Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20080423mysticMEMORANDUM DATE: April 23, 2008 TO: Board of County Commissioners THROUGH: Cindy Houben, Community Development Director FROM: Lance Clarke,~Assistant Director SUBJECT: Mystic Eagle Quarry (fka: White Banks AIabaster Mine; aka: Avalanche Creek Mine, White Banks Quarry} Special Review Permit Annual Review -- Public Hearing -------------------------------------------------- REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a finding of compliance with a special review permit condition that requires an annual review at a duly noticed public hearing before the BOCC to determine compliance with conditions of the permit. This is the seventh annual review under the long- term permit (25 years) granted on April 8, 1998, by Resolution No. 98-64. Last year, a new owner, Elbram Stone Company LLC, appeared before the Board and asked that the Board acknowledge the new ownership. They expressed that there had been no mining activity in 2006. The Board acknowledged the change and accepted the annual review. This public hearing received public notice in the Aspen Times, and specific notice was sent to the Swiss Village Homeowners Association, to the USFS, and the Crystal River Caucus. APPLICANT: Elbram Stone Company LLC APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Walter E. Brown III, Brown & Willis, LLP, Attorneys at Law LOCATION: Avalanche Creek, 10 miles south of Carbondale (on USFS land) ZONING: RS-30 PUD BACKGROUND: On Aprii 27, 1993, the BOCC approved Resolution No. 93-70 for a five year Special Use Permit for Robert Congdon (White Banks Alabaster Mine) to quarry and remove alabaster from Site 1 of the White Banks Alabaster Mine. The Board held the First annual compliance review of the project and permit on February 11, 1998. On April 8, 1998, the BOCC approved the Applicant's request for along- term permit (through the year 2022} by Resolution No. 48-64. This resolution requires annual v ~~6 ti reviews. The first annual review was held by the BOCC on February 14, 1999, the second on March 22, 2000, the third on March 14, 2001. No materials were submitted for an annual review in 2002. The fourth annual review was held May 14, 2003. The fifth was held January 14, 2004. The mining operations were found to be in compliance with the long-term permit in these previous cases. The then owner submitted no annual reviews in 2005 and 2006. There was no mining activity to speak of during those years. The 2004 approval (Res. No. 003-2004) allowed for aone -time trial winter operations period during 2004, and set some additional conditions on blasting and hours of operation. The winter operations did not take place, and approval for winter operations has expired. According to the Resolution of long- term permit, the BOCC is to consider the degree to which the permittee has complied with all the terms and special conditions of the permit and to assess the need for any new or changed conditions. ANNUAL COMPLIANCE REVIEW: The Applicant has submitted a report for 2007 indicating that no mining operations occurred in the past year. There have been no complaints lodged about mine operations in the past year. The Applicant has not requested any amendments to the County approval. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Crystal Caucus and Swiss Village Homeowners have provided comments. The Forest Service (USFS) did not provide written comments. The Caucus and Swiss Village have expressed concerns with a possible road relocation and urge caution in such a move and request the Forest Service offer opportunities for public involvement with that decision. Mystic Eagle Quarry is currently operating under the former owner's Forest Service "Plan of Operations" for the mine. This Forest Service Plan expires shortly, and a new Plan of Operation will need to be submitted and approved. The County approval requires the Applicant to simultaneously submit to the County any plans or amendments submitted to the USFS. The USFS has indicated that no plans for relocating the Avalanche Creek Road have been submitted as of this date and no Environmental Assessment of a possible relocation has been undertaken. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the BOCC approve a motion accepting the annual review for the Mystic Eagle Quarry for 2008, and approving operations for another year under the terms of BOCC Resolution No. 98-64 as amended by BOCC Resolution No. 49-2000, which changed the annual report submission deadline to December 15, and by Resolution No. 003-2004, which set conditions for blasting on site and hours of operation, all as outlined in the attached draft resolution. z ATTACHMENTS: I) Draft Resolution 2) Applicant's Annual Review Statement 3) Resolution No. 003-2004 4) Resolution 98-64 5) Swiss Village Comments 6) Crystal Caucus Comments lancec/mystic eagle quarry annual review 08.doc PID# 2649282 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, ACCEPTING THE 2007 ANNUAL REVIEW REQUIRED BY THE MYSTIC EAGLE QUARRY (FKA: WHITE BANKS ALABASTER MINE) SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT Resolution No. 2008 RECITALS 1. By Resolution #98-64, the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, granted a special review use permit for operation of the White Banks Alabaster Mine, now known as the Mystic Eagle Quarry. 2. Resolution No. 98-64 requires an annual review of the mining operations for compliance with all terms and conditions of the resolution. 