The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20021725.tiff �' ie , ,_, - I J %it 0 0 0 0 ) a� gra a�9e REALTY APPRAISAL & MANAGEMENT LLC "Serving customers from the plains to the rockies" Weld County Planning DOD' January 11, 2002 Mr. Robert Anderson Weld County Department of Planning Services REr " r II 7 D 1555 North 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 RE: AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES INC., PROPOSED KURTZ RANCH SAND AND GRAVEL PROJECT Dear Mr. Anderson: As per my testimony at the August 7, 2001 Weld County Planning Hearing concerning the above referenced project,the Landowners of the Kurtz property have expended considerable resources and time in planning for the project. We have entered into our agreements with Aggregate Industries after careful thought and consideration for how the mining will be conducted and what we will be left with, as the surface owners after the reclamation plan is completed. Exhaustive research and investigation of the proposed project conducted in advance of execution of our agreement, and since, has convinced us the proposed Aggregate Industries project is practical, sound and responsible. As authorized representative of the landowners, who are also owners of the mineral estate, I acknowledge that oil and gas interest have been incorporated into the design of the mining and mine reclamation plans, as proposed by Aggregate Industries, Inc. -West Central Region. The landowners are knowledgeable of their obligations to the oil and gas lessee under the effective oil and gas lease agreements on the property. The landowners have endeavored to reach an acceptable Surface Use Agreement with HS resources, now Kerr-McGee since October 8, 1999, which was prior to our Gravel Mining lease with Aggregate Industries. We have expended a lot of money and time in efforts to reach a reasonable working agreement with Kerr-McGee including providing them with an agreement executed by the Landowners and Aggregate Industries, complete with the appropriate Exhibits, all to no avail. As a result, it is our position we have gone more that half way to complete an agreement with the oil and gas leasee without success. We are requesting a favorable ruling on the application since we have provided for the oil and gas operators' interest in a more than adequate fashion. Any further delays created by the oil and gas leasee will only penalize the Landowner and Aggregate Industries. = EXHIBIT x 1 U52 #7340 221 W.Platte Avenue • Fort Morgan,Colorado 80701•(970)867-7816•FAX(970)867-0801•email:mcreeders@twol.cnm 2002-1725 Thank you, Sincerely, _, � 9c Donald L. Jones McFeeders Realty Appraisal, & Management Agents for the Elverna Burchfield Trust & Sherry Redmond 221 W. Platte Ave. Ft. Morgan, CO 80701 970-867-7816 Mr. Ross Horvath Page 4 October 2, 2001 1. 2005 Traffic Impacts Year 2005 is when the Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine is expected to be at full operation. In the Year 2005 traffic scenario, the unsignalized intersection of SH 66 and WCR 19 is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" for both the morning and evening peak-hours,with or without site-generated traffic. The northbound and southbound approaches are expected to operate at Level of Service "D" or better. The unsignalized intersection of SH 66/WCR 17 is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" in both the morning and evening peak-hours, with or without site- generated traffic. In addition, all approaches are expected to operate at Level of Service "B" or better. The unsignalized intersection of the site access and SH 66,to be built as part of the Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine development, is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service"A"for both the morning and evening peak-hours,with either the combined Kurtz and Varra access scenario or the combined Kurtz, Varra and Nix access scenario. Also, all approaches are expected to operate at a good Level of Service "C" or better with either access scenario. 2. 2021 Traffic Impacts Under the Year 2021 traffic scenario, the unsignalized SH 66/WCR 19 intersection is expected to operate at an acceptable Level of Service "D", or better, during both the morning and evening peak periods, with or without the addition of site-generated traffic. However, the northbound and southbound approaches will operate at a poor Level of Service"E" or worse, during both the morning and evening peak periods,with or without the addition of site-generated traffic. Traffic volumes on these approaches will be moderately high and may meet MUTCD signal warrants by the Year 2021. However, should exclusive left- and right-turn lanes be added at this intersection, many of the right-turning movements may be excluded and a signal would not necessarily be warranted at this intersection. The unsignalized intersection of SH 66/WCR 17 is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" in both the morning and evening peak hours, with or without site- generated traffic. In addition, all approaches are expected to operate at an acceptable Level of Service "D" or better. The site access onto SH 66 is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" for both the morning and evening peak-hours, with either the combined Kurtz and Varra access scenario or the combined Kurtz, Varra and Nix access scenario. However, the northbound approach is expected to operate at a poor Level of Service "F" or worse. Average Daily Traffic Impacts Figure 14 shows the average daily impacts due to the site-generated traffic including the daily number of heavy vehicles generated by the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine. The Mr. Ross Horvath Page 5 October 2, 2001 average daily impacts are minimal, indicating that by Year 2021, it is estimated that site- generated traffic will be accountable for less than 7.5 percent of the daily traffic west of the site on SH 66 and less than 1.5 percent of the daily traffic east of the site on SH 66. Access Recommendations The Colorado State Highway Access Code sets forth recommended acceleration lane, deceleration lane and taper lengths based on the speed and classification of the roadway while the storage length is based on the number of vehicles using the turn lane. As previously stated in this report, SH 66 is classified as a Rural Arterial (R-A) roadway in the 1998 Colorado State Highway Access Code published by the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT). Items 2 and 3 of Section 3.8 of the Access Code state the following: "... one access shall be granted to each parcel, if it does not create safety or operational problems. The access will provide, as a minimum,for right-turns only ... where it is shown that the location will be able to meet appropriate design criteria,full-movement access shall be granted at one-half mile spacing, ..." One full movement access on SH 66 is proposed for the site. Item 5 of Section 3.8 of the ^ Access Code states auxiliary lanes shall be installed according to the following criteria: "A left-turn deceleration lane with taper and storage length is required for any access with a projected peak-hour left ingress turning volume greater than 10 vph. The taper length will be included with the required deceleration length." "A right-turn deceleration lane with taper and storage length is required for any access with a projected peak-hour right ingress turning volume greater than 25 vph. The taper length will be included with the required deceleration length." "A right-turn acceleration lane and taper length is required for any access with a projected peak-hour right-turning volume greater than 50 vph when the posted speed on the highway is greater than 40 mph. The taper length will be included with the required acceleration length." Based on these requirements and the passenger car equivalent peak-hour turning movement shown in Figures 12 and 13, the following recommendations are made for the intersection of SH 66/site access for the Year 2021 total traffic volumes based on the posted speed of 65 mph: 1. A westbound right-turn acceleration lane is required with a length of 1,080 feet plus a 300-foot taper for both access scenarios. 2. A eastbound left-turn deceleration lane is required with a length of 600 feet for storage length and deceleration plus a 300-foot taper for both access scenarios. 3. A eastbound right-turn deceleration lane is required with a length of 500 feet plus a 300-foot taper for both access scenarios. Mr. Ross Horvath Page 6 October 2, 2001 4. For Scenario II, combined access for Kurtz, Varra and Nix, a westbound left-turn deceleration lane is required with a length of 540 feet for storage and deceleration, plus a 300-foot taper. All redirected tapers should be constructed at a 65:1 ratio. The recommended turn lane lengths are illustrated on Figures 15 and 16 for Scenarios I and II, respectively. Conclusions Based upon the foregoing analyses, the following conclusions can be made concerning the traffic impacts of the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine: 1. The Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine is expected to generate a total of 511 heavy vehicle-trips,which includes passenger vehicle/pickup trips on an average work day. Approximately 50 trips are expected to occur during the AM peak-hour, with 40 vehicles entering and ten exiting the site. During the PM peak-hour, approximately 50 trips are expected to occur with ten entering and 40 exiting the site. 2. About 90 percent of the traffic generated by the Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine would be oriented to and from the west on SH 66 while the remaining ten percent would be oriented to and from the east on SH 66. 3. The unsignalized intersection of SH 66/WCR 19 is expected to operate at LOS "B" with or without the addition of site-generated traffic during the morning and evening peak periods through the Year 2021. The intersection of SH 66/WCR 17 is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" during both the morning and evening peak periods through the Year 2021. 4. The intersection of SH 66/Site access is expected to operate at an excellent Level of Service "A" during both the morning and evening peak periods through the Year 2021, with significant delays on the northbound left-turn movement. 5. Based on the Colorado State Highway Access Code requirements,a westbound right- turn acceleration lane and an eastbound left-turn deceleration lane are recommended at the SH 66/Site access intersection. 6. The traffic impacts of the Kurtz Ranch Sand&Gravel Mine can be accommodated by the existing roadway system with the improvements recommended herein. * * Mr. Ross Horvath Page 7 October 2, 2001 We trust that this information will assist you with further planning for the proposed develop- ment of the Kurtz Ranch Sand 8s Gravel Mine. Please call if we can be of further assistance. Respectfully submitted, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc, p• pO RE4j�.. re 1 eft- By: O t Alex J. Arin' o, P.E. 4 AJA/TAL/wc jilitifik Enclosures: Tables 1 and 2 Figures 1-14 Traffic Counts Capacity Analyses \\Server\d\LSC\Projects\2001\011170\Report\f-KRSG.wpd > > r 0 r N W N co 0 I VG) Y a) a. c Tr .` I- 0 _ O V V r h j O O r C) V Yf N M = a < c o � n r m Q - N M r Z O d ~2 o O N > > O a m 0 W; 15 ..: = O v �i r m ai Zm Ill a e p ( E m r Does V o. a d W C �N) c a —c o M v O a Hd'co CO w i-5 a W to t '_ ~ r _ a F"Q: 4) 0 O J O Or • V r 1f) 2 10 { � it z O fl N (/)Y N W a Q C 'VV 01 A CI) A N 0)) a) C_ > p — N 0 O O os C '. 