HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 83-166•
STATE OF COLORAOO
ss.
County of Garfield
At a regular meeting of the Board of County Corranissioners for Garfield
County, Colorado, held at the Conmissioners ' Annex in Glenwood Springs,
Colorado, on Mond a y , the 25 th day of July , A.D.
1983, there were prese nt:
__ E_u_,,g.._e_n_e_'_'J_i_m_"_D_r~i"'"'n-"k"""h-"-o.-u-..s-..e ___ , Corraniss ione r Olairman
__ L_a_r_r_y..__V_e_l_a_s_g~u_e_z _______ ,.Corrmiss ioner
Fla ve n J. Ceris e , Commiss ioner -....;....;~~;;......;;~~~~------~ __ E_a_r_l_R_h....;o_d....;;e...;;s ___________ , County Attorney
Stan Broom e , County Manager
----------------~ __ M_1_·1_d_r_e_d_A_l_s_d_o_r_r _____________ , County Cle rk
when the following proceedings , among others were had and done, to wit:
RFSOWTION ID. 83-166
RESOLUTION COI\CERNED WITH THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION EUR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY COIDRAOO LIEN cr.MPANY
WHEREAS, an application has been sul:mitted to the Board of County
Comnissioners of Garfie ld County, Colorado (hereinafter , the "Board"), by the
Colorado Lien Company (h ereinafter , the "applicant"), for a cond;itional use
permit for extraction and processing of natural resources , specifically an
above-ground -J.irnestone quarry and crushing facility, in accorda nce with
Section 9.02 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978 (h e r einafter,
the "Zoning Resolution"), in the Open/Space Zone District, on the real
property described below:
Lots 7 and 8, SE 1/4, SE 1/4, Sec . 1 5 , Township 4 S, Range 92
w, in Garfield County;
WHEREAS , based on the materials sul:m itted by the applicant, the
recormne ndation of the Garfield County Planning Cormniss ion, and the carrments
of the Garfield County Departme nt of Developnent , this Bo a rd finds as
follows:
1. That proper publicati on and public notice was provided as required
by the Zoning Resolution for the public hearing on Apr il 5, 1982, August 23,
1982, August 30 , 1982, May 31, 1983, and June 27 , 1983, before the Board;
2. 'Ihat the public hearing before the Board was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts , matters , and issues were sul:mitted, and
that all interested pa rties were heard at the public hearing;
3. That except as hereinafter noted , the
statements are corrplete , and the applicant has paid
sum of $500.00; and
appl icat ion and impact
the required fee in the
4. That this matte r was considered by Garfield County Planning
Cormnission on August 11, 1982 a nd May 11, 1983 , at which times , on the first
date, · the Planning Corrnni ssion recorrunended denial , and on the second occasion
the Planning Cormnis s ion r ecorrunended approval with conditions;
WHEREAS, section 3.09.01 of the Zoning Resolution requires that the
Board d e termine wh e the r the applied-for use is a conditiona l or special use
in accordance with section 5.03 of the Zoning Reso lution; which the Board
finds as follows:
1. The Board hereby find s that the applicant 's e vidence, including its
reclamation plan filed wi t h the BIM , does not s how tha t it operates und e r
contract or permit from the Uni ted States Governmen t;
2. ~hat since the adoption of section 3.09.01 by Resolution No.
81-145, the Colorado Supreme Court has issued its opinion in the case of
Brubaker vs. the Bo~ of Coun ty Comnissioners of E~aso County, Colorado,
652 P.2d 1050 (1982) in whi c h case the court specifically held that the
assertion of a claim under the Mining Act of 1872, 30 U.S.C., Sections 22
through 54, if valid, gives rise to a right in the applicant , to assert the
doctrine of feaeral pre-emption of state a uthority over those uses on public
lands authorized by said act;
3. That based upon the opinion of the County Attorney, the Board
hereby finds that it does not have the authority to deny the subject land use
permit since the possible exercise of a denial would constitute "an obstacle
to the accomplishment and execution of the f ull purposes and objectives of
Congress",· Brubaker, pg. 1055; and
4. Therefore, as a matter of legal necessity, the above application is
for a conditional use permit.