3. On April 23, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter, "BOCC") held the annual public hearing and review of the special review permit for the operation year of 2007. 4. The annual review was undertaken at a public hearing at which time members of the public were invited to voice any comments. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, hereby accepts the Mystic Eagle Quarry 2008 annual review subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant/Owner shall continue to be bound by all conditions of Resolution # 98-64, as amended in 1999 to change the date of submission of annual statement of compliance to December 15, and by Resolution No. 003-2004 which set limits on blasting and hours of operation, among other things. Resolution No. 2008 Page 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 23rd DAY OF MARCH, 2008. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 23rd DAY OF APRIL, 2008. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Jeanette Jones Deputy Clerk By Jack Hatfield, Chairman Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely County Attorney LC c:\home\lancec\mystic eagle quarry res. 2008.doc APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~,~'Ll!1.t ,C' C~a?=Y~~ 'Cindy Houben Community Development Director PID # 2649282 P023-08 y~~;~ ~~~E ~~~~y 2548 15th St. Denver, CO 80211 Tel 303-455-9585 Fax 303-721-6501 This report is to serve as the annual review for 2007 of mining operations for compliance with all terms and conditions of resolution #98-64 of the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County for the Mystic Eagle Quarry (formerly known as White Banks Alabaster Mine). Mystic Eagle Quarry is in compliance with all the terms and conditions of resolution #98-64. During 2007 no mining operations occurred at the Mystic Eagle Quarry. However, geologic exploration work and site cleanup were completed. A topography survey of the site was completed by aerial photometry for a large area of the claims. This topo will be used in conjunction with a geologic study of the area and for a second mine entrance anticipated in the mining plan to serve as the secondary escape way to be in compliance with MSHA regulations. This topo will also be used in the design of the realignment of the Avalanche Creek Road. The engineering for the realignment of Avalanche Creek Road was given to a Denver engineering company, Flatirons, Inc. A Denver based company was selected because of schedule and higher cost of Carbondale/Glennwood Springs engineers. Partners and staff of the quarry attended MSHA Part 48 Underground New Miner Training held at the Western Mining Resource Center of the Colorado School of Mines. This course provided 32 hours of classroom instruction required to train and certify individuals who work in an underground mine or are regularly exposed to mine hazards. The completion of this course provided the MSHA Form 5000-23 to the attendees, who are now federally certified underground miners. Cleanup for the site began in May and was completed in September. A hauling company removed the old camper trailer that was located behind the cabin. All of the mining equipment trash was taken away and the pieces that were kept were placed in an organized manner against the West side of the trailer. Smaller rock and mineral materials were placed on pallets for easy movement in the future. In addition to trash, many chemicals, paints and old batteries were disposed of at the Pitkin County Landfill. Mystic Eagle Quarry, LLC was qualified as a Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator. This program was created to help small businesses dispose of hazardous waste safely and properly. Over all, over 120 cubic yards of trash were removed from the site. More exploration and core drilling is scheduled for 2008. ~~1-S~G~ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, ACCEPTING THE 2003 ANNUAL REVIEFV REQUIRED BY THE WHITE BANKS ALABASTER MINE SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT AND AME1rTDING RESOLUTION 98-64 RELATED TO HOURS OF OPERATION, Wil~rTER OPERATIONS, AND LIMITATIONS ON BLASTING Resolvfion I~To.f~632004 RR,C'TTA7,S 1. By Resolution #98-64, the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, granted a special re.vie~T use permit to Robert Congdon (hereinafter, "Applicant") for operation of the White Banks Alabaster Mine 2. Resolution No. 98-64 requires an annual review of the mining operations for compliance «~ith all terms and conditions of the resolution. 3. On January 14, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter, "BOCC") held the annual public hearing and review of the special review permit for the operation year of 2003. 4. The Applicant requested that the BOCC consider amendments to resolution #98-64 related to camping on site, hours of operation, and year round operations_ ~. The annual review and consideration of amendments were undertaken at a public hearing at which time members of the public were invited to voice any comments.' 6. The BOCC agreed to modify the hours of operation, and allow a trial winter operation, reviewed cazirping on site, and placed limits on blasti~lg. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Comity Commissioners of Pitltiin County, Colorado, hereby accepts the White Banks Alabaster Mine 2003 annual review and amends Resolution #98=b4 as outlined in the following conditions: Except as amended below, the applicant shall continue to be bound by all conditions of Resolution # 98-64, as amended in 1999 to change the date of submission of annual statement of compliance to December 15. 