Laserfiche WebLink
<br />revisions to the site plan and narrative addressing a possible gas line through the site, and <br />construction drawings for the roadways, including the access road into the site and <br />improvements along CR 309. <br />[ am including with this letter a copy of the Engineer's comments. <br />12. CR 309 Right of Way. The County Attorney is looking into this issue and will be providing <br />an opinion on whether additional right-of--way will be required for the proposed <br />improvements along the County Road. I will provide this when I get it. <br />13. Concrete Plant. It is my understanding that a concrete plant is no longer a part of the <br />proposal. Please verify this in writing. Revised site plans will be required prior to BOCC <br />consideration. <br />14. Asphalt Plant. Please provide further information on the use of an asphalt batch plant on site. <br />The narrative indicates it would be used "from time to time." Please provide an estimate on <br />the amount of actual usage. This could be expressed in days of use per month or year. in <br />addition, the San Suan Basin Health Department is requesting further information on the <br />proposed equipment and best management practices to curb emissions from these plants. <br />As you should be aware, asphalt plants must hold a current ADEN permit from the State. This <br />is obtained through the Health Department. <br />15. Secondary Containment. One condition of approval that will go along with the asphalt plant <br />and the crusher is a secondary containment system for the fuel farm and asphalt mix. This is <br />necessary to prevent leaching and groundwater contamination in the event of a spill. This is <br />for the protection of the operator, as much as it is for public health. Specific plans for a <br />secondary containment will be required in the construction drawings. <br />16. Sediment Control. It is my understanding that berms will be utilized on both the uphill and <br />downhill sides of the mining area. The upper one is to prevent offsite runoff from entering the <br />mine, and the downhill one is to prevent in-mine runoff from carrying sediment off-site. <br />Please confirm that this is the case. <br />17. Residential Development. While the conceptual plan for the redevelopment is appreciated, <br />you must understand that the CDP holds no vested rights to develop at a later date. At this <br />point, [he CDP is useful only to the extent that it can shape the type of reclamation on this <br />land. The CDP tells us that [he land is to be reclaimed [o a level appropriate for residential <br />development. Under the Florida Mesa District Land Use Plan, this area is designated for very <br />low density rural residential development. Returning the land to a state ready for residential <br />use is appropriate in this case. <br />However, the number of homes proposed is not in keeping with the Florida Mesa District <br />Land Use Plan nor the County Comprehensive Plan. As submitted, this Conceptual Plan will <br />not have the support of the County Planning Staff due to the density of homes proposed. A <br />further factor in not supporting residential development at the proposed density is the <br />proximity of this project to the County Airport, which is discussed later in this letter. <br />18. Airport/ Residential Development. The proposal to redevelop the site after mining has met <br />with strong opposition from Ron Dent, the Airport Manager. The development of residential <br />uses in close proximity to airports has caused problems throughout the nation, and must be <br />