My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE56969
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE56969
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:59:24 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 5:15:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2000016
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/2/2000
Doc Name
MEMO RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OVER OBJECTIONS MOBILE PREMIX CONCRETE INC RIVERBEND
From
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.
/
7
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
<br />If the objector is concerned about the loss of pasture, the Rutes and Regulations do not require the <br />return of an area to the pre-mining land use, a beneficial use is what is required. <br />ISSUED RAISED DURING THE INITIAL PUBLIC COM~l1ENT PERIOD THAT THE <br />DIV/SION BELIEVES ARE NOT WITH/N THE JURISDICTION OF THE DIVISION ND <br />BOARD <br />Mr. Davis raised several issues which the Division does not believe are within its jurisdiction. <br />These issues include: <br />• Additional traffic in the area, the damage that occurs to the roads. <br />• The decrease of property value in the area. <br />• Effects of additional trash due to additional work force. <br />• Safety of the local residents. <br />• The effects the operation will have on air quality. <br />• Increase of noise created by the operation of equipment and the movement of trucks traveling in <br />and out of the operation. <br />The Division also received a letter from W. C. "Chris" Alexander of the Crawford Broadcasting <br />Company. Mr. Alexander was concerned about the possibility of vertical metallic structures at the pit <br />operation interfering with the Broadcasting Company's directional antenna signals. The Division has <br />notified the applicant of this concern but does not believe [hat this problem is within the jurisdiction of <br />the Division or Board. <br />ISSUED RAISED AFTER THE INITIAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD THAT THE DIVISION <br />BELIEVES MAYBE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE DIVISION AND BOARD <br />Mr. Davis submitted a second letter on May 1, 2000 after the Apri125, 2000 Informal Conference. In <br />this letter he added the following comments: <br />I am especially concerned about the loss of my property, due to the increased potential risk of <br />off-site damage. <br />2. Any established trees that are in the 400-foot setback or near to it should be saved. This seems <br />to follow the purpose of one of the requirements of this permit. As it makes no sense to remove <br />standing trees and then replace them with seeding. <br />3. I have concerns on the inlet and outlet of the water for the lake after completion. <br />4. Also I have some concerns with some of the same issues in the 3 page letter from Allen <br />Sorenson dated April 12, 2000 to the Division. <br />Resaonse <br />Potential Risk of Off-Site Damage <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.