0 'o c c cco y y c !i) _d fll CO m t v 'a U > C co• C ' 0 > O N a' O I- e I- 0 V c o x I- Y > Z Table 2 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE (1) Kurtz Ranch Sand&Gravel Mine Weld County, Colorado (LSC#011170;September,2001) 2005 2005 2021 2021 Background Traffic Total Traffic Background Traffic Total Traffic Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of Intersection Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Service Intersections Control AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM • Scenario 1:Kurtz and Varra Combined Access SH 66/WCR 19 NB/SB Stop Northbound Left C B C B F C F D Southbound Left D C 0 C F E F E Eastbound Approach A A A A A A A A Westbound Approach A A A A A A A A Critical Movement Delay(seciveh.) 25.1 16.7 26.4 17.7 167.0 39.8 196.0 46.9 Overall Intersection Delay(seciveh.) 3.6 2.6 3.6 2.6 16.0 4.7 18.5 5.0 Overall Intersection Level of Service A A A A C A C A SH 66IWCR 17 SB Stop Southbound Left B B B B D C 0 C Eastbound Approach A A A A A A A A Westbound Approach A A A A A A A A Critical Movement Delay(sec./veh.) 13.5 12.1 14.3 13.1 25.8 18.8 29.1 21.4 Overall Intersection Delay(sec./veh.) 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.5 2.6 2.4 2.8 2.6 Overall Intersection Level of Service A A A A A A A A i� SH 66/Site Access NB/SB Stop Northbound Left — — C C — — F E Southbound Left — — B B — — C B Eastbound Approach — — A A — — A A Westbound Approach — — A A — — A A Critical Movement Delay(sec./veh.) — — 21.3 20.5 — — 50.4 46.7 Overall Intersection Delay(sec./veh.) — — 1.4 1.5 — — 1.7 1.8 Overall Intersection Level of Service — — A A — — A A Scenario 2:Kurt,Van and Nix Combined Access SH 66/WCR 19 NB/SB Stop Northbound Left — — C B — — F C Southbound Left — — D C — — F E Eastbound Approach — — A A — — A A Westbound Approach — — A A — — A A Critical Movement Delay(sec./veh.) — — 26.8 17.8 — — 202.8 44.3 Overall Intersection Delay(secJveh.) — — 3.6 2.6 — — 19.1 3.8 Overall Intersection Level of Service — — A A — — D A SH 66/WCR 17 SB Stop Southbound Left — — B B — — D C Eastbound Approach — — A A — — A A Westbound Approach — — A A — — A A Critical Movement Delay(seciveh.) — — 14.5 13.3 — — 30.0 21.9 Overall Intersection Delay(sec./veh.) — — 1.2 1.5 — — 2.8 2.6 Overall Intersection Level of Service - - A A - - A A $H 66/Site Access NB/SB Stop Northbound Left - - C C - - F F Southbound Left — — B B — — C B Eastbound Approach — — A A — — A A Westbound Approach — — A A — — A A Critical Movement Delay(secJveh.) — — 21.9 21.3 — — 55.7 51.6 Overall Intersection Delay(sec./veh.) — — 1.6 1.8 — — 2.3 2.3 Overall Intersection Level of Service — — A A — — A A Notes: (1) Using 2000 Highway Capacity Manual(HCM)methodology and Level of Service(LOS)definitions. RsQgs •— r . • N @� —a Eu N W C_ V v 444 'k0 47 do !. , Kraka' k d cr. fr .4 & rb,'itk N>a' awb, s@ a,'hgy Y . '"' «t Y`4 .tea'I" A 5 p 'Y �"¢. O yfss_ in y dA T T es'+Y On:4 _ £ 441,74.;‘,47k,- � � + )t. '", , ar it m 4 "` .. .}}ma !fist-n3-..4 fis • ' 531:4?"-44"4"'‘',44A-4.-•:- , �? .?'tY,rte � �}. }} • tl rt a- N gs O N it : C t•�� V T et v baJ u WNe 3 I eLaDM co rl —IIuui 1 : mom b LLlDM rvel I N jj L L aDnn Ia%%%•-..77 1 w E c J n V) V N a a o or In 6 II II Z O W W � 8s n T- ...--__:, WO - ?:- z toit iti t EU LA y ccC_ `.-J Y1 tan` N • X U W -o C b N ;IN L U C r Nm of M L t � RI° —_ — i n K:—RdiK 7= N NM 6I1DM I n Y1 /�^ 1InN f NIh Z i w I !d 1n > I LI NDM co LI YJM n b n I ti \ y L 11DM �I� +lj U U g1;71 � hi o w loin f _} - 5 = nm 0 0 NIA __ I I Y Y O C ✓ U EL 0- 2 2 r •• ¢ a O W II Lit NI.1 J o gT ,44. Cili N r t0 is -- z(40 _ -_ ?Y ` CLO Eo tU s.... f to cts V> II c mw O �� L. O bo e4 L U N YIN /Mt U .31:23- Im Nmin iW 3 mlJ l LzIm Y AIN — } -r °IN K,>1 IN ^IN 0 n N SIo 6 3 6L nM - •gg �mt Z .�+ vIR 1 I NIY I W b H td I _ J IL 7DM m arm 1DM N m6\ 0 CoI LLNJM c :1•2 O U Ct oa J 0 WI- 0 0 N W I I S S O 0 O 0 a 0- M M •• a a O Z u W Nh in r",• Usa N. AR Ls N ev N C O I b h�h� U laill "Is N rti -6 nn nn c I� IN se nl^n_I J—j I —�I3_"_IY L KTI -.1 f r- "I" II. ;In CO N r nlm c n CO3 6I 1DM I n rig t Z=lm y� I H N y > I _ 1111DAA ,c Li 1DM N 's n I CG....\\\N11 3 m' L l 8JM n cdt -I) u u zit'I�D f v o I- I- m10 O• O �In S 2 Y ae n 0 u u as .-•.. •• a a 0 Z II J Nir 1/4O "--... 1-4... U s Ny .- 1 N N CZ - `I.+ r -m .-' C) U Q z -o Q) a as C.) .n n O (,)T Y O4 O O co Q N a ire U O 61.1OM X II - Z ai IJi C a O O_ C C L l 1DM x y o j Z 1-2E2N N- r CL- m 6 3 u L L 1DM e4 to M N K O C U O � `O N O j a KIM I - CD all X > a- m o sin, m 0 0 N CO t N._ J I-V Y m W+, Et m O p 8 K in r O 0 Z . w CD w K N . `}— U s O 8 N ,_ d er3O ".73 ji su Tu m .! Qj U d 4.) ct ( v u O .2 ;' Ne Ne CD iRK 2 N O K 0 co o K 3 0 6L1DM r. I 1 N X — _ N ,----- _\ Z K K O I L I I- Ina V1 I > I - - -1 C C O LL CM z 0y.0 Z d d� a I- in N m LLCM en - p V H C O O p C 0 3 v1 do = LLNJM \ o 0) u 6 2 I-m Kce o 0 m C m t U rn coo-'5' cn 4- Y d 0 d o p H K in C. 6 00 Z rn W \ J al w 4► U o 1R , o O g � N G*c t C C Ea C G) � d OE -ow (f). .a0 (tf b (a) O Q C N U H (---- 1N- CU..,,L, my ICD C „J a-I J 4 x 771 Y \\ Kqc, w N 3 61 7DM I X •Z ^-, I \ _ _ _ W 1 y > I I— - - - _ LL1DM a 7DM N y[ N NY U u w Ti V Lu m MOM N tit,* COL u aui / N NY \\ / (70 0 v J IY� \ ^"3:1/ .•-• 0 ♦LP I--F _� 3 �• E J J f � x x K&--181,7-,iy I0 vwn 4) Ill ad rI as o II w recE O ;fu' J CI ••••••_ U o a z O 8 � C r- aj Etti vi W Q) "fJ ,` O L w En U Q CD N CD ItU JJ 4L z �w °S Y R. -.......:// YL � w n N 6L 1DM 1 X - - -i Z I _ I W ilf ``\ ~ I C.7) > I LL 1OM Ll1DM N _ el y N Y 4! w L u u U U L L CL7DM @ �Y j j A (� x c•. - �n u v_ T t/1 0 nN O O �n II- I- I 041 p n O o aVrY rO : ow^ 0_-: :''' s O a Z II w c7 2-4 = J Rai 44 o 'le's. In U 8o pp r V d O O N €61 Si" 4.) ct ill ro — 1 cn � oru 7-21-1) -I, L 2, 1 I� U QJ tiei 'Ih v -- YIN rteto ~nmla w� �� 1.14r ico a. i 1�- i� V J !« S it- oho nliI Fw \ n f�� g 3u 6 L 1DM I X_ I Z ,..-..., I �1 I Ill I I' CIE N > I _ J LL 1DM m Claw n a co x u T.)_ ere y L n YjF" J LL 7DM mn olo o to 1:Zite= °IN J1 r J ww Y KI-±-1, rI I w" (O^a Y Y =� as Nn .— O it LU a� W J — In •Ugs �� g= m .� O r l6 iSii c.tN � vu wL" tatD en1"---. 34 ; 4-1 cn O Te N U C .:;:-...\\14. N p al :I r N y " Cl I _ Q nI K- C,,IJlL�I��iN �'J1�� n 171"��i�f rl�im °2T f� `� N ;y CO tali n 1,4 4 n aN ill W NI* V 6L1DM 6 X Z -\ _ _ — _ 7 is, L I H 1d N J I LLBJM N\ $ N LL1DM Cm u CD 2 U V b N L _ C , 3 LL1DMYir. mn Jo I = Z 1 1 0 0 J O O OD_lf F ~ nIn 0 0 ��°^^ Zr +� I I co 0 0 V I) n_ a a --, O II Z mr. U, .°3- _ w J A N \ sire. ES O O N e. (-C---jic Q)) 3„,. o O f i l'''. ti!J ii CO N 0 `' SIN YIN VI n in i"I�JL - CV - =1 f C N ][ NIC \ 1-0..C.?" triff Cl ce 6L 1DM X — — Z \ _ « n. N o+ u m U U t L LJJ > > ~ ti v M N 1 I to W — _ _ J U U L t LL YJM > > ≥ u• u L L {an LL7DM '�m Bt V _ U U in in . V II a l 1DM o n 2 R >, T W alm > > U �1 and - , T I J U U , W r C `o o c C Ai��f •- nl? ....) ._ elg a_a o o w L O --e nY Im ♦ - - p ''Y,J1�� v�r dd u �Y a. cie o n a wzig, Y ri;i.^^,:'. . . _--I U 8 � t d N N , c z* g C RS 4. `t i ~ ou CD m C � ri GI U ta -o C c nm o N co nleron~ lm I. nlmo m C _n ^'`{�''` I NA nlce ��,lg -- JI��n Ml- r VP nl�l-1 f re-l" f fn • NnC.1R1 ata 03 CI n }l1Y n CV 3 61 XDM I X — — Z I I W— N w to \ _ > > L t I U > I > .Ni.M.v I- L V m — ft V U f/1I L L I - J > > L 1 1O 0 O t -c 0 O O N 0 2 L120M � 'n pn N II V N V v v N. w u u U L l7DM t t 4:V V wlmnn >> w 1:: j c c u aa) ac p xx > N� � � J rla D741'.....1! cr nln mlm o 0 „1-IL I- I- o nh�l��lc ! . L V Y > W COIN O O `p �J �O ? _ VP n� •YIn - I O N�Y f wlm a a V y w co nln lm a d o ^ mNYY �m d 3ln p ¢fl o W Z Z II O m�'` W a' J e In a N v s 4�p c Q �N . L. �5 € > E Q � v v N • a 0 al O ~ C 0 in Lri wa �� o QL. N Y O N O r a t L 6L 1DM T T P U o iii U O w h O 5 -\ E- o a W `. x N `O H LII v U U O o u `ow O p y u 0 n `$ LL 1DM > N�H en 2 .1' M y U LLiOM \ n Y I Et O D r u o -4- Y in ur \ O O to In II 0 to 0 a 0 0 0 N 0 O to N 0 r \ O Z a W 0 0 W J . \k2( "O-13 $t m ) & 2 Et o 1%,:e2-. ) a) / # C } CE § \ y 2/ ! @ s; - re 1 \ $ 1,0 to, —.t-o 0Zg� vIZII* C 3U IF' 7 Y m u,y y c N N O U Q Ly C Q Y U " E O D 11) C 0 b 0 N >> i • m t r Imo-F O O N I 1 k 11O23 - _ STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Region 4 - 411222.1. 1420 2nd Street Greeley,Colorado 80631 (970)353-1232 Weld County,SH 66 Kurtz Ranch Sand&Gravel E of WCR 17/N Side E of Platteville November 20,2001 Ross Horvath Banks&Gesso 720 Kipling,Suite 117 Lakewood,CO 80215 RE: Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Dear Ross: Thank you for meeting with me on November 5,2001. I have had an opportunity to review the plans for the above proposal. Based upon that information,CDOT agrees to allow access to this site,to align with the existing Varra Sand and Gravel access. It would appear that the auxiliary lanes needed by your site could be constructed. Please contact this office when your client is ready to pursue an access permit. If you should have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely. G la Hice-Idler Assistant Access Manager (970)350-2148 xc: file A-F1aelime44-f 3 : - apr.-t Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St., Suite 117 Lakewood,Colorado 80215 (303)274-4277 Fax(303)274-8329 www.banksandgesso.00m Memo To: Norm Roche From: Stan Peters Date: 3-10-2000 Re: Oil & Gas Agreement, Kurtz Ranch I met with Don French, Landman for HS Resources on March 3, 2000 to review the mining and reclamation plans submitted to Aggregate Industries and Don Jones. The following is a summary of his concerns, thoughts and suggestions. 1. With additional pipe relocations, some berms could be removed (such as between Pond 4&5) if the land owner would prefer larger ponds. Would need to analyze relocation costs vs. additional gravel and reduced reclamation cost 2. Will HSR be able to utilize the access road along the water line, especially if a second water line is installed. Is the easement exclusive to the water district? 3. When some pipelines are relocated to within 100 feet of the creek (to enlarge mining areas) will riprap be used to protect pipelines and access roads from future erosion? 4. MAJOR concern for post-mining access from Highway 66 (for both HSR and Don Jones) to both sides of the Firestone land. Drill rigs and tanker trucks crossing the bike paths, etc. probably wouldn't work well. 5. Will HSR still have access to the property from the north? 6. Fencing concerns, especially when bike path provides easy access to the oil&gas facilities on-site 7. Don said HSR now owns the transmission lines (north end and SE corner) once owned by KN. Many issues seem to be between Kurtz and HSR, without changing the maps/plans. r Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St., Suite 117 Lakewood,Colorado 80215 (303)274-4277 Fax(303)274-8329 www.banIcsandgesso.com Memo To: Norm Roche CC: Don French, HSR, Don Jones, Kurtz Ranch From: Stan Peters Date: 6-13-2000 -" / '�'' Re: Oil&Gas Agreement, Kurtz Ranch I met with Don French, Landman for HS Resources on June 13,2000 on-site to review the mining and reclamation plans submitted to Aggregate Industries and Don Jones. The following is a summary of his concerns,thoughts and suggestions from the 3-20-2000 meeting,with a few additional ones(bolded). We will be meeting Don and Don on-site Wednesday 21, 2000 at 3:00PM to further discuss, and hopefully negotiate the oil&gas agreement Weld County will require,and any conesponding changes to the mining and reclamation plans. 