HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.min.reg.03121991 ,..�.,..�. �
..�._Y:.. :. � . .
��
�� '� �5�.4, L ty9f �F.1.. ;: � �... -�i _
� �,, ��/����� '� �'i�� ^x L f� 1�� � 1 , R� .
�`d��4"4(��r ' , t� . �y . .�.}� �.�'li sR.;xi `�y�4�.'.
t
. '� r�S'�`tf A �.. ,q��S� It_�-F�,. -L �:; ) 4�. Z (�'.:Y 3 i '' ��...
1 .l ; ���}{"'cC � ry�Y...�(. �.F: 4 � ax "t � 1 .
� i , n r• ra t
f.? n
� '��_ :, ', ���t�k{�
.�,x������ T� ?,�sr�'-`d lSyf,�+�.�..+}�b��f .
.. . .'4_ ,. . �} .. . ._ . Y���:�"'74.. . . :, ., ��� . . e it1�.•.
a. • •
PITRIN COIINTY COMMISSIONERB , .
REGIILAR MESTING AGENDA
District Courtroom
TIIESDAY, MARCH 12, 1991 .�i' .
5:30 PM PIIBLIC COMMENT y' �• �
}^•'..�
' PRESENTATION OF CHBCR TO ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY '
-•• CONSENT AGENDA
1. MINUTES
2. Emergency Fire Fund Agreement, Steve Crockett �
9 3. Health & Human Services Building Dedication, Marty Ames
`� 4. Highway Users Tax Fund Resolution, Tom Newland
x 5. Aspen Valley Medical Foundation Special Events Liquor
! License, Kim Schultz
•h
ADMINISTRATIVE PIIBLIC HEARINGS
a 6. Abatement Hearing: Hans Lull, Carol Foote
7. Mid-Continent Hearing, Mark Fuller
i�
LAND OSE PIIBLIC HBARING3 �
8. Basalt and Rural Fire District Sub-station Rezoning, GMQS �.
� Exemption, Cindy Aouben �
�;;; 9. Starwood Homeowners Association GMQS Exemption, Mary Lackner
" 10. Pfister Ranch/Golf Detailed Submission, Cindy Houben (Staff �.� .,
� � requests to be tabled to April 9th.) .
1 11. Mollica Appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission Decision i
and General Submission Review, Mary Lackner
�f �:
LAND II6E RESOLIITIONS l `
� 1. Endorsement of Pitkin County Trails Plan, Ellen Sassano
,� 2. Resolution Amending East Owl Creek Subdivision Land Use 1� �
Approval
RE30LIITIONS. ORDINANCBS AND CONTRACTS �
3. 1991 County Goals, Reid Haughey
4. Policy Regarding Citizen Board Appointments, Reid Haughey � �
5. Hunter Creek South Trail Easement, Tim Whitsitt �
..; � _ .
� 6. lst Reading and Set for Public Hearing, Excessive Force
y Ordinance, Tom Newland '
' �� Resolution Cancelling and Rescheduling March 26th Regular �t .
Meeting, Reid Haughey i„
Resolution Approving Contract for Acquisition of Smuggler � '
Mountain Apts, Tim Whitsitt
a � -
ADJOURN
f �
� PLEASB NOTE: ALL PUBL=C HEARINGS ARE NOTICED FOR 5:30 PM. ACTOAL TIMES �
� WILL VARY.
�..
�
.�:,n
,I! `�',
b
,.. . .. - �
_� . . ..
:t. . . '
tt , .. . .
� .
?,��ii���, . .
_�t�`;,::a '
�.� � . .
��,,;_5p`c_� '
:!�"+.�y.y � i
��'a'v:
�T
� •
:G.�
_-
�...., -
'�,•�.,;�`=.t ,
�� t
q
` '. . ' ., K ,di �� � Yr - � 4 � l
t . .- . .�a.�{�f �sf�y�� - + y` �' � tit 1�K�'r
1 '-L jr�•ny, .�. 4.'Y�Y�'�'�i��' l.:l, � ���� � ,.i�� �}�? ,�e
a , �
"9„�, �, � �. � ;'. r�''ac �
. . . Y�,r . .. . . . i��.�a � �� ... +%'�L°�!rZ%'y . � � �� -
. . . . . ..�.4�M lt f .
�rpR�Ep �r _.
.. �R 2� /�1`/� '���.
M��$s �n�-�k�- .
PITRIN COUNTY BOARD 08 COIINTY COMMISSION8R8 -
REGIILAR ME$TING �•
`r
MARCH 12. 1991 � *
i:, '�.,
.. _ � ��. r�`f
i'[ '
MEIiBERB PRBBBNT: Chairman Wayne Ethridge, Commissioners Herschel ;i
Ross, Jim True, Fred Crowley and Bill Tuite :s
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ethridge called the meeting to order at �
5:30 p.m. ;•
� �.
Chairman Ethridge presented a check through the County Commissioner ��',
from the NBC Production of Zenith to the Aspen Historical Society d'':r�
� for $1,000. ' :
�
Chairman Ethridge read the resolution dedicating the Health and
Human Services building the Michael W. Schultz Health and Human
' Services Building.
CONSENT AGENDA: !. �
�PPROVAL OF MINOTES OF JANUARY 29 1991
� ;
, . APPROVAL OF FIRE FUND AGREEMENT � �
i R880LIITTON OFFICIALLY NAMIN� THE MICHAEL W. SCHIILTZ HEALTB AND �
HIIMAN SERV2CES BIIILDING f
' RE80LUTION APPROVING HIGHWAY II8ER8 TA% FIIND
;
� �PPROVING LIODOR LICENSE FOR ASPEN oALLEY MEDICAL FODNDATION
� SPECIAL EVSNTS `.
i
i Commissioner Ross moved approval of the Consent Aqenda.
, Commissioner True seconded. The motion passed unanimousig. '
I RSBOLIITION APPRODING AN ABATEMENT PETITION FOR PROPERTY TA$ REFIIND
' i TO HANS LIILL - MOTION TO APPROVB - PASSED IINANIMOOSLY
Chairman Ethridge opened the hearing to public comment. There �
being none, he closed the public hearing. ;�
Conmisaioner Roas moved approval of the resolution. Commissiotter �:� �
Crow2ey seconded. The motion passed unanimously. :':Y �
i
' RESOLLJTION AMENDING SPECIAL IISER PERMIT 86 239 FOR THE t4ID ;�.
�
' CONTTNENT RESOIIRCES COAL BASIN MINES MOTION TO APPROVS AND
" BOARD O� COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1 MARC$ 12� 1991 ` S
R
�
�j{e;
�.: ..
_�� Y� .:;� . .. , . _ � . . . . . . . . . . . � . - . . . ° 1 -
�Ta.
¢'{
f'1:=;',c•�.�'-.g`,��. ' � •
'$;s����z�r�` , ' . ' .
r,�4+X?-. .. . . .
a�
s✓t}.
�y���,,�� � .
P,t,�K}S�j•;4'.
�Y.kk�. . r �
,.t;U�?:
���'
�. .
'�`R�'�.'.�'*._ .
"D.�7�.�' .
ar
h'si;y.
�wtr��~f t _.. . , . . . . .
�.'�'�tr� � E Ar Y1''�},,�q4 N �'��FQi�` .� � ��"���""`�'�'4�,���
. ^, w�. ���,�,,,'�t�. ��� `'�'' �,, ;,,i � �y,i��{.t�ts" ,.
� •} J'� hV ,f� �i � �.. � a�-�r'4ZP+ . �':�� u'y `�i1���1t��r(�i�' � � .
q �
! - . w��*i 'c'£,. `Z. ��i ryvc, � � �' ����.� J YER?�4.k t�t r. t
`nr„!�' r, 1 � f "*� � �
q�}t '�'�dy ' h r �y �,� * '�' t^„�wr s'.t�;. 1 � r .i:
. . . . :�'lp3 t�� :�'..k`�,}�!��������'�s��. . ,�..:�Y�,;' tp 'cnt�„'"�`..sr•""��Y:"'�Ll. 9.t'.�.Sn.A�l-°' -�`c 1.' .
" � .:'\ � � �'.. •'
t.
� RBCONFIRMING RESOLIITION 91-13- PA88SD WITH FOIIR YEA AND ONE NAY � Y ..
vOTB Chairman Ethridge stated, that Diane Delaney and Ed Mulhull
have raised several jurisdictional questions and other questions ' ��".�'` �
of March 4 and March 7, 1991. He asked Tim Whitsitt, Caunty
Attorney, if he had any comments for the record regarding their �
conoerns.
