PERMFILE47333

• Permit No: M2004067
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 11/21/2005
• Doc Name: Exhibit 206
• From: City of Black Hawk
• To: DMG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

MMRR Quarry, M-2004-067
Response to Sept. 20, 2005 Adequacy Review
October 24, 2005
Page 9
t, In the present case, the commitment provided by the Applicant in this adequacy
review (see Item 22 at Page 5 of the Applicant's September 14, 2005, 3rd
adequacy response) is sufficient to ensure compliance with Rule 6.4.7(5).
City of Black Hawk (Hayes, Phillips, Hoffmann & Carberry, P.C.J - (3) Inadequacy of Lyman Henn
geotechnicar evaluation.
The Applicant's consulting engineer, incorporating comments from the Division's
engineer, developed a plan for the protection of off-site man-made structures
from possible blast vibration damage. The analysis provided by Lyman Henn,
inc., accounted for a variety of built features and included appropriate monitoring
and mitigation measures, as refined during the 3rd adequacy review and
Applicant response of September 16, 2005.
The Applicant has at all times provided complete information with respect to Rule
6.4.4(1). It is not accurate to characterize the details of the blasting plan, blast
vibration analysis, and/or blast mitigation plan as a completeness issue. The
Division's initial review of the blasting program followed general practices and
requested either a "concise" blasting plan or a commitment to gain approval of a
blasting plan through the technical revision process. As part of the extraordinary
consideration given to objectors in this case, the bivision later required the
Applicant to develop the concise blasting plan, and this has been developed in
accordance with standard practices with respect to Rule 6.5(4).
City of Black Hawk (Hayes, Phillips, Hoffmann & Carberry, P.C.) - (4) Notice to property owners.
Construction Materials Rule 1.6.2(1}(e)(ii} requires mailed service of a copy of
the published notice to "the Owners of Record of all land surface within 200 feet
of the affected lands." The Applicant's general compliance with this requirement
and Rule 1.6.6 are discussed under the heading of "Re-publish and re-notice
requirements," immediately below.
With regard to the Silver Dollar Metropolitan District, there is no record in the
public record or otherwise available to the Applicant that the District has any
interest in land surface within 200 feet of the affected area. The City of Black
Hawk has proffered an affidavit that the City purports to establish the District's
ownership of property within 200 feet of the affected land. However, the affidavit
makes no claim of District ownership of the referenced light poles and, on its
face, the affidavit indicates only that the District provided funding to CDOT for the
light poles' installation. This affidavit does not appear to contradict the
Applicant's previous conclusion that light poles in the right-of-way are owned by
either Xcel Energy or the Colorado Department of Transportation, In any event,
. ownership in a light fixture does not constitute an interest in real property and is
not "land surface" for the purposes of notice under Rule 1.6.2(1)(e)(ii).