Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 12.17.1984REQUEST: • • ,I=Zh/k/ BOCC 12/17/84 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS Special Use permits for extraction, storage and limited processing facilities tor a coal mine, industrial support facilities, water impoundments, mineral waste disposal and access routes. APPLICANT: Storm King Mines, Inc. LOCATION: SITE DATA: WATER: SEWER: ACCESS: EXISTING ZONING: ADJACENT ZONING: A tract ot land located in portions of the N 1/2 ot Section 6, T6S, R9OW; more practically described as a tract located 1 1/2 miles east ot New Castle, off ot County Road 335. A 292 acre tract of land to be used for coal mining activities and support facilities. -Portable water containers for domestic use. -Well - industrial make-up water. Temporary non -discharging holding tanK. County Road 335. Planned Unit Development. Nortn - PUD, A/R/RD South - A/R/RD East - O/S, PUD West - A/R/RD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed Special Uses are located in District B, Subdivisions/Rural Serviceable Areas, 1/2 to 1 mile radius, moderate environmental constraints. Under the District B classification, tne area falls within the sub-catagory 16, which is an area witnin one (1) mile of a subdivision with central water and sewer and moderate environmental constraints. Tnis sub-catagory classification is oased on tne Riveroend PUD location. Some relevant Plan policies are: 1. Non-agricultural areas and non-productive cropland snail be considered pest suited for development in agricultural areas. (Policy lb,pg.1) 2. Major streets, topographic features, open space and other similar undeveloped land areas snould oe used to separate residential areas from incompatible non-residential uses such as heavy and light industry and commercial centers. (Policy 5, pg.3) 3. Environmental impact and assessment statements will be reviewed carefully prior to tne issuance of any special or conditional use permits. (Policy la, pg. 4) 4. The County will require any iaentified environmental and/or fiscal impacts resulting from large scale commercial or industrial development to oe mitigated. (Policy lo, pg. 4) • • 5. Any development creating an adverse impact on a road system snail be required to upgrade and improve the system to meet standards acceptable to the County. (Policy 2a, pg. 8) 6. Roadway paving and curb and gutter design shall be designed to accomodate a specific projected traffic load. (Policy 7, pg. 9) 7. Proposed road design and improvement that will endanger dirvers, create congestion or provide inadequate ingress or egresss to existing road systems will be discouraged. (Policy 8a, pg. 9) 8. Heavy industrial, commercial and intensive recreational traffic should not be directed to residential collector, local and "farm to market" rights-of-way. (Policy 9, pg. 9) 9. The County will require major development proposals to evaluate their impact on County air and water quality and may require mitigation of any identified impacts. (Policy 3, pg. 12) 10. Require development on lands having moderate or minor environmental constraints to mitigate physical problems such as minor rock fall, 17-24% slopes, minor mudflow, potential subsidence due to nydrocompactive soils or mining activity, nigh water tables, slow percolation, radioactive soils, corrosive and exspansive soils. (Policy 5, pg. 12) 11. The County will discourage development proposals that require excessive vegetation removal and cut and fill areas that will result in a usual degradation of the area. (Policy 7, pg. 13) 12. New development will be required to mitigate impacts to, or contribute to any community service that will be impacted adversely by the project. (Policy 36, pg. 14) II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: Tne mine site sits on a bench south of the Colorado River and at the base ot tne Grand Hogback (Coal Ridge). The portions of the site nearest to the river are irrigated hay land, with the upper sections ot the site naving sagebrush and mountain scrub as the predominant vegetation. The area of tne site that includes the Grand Hogback formation has very steep slopes in excess of 40%. But tne majority of the site sits at tne base ot the hogback and has gentle slopes of 5 to 15%. B. Project Description: It is proposed to develop a coal mine to prove the feasibility of the nydraulic mining technique, provide coal tor washability and combustion tests and to provide small shipments to tne western coal spot markets. It is proposed, that the mine will eventually produce 2.2 million tons annually. Initial activity will include clearing and excavation in tne mine portal area. /O To gain access to tne coal seams to be mined, it will oe necessary to drive two, 2500 foot long, rock tunnels. The rock tunneling will require the use of explosives. During the initial phases of the tunneling, surface blasting will be required. To mitigate any disturbance of the nearby residents, it is proposed to blast only during daylight nours, with partial rounds. Tne applicants state tnat tne initial blast will produce sound less than an average thunderclap, with a duration of less tnan five seconds. It is stated by the applicant that tne measured sound intensity will not exceed any regulatory standard and would be similar to a large diesel truck at full throttle on I-70. Nearby residents will be notified of the times of eacn blast and travel on County Road 335 will be Halted temporarily during the blast. Tne surface blasting is anticipated to last tor a two week period. It is noted that tne nearest residential dwelling is 3600 feet from the blasting site. Once tne operations have proceeded 25 feet underground, subsurface blasting will commence with blasts detonated twice a shift, 3 snitts per day, 7 days per week. Rock from the tunneling operation will be stored on site, for future use as fill and base material. A sediment pond will be developed to control sediment yield from the initial and final surface development. Two diversion channels will be constructed to control the surface runoff and direct it to tne sediment pond. Tne pond would be 300 feet long, 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep and be capable of storing the entire runoff volume from a 10 year, 24 nour storm. An emergency spillway will be constructed to convey the peak discharge of a 25 year, 24 nour storm. Storm King Mines has applied for an NPDES permit for the discharge. During the test mine phase, certain temporary facilities will oe developed. A temporary dewatering and sizing station will be developed to dewater development coal, size and separate tne coal and pump the water fraction back into the Pluming circuit. Mobile and tractor trailers will be placed on site for offices, change houses and equipment storage. Along witn these facilities, parking areas and contractor staging areas will be designated. A temporary nolding tank for tne collection of sewage waste and bath water will also be developed. The facility will be non -discharging, witn the waste trucked oft -site to tne Town of New Castle's sewage treatment plant. Permanent facilities to be developed will include the initial repair shop, slurry holding ponds, an electrical distribution center and initial water treatment plant. The slurry holding pond is an operational retention structure that could store tne hydraulic mining circuit in tne event of a processing circuit failure or shutdown. Tne 100 toot wide, 240 toot long and 15 foot deep structure will be used during tne initial rock tunneling to retain up to 2,000,000 gallons of water that might be encountered. Once the rock tunneling is completed, the slurry ponds will be used to hold raw coal and water when otner surface facilities are inoperable or tor intransit flow to regulate flow densities. The structure will consist of a layer :J • • ot clay or other synthetic membrane, witn concrete poured over this surface. It will be divided in the middle by a retaining wall, with a spillway to allow for overflow to eitner side. The electrical distribution center will be a fenced in area to receive the incoming power and break it down for supply to the various components of the operation. Power will come from the existing Public Service, 69 KV line. A water treatment plant and two, 50,000 gallon water storage tanks will be developed, Initially the water tor the project will come from two sources. All potable drinking water will be brought in from oft -site and placed in coolers tnroughout the project site. Non -potable water for the change house and for construction make-up water will come from a drill nole used in monitoring wnich will be enlarged tor the installation of a pump. Tne water from the well will be stored in a 50,000 gallon storage tank and then pumped in underground lines for use in the change house, for construction and fire protection purposes. Tne water treatment plant will not be needed during tne rock tunneling but construction of the facility will precede tne development of otner permanent facilities. The facility will eventually be