|
Rationale for Recommendation to Approve 26
<br /> September 29, 2016
<br /> In these proceedings, the Division's jurisdiction is limited to enforcement of the specific requirements of
<br /> the Act and Rules. The Division considers all timely submitted comments in its review, but can address
<br /> only the issues that directly relate to the specific requirements of an application, as stated in the Act and
<br /> Rules. The Act and Rules do not address impacts to property values, quality of life, or maintenance of
<br /> visually appealing landscapes. Such concerns relate to land use and zoning and should be directed to the
<br /> El Paso County permitting process.
<br /> 21. Concerns regarding the concentration of mining operations in the area (already four existing
<br /> quarries within five mile radius; three existing quarries within eight mile radius; existing quarries
<br /> operating at half capacity,so should expand existing quarries rather than open new quarry; other local
<br /> companies say they can match demand without need for additional quarries; Transit Mix could use
<br /> existing train line to transport any needed materials from existing quarry into Canon City)
<br /> (S.Harper,K.Rawson, C.Burnell,M.McClurg,S.Firks, W.Baker,M.Baker, W.Sheaves,A.Sheaves,A.Sickels,P.Hencock,L.Pecoraro,
<br /> M. Yugovich,D. Yugovich,S.Fentman,J. Townsend,S.Bell,B. Chisnell,R.Eddy, W.Flaharry,J.Rigdon,K.Rigdon, T. Offutt,S.Diggs, W.
<br /> Diggs,L.Steer,B.Donahue, H.Sandler,D.Harrell,B.Lotizon,L.Louzon, G. Cousineatt, C. Cousineau,P.Ragan, C.Ragan,S.Ranson,J.
<br /> Flaharty, G.Klein,B.Powell, D.Martin, L. Martin, T. Hight, T. Sivonger, C Watkins, P. Watkins, C Hancock, D.Hancock, G.McCovven,
<br /> J.Moore,K. Moore,S.Sovaiko,R. Whitehead,J. Whitehead,J.McFarlane,J. Gard, D. Gard, T. Day,M Harper,R.Eddy Jr., W.Dean,M.
<br /> Heer, C Heer, Joe Koscove, S. Koscove, Jack Koscove, M Koscove, L. Rogers, J. Miller, K. Troutt, J. Salazar Jr., M. Hodges, Raven
<br /> Rudduck, E. Bransby, S. Boehr, R. Blair, D. Larrabee, R. Hassell, R. Welch, S. Samson, V. Wekamp, D. Wekanip, Brian Gardiner, Betty
<br /> Gardiner,J.Day, G.Sovaiko,M.Lihs,B.Delgado,M.Spoor)
<br /> The Act and Rules do not prohibit the concentration of mining operations and their cumulative impacts.
<br /> Conversely,the Act and Rules anticipate mining operations will locate wherever mineable resources exist.
<br /> The Act and Rules provide reclamation requirements to ensure affected lands are reclaimed to a beneficial
<br /> use. The Act and Rules provide performance standards and environmental protection requirements,which
<br /> apply throughout the life of mine. Pursuant to Rule 1.4.1(10), each application is reviewed, and ultimately
<br /> approved or denied, based on the Applicant's ability to demonstrate the application meets the minimum
<br /> requirements of the Act and Rules.
<br /> This concerns relate to land use and zoning and should be directed to the El Paso County permitting
<br /> process.
<br /> 22. Concerns regarding adequacy of proposed reclamation plan (revegetation plan not adequate;
<br /> need weed management plan; leaving steep highwalls is dangerous; will not return site to pre-existing
<br /> environment; orientation far outweighs effects of soil types in consideration of revegetation; pre-
<br /> mining forest will not be available to wildlife in 50-80 years as application states — will take much
<br /> longer; removing and replacing topsoil makes recovery time extremely long;how get seral stages when
<br /> plant Douglas Fir trees directly after grasses; bare blasted highwalls not aesthetically pleasing—need
<br /> to reclaim; reclamation plan may not be sufficient to protect and reclaim existing plant communities
<br /> and conservation values on property; cannot return location to anything which resembles or functions
<br /> as it does now in its natural state; will lose natural hillside slopes which hold soil, grasses and trees—
<br /> to be replaced by highwall benches; while reclamation is goal— may not be possible to `put humpty
<br /> dumpty back together again" after 50 years of abuse and depletion - and then what; successful re-
<br /> cultivation of destroyed biome physically unlikely and economically infeasible; standard plan of
<br /> replacing topsoil, "native"grasses, and mix of trees is not reclamation but a mutation of what was
<br /> destroyed)
<br /> (J.Enderson,E.Jessup, C Reed,N.Reed, W.Dean, G.Klein,M Heer, C Heer,A.Fellows, T.Fellows,S.Mulliken)
<br /> s
<br /> 1313 S-i- nian Scree" Pooh 215. D�:,)ver, CO 80203 P 303.?r6.3567 F 303.832.8106 ht p:/•'n1u1111a,5C,�*e.co.uS ti�� = 90
<br /> N . R��l d(,, EXlCUtll'D' -CCQf" 11,�iI��3 3f n17(r }"PCC01
<br /> *1
<br /> \ 18�
<br />
|