WHEREAS, the Board mu s t, for the purpose of analyzing the subject
application in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Resolution,
establish the neighborhood which may be affected by the granting of the
proposed conditional use permit, which the Board finds as follows:
1. That the Board has determined that, except as otherwise noted
herein, such neighborhood is the area of Garfield County, Colorado, in Range
92 West, Township 4 South, within a one mile r adius of the real property
described above;
2. 'Ihe Board hereby finds that located within the neighborhood of the
proposed site are recreational uses, including private recreational
homesites, the Rifle Moun tain Park , the Rifle Falls State Recreation Area,
and the Rifle Falls Fish Hatchery, which is a recreationally oriented
industrial operation; rural res idential uses ; and agricultural uses;
3. 'lhe Board hereby finds that adjacent to the neighborhood and
through which the proposed access route goes is a near-by area which includes
the Rifle Gap ~tate Recreation Area, the Rifle Golf Course, and residential
developnent;
4. That substantial evidence in the record e xists for the Board to
make a finding that the proposed use is incompatible with the ne ighboring
uses for such reason, among others, that the proposed use is industrial in
nature, while the neighboring uses are recreational in nature;
5. '!hat the court in Brubaker, supra , has determined that denial of a
proposed land use on public l ands cannot stand since "the federal government
has authorized a specific use of federal lands , and [the county] cannot
prohibit that us e, either t emporarily or permanently in an ~ttempt to
substitute its judgment for that of Congress ". Brubake r, pg. 1059; and
6. '!herefore, the presence of substantial e vide nce in the record that
the proposed use is incompatible with uses in the adjacent and nearby areas
cannot be a basis for de nial, but may be the und e rlying rational for the
imposition of conditions.
WHEREAS, the Board he reby finds that Section 5.03.12 of the Zoning
Resolution imposes on the Board an obligation to scrutinize the access to the
proposea site for a special or conditional use perm it, and the Board finds as ·
follows: ·
.1. 'Ihe Boa'rd hereby finds that
transport crushed limestone from the
325 in trucks of 38 feet in l e ngth;
it is the proposal of the applicant to
quarry site by means of state highway
2. As to state highway 325, the Board acknowledg es that said roadway
is part of the State Highway System, over which the board does not exercise
jurisdiction;
3. The Board hereby finds that the impact of the proposed use on state
highway 325 would require de nial thereof, because there is substantial
testimony in the record (from r esidents in the area and from the traffic
study report of Matthew Delich, P.E.) that said roadway , in its layout~ has a
narrow driving surface , in many places has inadequate shoulders , contains
blind curves with inadequate sight distances, a nd has many hidden driveways;
and further, that state highway 325 in its present condition presents a
danger to the public health, safety and we l fare of the residents of Garfield
County, and that increased truqk traffic on said roadway will increase the
potential for personal injury due to a utomobile accidents ;
2
4. The Board hereby finds that there is substantial evidence in the
record that increased truck traffic on state highway 325 will cause a
deterioration of the structure of the road and that the State of Colorado has
no plans for the improvemen t of said roadway. Further , that said roadway is
a secondary roadway in the state system, and does not receive imnediate
maintenance attention;
5. That by Resolution No. 83-110 Garfield Cou nty has made a formal
request of the Colorado Hi ghway Commission that , pursuant to its authority in
section 43~1-105(1) (g), it abandon state highway 325 from the state road
system and that it perform certain other conditions prior to the county
accepting said roadway onto the county road system;
6. '!hat substantial evidence exists in the record for the Board to
find that there is a r ational relationship between the impact of the
activities of the proposed use and the public costs asscx:iated with
improvement of state highway 325 so that the Board finds that the applicant
should pay a fair s hare of the approximately $1 ,000,000.00 cost associated
with its activities; and
7. That the Board has made extensive efforts to work with the
applicant to determine wh at the amount of money is that the applicant s hould
pay as a condition of approval of the subject land use permit and based upon
the unwillingness of the applicant to make an offer to pay its fair s hare ,
the · County under the authority contained in its Zoning Resolution,
specifically section 5.03.10, would have a basis for denial of the subject
land use permit except for the ruling of the court in Brubaker, supra.
WHEREAS, the Board finds that the impact of the proposed use upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the State of Colorado and the
uses in the neighborhood requires the imposition of certain conditions as to
the activitie~ of the applicant.
NCm THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the conditional use permit
application for the above d escribed unincorporated area of Garf ield County be
and here by is approved, and authorized to be issued , and effective upon and
during compliance with the following conditions:
1. The proposals and r epresentations of the applicant, shall be
expressed conditions of approval.