;
' Whitsitt responded, that he has read them, but has not prepared a �
' formal legal response to it. He thin)cs, to try to be distinct I
; about it, there were questions raised by Mr. Mulhall and Ms. j }'
� Delaney as to the County's jurisdiction to impose certain j ,;
conditions and make certain amendments with conditions upon the �
Special Review Permit. He said one of the issues raised was the � '':"•
County was possibly preempted from these kinds of conditions either
though the Mined Land Reclamation Act at the state level or through
� the fact that they were operating on Federal Coal Leases. There
are certainly case law developed both by the highest court in this
state, the Colorado Supreme Court and by the United States Supreme
Court, that make it clear that local jurisdictions do have the
power to regulate through the land use process and appropriately ' '
condition developments such as these, He referred to the state case
� of C&N Sand and Gravel in which a Boulder County regulation of a
gravel flowing operation was upheld, and the state supreme court , .
. specifically stated, that the Mined Land Reclamation Act, at the '.`
state level, did not preempt local jurisdiction. There is also the
' . U.S. Supreme Court case of the lteystone Bituminous Coal in which '�
local regulation over a coal mining operation very similar to the
circumstances of Mid-Continent was affirmed by the United States ��
Supreme Court. He said he does not think that there is a serious ���,
- issue of preemption before the Board tonight. Ae further stated, �
that there is in fact, very adequate authority for the Board to go
ahead and condition based on local specific land use and ,
environmental concerns the granting of a Special Review Permit. �'
Whitsitt said there are two other issues involved. He said it has � 4 �
been long conceded by Mid-COntinent that Pitkin County does have
the power through a special use review process to condition this �
operation. This is a special review that is long standing for over
, ten years. He suggested that it was a little late in the game to
come into the Caunty and say you don't have the power to regulate � . ,
us through special review. Finally, he would state, that the Mined ��`;
Land Reclamation Act itself, and the Mined Land Reclamation � ,.
Divisioa has specifically conditioned the reclamation permit for ��:i �
Mid-COntinen� Resources on their maintaining a valid local Y '
permitting situation. So the Mined Land Reclamation has itself j,,
recognized the jurisdiction of Pitkin County. ;,,y� .
�
One of the other final comments he would address is the suggestion �i
that Pitkin County not act on its own but act in conjunction with
' the various jurisdictional agencies who olearly do have authority ,
over the activities of Mid-Continent, and that in fact, is being '��•.•
' done to make sure that the County is not exceeding or conflicting
BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONBRB 2 MARCH 12� 1991 �
t..�-�,-, -. . •
.:'r;�r;`.. , . .
, `�;:=;'y`�.,f" � .
��r+f'�.�:s;+:� .
x:���J i
��'..,.�
e�:��9s�':.
[,;r.�. ,,:;
„����R'
�,'.,°za'�.,,�,T*:
x •
.n
=�:i�
.J
H.�;z.
:,..::-:
_ _ ....�..�,..�
..:;.,;
�f�
`'�;;,� , __ � _._
��r;,
...
� . .. ... a .. . ' . �.A'��'/�'`�j 7����� `��4F�'S�`�Lt �1�4�J�"��� �a�'�v��ycy}W�...
4 t`.:h� �..f ,a.�� .+.. �,y t ��.tl�.C. � f.*fp, J� t31 j }....
1 ^�� $.t�i�� -7: �t�.�gl,h�ik�.`��# 4�,"R'y� 4 . S � �� 2.� Y�{� °l�'�i n �y��.,+ �i ��� eut y . .
� �� ���������'� . , _ . _. . . , � . .
. .. . . r ������� �f i�
�' ..=) i }
i .
directly with the jurisdiction of the Mined Land Reclamation, the '
Office of Surface Mining, Forest Service and the other ,
jurisdictional agencies. �
Diane Delaney, representing Mid-Continent Resources, asked that •
her letter of March 7, 1991 be entered into the xecord of the .'��
public hearinq: A copy of this letter is made a part of this
record as ERHIBIT ��A��. .' r •
�� .�
Mark Fuller proceeded with an update of the work staff had done s.. '
� since the last meeting. He said that have met with representatives .I -
of the State Division of Mined Lands, the Bureau of Reclamation, �
the Forest Service, the State Division of Wildlife, the Water
Quality Control Division and the Department of Health and Federal i
Office of Surface Mining. He said the purpose of that meeting was : � �
to exchange information on the various permits held by those bodies �: !.
- re2ative to the operation of Coal Basin, and to coordinate their ; .
activities and address mutual concerns. Also, to be assured that ��••,^,
they were not stepping on each other toes. He said one of the most
important points as far as tonight's proceedings go is that during
the course of that discussion they discussed this proposed permit
amendment, and the resolution which was passed a covple of weeks
; ago. Those other agencies which were represented there stated
unanimously, that neither the process or the substance of the
permit in any way interfered with or contradicted their activities � , .
! relative to activities in Coal Basin.
� There were a number of other points that came up, Fuller said, that
. he feels the Board should know about. He said the Mined Land i:� '
Reclamation Division stated, that they have three basic issues they f�;.
are trying to work out among themselves and with Mid-COntinent at ,
this time. The first of those is the installation of the water n�
treatment plant. Since the last meeting, the State has approved �-
� a technical reviszon to the Mid-Continent Permit relative to the r�;.
' water treatment plant, and it states, that "construction of the �
� water treatment plant will be reinitiated prior to resumption of
coal production, and the water treatment plant will be in full
operation within 60 days of the resumption of coal production." � •
He feels that technica2 provision is an adequate substitute for the �. �
language in the resolution which was passed relative to the water �
treatment plant. He recommended, thaf the resolution be amended ,
to mirror the Atate's requirement or to incorporate it by reference
� so that there is no question about meeting that particular concern. '
Another issue that the State is working through with Mid-Continent ;,;',
is their mid-term review. The State issues five-year permits to %:i
coal mining operations. Mid-COntinent last had their permit f'
reviewed in 1988 so it is up for mid-term review right now. The lt "" -
, State gave them a great deal of information about what they are �i!y �
incorporating into the amendments that will he made to the Mid- � '
' Continent permit through that mid-term review process. The most
� important of those are changes relative to the reclamation of Mid- ":� '
�
� BOARD OF COIINTY COMMI88IONERB 3 MARC$ 12, 1991 1'
1
� .
� �� ..
___
i4�.a.� ;.:. _ -
t
��:�,.;" . _
t•F'f;:s�;� • .
;�t:::w-r ,
.,.,�;z
:yq�,. ,.. � .
,;y�r��• . . .
. i'r:YaSjr'� . . .
a«F;-,'• � - .
C�',y y.�J ,. .
� '�1
�r�,K�:;• � �
�r�
•NiA�;:;��'a1`.
t'
�� '
A�µ
l�
.t:�;Y:jir
��i
�,��,,���
����`i, � � .. �� , � � - t .
�� � '. ,y�. � 's�kc.' f .a$ � � ���kr ����,���N�•�'� t��.
� �. �;. 7�`��',l
' t► ti , � d,�5a ,�:z"�ir ��`�� T/� a+° :��T 4' N �c'
f� b.a �4...,� �t y vY:'��.^' �"'��'� �i�t��r� nr�•�j � ,i-7�tf
-�1 �� V 1 ii�k � $��7h�n�� � F
'����'�j � .'�i p�Y X�i{!} � {� � ���������},,�, 4�! '},��, S 7 �
�a�r �. y j U s � �:� ��� j.,� . � , ,
. � �'. Fs 8 _t�����4��•�i'?IW���, 1,.��. _....q�F���i�.t''��'a'�.Ff.�.�ir.,',.,���fn����������"..' {.��},�� •
.. � Yt xc.z ..:�7, r:p,
> .•.
a ' �
Continent�s coal roads. Ae said the Forest Service Special Use
Permit refers to Mid-Continent only. So if Mid-COntinent is no • -
longer the operator in Coal Basin those permits will be rescinded, •
and a new operator will have to start from square one with the � r
Forest Service.
_ _ Fuller said that the State is in the process now of a "Show Cause � ��� '
Hearing" which they initiated last summer. Ae said the Division �
of Mined Land Reclamation has not yet made a ruling whether or not
that process will be halted or suspended given the fact that the
mine was now not in operation. ! .
� On the various aspects of the resolution, they discussed them at � � �
some length and there have been virtually no representations made '
- by Mid-Continent to them up to this point, that any of the specific ± ��;
requirements, i.e, the water treatment plant, relocation of the gas
� and diesel tanks, notice on use of the spoils pile, and the `
; participation in water shed improvements degrade the ability of a
' new operator at Coal Basin to resume operations. Therefore, he
thinks the discussion tonight is not so much about whether or not
the specific requirements need to be changed or altered, with the '
exception of the water treatment plant, but rather whether or not �
the suspension provision, in and of itself, is appropriate for the !
County to be pursuing.
