My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-06-28_REVISION - M1982112
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1982112
>
2024-06-28_REVISION - M1982112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2024 8:44:24 AM
Creation date
7/1/2024 8:42:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982112
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/28/2024
Doc Name
Request for Technical Revision
From
Mark Heifner
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR6
Email Name
JR2
AME
EL1
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.
/
22
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
floodplain. That amendment was approved,but the mining never got started in the amendment area <br /> because the new landowner who acquired the land from Rick Hunt did not want that area to be mined <br /> and Schmidt wanted to finish all the mining in the original permit before starting on the amendment <br /> land. The landowner wanted to use that area as crop land possibly for their Hemp farming that began <br /> on the west side of Running Creek shortly after they acquired the land. So Schmidt sought a release <br /> for the amended land which brought the permit footprint back to what it was when Rick Hunt was the <br /> owner and operator and Schmidt was simply a contractor who did the mining. However, now Schmidt <br /> is the operator as a result of a succession of operator approval, and not just a contractor. The <br /> landowner at that time was not particular about what the final land use was because they apparently <br /> were in the process of finding someone to purchase the land which turned out to be Lakeport. Now <br /> Lakeport's final use for the land will be for the Community Amenity facility which has not been <br /> planned yet. And that facility is to complement the residential areas that are on higher ground and <br /> mostly outside the Miller Pit permit boundary. <br /> The point of all of this is to present all of the passing of this land from party to party ever since Rick <br /> Hunt's death. Nobody really knew what they were going to use it for but just allowed the gravel <br /> mining to proceed. No land use change in the Reclamation Permit was requested because nobody <br /> knew what to change it to. So, it remained Rangeland until now. But even now its exact final use is <br /> still not clearly defined. <br /> It therefore seems reasonable that amending the permit at this time may be premature as no actual <br /> work has begun to develop the site. Economic conditions or other factors could change the trajectory <br /> of the use of this land once again and if the final land use in the permit is changed to residential <br /> development and that does not happen yet another amendment would be needed to change it to <br /> something else. It seems that there is a good argument for leaving the final land use as rangeland <br /> simply because that is clearly the most flexible land use of all of those listed in the law. One must note <br /> that in all of the years since Rick Hunt passed away nobody had a definite use for this land. Rick <br /> wanted to grow alfalfa to mix with grass to feed his cattle on another location than this one. He chose <br /> Rangeland because it was the most flexible of all the land uses. Nobody since then has ever had any <br /> plans to graze cattle on this land. They couldn't even decide what they would like planted on their <br /> Page 3 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.