1. With additional pipe relocations,some beans could be removed(such as between Pond 4&5) if the land owner would prefer larger ponds Would need to analyze relocation costs vs. additional gravel and reduced reclamation cost. 2. Will HSR be able to utilize the access road along the water line, especially if a second water line is installed. Is the easement exclusive to the water district? 3. When some pipelines are relocated to within 100 feet of the creek(to enlarge mining areas) will riprap be used to protect pipelines and access roads from future erosion? 4. MAJOR concern for post-mining access from Highway 66(for both HSR and Don Jones)to both sides of the Firestone land. Drill rigs and tanker trucks crossing the bike paths, etc. probably wouldn't work well. Would they utilize the mining access road long-term? 5. Will HSR still have access to the property from the north? 6. Fencing concerns,especially when bike path provides easy access to the oil&gas facilities on- site 7. Don said HSR now owns the transmission lines(north end and SE corner)once owned by KN. 8. Larger drilling pad in Pond#9 9. Possible relocation of tank batteries to east,away from the river Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St.,Suite117 Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 274-4277 Fax (303) 274-8329 January 15, 2002 www.banksandgesso.com Weld Cc-Jay] -Lnning Dept. Mr. Robert Anderson JAN 18 2:1,1 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, RECEIVED Greeley, Colorado 80631 Subject: USR-1347 Conditions Prior to Scheduling the Board of County Commissioners Hearing, Aggregate Industries Dear Robert, Since the Planning Commission hearing on August 7, 2001, Aggregate Industries, Inc. — West Central Region, the Applicant, has worked diligently to resolve several issues regarding its application for a Use by Special Review. The Applicant continues to work with the neighbors of this proposed project, a sand and gravel mine to be located immediately north of Highway 66 between County Roads 17 and 19, and hopes to come to its Board of County Commissioners hearing with the neighbors' support. The purpose of this letter; however, is to address the three conditions of the Planning Commission's Resolution of Recommendation to be satisfied prior to scheduling of the Board of County Commissioners hearing. These three conditions are repeated and addressed below. A. The Applicant has submitted a Traffic Study to the Weld County Department of Public Works for review and approval. The Department of Public Works in their referrals dated April 6 and April 13, 2001 requested several changes and require resubmission of the Traffic Study. Evidence of Public Works approval shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. On Monday August 27, a meeting was held at the CDOT office in Evans, Colorado to discuss the scope of an updated traffic study and CDOT access requirements for this project. The Applicant and his consultant met with Gloria Hice-Idler of CDOT and Diane Houghtaling of Weld County Public Works. All at this meeting agreed that an updated study should consider two scenarios, which would take into account the two realistic traffic patterns that could result from the one existing (Varra/Sand Land) and two proposed (Aggregate Industries, Inc. and Owens Brothers Concrete Company) sand and gravel operations along Hwy 66 between the St. Vrain River and County Road 19. In both scenarios the Aggregate Industries access on the north side of Hwy 66 would be aligned with the existing Varra/Sand Land access on the south side of the highway. In one scenario, Varra/Sand Land and the Owens Brothers operations would share the existing access point; and in the other scenario, the Owens Brothers operation would enter and exit its facility via Weld County Road 28. The updated traffic study, prepared by LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc., was completed in September 2001 and is Attachment 1, accompanying this letter. This study EXHIBIT Ltse taw has been submitted to the Weld County Department of Public Works. It includes recommendations for compliance with the Colorado State Highway Access Code; and it has been used to prepare drawings of a proposed highway access configuration that has been presented to CDOT. B. The Colorado Department of Transportation (COOT) has jurisdiction over all accesses to State Highways. The Applicant shall contact CDOT to verify the access permit or for any additional requirements that may be needed to obtain or upgrade an access permit for the site. Evidence of such approval or access permit shall be submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. Based on the updated traffic study, an access configuration, aligned with the existing Varra/Sand Land access, has been designed and presented to COOT. A set of these drawings accompanies this letter as Attachment 2. Attachment 3 is a letter from Region 4 of CDOT indicating its approval of the design. Because highway improvements must be initiated within one year, and completed 45 days thereafter, after issuance of an access permit, the Applicant is not requesting issuance of a permit at this time; however, the access design is conservative in that it was based on the existing speed limit, along this portion of Hwy 66, of 65 mph, which is likely to be lowered in the future. C. The Applicant shall submit to the Weld County Department of Planning Services a copy of an agreement with the site's mineral owners stipulating that the oil and gas activities have adequately been incorporated into the design of the site or show evidence that adequate attempts have been made to mitigate the concerns of the mineral owners. Attachment 4 to this letter is two years of formal correspondence between the Applicant and his consultant (Banks and Gesso, LLC), the landowner and her representative (McFeeders Realty), and the oil and gas lessee (HS Resources). This correspondence demonstrates a considerable effort by the Applicant and the landowner to execute a Surface Use Agreement among these parties; however, at present, HS Resources (HSR) appears reluctant to execute such an agreement. The attached materials include a Surface Use Agreement and a Memorandum of Surface Use Agreement, which were drafted after considerable negotiation with and input from HSR, and which have both been signed and notarized by the Applicant and the landowner, and which have been in the hands of HSR since September of 2001. Included in Attachment 4 is a letter of December 14, 2000 from Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, attorneys for HS Resources (HSR), to the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board copied to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. This letter includes a Notice of Right to Use Surface of Lands and a request that agency approval of a mining permit be contingent upon the execution of a Surface Use Agreement. The Notice of Right to Use Surface of Lands, which is recorded in Weld County, states that "Notice is hereby provided ... that HSR has an ongoing right to use the surface of lands described above for any use as allowed by the Oil and Gas Leases now or at some future date." The Applicant firmly believes that it has made a good faith effort to work out a Surface Use Agreement among the Applicant, the landowner, and HSR. The effort to finalize such an agreement has been sincere, although the Applicant respectfully asserts that the rights of HS Resources are already defined and protected by private contract - the oil and gas leases and easement agreements which have been executed with the landowner. The Notice of Right to Use Surface of Lands acknowledges, in its own language, that HSR's right to use is "as allowed by the ... Leases". To make permit approval contingent upon execution of an additional contract gives the oil and gas lessee unusual authority over land use, and places the landowner in a diminished position to negotiate, as the oil and gas lessee can negotiate from a position with knowledge that its interests are already protected by contractual agreements. The oil and gas leases referenced by the Notice of Right to Use Surface of Land are included with this letter as Attachment 5. These leases do not authorize the lessee to control other land uses but do provide protection of the lease interests. In these circumstances, the landowner is respectful and knowledgeable of the terms of the lease agreements and understands her responsibility for the actions of the Applicant. Attachment 6 is a letter from the landowners' representative, which states that the interests of the oil and gas lessee have been considered in the mining and reclamation plans, and that the landowner is aware of her responsibilities pursuant to the relevant lease agreements with HS Resources. Because discussion and work with neighboring landowners continues, the Applicant is not yet prepared to schedule a hearing with the Weld County Commissioners. The Applicant believes, however, that the three conditions from the Planning Commission's Resolution to be satisfied before the next hearing can be scheduled, have been satisfied. Please feel free to call me or Norm Roche with Aggregate Industries, Inc. at 303-716- 5218, if you have questions or need more information. We look forward to the Planning Department's response and appreciate your interest and attention to this project. Very TrulyiYours, rd�� ILA Scott Keen Cc: Norm Roche, Aggregate Industries, Inc. —West Central Region Don Jones, McFeeders Realty Attachments • LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1889 York Street Denver,CO 80206 (303)333-1105 FAX (303)333-1107 E-mail: Isc@Iscden.com Web Site: http://www.lscden.com TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. October 2, 2001 Aggregate Industries c/o Mr. Ross Horvath Banks & Gesso, LLC. 720 Kipling Street, Suite 117 Lakewood, CO 80215 Re: Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine Weld County, Colorado (LSC # 011170) Dear Mr. Horvath: We are pleased to submit our report of the traffic impacts of the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand 84 Gravel Mine in Weld County, Colorado. This study first provides a summary of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the proposed site. It then provides estimates of the amount and directional distribution of traffic that will be generated by the proposed operation as well as estimates of existing plus site-generated traffic volumes on the surrounding road system. In light of the 20-year life of the operation, estimates of Year 2021 background and total traffic are also provided. Finally, the impacts of the project's generated traffic are evaluated and recommendations are made regarding roadway improvements. This site is within the juris- diction of Weld County, Colorado and this report has been prepared in accordance with its requirements. The remainder of this report presents our findings concerning the traffic impacts of the proposed development. Site Location and Proposed Use The site is located about ten miles east of the City of Longmont and five miles northeast of the Town of Firestone, Colorado,north of State Highway(SH) 66, east of Weld County Road (WCR) 17 and west of WCR 19. The proposed use for the site is sand and gravel mining. Access to the site is proposed by one full movement intersection onto SH 66. Two access scenarios are proposed for this development. The first scenario is to align the proposed Kurtz Ranch development access opposite a combined Varra Property access and Nix Property access point located south of SH 66.The second scenario is to align the proposed Kurtz Ranch development access with the Varra Property access on the south side of SH 66. Existing Roadway Characteristics Figure 1,enclosed,illustrates the site location relative to the nearby roadway system. Figure 2 illustrates the existing lane geometry and traffic control at the intersections of SH 66/WCR 17 and SH 66/WCR 19. 