2006-06-12_REVISION - M1978314 (4)

Home Browse Search

i[. [vuo '1:uurm dames nm a[ovaii, offsito mitigation strategies" Unfortunately, King Mountain's final application did not include any offsite strategies. Aa such, King Mountain's mitigation strategies fall woaiWly short of meeting those ~ suggested by DOW. b. Conservation and Fmngty Values The proposed gravel pit expansion site is located near property on which the Rocky Mountain Ells Foundation holds a conservation. Egeuia Park is a unique area, with minimal traf5c, few residential properties, and working ranches that are managed oa a laadecape Scala Likewise, adjacent ranchers granted a conservation easement to Colorado Opan Lands. Finally, Great Outdoors Colorado and Colorado Open Lands hold other conservation easements in the Topanas area for the preservation of significant ecological end wildlife habitat. AB a result, the conservation values within the arcs arse vary high. The proposed gravel pit expansion, together with significantly increased traffic and corresponding dust and other particulates, end the likely daerease in wildlife usage in the area, will inevitably compromise the conservation value of the various easements held by the Ellt Foundation cad other,conservation and environmental orgeaizatione. Hiltless of dollars of State funds are currently proposed to ba spear immediately adjacent W the pit to preserve t3rouae habitat. a Transportation and 5afoty Concerns King Mountain's currant operation hen two access points oa County Road 3 (CR 3). Tha short section of that road (utilized by the gravel pit) is very steep with grades up to 19%, a recognizable hazard. Due to the topography of the area, those grades cannot be adjusted without a mad relocation. The steep grade on CR 3 at its intersection with County Road 5 (CR 5) is a serious safety problem due to truck traffic associated with rho operation. There are very limited sight distances to aeo trucks or vies versa before an intersection, amend oomars, prior to one-lane bridges etc.. It is very dangerous. The project proposed by King Mountain will involve a significant amount of haul traffic and a significant increase in truck tratlic generally, At a minimum, it appears that an expansion of King Mountain's gravel mine will add a volume of approximately 160 vehicles per day during the peak reining months. Combined with the traffic volume alzeady traveling CR 3 and CR 5, approximately 350 trucks (plus 30 cars) will be using those roads daily. In their current condition, the existing roads simply cannot support that increased level of traffic. Furthermore, the intersection of CR 3 and CR 5 poses a serious safety concern. With respect to alt three approaches to the intersection, sight distance is very limited. The north leg of the intersection on CR 3 has a steep, 18%, grade on its approach. Trucks crawl down this grads at very low speeds. Despite those low speeds, it is questionable whether those trucks are able to stop for oncoming traffic. With the forecasted increased volume of truck activity that will result if the Board approves King Mountain's Permit Conversion Application, the safety concerns at this intersection (and along the roads generally} are aubataatially amplified, With a large volume of gravel tmeks, it would be extremely dangerous to try to pull a horse trailer, move cattle, drive a tractor or let a child ride a horse on these made. Finally, there era two bridges along the route with only single lanes. The pit operator, Kirk Eborlo, does not want to pay to replace the bridges and, instead, wants taxpayers to subsidize his gravel operations. Effectively, Mr. Eberle is attempting to use six miles of county road as a mina "haul mad."