Laserfiche WebLink
February 5, 2018 <br />Memo to: DRMS Jim Stark, Jason Musick, Clayton Wein <br />From: Judy Martin 15990 Farmers Mine Rd. Paonia, CO 81428 <br /> <br />Regarding decision to extend Bowie #1 application C1981038-05 for 15 days. <br /> <br />Information related regarding PR05 was discussed at the Informal hearing on the application for renewal <br />of C1981038. In particular, discussion by Bill Bear was made regarding the industrial purpose and use of <br />the site, which he considered separate from the Paonia Holdings LLC decision by the county. Reference <br />was also made regarding the letter from the County regarding jurisdiction over Bowie’s use of the Load <br />Out site. <br /> <br />Regarding the Statement by Bill Bear, representing Bowie Resources: <br /> Mr. Bear stated that Bowie Resources plans on keeping the land Industrial, thus, by inference, <br />that the reclamation agreement being required for the related Bowie#1 renewal application <br />may not include the previously permitted and agreed upon restoration to pre-mining use. He <br />did not want to discuss the reclamation agreement to be included in the renewal application for <br />PR1831038 RN7 because he believes that Bowie is the owner of the property and believes it is <br />now industrial and will continue to be industrial. <br /> Mr. Bear’s statement presupposes that PR05 permit will be approved as to the change of use to <br />Industrial post mining use, regardless of who will use the property in the future, should Bowie <br />Resources LLC sell or lease the property. (He noted that those new owners would be under the <br />county regulations.) <br /> The application for permit revision PR05 now before DRMS included a plan for industrial use by <br />the proposed purchaser of the property. This plan hoped to show that the industrial use <br />proposed was a “higher and better use” per Mr. Bear, and thus the property post mining use <br />should be changed from the original reclamation plan of crop land restoration to industrial. <br /> As Mr. Bear stated, the fact that the county denied the application for the use proposed by <br />Paonia Holdings LLC does not change the PR05 purpose—which was to propose the change from <br />post mining use cropland (per the permitted reclamation agreement in place) to industrial use. <br /> Mr. Bear did not say what higher and better use now the industrial change would encompass— <br />he just stated it would be Industrial use. <br /> <br /> <br />Letter from the County to DRMS <br />. <br /> The letter from Delta County should have no bearing on the denial of PR05 by DRMS. <br /> If, as this letter states, Bowie Resources LLC, is considered to have had coal mining support use <br />as a Coal Load Out as of the year 2000 when the Delta County Specific Development Regulations <br />went into place, the real inference here is that the County regulations have no bearing on the <br />application to DRMS for change of post-mining use to Industrial. <br /> The inference is that the decision by the county, to deny the application by Paonia Holdings LLC, <br />is valid. But by inference, Bowie is contending that their PR05 application can stand alone to <br />DRMS without Bowie applying to the county as well. <br /> The inference is also that anyone buying the land, with a post mining industrial use already <br />approved at the DRMS level, would not have to conform to the Pre-mining use reclamation <br />agreement—unless the final PR05 required a new reclamation agreement –but based on what?