1)- cAmetnff Mr. Ross Horvath Page 2 October 2, 2001 • SH 66 is currently a two-lane arterial roadway with east/west continuity through Weld County. It is located south of the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine development. According to the Colorado State Highway Access Code, SH 66 is classified as a rural arterial (RA) and is posted with a 65 mph speed limit. • WCR 19 is a paved,two-lane,north/south county road with continuity between 168th Avenue on the south and WCR 34 on the north. WCR 19 is located west of the proposed development. • WCR 17 is a paved, two-lane, north/south county road. It extends from WCR 28 to SH 66,with a second section, offset about one-half mile to the west, extending north from SH 66 to Windsor. WCR 17 is located east of the proposed development. Existing Traffic Figure 3 illustrates existing peak-hour intersection turning movement traffic volumes in the vicinity of the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine at the intersections of SH 66/ WCR 17 and SH 66/WCR 19. These volumes are based on counts conducted by Counter Measures, Inc in August 2001. Actual turning movement and traffic volume count data are enclosed with this letter. Year 2005 and 2021 Background Traffic A 1999 study performed by Felsburg, Holt, and Ullevig (FHU) contained future daily traffic projections for area roadways in the Year 2020. In light of the expected life of the Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine, growth factors for area roadways were extrapolated from the FHU study in order to project future background traffic volumes for the Year 2021. The Year 2005 background volumes on SH 66 were derived by applying a three percent annual growth rate, or a five-year growth factor of 1.13. For the Year 2021 background volumes on SH 66, an annual growth rate of three percent was applied to existing volumes, or a 20-year growth factor of 1.82. Growth rates for WCR 17 and WCR 19 were assumed to be the same as SH 66 due to the fact that Year 2020 volumes projected by FHU were less than present day volumes. Year 2005 background traffic volumes were also determined because this is the year in which the Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine is expected to be at full operation. These growth factors were applied to the existing turning movement volumes to calculate Year 2005 and Year 2021 background volumes. The resulting Year 2005 and Year 2021 back- ground traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. These background traffic volumes are the future traffic volumes on the area roadways without the expected traffic generated by the site and form the basis for evaluating the impacts that traffic generated by the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand&Gravel Mine will have on the surrounding roadway system. Estimated Traffic Generation As directed by the client, the amount of traffic that will be generated by the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine development has been estimated based upon the site-generated Mr. Ross Horvath Page 3 October 2, 2001 traffic from the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Krager and Associates, Inc., 2000. These traffic volumes, listed in Table 1, were assumed because they are conservative. On an average weekday the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 511 daily vehicle-trips, with approximately 255 entering and 255 leaving the site. The 511 vehicle-trips includes haul trucks, employees, service vehicles, and light delivery trucks. Approximately 50 trips are expected to occur during the AM peak-hour, with 40 vehicles entering and ten exiting the site. During the PM peak-hour, approximately 50 trips are expected to occur with ten entering and 40 exiting the site. Also shown in Table 1 are traffic generation rates estimated for the Varra gravel mining operation (obtained from Krager & Associates) and for the Nix mining operation (obtained from the Nix TIA prepared by LSC in May, 2001). Estimated Traffic Distribution and Assignment As directed by the client,the directional distribution was based upon the distribution assumed in the TIA prepared by Krager and Associates, Inc. It is estimated that from the Kurtz Ranch and Varra Property developments, 90 percent will travel west on SH 66 to gain access to Inter- state 25 (I-25) and the remaining ten percent will travel to and from the east to gain access to SH 85. For the Nix Property development,it is estimated that 75 percent will travel west along SH 66 to gain access to I-25 and 25 percent will travel east to gain access to SH 85. Figures 6 and 7 illustrate the directional distributions assumed for Scenarios I and II, respectively. Figures 8 and 9 show the assignment of site-generated traffic onto the existing roadway net- work for the combined Kurtz and Varra Property access and the combined Kurtz, Varra and Nix Property access, respectively. These traffic volumes were obtained by applying the trip distribution percentages of Figures 6 and 7 to the trip generation estimates of Table 1. The total traffic volumes are the combination of background (Figures 4 and 5) and site- generated traffic(Figures 8 and 9). Figures 10 and 11 illustrate Year 2005 total traffic volumes for the combined Kurtz and Varra Property access and the combined Kurtz, Varra and Nix Property access. Figures 12 and 13 illustrate Year 2021 total traffic volumes for the combined Kurtz and Varra Property access and the combined Kurtz, Varra and Nix Property access. Heavy vehicle volumes are indicated for affected movements. Capacity Analyses In order to assess the impacts of the proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel Mine, related capacity analyses have been performed which compare existing and future background traffic operating conditions (Figures 4 and 5) with those reflecting the addition of site-generated traffic (Figures 10, 11, 12, and 13). The methodology used is that presented in the 2000 edition of the nationally accepted Highway Capacity Manual published by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. The concept of Level of Service (LOS) is used as a basis for computing combinations of roadway operating conditions. By definition, six different Levels of Service are used (A, B, C, D, E, and F)with"A"being a relatively free-flow —. condition and "E" representing the "capacity" of a given intersection or traffic movement. Table 2 summarizes the results of our Level of Service (LOS) analyses. Computer printouts containing output from the Synchro 5.0 software are enclosed. `1 Karen and Scott Wilson 8233 Highway 66 Platteville CO 80651 970-785-6199 Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE January 30, 2002 FEB 1 1 2002 Commissioner Glenn Vaad RECEIVED PO Box 758 Greeley CO 80632 RE: Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine, Weld County, Colorado Dear Commissioner Vaad; I would like to bring to your attention to the above mining operation and the negative impact it is creating on property values. The enclosed map clearly shows the proposed mining operations. It does not disclose the property owners and their relative distances from the mining operations. The length of these operations will affect quality of life and property values outwards of 25 years and most likely much longer. I would strongly recommend you reject this proposed mining operations. Sincerely, • Scott Wilson Property Owner Segart r 4 EXHIBIT tat #/3y7 �C _ -. ; -1 .�• -. '~ ,,,=,./'�.,_- . ;,� - 41 t AREA s3 AC. ;r aT AC. `°'" NNG PHASE 11/1"---"2 ) (\..,\\,„_,,� 1 RHINO PHASE 2 Y ,r J 7,iii (- - • -,-- S.41•42'i' i / �.: (r , �"••••••• =7-'-'- -Y'/11 '�- • II r° 5.9 AC. •0610;: r.A.;31?.. ll' .... .`, .•-.."'MINING PHAS£2 /A J iir il "‘-1,I ii ( 't Il �a �y/� J r -a\ ^s�s.G6�l i,! AREA4 J '1 1 i� AM AC. , /- ! r. �./ j; MRtlNfi PHASE 2 /I ,' JJ------z:-___::._______,, i J . •�. y1 / 1 r �, w __•�_•4_� ,, i /:- II ,. r I ii, " ) • U AREA 5 i ,M 29.5 AC. rr ,, ulr •, ``y ii \MINIPIG PHA'aE 2 / )' L� fi II ......__ ____. i II r l -......— u , ' � I r N 1 1/ AREA , l• y r //1 p 204 AC, iY / 11 r� �� MINING PHASE 2 11 Y., / t�i4 fh„ =�� - i9' / jf f, ; - :, //7 ;� - 1. '.-1-\ ,i e7- / l tiJqit `IC i / li iIt t II; at' 0 AC' /,ks / MINING PHASE a \ MINING PHASE Ili • , \\\ a% i,• , �ii / • �17 I G ti ; I )).1) ,. •I Dii/ AREA 2A /0 .f�•�/ / AREA 7R 1 mama MIAMIti 1 ru ,Ii fI / J I,//• 1 AREAL it I'G•� f� MINING PHASE 1 .-•/` �i /, I 1 2D.e AC. 4 • ill 1 Ir ri J ^--.. I i.--.-�. I 1.i J I' Ai h /C rr Nr� � � ..-.� � i 11 � t--- LEGEND — nlrol awwr.>r if —•---•---r e:.m;mrom r\ � WfF awh/VOVIVAI a 2x400 •---us1,t^*UM MINE PLAN MAP I...u!n SCALE 91 FEET I•+200' E OrtP[dD ran ------ — �;Banks and Gesso,Lie AGGREGATE NOUSTRffS,INC KURTZ RANCH rm nr l te,m.Itf SUBSTITUTE SOPPY PLAN r�rr0a,,"CMyy,!!21! Las SCAM taus, 3nM scorn aLlCf 3` a posy 174-.277. U4.C.M.=IMMO ?.ter.:,Car' 98023 I /16(01 I t'-20a — RLK SP _�_ �- / ' A I AREA aJ AG. 1 \ fi]PG -� ,� ININ6 PHASE 1 1 MINING PHASE 3 1 � 11 j%—I i n /CZ:ye �.i / / ) 111A /% o`AREM �w� llI / MINING PHASE 2 /:1 - / / A ~ / il / / MINING PHASE 2 /�21/ � 1 / 1( 4. ,i� 1 I/ t °I 1 I �rp7Th ; j 1 PHASE / I/j �LL/ i/ / ! �� / / AREA 6 r ir n/ NC PH / MINING PHASE] (1 / 141,1 - `\\i )'1 IK i] AREA TC1 MFAeB 20.8 AC. •` /`•,� / MINING PNASEa Y� MINING PHASES r \ • �j) , `I Iq ,y % , y c fi,_ 111 �/1 r 71C/21";,7,` /i ; i`� / DAREA TA ii 10.1A¢ .i 1r A..., AREA Ta \ MINING PHASE1 sdu III 19 MINING �� iii j AREA �g I, r iI MNING PfIA3E1 171. A. b` b 20.8 AC > �F I ,MINING PHASE♦ / I I i I, ^� l — LEGEND --Jr \% Una C 040 0 ---• -- MINE PLAN MAP .Nsotaan SCALE N FEEL _ 00RnEn MIm MN Banks and Gesso,LID AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES.INC KURTZ RANCH ®1 SUBSTIFUTTE SUPPY PLAN Iniy₹ "°' .01.00 aens m.LE � 1 �FEr.. ____.