Laserfiche WebLink
MBSS <br /> THOMAS H SHIPPS <br /> SAM$4.MAYNF% MAYNES,BRADFORD,SHIPPS&SHEML LLP SHFRRI D.MAN <br /> AI)A-%t T RFFYFS ATTORNEYS AT UW DAVID C CRIPF <br /> t J%AIJM. 1 TAKFUCHI A+%r 14 L% <br /> (IIAk1X_%( SPF.N(F+ DANIF,i F MCCARI <br /> S)IAY I DFNNING++ W 4 9N WN" <br /> PATRICIAA ILA1.14 <br /> �Alw,AkWu'd M An..x "W N-01 NAN", JANI(.F( SHFFTFI RFTIRFD <br /> +Al—AJwk=. MAN.LN han)vt)omaµ J(H N HARLOW SPEAR•RFTIRF:D <br /> ++A).,Adms,ed in New%U,"'\, UM)N BRADFORD(19W-I911S) <br /> FRANK F (SA.S(►MAYW%(1933.2004) <br /> TRANSMITTED E-mail <br /> April 18,2021 <br /> Lucas West RECEIVED <br /> Division of Reclamation,Mining and Safety <br /> 101 S.3rd St.Suite 301 APB 10) 2021 <br /> Grand junction,Colorado 81501 <br /> Via email: lucas.west@state.co.us DMSION OF RECLAMATION <br /> IMNING AND SAFETY <br /> Comments,Objection and Request for Hearing Re: Toner Ranch Pit,File No.M-2021-011 <br /> Dear Mr.West: <br /> On behalf of,RMR Real Estate Limited Partnership LLLP("RMR") and pursuant to Rule <br /> 1.17, please consider the following Comments, Objection and Request for a Hearing. RMR <br /> owns the property directly south of the proposed pit location in this matter. RMR's irrigation <br /> ditch-the first of the three ditches identified in Exhibit B of the pit application-conveys water <br /> across the Toner property where the pit is to be Iocated,from north to south,to RMR's property. <br /> RMR owns water rights in the ditch, and the ditch has served their property for fifty years. <br /> Although the Parties have been diligently working to finalize a structure agreement pursuant to <br /> Rule 6.4.19 to allow this project to proceed without injury to Rh% such agreement has not yet <br /> been finalized and this Objection and Request for Hearing is filed in an abundance of caution. <br /> It is clear from our review of the pending application documents that Crossfire lacks the <br /> requisite property rights to construct the project as planned. In particular, Crossfire's plan to <br /> construct a 25-foot-wide gravel access road across our clients' irrigation ditch is categorically <br /> prohibited as a matter of Colorado law. It well-established in Colorado that a landowner may <br /> not unilaterally alter an irrigation ditch on its property - for example, by constructing a road <br /> over or culverting or piping the ditch - in the absence of either: (1) a judicial declaration that <br /> that the proposed alteration would not infringe on the rights of easement holders in the ditch, <br /> including their rights to access,operate,maintain,repair and improve the ditch,as well as their <br /> rights to receive water of the same quantity, quality and timing as historically delivered by the <br /> ditch,or(2) an express agreement under which all ditch owners consent to the ditch alteration. <br /> Colorado law strictly prohibits a landowner from unilaterally altering a ditch in the absence of <br /> %%$%9 HL ILI)ING (A ARANTY HANK M,11 DING <br /> II35 FAST SECOND AWNL F.M 1(F 124 1441%h NT".NrR Sl R:ET.SUITE 410 <br /> DURAN(Al,(AWORAIX)Rli()l DFNVER,COLORAIX)&1202 <br /> (974))2+7.17SS (720)"4)301.FA(�INII F <br />