My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE63573
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE63573
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:09:42 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 8:04:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/22/2004
Doc Name
Public Comment & Objection Ltrs.
From
DMG
To
Banks and Gesso LLC
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.
/
27
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
.t2/1a1299at'. 2:2s <br />'P't'a <br />~. ~'. <br />,;, <br />3835825449 GILPIhFCOUhITY PAGE 03 <br />} . <br />Future Use . Tt is the County's contention that, at some point in the future, <br />4he applicant, Clear. Creek Water Providers LI.C; will likely propose water <br />storage as a,post-reclatnation end use. "Ariuoicipal end industrial watez <br />projects" is lasted in Section 4.2 of Gilpin. County 12ai>ulation of Ceztain <br />batters of State Intergst (attached) as a rnajorinfrastzitcture project subject <br />to 1041 review. As such, it is likely th8t Clilpin County would e~etcise its <br />1041 powors over any and use that would include water storage. As the <br />proposed qualrying project world irreversibly alter the natural landscape,. <br />we believe it prudent to review the proposed quarrying activity in the <br />context of the likely end use before permittYmg. <br />The 112 application on.frle with the Gilpin CountyClerk & l2eoordeit clearly <br />states that a Gilpin County Special Use Review (SUR) permtt will be obtained <br />prior. to ittitiating mining activity, "if this property is subject to Gilpin County. <br />mining rogulations°:. Gilpin County does not iegulate:miaung per so, but the <br />County bas clear authority to, and does regulate o$site impacts of nriniztg and, <br />in this case, the end use of the rniued area. The above qualifying statement. <br />coupled with Mr. Woli's demonstzated comiotions suggest that County <br />permits will, Act. be sought. <br />Given the subject pzaperty owner's stated refusal to Acknowledge the authority <br />of County goveznment coolxe~ to local ~emnitting reouiremeirts .S}ilDin.. _ <br />~tutly rres~ asks that the Mined tazad I~ieclatt-atioa Board deny the <br />applicant's permit request under §34.32.5-i 15 (4) (d).C.R.S. Altezuatively, <br />Gilpin County would request that any permit issued by the State clearly and. <br />emphatically state that operation is conditioned upon local approvals. <br />Thank you for your consideration. We look i'ozwatd to a public hearing and <br />wr71 await notification, <br />~~~ ... <br />~o~ny~Pvetf~r~ sen <br />Gilpin County Community Development Director <br />c.c. Roger Raker. Gilpin County Manager <br />Jam Petrock, Gilpin County Attoiney <br />HtKC <br />;. <br />±. <br />~ .: F n~ <br />~. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.