Laserfiche WebLink
Revised: 07/06/97 Minutes - June 26-27, 1997 Page 37 <br /> working with Western Mobile on the development of the submitted Reclamation Plan for almost a <br /> year and feels that the submittal is consistent with CU's needs and the State of Colorado's interest. <br /> Mr. Cattany questioned what CU's long-term interest in the property. Mr. Lipton stated that CU has <br /> no immediate or long-term plans for the land. It is just a bank of land that CU can count on for the <br /> possible future expansion of the campus. The only short-term plan that they may have is that it may <br /> be used for grazing. <br /> Mr. Cattany asked if FEMA comes back and says that there is a need for better flood control in that <br /> area, is CU going to make the investment in the berms and drainage, etc. to protect the off-site <br /> homes. Mr. Lipton stated that they view it with utmost importance and they are concerned with the <br /> downstream implications to homeowners. They have an equal interest in protecting their own <br /> interests within what will be eventually be reclaimed in the pit. They intend to continue working <br /> with the City, County, State and Federal jurisdictions in doing long-term planning for flood control, <br /> not just within the property, but for the entire basin. <br /> Ben Binder, a concerned citizen who is an Engineer and Land Surveyor, introduced himself and <br /> presented Exhibit 151-Letter of Support from Flatiron to the Board. In the late 1970' and early <br /> 1980's, he attended a lot of hearings in Boulder City and County pertaining to the Permit of the site. <br /> There were a lot of concerns by the City and County about mining activities that were going to take <br /> place on the site. Concerns about dust, traffic and noise and he recalls very clearly, the promises <br /> made by the operator and the owners that when reclamation took place it would be a beautiful <br /> setting with lakes, streams and ponds befitting a creek bed from which millions of tons of sand and <br /> gravel had been removed. He is concerned that those promises made in public hearings, that people <br /> relied upon to grant the special Permit, are being very quickly forgotten. Instead, this land is going <br /> to be used for maximum, intensive use. <br /> Mr. Binder referred to his Exhibit 8 from Love & Associates, which is their proposal (or letter of <br /> agreement with CU) "...for providing consultant services related to optimization of the Great <br /> Gateway property in order to accommodate to maximum potential development at a future date." <br /> and that has to do with the removal of the ponds. The ponds were there for several purposes, one of <br /> which was to supply a source of material to elevate the site so that it would not have the bathtub <br /> effect that the channel flows from South Boulder Creek drainage onto the properties to the north. <br /> He thinks it reflects badly on the industry and the Board that Western Mobile was able to come back <br />