Laserfiche WebLink
N' <br />~}. - <br />S <br />.~ <br />0 <br />a <br />~ ti <br />III IIIIIIIII IIII III <br />~O <br />o~rFIVED <br />SAY 2 p 1.996 <br />May 15, 1996 <br />Division or mmetais & lieuiogy <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Dear Members of the Mined Land Reclamation Board: <br />I am writing on behalf of the Uncompahgre Valley Association in opposition to the Hawks Pit <br />Expansion, Montrose County, Application Permit #88-037. <br />The Uncompahgre Valley Association is a grassroots citizens action organization which involves <br />the people of Montrose County in decisions that affect their lives. We have over 160 members <br />and have existed since 1982. We became interested in gravel pit issues in 1994 following the <br />request by United Companies of Mesa County to construct a large gravel pit adjacent to a <br />residential area. We succeeded in amending our County's Zoning Resolution to require special <br />use permits for new gravel pits. However, expansions of existing pits remained unregulated. <br />In 1995, United Companies expanded its Colona Pit from 70,000 tons per year to 200,000 tons <br />per year with no regulation from our County. UVA proposed an amendment to [he Zoning <br />Resolution in August 1995 which would require special use permits for gravel pit expansions. In <br />March 1996, the Planning Commission unanimously endorsed a 120-day moratorium on any new <br />gravel pits or expansions in Montrose County while new regulations were adopted, and <br />forwarded an amendment to the County Commissioners for discussion. The Commissioners <br />have not yet acted on the Planning Commission's recommendations. <br />We implore the Division of Minerals and Geology to consider that our County is trying to gain <br />regulatory control over gravel pit expansions, and not rule hastily on the Hawks Pit expansion. <br />Please allow our County to get the tools in place to protect our citizens from off-site impacts. <br />__~- <br />We understand that the setback requirements from the neighboring subdivision have been <br />~' reduced from 300 feet to 30 feet. We believe that this is far too close to a residential area to ~ <br />protect the neighbors' health, safety and welfare. <br />~. We also believe that the reclamation plan should require reclamation at the end of each phase <br />before another phase is begun. !_ <br />V Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application. <br />Sincerely, <br />UVA Member <br />