2. Condition ~7. a) of Resolution ~ 98 -b4 is amended to read, "Applicant may operate from lam to 7pm, Monday through Saturday." 3. Condition ~3 of resolution #98-64 is amended to read, "Mining operations shall be limited to the period from May 1 to November 14, annually, as approved by the United States Forest Service. A. one-year trial for winter operations between OOOOOr~ ~4 ~3-6Y November 15, 2003, and April 30, 2004, may be undertaken by the Applicant subject to the conditions outlined in the letter of November 4, 2003, from Russell George, CDOW; to Margaret Dowd, Acting Sopris District Ranger (attached, Exhibit A). Any additional periods of operations between November 15 and April 30 will only be permitted after review and specific approval of the USFS and Pitkin County." 4. Anew condition T 23 is added to Resolution ~ 98-64 stating, "Any blasting operations must have all required State, County, and Federal permits, can or1y take place between loam and 3pm, and 24 hour prior notification must be given to CDOW, Pitkin County Environmental Health, adjacent property owners, and the Swiss Village Homeo«~ners Association." 5. The Board recommends that the United States Forest Service allow as much public participation as is feasible in its permitting process, and that reasonable _ conditions be placed on die oil site camping to limit undesirable noise and visual impacts to adjacent neighborhoods and the "Scenic Byway." . j, 6. A Board work session will be held in April 2004, to assess the impacts of winter ~` operations and the preliminary results of the wildlife monitoring program. ~' 7. The mine operator will keep track of the trips associated with his operation and provide a report at the work session in April. ; 00000 Resolution No. ~3 2004 Pale 3 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY ON THE 13th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2003. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 14th DAY OF J_~iltiUARY, 2004. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PTTK/~IN COLTI`'TY, COLORADO an e Jones By ~ %r~~,l~~~__~~_~-~J Deputy Clerk D ro othea Farris, Chao. Date ~ - / o - c ~ ,., APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: John Ely Cindy Houben Co rney - Community Development Director LC: cViomeVancecicnanrvrs2UD4.doc PID ~ 2649282 :.. P 141-03 ooooQo Attachment A RESt)LtiTIOV OF THE BOARD OF CDL~TY COQ ~ Si0*t~R.S OF P?TKL~I Ct?LIVTY, COL O~DO GR.~YTz`tG A SPECLAL ItEYIEW PERI~iIT FOR THE WHITE B~~iKS :~L~~STER ~~ RESOLUTION ~98-l~ RECIT:~I,S 1. -Robert Congdon, "hereinafter "Applicant," previously applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pir:{in Ceunry, Colorado ("Board"} and rec_ived a ~: erial review approval in Resolurcn 90-70, to quarry and remove ditneasienal ;tone, including alabaster and tnarbie, from the Whit;. Banks A1aba;ter i4ine, en unpatentE,:-niniag claims located witr~in the boundaries of the White River ~iarioral =Wrest. Site l and Site 2 of such claims are ~..tiscribed in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated 'py this reference. 2. As required b;r the P:~~cin County Lard'use Cote, Section 3-210.'_Or..4.b., and 4- 60.40C, aver to the expiratior, of the rive-year pernit ~ rated by Resclution ~?- %0, t_he Applicant subt~~tted a sunvletnental ia_nd use application to ccnvert the short-term perry t to a ,er,„-:e n permit for a duration cf 25 yer s. 3. In accordance wide 5ecdon 3-210.10E.~.b., tine apnucation is subect ±o the procedure in Section 4-50. Section-50_r-OD requires [wo duly noticed DllbLe hearn?t, tiro first before the Board of County Comnissierers to dete.:nine whet`:er a ew applicsdcn is necessary, then a second duly-necked public hearing before the Beard of County Cer.~issioners,to consider the long-term penult. 4. Under the crovisiors o; Section 4-60.40C, the orcc~dures in 5eccicn-'.-60."-0 and tithe standards in Section ~-~~0.110 apply to the conve:-sion et a s~cri-ter:._ permit to a long-te-n nerrnit. 5~-----S~tion :- yOT:~-C-a::version-ef-initi-al-5:~o:=:ems ~ir~it-;~-I.-a-ttg-:e:~-P-°..~rzaiz.,- provides as follow;: Tile Board shall ccnsicer the de?ree to wiuca due ~rmittea has eornpiied wir~`t ail of the terrns and soecisl conditions of the initial, sh ert-term pe:rtit, citizen com.-nents and c hangin; eotiditiens which may affect the expioratian or mirdng operation. 6. Pitkin County asserts that mineral exploration and tnirin~ is generally governed by the provisions of Section 3-250 of the Pit_kin Count; L?nd lise Cede, which irtciudes tl`:e foIlowir~g witlh respect to federal a^.d state pr°.~mption, in Section 3-2`0.0: The standards in this section and the requirements ei 4-617.40 anc 6-130 sh all aDOly to ary and all mine:af exploration znd minirp activities on all lar.CS within the County, except to the extent that ~~0~~~ Resolution a98- Page 2 any specific t~guiatien is preen: ptzd by Federal or Starr law. I.n making a determination wneuher Federal cr State law preemp v enforczrneat of these re~uire:nens, t're $oard of County Coma!issiorers shall be guided by he factors in his section. A. 'P_le Board may rewire a Coanry development :.nit to be obtained for ferw:~Jly aDnroved activities on F~teral lands, including unnarented :r~;nir_g claiIIS, DroY2(1P.d the purpt)se fff t_~'ie review is to impose condirions for the protection of tee public health, safety, welfare and he eaviroa.