Laserfiche WebLink
~ - ~ _ <br />' Jun-22-99 14e20 -- ------- <br />06/15/1v59 15:21 197026 III'll'll 111 1111 111 a ASS2 races ni P.ol <br />Received <br />aEGE1vED Y T C~~ P.S. JUN 2 2 1999 <br />~~N 25 1999 Miaiaq >i Geotachnical Sngiaeer Durd <br />of M~necals & Geo1o9Y 6rana Junction Colorado 61502 Own o(~ ei~ Geology <br />pryis~o~ Tel ( 970 ) 243-5690 t?a= ( 970 ) 245-9016 <br />B-mail: cobanpefinBworldnet.att.net <br />Juno 14, 1999 D~ c~j <br />Mr. Gsarga Orbanek ever ~`~7 Q~-F <br />Editor sad Publisher ~' <br />Grand Junction Daily sentinel F/~~, ,/C,~ F/~L+ C~.` <br />734 South 7th Street S ,I, ` 9 f ~ COplI <br />Grand Junction, CO 81501 Pe,TF;,soo~ ~zs <br />~~ 9 T <br />Subject: Proposed Soaring Eagle Gravel Pit ~Jo~;~.~ <br />bear Mr. Orbanek: ° r- ~7~ <br />I noted your concerns for upstream wildlife habitat in your <br />editorial last Sunday. Your concerns are certainly valid ones. <br />However, as a former member of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation <br />Board, I wish to advise you that there are laws and regulatinna in <br />place which requize the applicant, in this case Grand Junction <br />pipe, to teke all naeessary steps to minimize lmpacte to the <br />prevailing hydrologic balance, in regard to duality and quantity <br />of both surface end underground waters. These issues are covered <br />in CRS 34-32.5-116(h), kno~m es the Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Act for Construction Materials and Section 3.1.6 of <br />the Construction Materials Rules and Regulations, effective <br />January 1996. Certainly deraterinq an upstream waterfowl habitat <br />would not be considered a minimal impact to the prevailing <br />hydrologic balance. Tf the applicant cannot demonstrate that the <br />proposed operation will so minimize disturbances to the prevailing <br />hydrologic balance, the mining permit will be denied until such <br />time that the applicant hen submitted sn acceptable plan. <br />with respect to the truck traffic oa Broadway, we have <br />resided on Broadway for more [hen 31 yoars. Recalling the traYYic <br />during the "energy boom", we de not consider 55 trucks per day to <br />be the potential baaard that the objectors represent it to be. <br />Particularly so with respect to planned haulage route west of <br />Aighway 340 to yruita. <br />with respect to the project's location, it is in the flood <br />plain of the Colorado River and not within the view shed O! the <br />majority of the nbjectora. <br />the project will provide jobs and tar base for the Socat <br />economy. Those who moat work to earn an honest living deserve <br />bettor than to permit a few afiluerit people to deny them their <br />livelihood. <br />The raeourees of suitable gravel in the Gzanfl Valley era <br />