Chairman Ethridge opened the public hearing. •
� Ms. Delaney stated, that she thinks Mark is correct in saying that �
they really do not have specific objections to the four items of
concern. She said she will not belabor the points raised in the �� ,
letter. She thinks they are legal points that can be probably
• dealt with another day except to point out, that the County has
never before undertaken to create in a Special Use Permit a ��
;; production license. And she thinks that is essentially what they
are doing with this particular proposal. She said the difference
' between what has occurred for the 38 years at Coal Basin and what ` �
goes on now, is that currently they are not producing coal. And '
she thinks it does give rise to certain jurisdictional issues when '
the County says in essence, "subject to certain undefined .
conditions you may or may not be allowed to resume production of
. coal." She said that coal production at Coal Basin actually occurs �• `
under Gunnison County from federal leases. Federal leases are �`:
issued with a requirement and the desire of the federal government � , _
that in fact, production occurred from the. Therefore, she thinks
that probably does bring forth some questions as to the County '�
. through a new paragraph 28 for the first time casting this special !;
use permit to have permission to produce or not to produce coal. s�Y
Specifically, she would like to talk about paragraph 28 whether it _ ;Y�
is in fact necessary to accomplish the goals and objectives the
County has, namely the four points. The water treatment plant, to
� insure that it is in fact installed if an operator, does resume ��F•
� BOARD OF COQNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 MARCH 12, 1991
� ,`��
il I `
---� $ i
�� '�,.` . . : . . � . .. � . . � . . ..
�;..::�-,�
cs.�.:1�Y'. . . .
�.�'G''�
..}.%�,,::":'��-�`ti: . • .
::P.'n^d'•-L:' ' �
�t��!.. � , .
y���t
����,'� �
;,�.�i,-.�r,-:'.
:y�;�r�'
"✓y.,�
�..�� .
�i'Gr
�
r;.:��..;. .
�f-
��b
1�+rr� - ,
� ' 1 . . . . . . , .''y Sm,��'t�.i�4$.� r;��'���.�� i� ��7k�'�?'�ii����'k'�x�;7t��}
� n�"�� A�b'1.�� �Z 1�-'�` � � -"'�'� 't' 1�t �����/�ct. � .,�.�� `k4�s4 v`���p� �{ .,'y t
. . �Y�'+�`�'` . � .. . '��`�'`�� <'.������►�� . .. �� �....�.�.-1.��'¢}T� •-..
�. �
production, to try and cover remining of the coal spoils piles, , .
cover the movement of the gas tanks and then also to try to insure
that the discussions have begun concerning the coal basin watershed
should be ongoing if another operator comes in. She does not think _
of those as particularly honoris, burdensome or contentious. The 'r
water treatment plant is covered by MLRD, remaining of the coal ,
spoils is also covered by permanent permission of MLRD, and the ��_`
County would have an opportunity to make comments in that process. �� ,
� • Also, item no. 3 is probably a good idea and she would not disagree �
with it, and she thinks the same of item no. 4. Also, she thinks
they would be required by the Forest Service in any case, to
continue participating in such d�scussions. But she questions
� whethez a new paragraph 28 is in fact necessary to accomplish
;, those, and she thinks the necessary provision is a requirement of
the existing special use permit, mainly that if the County finds �
:; any additional language or changes to the permit to be necessary j�
. . � for health and safety of the people in Pitkin County. What is a ��,
point of contention is whether in fact, it is necessary. She
� reiterated, that these particular items have probably been dealt
';;.� with in any case under the auspices of other agencies or through
the permit process when the permit comes up for renewal in
December. She suggested, that it is not really necessary to invoke
a suspension to see that these are adequately dealt with.
IBeyond that, she has specific concerns with the language in the '
�•�, I new paragraph 28 as proposed in that it is extremely vague, and
does not have any particular trigger as to when paragraph 28 goes
" i into effect. She said as she reads it, that when production •
�w ceases, the permit is suspended. But production does cease
sometimes for a variety of reasons for a variety of timeframes.
' Therefore, her question is are they talking about two hours, two
. � days, two months, 90 days or what? Therefore, she does think it
�� is workable in the sense that the County has not really nailed down
;; what it is they want an operator to come in and talk to them about
with regard to additional conditions which might be placed on the
permit.
� Ms. Delaney said, the other question is whether the County intends ,
this to apply specifically in this particular instance, in this ,
V+! ' particular year or whether it is something they see as an ongoing
� feature of the special use permit. Beyond that, she thinks it is
) a quite unworkable situation for a coal operator who for instance,
' • has had an unanticipated cease in coal production, they don't know
- how long it will last, and there is this language that says the !
County might want to come up with some new conditions on their � •
Special Use Permit. Therefore, it would become very difficult for
them, in pursuit of their goals to sell the property to a good and �� --
_ responsible operator, to show them that they can have a real
?.� comfort level what they are dealing with as far as the particular t
permitting agencies.
� i Whitsitt, responded that, with regard to the issue of an operator
3
„�::� BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS 5 MARCH 12� 1991
:,,� '
� � r°
_--- "�'Y
t� - .
� T . _ . . . . . .
� ^"
'�yf'Yry„r{.
�I'��.F'�u�.;.ii . . � � .
Y ,
.•kji,i.r'^�kk'� , .
`` �'+';S�3 • . ' .
a�.'��'��;
}t.u.y'::
:'�Ai 1
�.�.��^.,: .
::�����
F� t
��S •
A
,+"°��
�•!'�'�`{� '.}�. . . . � - ..... � • ., � . . '. ' � .
r. ,. . . . .. . ' J r
��:.� � �.; . : : � �R� f y � �x�4s' ����} � ' ��f��y�`�4�'���,yy�f�yAc"��:
!� - t +nA-�"�`'� ~� � .���- . :.�:' �� t� � ����1���C�, f"SS�t. r4'F�t�2 f-0C`"j �i+] re� .
',�4���� �r�t a �. �},�,�r,s�.� .. � �. �����'6r�2 :���„��� �{ .�,f� }�#�,, �,
'y�� �}yj` �y �:'
"W'��,_� �'�"�:�'t`iR��������` .� , ��,pr.t�'�". �� 4����i�.s I2+����.Y�I�t. +9s } .
- ".`���r".�;�'!A- .�i..���,d� •..�w t y i;
. \ .
r., . . .
- not knowing what they are dealing with. He thinks the County is •
in fact demonstrating to Mid-Continent and any potential operator -
what they are dealing with. It is not a situation where the County '.r
can or will be pulling the Special Use Permit just on a moment's �
notice. Part of the resolution that is before the Board toniqht � .`;'.�:.�" .
� includes a specific finding that definite cessation has taken place '
in this case, and he perceives that is the way the Commissioners 7
intend to go forward in the event there is a resumption of ��
operations. He does not think it is realistic for Mid-Continent
to assume that this will be handled in any different way, that the
BoaYd of County Commissioners will in fact give notice, and an ( .
opportunity to be heard. He thinks in fact, that the Commission ' � '
has a right at this time to condition their permit upon their : !
implementing of local environmental and land use conditions ' �''
immediately. And the fact, that they are stating that the County @ �,;°,,
is putting the active operations into suspense rather than evoking !
`: the permit, is in fact, showing a large degree of indulgence and
understanding with the difficult situation Mid-Continent is in at
this time.
Reid Haughey, County Manager, stated that Ms. Delaney characterized
this as a license to mine coal. The staff's approach to that has ! •
, been, that the Special Use Permit allows a variety in Coal Basin,
one of which is mininq. And that the Special Use Permit is there
! for the protection of the citizens of Pitkin County. They believe
i that the completion of the tasks that are outlined in the Special '
� Use Permit is a way of communicating to Mid-Continent what are some
� of the requirements of the special use permit, and that it is not �
a Iicense procedure for the mining of coal. Again, the notion of �
. 1 tying it to the production of coal is to try and tie the activity
! to what the impacts are without disrupting the balance of the
� special use permit rather than using the special use permit as a
Whole. k°
� Mark Euller stated, that one point Ms. Delaney made was, that �. '
during previous suspensions of operation due to strike or natural � •
t disaster, the County has not seen fit to evoke this kind of change •
; to the basic setup for the permit. He said this is very true.
:� However, he thinks •they need to be very aware of the different ,
� circumstances which led to this point. He said these circumstances .
are the fact, that the ownership and the operation of the mines is
going to change. He said it's a situation where there are �<
� outstanding unresolved issues between the current operator and the I
j County, and the permit as a whole is due to expire at the end of
� this year, at which point he would anticipate that all of the ' �`
issues that are currently in the permit will be readdressed or I �
reviewed in a very comprehensive way. Therefore, he thinks all of
;� those justify the County taking a di£ferent approach and making a �
, different response to this particulaz suspension of operations.
,,�� Chairman Ethridge stated, that in other previous situations t .
r-,� mentioned, there was no public notification that Mid-COntinent �
x
BOARD OF COIINTY COMMIS6IONERB 6 MARCH 12� 1991
yp• ;r=
SY• j .
_�� `�
L�
� .
r ��: � . . . ... . . . . .
�E.- :�rt � . . . .