used to purify water for potable use. In conjunction with the construction of the water treatment plant, the second 50,000 gallon water tank will be built, giving the operation a storage capacity of 100,000 gallons of potable water. Coal storage during the test mine period will be on a concrete or asphalt mat, with an underlaying clay or synthetic membrane to seal the area. As operations continue to expand additional facilities will be added to the facility to meet higher production levels. The coal storage pile will contain a maximum 10,000 tons of coal, oe 60 feet tall and 160 feet in diameter. Tne coal will be loaded by front end loaders and trucked to a temporary loadout facility in New Castle. Employment levels for the project are anticipated to follow the projections provided in tne Fiscal Impact Analysis, only moved back three quarters. These projections identify a maximum employment level of 272 employees in the first quarter ot 1990, with a permanent work force of 258 employees by tne tnird quarter of 1990. Once the hard rock mining is facilities are completed the projected that the following in September 1985: 1985 1986 1987 1988 5,000 25,000 26,000 30,000 ton/montn ton/month ton/month ton/month * 4th quarter only completed and the temporary test mining will begin. It is tonnages will be produced starting 15,000 ton/annual 300,000 ton/annual 312,000 ton/annual 360,000 ton/annual • • Since this coal is proposed to be trucked to a temporary load -out in New Castle, the following truck trips/day would result: 1985 1986 1987 1988 9 trucks/day 45 trucks/day 48 trucks/day 54 trucks/day It is stated in the application that the hauling will only occur during daylight hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., witn a halting of hauling activity during normal school bus hours. It is also noted that the above numbers are averages based on the use of a 28 ton naul truck and tnat there may be increases or decreases in the actual number of trucks per day. Tnis is due to tne irregular use of tne loadout facility. It is noted that at no time will there be any more than tour trucks utilized for Hauling. At the Plannig Commission meeting, tne applicant requested that wnolesale/retail sale of coal De added to the requested uses. This would allow Storm King to sell small amounts of coal to local home owners for neating. Should the test mine be unsuccessful, Storm King Mines will reclaim the land in accordance witn a reclamation plan approved by the MLRB. III. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Zoning: All of tne uses proposed will be Special Use permits and it is proposed that the mine will employ 200 or more employees at some time during tne operation of the mine. Because the mine will eventually employ 200 or more employees if it reaches full scale development, Storm King Mines submitted the appropriate documentation required of Section 5.08 of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution for Fiscal Impact Analysis. Resolution No. 84-99 found the Storm King Mines Fiscal Impact Analysis to be adequate and identified necessary fiscal impact mitigation measures. Tne present Special Use permit application has a very brief description of the proposed mitigation program. Basically, three issues have been identified: 1. Proposed rebuilding of County Road 335. 2. Local nire 3. Proposed monitoring program. In general, the proposed mitigation plan is not adequate to meet the requirements set forth in Resolution No. 84-99. The new proposal changes the employment projections by quarter as noted, nas additional employment related to the transportation of tne coal, lower projected production levels and new capital facilities in New Castle. All of these factors effect the projected revenues to the various affected governmental entities. The new direction of the project needs to be reviewed in light of the Fiscal Impact Analysis and that all entities involved in the original review should have the opportunity to review the revised figures. /3 NORIO • • To accomplish this, it will be necessary to submit a revised Fiscal Impact Analysis that changes the figures to reflect the current projections, have that document reviewed and tound to be adequate, by all agencies involved in the initial review. Then, have a mitigation program established that addresses the findings made in the new document. B. Agency Comments: 1. Bureau ot Land Management: The BLM has been the process of developing an environmental assessment for a coal refuse disposal site proposed by Storm King Mines for the full production mine. As of this date, the BLM has not completed the assessment and is waiting for additional information from Storm King regarding the present proposed and future activities. As a result, tnere nas not been a finding, one way or another, as to the significance of any environmental impacts. (Sec letter pg. 2f0) 2. Storm King Mines has submitted an application to the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Mined Land Reclamation Division for approval of the required permit for the proposed test mine. In October, MLRB made their draft findings and stipulations for compliance, to wnicn Storm King nas responded. If the permit is approved, it would be valid for a maximum of five (5) years. It was noted by the MLRB staff that tne proposed temporary loadout in New Castle is not a part of the present application and would nave to be tne subject ot a separate application, review and approval. Additionally, MLRB staff nave noted a potential conflict with the Storm King Mines proposal to remove tne New Castle -Vulcan Mine tipple and the State Historic Preservation offices desire to preserve the tipple. (See letter, page 27 ) 3. The Colorado Department ot Health noted tnat they nave not completed the analysis ot tne projects impact on air quality. They also noted concerns about coal dust and otner dust generating materials on tne County roads and the tact that this was beyond their direct permitting requirements, but could result in enforcement action being brought against tne County if this became a problem. They also noted concerns about the proposed loadout in New Castle. (See letter, page 28 ) 4. Comments nave been received from Greg McKennis expressing concerns regarding tne impact of a coal mine on agricultural activities in tne area and the visual impact ot the development on the Colorado River corridor. He suggests a number of conditions to be imposed or considered in reviewing the application. (See letter, pages 29--,36 ) 5. The City of Glenwood Springs submitted a letter of support for the project. (See letter, page ,g7 ) C. Staff Comments: 1. The applicants propose to build a haul road from tne mine site to just east of the New Castle I-70 Interchange. Tnis haul road would nave a 40 foot wide driving surtace witn two, 20 foot wide lanes, witn a de -acceleration lane at the entrance to the mine property. Tne driving surtace would have a 6" subbase, 6" base course and a 4" aspnalt mat. The County Road Supervisor has indicated that the basic design may be adequate to handle the proposed heavy industrial traffic, but questions wnether any real analysis ot the road needs has been made. It may or may not be, tnat the proposed design is more than is necessary, initially. To this end, it is recommended that a pavement thickness design be performed by a qualified registered professional engineer to determine the actual haul road design. i¢— Related to this issue is the question of traffic congestion and conflicts between neavy industrial traffic and residential traffic using County Road 335 and the New Castle I-70 Interchange. It is projected tnat in tne first halt of 1988, there may oe an average of 54 round trip truck trips per day, wnicn could increase due to the need for the loading of coal on an irregular basis during tne test mine. The 54 round trip truck trips per day could be converted to 108 one way truck trips, or an average of one truck every four to five minutes on the haul route. Given the tact that this is only an average and tnat it could be increased substantially on certain days, it would be appropriate to nave an analysis of this issue by a qualified traffic safety engineer prior to actual constuction of tne Haul road. Otherwise, the developer may end up overbuilding a road that cannot possibly accommodate the proposed traffic volume. Issues tnat need to oe dealt witn at a minimum are; present road and interchange capacities, maximum number of naul trucks, time of operation and future projected traffic volumes. 2. Presently, Storm King Mines is in tne process of obtaining a change in use for their Vulcan Ditcn water rights from irrigation to commercial, industrial and domestic use. Initial water supply needs will be met from a proposed well. Prior to any coal mine activity, verification of the legal right to drill the proposed well needs to be obtained from the Division of Water Resources. Tnis snould be provided prior to the development ot the 50,000 gallon water storage tank and associated facilities. Prior to development ot the additional storage tank and water purification plant, a legal water supply snould be verified by the Division of Water Resources. 