Laserfiche WebLink
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: - 2 - May 2, 2003 <br />Re: Rocky Mountain Materials & Asphalt,_Inc. <br />FOURTH: Cont. <br />Anyone from Canon City or Florence Very few people read small print notices. <br />that read the notice would have been aware <br />of the proposed application. Perhaps there could have been a SPECIAL NOTICE <br />written on the front page of the newspaper in- <br />forming the public a mining operation was being <br />considered possibly releasing pollution and/or <br />other toxins that could have an adverse affect <br />on their health. <br />FIFTH: You will need to ask Rocky Mountain We see no reason to ask Rocky Mountain how many <br />Materials & Asphalt if the proposed jobs would be created by this mining operation. <br />mining operation equates to creating jobs. <br />We are concerned about the impact this operation <br />will have on our property and other properties <br />surrounding it. <br />Also, there are other agencies that regu- "will deal" if they have a pollution problem. <br />late pollution (dust, noise, etc.) and Rocky Rocky Mountain should know what type pollutions <br />Mountain will deal with those agencies if generate from this type of operation and should <br />they have a pollution problem. <br />deal with the problems by addressing the in- <br />formation to the proper agencies before a permit <br />is granted. <br />Also, the residents of the surrounding area <br />should be notified of this and the possibility of <br />respiratory and other serious health problems <br />arising from a gravel mining operation. <br />Is Rocky Mountain aware of other toxins this <br />operation would release? In addition to dust <br />pollution, they could also be polluting the <br />water, creating much noise, truck traffic and <br />whatever else may occur in this type of operation: <br />It is regretable~that`Canon.City_Pl'anni~ng and <br />Zoning refused my letter of objection; therefore, <br />nothing was checked into so that this could <br />have been stopped. <br />*** <br />REFERENCE is now made regarding the Cotter Corporation Uranium Mill where dozens of Canon <br />City residents have suffered serious health problems due to the Cotter Mill's <br />releasing of dangerous and hazardous toxins into the environment around the plant. <br />Many people were exposed to radiation and other contaminations released from the <br />Cotter Mills - many suffering respiratory problems - trgntal retardation - birth <br />defects and 8ther;problems. <br />Had the public been informed of the dangers present in this type of operation, and <br />been given the right to object, perhaps they would have stopped the Mill from <br />coming into their area; and this horrible tragedy would have been avoided. <br />FIFTH: Cont. The DMB does have jurisdiction <br />over potential groundwater problems, <br />)SB-181) <br />SIXTH: It is a personal decision for all This "personal decision for all those who are <br />those who are moving in or out of moving in or out of Canon City and Florence" <br />Canon City and Florence and a local issue, does pertain to us as there is the possibility <br />most likely handled by the municipalities. of someone in the family moving on';to'.our <br />property - it is just a question of WHEN? <br />Our property does lie within the territory of <br />Canon City and Florence. <br />SEVENTH: You are .correct, a life of mine Granting a "Life of the Mine" permit would make <br />operation is not a one-or=two- it practically impossible for the family to <br />day operation. By statute, the permit is .utilize their land with all the havoc going on <br />granted fora term as defined in from this operation; therefore, we object to <br />C.R.S.34-32-5-103(11). granting a permit. <br />