My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2022-07-18_PERMIT FILE - M2022018
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2022018
>
2022-07-18_PERMIT FILE - M2022018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2025 6:18:01 AM
Creation date
7/18/2022 12:53:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2022018
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
7/18/2022
Doc Name
Objection Acknowledgement/Response
From
Wasteline, Inc / South Hindsdale Sand & Gravel LLC
To
DRMS
Email Name
LJW
THM
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
South Hinsdale Response to Objections ; <br /> 12 July 2022 \/ <br /> Response: Section 5.8 <br /> (5) interference with wildlife mitigations <br /> Response: Section 5.6 <br /> (6) general safety <br /> Response: (The comment is too general to allow a specific response.) <br /> (7) Piedra road most traveled, various vehicles and poor condition, danger from gravel <br /> trucks <br /> Response: Section 5.3 <br /> (8) inadequate time offered to do due diligence and lack of newspaper support <br /> Response: Section 5.10 <br /> (9) summer traffic study <br /> Response: Section 5.10 <br /> (10)truck noise, dust, dangerous on narrow roads <br /> Response: Section 5.3, Section 5.7, and Section 5.8 <br /> (11) dangers to school buses and other road safety issues. <br /> Response: Section 5.3 <br /> (12) home values - assume on Piedra Road, not site <br /> Response: Section 5.9 <br /> (13) impact on wildlife—assume on Piedra Road, not site <br /> Response: Section 5.6 <br /> (14) Runoff, fish and wildlife and plant impacts <br /> Response: Section 5.6 <br /> (15) Land use compatibility - recreational <br /> Response: Section 5.1 <br /> (16) request for delay for due diligence <br /> Response: Section 5.10 <br /> (17) no direct access to Lake City <br /> Response: we all recognize the difficulties of Hinsdale County and the impacts on the <br /> South End because of lack of direct connections by road. The Hinsdale BOCC does work <br /> hard to among other things hold periodic meetings in the South End and does not <br /> discourage participation by persons who are not residents or landowners in Hinsdale <br /> County by web or phone. They also coordinate with Archuleta County on many matters. <br /> (18) impact 100% on Archuleta County and Pagosa Springs <br /> Response: Erroneous. This is overstating all impacts. positive or negative. Hinsdale <br /> County's South End(and therefore the entire county's residents, taxpayers, and agencies) <br /> will be impacted more than proportionately to Archuleta County and Pagosa Springs. This <br /> impact will be both positive and negative, and the positive benefits (discussed elsewhere) <br /> 5182-22-003 WASThLINE, INC. Page 23 of 107 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.