1997-07-10_REVISION - M1981302 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Revised: 07/06/97 Minutes- June 26-27, 1997 Page 40 wording: The operator shall replace a minimum of 5.5 inches of top soil on all reclaimed lands within the Permit area. Further, the operator shall provide a soil testing plan that would verify the replaced plant growth media's ability to support the plant species to be established and reclamation. The soil sampling plan must be provided in the form of a revision to the Permit. It must be received by the Division no later than 45 days after final action by the Board on Amendment 002 and approved no later than 45 days after original submittal. If the time limit for approval is not met, the matter will be presented to the Board at the September 1997 Board Meeting for extension or denial. The Division has agreed to the wording. The letter from concerned citizen Debra Biasca was submitted as Exhibit 15J-Letter from Debra Biasca. Ms. Green briefly summarized the letter for the Board. if there are any changes in the typography of land portions in the flood plain should be closely monitored. Adequate flood assessments have to be completed and they have not been completed. The writer is upset about the proceedings because they presume that the landowner can do what the landowner wants to do with the property. The feeling t d at the public doesn't get as much input concerns and the closing is that the Board has discretion to preserve the current water on the property in the light of the lawful objections of the proceedings and to keep that in mind and make a decision consistent with those views. Other persons attending in the audience: Dallas Glasser (Western Mobile), David Gillilan and Sarah DeHaan (PMH&S), Frank J. Holliday (CTUThompson, Inc.), David M. Packard (Property Owner), William H. Mitzelfeld (Scott, Cox & Associates), Nancy Love (Love & Associates) and B. Zince (self). The Board then closed the Hearing and opened Board deliberation. Mr. Cohan Moved to approve Western Mobile's Amendment 002 with the conditions proposed and revised by the Division and Western Mobile, but still questions whether there is a need for a minimum depth to the top soil, which was Seconded. Mr. Cooley Moved to Amend to eliminate the technical n11c--ondition on the soil which was Seconded. (For: Cooley, Cohan and Paulin) and (Opposed: Green, Kraeger-Rovey, Ernst and Cattany). The admended motion failed. Discussion ensued as Mr. Cattany and Mr. Paulin discussed the hydrologic balance issue. Mr. Cohan and Ms. Kraeger-Rovey questioned and stated their opinions. Ms. Green asked how removing such large bodies of water don't have an impact on adjacent properties. Mr. Ernst