Laserfiche WebLink
MAY 20, 2011 <br />MAY DAY MINE - V; \IIL \NCI: REQUEST SUBMITtAL REVIEW <br />PAGE 4 OF 4 <br />2. The access road construction plans need to be supported by geotechnical and drainage data and design <br />a. It appears the "geotechnical report" referenced in the plan set and Item 4 of the above preliminary <br />construction plan review may be a May 29, 2010 "Geotechnical Reconnaissance" report, with a <br />revision date of January 5, 2011, prepared by R Incorporated. This report recommends that a <br />Work Plan be prepared prescribing construction techniques. The construction plan set needs to be <br />supported in by a geotechnical work plan in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the <br />May 10, 2010 letter. Items 3 -8 of the above preliminary construction plan review need to be <br />addressed clearly and thoroughly in either the construction plan set or the geotechnical work plan. <br />b. It is assumed drainage issues, including those addressed in Items 10 and I I of the above <br />preliminary construction plan review, will be addressed in a drainage evaluation to address <br />CDPHE stormwater concerns and permit requirements. Copies of the state - related stormwater <br />evaluation and permit documents will likely suffice for county drainage requirements, which are <br />outlined in LPLUC 74 -112 to 74 -I 14. If the calculations and design addressed in Items 10 and 11 <br />are not in the documents provided to CDPHE, they need to be provided in a document prepared <br />specifically for the County as outlined in LPLUC 74 -112 and 74 -114. <br />3. The access road variance hearing will precede the Class II project hearing based on county regulations. <br />On a technical level, however, the variance and Class II processes are inescapably intertwined due to <br />the fact that the road is a central issue of the Class I1 permit. Thus, on a practical level, the two <br />processes will necessarily be run essentially in parallel. <br />IV. Review of Items Needed for a Variance Request <br />It is assumed the construction plan set will be accompanied by supporting documents. The list below parses <br />these documents out to create a comprehensive checklist for the applicant to use before re- submitting a variance <br />request. <br />I. Construction Plans for the full access road identifying intended uses of the access road <br />i. A mine rescue plan and mill site sanitary service plan if emergency vehicles and <br />commercial pumping trucks are not included in the intended uses of the access road. <br />ii. A drainage evaluation supporting the construction plans <br />iii. A geotechnical work plan supporting the construction plans <br />2. DRMS approval of the road plans <br />3. Written justification regarding safety of the road for its intended uses is needed. This may be based <br />on MSHA, DRMS, or other relevant agency regulations and review. <br />4. Meeting of all seven criteria as outlined in LPLUC 66 -26 <br />END <br />OCT • <br />i 0 20; <br />Division. <br />PLANNING DEPARTMENT M NT • 970.382.6263. • 1060 E. 2ND AVE. • DUR:\Nco, CoLoIL \Do • 81301 <br />