.e_:;�'y`o•• . .
��FY�...
'4 t"r'i S' .
.,`�"�,u�� ' .
�:'Y`,i�i=v.
.�+�e�'�j;,:' . �
:r.R��:',.t.:.{;, •
..�--..1{��f�l
r�" `
y_ I.�;r�
x�� •
,r-
41��
,��:
,����f�xe _ � .
`�Tt�'�`t ." . . E .t. ! .
. . ! �pL�, ��,N �f ~��` . :� '`3'p q"�,t "A� ��t ��i
�� . -%C�� w ' � .�::': i��r'��'�FYy_R�it� r.S.��'�+*-4x '^.:rrh'�z,�''��;� �if��r"4�rt I :
� -r:�.���� �,,��} Z,F.,•�,-; ,. � '"' .,a-� }�p,4' �Yitl� �hr�-'n � 1°a � � :
'yO �"9?��'1 .t�, 4 ' �4. •� 'd+1 _ . 1_ .. f L�- � t , i }<
r
" � •�,�J}'�" . s .. . . �.a.�i . ._, .. � . ,��.�. r..�. . . , .. . �.Sr)`,�#�,`.,��;�� .
`..
� �
intended to indefinitely cease operations so that is also a • •
distinction.
Ms. Delaney stated, that again, a new operator in reading paragraph ;•y !'
28, would question when it would trigger and aqain become a
. suspension if he has an interruption of production. She said there '
� is really no timeframe set out. It is not clear to an operator °���.�`�
; what the County is expecting. .
� Chairman Ethridge stated, that every cessation to date has had
� different characteristics. And it is not the intent of this
� resolution to try to anticipate every particular set of , �'
� circumstances that is impossible this but to provide an opportunity
for Pitkin County to review the operating characteristics of the ��
I mine based upon certain circumstances. Therefore, this is a middle '
_ � ground position. He believes, based on the previous history of the �,�':
Mid-Continent, that they have the ability to revoke the permit but � -''
the Board is trying to keep it in suspension so that they will have '`
r ; . .
the ability to find a buyer.
�
Delaney reiterated that she thinks the language needs to reference 1 .
j a timeframe.
� f',
`•! Whitsitt stated, that what this does is give the County the ' '
,� opportunity in the case of a future cessation of indefinite �r
duration, to impose further preconditions to resumption of �
_ operation. This amendment would have to go through the same public � ,
� hearing process that this amendment has gone through. Therefore,
it will not be a condition when a operator is waiting a long period �
jj of time not knowing what the County going to do. Either they are �
not going to establish preconditions to operate again, and nothing
� will change and the suspension will be lifted without preconditions r
- � or else those will be established and they have to be established ,.
by an amendment of the special use permit because they are new +
�,� conditions that will go through a hearing process which is very �°
well defined under the special review process. � ,
� Delaney reiterated, that she thinks the language is too vague. '
� Commissioner Tuite stated, that he feels the matter is being dealt � .
i with in as fair a manner and as easy a manner as can be as opposed •
, � saying "why are we allowing this permit as this stage", which has
( been discussed in the past for revocation of the permit.
I Commissioner Ross stated, �hat he agrees with Commissioner Tuite. '� ,
There were some timelines set for the improvements which were _
� mutually aqreed upon between the County and the permit holder. �, '
� That timeline was exceeded because of problems with the mine. The '�Y.
; County gave an extension to Mid-COntinent because they had the
j fire, and what they are saying, is they are understanding the � .
j predicament but before things start up again these have to be
± addressed. He thinks the Board is showing a lot of leniency and 'f
� BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS 7 MARCS 12� 1991
� c'::
i`I,E.
' ,�...
��. � .
�, { . .- . . . .... . . � .. . . .
r�.� - •
�.ty1 L� . � .
¢Y�sYe�`;y�
',.z;+. . . .. '
.4�,'�;'���� � . ' •
���r.. '
.a'°�yr� ' ' .
.�,A,hy�:
''��:.�: . �
�,.7:7:�;tx��;•': . - •
.,��',y^�•=?''.
j. .
��^
i
� �'
._..'�`„� .
i�"'
r
r,:°�"s_
;,
..;c,.;;
�T� � ,
=�'X]'R� . '.t : � ..
i L � �+,
� br- <rb 4 �: �� -. � . � J� � � �-i��5�? ��.��i" 1-• �.r4�:r'�' �y 1� k`C
i � � � ,• . ."�� d , a �fr J i t. # ?
r �� y �V , �I i t t!. ...2��SC'r3y, G�� ' . „�J•ti� t '
S }r'�k t] Y. .P ��JfN ,�„L f.� 4 t. �{ �
' ^�b�'�"���1��4. .f���l��+R11��1���4�a.�1. �.'.�.�� dr . � . .. � . . . _�fY3 �fai;�•�'�J{`t� .
�..
� ) :
:.
understanding for the problems that Ms. Delaney has described. ' �
Chairman Ethridge opened the hearing to public comment. . .
There were several members of the public who encouraged Commission -
members to adopt the proposed language of the resolution. They -
� felt it was a good time to get some of the issues and concerns ` '�
: further defined and settled, i.e, water treatment plant in
� operation.
� .,..`:n•
� ; Michael McVoy, representing the Roaring Fork Crystal Alliance, � �
. � stated that they support the County's resolution and the proposed
� suspension of Mid-COntinent's permit. They would like however, to
; ask further strengthening of the provision regarding the coal piles
� up there. He said they feel strongly that a 120 day notice is �
� basically an irrelevant kind of thing. They would like to see
� those piles tested as a condition of movement of the piles. Also, ��;:.
_ i they would like to add that the Forest Service report is out and I;'_
the recommendation is that the reclamation start happening
� immediately for a variety of reasons, and they support the Forest
' Service�s recommendation with this regard.
.•a
� Commissioner Ross stated that the movin of the '
� this ' 9 piles i Pnot gnder �
s permit at this time. But what the Board is antici atin is
; that with the notice, Mid-Continent would be notifying them of the �,
� new activity that was not part of the permit, and it would require -
an amendment to the permit. And pending what they were doing with
moving the coal piles at that time, the necessary requirements �1
would be imposed, and that is what the 120 days represent.
� Chairman Ethridge stated, that he shares Mr. McVoy�s concerns but .
this language is intended to be as general and deal with potential
mitigation of impacts for activities including something other than �
t using it as a fuel source. Just the active moving of it itself may
, � cause environmental problems that no one is aware of because it had
? not been permitted before. Therefore, it is more general than
� specific and is intended to deal with a broad array of potential
`� uses for those coal spoils. [,
� Diane Delaney stated, that it is usually environmentally beneficial +� •
� to remine and remove coal refuse piles. With reqard to the water �
� treatment plant, it has been permitted by the Mined Land �'
Reclamation Division. However, it has not yet been permitted by �
� the Department of Health. She said, that in the discussion last
fall, she indicated to the County, that they could not use the �1�
y plant in any case, until the permitting had been completed. '!`.
� Delaney summarized by stating, that Paragraph 23 of the special ��
�� use permit governs amendments to the special use permit. She said
this makes a requirement, that based on a preponderance of ] •
evidence, the County should make a finding that it is reasonable
and necessary to the health to the people of Pitkin County, that i
� �
� BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS 8 MARCH 12� 1991 ;;
. � j.
�i
Yj
, ,l�'
t
.�..,.
y� T- : . ' ..
� 4.�a$���-, M . �i .
��'i`A�.�: �
��°••s,�•. - `
K:�'��� . ,
:��;;;:�?:=�, .
�E,.� r ,
�,.�:.;:�i,`;; ,
..�Yn..�:l ' . '
�F/'3:;`f7..' . .
. 1��"'�4.�'! , .
�
��,��
.,#��.::y✓ . . '
{��Ke,��1.` � .
.^.r}a'°.':.'f.,.i� .
��r'��
��, .
..
,;��a.
��
��� �
=1l��tr'v ' . � .. . . � t ... `R �s��4 '3�;v��"L t l�'��� i� .:a�,����!�1:y'�i��tlL�j''..1!
, c,�'�"...���1�+�i x �a 3;it,' ri,,�,�'�"��;�"r�,��i �y i
' �:��,4.4.$.�,'° M�r.�•'A{ `Z� 3..k��... . � � �.���,�c hi�, n'�,'1,-a' !� � :+.
' + .:'1,�y . n,• a''�� i "�a y �'it a y4�'�e+.��"t�b rV1��!"` 1•�7
' .g��i#. q:T'�!-�.i.��`' ... r:�$i�e��_.�.t� .�E��°'v�,r"��'vs1!:�-. �� �ti..�A.4:�P'' . ,...i;i �.,
4 .
... � � . . .. . ,, , �.
