My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE50959
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE50959
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:55:16 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 2:42:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999029
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/2/1999
Doc Name
WRITTEN CLARIFICATION OF OUR 6-1-99 TELEPHONE CONVERSATION CONCERNING THE BOB TERRILL CLAY PIT 110 2
From
LOGAN CNTY DEPT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
To
DMG
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.
/
2
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
~IUN- ~-09 WE 10 10 AM IOGAN~,COMMISSONERS FAX N0, .1 ~ 522 4018 P, 1 <br />_~ <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />LOGAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT <br />OF PLANNING AND ZONING <br />LOGIIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE <br />STERLING, COLORADO 80751 <br />June 2, 1999 <br />(3031 522.7899 <br />Ms. Erica Crosby <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />Colorado Department of Natural Resources <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80751 <br />RE: Written clarification of our June 1, 1999 3:45 P.M. telephone conversation <br />concerning the Bob Terrill Clay Pit -Limited Impact - 110(2) Application Review File <br />No. M-99-029 <br />Dear Ms. Crosby: <br />The purpose of this letter is to respond to your concern's.from today's phone conversa- <br />tion point by point. The first was the 3 to 1 slope issue. <br />When I indicated that Logan County would follow Dawn Jackson's recommendations <br />that were included with my last letter, I was responding to the top soil depth issue and <br />did not realize her recommendations indicated a 2 to 1 slope. When I clarified this with <br />Ms. Jackson, she indicated that a 2 to 1 slope was a minimum and that a 3 to 1 slope <br />was better. Therefore, Logan County will provide a 3 to 1 slope as part of the <br />reclamation plan as shown in our reclamation plan map. <br />The second concern is the public road (State Highway 61) issue. As I indicated in my <br />last letter, this is a valid concern if we were mining north to south. However, since the <br />mining as shown on our mining plan is south to north there will be no disturbance of the <br />land between Highway 61 and our pit except for some remaining clay at depths of no <br />more than ten feet. I apologize for not catching my statement in the letter that we <br />would be at least 200 feet. This was a typographical error. I intended to type 100 feet <br />and hit the #two on the word processor. After discussing this with Bob Terrill, our <br />Landfill Supervisor, and that the cottonwood trees are 150' from the southern boundary <br />of the site, the 150' is reasonable because this would help insure that the trees would <br />not be damaged. Logan County can commit to 150' distance from the southern <br />boundary. <br />I feel it is reasonable to be allowed to mine within the 200' area considering the original <br />pit was dug to build State Highway 61 and for the past fifty years has not affected this <br />Public Road in anyway and that we will not be digging any deeper than ten feet. Also, <br />the State Highway Department was sent a referral concerning the April 13, 1999 <br />Special Use Public Hearing with a map and did not respond. This indicates that they <br />had no concerns. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.