Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.0 Resolution 80-83STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield Ata continued held at the Court House in Glenwood Springs on meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County, Corrado, Wednesday , the 21st dayof May A. D. 19 80 , thele were present: Richard C. Jol ie,y. Larry Velasquez Flaven J. Cerise Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr.. Nancy Sprick page, Deputy when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit: Commissioner Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Attorney Clerk of the Board RESOLUTION NO. 80-83 RESOLUTION CONCERNED WITH AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 80-62 - OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, on the 28th day of April, 1980, adopted its Resolution No. 80-62; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that said Resolu- tion contained a typographical error in the description found in the first paragraph of said Resolution, by which the number "6" was substituted for the number "7" in the reference to "T 6 S, R 88 W of the 6th P.M.", NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, that the words and numbers "T 6 S, R 88 W of the 6th P.M." contained in the first paragraph of the Board's Resolution No. 80-62 be and hereby are amended to read "T 7 S, R 88 W of the 6th P.M.", and that the said Resolution otherwise be and remain in full force and effect. ATTEST: �Lf/1/1, 1 e uty C1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO d,(1/C-- 7A—! /7(ii-e.z/ Upon motion duly made and seconded the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the following vote: Richard C. Jolley of th Board Chairman Larry Velasquez FTaven J. Ler-Ise STATE OF COLORADO County of Garfield 1, , CounLi Clerk anu ex -O Ciciu :.ierk of ouaru of County Commissioners in and for the County and State aforesaid do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing Order is truly copied from the Records of the Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office. Aye Aye Aye Commissioners IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County, at Glenwood Springs, this clay pi , A. D. 19 County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. Regular Members Members. Present Kelley Meyer Barbara Lorah Dale Albertson Dale McPherson John Tripp Allan Bowles Arnold Mackley, Chairman The meeting was called to order at 7:37 n.m. by Chairman Mackley. Arnold Mackley explained this was a meeting to review the application for Snowmass Coal Company. It is a resubmittal of the original application and now includes the request to allow "materials handling" and "storage of natural resources" as a special use under the A/R/RD zoning. Also included is a request for a special use permit to allow the construction of a coal loading facility 2 miles northwest of Carbondale. Art Abplanalp also advised that under the zoning the Planning Commission has to right to review and comment on a zone change and text amendment. Peter Craven said the County has already provided for the extraction and processing of natural resources and natural resources have to be taken out of there. These 2 functions are necessary to get the coal out on time, and they are asking for a text amendment to include materials handling and storage. This has come as a result of the alternatives which have been examined for the site. Art Abplanalp said the text amendment would apply to all land under A/R/RD. Tom Boettoer said a number of alternatives had been considered on the basis of studies from a number of different companies. He explained what they were doing at the mine, why they need it, and why they need it at a certain time. They have to have a loadout facility and plan to develop for 2 long walls. The mine was built in the early 1960's, is not expanding, and Carbondale is a termporary facility. Also, the Bureau of Mines is experimenting and funding money. When the long wall is ready to move, it will increase production by huge amounts, and it cannot be loaded out with their present facility because the quantity is too large. They plan to be ready in January or February, 1981, and it is imperative to operate the mine. They are already behind schedule. From the beginning they knew they were going to have to have a permanent facility. When they came for approval from the County, they were clearly told they had to find a place to store coal. Mr. Boettger showed illustrations of studies which were accessible for lona wall mining and where they would not be trucking into the Town of Carbondale. The Diamond S Ranch was more reasonable and that is why the land was acquired. They must load the train in 2 PLANNING COMMISSI0N February 25, 1.980 County Officials Present Davis Farrar, Assistant Planner Art Abplanalp, County Attorney Hope Roberts, Recording Secretary -1- February 25, 1980 hours to get the unit train rate. The 12,000 ton capacity silo is more efficient, minimal visual impact, avoids bridges, simple to operate, energy efficient and does not change the grade. It would be ridiculous to cross the river because