3. During tne initial phase of tne rock tunneling, the proposed surface blasting activities will be noticeaole to tne nearby residents. As proposed, all residents will oe notified of the times of tne blasting. Once tne blasting has progressed 25 feet underground, it is proposed to increase blasting activity to twice a snift, 24 hours a day. It is stated in the application that once underground, the noise level will be negligible. Should a number of local residents complain about tne sub -surface blasting, then provisions should oe made to return to a more limited blasting scnedule, until the impact to the nearby residents is negated. Additionally, all heavy equipment snould oe properly muffled and operate in areas with sound barriers such as berms or walls. 4. As noted previously, the MLRB will only be permitting the test mine activities. Given that the MLRB application will be limited to a term of 3 to a maximum of 5 years. The County approval should be for a similar term. 5. Permits have been applied for from the Colorado Department of Healtn, Air and Water Quality divisions tor an NPDES discharge permit and air quality emission permit. Prior to issuance of any Special Use Permit tor a facility requiring these permits, copies of tne permits snould oe submitted to the Department of Development. 6. It is proposed to use a non -discharging sewage holding tank for the test mine. The Town ot New Castle has expressed a willingness to work with Storm King Mines to allow the dumping of the mine's sewage into the Town's wastewater plant. (See letter, page 38 • • 7. Visual impact of the proposed mine cannot De completely negated, particularly during tne initial construction and excavation. Once the initial construction and excavating has been completed, some visual relief can be acnieved tnrougn perming and the sight obscuring fencing. Any outside storage of material or equipment should be either behind berms or sight obscuring fences. Any lighting required for night operations should be limited sucn that there will not be any reflection to adjacent areas, be directed toward the mine portal and be tne minimum illumination necessary tor operations. Any temporary or permanent structures snoula be painted in colors that will blend into the surrounding area to the degree possible. Tne applicant has proposed to berm and landscape extensively after construction. A landscaping and lighting plan should be submitted that is acceptable to the Board of County Commissioners prior to issuance of any Special Use Permits. IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties were heard at the meeting; 2. That the proper publication and public notice was provided as requred by law for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners; 3. That tne proposed Special Use conforms to Section 5.03 concerning the approval or disapproval of a petition tor a Special Use, of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution; 4. That the proposed land use will be compatible with existing and permitted land uses in all directions provided certain conditions of approval are met; 5. Tnat for tne above stated and otner reasons, the proposed Special Use Permits are in the best interest of the nealtn, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of tne citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION On November 14, 1984, the Planning Commission recommended approval on an incremental basis, with the following conditions of approval: 1. That all verbal and written representations of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval, unless specified otherwise by the board of County Commissioners. 2. That any permits issued will be valid until July 1, 1985 3. That prior to tne issuance of any Special Use Permits: A. Tne applicant will revise the Storm King Mines Fiscal Impact Assessment to reflect tne current plan of operations, and that the revised Fiscal Impact Assessment will De reviewed by tne affected governmental entities and a mitigation plan established tnat is acceptable to the Board of County Commissioners. • • B. That the copies of all other permits from other governmental agencies required tor the proposed Special Uses De submitted to the Department of Development. C. That the applicant submit a landscaping, lighting and color scheme plan tor tne proposed uses. 4. That prior to the issuance of Special Use permits tor extraction, storage, water impoundment and mineral waste disposal tne following conditions be met: A. That tne applicant agree to limit blasting activity to day time hours if the noise impacts to nearby residents is determined to be greater than projected by tne board of County Commissioners. B. That written verification from tne Division of water Resources of a legal water source be provided to tne Department of Development. C. That written verification from the Town of New Castle of their ability to accept the sewage effluent from tne project. 5. That prior to tne issuance of Special Use Permits for Industrial support facilities, retail/wholesale sale of coal, and tne access routes, the following conditions be met: A. That the applicant agree to pay tor a traffic safety analysis of the proposed haul road and that the traffic safety engineer be hired by Garfield County. Tnat the conclusions of the traffic safety analysis will be incorporated into tne design and improvement of the haul road. That, at a minimum, tne analysis study: 1. Present traffic volumes on CR 335, New Castle I-70 Interchange and St. Hwy 6 & 24 at the interchange. 2. Projected volumes for a specified period of time. 3. Establishes limits to traffic volumes. 4. Identifies measures necessary to mitigate congestion and circulation problems. B. Tnat the proposed haul road be designed based upon a pavement thickness design performed by an engineer qualified to perform such a study. Furtner, that the Board of County Commissioners review tne document and require tne applicant build the haul road in accordance with the specifications contained in tne report. C. That based on tne traffic safety analysis, a maximum number of truck trips per day be established tor tne nauling of coal and that a limited size of the operation De established But in no case will the test mine exceed 500,000 tons of coal per year or 54 truck trips per day. • • Ekk BOCC 12/17/84 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: Modification of a portion of the Riverbend Planned Unit Development. OWNER/APPLICANT: Storm King Mines, Inc. ENGINEER: Scnmueser and Assoc. LOCATION: A tract of land located in portions of the N 1/2, Section 6, T6S, R9OW; more practically described as a tract located 1 1/2 miles east of New Castle, off of County Rd. 335. SITE DATA: A 292 acre tract to oe zoned Planned Unit Development to permit light and neavy industrial uses and open space. WATER: Central Water (Riverbend PUD) SEWER: Central Sewer (Riverbend PUD) ACCESS: County Road 335 EXISTING ZONING: Planned Unit Development ADJACENT ZONING: North - PUD, A/R/RD South - A/R/RD East - O/S, PUD West - A/R/RD I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed Planned Unit Development is located in District B, Subdivisions/Rural Serviceable Areas, 1/2 to 1 mile radius, moderate environmental constraints. Under the District B classification, the area falls within the sub -category lo, wnicn is an area within one (1) mile of a subdivision with central water and sewer and moderate environmental constraints. This sub-catagory classification is based on the Riverbend PUD location. Some relevant Plan policies are: 1. Non-agricultural areas and non-productive cropland shall be considered best suited for development in agricultural areas (Policy lo,pg.1). • • 2. The PUD review process is encouraged, so that tne development community nas greater flexibility in project design. (Policy 3, pag. 2) 3. Major streets, topographic features, open space and otner similar undeveloped land areas should be used to separate residential areas from incompatible non-residential uses such as heavy and light industry and commercial centers.