Laserfiche WebLink
In Exhibit "Q (cont)" the applicant proposed the land be reclaimed as a private recreation <br />azea. <br />In the reclamation plan Exhibit "E" the importation of fill materials is mentioned as a <br />possibility. There was no discussion ofthe pit becoming a receiver site for concrete and <br />asphalt during the County special use permit heazing. <br />Lastly we discussed our concern over the access to the pit both off Highway 40 and <br />Highway 34. In the 1970's a permit for a pit in this location was denied due to traffic <br />concerns. The permit originally issued to Bob Kattenberg was to remove materials <br />stockpiled on the hill after the road expansion project. Once the materials were removed <br />the operation would cease. The application fora 112 permit proposes that Willits remove <br />up to 250,000 tons of material per yeaz. This is a faz greater tonnage than allowed out on <br />County Rd 60. We understand the permit to mean 40 trips per day through the CR 60, <br />6'th street and US 40 intersection and you understand it to mean 401oaded trips per day <br />(80 trips). Additionally, the issue of where the 25-mph speed limit starts should be <br />resolved before the operation begins and the signs should be posted. So faz activity has <br />been raze and the impact of the truck traffic has been indeterminable. As we discussed the <br />input of the affected neighborhoods at the next County Special Use Permit Heazing may <br />be significantly different if the truck traffic creates problems. <br />In closing, it is our sincere belief that the proposed mining operation at this location is not <br />in the best interest of the community. No matter which direction the truck traffic goes, <br />there aze real and significant safety issues that must be the primary consideration of the <br />operator and the officials who aze responsible for the permitting and oversight of this <br />operation. Furthermore, the 112 permit has several errors that must be corrected and at <br />least two of the conditions of the county permit aze ambiguous and confusing. These <br />ought to be clearly understood and agreed upon by all interested parties before significant <br />investment is made and the operation commences. We believe a meeting with the BOCC <br />and operator to clarify the conditions would be the most expedient way to resolve the <br />confusion. <br />Sincerely, ~, <br />Paula Sheridan and Liz McIntyre <br />Box 2150 <br />Granby, CO <br />80446 <br /> <br />Gc: Cazl Mount DNR Division of Minerals and Geology <br />BOCC, Lurline Curran County Manager, Deb Campbell Planning Department <br />Board of Trustees Town of Granby, Tom Hale Town Manager, Granby <br />Mike Crosby, District Manager CDOW <br />