Laserfiche WebLink
~- ,- ! ~ <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />September 19, 1977 <br />Page 2 <br />3, Control of eeds and weed seed during the period of the <br />gravel operation To reach the gravel layers it will be necessary <br />to have the overbur en of dirt on top of the gravel removed and <br />probably this will be piled on the premises, and as has been the <br />experience of other gravel operations, this pile of overburden is <br />not kept clear of weeds, trash and other items, is loose earth and <br />subject to wind erosion.~l'he prevailing winds particularly in the <br />spring period coming from the north, which means that the weed <br />seeds, the sand, and the dust blowing from these piles of overburden <br />will be blown onto the adjoining premises of Mrs, Ferguson to the <br />south of the gravel pit area. Conditions must be imposed requiring <br />the operators to control not only noxious weed growth on these <br />overburden piles and the areas not being actively mined for gravel, <br />but also for ordinary weeds including kochia, Russian thistle and <br />redroot and lamb's-quarter ~CThe area north of Mrs. Ferguson's <br />premises is badly infected with Canadian thistle, the seeds of <br />which are waterborne and airborne, and if these Canadian thistles <br />are permitted to mature on the premises not being actively mined <br />and particularly in the piles of overburden, the likelihood of <br />this noxious weed seed being blown onto Mrs. Ferguson's property is <br />very great. From Mrs. Ferguson's experience with the gravel pit <br />to the south of her premises, this spread of Canadian thistle and <br />weed seed is a severe problem, and certainly if an application is <br />approved to the Hazeltine Investment Association, Inc., a condition <br />should be imposed which would be subject to enforcement by Mrs, <br />Ferguson and by public authorities to curtail any weed problem. <br />4, Indicated dual activity after the gravel has been removed - <br />The notice of application indicates that the owners of the premises <br />seek to reclaim the area for active and passive recreational area, <br />and t has been indicated that this would include water sports of <br />moto boats and other activities attracting large crowds of spectators <br />and participants in the activity. The county road and other access <br />to the area would be overtaxed to accommodate a thousand or more <br />people participating in any such recreation, either as spectators or <br />as participants. The area is not prepared or designed to carry any <br />such traffic burdens, and particularly the parking of automobiles. <br />If motor boating and other activities are permitted, there is a noise <br />pollution problem which can be very severe to adjoining owners in the <br />situation like that of Mrs. Ferguson. It is further contended that <br />the role and authority of the Mined Land Reclamation Board does not <br />include the designation of what use would be put to the premises <br />other than to restore it for some use as land and aot as water recrea- <br />tion. It is therefore contended that the application in regard to <br />the eventual use as water recreation exceeds the authority authorized <br />under the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act, Sec. 34-32-101, CRS <br />'73, as amended. <br />Yours very truly, <br />SOUTH~ARD AND ASHLOC ' ` <br />By /`/~ /~ ~u~"""~ <br />wxs/c <br />