My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/18/1976
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1976
>
8/18/1976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:19 AM
Creation date
6/9/2015 4:36:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/18/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
252 OF'THE FILL WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH TO FILL THE AREA IN VIOLATION, AND THIS <br />MUST BE DETERMINED. HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE BOARD CANNOT GIVE A COM- <br />MITMENT ON THE REZONING. <br />VICE CHAIRMAN WODTKE COMMENDED THE MINING REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR E <br />f <br />t <br />DOING .AN EXCELLENT JOB AND .FORMALLY ACCEPTED THEIR REPORT. HE THEN STATED <br />TO MR. .JENKINS THAT IT IS THE FEELING OF THE BOARD THAT HE SHOULD START <br />s <br />COMPLYING WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE MINING REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THE BACKFILL <br />OF THE 40' AREA WILL BE REQUIR77D, BUT THE BOARD WOULD BE RECEPTIVE TO THE <br />IDEA OF WORKING IT OUT DURING THE OPERATION RATHER THAN REQUIRING IT BE DONE <br />PRIOR TO RESUMING OPERATIONS, <br />MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMIS- <br />SIONER MASSEY, THAT THE BOARD ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MINING RE- <br />VIEW COMMITTEE AS SET FORTH IN THEIR FOUR REQUIREMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION <br />THAT THE BACKFILLING OF THE AREA IN VIOLATION BE DONE AS 25% OF ALL FUTURE <br />MATERIAL REMOVED FROM THE PREMISES IN A CONTROLLED METHOD AND THAT THE BOND <br />BE THE NORMAL BOND AS REQUIRED FOR MINING OPERATIONS; THE 25% BACKFILLING <br />OPERATION TO BE KEPT WITHIN THE MAXIMUM $10,000 BOND, <br />DISCUSSION FOLLOWED IN REGARD TO THE 25? FIGURE, WHICH IT WAS <br />FELT MIGHT HAVE TO BE CHANGED AFTER FURTHER STUDY, <br />I <br />COMMISSIONER LOY STATED THAT SHE COULD NOT SUPPORT THE MOTION <br />BASED ON THE FACT THAT IT IS TOO.DETAILED. SHE CONTINUED THAT SHE FELT IT <br />i <br />IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MR. JENKINS TO COME UP WITH A PLAN TO HANDLE THE <br />i <br />BACKFILL PROBLEM AND WOULD PREFER A SIMPLE MOTION STATING THAT WE WILL <br />ADHERE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MINING REVIEW COMMITTEE BUT WOULD LOOK <br />AT A PROPOSAL IN REGARD TO THE BACKFILL, <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER WITHDREW HIS MOTION AND COMMISSIONER MASSEY <br />WITHDREW HIS SECOND, <br />ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER <br />MASSEY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MINING <br />REVIEW COMMITTEE AS SET FORTH IN THEIR FOUR REQUIREMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTION <br />THAT THE BACKFILLING OF THE AREA IN VIOLATION BE DONE AS AN APPROXIMATE <br />25% PROGRAM SUBJECT TO STUDY OF THIS PROGRAM AT A LATER DATE OR IN SUCH <br />OTHER FORM AS MAY BE SET BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT A LATER <br />DATE. <br />22 <br />AUG 18 197�t <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.