(Policy 5, pg. 3) 4. Non -extractive industry should locate in areas witn adequate transportation and utility corridors and tecnnical services available, such as existing industrial parks. (Policy 2, pg. 4) 5. Commercial venicular movement should be concentrated along major roadways. (Policy 3a, pg.4) 6. Where possible, the County will request that dedicated open space areas be contigious. (Policy 3, pg.6) 7. Any new development adjacent to public lands snail provide perpetual public access easements to tnose public lands involved. (Policy 4, pg. 6) 8. Development proposed in areas adjacent to streams or rivers with rafting and or fisning potential, snould oe required to dedicate easements for public access to these areas. (Policy 6, pg. 7) 9. Any development creating an adverse impact on a road system shall be required to upgrade and improve the system to meet standards acceptable to the County. (Policy 2a, pg. 8) 10. Development that provides bikeways and pedestrian patns tnat interconnect residential areas with service and employment centers will ne looked upon favorably. (Policy 4b, pg. 8) 11. Roadway paving and curb and gutter design shall be designed to accommodate a specific projected traffic load. (Policy 7, page 9) 12. Proposed road design and improvement tnat will endanger drivers, create congestion or provide inadequate ingress and egress to existing road systems will be discouraged. (Policy 8a, pg. 9) 13. Heavy industrial, commercial and intensive recreational traffic should not be directed to residential collector, local and "farm to market" rignts-of-way. (Policy 9, pg. 9) 14. Where a logical and economic extension of service lines from an existing water and/or sewer system can occur, the County will encourage new development adjacent to or within reasonable distance to serve, to enter into the appropriate agreements to receive service. (Policy 1, pg. 10) 15. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to pay for any improvements or upgrades to treatment facilities and the extension of service lines that will be needed as a result of the development, it required by tne service provider. (Policy 4, pg. 10) 16. Tne County may require new development with river frontage to dedicate this land as open space, accessible to the public, in a manner that will protect fragile wetlands, scenic resources and protect flood plains from encroachment. (Policy 2, pg. 12) 17. New development will be required to provide fire protection facilities and water storage on site tnat meets tne appropriate fire district's needs. (Policy 2a, pg. 14) 2 • • II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The proposed Planned Unit Development sits on a bencn south of the Colorado River and at the base of tne Grand Hogback (Coal Ridge). Tne portions of the site nearest to the river are irrigated naylands. With tne upper sections of the site having sagebrush and mountain scrub as the predominant vegetation. Tne area of tne site that includes the Grand Hogback formation has very steep slopes in excess of 40% but the majority of the site sits at the base of the nogback and nas gentler slopes of 5 to 15%. B. Project Description: It is proposed to rezone a portion of the existing Riverbend PUD to become tne Coal Ridge PUD zone. Tne Coal Ridge PUD is a 292.3 acre tract that would include three zone designations; a 39.74 acre Lignt Industrial (I-1) district, a 135.89 acre Heavy Industrial (I-2) district and a 116.66 acre Common Open Space (COS) district. Tne proposed PUD is primarily for the purpose of developing a coal mine in the I-2 district that would eventually produce 2.2 million tons of coal annually. The PUD has nine (9) phases aimed at the initial development stages of the coal mine. The following outlines the proposed zone district text: (See pages/9-23 tor detail) I-1 Light Industrial Uses by Right: Agricultural activities, kennel, riding stable, guiding and outfitting, utility lines 69 KV or less, utility facilities, conveyers, ditches, roads, etc. Uses, Special: Industrial operations, camper parK, natural resource fabrication, pumping facilities, commercial/industrial park, natural resource extraction, railroad spur, etc. Minimum Lot: 2 Acres Maximum Lot Coverage: 85% Minimum Setbacks: Industrial Standards Maximum Building Height: 45 ft. by rignt, 150 ft. by Special Use permit. I -Z Heavy Industrial Uses by Right: same as I-1 district Uses, Special: same as I-1 district generally Minimum Lot: 2 acres Maximum Lot Coverage: 100% Maximum Setback: Industrial Standards Maximum Building Heignt: 85 ft. by right 150 ft. by Special Use COS Common Open Space Uses by Right: Existing uses, easements, utility lines Uses, Special: Power and water utilities, storage of natural resources, public gatherings Maximum Building Heignt: 35 ft. Tne Common Open Space district is intended to be an unimproved area for passive recreation. It is proposed to allow power and/or water utilities, storage of natural resources and agricultural materials and public gatnerings as special uses. • • It is proposed to either develop a new central water and sewer system or expand tne existing Rverbend PUD water and sewer systems. The development engineer has stated the water rights owned Dy the applicant is sufficient to allow tor tne development of an expanded or new water system to meet the needs of the development. Venicular access to the proposed PUD would be from County Road 335. The proposed PUD does include provisions for a rail spur to be developed, if approved as a part of a special use permit. III.MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Comprehensive Plan: The Industrial/Commercial goal reads as follows: To maintain and support the existing economic base of the County and to encourage furtner diversification wnicn will broaden employment opportunities and help stabilize the economic future of the region. The proposed PUD would allow for the development of industry that would provide additional employment opportunities and the expansion of an industry existing in the County; natural resource extraction and processing. As it is presently proposed, the Coal Ridge PUD will need to mitigate the following impacts to oe found in general compliance with the Comprehensive Plan: 1. Impacts to County Road 335 related to tne physical capacity of the road to Handle Heavy industrial traffic and tne potential of tnat traffic to conflict with existing residential and commercial traffic. 2. Impacts of a heavy industrial operation on a nearby residential area. 3. Environmental impacts on existing air, water, noise, vibration and visual qualities of the area. In general, the applicant has proposed methods of mitigating the above noted impacts and feels tnat general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan can be found. B. Zoning: The Coal Ridge PUD proposes three zone districts. The following is a suggested revised zoning text tor the P.U.D. 1.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Effect of the Garfield County Zoning resolution of 1978, as amended: The provisions of tne Garfield County Zoning Resolution and the successors thereof, as now in affect and as hereafter amended, are by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, to the extent not divergent from the provisions of the Coal Ridge Planned Unit Development Zone Regulations. B. Conflict: The provisions of the Zone Regulations shall prevail and govern the development of Coal Ridge P.U.D. provided, however, where the provisions of the Coal Ridge P.U.D. Zone Regulations do not clearly address a specific subject, tne provisions of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, including, but not limited to Section 5.03 in its entirety, or any otner resolutions or regulations of Garfield County shall prevail. 4 • • 1.1 Map The General Development Plan is attached to this resolution and referenced as Exhibit 2.0 T Transition 2.1 Uses, by right: Agricultural, single family dwelling. 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.0 3.1 Utility lines of not greater than 69 KV, and facilities and municipal structures to serve existing and industrial needs, such as pipelines, powerlines, sub -stations, conveyors, ditches, roads, water and sewer facilities, and easements; Uses, special: None Minimum Lot Area: 2 acres Maximum Lot Coverage: 25 percent Minimum SetbacK: Front: 25 feet Side: 10 feet Rear: 25 feet Maximum Height of Buildings: 25 feet I-2 Heavy Industrial District Uses, by Right: Agricultural Utility lines and facilities and municipal structures to serve existing and industrial needs, such as pipelines, powerlines, sup -stations, conveyors, ditcnes, road, water and sewer facilities, and easements. 3.2 Uses, Special: Heliport with support facilities, mine salvage yard, yards tor layout of storage, temporary structures tor housing, office or storage wnen approved as a part of an extractive operation. Plant for fabrication of goods from processed natural resources; material handling, pumping facilities, electrical distribution, warehouse facilities/staging areas, fabrication areas, storage areas, water impoundments, access routes, utility lines over 69 KV, pipelines. Sites for extraction, processing and storage of natural resources, including mines, shafts, pits, storage points, and boreholes for coal, oil and gas, geothermal and other minerals, water, sand, gravel, rocK, soil, explosives, chemicals and fuel. Railroad corridor tor spur or branch line serving agricultural/industrial sites; radio and/or television transmission and receiving facility (not general broadcast). 3.3 Minimum Lot Area: 2 acres 3.4 Maximum Lot Coverage: industrial: 85 percent 3.5 Minimum SetbacK: All buildings shall meet the following minimums: Front: 25 feet; Side: 10 feet; Rear: 25 feet. • • 3.6 Maximum Height of Buildings: 35 feet permitted by rignt, 150 feet subject to Special Use Permit. Review and approval based on the following criteria: 1. The geographic location 2. Mitigation of visual impacts to the surrounding areas. 