Laserfiche WebLink
Standard road engineering demonstrates that the roads will need to be paved to withstand the <br />increased, heavy truck traffic. <br />1n general, transportation and related safety concorns clearly dictate that changes be made to tiro <br />roads, bridges, highway entrances and ways of egress before a 112 Permit is issued to King Mountain, <br />not actor. <br />o. Aesthetic and Recreational Concerns <br />The detrimental effect that an expanded gravel pit will havo on the aesthetiaa of the arse <br />surrounding the ranch lands is clear. First, the expanded operation of the gravel pit will cause a <br />substantial increase in noise. Likewise, the forecasted increase in truck (and other vehicular) traffic <br />will inevitably result in increased dust, whioh will reduce visibility and impair tho ability to enjoy the <br />area <br />From a rooreational perspective, Egeria Park is heavily used for recreational purposes, <br />including horaebaok riding, hiking, aiding, snowwobiling and hunting. A gravel pit expansion of the <br />nature proposed by King Mountain will inevitably and adversely affect the aesthetics and recreational <br />use of the ranch lands, and Topatras genatally. Agricultural lead values are very limited. Property <br />values are 3 to 10 times ee high as agriculture alone would support -these recreation enhanced land <br />values are lost with iacreasod gravel trucks. <br />f. Wale; Issues <br />King Mountain dose not own lnduaMal water rights necessary for non-irrigation purposes (i.e., <br />operation of an expanded gravel pit under a 112 Permit or to mitigate the impacts of the proposed <br />expatiaion). ~n particular, King Mountain currently uses a pump and 4-inch pipe m Ell water trucks <br />(1500-2000 gallons each) several times a day near the confluence of Egeria and Smith Creeks for dual <br />suppression. In addition, we believe that Ring Mountain owns the Morse Ditch water right, decreed <br />for 1 cfa for irrigation uses, with an adjudication date of November 20, 1890 and an appropriation date <br />of July 18, 1889. Id. if thorn is a call on Egaria Creek, the undecreod use would be required to cease <br />as such use would mean that King Mountain is using the water right for industrial purposes for which it <br />ie not decreed, <br />In short, any water right that King Mountain may own cannot be used for its proposed <br />expanded gravel operations until and ualeas it is changed by the Water Court. And even if the Water <br />Court approves a change in place and type of uaq and a change in the point of diversion, Colorado law <br />does sot permit a change in the time of use. Acwrdingly, King Mountain's water rights, in any form, <br />wi]! never be available for use outside the historical irrigation season. <br />King Mountain't Prior Performance Should Be Considered. <br />Even though on a small scale, King Mountain's prior performance as a gravel pit operator in <br />Routt County indicates that it is not a reliable operator. For instance, King Mountain was using a <br />"temporary pit entrance" ae a long-term entrance to the gravel pit, whioh is is an even more dangerous <br />location than the former entrance. Ftirrther, in the summer of 2005, King Mountain's employees were <br />