My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE59102
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE59102
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:01:25 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 6:08:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
11/3/2005
Doc Name
Further comments on adequacy review answers
From
Petrock & Fendel P.C.
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
any cleazer on this issue. <br />Applicant's contention that the express language of CMR 1.4.1(5)(d) only applies to section <br />110 permits, notwithstanding the fact that CMR 1.4.5 provides that it applies to the 112 reclamation <br />permit process, defies logic. <br />In conclusion, until such time as the Applicant has applied for the appropriate special use <br />permit approval, the application in this matter cannot be considered complete pursuant to CMR <br />1.4.5(2)(b)(II). Further, in addition to special use approval, there are a number of other County <br />permits required before this mining operation could proceed -including grading permits for road <br />construction and sanitation permit(s) for human waste disposal facilities. None of these permits have <br />been applied for to date. <br />The County requests that the permit application be denied by reason of Applicant's failure to <br />apply for necessary local government approval as is cleazly mandated by the CMR.' Thus, the <br />Application is both incomplete and procedurally deficient. <br />Thank you for your consideration of these requests. <br />Very truly yours, <br />;L, P.C. <br /> <br />JJP/SMH <br />cc: Jeannie Nicholson- Chairman, Board of County Commissioners <br />Roger Baker, Gilpin County Manager <br />Tony Peterson, Director Community Development <br />1 It is not the County's position that such approval(s) must be granted as a condition of approval of a section 1 l2 <br />permit. CMR 1.4.1(5)(d) requires only that the Applicant apply for necessary approval from the County. Applicant <br />has applied for the required State Highway 119 access permit, but has not applied for other required permits. As will <br />become evident at the hearing in this matter, the landowner-applicant does not recognize local government (Gilpin <br />County in particular) as having legal jurisdiction over him or his property, for any purpose. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.