*^.cnt i3. Patented lands arz to be gated as any ether private property and an: nct subject to tine preempticn of Federal min;rg Laws, ivtirin? en private lands snail be subject to the use limitations imposed by this C;x>e wirr~ont re4ard to Fede:?1 pre~mpn oa. C. Where sinerai explcra#icn ar mining activities "aT° ~r.,~~~v~ ti.. ~~e Rna,-~? of C'punrv Corrimissioners, re~son~Ie 0.VVly ~ ~-~ ) - conaitions may be innosed on such activi+.;es for the prete.:iicn of ti:e public health, safety, welfar° and the e::vironne.~ (Ord. 9~-3 (pari), 199d: prior Ccee § 3-203) 7. Applicant and the $card have been engaged in litigation sinc° 1.92, Pitkin County District Cour Case Civil Action 92 CV 1~7, and ore of the issues in that litigation hzs been the extent of the County's iurs;:iction to i.*nnose conditons on ~e ocerarioa oz miles on an unpaL°.nted mining claim Iocaied on ~'nitzd States Fcrest Service prop~^.y. S. With respeot to tee environment) issues over w'tuca he County asseru ;urisdicsicn., tt'~e Firkin County Land lise Code provides, in Section ~-=50.50, Envirorrnent~l Prot:.ction, as follows: Mineral exploration, coning, sand and gravel pits, rocti c.-ushe ,, concrete batch plants and asphalt hot-rnix' plants, oil and gas drilling, surface mining, open nit :Wining 2_^.d subsul~ace ^uning shall ccmnly with :ne srandards in this section. A. Damatre or naisanc~ nsuli;ng from noise, smexe, odor, dust, vibration or eres-on is prohibited. $. DusT produced by m,..t:hanical operation, trucking ar rand conditions must be controlled. C. Perr..it*.ees shall maintain private and public roads in a reasonable cult-:zee eondirion. 00000 it~alution n98- ?arz 3 D. Landscaping or anaroDrate visible barriers maybe rewired to sc:°en the operations from the gea~al public. E Disrs:::t=on ci n2m:31 vegcation within two-hundred (200) feat of a Ovate- coarse or rlDarlan aR3 is prnhioited; unless thz Beard aD~roves a lease: distance upon a `finding that no adverse lIIIpaCiS Wtll reSL'1L F. Dar_iaQ. to any public, private, residential, or a_•riculr~rzl water supply sourc° is prohioited. G. Adverse impacts to any eavirorr.ental system such ?s acaLifers, landslide or avalanc:,e prone a,~as, t7ced plains, ripara.^, at~eas, or wildlt_*e habitat or- sisnincance to the County, region, cr nation is prohicited. H. Toxic waste shall '_,e disposzii of pursuant to an approved tonic waste dis~csai plan apvroved by the County. 9. Operations a.-e gevered by Code Section 3-?SO.dO~,, Crer_erai vpe:ationai Standards, which provides as follows: This section contains general operational standards apalicable to mineral exploration, mining, sand and gravel pits, roc's crushers, concrzta b3ICh plan; and asphalt het-mi; pl:.nts, oil and gas drlling, surface r,^.ining, open pii m~^in~ and subsuracs and sr;~ific ot;era*.ieral ~~7dards for sand and gravel pits, rccic rushers, conc:pte batch plants and asphalt het-mix alan[s; and oil and oar driP.ir:=. ~~::~:~Operarionsi~~and~ds:-~me ~eaerai-operatoa2l stardares in ~~~is secL~on apply to ?yline2l explor3ticr., sand and gravel pits, rock crushers, concpte batch plants and asphalt hot- mix plants, oil and gas drilling, sort-ace training, open pii mining and Subsurface dining. 1. Excavation shall not be permitted closer tan ten (10) fee: to the boundz:-y o; as adjacent grope.^i, easement, i-rigation ditsn or right-ef-way. The Board may retrofire a greater distance, when justif ed. Z. E;uipment shall be located w minimiz° nuisance er"fets such as noise and dust. O~~f~Q ,~ n ~~,, .: 1",~ ~ ];--x-11 '.,., ~. y ., ,., ~, iii r Rcsoluvon ~8- Psse 4 3. Hours of opet-a_.tion, unless ot_he^~+ise spavined, shall bs Pram 7:00 a.m, to r;CO p.a, unless saerial permission is ~nt~d by the Board. 4. Qpera*_iens may be re^tli=~d to be fenced, or other~,vise enclosed for he=lm and safety protection. S. Sound levels mast c.^mpiy with Pit'~n County Noisy Standards or other spec>1=:c stardares as tray be approved by t'ce Board for a specific deveIenmenc 6. ylater_ai, eauiprlert, ma~~lin°~ ,, or vehicles, not intended fortrnme~?iate use or servicin, of the exploration or tnirling site shall not be sore: on site_ 7. .Exploration or n',jnin~ sites and alI pet_anent installations shall be maintined in a nest, clean and orderly condition. ' - 8. All surfaces of petzn2nen2 bulleings and structures snail be painted a_nd main+_ food in a nett and once.:ly rra.ne:, 9. Operatierls may be Limited to certain seasons and time of day to protec'_ wilelife. 10. ° In addition, the County asserts jurisdiction under iU police powers, as reserved to ti7e states, and as a subdivision of the state, under 16 U.S.C. § 480, whica provides as follows: The jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, over persons withi*1 national forests shall not be affected or c:,anQed by Mason of their " existence-exce~so-far as t~`le-punislltnenrof-~f2errs~s~gaii-,s-t-tktL --- United ,Statac herein is concerned; the in~wnt and meaning of L`:is pravison beine that tree State waer;,in anY such national forest is situated shall not, by r`ason of ~a establishment thereof, lose its jurisdiction, nor the inhabitants thereon their rights and privile`es as citizens, or be absolved from [.heir duties as citizens of the State. 11. Applicant has previously received Forest Service approvals for his operations, by virtue of the l~''nite Banks Alabasterlfline Plan of Operations with l~lodifications, approved in part Lane 9, 1992, wish subsequent modifications. 