Laserfiche WebLink
RESPONSE: Newmont will be submitting a rezoning application to rezone the <br /> CCMOD boundary in the vicinity of Poverty Gulch as well as a Mine Development Plan <br /> application and is working closely with the Teller County Planning Department on <br /> ensuring the necessary land surveys are completed. Septic Vault#T-5839 is current and <br /> Exhibit M has been updated to reflect its status. <br /> CITY OF CRIPPLE CREEK <br /> E. The Division received objections from the City of Cripple Creek on March 29, 2016 <br /> outlining nine issues the city has with AM-11. Exhibit M (Vol. I) indicates the only City of <br /> Cripple Creek permit(Memorandum of Understanding) is current. Pursuant to Rule 6.4.13, <br /> please explain this apparent discrepancy and what is being done with the City of Cripple <br /> Creek to address their comments. <br /> RESPONSE:Newmont has had several meetings with the City of Cripple Creek to <br /> address its comments. In addition, Newmont has responded in writing to the City <br /> addressing each of the comments contained in the City's March 20, 2016 letter to the <br /> DRMS. The majority of comments received by the City of Cripple Creek will be <br /> addressed by the information that will be submitted with the Teller County Mine <br /> Development Plan application and the CCMOD Rezoning Application, both of which <br /> will be submitted in mid-October. None of the activities proposed by Amendment 11 <br /> reside within the city limits of Cripple Creek so we are confused by DRMS's comments <br /> regarding Exhibit M and its reference to 6.4.13. The Memorandum of Understanding is <br /> an agreement between CC&V and the City of Cripple Creek that was negotiated as part <br /> of Amendment 10. It is not a permit or a license and if DRMS would prefer we remove <br /> reference to the MOU on Exhibit M, we are happy to do so. <br /> MARY JANE FOLEY <br /> F. The Division received comments from Mary Jane Foley on February 2, 2016 seeking <br /> assurance that her lots in Cripple Creek will be "left untouched by heavy machinery,water <br /> and other kinds of harmful items that could go through my property". As specific property <br /> owners are not identified on Exhibit C maps,the Division is unable to determine if Ms. <br /> Foley's property is adjacent to the expanded area. How is CC&V addressing this concern? <br /> RESPONSE: The Newmont Lands department has reached out to the property owner to <br /> discuss the issues raised in her February 2, 2016 letter. After several attempts, contact <br /> was finally made with the property owner who was assured that no disturbance to her <br /> property was planned as part of the permit amendment nor would any disturbance to her <br /> land occur without her express and written permission. Ms. Foley seemed satisfied with <br /> this exchange of information. <br /> STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE <br /> G. The Division received comments from the SHPO on January 19, 2016 (AM-11)and again <br /> on March 9,2016. The January letter expressed concern over the affects that this proposed <br /> expanded permit area will have on historic properties located within the project area. The <br /> March letter stated"This boundary revision does not involve any sites that are listed or <br /> eligible for listing on the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties". The Division has <br /> confirmed with the SHPO that amended Amendment 11 information was sufficient to <br /> address their concerns. Please confirm you are continuing to coordinate planned mining <br /> activities that might impact historic structures with the State Historic Preservation Office. <br /> Page 4 of 14 <br />