1,
an amendment could be adopted. She does not believe that there is '�" r �
a preponderance of evidence that has been offered which would
support Paragraph 28 as it is written. She also believes, that •.* r•
the language in Paragraph 28 is vague, it does not give an operator ` '���
a sound idea as to what the conditions of the permit are and would
be. And also, it is in essence nnworkable for an operator. She 1 -
said, she wished to make it clear that they have those concerns and �
1 have stated them for the record. '
Also, Paragraph 23 does not provide for the suspension of the
germit. It provides for amendments to the permit. The two are �f {
1 different things, and she does not think there is a provision in 1 -�'
the special use permit which in fact does allow the County to ��=
essentially set up their own suspension procedure. She said
again, they disagree with certain procedural aspects of this
hearing.
i
Chairman Ethridge stated, that there have been three suggestions.
one by staff which would amend Condition N�. 1 to be consistent
with the MLRD. Another suggestion has been to require specific .
testing of the coal waste piles prior to any movement from the �
i site, and the third item is the concern expressed by Ms. Delaney,
� that this amendment is unnecessarily vague. Iie asked if any meznber
; of the Commission desired to reconsider Resolution 90-13 at this �; •
time for any of those purposes.
Commissioner Ross moved confirmation of Resolution 91-13 �
inaorpozatinq a reference to the MLRD lanquage as recommended by y�t�l
staff, no other amendments. Commissiaaer True seconded the motion ;..
with aad amendment of an additional Whereas clause with language '�,
• , that there is a preponderance of evidence necessary to protect the �
j health and safety of the present and future 3nhabitants of Pitkin
i County. � �
Chairman Ethridge suqgested an amendmant to Item No. 2. At tbe =I���, .
end of the sentence to address mitiqation of impacts of that `
aativity such mitigation may include but not be limited to ahemical '
I testinq of the coal waste piles. '
. c t ,"'..,
Commissioner Ross stated that he would choose aot to a cept hat
amendment. ;yi `
j Commissioner Tuite stated, that he would like to leave out the 60 ��1 -_
day reference. }
. �
` �;.+,
This was aqreeable by Commissioners Ross and Tuite. � �
��.!� .
� Whitsitt adviaed that it should also be explicit that the last '"�
sentence of Condition No. 1 will be removed that references the "� ,
� requirements of the MLRD.
, ,
,
�.';`
� Commissioner Ross and Trua accepted the recommendation. ` �
� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERB 9 MARCH 12� 1991 �� .
*� . _ , . � _
�:Fy~
��
.Z.�,�y�it'. . .
. ..�:: .
'4'�s✓��t� . . . �
�S���Cy''�a� .
��"�j�
h.yql�r.v��t�:�•'
+.i i�?T�='{�:L:
;��_�i .
���
�`.%W�
_.____._�___.-.-..�_ _.
,y..��:.,_
e�',�;'ro
t
'..�,'4 � .. _. ' .
::�qa}sP*: .� . . . _ � .� . ; . . . . . ...
� y,
i . . . • •�. � . �� � �{'- �.}j� AiF..2 ��f;.•i8 1 �_ 0..`��-�'{'^ °t t_.
!. . �fi,�„�:i�����'s'u 4 �t�'_.p��Z 1 � . t; . a .y'��^"'I!f'��1.�*j'�4� �!4 k� '� r"�"l�Yt��`yjtU`�!������� -
i�{7� � -q� 1�C'� }C. {�i`C�tc bj;vi �:.�.� � 2, '`�,l �ei�;,,7��•M U„��`* y`i��,�� �ti .
� • slfij�t! _,..�'i�Z���y��� �C t Y � 3 1 �.; +�, yrra...,�. _ .."YG'�' � ,,��n�;�z:t`' � , �
. .��[�,�?��l���(:i�:a�t i't "��f.`.a..j�.'.,. �-�3 ��a� ro ,� h � � ��
, =��'7�L.�'s,ti� :i�������•c��t�.��i�:d�� ,4rr �� t ,
a. .> .'.
Chairman Bthridge moved to amend Item No. 2 to add languaqe in the •
last sentenae which would read ��further amondment of Permit No. 86- -
_ 239 to Qetermine chemical conteat of such coal spoils and address ' r
mitiqation of impacts to that activity. commissioner True seconded
the motion. :'n • �
• `. � ,;�
, Tom Dunlop, Environmental Health Director, suqgested that the `� �
: laaquage state ��to determiae content of the waste pile.�� ;'f
' It was aqreed, that this lanquaqe would be added. �'
i , �
Chail�man Ethridge called for a vote on the proposed ameailment to ; ;�
_ the amendment. The motion passed with three yea votes by " �
Commissioaers Ethridge, True and Tuite, and two nay votes by �, `
Commissioners Ross and Crowley. �� �,-.,
Chairman Sthridqe cailed for a vote on reconfirminq Resolut3on 91-
13 with Resolution 91-21 as amended with the laaquaqe
��preponderaace of evidence�'. The motion passed witL four yea votes
by Commissioners Ross, Ethzidge, Tuite and True, and one nay vote
by Commisaioner Crow2ey.
,s ,
ORDZNANCL APPROVING BASALT AND RIIRAL FIRS DISTRICT $IIB-STATION
_ RBZONING GMOS EREMPTION - MOTION TO APPROVB - pABBED IINANIMOUSLY
Cindy Houben, representing the Planning Office summarized this item
. by stating, that this is second reading of this particular action. '
At the last meeting on January 29, 1991, the Boax'd reguested that �,
the District look into several issues and those issues have been ;�
reflected in the conditions of approval in the ordinance. She said �
. the applicants have dedicated eight of their parking spaces on site
" to the volunteers for the fire district and have reduced their
C number of parking spaces from 24 to 15 to allow a better site j'I
j design. Also, they have moved the building on site approximately �;
� 12 feet baak Prom the property line on Snowmass Creek Road.
i' .
j Chairman Ethridge opened the hearing to public comment.
� Lee Levi.nworth, representing the applicant, stated that since the
last meeting, the District has tried to address all the concerns
' that the Bpard had at the last meeting, and they have no problem '
� with any of the conditions.
commisaioaer Ross moved approval of the Basalt Rural Fire Distriat l , �
� GMP Sxemption, Rezoning. commissioner Crowley seconded. The
� motion passed unanimously. , " �-
4 . �
Chairman Ethridge closed the public hearing on this matter.
# j;
� RESOLIITION APPROVING BTARWOOD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION GMOS E]CEMPTION r� '
� - MOTION TO APPROVE PASSED UNANIMOIISLY - Mary Lackner, ;
-� representing the Planning Office, summarized this item by stating, 1
�i
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMI88IONERS 10 MARCH 12, 2991
i
� =.r,-
�_.. 'r'J . .
�
�
pt �'R� .. .. � . . . . .. . .. . - � � - � . .
���.[ . � . . �
*� ..}�'y,' . ' . .
'.•p:`ar::5' . . .
� '...-�,;��� . � ,
q'S.rS(��h� . .
.,„,,�."� ,
•'� '�
��,3����,: . � �
'� `�:,
���nz
r:..�-'.��,s
,�� •
�
:;s%`
;��_�` . � . .
�'��
w. . • � . �� .�# �?#5� � `�°�.� ���},#a'e
,}� 1 �r� � ti. ��.�P:�'�!'J[rv", �.f n �,
� 4. ,� � y 'i.,�'��"��������y''��� 2.;���k�i���,�,� r� ��
� ,�lfa 'J` LLn .� f�i�,•� J���� �* `�l d��y,i rr�fF=, . . :,�.�v� ���1.}���' t:•
J � �q- ��•��}i�q,} t1i ����� �: 5� r � ���K,,�c� r�L, g,r 4v�f����l3 �t,�..� ��'/,�k���l t 1� �'�i- :
.. .. .:�2+ ,�4y�J�.� � P� "' lr Y+3+�.��r .�+.�.�,.'!4.`,R .:'�!�?iL:" �.'7.'�.!4.Y.i..:✓� �4 �. ..'•;
. - _\ . . - . � ..
. . � - - . �>'.
i, �
that the applicant, the Starwood Homeowners Association is �' ' �._
requesting for an approximate 1,000 addition to an existing fire
' station in the Starwood Subdivision. Both the Planning Office and ;,�.�•`"
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the
request. ' '
� Commissioaer Ross moved to approve the Starwood Homeowners �
Association construction of an addition to the fire station and
qrantinq GMQS exemption, and authorized the Chairman to sign the j
� resolution. Commiasioner Crowley seconded. The motion passed ! ��
j unanimously. j '
� E;;.
- i PFISTER RANCH/GOLF DETAILED SIIBMISSION - MOTION TO TABLE - PASSED
iJNANIMOIIBLY - Chairman Ethridge stated, that staff has requested ' •
�� that this item by tabled to April 9, 1991.
� A discussion ensued with regard to the date. `.