2. This r esolution requires the applicant to perform certain acts as a
pre-condition to the i ssuance of the subject land use permit. Said
conditions shall be accomplis hed within two (2) years of the date of this
resolution, or the applicant shall make a showing before the Board that said
condition is impo ss ible of performance, good faith efforts being required in
any case . In the absence of performance of said pre-conditions to the
issuance of said land use permit , the grant of authority to the applicant,
contained in this r esolution, s hall automatically be rescinded.
3. That prior to the issuance of the subj ect conditional use permit,
the applicant shall obtain and sutmit to the Garfield County Department of
Develoµnent/Planning Division copies of its permits from all othe r government
entities.
4. The applicant shall substantially comply with conditions imposed by
permits issued by other government entities . Compliance s ha ll be determined
solely by any issuing government agency and the County shall not consider the
question of non-compliance und er this condition until a violation is
determined to have occurred by such agency. The applicant shall advise the
County of any d e termination of violation within t e n (10) days of the time it
is advised of any such violation. The Board s hall consider such violation
upon r easonable notice to the applicant. In the event the Board determines
that any such violation adversely affects the health , safety, or welfare of
the population of Garfield County or of the u ses within the zone district,
the Board may require that the permitted operation be brought into compliance
within a specified period, and the permit may be suspended or r evoked .if the
operation is not brought into compliance within the per iod allowed.
5. 'Ihat the recorranendations of Mr. Howard N. McGr egor , P.E. contained
in his affidavit of Augu st 23, 1982, for the reduction of noise to adjacent
landowners from the proposed mining site , s hall be implemented by the
applicant, and the applicant s hall pay all of costs therefore.
3
6. 'Ihat the r ecommendations of Mr. Matt Champ i on of the Dupont Company
for the r eduction of noise , dust , and vibrations f rom blasting on the
propos ed site s ha ll be adhered to by the applicant. Blasting will be
r e stricted to mid-day and warn ing signs will be post ed giving notice of
actual blasting and the hours blasting will occur .
7. Du s t
a nd seal will
highway 325.
Rifle Creek.
control will be implemented on .the crus hing oper a tio n. Chip
be a i;plied to the access road between the qu a rry a nd state
Sederne ntary procedures will be used between the qu a rry and
8. 'Ihe applicant's activities in regards t o the use of s t a t e highway
325 as a haul road, s hall be r estricted as follows :
a. 'Ihe applicant , s hall prorrote public safety by means of
restricting its truc k traffic in a manner i n wh ich a r easonably
purdent pers on . would do under similar circumstances , a nd a dopt
the following mea s ures wh ich are included by way o f example but
not limitation:
i. 'Ihe applicant shall coordinate wi th the RE -2 School
District to ins ure tha t truck traffic will not oppo se school
bus traffic;
ii. All truc ks shall be equipped wi th J a ke bra ke s;
111. 'Ihe l e ngth of vehicles shall be limited to
thirty-eight (38) feet;
iv. All safety r equirements of the Safety Depa rtment of
Transportation s ha ll be irrplernented ;
v. Ta cographs will be installed in a ll ve hicles to
monitor vehicle speed and engine r .p .m. to provide additional
checks on ve hic l e safety and speed on highway;
vi. Drive rs shal l paid on a per ho ur basi s r a the r than
on a per load hauled basis in order to reduce incentive for
high speed;
vii. The applicant shall ma ke avail abl e to Garfield
County the following information:
1. Number of citations issued to individual
drivers, if any;
2. Number of motor vehicle acc i dents involving
Colorado Lien drive r s , i f any ;
3. Number o f deer killed , if any;
4. Number o f loads hauled per wee k;
5. Number o f workers employed ;
6. Monthly quarry output ;
7. Othe r information to show c orrpliance with
State regulations.
b. Truck traffic wi ll be limited to the hours be tween 7:00
A.M. and 5:00 P.M. du ring summer months and daylight hours in
the winte r. No loads will be hauled after 3 :00 P.M. Friday, on
week-e nds or on State o r National holidays ;
c. The applicant shall participate i n the r econ s truction
of State Highway 325 to construct those improveme nts which are
made refe r e nce to in the report entitled State Hi ghway 325,
Qua rry Site Traff ic Report , by Matthew J . ~lic h, P .E., d a ted
July 28, 1982,~maki ng in-kind contributions towa rds this
cons truction effort, i ncluding , by way of example but not
limitation, man powe r, haulage of material , cont ribution of
~irne s tone for base p urposes , and expertise in blas ting or
drilling.
d. As a r esult o f the truck hauling activities of the
applicant, state highway 325 will require on-going ma inte na nce.
