PERMFILE137076 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mark Loye • • December 17, 1980 Page 2 Exhibit L As stated previously, Brannan intends to replace the bond presently in force with a new bond of $49,200.00 Pit 29 Exhibit E As stated previously, under the present zoning restrictions at Brannan's Pit 29, no residential use could be allowed. The "residential area" shown on the plans submitted to Adams County and the Mined Land Reclamation Board was intended to be a concept only. Until, and if, this property were rezoned to permit residential development it remains entirely under the control of the Brannan Sand and Gravel Company and there will be absolutely no swimming allowed. If, at some point in the future, zoning on this property were changed to permit residential development Brannan would agree, after the rezoning action, to modi- fy slopes in the area of concern to 5:1 to a depth of 6' below water level. A stipulation to this effect would be acceptable as a permit condition. Exhibit G I have calculated that an estimated 14.69 - 29.38 acre feet of water total or an estimated 0.67 _ 1.34 acre feet of water per year would be lost over the entire 22 year course of the project. This equates to a loss of .42 - .84 gallons per minute. In comparison to the stream flow in the South Platte River this loss is de minimus and could not logically be construed to constitute a disturbance to the prevailing hydrologic balance in the area. If the Board chooses not to agree that this calculated loss is de minimus Brannan would agree to have one share of our Fulton Ditch water, which yields an average of 2.4 acre feet per share at the headgate diversion, decreed an industrial water right in Water Court. Provided that evidence of such a decree would not be required until Brannan begins excavation below the water table and that the mining operation for dry material could con~ence immediately upon receipt of the MLRB permit. Exhibit H Brannan would agree to try to enhance proposed shoreline irregularities and to create additional shoreline topography during the course of the project on an as feasible basis. We recognize that often gravel is not distributed the way we think it is based on test drilling, which may provide the opportunity to change the shoreline configuration, or that excess reject material is sometimes available and can be used for shoreline modification. Additionally, we have the option on Mrs. Allen's property, which may ul- timately enlarge the lake size, so there appears to be several opportunities to change the proposed lake configuration.