12. In addition, Applicant hss received Forest Service a:,oreval of his St~pplernental Plan of Operations dated March 7, 1;95. The:,, have been no changes or modifications in Applicant's I~SFS approvals sine then; exe°pt a modification dated Lune 24, 1496. ODQQ~.l~ 14 J ~ . L ~d I : ~ ,~`, i i ,1 ~ 0 ~~ ., - • ,.; v V '{ : tY`I . V ~i L . ~ ~ i _ V :Zcsolution ;:98- Paee ~ i3. Under the provisions of Seouen ?-60.40D.1 _, the Board_he!d a duly-noticed public ile?riP_g t0 CORSId•.r wlle[.t:er a new 3pDLC3tiGn 13 ne^,eSSu'y, 1n COnIleCtlOn W?tlt ACC11Cc11t'S re ;nest for an extension upon expi:atien cf the snort-terr*1 pet3iit ~rante~ by Resoiutinn 93 '0. I4. The hearing by Lhe $card to dete^rine wi:ether a ne x application is nwessary was held in cenjunc~an with an a^nual rzview he :ring under the ezis'urg pernit 93- %0, or_ rebruary 11, 1998, at which time it was cete.^;ined t14zt a cotrnietely new application was not necessary, and that Applicant needed to submit only copies o; all Perest Service zgprovais and state approvals and permit; relating to his ~srrent cue: anon, and that the sun_oiementaI a~_ iicaticn also needed~to specincaIly address'~re standards in 5ec~on 3-250;x. 15, . Applicant there`?er subrut*a~d his suppietneatal anDiicatien for alone-term perir~t, including the following documents evidencing tl-:e lull extent of his state and federal approvals as of the date of acviicatior_ 1991 ;Llr^sted lrinac~. Pe,:nit f_om the Statz _llirled Lard Reclamation bivision(ncw :{riown z; the Division of ?~linefa'ts and C~eiogy); apnruve3 Operating Plan by the United Stites Forest Service, as anpraved lure 9, 1992, and aTrlended en ~Iay 6, 1993, October ~b, 1994, Jure 1, 1994, October 12, 1994, ~lzy 16, 1995, as -authorized ilnd:.r d beC:Siou CtiCe iSSi.c.. b"v LhB ac '., c T' o - r ~„ may 'Jd ? QOM anA ~ Jiig JVUitj Ulsl~. Vt 1\ait~~.a vat 1 ~, Alternative S of the proposed Suppiernental Plan of Operation snonitted cn ~iaroh 7, 1995, as authorized under Decision Notice da**?d Aug,.lst 23, 1995, by District Ranger ?~evin Riordan. 16. Tne BOCC subsequently heard the su;:t;iernental application for conversion to a long term pernit ai a duly ne~~ced public he~r~ng cn April 8, 1998 17. 1'he Applicant, by ri, si7 an:re below, and the Cour_ty, by adopr;ng Llis reSOlutlOn, SEI'~..°, t0 reSOlve arty C15CUtes Challenging the CCL'ni~/'S ~llrlSdiCnOn to reaulz±e Applicant or the propriety of Cl`:e County's requirements under ~`iis Pe.~r~it or throw any annual review or moaincation to tl?~s Ferr:.it under the altenacive dispute resolution pr^~ss ourlined -13elt~w--~~~13aliengv-~o--tr'`Pe.~i-t-cr-rnodir=l:.ation~hexai,--,~ausL~P rn~~e in writing and -~ --._ forwarded to tl:e attome,rs for the oL~:er party within t_hiry (30) days of the ofncial action by the Beard of County Commissicne_s rotating to the Permit or any rnodiucation. T'ne parries ag=-,..s. to use Judge Neighbors from the Judicial Aroiter C-reup("JAG") as the Arbitrator; and if he is not availzbie, a mutually agreed upon aroitrator tram JAG will be se!ected_ The parties will equally split the cost of any aroi[rator fees to be paid in advznce ot" the arbitrarion. The arbitration will c;;nsist of a review of the record of action relating to this Permit under the sane procedure and standards for review set forth for judicial review of a zuaSi Judicial proceeding under C.R.C.P. I05(a)(4), and ail at;z~licable precedents construing the t nlle. The parries awe that any jurisdictional euestions over the County's agility to regulate a panicular aspect of the pennitIee's operation cart be addressed under C.R.C.P, 106(a)(4) as it provides a mechanism for reviewing who+!-ter the Cour.[y hs "exceeded iU iurisdiction". The t;arties asree than the Ceunt}~s jurisdiction is currently enunciated in the cses of California Cozstzl COmIPJ5510n v. Grantte Rack Comt;anv, 480 li,5, f72 (;987) and Bnibakzr v. $oard of County Cornmissiorers, 6d2 P.2d 100 (Colo. 1982) and the arbitrator, in assessing the county's ~~~~~~ Resolvaon ~8- Page 6 jursdiction, shall cntisider these standards along with any subsequent staizttoty or c:s,° law in rtsolvin~ issues of jurisdiction. The pares aQ*e~ that any challea~e to conditions imposed by the Cotmty under this per-tit or modification, other tY.an a c:^.;:.ilense to jursdic'ion, wi?1 be addressed uncle: uhe "abuse of discretion" stanaard of C.R.C_P. IOfi (a)(4). To t_he extent not provided for ir: this agreement or under C.R.CF. 106 (a)(4), the provisions of the Coiorado Uniform Arbitration Act, C.R.S. §§ 13-22-201, e:. seq. shall aaaly. The record must be certified within thirty (?0) days of the initial demand for arbitration, unless an extension is obtained for good cause shown. It is tree aarses' contemplation to complete the arbitiatien process as soon as practicable. Tee patties contemalate +hat the arbitrator sha!1 issue a w;;tten decision and award concerning L~?e challenge to the Permit andJor modifcaticn thereto shar`uy a~ter all the beefs have bean filed. The arbitrator may, but is not re ui"ed to, hold ?n oral argurn.°nt in his or her disc ~ticn. ine Applicant and the County a~ee :hat all artor::ey's fe°s, costs ar_d arbit:~ater fees of this alteratve disputs solution process will be home by the losing parry to the process. In the event that the challe:tCing pa^.y only obtains cart, but not all, of the re.~~s~~t~d relief f:oru the process, the arbitrator will decide on the appor-~onment of the aremey fe°s, costs a_nd arbitrator fees of the arbitration. 