Laserfiche WebLink
<br />mitigation strategies m reduce the impact atf mitring as the bird ttad its hatita[. Lt fact in <br />September 2005, the State of Colorado submitted the Wildlife Conservation Plan m [he USFWS. <br />Lr dte utiyjrud paruit cuuvcrsiuu ptuccss, dre Colorado Divisitnr of Wildlifc (dye "DOW") <br />staled "adegmte mitigatiar will otdy be accomplished through the implcnrentation of arc or <br />more offsik mitigntiar stmkgin." Uat'ortumkly, King Mountains Baal applicnrion did trot <br />include my affairs strategies. Ao such, King Monataia'o mitigation atrategieo fall woefully abort <br />ofineetiag those suggested by DOW. <br />h (:nnaervahon and Prnnerty Valnex <br />The proposed gavel pit expadsion site is located aeaz prope[ry oa which the Yampa <br />Valley Land Trost holds a conservation easemeas. Five Pine Mesa and su[routtdinR azea is a <br />uaiyue mu, with udrrunal 4adic, few resitkattial prupa4cs, pristine alpine forest sad wedazrds, <br />where significmt investment has bem made to protect and pr«e[ve the views, peue and quiet <br />water quality, wildlife habitat and wildlife. As a result, the comc:votioa values within the arcs <br />m very higk The propaoed gravel pit expemion, together with aigtrifreaady increased traffie <br />and caaz«poading dtnt, and other particulat«, aoice sad the likely deereue in wildlife usage in <br />the area, witl inevitably Compromrs! the tOnaeNatlOn Vain! of the Van0aa lasemmta held by th! <br />rnrtanrvahnn and mvtrmm~ental nrppmsmnnx Mtlhnnc of dnllarx nF' Starr. firndc m rturmtly <br />proposed to be spent immediately adjacent to the pit to preserve Grouse habitat. <br />c. Transponarion and Safety Coacerna <br />King Mountain's cuaent opuation has two access points on County Road 3 (CR 3). The <br />shoR acctiar of that rood (trtilincd by dre gravy! pit) is vcay steep with grades up to 1996, a <br />recogtrizable haaard. Due to the topography of the area, drooa grades cannot be ndjuoted without <br />a road rdocatioa The steep grade ar CR 3 at its iatersec4ar with County Road 5 (CR S) is a <br />serious safety problem due >n truck traffic essoaated with the operstion. There are very limited <br />xtght drxtancrx to xee tnrrkx nr vtxa verxa before an tntnxrxttnn, srnttnd cnrnerx, poor [n one-lane <br />bridges etc.. It is very dan¢erotu. <br />The project proposed by Kiel( biotmtain will involve a sippi5cant amount of haul traffic <br />wd a sigrnficard iuacase is Much traffic gcnnally. At a adrdrnmt4 it appems dud m expaositm <br />of King bountain's gravel nriae will add a volume of approximately 160 vehicles per day during <br />the peak mitring moadts. Combi>kd with the traffic voltunc already traveling CR 3 sad CR S, <br />approximately 350 trucks (plea 30 cam) will be traing those rondo daily. Ia their currmt condition, <br />the existing roads simply earmot enpport that increased level of traffic. <br />F1Mhmnnrr, the rntrrxMrnn of (:k 'i and (:N 5 pnvx a xenotu xatHy ronrrrn N~tth <br />respect to al! three approaches to the intersection. sight distance is very limited. The aoRh leg of <br />the inunectiar on CR 3 has a seep, 18%, grade oa its appmarh. Trucks crawl down this grade <br />az very loa spade. Despiu dross low speeds, it is tpussionable whether those trucks aze able m <br />slop fm ura:vatiryl traffic. R'idr die finccasted increased volume of ouch activity lbat will reaull <br />if the Doard approves King bloturtain's Perutit Conversiou Application, the safety contents at <br />thin inkrscction (and along the roads generally) arc sabstantially amplified. With a lazgc voltrmc <br />