PERMFILE41531 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'r 1 BEFORE THE MINED LAND RECLA~MAT[ON BOARD STATE OF COLORADO LVDL`;GS CF :ACT, CD~VCLliSID~VS OF L-t lI; BIND CRDER IN THE MATTER OF THE 112 PERMIT APPLICATION OF MOBILE PREMIX CONCRETE, INC. FOR THE RIVERBEND PIT, FILE NO. M-2000-016. THIS MATTER came before the Board as an application by Mobile Premix Concrete, Inc. for a construction materials permit, pursuant to 34-32.5-1 l2. Pam Acre and Duane Bolig of Tuttle Appelgate, Inc., appeared on behalf of Mobile Premix. Only one objector, John Davis, appeared. Gregg Squire appeared on behalf of the Division of Minerals and Geology, testifying in the capacity of staff to the Board. The Board, having considered the application and testimony, having been otherwise fully informed in [he premises, finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Division found Mobile Premix's application for a construction materials permit application complete and filed on February 7, 2000. The proposed permit area is located approximately three miles north of Brighton, Weld County, Colorado, along the Sottth Platte River. Mobile Premix proposes a 237 acre permit area, affecting 120 acres of ]and for the purpose of mining sand and gravel. Mobile is proposing aten-year mine life, with a proposed postmine land use of 2 water impoundments. 2. The Division has received timely objections from Mr. John C. Davis of Fort Lupton, Crawford Broadcasting Company of Denver and Mr. William P. Ocher of Fort Lupton. 3. On June 2, 2000, the Division recommended approval of the application, over the objections. 4. On June 13, 2000, the Board's designated prehearing officer conducted a prehearing conference. Of the objectors, only John C. Davis appeared. The prehearing officer proposed a prehearing order, which was adopted, establishing the following issues for [his proceeding: a) The effect of the proposed operation on Mr. Davis' irrigation and domestic water wells. b) Concern that the site will be used for water storage with the ability to create stagnant water. c) Flood control down river from the proposed operation. d) Effects from the aggregate removal on the course of the river. e) Methods of how the area will be reclaimed. `' 5. At the hearing, Mr. Davis withdrew his objection, declaring that his concerns have been addressed. He commented that he was concerned about how the proposed operation would affect the stability of the South Platte River bank. He commented that the applicant and the Division have satisfied him that his concern will be addressed by a condition on the permit.