7ueicial etiorcetnent and appeals from the award and decision will be made under the Coiorado UnTfortn Arbitiation Act. 1V0~', TriERBFOP.E, BE 7T RESCL"v-ED by the Firkin County Beard of County Comrnissione ~ thal it hereby convert; tl'ae rive-v°~* special ;zview pern,.it Granted in 93-"r0 t^ a long-tote: petx,~it for a dnratioa of twenty-true (~.;, years subject to annual reviews a:-~d subjec*, to t_he following Conditions: CO~~IT?ONS This special review perrri*. deer rot cove: prospe:.ting or sur±ace mining on Site 2 of the Pr'hite Banlc~ ruining ci~+m. 2. This special review permit approves an operating plan for Site 1 of the w"hire Banks mining claim, based upon representations by .Applicant relating to those operations as of the data: of his anpiicatior., through the end of the 2022 oper`~ting se~scn. T"'ne minins operation shall be subject to an annual review for compliance with conditions of this P,,°^ait, z< contained within this Resolution, ant for anY additional conditions which may be required as a result of changes in the operation or other.infer:nation dei_rnined as a result of the anrual review. The first annual review before the Pit.~in CoLnry Board cf County Commissioners shall occsr no Inter than one year from the date of the public hearn~ at which this resolution was adopted, and annually therea.~r, at a time and place to be dete:-tn~ned, through ire end of the 2022 oeereting season. As required 6y L. nd Use Ccde Section ~60.40F, the annual review shall talon pia:.o at a duly noticed public hearing. As required by i end Use Code Section 4-b0.40F_., Applicant shall submit his statement of compliancy with. conditions of the g~~tut to the planning dig-ector during October, but no Later tl'tan ~t~t ~? , of esch year. xys:.-: ~~.:_ ,~ U~Ol1~ i~JGV.2C. li:~ i.~II~`fl _ ._'l vv:.V ~~ 1.viYI.V ~'jV.~~:L ~. .. Resolution ~J8- P1oC'1 S, Mining ooeraticns shall be Limited tc the ~iod from ~iay I to November ls, a_*umally, as approved by the Lnited States ror°.st Service. 4. No lacer than Ccteber 1Cth each caleaear year, the Anoiicant shall complete any surface censtrucaon in Deter to r-ul-iirLize noise and visual itnnacts associated with the :rdning activity; Applicant shall conpiete e?° ~:c line installation for the purDOSe of pros+icing ; ower for tuning equipment as soon as finarcially fesible, to be addressed at each annual review; perimeter landscaping for sc.~ nine purposes as requit°~ by the Forest Se^lic~ shall be maintained continuously, and suc:: fencing as required for suety 6y the Forest Service and oche: state or federal regslating agenc;es shall be :Hain*_aieed con~uousiy. The Applicant shall abide by .all terms of his approved Ope:-atin? Plan by the L"nitea States Forest 5errica, as a~tlreved 3utte 9, 1992, and amended on.~fay E, 1993, October 6, 1994, Lune 1, I99~, Ccrober 1%, 1944, May 15, 1945, as au'~hotized ~;nder a De`isior. Notice issued'oy the arhng Sepris Disc ct Ramer on May s4, 1992, and Al[e::iadve 5 of the propose::, Sut:olemental Plan of Cperatica subrtitted on March 7, 1995, as authorzed ender Decision `iotice data Aub::.st o?, 1455, b_v /ist:_Gt Ran Per, Kevin Riordan, as :~~odified June 24, 1996. 5. T`ne Apn_ +~cart is also operating purse. nt ;o a ySined Land R~!.::..aticn i~ivision Per_nit issued in 1991, as it may be amended from time to tr:ie. T'ne Applicant shall abide by ail tens and conditions of t~`tis Fetmit at ail times. At such tame as Applicant engatres in mining activities as der`ined by the State of Colorado outside of his current stag p~°rr.2irted area, Applicant shall have in place ;.be Section 110(:.) Per_^_~~t and :zquired bond. 6. Whenever Anpiica_nt seeks an ar,.erd_rnent to any existinP feaPral or sLie perr;,its, the wrtten doc.urents submitted to either the Lnited Stems Forest Service or the Colorado Deparu ent of Minerals and Geolow, shall be subnitted simultaneously `.o the Pitk~-t County Comr:~unity Development Depa^~t. To the extent ether any permit ameadme .is chanSe any previcusly approved operaticn, and thus affect tl`:e conditons ~of this Permit, AppiicVrtt shall specify at sec c anges n :s statement suorr::ted`foi annuatreviea~an~thz 3o_ard ~-nav-irLuese addifional conditions at eac:^, annual review. Applicant may operate uncle: the federal or state approved cSanPrd permit ccnditions until each annual review. 7. Operations shall be ccnsiste.nt witch t.;e standards in § 3-%5Q.50A, set forth in Recital pzragraph 9, above, e:,c~~t as follows: a). Instead of subsection 3, Applicant may operate froth thirty minutes alter sunup to thirty sinutPS before sundown. 'o). Instead of subsection 5, Pitkin County `leise Abatemen[ Orainance 92-06 shall apply, except that standards for the RS-30 zone district shall apply to noise levels measured at nearby r°.sidences, including Swiss Village, and indusuial standards shall apply to noise levels measured at ire rational forest boundary adizcent to the near:sc residence. T'ne ot;erations must comply with both standards at all times, The ;enerater shall be erciosed with i :two yEZ*s, subject to ior°„st serv?ce Q ~ ~ ~ approval. „~ .~~,. ., .., ,,, ^, a-y sv+-~ 1 A. Resofuuon ~98- Psge 8 c). Instead of sucseotien 9, operations are litnite3 to a season Trom l~iay 1 through Vovernber l4 of etch year to protect wiielife, In addition, the wazer t4nk si-.all be aainted to blend with the environmet*_t anc be labeled "non-ootabI"e." S. Applicant shall submit an equipment list each year with tree other decumentat:an re :uire^ far annual review, and ail equipment shall comply with county noise standards and state air pollution standards: 9. Storage cf eauipraent afrer wor.~cing hours shall be eiliher in tl',e mine, in the existing storage building, or in tFe storage area a~roved by the Forest Service. 