Laserfiche WebLink
Revised. 07/06/97 Minutes - June 26-27, 1997 Page 20 <br /> the last 25 years. She thought that the new issue #2 was not stated correctly because the berm is <br /> now not included in the Amendment and she felt it was an issue and wanted the words"and are now <br /> not included" to be deleted. Also asked if the Amendment adequately addresses impacts of all its <br /> land contours, including all the land shapes and the berm shown on the reclamation plan1Al1 the <br /> impacts on Flood Plain Management and Flood Litigation.)She was scheduled to speak as a Party <br /> in the Hearing, but felt it was more appropriate to'say i in the Preliminary Hearing and requested to <br /> speak during the Preliminary Hearing. ; <br /> 2. <br /> Curt Parker, Civil Engineer for Boulder County (County), introduced himself to the Board and <br /> concurred with the statements made by the Ciry� <br /> 1'a ,w JJ>�c1�ro <br /> Jeff Schwarz, with the law firm of MH & S�epresenting Western Mobile, introduced himself and <br /> David Plummer, Vice President of Western Mobile. Stated that they did not have a problem with <br /> !t w > z <br /> issues #3 through #6 or with issues 41 and 42 being switched and felt t#t"ey-were appropriate to <br /> talk about ogether. In respect to the proposed change to what is currently #1, he feels the language <br /> 1 in that current issue�Aand is not included in the Amendment Applicationcaad is critical to that issue. x; <br /> The Amendment that has been filed has nothing to do with the berm and needs to be left in, in <br /> respect to whether the Amendment Plan has addressed all impacts on Flood Plain Management, <br /> should issues be related to minimizing hydrologic balance. Mr. Schwarz objects to spelling out the <br /> Flood Plain mitigation as a separate issue and wanted the Board to clarify whether they wanted to <br /> simply hear from the parties on those issues or whether they are going to accept cross-examination. <br /> The Board considered the objections and proposed changes to the Order and began discussions on <br /> whether to include those changes and adopt an Order. Mr. Ernst stated that in the Pre-Hearing a <br /> yssH�— <br /> number of issues were consolidated into the water^as they felt it would be better presented. The <br /> Board then closed the Pre-Conference Hearing and opened Board deliberation. Ms. Gallet stated <br /> that Mr. Ernst and herself thought that the preliminary matters would be in the nature of argument <br /> which is not testimony and does not include cross-examination. Mr. Ernst Moved to accept the Pre- <br /> Hearing Order with the exception of switching of issues 41 and #2 and include the switching of Ms. <br /> Bunin's time as requested. Seconded and Unanimously Approved. (Green, Kraeger-Rovey, <br /> Cooley, Cohan,Paulin, Ernst and Cattany). The Pre-Hearing was Adopted. <br />