Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(gravel) would adversely effect the quality of life, and have adverse visual and <br />environmental impacts including an increase in noise level and a decrease in <br />air and possibly water quality. These impacts are not adequately mitigated. <br />The reclamation plan is inadequate. <br />Response: Virtually all of the existing information regarding the adverse effects <br />of gravel mining in Routt County documents that the opinions shared by the <br />Opponents cannot be documented from similar gravel mining operations in Routt <br />County. In fact, during the early states of the Routt County Special Use Permit <br />process the Opponents submitted a letter dated 19 October 1997 wherein they <br />listed 22 gravel pits in Routt County where gravel is being mined without the <br />adverse impacts predicted for this pit and therefore there was no need to permit <br />this new pit. What they completely ignored is the fact that there is a total of 346 <br />residences living closer to the existing gravel pits in operation in Routt County <br />than would be associated with this operation. What seems extremely assuming <br />is that they suggested is writing that it is acceptable to mine gravel in these <br />existing pits, but they that it is completely unacceptable and that it will "ruin the <br />quality of their lives" if gravel mining is allowed in their neighborhood. Other than <br />complaints being made regarding the operation of asphalt batch plants, which <br />are not anticipated to be associated with this operation, there has to the best of <br />the knowledge of Mr. Greg Squire of the DMG and Ms. Caryn Fox of the Routt <br />County Regional Planning Department never been a complaint about noise, dust <br />or adverse environmental effects for any Routt County Gravel mine. Their <br />suggestions are based upon emotional arguments which cannot be supported <br />by facts. <br />The Applicant submits that given the extensive input obtained relative to this plan <br />from the USDA NRCS, the Colorado Division of Wildlife, that a suitable <br />reclamation bond is posted with the DMG and the fact that the Applicant has a <br />proven tract record of being an environmentally responsible Operator in <br />conducting mining operations in the Yampa Valley refuses the opponents <br />contention regarding inadequacies of the reclamation plan. <br />EXHIBIT A, Legal Description. The location of the gravel pit is improperly <br />described in the exhibit. <br />Response: This issue is discussed in considerable length in response to the <br />DMG letter item 4. <br />EXHIBIT D, Mining Plan. <br />1. The mining period listed in this paragraph is 10 years, which is in conflict <br />with the period of 3 years listed in the Public Notice. <br />Response: This problem was identified in the DMG letter under item 1, and has <br />12 <br />