10, unless and until cthe.~xise pe,.. ~tted by the united States sorest Service ~~d reviewed by the County, the shall be no temrorary or penman°nt rr.sideneai ese of the prznises. This dees act pro'ribit the use of the existing camper on site as a watc^uiza's- quarters, Ter security purposes, as anproved'oy the =o.,.st Service. - 11. The nursber cf employees and nu Lber of vehicle ~ ps shalt ce limited 6y the terms or" the united Slates i-orest Service approved operating plan. OTf site iro_ ac's of caanges in operation and nus;:ber of ern~ieyees during each year of opera~~on shall be cdnsider;.d in connection with etch annual review, and a^.ditienal conditions mzy be im~ased to rea_serabiy mitt=are local offsite eavironrnental iru_ acts. 12_ Tile Envircnr-eni~1 Huth Department may r,ienitor the r~uning operation once a month for the frt six (b) continuous months of active riving eperatier._ and tiZe:eaTter as periodically required, but no less than once etch year, is orcet to determ?ne eemplianca with Ioca1 and state reg_ulaticns re_arding water supply and quality, air quality, and noise issues, '± he results or all such monitoring saa!1 be arid.-~ssed a[ each annua. review. - (a). Prior to comrencemeat cf the 199& operating season, Applicant shall provide infcrnauon co the Environmental I?ealth Department docur::enting t1-;e source of potzcle drinking water to be available fqr employees and visitor, (b) During each operating season a por~ble ghemical toilet trust be installed and maintained to be easily accessible to petsoanei and visitors on tl:e site, znd the taile*s must not pose any environmental or public health problems. (c) lion-point souse draina_e from the permit area shall be retained on-site to allow suricient sett!etnent of soils and entrapment of other nzteazls present in runoff. (d) No diesel fuel storage shall be permitted on site without first subrnit*ing for review and acoroval of the Environmental Health Departmment detsiled drawings showing the dir,:ensions and liner of a cgntzinment basin for the fuel storage. 000 0 ~ l~ R°snlurion nog_ F_ge 9 13. Prior to commencement of mining acrivities, the Applicant seal obtain any necessary air pollution erzussiens pe^nits from the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division and provide cot;ies to uhe Enviranl-nencal Heap Dcpa~-tmeaL 14. Applicant sha13 con~ol road dust, in tonne won wit's a fugitive dust control plan app moved ';y the Environnertal Health Department The dust cantral plan shall also add.,:ss parking areas and ~. 'ne yard areas and shall be submitted ,~ and approved by the EavironmenLl Health Department prior to cetrmencetnent of the 1998 operating season. ld. Water supply and storage for :ire fighting purposes shall be as specified in the USrS approved plan, attached as Exhibit ~. I6. Water supply and disposal for the operation of minim equipment shall be as follows: water is captained in an under~ound settling pcoi, and is brought in by haulage from oil-site. ~ - - 17. The following wildfr hazard rutigatica measures shall be~ ad'nerec to: see Exhibit A. I$. All slops shall comply with Section 3-110.130 of ti*te Land lise Code except as they may conriict with USFS or OSHA sta.*tdzrds. 19, .All future residential sul-face strsctures s'r!a11 receive building permits, or building permit exe:rpdons, fron the Community Develepme^.t L~epar~;nent. The exisung two story structure oar the prose.:y i~.ay only be used for hur.,an ocL.:pancy, (other ti,an residential purposes), including mire elute use, if Appiica.~t has in place adecuate insurance to cover injury to occupants of the structu:.,, er ii it has LSS:-iA anpmvais_ 20, Ezcsvating per_^.uts shall 6e required whey 50 cubic yards, or more of fill or excavated-material-is-~o-be -r:=roved-fmrtl-thesurlac ;_ezcep_I_for emezency excavation and _ roadwork associated wit~'~ muculides, and except far uncle ;aural quarry activities. 21. County lighting standards shall be complied with at all times, except to the extent that they conriict with YSSI~~~ cr OSHA re~slations. 22. The Applicant shall at all times ke:°p a copy of its current reclamation pl~rt on isle with the Pitkin County Comriuniry Development Office, 0~0~1.7 • Fusoluuon n9$- Paga 1D 23. The parties ac?cnowlezige thaz aiI mate.~ial issues and repr'.-scntacions z~Iarin~ to this Penrit have be°n addressed and incarpDrateu it this Pe^rut. 24. The ar~itration agreement recited in pa~~Qrapa 17 of the Recitals is iZU~t,'~e* a:*•proved and made a cnnditior of ,his P~rnziL - NOTICE ©F PLBLIC HEARING PL'BLIS~D iN rT'iE WEEKEND EDITION OF THE A51'EN s'I'r~IES ON '2~_'l DAY OF 4~1 ~" .'i~' ,149q . ~. APP, V~D AFTER PUBLIC ~IiEA.'2L'~IG OBI THE ~T'rI DAY OF 199: . PLBLIS~D AFi'ER ~}D PTION Ily TAE ~°; FEND EDITION OF T~iE ASPEN TLNfES ON THE i T$ DAY OF . 199. ~~ ATTEST: ~ ~. o . Deputy Clep~ BOARD flF COG'N'I'Y C01YI~~IISSIOh~RS OF PiT'~3N ~')UNTY, COLORADCl Doroti-tea r arris -. Chair Dste: u - ~ - a ~ APPROVED AS TO F©R:~Z: Deborah Quinn ~~~~~ ~ Assistant County A orney l~Isnsget Accepted finis ~i a~ day of ~ ~r.l 199 ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ , Robert Cnnbdan A. t~ir.