Laserfiche WebLink
. <br />AR NOLU if Pori '1'li l2 <br />t•1r. David Shelton <br />[•lay 8, 1981 <br />Paye I:iyht <br />is orte of efficiency based orr the state Uivision with- <br />holding its decision until the local government has acted. <br />Under the prior comprehensive Act and under the new Non- <br />Coal Act, prior local yuvernr~[ent approval is explicitly <br />reyuired before the Uivision could grant a permit. Such <br />prior approval is clearly implicit in the new Coal Act and <br />accordingly the Uivision should defer its decision here <br />until the county conuuissioners have acteu. <br />II. <br />Rio trlanco County's objections to the proposed <br />plans for the Ueserado Line focus on the adverse socio- <br />economic impacts wttict[ the mine will have on the county <br />and its citizens. Thu county commissioners believe that <br />adequate measures, designed to ensure, as tare county <br />master plan reyuires, that development will bear a fair <br />share of the cost associated with it, can be incorporated <br />into plans for the mine, so as to n~itiyate the adverse <br />impacts of the project and briny it into compatibility <br />with county laud use plans. Plans for the mine currently <br />lack suctr rnitiyatiny measures and the mine promises to <br />have serious and wide-reaching conseyuences. <br />Preliminary projections of the county indicate some <br />1,500-2,300 new people will live in kanyely and Rio Blanco <br />County as a result of the construction and operation of <br />the Ueserado Mine and the first wait of the Ploon Lake <br />Power Plant. <br />'rt,e County and Town of 12anyely expect that such an <br />influx of people into a sparsely populated area will <br />result in substa[itially increased capital and ol:eratiny <br />costs. 'f he exact extent of the costs involved may be <br />roughly calculated based on State of Colorado figures <br />estimating impacts fur one ttrousand new residents (see <br />