2003-06-12_REVISION - M1999034 (2)

Home Browse Search

Topper OFgecdoa Amendment No.l - Jetoaimus Property Permit # M-99-034 The applicant's permit documentation includes a Geotechnical Stability Exhibit prepared by TuttleApplegate, Inc. The Slope Stability Evaluation, prepared January 1999, is from the original application. Item #4 on page 10 of the Geotechnical Stability Exhibit states "The analysis is based on assumptions using soil properties that are generally found in the South Platte River. Field inspection of geologic anomalies by a professional is recommended." The rules and regulations of the Division of Minerals and Geology require that any mining within a 200-foot setback of a man- made structure show through engineering analysis that the mining will not cause damage. As noted previously, the residence structure and outbuilding on my property are located approximately 40-feet east of the Amendment No.l Area boundary, while the storage barn is directly adjacent to the property boundary. Adjacern to these structures exist our water supply and irrigation wells. The mining plan proposes a minimum excavation setback of 35-feet from any adjacent property line. Considering this setback, my structures lie within a range of 35 to approximately 75 feet of the excavation. An analysis of the surface contours on the applicant's mining plan map, Exhibit C-2, indicates that at least 30-feet of material lie above the current lake level. With mining continuing - - below the.water_line, the.resultant high_wall_will_be in.excess_of 3.0-feet vertical.adjacent to.my. . . property line. The applicant has not demonstrated that an engineering analysis was conducted to evaluate potential damage to my existing structures, nor have these structures been identified in Exhibit S -Permanent Man-Made Structures. The applicant has not followed through with recommendations provided by their consultant TuttleApplegate, Inc. in performing geologic field inspections, nor have they used site specific geotechnical data in their modeling. Lastly, the vegetation information included as Exhibit J contains a letter dated January 28, 2003 from Andrea Vialpando of the Natural Resource Conservation Service. Under the heading "Threatened and Endangered Species" on page 2, Ms. V ialpando indicates that `"there aze a number of protected species associated with riparian areas including Bald eagle and Preble's meadow jumping moose. We recommend that the Colorado Department of Wildlife be contacted to assess the potential impact to these species." While the wildlife information included as Exhibit H includes a letter from the Colorado Division of Wildlife dated December 29, 2002, that letter makes no mention of an evaluation of protected species as required under the Endangered Species Act. The applicant has not demonstrated compliance with this Act or implemented the recommendations of the Natural Resource Conservation Service. In conclusion, I request that the Division of Minerals and Geology reject the application for Amendment No. l - Jeronimus Property to Pettnit # M-99-034 subm_itted_by Aggregate Industries - WCR, Inc. on the basis of 1) inconsistencies in factual information contained in the permit application documents, 2) likely injury to decreed water rights, 3) inadequate evaluation of water quality impacts, 4) lack of adequate slope stability evaluation, and 5) non-compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Thank you for the opportunity of presenting my concerns and objections. Again, I wish to be a registered party to future actions concerning this permit application. Sincer~el`y,~ ~ jJ ~W ~"Y~.J'c~~' Karen Topper