1i 11111 Reception9: 823748 0810512012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberico 88 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.09 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO MM.WITUMM 111.1[1.11111111 III. ITI•1 r .1 r.; iiiiiiiiiiimplitimilimi g g 1 Petiallnee 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 tainaplos • g 2 7 ffl 0 0 uJ ± • : IL. : 111I W leitt If'i\ thiNalkirlrireNVIRICIPCHlui 1110 I Reception*: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberloo 69 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO EAST so TRENCH 3 1 Inch = 5 feat Distance . Feet WEST 35 40 45 50 55 50 I ILL,I li)II'Jill IIIIHill i0 OS); Sandy Clay rootzone, dark brown (OL); Burled organiGS, dark brown (SM); gravelly sand with aeattered cobbles, brdwn :(CL); Sandy Clay with scattered gravels, red (GC-GM); Sandy gravels with sift and clay, cobbles and :boulders, basalt rock (SM); Faultscour zone of loose silty sand with gravels a Basalt boulder 109 433A HD WORn18AN�ml[dORCN, LOG OF SOUTH WALL OF TRENCH 1, 30 TO 80 FEET Figure 6 ■IIII '•1i ,K111Fnintimmirich1 kintKd9ki 11111 Receptiontt: 623748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Alberioo 70 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO South wall of Trenoh 1:at 5 feet Buried Organics'.,.. Possible Animal Burrow Rotated Cobble Possible Scour Zone of Soft Sous 109 433A minioirnekwuat GIOTICKNICM, TRENCH 1 OVERVIEW AND FAULT ZONE figure 7. 1111 nceir17MIP* 14111F1IIENdf f CIN411III Reeeptlon#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Riberioo 71 of 79 Rec Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO South wall of Trench 2 at 50 feet Upper Fault Zone Wedge of Soft Soils South wolf of Trench Zeit 105 feet Lower Fault Zona Possible Scour Zone TRENCH 2 UPPER AND LOWER FAULT ZONES 1111 VileittIOCOilial li irli h ICIftilith 11111 ReeeptSen#: 823748 09/05!2012 03:39:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 72 of 79 Rea Fee:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO Trench 2 Looking East Trench 3 Looking West Fault Zone in Center 109 433A meWGRTR' AWwmmomaimpoi. TRENCHES 2 AND 3 OVERVIEW.: Figure 9 ■III 016 ire 'hir.4 111111 ReeeSpttan#: 823746 09/05/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberloo 73 of 79 Rea Fee:$0,00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO IIID10i101115117fr 11111 Reception*: 823748 09/06/2012 03:38:48 P11 Jean Plberico 74 of 79 Reo Fn:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GRRFIELD COUNTY CO Exhibit god 12/16/200 HP Geotech Report Lake Springs Ranch SUbdivision Preliminary Plan & PUD Amendment June 2011 HP GeeteCh HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL February 16, 2010 Mike and Maci Berkeley c/o TO Malloy Consulting, LLC Attn: Tim Malloy 402 Park Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Heprrnrth-Pawlak C,ctgcchnical, Inc. 5020 County R'iaJ 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-9454988 Fax! 970-945-8454 email• hpgeo@hpgeotech.com Job No. 109 433A Subject: Review of Proposed Development Plan, Lake Springs Ranch PUD, County Road 114, Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. & Mrs. Berkeley: As requested, we have reviewed the currently proposed development plan with regard to our previous reports. The findings of our review and recommendations for the current development plan are presented in this letter. We previously conducted a preliminary geotechnical engineering study for development of the site and presented our findings in a report dated August 29, 1997, Job No. 197 348. Subsequently, we provided a geotechnical review of the proposed development in a letter dated September 9, 2002, Job No. 197 348. Recently, we completed a geological fault study in the eastern side of the proposed development dated January 15, 2010, Job No. 109 433A. Proposed Development: We were provided with the current development Phasing Plan by High Country Engineering, dated February 12, 2010. The plan indicates the western third of the property will remain undeveloped and the eastern two thirds will be developed in a similar pattern to the previously reviewed plans. The current plan indicates 118 single family lots in 5 filings of 18 to 37 lots each. We understand that the single family lots are about 1 acre in size. Eighteen affordable units are planned for Tract A on the south side of the development which is part of Filing 3. The mad layout has been changed but the development area (including the land swap parcels) is similar to elements contained in the two previous development layouts. Findings of Review: The conclusions and recommendations presented previously are applicable to the currently proposed PUD. The recent fault study indicated the fault is further east than previously shown and is generally more than 50 feet outside the building envelopes of the nearby lots. The building envelope far Lot 29, Filing 4 may be within 50 feet of the fault which was survey located. The location of the building envelope on Lot 29 relative to the fault should be verified by the surveyor and adjusted as needed. As described in the Foundation Conditions section of our 2002 review, a few lots and some roadway were underlain by geologic lake deposits. The original subsurface exploration did not include sampling of the mapped lake deposits since the original development was not proposed in that area and we recommended in 2002 that additional Parker 303-841.7119 • Colorado Springs 719.6.33-5562 • Silverrhorne 970-468-1989 Oil --! 8 I 8 o H 1.1ii ySe WS Mas aW S CLL ."O 4ao rmm•ax , ti.0-� 5.. .3 orstu zit:gm M go :_aon Mike and Maci Berkeley February 16, 2010 Page 2 ! 