PERMFILE105572 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' In previous applications, for open mining, a concern has been the degradation of air quality, specifically the impact on PM10. We have found the impacts of sand and gravel mining, when operated if the air speed is below 30 mph(steady), do not degrade the air quality. The nature of 5~~'y~`~ ~- this operation is different, with blasting and haul. Have is missed some information? If not s~~``ss please provide information which addresses this issue. .~ ' Numerous concerns have been raised regazding the "end or Post mining" land use. These aze related to previous development proposals reviewed by the Town of Lyons and to the \,P relationships which exist between the applicant and the other interest holders in the property, post mining. A discussion of the implications to the wildlife habitat, if the surrounding azeas aze developed residentially would be helpful. ' Some of the public comment which has been received have also noted a serious concern about the potential impact a proposal of this scope and scale may have on property values. Please ~~~' provide this office with any information you have available regazding the impact of a quarry on neighboring property values. You have indicated the applicant is, as a part of this proposal, will close and/or discontinue operazions at the Lyons and Lazimer County quarries. A'hat is the remaining useful life of these two existing operations and what is the timing proposed for discontinuing operations and reclaiming these sites? As you aze awaze the County has been very concerned about the time frames associated with any mining proposal. The past trend in the review of mining has been to limit the time of disturbance and mining to the absolute shortest time necessary to extract material. Have you conducted any analysis of a shortened mining time? Is it possible to stockpile material at the plant site and, if so, how much and what impact would this have on the time of the permit requested? Additionally, the impacts to traffic and other components of the permit would need evaluation. ' You have previously committed to provide an analysis of the phasing of the mining operation. " ,~~ e~ This needs to include the areas to be disturbed by the removal of overburden and the actual `~~~ o,,~-~ining of the limestone deposits. As a part of our review we will need to have information `~ ~»~,,.r '~e~' regazding the location of all areas affected by the relocation of overburden and mine waste prior R . <a~ to rt's use in the reclamation of the site. As you aze awaze, we will be meeting with Mr. Abbott during the week of September 29, 1993. He has a~ raised a number of issues regazding the delineation of wetlands within the permit azea boundary. The ~~ materials provided in you application clearly indicated the Corps of Engineers has accepted your "~,k~~,s~ delineations. I will have an agenda for the meeting on the 29th, so that we may identify any wetland azeas or issues which remain unresolved by the materials submitted in the application. ~ps~~ We have not had significant public interest in the field visit as of today's date. The length of time between the notice and the visit, and the fact that it was only a published notice, may be the causes of that. Hased upon the interest expressed so faz, it would appear that the number of riders from the Boulder azea may be azound 15-20. I will provide you with an estimate on Friday, October 1st, and a definite headcount on Monday, October 4th. Based upon the other field visits and hearings scheduled for eazly October, it is reasonable to assume that the eazliest Planning Commission heazing dates for this application would be in the eazly part of November. There will be Land Use Department staff, myself and/or Rosi Koopmann, at all of the heazings and or site visits. This includes the Tribal consultation reception and site visit, the joint meeting of HPAB and POSAC to be held on the evening of Thursday, October 14, 1993 at 7 p.m. There is other