My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE31818
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE31818
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:43:11 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:06:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1991082
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
11/12/1991
Doc Name
FRANK LOUGHREYS UNPERMITTED OPERATIONS FN M-91-082
From
MARK A HEIFNER
To
MLR
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r <br />~~ ~ ~~ <br />37 E. Colorado Avenue <br />Denver, CO 80210 <br />(303) 722-9067 <br />• iii iiiiiiiiiiiii iii <br />Environmental Services Botanical Studies Photography ~: - ~~" -~M ~~~ <br />November 8, 1991 <br />~~=~EIVEC <br />Jim Stevens <br />Mined Land Reclamation FAX WITH MAIL FOLLOWUP ftl~ i <br />215 Centennial Bldg. ~ 1 2 1991 <br />1313 Sherman St fninadLan <br />Denver, CO 80203 Rey-amation Di~G;,,,. <br />re: Frank Loughrey's unpermitted operation. <br />File no.: M-91-082 <br />Dear Mr. Stevens; <br />I would like to bring you up to date on our progress in developing a <br />permit for Mr. Loughrey's pit near Florissant. On November 5, 1991, <br />Roland Obering and I spent most of the day at the site attempting to <br />identify the property boundaries. Little did we know just how difficult <br />this would be. <br />To make a long story short, after finding key monuments, corner pins, <br />and fence lines we were unable to achieve correspondence between the <br />Assessor's map and the recently prepared topographic map. The east and <br />south property lines appeared to match quite well, the west line seem=_d <br />to be pretty good, but the north line does not correspond with the <br />section fence or much of angthing else, for that matter. It appears at <br />this time Mr. Loughrey MAY actually own about 70 feet less land in a <br />north to south direction than he thinks he owns. <br />All of this has a familiar ring. I encountered very similar problems <br />with section corners on a site a few miles east of this location that I <br />worked on several years ago. In that case, several different surveys <br />showed the section corner in different places with some discrepancies of <br />nearly 200 feet. It was finally decided that the accepted section <br />corner was the one that would be used in identifying the property lines. <br />In that case, the Assessor's map was wrong with respect to the accepted <br />section corner although correct with respect to the original survey, I~ut <br />I do not think they ever changed their maps. Because Frank Loughrey':; <br />land might be using the same baseline as that used on the other site :: <br />worked on, I aio really not very surprised there are problems here. It <br />is beginning to look to me like much of northern Teller County is <br />seriously fouled up with respect to exactly which survey should be used <br />to determine who owns what. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.