11111. i%�lal# Irfi14+'If411III Reception#: 823748 09/06/2012 03:38:48 PM Jean Rlberioo 76 of 79 Reo Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0,20 GARFIELD COUNTY CO subsurface exploration be performed to evaluate the engineering properties of the lake deposits. The current development plan shows 3 lots (Lots 6, 7 & 8 of Filing 2) and about 200 feet of roadway over the lake deposits located on the far western side. This represents only about 2% of the proposed development. Due to the small area involved, subsurface exploration at this time is not warranted but the subsurface could be evaluated as part of a pavement section design study for the on-site roads. The other recommendations for development contained in our previous reports are still valid for the current plan. The recommendations regarding the stream channel on the north end of the property mentioned in the Storm Water Management section of our 2002 report are not needed since this area is well outside the current development. Limitations: This study was conducted according to generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area, at this time. We make no warranty either express or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this review are based on the currently proposed development and information in our previous studies. Our findings in this report and our previous studies include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface conditions previously identified. If variations in the subsurface conditions are encountered, we should be notified so that re-evaluation of the recommendations can be made. This report has been prepared exclusively for our client and is a review of the current development plan with respect to our previous studies. We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and monitor the implementation of our recommendations. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations presented herein and in our previous studies. We recommend site specific subsoil studies for individual lot development, observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Sincerely, HEPWORTH — PAWLA CAL, INC. Daniel E. Hardin, P Reviewed by: SLP DEH/kac %.; 24443 a./s3 fcok •oak, jillalree cc: High Country Engineering — Attn: Dan Dennison/Scott Gregory Job No. 109 433A am rill NIKIVI:01111AMIWCWORWOR III III Reception#: 823748 09/05/2012 03:39148 PM Jean Alberto° 77 of 79 Ren Fee:$0.00 Doo Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO 109 433A PGtech EXPLORATORY TRENCH AND FAULT LOCATIONS I FIGURE 1 HEPWORIMPAWIAlt GDOTEGHNICal 1:.`97/2ede 11:i8 PAX 599 295 8581 HOLLAND & HART LLP E ° 0 pj • r'S$ -04sari tu`�u rsto W lJ =du - nig hN 'OP � m cats 1-1 Wo x inmw in a.O in oY a. VIA FACSIMILE TO; AfFAIORANJ. UM December 6, 2000. Lori Satterfield / Scott Balcordb, Basalt Water Conservancy District Lee Leavenworth / Greg Hall, Los Amigos Ranch Partnership Sohn Schenk Berkeley Family Limited Partnership Kevin Patriot / kamsey Kropf, Colorado 'Mountain College FROM: Anne Castle Chris Thorne Spring Valley Aquifer - Groundwater lvMonitoring Plan This memorandum follows up on our meeting in Glenwood Springs on November 15, 2000, concerning the proposal of Spring Valley Development, Ina. ("SVD") for joint implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan by the major land owners that use or plan to use groundwater withdrawn from the Spring Valley Agtiifer to supply development on their respective properties. The primary purpose of the proposed plan is to monitor aquifer levels and productivity as this resource becomes more widely utilized in upcoming years. SVD was pleased to learn that each of the landowners identified above is interested in participating in the plan, as this will increase the utility and quality of the data to be developed. At the November 15 :meeting,we agreed that within an appropriate period of time, each landowner will' identify the well or wells to be including in the monitoring program, We thrther agreed that the Basalt Water Conservancy District wouldbe the best _entity to serve as a central repository for the data to be collected, and the Basalt District has agreed to fill this role. As January 2001 would be an opportune time to commence joint data collection, we suggest that each landowner identify to the Basalt District the well or wells to be included in the program by December 3i, 2000. Each participant should receive a copy of the designation of %yells to be monitored. $111 Lorah's November 14, 2000, letter identifies three SVD wells to be included in the program. SVD has been monitoring these wells for several months. SVD Will also designate an additional "upland well" for monitoring as suggested at the November 15 meeting. We agreed .that static water levels and total monthly diversions for each well should be recorded and reported to the Basalt Distr'ict's engineers on a monthly basis. The Basalt District will compile the reported data and report it to the participants in spreadsheet format. The data reported to the Basalt District will be E-4-PrIBIT ss • Lk.'87/2000 11:19 FAX 303 295 A'i81 HOLLAND & HART LLP U003 1111'aiP11110 A.fhl Intl 10#WlNWM11114 11 11 1 Reception#: 823749 09/05/2012 03:39:48 PM Jean P1berico 79 of 79 Rao Fea:$0.00 Doc Fee:0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO publicly available. It is anticipated that the Basalt District may utilizethe reported data in discussions with the Colorado Division of Water Resource concerning the Basalt District's augmentation program and temporary substitute supply pians_ Once again, SVD appreciates your interest in this plan, which we hope will prove to be a useful tool for all of the Spring Valley water users.. Please let us know if you have any suggestions or 'concerns regarding the procedures for implementing the monitoring. plan as described above. Ifwe do not hear from you by December 18, 2000, we will assume these procedures are acceptable. In the meantime, ;do not hesitate to contact either of us with any questions or comments you may have concerning this memoranda—til or the proposed groundwater management plan. cc: 'Bill Peacher Cam Kicklighter Bill Lorah 2740033_1.00C 2