Laserfiche WebLink
Ducray Pit#2 <br /> Page 3 of 8 <br /> be built to mitigate the additional storm water runoff created by the mining activity. <br /> Partial and/or inadequate storm water retention control is not acceptable for this <br /> site for the long term. <br /> Modifications were made to an existing public road (22 Y2 Road) that was affected <br /> by the mining. Asphalt millings were applied to the road before and after mining. <br /> Work performed by Martinez Western Constructors on the existing public road (22 <br /> Y2 Road) was not permitted as required by both Mesa County and the City of Grand <br /> Junction.The road needs to be included in the permit boundary as 22 Ya Road was <br /> affected by the mining, 22 Y2 Road was the haul road for the mining,and 22 Y2 Road <br /> was modified by Martinez Western Constructors as a part of the mining. <br /> The application has not adequately evaluated the potential failure of the septic <br /> system leach field. The leach field is within 10 feet of the excavation according to a <br /> Division inspection of April 20, 2018. It appears the alternate leach field site for this <br /> septic system has been mined over. <br /> The application map (C-2) Pre-disturbance does not accurately show the conditions <br /> before the mining. The map is a 2015 map. All maps in the application are <br /> inaccurate in depicting the area impacted by extraction, and in depicting the <br /> conditions of the site just before and just after the mining (See attached map <br /> (Exhibit E Reclamation Plan) from application with comments and see the three (3) <br /> attachment air photos. <br /> Robert L. Duran, E. I. of Kramer and Associates, Inc. conducted a geotechnical review <br /> with a date of June 10, 2019. It stated,"The 'Mary Ann Sink Trust Fence' is <br /> approximately adjacent to the west edge of the northern ' Newly Affected Lands' <br /> area at its closest point". This statement is inaccurate. The applicant did encroach <br /> onto the Mary Ann Sink Trust property,did cause slope sliding,and did cause fence <br /> damage. The geotechnical review did not identify these impacts. These impacts <br /> need to be included in the application and addressed for resolution. The Kramer <br /> and Associates geotechnical review is clearly inadequate. The review also referred <br /> to an"attached Figure 1 - Exhibit E - Mining Plan 1 (aka Figurel)"which is one of <br /> the 2015 maps in the application that are "inaccurate in depicting the area impacted <br /> by extraction and in depicting the conditions of the site just after mining" as <br /> described in the paragraph above. <br /> The application does not identify or address impacts to the two-recorded <br /> permanent easements that were mined over. Backfill will be needed to reclaim the <br /> roadway easement to its original condition and to mitigate the trespass and lack of <br /> adherence to setbacks for the Mary Ann Sink Trust property. The application does <br /> not identify recorded permanent easements for the Xcel overhead power lines and <br /> for the public road (22 Y2 Road). <br />