Laserfiche WebLink
Snell & Wilmer <br /> <br />January 20, 2022 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />when the wind shifts in a certain direction, our clients have also been subjected to the distinct smell <br />of exhaust. It is our understanding that no mining permit of any kind has been granted to the <br />applicant. The applicant is thus currently operating without a permit in violation of Colorado state <br />law and the Land Use Code. As a result, we request that the County order the applicant to stop its <br />current mining operations on the property until a permit is obtained. <br />Ultimately, our review of the Application indicates that it is woefully insufficient and <br />superficial in its analysis of these potential impacts. Enclosure 7-D to the Application, the <br />Mitigation Plan, even goes so far as to say that it “is not always possible to address every potential <br />impact” caused by the project. See Application, Enclosure 7-D, p. 2. And when Enclosure 7-D is <br />viewed in conjunction with the Mining and Reclamation Plans, attached as Enclosure 7-A to the <br />Application, it is clear that the few potential impacts that are addressed by the Application are only <br />done so in a perfunctory manner. The Application suffers from a serious lack of specificity in this <br />regard and instead relies on broad and vague language, such as “frequently inspecting the perimeter <br />of operations and the property,” and “fixing problems in a timely manner.” See id. This clear <br />omission of particularity leads to obvious questions, such as how frequently will the perimeter be <br />inspected, and what standards will be used? Similarly, what problems does the applicant suspect <br />will arise that will require attention in a timely manner? The Archuleta County Development <br />Services Planning Department, Planning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners <br />should not consider awarding a permit without a more detailed understanding of the applicant’s <br />proposed answers to these questions, among many others. <br />In addition to these issues, Section 9.1.6 of the Land Use Code details numerous and <br />specific “Performance Standards for All Operations” under a Major Sand & Gravel Permit. See <br />Land Use Code § 9.1.6. Here again, the Application either fails to address these standards or only <br />does so in a generalized and cursory manner. The Application fails entirely to address the <br />requirements in § 9.1.6.2 ,concerning “Air Quality,” § 9.1.6.3, concerning “Visual Amenities and <br />Scenic Quality,” and § 9.1.6.4,concerning the standards for “Crushing, Processing, Batching, and <br />Hot Mix operations.” And while the Application does respond to the requirements in § 9.1.6.1, it <br />does so in an unsatisfactory manner, using the kind of broad and vague language used in the <br />Mitigation Plan. See Application, Attachment 6, pp. 2–3. <br />For all of these reasons, we are requesting that the public hearings scheduled in connection <br />with the Application, currently set for Wednesday, January 26, 2022 (Planning Commission) and <br />Tuesday, February 15, 2022 (Board of County Commissioners), be postponed until the applicant <br />submits the following studies for thorough review and analysis by the Archuleta County <br />Development Services Planning Department, the Planning Commission, the Board of County <br />Commissioners, and any concerned member of the general public: <br />• A traffic impact study; <br />• A health and noise study; <br />• A wildlife impact study; and