___FO_}_ I 4/16121 I 1' 200� RD( SP 4 J_ MN Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St.,Suite117 ■■ Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303)274-4277 Fax(303) 274-8329 www.banksandgesso.com Transmittal Weld County Planning Department To: Clerk to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners GREELEY OFFICE 915 Tenth Street APR 18 2002 P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 RECEIVED From:Alex Schatz Dec: 17 April 2002 cc: Robert Anderson, Weld County Department of Planning Services Steve Fancher, Loveland Ready Mix Concrete 20023 — Follow-up Re: Deeds of Dedication, Weld County Roads 54 and 13, near Green/Croissant Property Enclosures i- 1. Deed of Dedication, Loveland Ready Mix Concrete, Inc. to Weld County, dated March 20, 2002 2. Deed of Dedication, Leon H. Croissant Family TrustNiola Croissant to Weld Cty., dated February 25, 2002 3. Construction Easement, dated March 15, 2002 (property on north side, WCR 54) Please find the enclosed documents, the first two items of which are presently submitted for the acceptance of the Weld County Board of County Commissioners. The two enclosed original Deeds of Dedication (Items 1 and 2 above) involve grants of rights- of-way for County roads adjacent to the Green/Croissant Sand and Gravel Mine (USR-1329), specifically on County Roads 54 and 13/County Line Road. As part of the Use by Special Review process in 2001, the County noted that its road standards required the expansion of its right-of-way by 10 additional feet where the subject property fronted County roads. Acceptance of the enclosed deeds of dedication by the County Commissioners will accomplish the widening of Weld County right-of-way for the Use by Special Review properties. The third enclosed item is, for the County's reference, a copy of the construction easement for the opposite side of Weld County Road 54, where some encroachment will be necessary for the USR road improvements. No action by Weld County is required on this item. Please contact me at 303/274.4277 if you have any questions regarding this transmittal or the USR-1329 project, with which this originated. Our case planner at Planning Services, Robert Anderson, may also be able to provide clarification, if needed. Thank you for your attention to this matter. [4. EXHIBIT AA U5ie*/3y7 Page 1 of 1 Alex Schatz r From: <Spuds9826@aol.com> To: <Aschatz@banksandgesso.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 5:23 PM Subject: Re: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Alex, Thanks so much for your e-mail. I understand from Bobbie Wilson that you and she are talking about setting up an evening meeting for early May. We are looking forward to meeting with you! As you might well guess, our major concern with Aggregates is the impact on our water. I spoke with Connie Davis from Aggregates at our last neighborhood meeting concerning a monitoring well on Mayer Family Farms and am still eager to pursue that. I our opinion it might be helpful for you to have a list of possible monitoring wells in the area available for the meeting. We certainly believe the neighborhood group and Aggregates can come to some mutual agreement with regard to water issues prior to the Board of County Commissioners hearing. Our desire is to attend the hearing with a mitigation plan in place. Thank you again for your e-mail. We'll see you in early May. Linda and Ritchie Pyeatt g EXHIBIT tfS2 i3y9 4/17/02 Page 1 of 1 Alex Schatz From: "Alex Schatz" <Aschatz@banksandgesso.com> To: <spuds9826@aol.com>; Cc: "Tug Martin" <tmartin@banksandgesso.com> Sent: Tuesday,April 16, 2002 3:55 PM Subject: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Kurtz Ranch Neighbors - I am contacting you firstly to introduce myself, Alex Schatz, as the new project manager for the Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Use by Special Review application. Tug Martin of our office (Banks and Gesso, LLC) has been managing this case in an interim period since the Planning Commission hearing last fall. Tug will continue to be involved in the planning process for the Kurtz Ranch project, but I will be the project manager for the forseeable future, probably up to and beyond the time of the Board of County Commissioners hearing. As you are probably aware working with Tug, we have proceeded slowly with this case, and with the goal of soliciting and incorporating neighborhood input into the proposal. The Use by Special Review case will soon be eligible to be heard by the County Board, but it is our intention to meet with neighborhood representatives prior to scheduling that hearing. This meeting will review, as has already been requested, potential groundwater mitigation strategies, and we are also willing to discuss any other aspect of the planning process or proposed operation that is of concern. It is my understanding that the two recipients to which this email is addressed (the Wilson's and the Pyeatt's) have been appointed in some capacity to act as neighborhood representatives. Do you feel that, as a next step, a meeting of Banks and Gesso, LLC with these two households would be appropriate? It would also be possible to hold a neighborhood open house if, at some point, that would be a better option for soliciting input. In any case, please contact me at this email address, or at 303/274.4277, to let me know how you wish to �- proceed. Our office in Lakewood is available, but if you would like to meet at the site or at a house in the neighborhood, please let me know the arrangements and I will be there. Also let me know if there are any particulars you wish to discuss and I will draft and agenda for our meeting. Your feedback is appreciated. Regards, Alex Schatz BANKS AND GESSO, LLC 303/274.4277 4/17/02 -- ME Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St.,Suite117 ■■ Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 274-4277 Fax (303) 274-8329 www.banksandgesso.com Memo To: Robert Anderson Weld County Planning Department Weld County Planning Services GREELEY OFFICE 1555 N. 17th Avenue APR 18 2002 Greeley, CO 80631 From: Alex Schatz ..../t) RECEIVED Date: 17 April 2002 cc: 98023 (Kurtz) — Agency Correspondence Re: USR-1347, Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel, Adjustment of Board Hearing Date At your request, this memorandum formally notes that the Applicant in Weld County Use by Special Review case 1347, Aggregate Industries, wishes to suspend until a later date scheduling of the USR-1347 case for hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. Recently, the last Condition established for a hearing before the County Board was satisfied, making this case eligible for scheduling. However, instead of the next available hearing date, the Applicant requests additional time to pursue discussions with neighbors of the USR site. The Applicant therefore plans, and reserves the right, to submit for future scheduling of the Board hearing upon written notification to the County. In terms of our discussions with neighbors, you may enter the two attached messages into the case file. A general meeting with neighbors (30 to 35 people according to the neighborhood organizers) is tentatively scheduled for May 2nd at 7:00 p.m. We will notify you of the firm time and place for this meeting when it is arranged, and you may attend at your option. According to neighborhood representatives, groundwater impacts and traffic are their primary concerns, and an important goal of our meeting will be to clarify relevant facts and discuss mitigation measures if appropriate. It should also be noted that the Applicant agreed to prepare a groundwater study, and met with neighbors this winter (December 10, 2001) to present and review the results. It is the hope of both the neighbors, based on representations thus far, and the Applicant that this effort will eventually lead to a reasonable resolution of the groundwater issue. Please call me at 303/274.4277 with any questions. end: Message from Linda and Ritchie Pyeatt, dated April 16, 2002 Message from Alex Schatz (to neighborhood organizers), dated April 16, 2002 (1 EXHIBIT GG siv7 Weld County Planning Department 0 GREELEY OFFICE a ' MEMORANDUM APR 18 2002 RECEIVED O TO: Robert Anderson, Planning DATE: April 16, 2002 • FROM: Drew Scheltinga, P. E., Engineering Manager COLORADO SUBJECT: USR-1347, Kurtz Ranch Sand & Gravel In a memo of July 6, 2001, I requested additional traffic information regarding the access to the site. That information was supplied on January 9, 2002, and is acceptable. At one time there was an effort made to combine accesses to three gravel operations, including the Kurtz Ranch. That effort was not successful. The access to the Kurtz Ranch will be directly from State Highway 66 and there will be no hauling on County roads. The applicant will be required to obtain an access permit from The Colorado Department of Transportation. The traffic studies that have been submitted have r adequate information to obtain the access permit. The Public Works Department has no further issues with this application. PC: USR-1347 Alex Schantz, Banks and Gesso M:\WPFILES\DREW\Planning\usr-1347.wpd EXHIBIT i LlSt°#1397 Robert R. Anderson - Re: Fw: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Page 1 n From: Robert R. Anderson To: "Aschatz@banksandgesso.com".GWIA.CENTDOMAIN Date: 4/23/02 3:06PM Subject: Re: Fw: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Hello Alex, Clerk to the Board schedules hearings based on notification requirements, type of case and , I believe, BCC case load. I have the original file that the Clerk needs. . . . so approximately two (2)to three (3)weekd before your preferred hearing date drop me a letter or email indicating your ready to go and I will forward the file to Clerk to the Board for scheduling. May 2nd is pretty busy but. . .111 try and make it Robert >>> "Alex Schatz" <Aschatz@banksandgesso.com> 04/23/02 12:07PM >>> Robert, Please feel free to attend the Kurtz Ranch neighborhood meeting we are holding on May 2nd. The location information, etc. is below. Also note, as I mentioned in my voice message today, that Aggregate Industries may wish to schedule a Board hearing soon. Just let me know when and how an applicant could schedule a specific date in mid to late June. Regards, Alex Schatz BANKS AND GESSO, LLC 303/274.4277 Original Message From: Spuds9826(Waol.com To: Aschatz(Wbanksandqesso.com Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Re: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Alex, Meeting is set up for May 2 , 7PM at Pyeatts 9826 Hwy 66, Platteville, Co 80651 Telephone 970-785-6203 if you get lost. Yes,we can get you the mailing list. Its on my computer. Looking forward to the meeting. --Linda Pyeatt r"- 4 EXHIBIT E eat #r3417 Robert R. Anderson - Re: Fw: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Page 1 From: Robert R. Anderson To: "Aschatz@banksandgesso.com".GWIA.CENTDOMAIN Date: 4/23/02 3:06PM Subject: Re: Fw: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Hello Alex, Clerk to the Board schedules hearings based on notification requirements, type of case and , I believe, BCC case load. I have the original file that the Clerk needs. . . . so approximately two (2) to three (3)weekd before your preferred hearing date drop me a letter or email indicating your ready to go and I will forward the file to Clerk to the Board for scheduling. May 2nd is pretty busy but. . .I'll try and make it Robert >>> "Alex Schatz" <Aschatz@banksandgesso.com> 04/23/02 12:07PM >>> Robert, Please feel free to attend the Kurtz Ranch neighborhood meeting we are holding on May 2nd. The location information, etc. is below. Also note, as I mentioned in my voice message today, that Aggregate Industries may wish to schedule a Board hearing soon. Just let me know when and how an applicant could schedule a specific date in mid to late June. Regards, Alex Schatz BANKS AND GESSO, LLC 303/274.4277 /"", Original Message From: Spuds9826@aol.com To: Aschatzt7a.banksandoesso.com Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Re: Proposed Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine Alex, Meeting is set up for May 2 , 7PM at Pyeatts 9826 Hwy 66, Platteville, Co 80651 Telephone 970-785-6203 if you get lost. Yes, we can get you the mailing list. It's on my computer. Looking forward to the meeting. --Linda Pyeatt J EXHIBIT EE e *rn7 •II Banks and Gesso, LLC 720 Kipling St.,Suite117 ■■ Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 274-4277 Fax(303)274-8329 www.banksandgesso.com