3. Mitigation of impacts to adjacent land uses related to shadows, air circulation and view. 3.7 Multiple Uses: Multiple uses snail De permitted on all lands within tnis zone district, provided approved by Special Use permit. 4.0 COS - Common Open Space: Tne Common Open Space district snail include parcels of land and areas of water, or a combination of land and water, within the PUD, designated and intended primarily tor the use of enjoyment of the owners and occupants of the PUD, and tneir employees. 4.1 Uses, by Rignt: Existing uses, provided that such shall be a non -conforming use as defined in Sections 6.11 and 7.0 of the Garfield County Zoning Regulation, greenbelt, utility lines and sub -stations, public and private easements and rights of way; park. 4.2 Uses, Special: Site tor power and/or water utilities; storage of agricultural materials; public gatherings, water impoundments, recreational facilities and park shelter including maintenance facilities. 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 5.0 5.1 Minimum Lot Area: Not applicable Maximum Lot Coverage: Not applicable Minimum Setback: Not applicable Maximum Heignt of Buildings: 35 feet Supplementary Requirements: All Special Use Permit applications shall include a landscaping design plan that minimizes to the extent feasible visual and noise impacts associated with the proposed use(s). 5.2 All outside storage snail be enclosed and screened by a sight obscuring fence. Storm King Mines requested that the retail/wnolesale sale of coal be added as a Special Use in the I-2, Heavy Industrial District and that tne I-2 zone district boundary be increased in size to allow for additional industrial support facilities. C. COMMENTS 1. The Riverbend Homeowners Association has submitted a letter objecting to the proposed modification of tne P.U.D. Tne basic reasons for objections are questions regarding the general compatibility with tne comprenensive Pian and the compatibility of an industrial activity in an existing residential neighbornood. (see letter pgs. 11.1110. • • 2. Staff Comments a) Tne proposed PUD would be served by a central water and sewer system. The developer nas noted two options; hooK into the existing Riverbend PUD water and sewer systems or to develop new water and sewer systems. Storm King Mines has a 395 acre toot irrigation water right out ot the Vulcan ditcn, wnicn could, according to developers engineer, more than meet tne development needs for the Coal Ridge PUD. b) Tne proposed PUD will have direct impacts to County Road 335. Tne applicant nas proposed to upgrade tne existing road within the proposed Coal Ridge PUD to standards acceptable to the County. Additionally, tne applicant has proposed to upgrade the County Road outside of the PUD to the New Castle interchange to a level consistent with the proposed industrial and residential traffic needs. c) Tne impacts to tne nearby residential development as a part of this rezoning request are primarily related to traffic impacts and tne general impacts of an industrial activity on a residential area as noted above. The applicant nas proposed to mitigate tne traffic impacts by improvement of the common access road (CR 335). The general impacts of an industrial activity on the residential neignbornood will be related to air, water and noise pollution and the visual impacts. Tne potential air, water and noise pollution impacts can be mitigated by buffering, control over times ot activity and adnerence to local, state and federal standards. Visual impacts to the area will need to be mitigated to tne degree possible through landscaping, revegetation and berming. Tne suggested landscape design plan approved with any special use permit should provide mitigation from the above noted impacts. It is proposed to nave nine phases in this rezoning application. The pnases are oriented to tne development of the test mine. The proposed phasing could be simplified to tnree pnases: Pnase 1. Permits for extractive operations obtained 6-1-85. Pnase 2. Permits for support facilities to extractive operations obtained 1-1-86 Phase 3. Completion of test mine construction and associated facilities 6-1-86 IV. SUGGESTED FINDINGS: 1. That the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and tnat all interested parties were nears at that meeting; 2. That the proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearing before the Board ot County • • Commissioners; 3. That the proposed zoning is in general conformity with the recommendations set fortn in tne Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated area of the County; 4. That the proposed land use will be compatible with the existing land uses in the nearby area provided proper mitigation is performed to mitigate impacts; 5. That other than the foregoing particulars, the requested zone change amendment and plan approval nerein is in general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan for Garfield County, Colorado, and does meet all requirements of tne Zoning Resolution of Garfield County and, further, that tne requested planned unit development is suitable and appropriate tor the subject property, concerning the location, condition and circumstances of said property and is in the nest of interest of tne morals, order, health, safety, convenience and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. V. RECOMMENDATION: On November 4, 1984, tne Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. That all verbal and written representations of the applicant shall be conditions of approval, unless expressly provided tor in this resolution. 2. Tnat prior to signing the Resolution of Approval for tne requested zone change, the PUD zone text be revised to incorporate the changes recommended in the Project Information and Staff Comments and include tne addition of "retail/wnolesale sale of coal" as a Special Use in the I-2, Heavy industrial zone district. 3. That the proposed phasing of the project be revised to read: Step 1. Permits for extractive operations obtained by 6-1-85 Step 2. Permits for support facilities to extractive operations obtained by 1-1-86 Step 3. Completion of test mine construction and associated facilities by 6-1-86 4. That the PUD Development Plan be revised to reflect tne changes to the zone districts and that the zone districts be legally described, including the requested modification of the I-2, Heavy Industrial zone district boundary. 8 IN REPLY REFER TO: • • United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Glenwood Springs Resource Area P.O. Box 1009 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 November 8, 1984 Mr. Larry Velasquez, Chairman Garfield County Commissioners P. 0. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 pe • Topic.. Oita pin. (7-162) 1786 RECEIVED NOV 9 1984 cAiLJ COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Ekb/ / r E Dear Mr. Velasquez: This letter is in reference to the Storm King Mines zone change and special use permit applications. We have reviewed the application submitted by Storm King Mines for the zone change and the special use permits. The document does not conflict with the applications we are processing and further clarifies Storm King Mines' phased approach. Storm King Mines has applied for rights -of -ways and a refuse disposal site on public lands in association with their proposed coal mine. An initial step in processing these applications requires the preparation of an environmental assessment. As previously discussed with Dennis Stranger and Mark Bean of the planning staff, representatives of this office will be attending planning and zoning commission meetings and the county commissioners hearing to identify public concerns relevant to our environmental assessment process. Our process will require decisions for specific rights-of-way and the refuse disposal site throughout the life of the mine, primarily during phase B. To facilitate this approach, we are analyzing the entire project at this time based on projections by Storm King Mines and its Mined Lands Reclammation Board application. We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the applications before the county. If you have further questions on the status of Storm King Mines' application with this office, please contact David Atkins at 945-2341. incerely, James R. Owings Area Manager 1984 { Richard D. Lamm Governor • • DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES David H. Getches, Executive Director MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION DAVID C. SHELTON, Director December 4, 1984 Mr. Mark Bean Garfield County Planning Commisson 109 8th Street, Suite 306 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Storm King Mines, File No. C-84-065 Dear Mr. Bean: �=1//ai T t= As we discussed in a phone conversation, it has come to my attention that Storm King Mines proposes to raze the old tipple at the New Castle -Vulcan mine, directly North of County Road 335, as part of road improvement for the Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine. Jim Green of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) contacted me in November and stated that a determination of whether the old tipple is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places would have to be conducted, since the tipple is located on BLM land. If the tipple is found to be eligible, it would have to be protected, thus, Storm King would not be allowed to raze the tipple. Since the tipple is located outside the area Mined Land Reclamation would permit, we have no jurisdiction over this site. The ultimate decision will probably rest with the BLM and SHPO, but I thought you should have this information to assist in making the decision on the county permit. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. incerely; Ji Herron lamation Specialist JH/yt Doc. No. 5770 i`.0;101984 423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 • 1 ( O COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Richard D. Lamm Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. Governor /876 Executive Director November 9, 1984 ,4i.e/7. 4 Mr. Mark Bean ✓ Garfield County Planning Dept. Garfield County Courthouse Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601 RE: Storm King Mine Dear Mark: Please excuse the delay in submitting these comments. I hope they may still be of some use in your decision making process. At present the Air Pollution Control Division has not completed its review of the proposed project, although an application has been received. Until this review is completed no quantative analysis of the project's impact on air quality can be made. Review of the material submitted to Garfield County reveals two areas of air pollution concern not covered exclusively by the Air Pollution Control Commission's Regulations. These pertain to the use of public roads to haul large quantities of coal. Any coal spillage or other dust generating materials placed on the public roads become the responsibility of the county under the existing regulations. It is recommended that the county require Storm King Mines to remove all coal spillage and clean or prevent mud and dirt from being tracked on to public paved roads. Cleaning or removal should be on a daily basis as required to prevent particulate emissions. The second area not adequately addressed by the Division is the impact of the rail loadout facility on existing business and residences of the Town of New Castle. Even under optimum control significant amounts of particulate will be released by any coal loading operation. Due to the close upwind proximity of the proposed loadout, noticable impacts may be expected. It is recommended that a more appropriate location be found which has sufficiant spacial separation to alleviate any problems between the loadout and its neighbors. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to comment. Si ncr ly , Scott J. Miller Air Pollution Control Division SJM/zp cc: Stan Fulbright file 222 SO. 6TH ST., GRAND JUNCTION, CO. 81501, ROOM 232 (303) 248- 7000 THE FARM Jill and Greg McKennis 1270 240 Road Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 740E /2 2 c r /-Z-C. r��'n -,Lill z -717(� z i •ds,/%?(/ ,6(EiM 1-71 %moi . te7A42 ted- free_ek-2 /,,T-xL',1 te-4e,p-t.,i44-4---7". ,--.? r ,,,, c9 /zL t, ' he-e-ze--e,te 1,4.L.462 l'et4-<-zY t/lc) eelle'i7 e'24'e--ik ,b-7/- , (z,e.--6A-e /C44A;r1--)-e-eq(Z4t/L--/--a..-- a -A ----O--12 (,(:-6-e ,,,c_ Zia arr-ei M-- e kr -6- ,t, ,i34-e-gLe ze ---6<et_06-2 7)1A-7 ei-Pirilt" (t,-6& A-,-- c -a4- _. .;tid--e_, e,i, (2 -es �,,i�� 7'47t -e -de -6/1200 C Gc �'1 ci�ry�c czee 4 C /),t4 -7w c- c4L62- ya,c.<7, Olat4A-c, 3`ie," le -y 6.e7 t C ,� c_L-6;(r/ rte. C C e./y a cz}47_e_et 47:ec4"._ t)fi-e 1:ezepeez -t4ti Z%4/1.4.4 ` .( rzeocrc61, 4., fi44,x,-.1,04?,,t,, ins /46, A-6-1 0--y‘- eixALO /J 6 _af .__.. ,Pet 1,4-- -1,, (4,:yte241J, 1,4pc,M, cz,-vt, t,s<f2„„de_d_39-A-a2te0o4-`'14"- (L-63) -e4e e‘-e446L‘'6' f;J, 0-7/ bd a iaive'l A"- zw-6 a-4- atai' ,e -ice -ate 6g)7F-zdLe (3-1121 14) -t -e-69/12- ()lit .dxsect-L"' ?Xe ,(GtAv•- 660 -ti l0014 U� -6� lbw Cis 92�, aV�%u,ze��^"e THE FARM Jill and Greg McKenrn3 1270 240 Rna.J �rwv • /11^e.40' ziAe //71 -e -e. it,t4} daYY40 92>G0 A9 --tAe 15)-eAD e_o-e-c-K4 61-k_ cz-e--zeJii\- eiv2 FC2'r`ea z/rdi-c-jcze.t0 r i CI _ 4A1? -7 " Al .. / CAl���fAy 6A49 -02e (4,201-01 1. A,‘‘z12-e --/AP ig4-tc-tJ _.-eix•-e a /4 -e -u -AL`' 71m:(2 bP-z2-ett“2,e 1" 14:4'4" tj- lacr_aze-4' 4/3 Gj w t&-[, ).4-?-pru2-tv v/,,() ;Tc44. c�r�' , te,,, &e frtgyizii-7)-•• 7g -e4-* ri�tcu� c� 47 2 1/a -/1-40 "Z'tic4 "Ll d 6(/',16V a4 '-entP rRAQ 04, a*e_ert.-17 010/C exxze_ia dt&s / rzyko-0-1, „„Lo-r)J_epte_eacetci;c "e -/--1e4 (z,„ ,21or nu? ,e,c4 CSL dhzied2, 6'e/to 0,f_aq ,.//tp ,e/71'132e2- -157 -mp /b2Gthe_ Ore a'ae.CT2 19/w ceeV2- --/A6p &e612, a1/4p Acake 11-4-r ,e(40 -gee(A4' h'i-em)/7 tee,22 -"/J6 ek-v aux/ THE FARM Jill and Greg McKennis 1270 240 Road Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Ak) dae_e ot_&e,a7c,c).‘4__Pc 1/11e t.,re;c-e/27Lre,e,e -64D 4yi4i7Le --tA‘te,zd t ,1017xiarAfi- ,i)ZuY)iL r aP---g)/3"--(j=0 06-2 /)/ /NM- )1b14) .Go dcz- v,„1/269,2_0_e7 7ze--A) �j-zl'1ti to Z4.LiP/l�oiY 671,tai. 411--eze- CSEX-e e 02°A 69-etlese 1 czo Pe_e .�� -tae a. e.‘IAJec4-e Ltf °e11:75Lc4-tz°0/°-6Trvi2f2-un, hav,e_ -�. a 'ae�u-ate cut tLe ee-a4?& tirA.0 clord) Viz". tr; be/1�?�`e�60AS bi--to -e414.-(24-6-67 0/-ee he °y`� 4 72-6ttizo-z�� &'ufb'i 0-61-14 ,i_e__,Oet,P. 6c.c,7 ()-4;t--_,-‹e,(_ ,,,z, e-Atior- 60-Wiie ./2,)&41/971124- . "ke c20 --e, zeeca0'6,-, - ,-rke;k_e f2ht‹Li4,4) 04-4.ae,te, cte-- 1->4 .,i,c 0-neOpaxi-ae 6- a ,41,,,6' elja Xg-eg c'ai 6'61 6fie-e,n, , Riv --1-0--re a)it0 dr.46-64, - g‘iey ,--6t-e--A ea --t- .e't-e2.i7 04vIQz�' Cu� A122 GT,�et-tu'�lissv�c, �Gevzc2fl Ld a-blizo,%aea._e. O -3(2-,7)14a efi? -614, (-05-1(A0 V5„,,) 9Z -z- Zt2,4) 6-ye2� /jJ / 1 ,,-C�$Lt� ��'�'I�c�P/ '4 - l RC1 C"� �r..t n �_ .e,dic7 -4, a_f_P--zi„ - - - --m., 6,,,a, ,..„,,,,,eae -a,,') ,,,,,„,46,„ ,„;„5„ .„0 x/;,/,„,,, 6'12 4-6---tc-r-ta-ge. ,,&P- ? - 0-2-(;14 l_Ce") Ae-a-,*(--- 0141'cart 70 otc, ,i-cL. %Y-ez. .4(e_ea<7. x,,,,tex 6(ize/ t_ /7c0 60-7j;i1-07J-€0 z -4A -L -a- 1 ./A_ ef,,,,,, .a.-__e__0_,_d ------ -ee6.a-(‘2€7 /26i,Le,/ Goz:e, Ae de -Pae -e cie_z`e(ko t) f,,%-e.gi efz4-y14 -e4P A/L9'2, - i tAto .27V,(A) ,-6' avVVCI &/L. -6e a41A _ /J "1/1-Q aQr."'o °tet.e4(,y. e44"ffacate /2, erk 0 .-7Of i,trc-q& izi9;0(lete,c-e--r -64-Poli-t4ii-- p r e z , , e. 0 At7c,v-ee, he /tart4c„,e,a f-e,;4z)v,ti4)-ak__4zt,, .6-7L _ i:Xe_ ecr-c." • • THE FARM Al and Greg McKennis 1270 0 Road 1 � Glenwood Spri24 ngs. Colorado 81601 /,-617t-a6e 136L19A /2...aiy‘uk, ag-6-ea_ta 74(2 &-64_ enyze2a7 rv\V 5ee-2,y‘. Aa-,a-Q_Qcfree0 d2)2-4-tryk -&ite A.orta42, (0X-4-clz_ , ('�r/cGUI ktP(r-t4x12 62,t`_' a-;/\4 71°V“- %fi SLE o&-ega-r Awe de;Le, (1 -Y6A,; _ed„to �7. tU oeto€4.412- _g=�'"�`7 t4tezoc CL 9-D2ayi tc;--ati;te io �e61"-z 6t6„,„,3 -i/tw 60-zz-tezt,e0 7462, A/42 ,6-e .7)144 94s /c: -WZ-120-7 ce ArJ raw 6,,riefa Ag,-/eze-cnc7 07( /4-)2, 64{7 4--we'-( zve 4,rm,07 ice0 6 ye er-7Y.Y. 72-ezdt-i- i/AaL12-„, a -6/t-t&i 6 -€4/OrC4 A-aefgk n c J `� t/te=LI Pte' e.u7 aCeZ.,l 5 e 2 4 4 /tia-e,) UJB " i'J''(-12 y.-49 �,��,�p oe A - e 02 a Gee A)152 ,,z7AgtLl& GO-e / tez6,t Aa40 .,)-i‘4Lz. ,A5L.7 (//iS /t,0 a (6b4-Q-i 0?('7 #7 G / EXtil /7 November 12, 1984 Mr. Arnold Mackley, Chairman Garfield County Planning and Zoning Commission P.O. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Dear Chairman Mackley: On behalf of the Glenwood Springs City Council, I would like to urge your favorable consideration of the Storm King Mines applications before you Wednesday evening. Previous project reviews by this City as well as others in the county strongly point to the fact this coal development project will be an economic asset to this area as well as being environmentally acceptable. Approval of applications before you will enable Storm King Mines to proceed to the test mining stage, a crucial_ step in project development. Further land use applications will be required before the mine can go into full production. Reviews at that time will enable the City and others to comment on fullscale development plans. Potential impacts on the Town of New Castle need careful scrutiny. The City supports the Storm King Mines project and its diversification of the local economy. I would appreciate your reading of these comments into the record at your meeting. Sincerely yours, City of Glenwood Springs Michael Copli City Manager J 806 COOPER AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 303/945-2575 'Burning Mountain' 1888 TOWN car N ( t' c:n; it i Teloptioh h;1 • t t December 4, 1984 Garfield County Commissioners 109 8th St. Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Storm King Mine * RACE Wpb DEC - 5184 x s(;" bo'1iF ft'EOMP S IO i7 kr)04/8Ir,�T Gentlemen: The Town of New Castle wishes to inform you that we agree to work with Storm King Mine with regard to dumping their sewerage from the mine into the Town's wastewater plant. ResPectfully, Stanley Fulbrigkft Town Administrator • -zsc.