Laserfiche WebLink
• Page 5 <br />March 6, 2002 <br />See drawing Exhibft "A" for the effected areas. See drawing Exhibit "B" for Overall boundary. This <br />drawing notes the setback and other urxfisturbed areas. See drawing Exhibit " F" for edge water <br />lok~tions. <br />Griffin # 1 D'Rdt, see drawing Exhibit "D". <br />Exhibit G -Water Information (Rule 6.4.7) <br />Settling Pond. This pond is located in area "B" only. See drawing Exhibit "C". <br />Discharge of Water, see "Discharge of Water", above. <br />A water augmentation plan has been filed with State of Cdorado, Water Court, Montrose, Cdorado. <br />Depth of ground water. The ground water with in these areas is between 20" and 24" below the ground <br />surface. <br />Effect on existing water wells. The exgvation site is more then 325 fed from the nearest residerx~. <br />This residence is across the Tomichi Creek (to the north). The water well that service this residence is <br />more then 400 feet from the excavated area. The well is lok~ted on to the north of the site and to the <br />north of the residence. This well extends more then 60'-0" in to the ground and is not effected by any of <br />the activities that will take place with in the gravel pit site. All other wells with in the Signal Peak <br />Industrial Park are further to the rrorth of the gravel pit site and are rxrt effected. <br />Wildlife infomration (Rule 6.4.6) <br />The Department of Wilm'rfe Idler is some what of a concern to us, but, not based on R stated concerns <br />about wildlife with in the proposed gravel pit site. In September of 2000 the Seahorse Ranch placed a <br />corrservatiorrhvildliFe easement against portions of the Seahorse Ranch. The DOW funded a portion of <br />the easement, Paled Jones from the DOVV managed the Over view of this matter for the DOW. With in <br />the easement, specific management areas are defined with respect to "Sage Grouse". As is the <br />spedfic area for the gravel pit site. The tuw do rrot cbnfiid with each diner. Further the easement <br />documents acknowledge that the proposed gravel pit site is just that a gravel pR site. The DOW agreed <br />to this as a part of the easement We do rxrt know who this Ridk Basagoitio is at the DOW. We have <br />had one telephone conversation with him. Based on this telephone corwersation it appears he did not <br />review the application, nor did he review the easement. Based on the content of his letter, the <br />appearance is that f~ wants the DOW to txeak the already agreed to easement documents. Our <br />diskxissions with Paul Jones of the DOW does not reflect this same desire. <br />To address the specifics of the letter we submit the fdlaving. (1) The areas are hay mcedovus. (2) <br />The areas does not contain vast amounts of wildlife, they contain the wildlife that is listed with in this <br />112 application. (3) H Mr. 8asagoifio w~ at the proposed gravel pit site, we do not have krtowtedge of <br />same. (4) The proposed gravel pit site does not "lie with in severe winter range, nesting and brood <br />rearing habitats of the Gunnison Sage Grouse". Under the terms of the conservationMrildliFe easement <br />spedfic management areas have teen set up that are a part of the Gunnison Sage Grouse areas. <br />This gravel pit sRe is speaficelly excluded from these management areas. (5) The proposed gravel pit <br />site is rxrt vidth in a SignficaM WikJlife Habitat Area. (6) The proposed gravel pit site does not interface <br />with any of tf~ spedfic management areas, as such, does not require mitigation nor revegetation as <br />called out in the letter. <br />