GENERAL33245 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Pikeview Quarry -33ecision Notice and FONSI 08/30/01 Page 12 The layback will generate about 7.6 million tons of material which will remain onsite. This material is composed of granite and low grade limestone which will be used to bac-kfill the existing hole at the toe of the high wall. This hole was created by Excavating limestone over the last six years. A final recommendation which was received was to evaluate the effectiveness of buttressing the existing high wall instead of laying back the slope. This alternative should have been included in alternatives considered but eliminated from furthef consideration. This alternative has been considered in the past but discounted because it is not reasonable to believe that the material could be packed tight enough to restore the support to the limestone faced high wall. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The public involvement process for the proposed layback of the Pikeview Quarry was launched byshe.applicant through a partnership with the Colorado Mountain Reclamation Foundation (CMRF). The CMRF, founded in 1991 with a seed grant from the Energy ImpactBssistance Fund, has been supported by the public and private community of Colorado Springs in addition to donations and technical assistance from Castle Concrete. The public support and concerns were then considered in the development ofa proposal for a layback plan at the Pikeview quarry. After the application was received, the Pikes Peak Ranger District issued a press release notifying the public that aSpecial-Use Application had been received from Castle Concrete regarding a proposed layback plan at the Pikeview Quarry, Colorado, and public comments were solicited. In addition, the National Forest Service issued a notification which was mailed to several organizations, individuals and governmental agencies. Ln response to the proposed reclamation plan, as described in the Permit Number M-77- 21 1, the Colorado Springs City Council issued the resolution No. 37-00, dated March 14, 2000, endorsing the referred plan. Also, the Board of County Comrttissioners of El Paso County, Colorado, supported the proposed reclamation plan through a resolution dated February 7r 3000. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT I have determined that implementation of Alternative B will not significantly affect the quality of the biological, physical or human environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not needed. This determination is based upon the analysis of environmental-censequences documented in the EA. The following discussion focuses on factors to be considered in determining what constitutes "signiScant effects on the environment" (see Council on Environmental Quality regulations at 40 CFR 150827).