I ��
ICommissioner Ross moved to table the matter to April 8, 1991 at �.
i 1:30 p.m. Commissioaer Tuite seconded. The motion passed � �
� unanimously.
i
�
€ MOLLZCA APPEAL OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECISION AND
- � GENERAL SIIBMZSSION REVIEW - MOTION TO TASLE - PASSED IINANIMODSLY '
L Mary Lackner summarized this item as an appeal by James J. Mollica r:
" C of a denial of a 1041 Geologic and Wildfire hazard review and •�
� General Submission approval for a single family residence. �
� Lackner said, the Mollica property is located on the Bolivia and '
Equador Lode Mining Claims off Little Annie Road on the back of �
Aspen Mountain. Access to the property is up Little Annie Road �
approximately two miles from the intersection with Castle Creek
Road. She proceeded to read from staff's memo the history of the ' '
, application. A copy of this is made a part of this record as
iE]CHIHIT uga, , .
t
i A discussion ensued with regard to the access easement. ,
� ! Tim Whitsitt, County Attorney, stated, that it is his , �;
understanding, that Ed Smart, the owner of the Calvaras Claim, has i,;':
stated, that he has not granted access across the claim to the ��
� applicant.
f{ �
�
� Lackner stated, that the applicant has submitted in a letter, that � �
there is an easement across Castle Creek Investors property to the �!
� site from Little Annie Road. However, the applicant has not �
� submitted any drawings showing survey lines showing exactly which ��;� '
? mining claims it would be crossing. Therefore, staff is uncertain
' what the access alignment would be. �t ,
' i .
Commissioner Crowley stated, that he has a real problem, that ;�4.';
unless the county attorney is satisfied that there is access to
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER6 11 MARCH 12� 1991 '
�, .. , - , .
a:v:':;'�h '
•T��2'::��,�'� � �
h,Y���i����'.
;c;
+�.
„�.i�ii
£ �5/_
' f,'7
i'a'
aN �i. .
°?'��yl;`f
At�
�
�'4
-•��;,
��
"y`����-.��''.r'��{{a. � , -
� �� �7.�44 �Y�..� 1 f ' � .. � r � .
� �.�Y}�}Y1: , `yr�' {���� ' -�. � • q'�ilF� ♦ �` � .v � ,S� � � '�� �%i. � !� . +fe��J��� �.
1 �.�F ...1����d V k� "`�. �� u'1 t� ' l; 21r•.. ; a'{.�y��
^'��Y1����i�•' . "��C "_ .� �� 3
�� �. .�� ....`. ��i��...., ,.... �.. , N ..�'i'}�4 + .
i '
•.�-
� .
the property, hearing the application. �
David Myler, attorney for the applicant, stated, that he did submit -
� to the former county attorney a copy of ah easement for access � _
across an existing road which crosses three claims located off of .�`r
that site map to the north. He said the existence attd their title
to it was Confirmed by Castle Creek Investors in writing, which was �
also provided to the county attorney at the time and should be part ''-,� �
' of the record. He said the access which is shown across the
Calvaras is actually their alternative access. The main access is i
the one to the north that crosses the Private South, Private West �
and the Denver claim. As far as he is concerned that have +
confirmed access, and he has not heard anything to the contrary i
with respect to that particular road. With respect to the � ;.
' Calvaras, Castle Creek Investors have informed him that they own ;
_ the property not Ed Smart. Admittedly there is an issue whether � '.
they have a legal right to cross the Calvaras. But it is his �;;�:;
opinion, that as long as they can demonstrate that they have a ; ; .
! single access into their property, then they had met the
� requirements for 1041 and General Submission.
Whitsitt, stated,� that he does believe there is a legal access
ease�ent agreement established. But that is not an easement
agreement, as he understood, which was part of the 1041 review that �:i
was submitted. It was his understanding, that the one submitted
i was what is shown on the plat, which is the one that there is not
' legal access to.
; � .
- ; Myler stated, that they did submit an alternative access map a long
time ago that showed easements across the Denver, Private South, �
� and the Private North together with the easement docwnents which '�.
supported their right to utilize that access. �
� Commisaioner Crowley moved to table the public hearinq to April
' 23, 199i to a12ow Mr. Myler and Mr. Whitsitt oaa qet toqether to �
� bring the acaess issue to a conclusion that they 80 or do not have �
� leqal access so that it can be discussed at that particuiar time. � ,
Commissioner Ross seconded.
i' � .
A discussion ensued as to whether the matter need to be referred
+ back to Planning and Zoning Commission_
;
� � Myler stated, that the P&Z record would clearly reflect that the �
� P&Z were fully aware of this particular access. Also, the Planning
Staff's comments reference this particular access. He said, that �t '
, between himself and the county attorney they will confirm that •
fact. j .., -
S�
Chairman Ethrid e called for a vote on the p '' �
; q pro osed motion. The
� motion passed unanimously. �•
.� .
� RE60LIITSON BNDORBEMENT OF 1991 PITAIN COIINTY TRAILS PLAN — MOTION
_ .,f
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 12 MARCH 12� 1991
�
' r.�;
I;:;�:
t .
_� !
x��� �
� . - .. .
� r�k �
��F��':�3' . - .
. ':�s�s:!eT,� � • ' ' . .
. a�,.y�F' . .
ln•:�:ti:y '
.�'�i. ,
: _�, !•_;`
��4,.��:._:
� � .Ai�i��"1
y���".'j,•y,h�^'fR
,'�i�'�`�"� .
a�� •
,+f
'.'.,��.y`'�,"
�'`'`` � - '
'�'`�< . ' . � ., - , r� v �f r5". � M�.y..4 ti i, !'ii t
�JFr t . ' � . . � " � a ���C4-� - .����,�1 �, �Mt�ict ,yAl:�
v .�•� f y�ti�'s���t '�� "ri.�.4 }'y��„".,�' J�Sdtlt'p�r�}� -e .
� . �� 3,1t.., y� � � �s i' �tt , , -H ''ri��rt��h +'� vs 'ti +��c� i; .�- ��� f .
s � @.n� �.�y � y,• �{,, * ,.� , �£ r 1.
4�r �� c, k yy� �.��e ,.�
"�`"r�`+�>r",��." p_ . �'_ � l.'i. ` _ .j�`r°�"�`'. ..
�::,
TO APPROVB - PABSBD IINANIMOIISLY - Ellen Sassano, represettting the
Planning Office, summarized this item as a matter which has been .
reviewed numerous times at regularly scheduled meetings, during .
which public comments were heard and concerns of the Commission ' -'r
expressed. Staff has revised the plan to its final form which
reflects resolution of concerns expressed by the Commission and •.`;:.� ,
members o€ the public at large. 5he proceeded to review the ` ` •t
proposed changes with Commission members. A copy of her written :.. . �
presentation is made a part of this record as E%SiBTT ��C��. ��
A discussion ensued with regard to the proposed plan. �f
Commissioner Crowley stated, that he would like to see what kind ��
of a connection there is to possibly tie back into Basalt for -���
recreational users down there. He asked staff to look into this �� !
matter. '�`, ; ,
:� `
� Commissioner Ross moved approval of the Resolution adoptinq the '�
Sndorsement of 1991 Pitkin County Trails Plaa. Commisaioner r
Crowley seconded. The motian passed unanimously.
RE80LIITION MODIFYING AND CORRECTING CERTAIN RESOLOTIONS ADOPTED BY
THE PITRIN CODNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THS BOARD OF �';. .
COIINTY COMMI88IONkRB OF PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO (EAST OWL CREBR
SIIBDIVZSION) - MOTION TO APPROVS - pASBED IINANIMOIIBLY - Tim
Whitsitt, County Attorney, summarized this matter as a resolution ;�•
modifying and correcting the leqal description for East Owl Creek _r� �
. Subdivision. He said the former recorded legal description was :�,
overly broad and contained all lands owned by Mitchell Development
' Corporation rather than that portion which was being platted as the ' j
East Owl Creek Subdivision. ;�.��
::._.'�:.
Commisaioner Crowley moved appraval of the resolution. : � .
� Commissioner Ross seconded, and the motion passed unattimously.
� Chairman Etriridqe entertaiaed a motion to add two items to the �
; Contracts and Resolutions portion of the agenda. A resolution •
caacalliaq the March 26 reqular meetinq, and a resolution appraninq .
a contract for purchase of the Smugqler Mountain apartments.
'�,
Commisaioner crowley moved approval of the items beinq plaeed on '
the agenda. Commissioner True secon8ed. The motion passed •�
, unanimously. �' '� �
:�
RESOLIITION SE'!`TINti FORTH 1991 GOALS FOR PITRIN COIINTY - MOTION TO yi `
APPROVS - PASBED UNANIMOIISLY - Reid Haughey, County Manager, { --
summarized this item as a resolution which staff has put together ' `�� ,
whiah reflects the goals that the Soard has been working on for _�� �
adoption this year. He said a significant amount of work has gone a �
into this both with the Board and with staff, and a series of �{�•;,�
objectives have been developed and worked through staff in support � '
of these goals. "; ,
• BOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSXONERS 13 MARCS 12, 1991 " •
�''
�
r �,
. c•. � . ... .. . _ . . . . . .
