My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL39271
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL39271
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:58:45 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:04:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981016
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
4/20/1981
Doc Name
letter about environmental impacts
From
WESTERN SLOPE CARBON INC
To
GUNNISON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
8
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
Mrs. Dora Mae Trampe <br />Page Four <br />April 16, 1981 <br />• Health Care -The section on health care, Page 24, will be totally <br />modified. The discussion will center on physicial availability, clinics, <br />acute care and long-term care facilities, mental health and social ser- <br />vice programs, and disaster plans. In addition, the discussion on Page <br />33 will be expanded to look at potential alternative health care delivery <br />systems. <br />• Sales Tax in Crawford -The reference in Page 27 to the existence of <br />a one percent sa es city tax in Crawford will be eliminated. <br />• Overall Population Impacts - The discussion on Page 54 concerning <br />potential total population growth in the region indicates cumulative <br />impacts, not just the impacts of Western Slope Carbon. The narrative <br />will be revised to this effect. In addition, according to our estimates <br />of a worst case scenario, the irnpact of Western Slope Carbon, in speci- <br />fic, accounts for only 250 of the projected 4520 (or 5.5%) population <br />growth anticipated in Delta County over the next five years. These <br />changes will be indicated on Poge 56. <br />These are primarily the errors referred to in the comments received from Delta County <br />as being "cosmetic in nature." The revision of the document is suggested to present <br />a complete socio-economic assessment in a single volume. <br />Clarification of Issues <br />Other issues besides informational deficiencies concerning the socio-economic assess- <br />ment were raised in the comments prepared by Gunnison and Delta Counties. In this <br />section, those issues which are significant are discussed. In most cases, clarification <br />is required. In others, additional research will be undertaken to provide the informa- <br />tion. <br />• Orchard City - It was pointed out by Delta County that the study did not <br />refer- to Orc7iard City and that this oversight was a "major deficiency." We <br />did not include detailed discussions of Orchard City for the reason that the <br />assessment focused only on those areas iri which major impacts may occur. <br />Referring to the list of employees' place of residence on Page 3 of the study, <br />the area comprising Orchard City (Austin, Cory, and Eckert) accounted for <br />only 10 of the 319 employees, or 3.1%. Considering an additional work force <br />of only 31 new hires, it was assumed that the impact on Orchard City would <br />be relatively minor compared to the impact on Paonia, Delta, Crawford, <br />and Hotchkiss, which account for 80%of the existing work force's place <br />of residence. Therefore, Orchard City was not included in the study. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.