~nt AttDrney far Robert Congdon -~ ~ i ~~11 ~~~11 ~~;~~11~~1111~~ 1~1~~# i('~~ fff ~flf ff 9 /3/2n OB 10:06 AI9 FP.OD7: Fax y'rj; ~g205439 PAGE: 002 OF 003 April 3, 2008 Lance Clarke Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Via P'~csr~ntfe';;`to (970) 92~=5439 Re: Mystic Engle Qrrai•ry (2005) A-rni~al Xer•iety (Case# PO23-08; Pifl 2649-282) Dear Lance: I have been asked to cormnent on the above application slated for review by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners on April 23, 2008 and. the one page report submitted by the Mystic Eagle Quarry which states that it should serve as the annual review for 2007 mining operations. We have no disagreement with the detail of activities that occurred in 2007 as stated in said report. With respect to any possible future realignment of C'R 10, we have in the past requested that there be opportunities for public involvement in any discussion of realignment of the road. To our knowledge there has been uo such involvement to date. While there maybe legitimate safety issues that would support moving the publicly accessed road away from the mice, we believe that any such decision should be deferred until such time that there is enough mining activity to warrant such a move. This has not been the case for a number of years. It should be pointed out, that the road as it currently passes in front of the mine, is in an area that is almost completely historically devoid of debris flow activity. The area to the south of the mine entrance, where survey flags appear to stake a possible new route and wherc the previous operator had suggested moving the road is in a very active debris flow area. Moving the road to the south would undoubtedly increase the am7ual costs of the peretmially cash-strapped Forest Service to keep the road passable. Also of concern would be the number of trees that might have to be removed to facilitate such relocation. The report of the Mystic Eagle Quarry states that the aerial topographical survey of the site has been completed. If that is the case, can the aerial markers be removed? They are located in several areas such as Jaueway and east of the mine site. Those of us who regularly hike in the area would be happy to remove them, but don't want to interfere with the surveying. Svl IA.-Clarice-I ¢'-04.03.03 4/3/?008 10: Ou A17 FROM: Fa:+ Try; 991054 ;9 PAi~E: n~3 GF 0~' We are very concerned about plans for a secondary naive entrance, which also should involve public participation. While we would not argue with the safety or MSHA compliance rationale necessitating a secondary escape way, we feel strongly that it should be in tlae appropriate locatiun, ideally accessible fi~ozn an already distwbed area, such as off of the existing road. The prior operator had suggested locating it in the area anecdotally known. as Jones's Meadow, with a proposed road switch-backing up the hillside to construct and access it Jones's Meadow is heavily used by elk and bighorn sheep in the winter months and is entirely located in an area completely closed to human use atuiually from November 15 to May 1. During the one-year trial winter operation of the mine several years ago, the wildlife that can be observed almost daily in Jones's ivleadow virtually disappeared. We would also argue that. any such second portal should be used as an emergency escape route only and not as another operational access point. The new owner's consideration of neighbor and. forest user issues has been a big improvement and we hope to see that continue. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bill Brun~nrorth 032J 1Jte Trail Redstone, CO 81623 (970)704-9396 Cc: SVHA BOD SVFLA-C;lark:o-Itr'hLU3.ti3 2 CRYSTAL RIVER CAUCUS WILDLIFE TASKFORCE March 31, 2008 Lance Clark, Cornmunity Development Dept. Pitkin County 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sir, In reviewing the materials for an application submitted by Mystic Eagle Quarry the Crystal River Caucus Wildlife Task Force has the following cornrnents: In regazd to plans to realign the Avalanche Creek road the Wildlife Task Force and Swiss Village have the following concerns: - This planned activity falls within the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) designation of Avalanche Creek as a Potential Conservation Area PCA, (1999 and updated 2005). This area was ranked as the 3`d highest area for species biodiversity within the entire Roaring Fork River Watershed. Only the upper Roaring Fork River, above Aspen and Castle Creek near Aspen had slightly more raze and imperiled species. It is their wish that before planned activities are initiated that they be contacted. Susan Spackrnan, Colorado Natural Program (CNHP) Colorado State University 254 General Services Building Fort Collins, CO 80523 - This area also falls within the Avalanche/Janeway Natural Heritage azea as designated by the Caucus Wildlife Task Force (2007) because of its Bighorn sheep and elk activity areas. The rare Canyon Bog Orchid is also located nearby. - Any relocation of the Forest Service road will magnify the impact of the reining site on the narrow valley floor. A realigned road will create new "edge effects" and reduce intact land previously fragmented by the existing road and which has reduced critical habitat. - There is an existing geologic hazard in the area, amud-flow, that moves every samrner during cloud bursts in the area. Two homes immediately west of the mine are currently threatened by mud flows and flooding. Mark Lacey of the USFS in Carbondale is aware of this problem. Any realignment may increase this risk. - The Caucus Task Force requests that Pitkin County contact the CDOW, the USFS, and the CNHP before prematurely granting the road realignment request. Sincerely, f William Hanks, Task Force Coordinator. cc: Irene Davidson, USFS; Susan Spackman CNHP; John Groves, CDOW; Tom McBrayer, Crystal Caucus chairman; Jack Hatfield, Dorthea Ferris, Pitkin Co. BOCC