Transmittal To: Robert Anderson, Weld County Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Weld County Planning Department Greeley, CO 8 631 GREELEY OFFICE From:Alex Schatz MAY 1 3 2002 Date: 9 May 2002 C �� g J �y cc: 98023 —Agency Correspondence RE� 1i l,/ Re: Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine, USR-1347, Update Regarding Neighborhood Outreach Enclosures 1. Groundwater Hydrology Report and Modeling Scenarios, Martin and Wood Water Consultants study, dated December 20, 2001 2. Proposed Groundwater Mitigation Strategy and Use by Special Review(USR- 1347) Development Standard, current as of 9 May 2002 Please find the enclosed materials, to be incorporated into the case file for USR-1347, the Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel Mine. These materials are especially useful to understand the process we have undertaken to address neighborhood concerns, particularly with regard to groundwater. Martin and Wood Water Consultants' Groundwater Hydrology Report was produced at the request of neighborhood representatives, well in advance of the requirement that this report be produced prior to plat recording (Planning Commission Recommendation, Condition 3O). This report was submitted to neighbors following an initial neighborhood meeting in December of 2001, and has been available for review for several months. This report examines the possibility of groundwater well impacts in the vicinity of a dewatered Kurtz Sand and Gravel Mine, and errs on the side of demonstrating even slight potential for impacts. The primary concern of neighbors has been a worst-case scenario based on complete, simultaneous dewatering of the Sand Land (Varra) property across Colorado Highway 66 and the Kurtz Phase 4 mining area. This scenario showed potential for drawdown of the water table extending over a mile to the east. At the second neighborhood meeting, held May 2n°, the primary item of discussion was a Groundwater Mitigation Strategy based on recommendations of Martin and Wood to avoid the worst-case scenario and other groundwater impacts in a systematic fashion. The enclosed Groundwater Mitigation Scenario identifies several layers of protection available to wells in the area, and this plan incrementally addresses each potential impact with an equivalent mitigation measure. The plan has been given to neighbors with the understanding that they have a water engineer who may recommend modifications to this plan. 14 EXHIBIT uzetsv7 Kurtz Ranch Sand and Gravel(USR-1347)Groundwater Materials 7 May 2002 Page 2 The details of the enclosed mitigation plan seem to be less at issue than the mechanism by which this plan is incorporated into the USR and made enforceable. We have heard and expect that neighbors will ask for individual, private agreements with Aggregate Industries. This promises to duplicate, if not complicate, the enforcement of the USR. As we have presented to the neighbors, if this mining operation is found to be the cause of significant well impacts, the most reasonable and expedient way to address this problem is with enforcement of a Development Standard under the USR. The enclosed USR Development Standard was proposed at the recent neighborhood meeting, and we seek the County's assistance in reassuring local well owners that the USR process — and the specter of permit revocation — affords substantial protection to neighbors. Similar requirements are also enforced by the Division of Water Resources and the Division of Minerals and Geology. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments in relation to these materials. We would also appreciate notification if letters in support or opposition are filed prior to the Board hearing. As we informed the neighborhood group, we anticipate asking for a mid to late June Board hearing, but we will not be formally requesting this hearing until a later date. Thanks for your assistance. If you need to reach me in regard to this project, my number is 303/274.4277. Ell Banks and Gesso! LLC 720 Kipling St. Suite 117 Lakewood, Colorado 80215 Phone(303)274-4277 Fax (303)274-8329 www.banksandgesso.com Fax To: Norm Roche From: Alex Scha Fax: 303/716.5269 Pages: 6, including this over Phone: 303/716.5218 Date: 9 May 2002 Re: Kurtz Ranch USR CC: 98023—Client Correspondence In anticipation of the mid to late June USR hearing before the Weld County Board of County Commissioners,we need to discuss strategy for the Kurtz project. Attached to this fax is the revised Use by Special Review Development Standard and Groundwater Mitigation Strategy (revisions in italics)that we would propose presenting to the Commissioners. With your review and comments, we would like to forward these materials, including the attached transmittal letter, to Robert Anderson (our Case Planner at Weld County Planning Services)by the end of the week. Below are some considerations for the period between now and the Board hearing: 1. At a minimum, the Neighborhood Meeting provided numerous examples of well impacts already occurring in the area due to drought and other factors. By going ahead with a monitoring program, Aggregate Industries would protect itself from accusations that similar conditions in the future are due to mining. Agreeing to a monitoring program would also be a good faith measure to point to as a result of the meetings with neighbors. 2. The neighbors are adamant about wanting private agreements. I believe we presented a good case why the Use by Special Review Development Standards are the best method to deal with groundwater issues, and we were also clear that private agreements were not favored by Aggregate Industries. If Aggregate Industries wants to do nothing on this issue until the hearing,we have laid the appropriate groundwork. However, signing agreements versus not signing agreements may make the difference between having no neighborhood objectors (maybe even supporters at the Board hearing)versus having a crowd of objectors. Quite realistically, this may make the difference between approval and denial of the Use by Special Review. It is possibly worth reconsidering Aggregate Industries position on agreements, especially considering that the terms of such agreements are theoretically the same monitoring and mitigation measures that would be incorporated into the Use by Special Review. Kurtz Ranch USR Follow-up 9 May 9,2002 Page 2 3. There is probably work in store for Phil Martin. We may particularly want him to model the mitigation measures to show that they would completely remove any impact due to mining. We may also wish to have him attend the hearing, though it is our opinion that detailed engineering discussions at the Board hearing must be limited. 4. The neighbors nearest the proposed mine, Louise and Tracy, have special concerns. They also presented information to us at the neighborhood meeting that indicates their well problems are already occurring due to non-mining factors (e.g. the well was hand excavated over 100 years ago). It is unclear whether mining would amplify their problems, but issues with these potential objectors may go away if Aggregate Industries takes preemptive measures— possibly digging a new, deeper well; placing vegetative screening, etc. In order to keep the follow-up process in motion, please call me at 303/274.4277 when you have had a chance to review these comments. file : 98013 -Avid --ter arA • MARTIN AND WOOD WATER CONSULTANTS.INC. MARTIN AND WOOD WATER CONSULTANTS, INC. 602 NARK POINT DRIVE SUITE 275 GOLDEN, COLORADO 80401 MODELING REPORT AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES KURTZ GRAVEL PIT Prepared for Banks and Gesso, LLC r by Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. 602 Park Point Drive, Suite 275 Golden, Colorado 80401 Phone: (303)526-2600 Fax: (303) 526-2624 December 20, 2001 Job No. 536.1 a Table of Contents Page I. Introduction 1 II. Purpose 1 • M. Scope 2 IV Model Conceptualization 2 V. Simulations 10 VI. Results and Conclusions 13 Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Mine Plan Figure 3 Model Grid Layout Figure 4 Mining Phase 1 Drawdowns Figure 5 Mining Phase 2 Drawdowns Figure 6 Mining Phase 3 Drawdowns Figure 7 Mining Phase 4 Drawdowns Figure 8 Phase 4 and Varra Pit Drawdowns Figure 9 Local Wells L INTRODUCTION This report describes the computer modeling analysis carried out for Banks and Gesso, LLC, pursuant to the October 4, 2001 agreement with Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. The study was carried out for Aggregate Industries in support of their application for a gravel mining permit for the facility known as the Kurtz Pit. This report discusses the overall hydrogeologic regime, the computer model design and construction, the assumptions incorporated and the results of the simulations carried out. IL PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assist Aggregate Industries in assessing the potential impacts on the local ground water system from dry mining that would be carried out at the Kurtz Pit to be located approximately 3-1/2 miles west of Platteville, Colorado and along the St. Vrain river (Figure 1, Vicinity Map). Of concern was the pattern of drawdowns propagated in the alluvial aquifer by the mining activities as they progress through the various mine phases, and the potential for impacts on neighboring water wells in the vicinity of the pit. An additional purpose of the study was to also ircorporate into the simulations the operations of(initially) two adjacent pit facilities: the Varra Pit and the Nix Pit. During the course of this study, however, it became apparent that the owners of the Nix pit had decided to operate that facility with wet mining. Thus, there was no reason to include that pit in these dewatering impact analyses. 1 Martin and Wood Water Consultants,Inc. IIL SCOPE The scope of work for this project included research, data acquisition and analysis, model conceptual design formulation, model layout and construction, initial model calibration to generalized water table conditions in the model domain, simulation runs for the various mining phase configurations, sensitivity analyses, and preparation of this report. In addition, the work carried out for this project included a meeting with local residents to present the initial findings and to discuss ways in which the potential impacts could be addressed. • IV. MODEL CONCEPTUALIZATION The goal of this study, as described above, was to make initial predictions as to ? the potential impacts on the ground water table resulting from the progressive phases of mining to be carried out at the Kurtz Pit. The mining process would involve "dry" mining in which the mined area would be dewatered essentially to 7 i bedrock though a configuration of drains and large pumps. Figure 2, the Kurtz Pit • it Mine Plan, presents the current configuration of the proposed mine phases as 1 1. simulated for this study. To best calculate the effects of these mine phases, and • recognizing that their areal configurations are not simple, nor are the aquifer ii boundary and river configurations, it was concluded that simple analytical methodologies would not be appropriate. Instead, it was decided to construct a 1 's numerical simulation of the aquifer and use that model to run simulations of the effects generated by the mine phase dewatering. The model code chosen was the { ' Modular Three-Dimensional Finite-Difference Ground Water Flow Model created 1 i 2 ] ] Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. 