PERMFILE139986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Comments on Objections and Concerns Mr. Gromke's issues regarding noise, property values, traffic problems, and location of commercial businesses in residential areas are not specifically addressed in the Act and Rules. Therefore, failure of the application to address these issues does not prevent the application from meeting the minimum requirements of the Act and Rules. The operator has addressed the concerns about failure of the inlet structure, expressed by Mr. Miller and Mr. Engelke, by committing to have the inlet and outlet structures designed by a registered professional engineer and have those designs approved by DMG, prior to construction. The operator has also committed to submit as-built certifications for these structures upon construction. Mr, Miller and Mr. Engelke expressed concern that diversion of a portion of the Colorado River's flood water volume, into the pit, would result in additional sedimentation in the various river channels adjacent to the pit. Mr. Miller and Mr. Engelke believe this additional sedimentation will alter the channel/slough/backwater system thereby adversely affecting the wildlife habitat provided by that system. The Colorado Division of Wildlife, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service have reviewed the application and the Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed a 404 permit application describing this proposed plan. None of these agencies have provided comment indicating potential for adverse impacts due to possible increased sedimentation in the river channels adjacent to the proposed gravel pit. It has not been demonstrated that additional sedimentation would take place, nor has it been demonstrated that this potential sedimentation would be considered to be an adverse effect. DMG has determined that the application demonstrates compliance with the performance standards of Rule 3.1, and indicates that operations will be conducted in a manner to minimize disturbance to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land and the surrounding area and to the quality or quantity of water in surface and groundwater systems both during and after the mining operation and during reclamation, as required by Rule 3.16 and C.R.S. 34-32.5-1 16141(hl• The "flow-through" design, required by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is intended to cause the lake, created by the excavation of gravel, to silt in within several years. The USFWS believes this will remove any non-native fish habitat that may result from initial creation of the lake, thereby protecting endangered native fish species in the adjacent Colorado River. The "flow- through" design is not considered desirable to either Mr. Miller, Mr. Engelke, or the operator. The operator has indicated that efforts to develop alternate means to satisfy USFWS requirements will be on-going, and that the proposed inlet and outlet structures will be constructed only if no other alternative is developed and appropriately permitted.