Laserfiche WebLink
r,Ep-._~-y=. ]'~iF 1::11 PM fi01~G ,i~?H~'Ri~~. <br />February 24,1998 <br />To Whom It May Concern: <br />t:,. <br />117y husband and I own Roper lot #63 of Red Creek Ranch and my sister and her <br />husband own Roper lot #62. Enclosed you will fmd notarized authorization from <br />her for us to speak in their behalf regarding the mining lease. <br />We received a certified letter last June 27th from Siloam Stone, which we knew was <br />owned by Ferd Mueller, concerning an application for a mining lease. I called the <br />number listed to find out what this was all about, and 1 spoke to a Mr. Barnhardt. <br />Mr. Barnhardt assured me that this had nothing to do µ~th our property and would <br />t. have no affect at all on us. This is just a legality that surrounding property owners <br />had to he notified. There would be just a small amount of road base removed and <br />we would not even not[ce an increase in noise or traffic. <br />In October of 1997, we a second certified letter from Siloam Stone. We believed this <br />to be the same matter. Since Mr. Barnhardt had already assured us there was <br />nothing to worry about, we felt everything was alright. It seems that we were <br />deceived. <br />On January 22, 1998 we received a letter from the Department of Planning and <br />Zoning notifyittg us of a public hearing on the final action of a special use permit. 1 <br />called Phil Shafer from that department. He told me that Ferd Mueller has applied <br />far this permit and if we did not speak at this meeting that we would lose all rights <br />to say anthing further. He was the first person to actually explain to us what was <br />going on and what it could mean to us a landowners. <br />We are planning on building our home there next year. We do not want to be told <br />that our home, on our property has to be moved due to mining. We do not want the <br />beauty of this land destroyed. We understand that the State has mineral rights, it is <br />that way in Utah where we presently live now, and if we did any kind of mining on <br />~ our property, the minerals would belong to the state. It would never be our <br />intention to do that, it should be left as pure as possible. Even Red Creek Ranch <br />Homeowners Association has to approve the home you build so that it blends with <br />the surroundings. However, we believe that it is wrong for the State to lease <br />property that is no longer state property or to even consider the possibility of doing <br />so. When the state decided to "swap" land with Red Creek Ranch for some other <br />land that it desired, they should have made any leases void or if not void, non- <br />renewable. <br />F. <br />