Laserfiche WebLink
f <br />~~ <br />~- . ._~ <br />o - o <br />Commissioners <br />web Siu, 1" District <br />Jeanne Nicholsas, 2°v District <br />Ken Eye, 3`a District <br />Connty Manager <br />Roger Balder <br />Community Development <br />Director <br />Tmty Petersetr <br />Buadiog Code CompOana <br />Officer <br />Plentta <br />Ray W. Rests <br />IT/GIS Specialist <br />James Russell <br />Office Ass{atant <br />Jennifer West <br />Cmnntuoity Ikvelopment <br />Deparmtem <br />P.O. Hox 661 <br />Central City, CO 80427 <br />CDD:303-582-5831 <br />Admin.: 303.582-5214 <br />Fa~c: 303-582-5440 <br />located in the Hiatotic <br />County Courthouse, <br />3'd 9oor, <br />203 Eureka Street <br />Cemml City, Colorado <br />December 2, 2004 / <br />Thomas Schreiner, Environmental Protection SpectCEIVED . <br />Division of Minerals & Geology DEC 0 72004 ~ <br />Department of Natural Resotuces <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 Division cl Minerals and GealoBy <br />RE: Clear Creek District Water Providers, LLC MMRR Quarry <br />File No. M-2004067,/ <br />Dear Mr. Schreiner: <br />Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced <br />application Gilpin County wool like to formally record its objection to the <br />proposed MMRR Quarry. Consequently, as per State statute we hereby <br />petition for a formal public hearing before the Mined Land Reclamation <br />Board <br />Our objections are based in §3432.5-] 15 (4) (d) C.R.S. which lists mining <br />operations, reclamation or proposed future uses that are contrary to local <br />permitting and approvals as grounds for denial. Gilpin County wntends that <br />the proposed operation and the likely end use are contrary to local permitting <br />and approvals as follows: <br />Mining Operation -The owner of the subject property, Phillip Wolf, has <br />stated, verbally and in writing, to Gilpin County officials and in District <br />Court, that he does not recognize County authority and therefore will not <br />apply to the County for permits. In fact, the property owner is currently in <br />violation of Gilpin County building codes for building two structures, <br />including his home, without County permits. Mr. Wolf lost his <br />jurisdictional argument in wort and is presently accruing daily fines as a <br />result. <br />Gilpin County requires mining operations to be permitted by Special Use <br />Review (SUR) as per Gilpin County Zoning Resolution, Section 6.1.d <br />(attached). "Exhibit A, SUR Mining Limits, adopted 8/]2/03" (attached) is <br />a review process identification matrix applicable to all mining activity <br />proposed in Gilpin County. As per Exhibit A, the proposed mining <br />activity would fall within Gilpin County review process, "Tier 4, Open <br />Cut Mining". Gilpin County Tier 4 Open Cut Mining reviews require a <br />wmplete SUR application, an application fee, and an environmental <br />impact study (EIS) addressing potential off-site impacts. None of the <br />above has been submitted to Gilpin County. <br />