'Ihe applicant s ha ll contribute monies towards the mainte nance
costs e xpended on said highways to the jurisdictiona l e ntity
performing s aid suc h mai n tenance. The percentage c ontribution
du e f rorn the a pplicant will be calculated according to the
average number of r o und-trip truck trips per day ge ne r a ted by
the ai;plicant as follows :
i. Between one (1) and four (4) round-trip truck trips
per day', the applicant wi ll contribute five percent (5%) of the
actual mainte na nce costs ;
11. Betwe e n f ive (5) and eight (8 ) r ound-trip truck
trips per day, the applicant will contribute ten perce nt (10%)
of the actual mainte na nce costs ;
4
iii. Between n i ne (9) and twelve (12) round-trip truck
trips per d a y, the applicant will contribute f i fteen perce nt
(15%) 0£ the actual mai ntenance costs ; and
iv. Between th i r teen (13 ) and sixteen (16) round-trip
truck trips ; the applicant will contribute twen t y perce nt (20%)
of the actual ma inte na nce costs.
'Ihe applicant's cont ribution of actual ma intena nce cos ts,
pursuant to the above specified percentage scale s ha ll not
e xce ed in tota l dolla r s the sum of One Dollar and No/Ce nts
($1.00) multiplied by the number of tons of l im est one a ctua lly
hauled over state highway 325. Contribut i o ns for · actual
maintenance, pursuant to this subparagraph , s hall be made
annually, on January 1 of each year , based upon the actual
maintenance cos ts expended during the year , the a ve r age number
of round-trip truck t r i ps per week day during the y ear, and the
total m.nnber o f tons o f limestone hauled during the year. Such ()
.,..cQntaoo.t.i.ons sha J J be -made-ii 1 one--of--the--t.hr ee-methOOs. ~
pu&.i.ded.....f~ubpa ragr:aph-1-aOOv&>
e. The evidence i n the record substantiates the f a ct that
truck traffic associated with the proposed use will cause an
immediate d e t e riorati on of the asphalt surface of said roadway,
which d e teriora tion i s contrary to public health, safety and
we lfare. Th e r efore , prior to the issuance of the s ubj ect land
us e permit, the appl i cant shall provide , i n monies or by means
of a fina ncial a greeme nt, approved by the Board , which approval
shall not be unreason ably withheld , the fo l l owing S tnnS of
money:
Garfield County and the State of Colorado s hall e ng age in a
r e construction proj ect of state highway 325 s o tha t s aid
roa dway is ove rla yed with an asphalt mat suffi c i e nt, accord ing
to state highway standards , to meet present traf fic
r e quirerrents. Eithe r in conjunction with this r econs truction
project, or in a ddition thereto , the applicant s h all contribute
such monies a s are necessary to increase the aspha lt mat on
s aid roa dway so tha t i t meets applicable state s t anda rds for
use by the a pplica nt's trucks in the amount o f s ixte en (16)
round-trips per d ay; prov ided that this conditi on s ha ll only be
binding upon the app licant in the e vent that Ga r f i e ld County
a sslllUes jurisdiction ove r state highway 325 .
9. That the applica nt s hall not engage ·in underg round mining, s ince it
did not include a plan for und erground mining in its application.
10. That the applicant s hall be limited to 100,000 tons o f production
per ye ar.
Upon motion duly ma de and seconded the fo r egoing Re s olution was
adopted by the following vote :
Eugen e "Jim" Dr i n khouse , Aye
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Larry Ve las que z
Flav e n J. Ce r ise
A'ITEST:
7£µh/uL~ Clerk of the 130ara
STATE OF COLORAOO
County of Garfield
)
) ss.
I, , County Clerk and ex-officio Cle rk of the Boa rd
of County Cornnis s ione r s i n and for the County and State a f oresaid do he r e by
c e rtify that the anne xed and foregoing order is tr ul y copi ed f ro~ the Records
of the Procee dings of the Boa r d of County Commissione r s for s a id Ga rfie ld
County, now in my office.
5
• IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have he reunto set my hand and affixed the seal of
said County, at Glenwuod Springs, this day of , A.O.
1983.
County Clerk and.ex-officio Clerk of the Board of County Corranissioners.
6
,·