2004-11-01_REVISION - M1989029 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Kate Pickford October 29, 2004 Page Two of Three As to the discrepancy in permitted acres between the September, 2000 Index Map which identifies 718 acres and the September, 2000 permit amendment application form that identifies 530.3 acres, AI has concluded that the 530 acre i:rgure represents the affected area within the 718 acre permit boundary. It should be noted that the public notice requirements associated with the September, 2000 pemrit ~unendment were based on the permit boundary depicted on the enclosed Exhibit B. Implicit in the Distei TR is a revision to the current permit area. The permit azea requested for release is not included within the mining lunits of the approved permit azea and has not been disturbed by mining activities. The area for which a release is sought is incompliance with Section 3.1 Reclamation Performance Standards, Construction Material Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board. Also, the land use on the area to be released is unchanged from That prior to inclusion in the Distel Pit permit boundary. The six (6) acre permit area reduction is based on deleting 9.6 acres from the current permit area north of the Saint Vrain River and adding 3.7 acres of a previously permitted parcel (DMG Pemut # M- 1979-113) known as the Boulder Creek Estates Pit which, like the release area, is owned by the City of Longmont. The acreage reduction is included in this TR request in order to insure that the proposed revisions result in a net reduction in the permit area of AI's Distel operation. If the DMG requires a separate application for permit acreage reduction please provide information regarding the 1?ivisions criteria for same. Concern No. 2. "With regazd to item a), please indicate what parameters would lead to the installation of an additional flow control box on the Coffm-Davis Ditch". Response: For AI, the primary "parameter" related to the installation of an additional flow control box fmm the Coffin-Davis Ditch will be the ability to establish wetland vegetation on the Bigelow property. However, the City of Longmont which owns the Bigelow property and the associated water rights may decide to install additional irrigation controls in order to better manage their water riglrts. Concern No. 3. "With regard to item b), please indicate what parameters would identify a "low point"along the St. Vrain bank that would indicate the necessity to install a protective trench." Response: The location of the "protective trench", as described on page five (5) of the TR submittal and on page 20 of AI's September, 2000 permit:unendment application package as approved by the Division, is determined by the existing topography along and adjacent to the south bank of the Saint Vrain River. The installation of the protective trench at an identified "low Point" will facilitate a controlled overflow firm the river into the reclaimed pit in the event of over bank flooding.