environ- mental danger would be too great and the visual impact on the bridges would be greater. Slot storage would take up more room, it was more energy inefficient, they would still have to have something at the top to distribute coal, and if they had 3 times the capacity, it might be the way to do it. It is almost impossible to contain dust, they would be getting closer to the water table, it is unsightly, and it is not right for this type of storage in this type of location. There would be 90' of waste with two tunnels and they would still have to duplicate 60' plus 30' where the trains -go through. They have to have 2 cones because if the angle was flattened, the coal won't flow. Mike Clark said the cost impacts are all laid out and part of the record. It is something they have to have to stay in business. Their intent is not to do the minimal amount to get by. They have done some things to reduce the height of the silo. The 34' sampling structure on top of the silo does not have to be there and can be removed, they can reduce the size of the silo by 25% by changing the interior, and they could move it 120' back towards the river. The height of the silo would be changed to 173'. Mr. Clark showed an artist's drawing of the revised configura- tion and stated they proposed to landscape with 20' trees and 50' of screening. Tom Boettger said they had run soil boring on the land and because there was no gypsum dust, there would be no problems with geology. Art Oldham, from RSWA, said they looked at the visual effect on the valley. He felt the tower should be shorter and as close to the embankment as possible. Mr. Oldham showed slides of other operations around the state. There would have to be lighting for the airport and asked if it could be screened. He showed drawings of other systems such as opened, filtered and screened and said there should be vege- tation or earthwork. The problem is access to the river and they are looking at a 1% or 1/2% of road grade and not too much could be done, and a much larger facility would be required to use slot storage. He also felt there was no way this facility could be hidden and there would be 80' protruding at time of vegetation. The Glenwood Ditch being a proposal of coal run off water and washdown water was of critical concern and has not been studied yet and felt that duplication of the silo was not a good idea because it uses more space and more water. If something is going to be allowed, there should be strict controls over what is going on particularly on clearing and grading during construction. He also asked if their submittals on the impact statement were going to be complete. Tom Boettger said they requested information from state agencies and they have -2- February 25, 1980 not heard from them yet. Arnold Mackley said the first thing to be determined was the text amendment. Kelley Meyer felt if an industrial use is going to be considered as an expendable use under a special use, it is logical for temporary storage in ware- housing. It is a logical change in the text to include storage and materials handling. For this purpose it is a logical change; otherwise, you are entrapping them, and they can't do their job. Art Oldham said this zoning classification covers a large part of the County. If you include the text change, this type of facility is a requestable facility but storage is something that if wanted, a distinction could be made between the types of storage. Arnold Mackley said he had concerns with oil shale. If this was put in, could they store oil above ground before processing. Art Abplanalp said they would be in the resource land district. Jerry Hartert said you can store anything in A/R/RD. Nothing says you cannot bring something from one area and store here in this area. Kelley Meyer said this is the most extreme change in land use. Dale McPherson could see no problems as long as it is a special use permit. Davis Farrar said we could require a storage wall and concealment under a special use permit. Art Oldham said it would be a requestable use under a special use permit. It does have to come up for review but you are setting a precedence. Kelley Meyer felt the most important thing was that the elected officials always got a look at this. Skip Flewelling said the Town of Carbondale was in favor of the text amendment. Barbara Lorah made a motion to recomiend to the County Commissioners that the text change be amended as proposed. Kelley Meyer seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Art Oldham said there were height limitations in the existing zoning and they would have to apply for a variance. Jeff Lyle, resident for 6 years, stated he worked for a rival coal company and questioned the figure of 10,000 tons as opposed to some other figure, and also asked what the surge capacity was. Tom Boettger said in order to get a unit rate to get foreign rates and be competative, they must have that capacity. There was a big difference in the rate. They are going to have to work the tolerance and have taken all of the excess out of the facility. The maximum is slightly under a million tons a