..���5' ' . .
��...;.iiy,� . .
tT'rT%:.•�..x. , .
.�z�' `ti.. '
�« .
:�.�i -
^�s%i�'�kF..� � .
� -sy c�'t i�. . i
':�� ;d;
'•'„�.'L�.t��*`1!;��r . .
. r"�ax:-."�S�`'
y�'�,'��,;:�'b�'�x
;�Q,:-'�� ,�i'. .
.�y��� .
M
4Y/+
-��;�:�
��
r
�'��, � � , _ ,
,. ;
� '
�c}f}'" l�,, ,�
f � ....5 . y'�" p��l' �!; � �.,�y y..v � L i,�� a-5°� f^�L'�� ; �Y�J� ta 4Y 3-,
.� � . ,���i,ad a'Y�� "ia�I.�!�'iHf��t;� (�y� ,*F.1�y v `��y� '"Uk'f���ify����'`��4` ��''� .�yyik'"��'f7'.i�,����7��iirfM •
� ;: l: t
'+1't :�•Ja�j���..'����a����'j;. �,,�.v� �: . �`+ih w�,.y nb .r�Fi.) ' � F�' ��4 �
� * .�,6� .� Y Y ��1�'
, . . w��.; . . ... . .... .. . I'��',J .i i; t i
•n,���r
i.
s ,�.
commissioner Roas moved adoption of the Resolution adopting the -
qoals for 1991. Commiasioner Tuite secon8ed. The motion passetl
unanimously. :•;..,"
RSSOLIITION ESTABLISHZNG PULICX ON APPOINTSENTS TO CTTIZEN 80ARD8 •
COMMI88ION8. COMMITTBES AND TASR FORCES - MOTION TO APPROVE PABSED • `",� �
': WITB THREE YEA AND TW� NAY VOTES - Haughey summarized this item as � •
a resolution reflecting the Board's desire to communicate to the �
public and to put further discipline on themselves to appoint new
i individuals to various boards and take advantage of the expertise �
' developed by Board members already by dividing the citizen boards •
i into three separate categories and allowing for appointment of
individuals to multiple boards if they are in different categories •;;
but restricting that one person can serve on only one board within
each category.
,,F
Chairman Ethridge stated, that he would like to make the Board ,
aware, that he has reconsidered his own position. He said he has i
been contacted by a lot of people who feel that a more appropriate
' way to deal with this is deal with individuals on a case by case ;.
basis and tackle the issue head on. Also, he knows that it has
i been difFzcult to get citizen participation in these Hoards. He '
' initially favored the resolution but for these reasons he is now �'
� opposed to it.
� Commissioner Tuite stated, that he disagrees with the resolution. . �
- . He thinks the Board was trying to give away their authority, as an �
' elected Board to pick and choose who they want on Soards. He '
, �-� thinks i£ a person is on too may Baards, when they apply, the Board
°� should tell them, if that is grounds for rejections. He said too
often they do see too few people applying for Boards, and
-��� therefore, he would rather see the Board make the decisions as a
- Board and not have a forma2 policy,
:=�r;
Commissioner Ross stated, that the Board has been interviewing for ,
'� new boards, and have been very pleased and excited about the ,
quality of the applicants. He thinks that one of the reasons those ,
, � applicants came forward because it was a new board, and there
�� wasn�t the problem applying for a board with an incumbent asking �
for reappointment. He thinks on these policy makinq boards, this -
policy will help the Commission achieve the goal of being able to
bring in some new people and have a broader representati.on.
-.,.::i
. Commissioaer Ross moved approval of the Resolutioa establishing
' Policy oa Appointment to Citizen Boards, Commissions, committees ;
`w� aad Task Forces. Commissioner Crowley seconded. The motion passed
�° with three yea votes by Commissioners Ross, True and Crowley, and
tro nay votes by Commissioners Ethridge and Tuite.
. ����,F•�'� �;
.,r���, �tSSOLUTION AIITHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A TRAIL EASEMENT AGRSSMENT �
'�t=:t
FOR THE 80IITH HIINTER GREER TRAIL - MOTION TO APPROVS - PASBED WITH
�'� SOARD OF COIINTY COMMZ86IONERB 14 MARCH 12, 1991
��;?,q
—V }�'.r°"`��
.���'k .
YC'�-�
�r�,
Y S 1 _
!. � :�"xS . . � .. . .. � . � ,
.t':fr��4��{- . . - : .
rF...
. .��;.� � ' . ' .
.:�;''���• � . '
.�
.�`���s�;;.�`
.��.;ru�ay��, � . ,
WJT
4� .
r
•�2
�,+�....:'
!Y
.����.A{., .
w�.� ,.__ - . . .. , . '. ' ' .. . . . . ,-. ..
, -•; �,-�,�..� „
. . .. � .��� .. . .,
��Kra,+ `` ;' ` � ';�- ' �y�p,¢1? i��� tr � • 7 ?'1�� �s";,;s w
. . , - � y��� Y ' .? :1 ,"L .{.� ) yy��J ya
�r � �py,�.:.. rv` ��� .a:, . t �vra�yEs''��x� � 9� �� yif' ^V'� 7 � '�' �S �
.,,��"'i:° "k��• ..l•' �, t a i i y. *�' " �{ `F t
' n. s; 1 �'- �'°`�,t _ �f:_�i�le.�f
. _. ,x�. .`�'�:,.� .. _ , . "� �. ,�_._ ;+ri #
��� � '� r s;' . . ,.���,: _ .. ' . ,'�' ,'.,+y.
. . _ _ ,��.._ .
� .
T8R8B YEA AND TWO NAY VOTES - Tim Whitsitt, County Attorney, �
summarized this item as a form easement which had previously been '
presented to Commission members last year. The easement contains -
amendments to paragraph eight as made by the land owners to ensure -
that the Board gives up title to either this easement of the South ;'�
Road pending a decree of the Court in the Hunter Creek litigation `. '
which declares a south vehicular access along an alignment � �,� 1, "
. _ different from this proposed easement. � ''-+
Chairman Ethridge said section eight previously said "the parties �
mutually acknowledge and agree that neither the granting of/or the
acceptance of this trail easement agreement shall prejudice any ,
claims or defenses and party may have with respect to the north -
� access route into the Hunter Creek valley�'. :
: '.
- ! Whitsitt stated, that the court action which is going on, the court �,
will potentially say there is a Hunter Creek Road on the south !±�=
� side, and if it says so, it will also define a centerline for it. ;
If there is a variance between the two, the new paragraph eight �f,�.:
will require the Board to take a choice and vacate either the road �
or the easement that is being granted here. It would be the
Board's discretion as to which of those to vacate but it would �:.
require them to vacate one or the other. �.
Jim Auster voiced opposition to acceptance of the trail easement. ,' '
, Jim WaYd stated, that he has been out of touch with the Hunter �
Creek issue because he has been told many times, that it is all � ,
� contingent upon what the courts say. However, there seems to be
.� other things going on that has nothing to do with the court case. �
Therefore, he has decided to start to become reinformed on what is
JJ' going on in Hunter Creek. He said he wonders why the Board is
`'� doing anything that has some effect on what the court case is going � ,
j to say, and why these kinds of decisions are being made on the i
� South Trail until there is a court case. �
� Whitsitt, responded, that this is an easement that was brought to �
the Coirtmzssioners by the McCloskeys, Fritz Benedict, and Mr.
Hosier. They offered to grant this easement, outside the realm of f ,
ithe court case, to the County for no further consideration. In his }
opinion, the granting of this easement will in fact, have no impact �
. whatsoever on the Court�s decision. The court�s decision however, �
may have some impact on what happens to the easement later on.
.I
; Commissioner Tuite stated, that he has grave concerns about ,
� accepting the agreement the way it is written right now.
iChairman Ethridge stated, that he also has concerns about the
i process. It was presented with no strings attached, and now it
comes back with a very significant sting. He said this has been
:� the history of negotiations, it is unfortunate but last minutes i
� changes like these are not unusual. And one of the reasons it has
'� BOARD OF COIINTY COMMI86IONERB 15 MARCH 12� 1991 f ,
�
j t� . l;'
��
_—'� ,f .
� _
q Y 1 yk'I'.�' . , . . .. . � ' .
'r'�y,-�;,.;�-e . ' . . .
:j�'���'���,R . . � �
�:�;.���:_'�. ' . .
.�r}'�yi;�'�'�,. ... � . .
!Y .
.����V
Y
.":.��sb�•��;; � ,
��m�i.9�1.
� .�.". . .
x
�� •
.r
x.��Y..