%),-/ COLORADO DEPARTMENT DF HEALTH Richard D. Lamm \�'"E N"' j Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. Governor � 8 7 6 Executive Director November 30, 1984 Mr. E. Peter Matthies, President Storm King Mines - Twin Park Tunnel Construction 9137 East Mineral Circle Englewood, Colorado 80112 RE: Certification Sheets Storm King Mines - Twin Park Tunnel Construction CDPS No: COG -070012 Garfield County Dear Mr. Matthies: Through some oversight in the processing of this permit we forgot to include the Certification sheets when your permit was issued. This has no bearing on the legality of your permit, as it is still in effect per the original issuance. Enclosed are copies of the Certification sheets. Please attach them to your copy of your permit. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Debra Kaye Getz Senior Secretary Permits and Enforcement Section WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION xc: Karen Young, Permits and Enforcement Section, WQCD Leslie Simpson, Administration Section, WQCD dkg • • COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Richard D. Lamm � '`'"�:Nv* Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. Governor j 8 6 Executive Director November 30, 1984 Sam S. Arentz, III Vice President/Operations Storm King Mines 9137 East Mineral Circle Englewood, Colorado 80112 Re: Notice of Intent to construct and operate an underground coal near U.S. Interstate 70 between Glenwood Springs & New Castle Permit No. 84GA323 Dear Mr. Arentz: mine The enclosed package referenced above has been prepared by the Air Pollution Control Division for release on December 7, 1984 for public comment in accordance with the requirements of the Colorado Air Quality Control Act and Regulation No. 3 of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, Section IV.C. For a period of 30 days after the notice appears in the Glenwood Post copies will be available for public inspection in the following locations: Colorado Department of Health Air Pollution Control Division 1101 Bellaire Street Denver, Colorado Garfield County Clerk 8th & Colorado Glenwood Sprngs, Colorado This letter will also serve to advise you that and in proper form, as required by Air Quality No. 3, Section IV.B. Sincerely, ?—/—/ Nancy Abens Public Notice Coordinator Air Pollution Control Division Enclosure the application is Control Commission A /14 IN 1 A C%T •• T11 A\ 11," I. 11 Ir 11 r► I./r l"1 A011 I111s .-...w.... Iw .. w\ complete Regulation • NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE UNDERGROUND COAL MINE BY STORM KING MINES, INC. IN GARFIELD COUNTY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PUBLIC NOTICE 2. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS 3. APPLICATION FOR EMISSION PERMIT 4. AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS NOTICE 5. MAP Prepared by Stationary Sources Program Air Pollution Control Division 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 COLORADO DEPARTMENT DF HEALTH Richard D. Lamm � It 4!,4 Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. Executive Director Governor \l 8 7 6 Released to the Glenwood Post for publication on December 7, 1984 PUBLIC NOTICE OF A PROPOSED PROJECT OR ACTIVITY WARRANTING PUBLIC COMMENT The Colorado Air Pollution Control Division has declared that the following proposed construction activity warrants public comment. There- fore, the Division of Air Pollution Control of the Colorado Department of Health, hereby gives NOTICE, pursuant to Section 25-7-114(4)(e), CRS 1973, as amended, of the Colorado "Air Quality Control Act," that an application to the Division for an emission permit on the following proposed project and activity has been received from: STORM KING MINES, INC. to construct and operate an underground coal mine and surface support facilities located approximately 10 miles west of Glenwood Springs along Interstate Highway 70. The mine will produce up to 2.2 million tons coal annually using hydraulic mining techniques. Maximum emissions of 151 tons per year from construction and limited coal production activities is .expected to occur during 1986 and produce an ambient impact less than 27.3 ug/m3 near the property line. The Division hereby solicits and requests submission of public comment concerning the aforesaid proposed project and activity for a period of thirty (30) days from and after the date of this publication Any such comment must be in writing and be submitted to the following addressee: John Plog, P.E., M.S. Stationary Sources Program Air Pollution Control Division Colorado Department of Health 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 (MORE) • • Within thirty (30) days following the said thirty (30) day period for public comment, the Division shall consider said comments and, pursuant to Section 25-7-114(4)(g) and (h), either grant, deny, or grant with conditions, the emission permit. Said public comment is solicited to enable consideration of approval of and objections to the proposed construction of the subject project and activity by affected persons. A copy of the application for the emission permit, the Preliminary Analysis of said application, and accompanying data concerning the proposed project and activity are available for inspection in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Glenwood Springs during regular business hours of said office, and also may be inspected at the office of the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health, 1101 Bellaire Street, Denver, Colorado. ### • • PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS APPLICANT'S NAME: STORM KING MINES PERMIT NUMBER: 84GA323(1-13) REVIEW ENGINEER: John G. Plog, P.E. DATE: 11/23/84 CONTROL ENGINEER: Jim Geier, P.E. PAGE 1 of DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Storm King Mines, Inc. proposes to construct and operate an underground coal mining facility near U.S. Interstate 70 between Glenwood Springs and New Castle. The mine will produce up to 2.2 million tons coal per year using a hydraulic (water jet) mining technique and commencing in 1987. During the period 1985 and 1986, con- struction and site preparation activities will take place along with up to 150,000 tons per year coal production using conventional mining methods. It is anticipated that maximum fugitive emissions will occur during this period. Raw coal will be processed (screened, washed and crushed) on site and hauled off site by Railroad train. Refuse coal will be stored on site. Activity SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS (TPY) Uncontrolled Controlled Construction 107.3 107.3 limited coal production 43.3 43.3 1985,1986 annual emissions 150.6 150.6 Coal production of 2.2 million tons/year 1987-2012 annual emissions Activity Construction & limited coal production 119.2 36.49 AMBIENT AIR IMPACT (worst case) Source Contribution Background Total Standard 27.3 80 108 150 (24 hour avg.) (24 hr. avg) (24 hr.avg.) (24 hour) The Division has determined there will be no exceedances of any air pollution standards by the proposed project. APC -73 (8-82) Mill rVLLUi IUIV IrWL v1.I.r.v.+ v1�LN,,. .,.v �. ..... 4210 East llth�Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80220- one: 320-4180 APPLICATION FOR EMISSION PERMIT -Construction Activities - This application shall be filled out completely - see instructions on reverse side. 1. PERMIT TO BE ISSUED TO: Telephone Storm Kine Mines. Inc. No {303) 792-2625 2. MAILING ADDRESS (include ZIP Code): 9137 East Mineral Circle, Englewood, CO 80112 3. TYPE OF .ORGANIZATION: Q Governmental Agency 1 Corporation Partnership Individual Owner 4. AGENT FOR SERVICE: Storm King Mines, Inc. • GENERAL NATURE OF BUSINESS: (Include SIC Code if known Underground coal mining and surface coal preparation (SIC:1211) 6. AIR POLLUTION SOURCE: Pursuant to Regulation No. 3 of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, application is hereby made for an Emission Permit for the following air pollution source (attach seoarate sheet where necessary) : Sources 1-a, 1-b, 1-c & Construction activities: includes construction of surface facilities, temporary storage piles, starter dam and haul roads. 7. SOURCE LOCATION ADDRESS: (Include UTM Coordinates if known) South of I-7 , between New Castle & Glenwood Springs I'1'M s(meters • Mostly near 286,820E/4,381,660N and 8. ESTIMATED COST OF SOURCE OR MODIFICATIONS:Process Total Proiect Cost: j. $60,000,000 Air Pollution Control Equipment .