My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL52556
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL52556
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:38:23 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:50:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1984069
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
8/3/2007
Doc Name
Allegations
From
CDPHE
To
Gunnison County Planning Department
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
Mr. John Whitley <br />Mr. Neal Starkebaum <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />July 27, 2007 <br />equipment was captured by the Order since it referred to equipment related to the asphalt <br />operation. The site is still used as a construction storage yard and is receiving fill material. <br />Modular buildings, tractor-trailers, and other equipment are stored on the site (see attached <br />photos). Since this portion of the yard apparently is not under the gravel permit (nor is the area <br />where the fill is being placed), it would appear that the Order has not been satisfied with respect <br />to getting the land use change permit However, Mr. Starkebaum indicated that one wasn't <br />needed. It is suggested that the parties re-examine the boundaries of the gravel operation and <br />ensure that the rest of the property is properly permitted for its current and intended uses. <br />4). Allegation: The City removed 8 feet of material for a street project instead of 8 inches for <br />repaving, and that these materials were possible uranium mill tailings impacted. <br />According to Mr. Schmalz, the City did remove about three feet of material from the first block <br />of South 14`s Street in order to put down a more stable base. There is a sand bar that goes <br />through that part of town that does not have as much alluvium as other parts of the river basin. <br />The remainder of the project required removal of about 16", Mr. Schmalz did not have that <br />contract for the street project; he only had the contract on the curb and gutter. There were <br />numerous curb and gutter projects being undertaken in Gunnison during my visit. I spent some <br />time scanning random excavations and found no evidence of mil] tailings in any of them. There <br />is only one supplemental standards property left in Gunnison, and that is not on 14s' Street. Mr. <br />Ken Coleman, City Manager, verified this. According to our records at CDPHE in Grand <br />Junction, the only uranium mill tailings lefr under Gunnison streets is under a sewer line on <br />South 9`~ Street, between Rio Grande and Railroad Avenues. It is estimated that approximately <br />340 y3 covering 654 y2 of area remains under the sewer, and is at a depth of about four feet <br />below grade. <br />5). Allegation: Materials from the street job were transported and dumped at the Schmalz <br />property. <br />Mr. Schmalz stated that no material from the 14s' Street project went to his property. The Ciry <br />excavated the materials and used the materials around town on other projects. Mr. Schmalz has <br />been hauling in debris from a project at the College. I scanned those materials and determined <br />nothing was above ambient background gamma exposure rates, and that the fill was primarily <br />concrete rubble, rock, and soil. The Whitley's contend that City trucks had been hauling some <br />material to the Schmalz property in recent weeks. Uranium mill tailings were not involved with <br />the project, nor were they deposited on Mr. Schmalz's property. <br />In conclusion, uranium mill tailings were not deposited on the Schmalz property. Portions of the <br />subject property aze permitted as a gravel mining operation. Fill material is being brought onto <br />the property at times and deposited in areas outside the boundary of the gravel permit. Land use <br />issues persist with respect to operation as a construction yard on portions of the property not <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.