Laserfiche WebLink
~~ ~r <br />United Companies Interested Parties <br />September 5, 1996 -Revised DMG Recommendation <br />Page 3 <br />5. There is no mitigation concerning road maintenance; <br />6. There is a lack of guaranteed water for dust control; <br />7. The pit location will adversely affect the Sunset Ridge Homeowners' health, safety, <br />quality of life and property values; and <br />8. There is no application or plan to the Air Pollution Control Division. <br />OBJECTIONS THAT THE OPERATOR'S APPLICATION AND RESPONSES TO THE <br />ADEQUACY REVIEW OR TO OBJECTORS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED TO BE <br />ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED: <br />Surrounding land uses have been mis-characterized; <br />2. Phases I[ and IV are not separately described in the Mining Plans; <br />3. The location of proposed asphalt and concrete batch plants are not described in the <br />Mining Plan and they are not located on the Maps; <br />4. There is no reference in Exhibit M of permits required to process sand and gravel in <br />San Miguel County or to operate an asphalt batch plant in Montrose County; <br />5. The pit excavation occurs only 30 feet from the perimeter county road; <br />6. Exhibit ]fails to include a narrative of present vegetation carrying capacities for <br />rangeland, in violation of Rule 6.4.10(1)(a) and (c); <br />7. Exhibit K is bereft of any detail. An inadequate climate description could inhibit the <br />MLRB consideration of cumulative impacts; <br />8. No mention is made of any obligation to actually grow a soil stabilizing plant cover. <br />9. A portion of the site is covered by pinyon juniper woodland and scrub oak, but no <br />provision is made for re-establishing this type of cover; <br />10. The financial warranty proposed by the operator is inadequate; <br />11. The Town of Norwood did not receive proper notice; <br />12. The applicant's proposed water supply is legally unavailable; <br />