Laserfiche WebLink
..~2/T4/2004 12:25 <br />Conroy Mnmgelr <br />irogarHelca <br />Comdtuaity DevdoptnenE <br />INrectpr <br />Testy Petetsdd , <br />Bolidmq Code Cmgp~edei: <br />Of~eor Vii': <br />;:, <br />Plaat~ar <br />Itay w. x~a,r+ <br />IT/GIS Bpecialiat <br />James Russell <br />t~fllceAsslstant' . <br />Jannifar west <br />Community Aeuelopment;., <br />~; ;,; <br />P,0, Bwc66I° ~ ; <br />central aty> to sa4zr <br />CDD: 303-582-5831 <br />Adimin.: 303-581214 <br />Fee 303-58x~aA40 <br />Iacated in theI~istoric <br />County CoutLhouse, <br />3m 6aor, <br />203 TbuakaStreee <br />carnal sty, colciedo <br />3. <br />303582544.0 GILPIN COUNTY PAGE 02 <br />~ }. <br />December 2; 2004 <br />'lilomas Schreiner, Euivironmental Protection Specialist <br />Division of A+iinerals & Geology <br />Department of Nattval liesources <br />1313 Sherman Burnet, Room'215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Clear Creek District Water Providers,. Ld.C MMRR Quarry . <br />)idle No. M 20Q4.067 <br />Dear Mr. Schreiner: <br />Thank you for the oppordlaity to cbmulent on the above referenced. <br />applioatitin: QiiPin County would.ll'ke to formally record its objedfiortSo the <br />proposed MMRR Qtiarty, Consequently, as per State stators we hereby ' <br />pttition for a formal public hearing before rile Mi~aed Land Reclauaation <br />Board <br />Our objections are.based in §34-32.5=115 (4) (d) C.R.S. which lists ioaiuaing <br />t~erafion_~_reclema ~ o_r.nrrnnoaed future naP rk t am rnd±~.y .. <br />permitting and approvals as grounds for denial. C3ilpia County contends that .. <br />the proposed operation and the ]iirely end use are, contrary to local permitting <br />axld approvals as follows: <br />1Yiiafng C)peratian > The owner of the subject property, Phillip Woli; has. <br />stated, verbally and in writing, to Gilpin County offlaials and in District <br />Court, tha# he does not recognize County authority and therefore will not <br />apply to the County ;For permits. In fact, the ;property owner is ciurently in. <br />violation of Gilpin County building codes for building two structures, <br />including his horse; without County peitnits. Mr. Wolf lost his <br />jurisdictional argtwaem in oourt 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 ZArling Resolution, Section 6.1.d <br />(attached). "Exhibit A, SUR Milling limits, adapted 8!12/03" (attached) is <br />a review process identification xnatri;i applicable to all mining aotivity <br />proposed in Gilpin Cotuny. As per Exhibit A, the proposed rRitiing <br />activity would fail within Ctilpin Coutlty review process; `°Fier A, Qpen <br />Cut Milling". Gilpitl Coutrty Tier 4 Open Cut Mining rnviews requirt: a <br />cobnplete 5UR application, an application fee, and an environmental <br />impact study (EIS) addressing potenti aLoff-site impacts. None of the <br />above has beau subatitted to Gilpitt Cottnty, <br />Cammleeioaers <br />Web Sill, 1" District . <br />Joanne Nicholson, 2n° District <br />ICcn J3yo, 3`d District <br />