Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Dear Sirs; <br /> <br />Abby Altshuler <br />P.O.B.944 <br />Norwood, Co. 81423 <br />July 3, 199G <br />I am writing in regards to my phone conversation yesterday with <br />Larry Oehler. I called the office to reconfirm the comment period deadline for the <br />proposed Norwood Gravel Pit Expansion, as I had heard on the street that it was moved <br />to early July. <br />On May 16 I had spoken with Jim Stevens to get the comment period deadline as <br />I was preparing to engage an attorney and was concerned about the amount of time <br />we had to prepare a through document for your examination. My notes indicate that <br />I came away from this initial conversation understanding July 26 to be the deadline, <br />and have been working on this application this entire time with that date in mind. <br />Now, in yesterday's conversation with Larry, I was told the period ended June 18, and <br />we still have a fully researched document for you that took quite a bit of time, effort <br />and funds to put together. <br />Clearly it was not my intention to submit my comments after the deadline. <br />Despite my best attempts to keep on top of this project the last several months, despite <br />conversations with many involved on both sides, the July 26 date was never <br />questioned and remained the date I had in mind - as far as I knew from the 5/1G <br />conversation with your office I had the correct date and was given no reason to <br />double check. (I'm glad I checked now rather than continuing to work under <br />misinformation.) <br />Larry talked yesterday about the backlog of work in the office and indicated <br />that he had not yet been able to give any attention to the application. We, as <br />immediate and concerned neighbors of what is likely to become a huge commercial <br />industrial operation, have been putting our time, energy and money into this issue <br />for many months now. I have numerous concerns that this application, as paperwork <br />in your office in the midst of mountains of other paperwork won't begin to reflect <br />the chilling reality we are observing outside our windows. Considering the fact that <br />this applicant's file has not yet been reviewed by your office and is in the same state <br />it was in on June 30, and in consideration of the deadline date misinformation I wrote <br />down and worked from after the S/16 phone call, I respectfully request that my <br />comments and letter be considered retroactively and that I be listed as an objector <br />(which I most certainly am as my house sits less than a third of a mile from the mine) <br />rather than simply as commentator. When I asked Larry what the difference would <br />be in getting my concerns registered before as opposed to after the deadline, he said <br />the document would still be considered in respect to the application, but the status <br />would be as comments rather than as objections. In light of all the problems I have <br />covered in this letter, none of which are anyone's fault but are simply how things <br />have panned out I really believe a note on my paperwork is in order indicating that <br />it will be considered in retroactive status, as if it had been submitted on time. <br />I have put my best efforts into this work, and hope that this kink in the <br />process will not be responsible for your not giving this the <br />consideration it, and I, deserve. <br />Thanl: you for your time. <br />Sincerely, <br />~" Q.Gta>2~~-,~ <br />Abb J.7Utshuler <br />