$493,000 Equipment DaYS Per.Year Sourceei lldebeedOperatjed Dur r ood construction weather -Assume d3 5d Note: Application wi no complete wig prove ing In ormar_ion ree,uety ., CCUNTY(1ES): Garfield 9. STATUS (check and complete applicable items): EINew Air Pollutant Source 7-1 Control Equipment Being Added to Existing Source Activity Change 11 Estimated Date Construction Wi11 Begin: September, 1984 Estimated Date Construction Will Be Completed: Early 1987 fuer mina/Wren. facilities & starter dam. Haul grading will continue 10. Check is enclosed to cover APEN FILING FEE: (See No. 10 on reverse side of this form) 11. ANTICIPATED START-UP DATE °N/A 1)0q$40.00 X PER APEN "2012 13. SIGNATURE 0P)LEGALLY AUTHORIZED PERSON 12. DATE OF APPLICATION RECEIVED SEP 51984 14. Type or print name and official title of person Mr. Sam S. Arentz, III; Vice President/Operations s i gn i ng th i s SJA4106/Yo !JHCES APCD 15. REMARKS: This application is part of one of 13 APEN/application packages being submitted for sources at the Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine T Date Received COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALT110 AIR, POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 (303) 320-4180 APIPapplication ##1 -Construction Activities - Permit No. ;?L/ 6—A 1-3-- j AIR POLLU'T'ANT EMISSION NOTICE (APEN) FUGITIVE DUST Name of Firm: Storm Kine Mines. Inc. Mailing Address: 9137 East Mineral Circle, Englewood, Co. - ZIP 80112 Project Location: South of I-70 between New Castle & Glenwood Springs County: Garfield Contact Person: Mr. Sam Arentz, III, Vice President/Operations Phone: (303) 792-2625 Source 1: Construction of underground mine. coal preparation facilities, haul roads, Type of Activity: storage piles, and starter refuse impoundment dam. Early 1987 for mine/prep. Estimated Starting Date: September, 1984 Date of Completion:facilities_6( starter, dam. Haul road grading will continue... -25 years. - Work Schedule: 13 hours/day 7 aaysiweek Assume 52 weeks/year (However, construction activity will Include a schedule for each activity below if substantially different. decrease during winter. DATA REQUESTED BELOW SHOULD REFLECT A TWELVE MONTH PERIOD OF GREATEST ACTIVITY SINCE EMISSION`. ARE ESTIMATED IN TERMS OF TONS PER YEAR FOR THE WORST CASE YEAR. TOPSOIL 1.5 to 1.7 million Est. yds. to be Removed: cu. yd. or Est. Scraper-Hrs. required for removal: N/A 493,000 Total Est. amount to be Stockpiled: cu. yds. Description of Control:Mulch and cover crop as specified by Colorado Mined Land A. For future reclamation 493,000 Reclamation Board (MLR). B. For cut and fill activities DRILLING No. of holes required for: Overburden or Ore; Coal Blasting may be required to prepare surface facilities construction Description of Control: site and to open tunnels. Drilling will be necessary whenever blasting is required. Most blasting, if required, will be underground. Frequency of Drilling: holes/day 4C340 days/year BLASTING ECEPI rn Amount of material requiring blasting for removal: 400,000 cu. yd.° Est. Frequency of Blasting:Surface: 1 Estimated blasts/day: <261(weextmys o`��n1�i ys/year Underground: 3 Blasts/day 340 i'/'TUVA SOURCES Type of explosive used: conventional dynamite (TNT-ANFO)-blasting caps. Arc&- °Total quantity of rock/topsoil to be removed from surface facilities. Only a small fraction, possibly none, will require blasting. PRODUCT REMOVAL 1985-50,000ton/yr. Cubic yards or tons of: Overburden; 1986- Coal; Rock: Other 150,000 ton/yr. Equipment to be used (end loader, dragline, shovel, etc., include capacities): SN/appljcation #1 -Construction Activities- ..ne Front-end loader. 6 cu. yd. or greater capacity. Product Transportation (include on and off property) by conveying and unpaved haul road: No.of Trips Capacity No.of Trucks No.of Wheels per day 1. 28 ton Haul Trucks: 2. N/A 3. N/A 4. N/A 4 Haul Road and Conveyor Distances: Temporary Coal Conveyor Ave.Vehicle speed 18 7 . 5 /Truck <30 mph. From Access road from 1.Coal Storage near mine mouth. 2. County Road 335 Temporary 3. Screening System 4. 5. Mileage per day per Truck 12 mi. access 15 mi . on unpave road. on unpave county road; all other offsite ro to be paved One-way To Distance (miles) County Road 335 Interstate 70 10,000 ton Coal Stockpile 0.8 1.Q 0.1 Description of controls for unpaved haul roads: Apply water or chemical dust stabs i er rn road. Description of Controls for Conveyors: LOADOUT TO GRIZZLY OR STOCKPILE Description of loadout (truck bottom dump, truck end dump, conveyor, To refuse dam: Truck end -dump; To refuse pond: sluiced by pipe. Description of Controls (watering, chemicals, etc.): None. Cubic yds. or tons of: STOCKPILE (RAW) Overburden 493,000 cu. ydsTopsoil N/A pneumatic elevator,etc.) N/A Coal 10,000 cu. yd. Rock Other(Describe) Method of loading into pile (conveyor, stacker, end loader, etc.): Temporary conveyor to temporary stacker. Front-end loader to truck to topsoil storage. Controls: see below Length of time stockpile remains undistrubed ,-,--9125 (25 years) days Topsoil: Mulch and cover crop as specified by Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board. Rockpile: Watered as needed. • •N/application #i LOADOUT FROM STOCKPILE TO PROCESSING -Construction Description of Loadout (bulldozer, Description of Controls_ (watering, Activities - conveyor, etc.): Flumed directlfrom mine to a tem.o ar screening system. chemicals, etc.): None re uir d Loadout schedule: ° 200 tons/hour 24 hours/day li5 days/year PROCESSING Tons/year of Material Subject to: 0 Primary Crushing; 0 0 Tertiary Crushing: 0 Recrushing; Secondary Crushing 0 1985-50,000T/Y 1986=150 000 T YScreening; Flumed % Moisture Content (of 14% % Moisture Content (of Description of Controlsjbagfilter, spray bars, etc.): on Fines Mill raw material) finished material) CONVEYOR AND TRANSFER POINTS (IN PLANT) Description of Controls for Conveyors: None (Indicate on separate diagram if more than one conveyor system is involved) Number of Transfer Points: 0 Description of Controls for Transfer Points: NIA 1985-50,000 Ton/Year Quantity of material conveyed: 1986-150.000 Ton/Year Cubic yds. or tons STOCKPILE (FINISHED OR PROCESSED MATERIAL) of: 10,000 tons Coal; Description of Controls:_ Watering as needed. Rock; Method of Loading into Pile: Temporary conve or to tem.orary stacker. Length of time stockpile remains undisturbed: 0-100 Other des Prior to the actual construction activities period, no schedule for load in or stockpile will be known, so the length of undisturbed period s indeterminable LOADOUT FROM STOCKPILE FOR FINAL TRANSPORT Description of Loadout: Front-end loaded into haul trucks (28 -tons per load). Description of Controls: None Loadout Schedule: ° 200 tons/hour 8 1985-100 hours/day 1486 rV out fr in adv ° Maximum possible rates, but annual totals will not exceed 1985-50,000 tons; 1986 SFP At; • FINAL TRANSPORT P /application a pPlication #1 -Construction Activities - Method of Transport of Product (Check One); ED Haul Truck on paved roads Rail Car; XD Other (describe) Access road on'SKM property will be unpaved during construction. Capacity of Transport Vehicle (tons or yd3): 28 tons Haul Truck; N/A Rail car Description of Controls: Wash or wet load, limit load size, wash vehicle. Description of Route: Unpaved. 0.8 mi. access road to County Road 335; unpaved, 1 mile to Interstate Highway I-70; paved, 9 mi. to Glenwood Springs ROAD MAINTENANCE Estimated Number Hours of Grader Work Required on Unpaved Roads: EXPOSED AREAS 2 (Daily) 520 (Annually) Estimated Total Disturbed Acreage Subject to Wind Erosion: 200 acres Reclamation will occur in 2 phases. Construction areas will be Time before revegetation: reclaimed in 1987. WriCtiiir4C Operational areas (mainly the refuse disposal site) will be reclaimed following mine closure in about 2012. Estimated Total Acreage Required for Tailings or Waste Disposal: 25 acres (refuse disposal si Description of Controls and Reclamation Plan: Reclamation measures will include covering the refuse impoundment pond with a stable cap contoured to divert runoff away from the facility an treated to encourage vegatative growth. Reclamation will probably not begin before year 2012. However, topsoil will be stockpiled immediately for reclamation purposes. Remarks: This APEN is part of one of 13 APEN/Application packages being submitted for sources at the Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine. Types of emissions not addressed in this particular APEN may be addressed in one of the other 12 APENs. Signature of Person Legally Authorized to Supply Data: Typed or Printed Name and Title: Mr. Sam S. Arentz, III Date: 1 Vice President/Operations November 29, 1984 Mr. E. Peter Matthies President Storm King Mines 9137 East Mineral Circle Englewood, CO 80112 Dear Peter: 36671 /4 This letter is in regards to a conversation we had earlier today concerning use of the City's dump in South Canyon for your excess materials. After discussing this matter with Mr. Tim Danner, who is the manager and operator of the dump, it appears certain that we will be able to handle the materials that you need disposed of at this facility. We have plenty of space and your excess would not hamper the overall adequacy of our dump. If you have any further questions or comments or need more information please feel free to contact this office at your convenience. The City of Glenwood Springs looks forward to working with Storm King to bring a stronger economic base to our valley. Sincerely, 171)0,2_0;r_ Michael Copp City Manager City of Glenwood Springs NO6CO(01.1: :AV!•:NUI'. (;11. \1“)()1) UlN'(;S. CO! ''•