Laserfiche WebLink
._ ~~ • iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii • <br />pof~[~o~ c„o~ar~~~ <br />506 east main street <br />aspen, colorado 8'16'1'1 <br /> <br />May 23, 1980 <br />Pd AY 2 71980 <br />Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />723 centennial Building MINED LAND RECLAMATIOPJ <br />1313 Sherman Street Colo. De t <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 P of Natural Reso!~rcec <br />Attention: Mark S. Loye <br />Re: Elam Construction Permit Application <br />Dear Mr. Loye, <br />In regard to the above-referenced permit application, Pitkin <br />County has the following comments: <br />Elam's MLRB permit application is, in most respects, identical to <br />the Special Use permit which was issued by the County last year. <br />The following changes are noted: <br />The total land area to be permitted has been increased from 90+ <br />to 105+ acres. We understand from conversations with the applicant <br />that this is a result of the most recent survey of .the Vagneur property, <br />which indicated the expanded property lines. We do not anticipate that <br />this expansion will have any effect on the impact of the pit. <br />The areas of the pit that are no longer being worked will be revegetated <br />to a maximum slope of 3:1, as opposed to a maximum slope of 2:1 as <br />in the County-approved revegetation plan. It is also our understanding <br />that the berms now being built to shield the pit site from view will <br />be caved into the excavated area as part of the revegetation effort. <br />Thus, the topsoil and plant life on the berms will be put to use <br />during the revegetation process. <br />As for the discussion we had regarding bonding, I would point out <br />Exhibit M of the permit application, County Resolution 79-132, page <br />6 paragraph C, which states: "Pitkin County recognizes that the <br />State of Colorado's Mined Land Reclamation Board will require a bond <br />for revegetation. So as not to duplicate said bonding, Pitkin <br />County will not require a bond at this time." I would suggest <br />