1 t i r in the model domain. Thus, an engineering calculation model does not account for all stresses on the system, which is useful when there are many stresses or when the data sufficiency relative to those stresses is not adequate. For the subject model, the operation of many local wells and the potential existence of other stresses on the system that would be very difficult to define render the choice of an engineering calculation model appropriate. The impacts from mine dewatering can be assessed separate from any local drawdown impacts from well pumping that can vary from day to day and season to season. To create the conceptual model prior to actual model layout and construction, data is needed on such things as aquifer extent and boundaries, aquifer characteristics (depth, transmissivity, ambient water levels [heads], etc.), general flow patterns and any important local stresses that must be included, such as stream systems } which can act as recharge or discharge boundaries. For the subject study, the primary source of data was the recently published report by the United States Geological Survey ("USGS"), entitled "Geohydrology of the Shallow Aquifers in the Fort Lupton-Gilcrest Area, Colorado"; Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA- 746C; by Robson, Heiny and Arnold; 2000. The active model domain includes an area extending from the highlands west of the St. Vrain River to close to Platteville, and from roughly 1-1/2 miles south of Gowanda to three miles north of Gowanda. Within this area, not all of the model is active, as the aquifer is truncated to the west along a line trending southwest to 4 Martin and Wood Water Consultants,Inc northeast, and there is an area of minimal saturation in the south-central portion of the domain of roughly one square mile. The St. Vrain River lies along the eastern edge of the active portion of the model domain, following a meandering path from southwest to northeast. The average gradient on the river is low, which accounts for the meandering nature of the stream channel. The actual aquifer extends beyond the north, south, and east boundaries of the model domain. Figure 3 presents the modeled area along with the model grid and boundary conditions as discussed in more detail below. The model setup involves breaking the active model domain into discreet cells for which data input on all required parameters necessary to operate the simulation • are entered. For this problem, it was decided to use a variable grid of cells in which relatively fine cell sizes were used in the vicinity of the mine and larger cells used further out from the mine area. This increases the model resolution in the area of the stresses and reduces data and memory requirements for areas of the model domain where less resolution is required. Figure 3 details the model grid, indicates the active and inactive portions of the grid, and presents the location of the pit. To simulate the boundary conditions appropriate for this model, several different types of boundaries were utilized. First, the area to the west of the St. Vrain valley is not part of the aquifer system and so was setup in the model as a no-flow boundary. In this area, the cells are inactive and no computations are carried out 5 Martin and Wood Water Consultants,Inc. for these cells. To simulate the aquifer extending beyond the model domain to the east, a set of general head cells were established to simulate the presence of aquifer materials beyond. These cells act as a controlled source of water to the model, much as the actual aquifer in that area can contribute water to real life drawdown stresses occurring in the active model area. At the north and south ends of the model domain, there is similarly a continuance of the aquifer beyond the model boundary. In the model these boundaries are simulated with constant head cells that provide two important functions. First, they assist in establishing an accurate simulation of the water table at the north and south extents of the model domain, and second, they provide water flow into and out of the model to simulate the real life flow of water in the alluvium from the south to the north. Because the area of inactive cells noted in the south-central portion of the model domain does actually contain some aquifer materials of minor saturation, that area needed to be included as a minor part of the larger aquifer. In this case, a limited number of general head cells were distributed along the eastern edge of this area to provide for some flow into or out of the active model area as appropriate pursuant to local head conditions. The aquifer parameters to be input to the model for each cell included initial head (water table), bottom elevation, hydraulic conductivity, and the presence or absence of any type of hydraulic stressor such as a stream cell or dewatering drain. 6 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. The presence of St. Vrain creek adds another special type of boundary to the model that must be carefully set-up to achieve a valid simulation. In the case of typical creeks and rivers in the arid west, it is common practice to include the live channel as well as the main stream alluvial channel of the creek as part of the overall stream system. The interconnection of that set of stream cells with the underlying aquifer is simulated through a representation of the bottom of the alluvial channel that allows flow of water to and from the underlying aquifer depending on the relative head of the live flow and the ambient head in the aquifer at that particular cell. The model requires for each stream cell input, a value for the parameter known as stream conductance. This conductance factor is a composite number made up of the surface area of the stream-alluvium as it traverses the cell, the relative vertical hydraulic conductivity of the bottom of the stream channel, and the thickness of any less conductive layer that may be present at the base of the alluvial channel. In the subject model, the length of the stream channel in each cell was measured from topographic maps, the width was set at 75-feet throughout, and the leakage factor (the ratio of the vertical hydraulic conductivity and the thickness of the lower conductivity layer, or "k/m" ratio) was derived from published values utilized by the State Engineer's Office. These factors were combined for each cell to generate the conductance values used. The conductance values are thus combined factors that can allow for quick relative adjustment through the use of multipliers. This is important in that it is very difficult to derive empirical data on 7 Martin and Wood Water Consultants,Inc the k/m ratio and so being able to simply vary the one conductance value allows one to essentially vary all the composite values over a range of reasonable values. With the overall geometry of the stream within each cell fairly easy to measure, such sensitivity analyses really can be best addressed to the k/m values. Once the basic grid was established, the data input for all cells, and the boundary conditions and stream system defined, the next step was to establish a calibrated steady-state water table that matched the available data from the USGS reports and maps. This was accomplished by setting an initial flat-lying head, adjusting the constant head boundaries to match the incoming and outgoing heads, and adjusting the general head boundaries to approximate the general gradient along these boundaries. The model was then run under steady-state conditions and the resultant head configuration compared to the desired target head configuration. This was repeated with slight adjustments to the boundary head conditions until a suitable and close match was achieved. At this point, the model was considered ready for the predictive simulations. With any modeling exercise, or almost any hydrogeological analysis of any type for that matter, there are any number of assumptions that must be incorporated into the problem definition and set-up. This modeling study is no exception and, while data of very good quality were available for this exercise, a number of important assumptions have been made that could have impacts on the predictive results if such assumptions were proven unreliable. These include the following: 8 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. • It is assumed that the aquifer is generally homogeneous and that the aquifer hydraulic conductivity applied is truly representative of the aquifer on both a wider-scale and more local basis. • It is assumed that the boundary conditions set-up in the model do match the real boundary conditions to an extent that no significant impacts on the predictive results will occur. • It is assumed that the USGS data on ambient heads, aquifer depth, and aquifer extent are reflective of actual conditions. • It is assumed that the drawdown impacts from pumping of existing wells will not impact the net aquifer saturated thickness on anything other than a very local basis and thus their absence in the simulations will not have any significant impact on the predictive results. • It is assumed that the stream-aquifer relationships are consistent throughout the model domain and that this assumption does not impact predictive results. • It is assumed that no other significant stressors exist within the area covered by the model domain that could impact the predictive results. • It is assumed that no significant vertical stratification exists in the aquifer • that could impact drawdown configurations or result in anomalous flow patterns within the aquifer. • It is assumed that the configuration of the aquifer bottom (bedrock surface) is consistent with the USGS mapping and that there are no 9 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. perimeter of these areas was placed simulated drains that would dewater the area central to the perimeter drains. The drains were set at averaged bedrock elevation to facilitate complete dewatering of the interior area. The model, set to run in a steady-state configuration, was then run and the output generated as a contour map of drawdown. For each simulation, the drawdown contours were set to 0.25- feet to provide a finely defined set of contours. As noted above, each successive phase of mining simulated removed the prior dewatered area from the model. In other words, the model does not reflect the lakes that will be allowed to fill after cessation of mining activities in each phase. This is considered to be a conservative aspect of the model in that the lakes are r^ expected in reality to attenuate the drawdowns from successive phases; the extent of such attenuation would depend on the distance from the lake to the current mined area, as well as their respective geometries. • In addition to the four Kurtz Mine phases simulated; a final run was also made that incorporated the Kurtz Phase 4 mined area and the Yarn pit located immediately to the south. Because no data wire available regarding the Varra pit mining plan or phasing of the operations, it was decided to simulate a "worst case" set of conditions and simulate the Varra pit as completely dewatered over • the entire property. This was accomplished by ringing the perimeter of the property with drains and running the model. 11 • Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. 