Laserfiche WebLink
As part of the pavement design, Russell Engineering should explain the Lane Factor used on sheet 2 <br />of Appendix E and why it is different than the factor use in other sections of the roadway and different <br />than used on sheet I and explain the reliability % used on sheets 3 and 4 of Appendix E. " <br />Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment Air Ouality Division <br />Comments were received November 10, 2010: <br />Staff Note: CDPHE was consulted regarding air quality issues related to this project. The agency <br />provided a courtesy review of the applicants proposed dust mitigation plan, as this agency does not <br />typically provide agency review comments for Class II permits. <br />"The Air Pollution Control Division reviewed the 13 dust mitigation measures proposed by WCA in <br />their 9122110 narrative document. We compared these proposed measures to the types of dust control <br />measures we typically require in our state-issued air qualitypermits/fugitive' dust control plans for <br />similar sand and gravel mining sources. The measures proposed by WCA track very well with the <br />types of measures we sped in our permits. Here are just a couple of possible additions: <br />1. With regard to proposed mitigation measure 46, we typically identify a specific wind speed level <br />(30 mph or greater) when the operator must cease operations. In practice, it is often a challenge at the <br />site to determine exactly when sustained wind speeds exceed 30 mph, but it can help to have a specie <br />wind speed number vs. the more discretionary "when the wind is too excessive." <br />2. Similarly in proposed mitigation measure #7, we typically specify that the re-vegetation activities <br />are completed within I year. So WCA's proposed measure #7 could be reworded to say "All mined <br />areas that are complete will be covered with topsoil and re-vegetated as soon as possible, though in <br />no case longer than one year from the time the mining in the area is completed" <br />Colorado Department of Transportation <br />Comments were received by email on October 24, 2040: <br />"The information provided is helpful to provide a better understanding of their proposed activity. <br />1. based upon Appendix A there is a significant increase (26% ingress right & 46% egress right) in <br />right turns at River Road. It is still CDOT's position that this proposed land use will generate a <br />significantly higher level of truck activity at the intersection of US 1601550 and River Road. The <br />increase in large trucks (and larger trucks) will significantly impact the intersection by further <br />damy nQ the curb and gutter and sidewalk at the right turn ingress/egress lanes ofthis intersection. <br />Glacier Gravel should provide improvements to this intersection so that the intersection will perform <br />better for the highway users and THEIR gravel pit users. " <br />Colorado Department of Transportation Aeronautical Division <br />Comments were received by email on June 17, 2010: <br />"Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Animas Glacier Gravel Pit in close <br />proximity to the Animas Airpark near Durango, Colorado. <br />While it appears the proponent has done a good job of addressing many typical issues with a gravel <br />pit, we do have just a few comments. <br />Project No. 2010-0055 Page 13 of 21 <br />Animas Glacier Gravel Class II EA/TH <br />P. O. Box RA - Toviao1:9 CO 8133 <br />AM tMAS GLACIER C-2A'"'L- <br />r-4A t e, LT M ^ PAGE M - 15