Laserfiche WebLink
(c) Any part of the proposed mining operation, the reclamation <br />program, or the proposed future use is contrary to the laws or <br />regulations of this article. <br />(g) The proposed reclamation plan does not conform to the <br />requirements of section 34-32.5-116. <br />C.R.S. § 34-32.5-116(4) (2016). <br />41. The Applicant failed to meet its burden to show that the Application <br />meets the minimum requirements of the Act, specifically, the requirement to show <br />the source of the legal right to enter and initiate a mining operation on affected land <br />set forth in section 34-32.5-112(1)(b)(lV), C.R.S. The Application proposed to <br />realign a portion of Little Turkey Creek Road, close the road temporarily during <br />mining operations, and to install crossings of the road. The Applicant's proposed <br />impact on Little Turkey Road may affect the legal rights of the dominant estate <br />owners of the easement on the road. Determination of the legal rights of the <br />easement owners is outside the Board's jurisdiction. However, the Board is <br />required to determine whether the Application shows that the Applicant has <br />obtained from all owners of record a legal right to enter and initiate a mining <br />operation. The Application failed to demonstrate to the satisfaction of members of <br />the Board that the Applicant has obtained from all property owners, including <br />dominant estate owners of the private road easement, a legal right to enter and <br />initiate a mining operation on Little Turkey Creek Road. <br />42. "Affected land" means "the surface of an area within the state where a <br />mining operation is being or will be conducted, which surface is disturbed as a result <br />of an operation," specifically including private ways and roads. C.R.S. § 34-32.5- <br />103(1) (2016). Little Turkey Creek Road constituted "affected land" because of the <br />manner of use, and intended modification, of the road as proposed in the Application. <br />43. Applicant has not demonstrated that it does not need to obtain a legal <br />right of entry from the dominant estate holders. There exists a dispute regarding <br />whether the servient estate holder has authority to grant the Applicant permission <br />to alter Little Turkey Creek Road over the objection of the dominant estate holders. <br />This dispute exists regardless of whether Applicant's proposed modifications and <br />use of the road constitutes an impermissible or unreasonable interference with the <br />dominant estate holders' use of the easement. This is a legal dispute regarding the <br />respective property interests of the dominant and servient estate holders as granted <br />by the easement. The Board does not have jurisdiction to resolve this legal dispute. <br />Without resolution of this issue, however, Applicant cannot meet its burden to <br />Transit Mix Concrete Co. <br />Hitch Rack Ranch Quarry/M-2016-010 <br />