Laserfiche WebLink
C -2010 -088 Fruita Loadout <br />3"d Preliminary Adequacy Review (MLT) <br />20 -Jul -2011 <br />Page 5 of 10 <br />Im. Section 2.03. 10 does not include list Mesa County in the Iist of additional permits required. <br />Will the County require a special use permit? Are there any permits that will be required <br />from the City of Fruita? (Page 2.05 -13 says Fruita may annex Haul Road #L) <br />CAM has responded that Mesa County will require a Major Site Plan, and that the City of <br />Fruita will require a NOI to use its right -of -way. The City and County were added to the <br />list ofpermits that will be required. Item resolved. <br />In. Is the segment of 15 Road located south of US Hwy b & 50 under City, or County, <br />jurisdiction? Will an access / driveway permit be required for 15 Road? <br />CAM responded that 15 Road south of US Hwy 6 & 50 is under the City's jurisdiction; the <br />City will require a NOI to use its right -of -way; an approval letter will be issued. Please <br />incorporate the approval letter from the City of Fruita into the PAP. <br />2.04.3 Land Use <br />4a. The first paragraph of Section 2.04.3(1) says private lands are under jurisdictions of Mesa <br />County and City of Fruita. On Map 02 Surface Ownership, please show Iimits of the City's <br />jurisdiction. <br />Map 02 has been modified to delineate the City's jurisdiction. Item resolved. <br />2.05.3Q) Roads <br />Haul Road #1 <br />51 a. Typical Section on Map 15 - How will thickness of Pit Run be determined? Is there a <br />minimum thickness? No discussion is provided. <br />CAM has adjusted the Pit Run thickness to be 12" minimum for constructing Haul Roads <br />#1 and #2, and states that more pit run will be added if necessary to achieve stability. The <br />cover letter response to this item indicates that the City of Fruita Engineer requires only <br />that "improvements are in place to structurally support the amount of truck traffic <br />proposed. " CAM indicates that the section shown here is based upon haul roads <br />constructed at other mines and used by similar trucks, with similar weights and volumes. <br />CAM is correct that there is no particular standard that must be followed for haul road <br />construction. However, for roadways used by the traveling public, pavement sections <br />(including one or more types of road base) are typically designed using AASHTO <br />(American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) procedures or <br />modifications thereof. Pavement thicknesses will vary depending upon the native soils, <br />climate, type of road base and/or pavement, type and volume of traffic, and the desired <br />lifespan of the roadway. These same methods and parameters can also be utilized haul <br />roads, particularly where the haul trucks are commercial, over - the -road vehicles. <br />CAM's proposed minimum thickness design for this project, with additional materials to <br />be added as necessary, will probably suffice, given the relatively short haul road lengths. <br />This portion of the item is resolved. <br />