Laserfiche WebLink
Response to Preliminary County Comments Received on March 17, 2011 <br />Adequacy Issue #4 <br />Figures C-2 and C-7 are difficult to read due to the inappropriate scale of 1 inch = 800 feet. <br />Pursuant to Rule 6.2.1(2)(e), the acceptable range of map scales shall not be larger than 1 inch = <br />50 feet nor smaller than 1 inch = 660 feet. Please submit new Figures C-2 and C-7, which <br />comply with the basic map requirements of Rule 6.2.1(2)(e). <br />Response #4 <br />Adequacy Issue #4 has been addressed in the enclosed submitted maps Pursuant to Rule <br />6.2.1(2)(e), the submitted mans as referenced have been modified such that the map scales <br />are not be larger than 1 inch = 50 feet nor smaller than 1 inch = 660 feet Figures C-2 and <br />C-7, comply with the basic map requirements of Rule 6.2.1(2)(e). <br />Adequacy Issue #5 <br />Figures C-2 and C-7 indicate eleven man-made structures located on nearby affected lands. The <br />owner(s) of structures D, E and F are not identified. The colored circles, intended to locate each <br />structure, are approximately 200 feet in diameter and obscure other important map details. <br />Figures C-2 and C-7 do not identify County Road 124 as one of the man-made structures located <br />within 200 feet of the boundary of affected lands. Please revise Figures C-2 and C-7 to identify <br />the owner(s) of all structures located within 200 feet of the boundary of affected lands. Please <br />delineate and label the appropriate boundary of affected lands. Please indicate the location of <br />each man-made structure in a more precise manner and which does not obscure other map details <br />unnecessarily. <br />Response #5 <br />Adequacy Issue #5 has been addressed in the enclosed submitted mans The maps have <br />been modified as recommended. Each man-made structure is presented in a more precise <br />manner and which does not obscure other map details unnecessarily. <br />Adequacy Issue #6 <br />Exhibit A, Legal Description, indicates the Augmentation Pipeline Corridor is illustrated on <br />Figure C-4. There is no such pipeline or corridor indicated on Figure C-4. Figure C-4 labels two <br />augmentation ponds, one of which is located outside the boundary of affected lands. Figure C-4 <br />inappropriately locates the mill facility at the Idaho rather than at the May Day 1 level. Figure <br />C-4 fails to include all affected lands within the boundary of affected lands. The color and <br />pattern of line used to delineate the affected land boundary and the permit boundary are <br />sufficiently similar to confuse the two boundaries. Please submit a new Figure C-4, which labels <br />and delineates all pipeline locations, shows the location of the single augmentation pond <br />proposed by the application, correctly locates the mill facility at the May Day 1 level, delineates <br />Revised <br />4/14/2011 <br />3