PERMFILE68000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ III IIIIIIIIIIIII III ~ 999 TO: Hoard of Commissioners FROM: Gunnison County Plannir~a Commission kE: Fred Schmalz gravel pit HATE: June 1v, 1984 ISTAFF NOTE: The Planning Commission has regaes+,ed the following ration, ar~d the rinutes of the meeting which preceded it, be included in the transrittol to the Haard.l RGB WRIGHT and FP,EO SCHMALZ met with the Commission on a resubmittel of a request to place n gravel pit in ari area off the Antelope Creek. P.oad. Aright verbally resubmitted an application far minor impact for n two-acre site to remove 10,000 tons/year. (The original request would have affected 9.8 acres?. The Hoard of Commissioners has agreed with persons who live in the area that an original approval of this request as o minor impact was incorrect, and with the cooperation of the proponent, have indicated the land use change application should be re-reviewed through the entire land use process. Wright also indicated that a survey in the original application is incorrect, and tha+. the site is actually south of that shown on +,he application. the Commission asked about the location of the closest home, ar~d what the visual effect is an homeowners ire the area. The proponent said the site is about o half mile from any residence. The otce=_.s road would be r~enr the Lehr- berger property. Wright submitted photographs of the site, and an aerial photo of the vicinity. Another photo of a nearby gravel pit, which Wright contends is closer to residences than the proposed Schmalz pi+,, was submitted. Rusty Whitley, n nearby landowner, contended that the gravel pit is riot a minor impact, that the Antel- ope Creek area is residential in nature, and that approval of this application as o minor sets the precedent for mining and industrial land use in that valley. Ne suggeested that such approval would be piecemeal zariir~g. In response to concerns erpressed by the neighbors, the Commi=_sior~ a=.ked Santarelli what controls the County has concerning dust control; there is no water available a+, the sate. Santarelli indicated that the County has na authority to require any particular reclamation, shot that jurisdiction is limited to the Mined Land Reclamation. Wright noted that recommendations included 6y the Soil Conservation Service as part of the applicntinri to +,he Mined land Reclamation Hoard will be complied with. Uhitley protested that there are no other mining activities in this area. Ed Halton noted that the effects of dust and traffic on that access road will create problems for the entire City of Gunnison, riot just for resi- dents of the immediate area. Oan Heck., a resident and business owner nearest the site, contended that, should the Corrlsslon approve this request as o sinor impact, it would be approving a miner impact with major impact implications. Whitley noted that today's application does not, in reality, represent o true change in scope, but that a minor impact ayprwal would be virtually changing the overall 1?0-acre parcel to a mining use, PAGE 1