My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE69699
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE69699
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:18:47 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:59:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1997089
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
11/17/1997
Doc Name
COMMENT ON APPLICATION FOR A CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS REGULAR OPERATION 112 RECLAMATION PERMIT BY DARR
To
DMG
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.
/
9
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
<br /> <br />Ms. Lemay <br />November 12, 1997 <br />Page Six <br />if this requires importation of topsoil, soil amendment, irrigation, and <br />erosion-control practices. Who is responsible for monitoring the reclamation <br />progress? What timetable is established for reclamation? Is a performance <br />bond or escrow account set up for reclamation after the Applicant has <br />finished his mining? <br />Inadequate Financial Warranty. Mr. Stone's Reclamation Permit <br />Application only covers Units One and Two of his proposed mining plans. <br />We request a full breakdown of all units and a description of anticipated <br />costs. This is essential to our understanding of the proposed reclamation <br />and to the State's accurate determination of the costs involved, should the <br />state have to utilize the reclamation bond to complete reclamation. <br />Lack of Notice to Neighbors. At the present time, Ric and Lynda Emerson, <br />who own the property at 6066 C.R. 21, have not received a certified letter <br />concerning the planned gravel pit that will be located directly opposite their <br />property. Although they live in Denver and plan to use the Cortez property <br />as their retirement home, notification is due and their opinion should be <br />heard. <br />Water Information. <br />The Plan fails to comply with Rule 6.3.2(h) ("specify how much <br />water will be used in conjunction with the operation, and the <br />source of this water.") We need projected schedules for use of <br />the water to determine seasonal requirements. <br />Does he have the necessary rights to irrigation water? What <br />proof exists? We understand that Montezuma Valley Irrigation <br />is accepting no additional customers at this time. If this is so, <br />will additional water trucks be required to haul water from the <br />City of Cortez or other sites? This would add to the heavy <br />industrial traffic that will negatively impact our rural <br />neighborhood and create an undue burden on citizens, school <br />buses and pedestrians. <br />Mr. Stone states that he plans to convert active irrigation water <br />rights to temporary industrial use. Since his Application states <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.