Laserfiche WebLink
Permitted, Affected and within Right of Way: This category of land (totaling 11.58 <br />acres) presents a more difficult problem. Clearly this land has not been completed with <br />reclamation and therefore cannot be released via normal pathways of consideration. However, if <br />disturbance within these areas results as a consequence of implementing the Project, the <br />permittee could well be held responsible for the reclamation of those lands. Furthermore, in some <br />cases, a type of revegetation is going to be implemented that is not precisely consistent with the <br />details of the permitted plan, although the final land use is cleazly consistent. Resolution of the <br />overlaps between the Project and the Permit in this category could follow at least four solutions. <br />Release All Land within Right of Way that is Affected Land: This would <br />effectively move the permit boundary back to the Right of Way line except where <br />unaffected land extends further from the river than the Right of Way. In that case, <br />release of the unaffected land would include the Right of Way. <br />2. Retain All Land within Right of Way: In this option the permit boundary would <br />move to the edge of the affected land, and land within the Project area that is <br />affected land would remain in the Permit. The potential conflict between the <br />permit requirements and the Project requirements could be resolved by accepting <br />the Project reclamation work as the permit requirements and any land not covered <br />by the Project reclamation work would remain the responsibility of the permittee. <br />The problem with this for the permittee is that land within the Right of Way that <br />is currently under final reclamation (seeded) maybe disturbed as a part of the <br />Project but would have to be reclaimed again by the permittee. <br />3. A Variation on Solution 2: Another way to approach this would be - <br />A. retain affected land within the permit; <br />B. accept the Project requirements in substitution for Permit requirements on <br />those lands where Project requirements differ from Permit requirements; <br />C. allow the permittee to establish easement agreements with contractors so <br />the contractors are responsible for repairing damaged reclaimed land back <br />to Permit standards, and <br />D. retain responsibility by permittee to reclaim land within the Right of Way <br />not reclaimed by the Project or by an easement agreement. <br />4. After the Fact Approach - In this solution, currently affected land within the <br />Right of Way, irrespective of its current status, including access corridors, would <br />be free to be used in the course of implementing the Project. After the Project is <br />completed the various disturbances and actions would be reviewed and a proper <br />course of action taken to complete whatever reclamation is then needed. Prior to <br />project implementation a complete photographic record would be established <br />(vertical aerial photography combined with some ground level photography) to <br />establish a baseline of condition prior to the Project beginning. This approach <br />offers an advantage in that it is not known with high precision exactly what will <br />be disturbed in the course of implementing the Project or how extensive any <br />particulaz disturbance will be. This approach seems to provide the greatest <br />Pueblo West Pit and River Restoration Project Investigation Report <br />