REP24805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i • ~+. Copy of reclamation plan submitted by Petitioner as a condition oi~taining conditional Use Permit. 'When first e tering Planning Department this date, Messrs. Grist goes Campbell asked a v ry pregnant clerk for this inform ion. After several minutes tr•/ing to c mply, she asked Linda Dannenberg r, Planner to assist. When M=_.. Dannen erger was unable to comply sh enlisted the aid of Keith 3. Fife, Assist nt planner for the Planning Department. After =_searching th file for this location, together with files for other Parkenson gravel ~ t locations, Mr. Fifes informed Messrs. Grist and Campbell other records w uld need research to provide requested document°_. When as!~.ed how much time ould be r~eeded to rovide these documents, Mr. Fife said he would not be vailable most ofi the week of lharch 22nd. but would have the information y April 3, 199. Mr. Fife was asked if h was the ass stant planner interviewed by Channel ~ news tar the news 3st on Frid v March 20, 1992, and if he had stated the Planning Departmen had not eceived any complaints about the Park'.enson gravel pit operation hlr. F e replied in the affirmative to both duestions. i•Ir_ Fife was asked what the pr complaint. Mr. Fife stated there w needed was, to come into the Planni complaint. Mr. Grist reminded Mr issued verbal complaints about d st Several documents supporting Mr Cr Petitioners file. ~edure was to issue a non-compliance s no formal procedure. All that was Department office and issue a verbal ife he had been in several time=_ and created by gravel removal operations. ~t's allegation were observed in one document observed wa a copy f s letter gated Fabruary 5. !992. to Albert Buckman, Parkenson Construe*_i n, from Larry D_ uehler, Reclamation Specialist, whe ein the Min Land Reclamation Division, State of Colorado. had received complaint fr m Mr. Grist about excessive dust. Three times i°Ir. Fife was asked if Pe tioner had applied for the: annual compliance review schedulec for Fe ruary 1992. Twice Mr. Fife denied Pe titior~er had a lied. The third t me Mr. Fife suggested it was passiole Petitioner hag~ started the process. mr. Fife sgreed to notify rtessrs. C'ri.st and Camp}5e11 when the Fanning Department sr_arted the annuac review, now one month l~~te_ Mr. Fife was a ked for dor_ument.;ti.on ofi P! nning Department steps co complete the revie I`Ies=_rs. Grist and Campbel were given the Planning Department process for rezoning, P_iJ.D.'s and ma. or sub~.Jivisions, with the understanding the Petitioner is annually, over th ten year life (1935-95~ or tl~e Condition 1 llse Permit, required to r_ompler_ this review process. This process to 15 5~~ %~ay= and incl~~aes a public r. aring before the Mesa County Planning Commission and a sacond public hearing before the Mesa County Commiss oner-s, and Mr. Cr1sC will be given am le notice of hearings