2017-03-21_PERMIT FILE - M2016085 (4)

Home Browse Search

Peter Hays RECEIVED Environmental Protection Specialist Division of Reclamation, Mining& Safety—State of Colorado MAR 21 2017 1313 Sherman St. Room 215 DIVISION OF RECLAMATION Denver, CO 80203 MINING AND SAFETY Dear Mr. Hays: I am writing with regard to applicatio M-2016-08 orthern Colorado Constructors, Inc. Bennett Pit I I2c. My farm is located directly to the north of the Bennett Pit project. I have the following concerns and objections to the project in its current form: 1. My grass and alfalfa fields lie adjacent to the pit project. They have high groundwater. The land has high yield of grass and alfalfa but, with any significant rise in groundwater(e.g., 6 inches or a foot), areas of these fields would be flooded or saturated within the root zone and therefore not useful for agriculture. It is not clear to me that this issue has been addressed by Colorado Constructors. 2. I have an irrigation well on my property that is regulated by the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District. The well is 30 feet deep, and the distance to alluvial water is about 1'/z feet during summer and about 3 feet during winter. The well is about 70 yards from the property line separating my property from the Bennett Pit project. It is located on a high point of local topography. I am concerned about a change in water level affecting the well. The well is very valuable as a source of irrigation water and yields approximately 1000 gallons per minute. 3. The pit project will cause deflection of floodwaters from the pit area, which is now floodplain,to lower points on the river, particularly those immediately adjacent or near to the Bennett Pit project. I am concerned about increased frequency and severity of flooding on my property as a result of the deflection of floodwaters from the Bennett Pit area. 4. I do not understand why the access of the Bennett Pit project would involve a truck exit to the junction of Roads 23 and 24, where Road 24 ends. This area is already congested; it is far too small to accommodate extensive truck traffic because of the turns that need to be made by the oncoming traffic and the exiting trucks. The exit for this project should be to the south. This type of access to Road 23 is not consistent with the developing residential neighborhood in this area. 5. Batch plant. A batch plant is part of the proposed project. The batch plant is not necessary for removal of gravel. It is an industrial activity superimposed on the gravel removal business. It will increase traffic and make noise and smells. The agricultural nature of this area and its zoning are not consistent with the creation of a batch plant. 6. Setbacks. The map that I have seen of the Bennett Pit project shows virtually no setback from the river edge. A setback should be created for wildlife access to undeveloped areas on either side and avoid excessive restriction of river with or flood. Restriction will increase velocity going downstream, and erode banks on my property. Sincerely yours, William M. Lewis 11446 County Road 23 Fort Lupton, CO 80621 C?