My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-09-17_PERMIT FILE - M2009064
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2009064
>
2009-09-17_PERMIT FILE - M2009064
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:55:29 PM
Creation date
9/22/2009 2:17:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2009064
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
9/17/2009
Doc Name
Sup Hearing and Weed Control Letter
From
Grand Co.
To
DRMS
Email Name
PSH
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Board of County Commissioners Meeting -Grand County, Colorado <br />May 19, 2009 <br />Page 14 of 18 <br />have gotten the Certificate. Ms. Underbrink Curran stated that the only anomalies would be the naming of <br />specific pieces of equipment that were not listed in the Planning Commissioner Certificate. The maintenance <br />facility would require a building permit and that would be a use by right. <br />On Recommendation No. 19, Ms. Clement would like to strike "concrete and asphalt plants". <br />Mr. Clark stated that he would like the hours of operation be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mr. Clark stated that if the <br />hauling time is limited, he will have to move gravel out of other pits. If that is done, the crushed gravel is <br />moved out of the district that was to receive it. When it is hauled from a different pit, it costs the applicant an <br />extra person and an extra loader. The applicant looses about 10 miles of graveling because of the shortened <br />hours. The material needs to get placed before the magnesium chloride is applied. It is costly for the applicant <br />to change the hours. Mr. Clark stated that the pit is 1,000 feet off of County Road 3. That is the same County <br />Road that they now haul up and down when they haul out of the other pit. There is the same amount of noise <br />because trucks are pulling the hill and exiting on the other side. Mr. Clark added that he does not believe their <br />noise will be a big issue. The applicant will not be crushing during the period of March through May. The <br />applicant wants to haul during the time period of March through May. <br />Mr. Clark stated that the applicant owns only two pits. This is the pit will supply future uses for the applicant. <br />Jerry Helmicki of Bar Lazy J Guest Ranch stated that County Road 3 bisects his ranch. Mr. Helmicki stated <br />that much of the activity at this facility is guided horseback riding. All of the rides have to cross County Road 3 <br />or parallel County Road 3. He is concerned over 64 more trucks using the road. Mr. Helmicki asked that the <br />speed limit of 25 miles per hour be enforced. <br />Mr. Clark stated that this pit is used for the district. Most of the roads that receive the material from the pit are <br />in the Williams Fork valley. Mr. Helmicki will likely see fewer trucks. <br />Mr. Clark stated that most of the drivers are County employees and the Road and Bridge Department can assure <br />that the speed limit is followed. <br />Pat Shaw who lives at 760 County Road 340 stated that his property is adjacent to the proposed County Road 3 <br />pit. Mr. Shaw commended the Board for recognizing the material difference between the initial <br />recommendation and what was recommended at the Planning Commission; specifically the asphalt and cement <br />plants. Mr. Shaw asked for a better description of the maintenance facility. <br />Ms. Underbrink Curran stated that the County has a plan, sometime in the future, that if the County outgrows <br />the area where the Parshall shop is; it will be relocated. If that is the case, a Special Use Permit will be <br />required. If the County puts up a building just to run the crusher operation or maintenance the crusher, a <br />Special Use Permit is not required. <br />Lisa Palmer, representing Sky Lark Ranch, stated that they are partial owner of 340 Pit. She is hoping that the <br />340 Pit will be closed down completely and would like to confirm that with the County. The County owns 5 <br />acres that was donated land. Ms. Palmer does not want to run cows in the area or change the fence. The Ranch <br />would like to leave that as a lek for Sage Grouse, as it has been for years. The lease is done in 2010 and she <br />would like to see the pit "done". <br />Ms. Underbrink Curran stated that this Board cannot bind future Boards. Ms. Palmer stated that there are four <br />gravel pits in the area and she would like to see them consolidated. <br />Mr. Haynes stated that the 5 acres at the 340 Pit will need to be reclaimed before the County could get rid of the <br />property. Mr. Clark stated that the County will need to use the 5 acres of the pit to stockpile material until it can <br />be used. <br />With regard to the concerns of Mr. Helmicki, Ms. Underbrink Curran stated that there may be ways that Bar <br />Lazy J can work with the Division of Wildlife making a safer way to move the horses from the ranch. <br />Lyle Sidener, Area Wildlife Manager for the Division of Wildlife, stated that the 9:30 agreement was a <br />gentlemen's agreement. When it is not in writing there could be errors in understanding. Mr. Sidener stated <br />that the Division of Wildlife has collected research in several states and best recommendation for mining or oil
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.