2009-04-27_REVISION - M1977210 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 41 Southwestern Ecological Services 37 East Colorado Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80210-3105 • (303) 722-9067 April 24, 2009 Berhan Keffelew Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Room 215 1313 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80203 RE: Response to adequacy questions on TR#3, Snyder Quarry, M-1977-210 Dear Berhan: CEIVE0 APR Z 7 2000 Division of Reclamation, Miming and Safety Thank you for your letter April 21, 2009, regarding your questions on this revision. Following are the responses. Shop Building: Question on need for proof of county approval - The Snyder Quarry and its facilities are exempt from county planning requirements because, like the Pikeview Quarry, the Daniels Sand Pit until 1993, and formerly the Queens Canyon Quarry, it is a nonconforming, pre-existing use. Therefore, there is no special use permit and none is required. This has been the case since 1980 and has never been questioned. Therefore, with respect to the county the presence of the shop and its uses are legal. The only circumstance where a special use permit would be required under the county rules is where a new parcel of land would be added to the existing non-conforming, pre-existing use. But even in that case the special use permit would only apply to the newly added land and would not be required for the rest of the site. To further support this conclusion I have provided a copy of the District Court ruling Castle v. Ingraham that specifically concludes the operation does not need to comply with county zoning rules. This document is in the permit file and appears to have been provided during the lengthy 1989 amendment. 2. Question on compatibility with final land use - The presence of a building in a wildlife habitat is not in conflict with that use. In fact, most National Wildlife Refuges have buildings to hold offices, visitor centers, trucks, tractors and other farm equipment, as well as other facilities. Wildlife habitat does not necessarily imply wilderness although a wilderness is certainly a wildlife habitat. It does not seem that having a building there has any greater conflict with a wildlife/rangeland end use than leaving roads. The shop has been there through three permit amendments now and its incompatibility with the end use, which has not changed since the original permit, has ever been questioned. It seems unreasonable to question it now when it has not been a problem for the last 20+ years. The building is an asset and so long as it can continue with utility after the reclamation of the rest of the site, along with the roads, it seems unreasonable to require the company to destroy their asset. Sediment Basins: The sediment basins were thoroughly discussed and designed in both the 1989 and 1994 amendments. For the sediment basins along the road please refer to the "Snyder Quarry Access Road CAP Culvert Designs/As-Builts" prepared by Obering, Wurth Associates and dated January 24, 1991. This document is a part of the permit file. The sediment basins on the west side were designed by Obering, Wurth and Associates as a part of the 1994 as well as the 1989 amendments