2011-12-06_PERMIT FILE - M2011039

Home Browse Search

asked Mr. Raso what the agricultural designation could be used for. Mr. Raso replied it could be used for a single - family residence or to conduct agricultural activities, noting there's a list of uses -by -right and uses -by- review. Mineral extraction or natural deposit extraction is one of the uses -by- review. Mr. Leverington asked Mr. Raso if he could do cattle ranching, and Mr. Raso replied no. Mr. Leverington stated a typical acre of land would support five to eight head of cattle and asked Mr. Raso if he could have 300 to 500 head of cattle on that piece of land. Mr. Raso replied he's not a rancher, noting farming and ranching are uses -by -right in the A-3 Zone District. Mr. Leverington stated if he had a herd that large and with livestock options he could have 20 or 30 livestock trucks traveling up those roads in any given week. He's trying to figure out how picking rocks off the land and having three trucks a week isn't in the spirit of the Code when he could do cattle ranching that would certainly cause more noise and utilize more trucks. Mr. Raso stated he's not the best person to ask because he didn't write the Code. Ms. Pat Olshaw, 8394 Zorn Road, Rye, spoke in opposition to the special use permit. She reported she hates the word opposition because it's a misnomer. They have a different take on land use which is why she was here. She has lived in Rye for 56 years and her parents had lived there since 1946. She's ver of the property, noting before Mr. Barickman purchased it there were cattle on it and they were given free rein to walk and wander around. She was allowed to look at the area that's being proposed for the mining operation. When Mr. Banner was talking she wanted to counter point, noting she had a different opinion. Some of the points being made really expressed what she was thinking, noting Mr. Barickman is going to wait five to seven years to build a residence, when she thought the primary purpose was to build a residence as opposed to mining it. She felt like there was a shifting of priorities. When she walked the land she saw the extent of the road that goes almost all the way up to the Greenhorn Trail, probably a football length away. In her mind, visually walking it felt like a mining operation was already in progress as opposed to an effort of clearing the area for a residence. She works for a government agency that deals with collecting royalties for people who drill or collect minerals on Federal and Indian land so she is very aware of mining operations. There's going to be greater disturbance to the land than what was portrayed with the depths the rocks are going to be extracted and the size of the boulders. She loves the land, noting the glaciers were mentioned and the land is special. If they build, there could be issues with the floodplain and they can't replace the wildlife, noting they would be disturbed and there's a great deal of wildlife. They talked about one vehicle operating to move the rocks and the noise is so loud they wouldn't believe it. One of the residents is 87 and she didn't know there was a place to express her complaints. She lives on Cuerno Verde Road and her hearing isn't that good, but she could hear the activity at the site. There are a number of summer residents who live in the area for the peace and quiet. She realizes there's normal day -to -day activity like trash haul schedules and deliveries, but it's in a residential and agricultural type of setting and not a business. There's a big difference when they try to shift to thinking like a business venture as opposed to a residential one. With the terrain and the way it's set up, an excavator creates a lot of noise. In terms of a taxpayer, the road coming out of the Rye Mountain Park isn't pavement and when they're hauling loads over a prolonged period of time, there would be road degradation. As a taxpayer, if someone is operating and making a profit on a mine, she would want them to bear the expense of fixing the road as opposed to her. The operation is a mine even though they're calling it surface mining. The whole idea of having it there without the broader perspective of the surrounding residents is a disservice to the neighborhood. She knows the County's only obligation is to contact the immediate landowners, but whenever they have trucks going down a route they use for their everyday use, and whenever people are jogging or walking and enjoying the silence, and whenever they have wildlife going through, they are disrupting what the area was intended for. It's agricultural and residential. The owners of the property before Mr. Barickman ran cattle but they didn't have that many and it wasn't a big deal. There wasn't a lot SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPEAL NO. 2011 -002 STAFF REVIEW 11 -30 -2011 -DRAFT MINUTES- 9 PCPC EXHIBIT NO. 3 cont' 11 -15 -2011