1 Once the predictive simulations were completed, it was necessary to carry out a sensitivity analysis on the model for two primary reasons. First, the sensitivity analyses would aid in determining which aquifer parameter or model input had the greatest impact on the predictive results. This would also assist in identifying any weakness in the data used in the model. Second, the sensitivity analyses would allow for determination of the reasonableness of the assumptions applied in the model. The procedure involves, for one selected parameter at a time, varying the input values over a likely reasonable range and then running the model. The model predictions are then compared to those generated by the originally utilized set of values to see if any significant changes in the drawdown configuration results. For this study, sensitivity analyses were run on aquifer hydraulic conductivity and stream conductance, which involves an inter-related set of r values for stream width, stream head, and stream bottom conductance and configuration. It was found that the model results are fairly insensitive to the aquifer hydraulic conductivity, assumedly because the reasonable range of values expected for materials typical for such aquifers is generally quite high. Thus neither the higher values or the lower values reasonably expected really vary to a great magnitude. Similarly, the stream conductance values exhibited a fairly low sensitivity. One likely explanation for this is the very close proximity of the • stream to the project area, the high transmissivity of the aquifer (this tends to localize the drawdown effects, thus limiting the reach of the river over which M impacts will be felt), and the generally large surface area that the stream covers in 12 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc each cell. This will tend to attenuate the influence of lower kim ratios to a large degree. VL RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The model simulation results for each of the four pit mine phase configurations and the phase four-Varra pit configuration are presented on Figures 4 through 8. In each figure, the drawdown contours reflect the magnitude of the impacts of the dewatering at steady-state conditions. One significant test of any modeling study is an assessment of the qualitative nature of the results in light of the model set-up, boundary conditions and the nature of the stresses applied. In this case, the patterns of drawdowns appear reasonable in each case. The contours exhibit the steep gradient out from the dewatered areas that would be expected for a fairly transmissive aquifer and also exhibit a configuration that appears correct for a dewatered area adjacent to a meandering stream system. The magnitude of the drawdowns and the distance-drawdown patterns are seen to differ significantly from one mine phase to another. This is the direct result of the location of the stream with respect to the mined area location. Thus, mined area four results in the greatest impacts on the local water table. Drawdowns of one- foot are seen at one-mile distances both east and south of the pit. The phase two mined area results in the smallest predicted drawdown impacts, which seems 13 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. reasonable given the proximity of the mined area to the creek and to the abandoned channel cut-off that runs through the north half of the Kurtz pit site. In this case, drawdowns of less than one foot extend out roughly one-half mile to the north-northwest, but essentially no drawdowns are seen to the east and south. Note that on several of the figures the many small areas of unlabeled contours to the south and east of the pit are reflecting contouring computational noise rather than true drawdowns. In these areas, the predicted drawdowns are less than the resolution of the contouring algorithm and such noise is the result. The final simulation run, combining the phase four mined area and the Varna pit as totally dewatered, produces the greatest drawdowns of any scenario and indicates that the greatest effects will be to the south and the east. In this case, 1 drawdowns of up to four-feet are seen at distances of up to a mile from the pit site, and two-foot drawdowns are seen out at almost two miles. The modeling study has shown that the Kurtz pit operations, if operated as simulated in the model, will cause drawdown impacts in the local aquifer. The magnitude of the impacts varies significantly from one mining phase area to another, and will be exacerbated by the operation of the Van-a pit. While combined assessment of the exact impacts from each pit cannot really be accomplished simply through drawdown superposition due to the sloping ambient water table and the attenuating effects of the nearby creek, it can be assumed that } the net effects will approach superpositioning. { 14 Martin and Wood Water Consultants,Inc installation and monitoring to gain background data on the current aquifer conditions, data on neighboring wells in the vicinity that could be impacted, and data on historic and current pumping rates and efficiencies of selected wells that jcould act as baseline against which any reported impacts during pit operations could be compared. In addition, such baseline data could be of great assistance in formulation of any mitigation plans to reduce drawdown impacts if it is later determined that they could be of concern. i i 16 Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc. Figures 3 a ?b` ' f — , i i 4859 c ., 4782 S Well 4885 .. .� Aggregate Industes CAMAS)/Kertz I we .Y .I it Gowanda yarra/ Sand taAd Nix Pit /r a *et • 829 I .mis / ., IJ95 VV. \ t i 41 d i 3 11 / I i ({t'1 1'II'I. warc.ern Gravel urea La,f R N II 4823 lei s z A li . 3t V'rant tick _ e 3 3. r/40100 J:'i tO Scala 1"snot fryy 90,-DmSada 21.11sillit 3N RIss MINA r of des mh...NdS . Via Metz Cara ■■ Banks & Gesso, LLC Vicinity Man .-. IIIIIII 720 Kipling, Suite 117 Lakewood, CO 80215 Figure 1 banksandgesso.com Used with Permission 4/30/01 20075 I }) i� I IVIM maks ASK. MwAgN6ea .....'%, % �� rnFA0 fl/I / i ARF-flk 7C AREAS ..".."1: a. // N-/ �r/i e�vk9RT9 �'� /� T9 I ' ....at, { °,44174.4 e C 4p Mine Plan Detail Provided By Banks and Gesso,LLC 0 1000 2000 illinnIl Scale-Feet (approximate) Banks and Gesso, LLC Aggregate Industries CF- Kurtz Mine Mine Plan 2____ MARTIN AM) Figure2 Wool) Enlini Job No.aq.1 DeanberiJ"el J N R -- N �\ GM 7C j d a y t IIIV ° i g m Cl m I /0a CO 7 ni Ps E-4C ^ m . gg . T ^3 m d d " z i s z � : S III � pIIIIIIII�IIIII1110I1111�p 1.,„„„,,,,,„,i,„,„„.„,„„,,,roolloomoilr,,„,,„„ri ,„111111111111I01111111N10111111 IIIII Ili 1111111IIII I VIII1. i IIII I IIIINI IIII I it A■ 1 IIIIIII IIIINI No i II IIII I I I IIN Ii5Ii. wpn!■ ■■IIIIII IIIIIIIINII 1 111NI I an ''■111111111111111IINIIIIN i 11111NNI1 111 S -MIMIIM■11111 UMW 1 1111111H Hill .ase. .n= •uRPI a ilnil�n°9lllllu!nnlininllnml �� a n m nm 1119 sn s n S p i�"..vn��=_El !ilii i••iHH ip .lei `iu i!"I— Vii:_ a==s=e.s. ...s1l"1".i 13ie::...::ss.:es:1 s" ". "— — nkMeag==;il: ....iiilireeiii vii=-...E'�11i'iiiiriiiiiiiis: It=_ �=�aS.ss...i::ns..s.s.:':ilissleisss......: deli lsis....0E SaE_ �'i eiiiei..... .. 2 a= _===-2: s• - :.=i::..1,ii.r s '1111::,;p isss ''naEl E:se:MI •NE sii9e�i:hsii lli iih s a rara2 o ---..... .... ..s'.c :iiislis ii li:elsii' ;i h ii a ni s.,. i.:l i i h ..i...iiiiili.ili111i ' i ?nninuhi innnrnnlil d1:: IMR linen m nm m _ ! 111111 nMHO OWE : U . d • IIIIIIIIIIIal 1 I 1 E mini I \\ H1HON ) U Rows :" !3 R R RI S S ffi S 0R \\ ! J + 7 , . , . 1 .1 i., i c J NNr. I J ^ N 3 N E 0 -aN c f O c vaV1 e u c a D a u. 1 CO CD Y a cri c co en m Q c m E Z F A s a d d T 4 ; S I I 1� :::IIIIIIIIIII I I HM I I Ilii1; L, '_L 111 I I I I Nf4I[b I II I II' ' I ! of I II lir t$ 1 -- :!IllhIlIIIIIIfflji1flii'i ii i MI n ill 1 M I umil 11 11 MIN I II �e14: iiahiii: ,IP.A iIr ,- ii s'i?iitiler i ..F,,,,a .i r� I � , tP fiil_ , I i ,-7---- �ao� en U i j d 0 6 N 0 3 co C LJ N a C - N N'O r L d 2' g C W = en u. go X L. 0. I en m a c m c 7_, ., 8 4 v ^ � i c475' 5 IC p i a i _1 IIIIIII MAUI I Ir N I ill ill 22IIgI II !Jk` � NIII hIII � 'I�I HHOllllHAL RI III p ! ,...-- / I ll l LtL 111IIfflhiidIHPH J _ mull 1 lip U1 aaiR e C T_ -s:!si!illlll. L. !I ....a" RNA. !.. Ma----n_— —'4-i"'anion i a ulilimplaiiiluuiilri. m Rte--"inin ly u.. .„a ..l"i••suln: •'ue �mi• ii l gun I3N• '=iaell " i•u" �� iric'ii= 9ailiuillii l : :l"s:l l'lOHL nu dullti a: ivy �— aola •:as a s:• t:R :•: as ream us"7• _ E .. a:.: :llil:I::a.... all:iaaes?l ia• llllaul'lul�- Sw: 1 mas girsrm e— ;y in s•lili:iisiirellllii��=iir'sR --�� - _ :ii la:, ia:iii:iaa:lirea• 'r,.lifi.liuu m �. allllil: i.:gl:�•• ii: aielllsili;:lll,ae•a�•= � ::..ii:3i.: silitinelliliisuiiiuei•llr lall� N.N.Ndsm "RIR:IMU RRFM: liC RiR: "DU NI Min nu;Nu I r.rt lulli ii it I I Y 1 I! II lrll 11lill 1111111 I e e m 2 2 2 2 2 2 5: :2 f; 2 2 g, I r 1 I SS 11 C R J C D w 11) 7 m co 12 F. e ta) c 2N a @ C a L N LL 1 7 Y x al c, I m Q c m c Z a kt,— -- 51 e C e 8 ril ill il Ill I I ....:a•-- 1 ' iiiillIIOH ' g ■11_i111 1 Iasi; j IIII' - AI 417 1—I 1 I i I ill Nr - - .. . III fl r" NorioI tp hi f 1101 —ao•m•aml n ■ u• • r Lin r=o...i•iiiCi •E . ss .Nil "•a s° ..E sgss5 g�3,_r_, ra•• e E• neon i:iC SSI.:I.0 JANE ss E��:mai eiEEEEE'siEIEEE, PP r ss g' g�ggeC„• tin R = _ ::e : ' glEar eiailegs. .MC ,o�ag�g a ee—s: e s g s svgsi• ...,�s .. ®;� r—' °s 1 <; ee eeete Ensteldi3.Mi l!i�Whi ' a — SIMISWIMII .3 . E :g::rg:1:•:erp. .- eis�sii - —fr r nmihinir.milin�`I` ilgik + , iii�n ll IlIIBIIII it 1IIIIIll SL N- R "' R R R R S 9 S ffi 2 3 2 0 Si, C 0 0 a :I v c a n c m Wto co 2 Y o .c I a m ¢ c CO 'c 7 ,. 8 ., .aI d d �0 3! s ii _ 7tmounomomompprgqi I 4!_ t-� ill ,u ,; q � ,NIII II - - L Il II � I IIIPI� INI .' IIINNIIIF INiI�gip Liu, sa I i tx EwE x m '" g • �t� e�F..:`:s�: 61C k gik:! iv iss it s:assg33 or ose R= sswim se{a,.s. eisui. #..e IEEE'i a 3"e IF: k s — :#a37 11.11.312%.': 3# :: as a# II= s. --. ?. s: �S s:,.; a eksl e sa�� — 'i,e,;e. ew E sEE ! Pl aim= s=e2�s #lib. s =3: #,ea e.se4e.eeel;. : ' e� s# es as. :#s ognaag: a =a 'U. s �a ans�I .I:s . a a p -- = c..."VI ...s::•ssxia.sea a: ::a..n 3l:ee.nifu :e�e-aaa—aa wig ®® ..... °.�#ass. .11 ssa:sas1•.:::.:: :: a,_ Iniiliee�I#es�ee€e e� �m �``'.�Ee ■ i nom :iitiI1!I GI"Ia�i�ii�I IIIIIIHIIINIllI i . I! II ,� p p �p 111111 iaoN) M a n N m W !� p p p p e �� S t � O Y a A O 0 3 I J E E O w p y 'JO C w w C M a e c m.O IR , mF. c $ Y L v ag CD rn m m a v Z y q m c. ,_^. Ti a g 7 01 l e c a NM IN i it III 1 1 1 a1 � l� i } J L ' �� ,:i _ I INK II I iii I � � ill ' HI I II I 11 I. ; 'II {' i, t if .11 , 'I.11 yy 11 ! I l I " IlI a1 r I g °_ = 1 4,, ILL i I III, I iii` l I I 41 , , t11 1NI a � _ wq .\.. R\ t..\\ . s _ sse1esnieilm Pi: eel 3 • k�� =ate= .r. SIL o �3i?iesiee .m saisees ssl s ssL € eleSe = liieeeer .'tn S E R ;T i fxl e. s MGAISI x�S M�—Bxsi€i a !s i , i..�i�s" i rers.�ns N �:id . e ES.Is:s II ee .... ..:inse iii La Bail:into m. .RiElm. �� _ se MUM ea s esss es 'ski a e^, � 'E s .2".d....ee € .�; z e ierii_E nf au\te i v.xt\e "ilIeiea ee seeaschhHhhia"ih nr Min 1 iA } T� 10 Il fi N III Hlao 1 ��./ n s 22222422232 e r J N ll J a r 6 IS d !� co L C _ _m 3 c co o 0 a $ Y °f to O s cm co z xz " e . ' tl'% ` -i 1 :r i, J e 4 t° „ r y I. k ,A m y A i 1 t r d Y \ i + i `r..'— i ;f°'" // -.I,. ti zit XI t i 8 .i L +i p °`14,*,,,�' 1' * •i jj VC .11 14 A49 . ilL 142 .✓ ;I 1. g , �' P f'• has I CIA �K/JJ - 1C1 _ .-; is: '.A,-`p. --<.) .P L - n r WS J N O e s; ado cs_ Y g, • m G � 1 .. * J" • ti�tl tl x r n1 � .ri2. I PH1HOI‘) Hello