year and they will not dump coal on the site. It will be completely self-contained and no need for a -3- February 25, 1980 second silo at a later time. Rebecca Young, from the Valley Journal, asked about the abandonment plan for the silo. Tom Boettger said they have submitted a reclamation plan. When this facility is not being used, it will be dismantled and restored. It is supported by a bond and is on file with the Clerk and Recorder. Walt Brown asked if these were the only two changes in the applicatin. Art Abplanalp said the application is for the 220' silo and that has not been changed. Peter Craven said he is willing to accept restrictions to lower the silo and put in trees. Tom Boettger said they made a rough estimate of how it would look, and they will hire an architect to do it professionally. The application has not changed. Peter Craven said they would not change the application because of time. They are willing to voluntarily restrict everything to 170 square feet. It is a guarantee. They do not want to be trapped with republishing and they will do whatever paperwork is needed. Art Abplanalp said the County Commissioners can make it conditional. Greg Durrett said he has seen no documentation and it was unsupported. They are justifying that they will use less electricity but it would benefit costs to their own firm. They should have the best proposal for the residents and questioned if the County is best served by this type of thing. Jerry Hartert, representing 2 landowners, said that if the Board of County Commissioners would grant this special use permit, the character of the valley is being redefined. It would be hard to turn down anyone else who comes into the area. Also, the heighth restriction in this zone district is 25' which indicates what was in mind for this area. It is not consistent with the master plan. Because this company may have to get resources out, that should not determine land use in the County. This is probably the first one in significence and will be followed by a lot more applications. If Snowmass Coal can change the entire character of the valley, he would hate to see the future of the County. This is not oil shale land. A lot more decisions are being made than just this application. Marvin Martin, resident, said changing it to industrial probably isn't the first. time a ranch has been changed. Everything around it hasn't been turned to industrial. As this is a special use permit, it doesn't mean the valley has been opened up to industry. The mine has made some concessions by moving closer to the river and lowering the height. If you don't like it, you can look in the other direction. -4- February 25, 1980 Sandy Martin said this is a working persons way of making a living and it is needed in this valley. Stephanie Lavorini said she didn't remember seeing a diagram of how the tracts would go through and any information on landscaping to hide trains and tracts, control dust, and questioned if it would be a high traffic area. Would there be landscaping for turn around or tracks for trains. Is anything planned. Tom Boettger said they hadn't planned on it. When the mines are at a maximum, there will be 2 trains a week for 2 hours. Within the next 3 years there will be about 1 train a week. Joel Dembinski said there would be a huge social impact to the County. Most of the tax base will be in Pitkin County and we have scarce housing now. This would be an economic crisis and is being run down our throat. They are trying to force this on the residents of the valley. Skip Flewelling said Carbondale City Council would like to see it expedited. Jeff Lyle said he would like to come out formally in favor of Snowmass. He is a little less than totally pleased and this is a dramatic addition to the valley visually. It is probably the only company alternative. It is a tough market. Everything you can save is going to keep you in business and providing jobs. It is a direct means for employees, merchants and other people who are involved in the commerce of the valley. There are not that many natural resources in the valley that can be developed. These people would fight light commercial or residential development too. He felt it is perhaps not the most esthetically pleasing thing in the valley but should not be turned down because we don't like the way it looks. Peter Craven said they have provided every bit of information they have been asked to provide, and it has been before the Planning office and Commissioners since fall. This is an extension of the existing natural resource operation which has been going on for about 50 years. It is nothing new. You have to get it to the railhead, it is not coming to you. We are not trying to industrialize, but trying to extract natural resources. They have come up with the least obtrusive thing and 200 families are being supported by them. Arnold Mackley asked what the expected life of the mine was. Tom Beottger said about 20-30 years, maybe longer. Skip Flewelling said he personally felt with 2 batch plants and 1 concrete plant, he didn't find this to be any more obtrusive, maybe less so. Greg