My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2007-05-01_REVISION - M1994005
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1994005
>
2007-05-01_REVISION - M1994005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:35:59 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 7:17:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1994005
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/1/2007
Doc Name
Rational for Recommendation for Approval
From
DRMS
To
Parties
Type & Sequence
AM2
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1. Traffic <br />Mr. Chappell raised a concern over the impacts of the operation on traffic in the area, specifically on <br />Colorado Highway 550. <br />DRMS Response <br />State Highway traffic issues fall under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Department of Transportation <br />and not the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety. <br />2. Property Values <br />Both objectors raised concerns over the negative impacts to property values and the potential for <br />development or selling of property, due to from the operation. <br />DRMS Response <br />The Construction Materials Rules and Regulations and the Act do not address issues related to <br />aesthetics or property values related to gravel operations. <br />3. Land Use <br />Mr. Chappell raised a concern regazding the site's land use as a gravel pit was improper, since this is a <br />scenic azea, it is becoming too developed and there are numerous nearby residences. <br />DRMS Response <br />Land use and zoning issues fall under the jurisdiction of the county, and not DRMS. The <br />Construction Materials Rules and Regulations and the Act do not address issues related <br />to aesthetics. <br />C. COMMENTS SUBMITTED OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD <br />There was one written objection received after the close of the public comment period. Tim <br />Kenney, also an adjoining landowner, provided a written objection to the amendment application, <br />which was received by the Division's Denver office on March 2, 2007, one day after the close of the <br />public comment period. Mr. Kenney's letter named numerous negative impacts from this <br />operation's past activities, including impacts to quality of life, properfy value, blowing dust, and <br />days and hours of operation. <br />DRMS Response <br />The issues of blowing dust and days and hours of operation are under the jurisdiction of the county, <br />and not the DRMS. <br />The issues of quality of life and property value are not under the jurisdiction of DRMS. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.