Laserfiche WebLink
.. .. ~~ <br />Mr. Lloyd V. Barnhart - 3 - April 8, 1986 <br />Exhibit E - Reclamation Plan <br />1. Please try to more closely define your commitment to a more sinuous <br />shoreline. This needs to be a firm commitment, given the proposed and end <br />land use. <br />2. Any trees within the undisturbed setback from the river should add to <br />the proposed end land use. It is vital that the operator affirm that this <br />X will be an undisturbed setback (in those areas not already disturbed) such <br />that replanting of trees will not need to occur in this area. <br />3. Given the end land use, why have not trees and shrubs been considered <br />~/ for planting along the west and north perimeters of the proposed lake? The <br />$.C.$. can be helpful in providing suggestions for such plantings. <br />Exhibit F - Reclamation Plan Map <br />1. As I mentioned above, the permit area must include all areas disturbed <br />as a result of this mining operation (including diversions, discharge points <br />1, and presently disturbed setback areas requiring reclamation), and this map <br />/X\ must reflect any additions to the acreage made as a result of responses to <br />this letter. <br />2. To what areas do the notations of "50' setback" refer? As I mentioned, <br />\ /even a 100' undisturbed setback from the Arkansas River will probably not be <br />,/~ sufficient given the history of the 110 operation on this site. <br />Exhibit G - Water Information <br />1. I have sent a copy of your application with a request for comments to <br />xthe Colorado Division of Water Resources. As soon as I receive their <br />comments, I will pass them on to you. <br />2. The diversion of the arroyo which presently bisects the 112 permit area <br />needs to be discussed in more detail. Several questions need to be considered: <br />a. What is the capacity of the abandoned Booth Canal (both concerning <br />size and construction) to handle flood flows during operation and <br />final reclamation? The expected flows during operation should be <br />S,r;P• discussed and its capacity to handle maximum flood conditions after <br />/-' final reclamation should be verified. This is true especially at <br />the diversion point at which the arroyo flow is to be diverted into <br />the canal and the other two points at which the diversion makes a <br />nearly ninety degree bend. Reconstruction (e. g., deepening and <br />relining) of the Booth Canal diversion stretch should be discussed. <br />b. Presumably the diversion is to function in final reclamation to <br />protect the lake from flood inflows from the remaining arroyo above <br />the lake. Please confirm this and give more detailed descriptions <br />of the diversion into the Booth Canal and the outflow diversion and <br />short channel into the Arkansas River at the east boundary of the <br />112 permit area. <br />