Durrett asked if we should amplify these visual effects, and stated they are not 200' in the air. We should figure what works better with what we -5- February 25, 1980 have here, tourism and agriculture. Kelley Meyer thinks the Commission was critical.. They have taken a serious look at it. 20' in height is significant, 30' burm with 20' trees, and 125' farther from the road way it becomes similar from the relationship of the background. He wished it were somewhere else, but they have made every effort we have asked, and he would reconu end approval. Barbara Lorah said there would be social impacts of 200 families, housing, busing, and questioned if they had done anything more on housing. Tom Boettger said they haven't looked into that. It is going to take quite a bit of study, they would like to work with the County, and it is a critical problem. Barbara Lorah asked if they had looked into busing. Tom Boettger said they have looked into that. The cost is too high and only a few would use it. They intend to continue to look into it. One of the things they were asked to do is provide a bus or pave the road. They will he paving the road. Barbara Lorah said she was concerned that they would have some kind of obligation or responsibility to the community in the social impact areas, such as hospitals, mental health clinics, etc. Tom Boettger said they were struggling now but expected they are going to have to contribute to the community. Barbara Lorah suggested that the railroad he represented at the public hearing. Tom Boettger said 2 representatives would be there. Barbara Lorah said she could not vote for it. It is an impact on the character of the valley and would have to vote for denial. Dale Albertson asked under the bonding requirement, is the wording of that specifically through Snowmass and specifically that location. Tom Boettger said yes. This facility and entire coal mine. All facilities are required to be dismanteled and reclaimed. Dale Albertson said he felt the visual aspects would be greater to the neighbors and asked if there were any programs for them. Tom Boettger said they could work with the people and are sure they can do something. They would talk to them. Dale Albertson said most people that advocated agriculture see this as green belt. That won't make it green. Irrigating will make it green. On changing the entire character of the valley, that is a decision in each ones mind. He felt they probably had answered all of the questions the County had as far as lowering the facility and felt the visual impact of the adjoining landowners is important. Dale McPherson said he sympathized with the adjoining property owners, there -6- February 25, 1980 would be more people driving up and down the road, didn't see any way they could develop and use the mine without doing this and didn't see any problem with it. John Tripp said about 2 years ago they were given a special use permit, and they were also given 2 years to get out of there. He felt we owe it to these people to give them a loading facility. He also asked if they could come back another 200 feet, and stated he would like to see buffer space. Tom Boettger said it would be too close to the Glenwood Ditch and would be much more of a change to the facility. It will be completely elevated but they would examine it. They still have to go through the Board of Variance. John Tripp said if this thing goes through, this will raise hopes and might get turned down. Otherwise; he had nothing else to say. Davis Farrar said there are 2 ways to go with addressing the problem of the loading facility. 170' tower has less visual impact then 2 or 3 silos, but he would reserve judgement on this project. If this were going to be approved, he would rather see a 170' rather than slot loading facility. Arnold Mackley said he has mixed emotions. It is not going to be a pretty thing to look at and asked if it was going to be painted green. Tom Boettger said absolutely. It will be flat paint and the actual color will be selected to blend. Barbara Lorah asked if there was a program for it to be repainted. Tom Boettger said they would not let it go to pot. Peter Craven said they have 6 to 12 months to review a special use permit. Art Oldham said it was just as important for coloration as berming and landscaping and they could deny on the basis of being injurious to established character of the neighborhood. Tom Boettger said there will be another 100-150 more employees over the next several years and there are 200 now. Arnold Mackley asked if they were indicating any cooperation of busing. Tom Boettger said they were willing to cooperate but they could not force them to ride under the labor law. Kelley Meyer said they had to take the responsibility of maintaining the water, whatever it takes. Tom Boettger said it was a requirement of the State. John Tripp made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the special use permit be allowed with the following conditions. 1. Snowmass Coal Company would pave the road to the mine 2. The coal must be covered and enclosed at all times and there will be no open storage. -7-