�� . . �
��r,� . �
, . ,
"� � I,t�p. �h y� -� . ���,i � I'i,-Fi �r�" S��yfij� .���`� x�`�c i��`y,jyC ��,i. � ii
'!, ' ,�(..4�:a�.a}�8;.'• �k /i.. Z� `� L ^.. . �'Fi �������k��,�C��R 'w��t f �,�.n��',�J �.-�� f�
, �
l pT �� �. "Z1. }�,�i �t ,�y� { ��� .� -�,�. �
' S�,�',Z r t��� �•�'1H'� ���y �� �g�'��+r�'� .'!q:��/// .f� 1�� � '�'" ' ��
rRf�� �N 1 � i, g�4'��,�yyy��� �` � �[1 (����
. _ ���..��'�� �•.?fF��:��q�T�y^,.RiT-r^, i t�y
t
taken so long to reso2ve. He would like to accept this but this �-
chattge is significant enough to him that he cannot support it. ' .'"
.. Commissioner Ross moved adoptioa of the Resolution Acceptinq the � 7`.,.�r '
Hunter Creek 8outh Trail Easement Agreemeat. Commissioner True •
seconded. The motion passeG with three yea votes by Commissioner ''
Crowley, True and Ross, and two nay votes bp Commissioners Ethridge '�j
anQ Tuite.
x+'IRST RBADING - ORDINANCS FINDTNG A NECESBITY TO ADOPT POLICIES s
BANNIN(3 THE BLOCRING OF BNTRANCEB AND 8%IT8 TO BUTLDINGS 6UBJ8CT i �'
- 1'O NON9IOL8NT CI4IL RTGBTB DEMONSTRATZONS - MOTION TO APPROVE AND � ;:'..
SST FOR PIIHLIC HEAR2NG - PASSBD UNANIHOUSLY - Chairman Ethxidge `
! stated, that this item is a requirement as part of the grant for � ��;`�
, the Health and Human Services Building. ' :
Commiasioaer Rosa movefl approval of the Ordinance Finding a
Necessity to Adopt Policies Banainq tha Block of Entrances aab
Eaits of Buildinqs 8ubjeet to Nonviolent Civil Rights
Demonstrations and set for public hearing oa April 9, 1991.
� Comm3ssioner Crowlep seconded. The motion passed unanimously. +
� . R$SOLUTION CANCEALING THS MARCH 26 1991 REGIILAR MEETTNG - MOTION �
, TO APPROVE - PASSSD DNANIMOOSLY - Reid Haughey stated, that the
Board discussed this matter in a work session. As a result of � '
prior commitments, there will be no quorum on March 26th, staff �.
" has put together this resolution which wou2d table all items j
advertised for the meeting o£ the 26th to a meeting on April 2, �
- ° 1991.
j
i Commiasioner Crowley moved approval of the Resolution. i`
+ Commissioner Ross seconded. The motian passed unanimously. �;
�
RE80LOTION APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR THE PIIRCHABE OF T$E StiQGGL&R �
MOUNTAIN APARTMENTS - MOTT�N TO APPROVE - PASSED ONANIMOIISLY -
! Whitsitt stated, that this was a matter which was brought up to •
, the Board of County Commissioners at the request of the Aspen City
� f Council and the Housing Authority. As a satisfaction of an
� employee housing requirement in the City, a developer had proposed � �
� the purchase and conveyance to the Housing Authority of the
Smuggler Mountain Apartments for the reasons that they are located `
within the Smuggler Mountain superfund site, there was some I.
question about actual ownership passing to Lhe Honsing Authority.
� Therefore, the Board was asked to consider becoming the owner since ' -
the Board is already involved in the superfund site and has ;k �
{ liabiZzty issues developed. He said this was discussed by the
I Board in a work session yesterday, and Commission members raised t
; certain contingencies they had concern about in the contract.
� ' Those contingencies have been placed in the contract and are a
�,� matter of the resolution. He proceeded to review those �rf .
q contingencies.
�:
i� HOARD OF COIINTY COMMISSIONERS 16 MARCH 12, 1991 �.�:'
--+ 4� r .
�� '
•w `�ti . - . . � .
���t���� � .. .. �. . � . . . . � . .
� ci.S':,: `�,� . . � �. .
.��,�y.�.+ '
_.�F��t;�;
� ,`.:ny#•.x . ,
.L}�5"7*:;��J;F7 ' .
�. �;_,',-�'
'�f�.. .
y i"�r
.�-
- ��' -
v�
y�� 5� �4.,_ h L -I! i '
� s",�!s J'� ��.• ' � }� .. ` � s i+ .'� .. ' . . . .. .
u � ' ' ,
{� �. 4,,�y�1 ;y. � � �j� ,i� S �:� � � Y � '�' + �'��Ia fi�
� . 3 h`}FJ 1 .y �;'�F!'1'Y ] ,�kZ� 14�::.. �� y �a ; '� M � �q.� � i�.i . .
. r, ...;�. � + . ., � ,�. i
� . . � - . . .. - • .� .yQ�. - .��.T Z��+��.,: a>�5r �+' �-'r � .
. .. _,..��_x:" �1F'�hY:. .', ... f�"•,y'�`'�f �
tK�kF t�t�,::
�, -°
�
Conmisaioner Crowiey moveQ approvai oF the Reaoiution Approviag a • �
Contract for the Purchase of the Smugqler Mountain Apartments.
Commissioaer True seaonded. The motion pasaed unanimous2y • ,
; AWOURNMENTs The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ? := `°-.;1
i
� Re ctEully s tted, ;;."'�u�
i ur� � •'�'
�
� anette Jo s�.,
( lerk to t Board of County Commissioners ;;�� -
� ;�
� 4� !`
- -� � ;_`
', ;;
� ;.�.
�� � �,.;�, �
�' .
, l.
;
- S_
�.'
. � � � �$�` , .
. . . � � ��' ' '
i:
: .;`
. ;�
SOARD OF COUNTY COM2iT8$IONERS 17 MARCH 12, 1991
;� ���
, .y,. . t „�
+�i,C'ifx�`-cz*a.-�:��:s8 +r��.-�.;fiJk,1,,.:�,.,-,. , .,. „ . .. . ......... �..,:�:; ,.. �� s�..-��v �
t .,
� �. . . . . . . . . � . � � . - �. . � . . .
Z`,�. a," . ... . �: . . . . . . � . .
F`. � . ,
.� �'- . . .
� .,ry, - . . - - . . . �
�.� . _. . ... _. . � � . . . . ' �
� � �_ .. , " . . �
�
.:�,=r
«��t , `
��ri ' � �ti- �c.a��,�'r`�����k���<��%�;�h:�����L�t +��'}���� ..
� T11r.. h� 4` � 4 �.k��r a F!+v-, � � a � � a.4 s�:'
1 ..., '#� k "i. ����r�'�. ��4"�k „�1 ''��'� � �"yw�,� '�.�r'"`�` t F.���+�.�����' }`th 7'
. - n�'"K!:3��. 71 'A. { 4 Yya��M,_ti�.y;•Y� :.�� T�^PT.�/J..�r�..',LlSSiT'����-•1'+liGlu. .i.4;Y•�',
��' `'
! - • M1D-CONTINENT RESOURCES, �NC. � -
PROpUCERS OF TXE FAMOV9 COAL B�SIN COKING CAAL T��' . .
1058 COUNTY ROAD 100•BOX 500 �'� �
y .
� � CAHBONOAIE,CULOftADD 8192� ��� �
NAINOFfKE f�loo��asl� . aen� -° �
D15�RICTOfF7f�qO31iC}o156 p0�%}hi� ,
wenenouse pnnoa+un Marck 7� 1991 _
. ��, .
VIA TELEFAX TO 1-920-5190 .
gOA�I��F C0.��37,�+:;'t;'S �`�'. •.:� .
VtTKI'idCUl!�`d"iti ; '''.
Board of County Commissioners pi,�+i��;:;�;in�1 c:•.:=���' �
Pitkin County Colorado - � ��j
Pitkin County Courthouae D�?":_�-1�=��---'— �
nspen, CO 81611 g�b�)'ectL�CO�rl1�I.:L.tE.tc_.__ � s
� ,5f'(eGl.t� �jF /�f�anr�r f.IK�N.L ;. . .�
.. R ;.
, EX?i. :.:_i. Y�<y'u.... .._........._..
. Gentlemen: . i , '
1', s>
At yo.ar mee�ing af February 26, 1991, you adopted a reso2ution �;::
- aruending Mid-Contiherit ResouYces, Tnc.�s Special Use Permit a85- �"`�
139. The amendment adds a new section to the existing special use �
i permit which allows for a suspension of the permit "iE active
mining opeYations should cease for an indefinite period of time
without specific arrangements for continuation o£ trie full Permit
having been made beforehand." Within the same resolution, a
£inding is made that "Mid-Continent Resources� Coal Basin Mine are �
hereby found to have ceased active mininq operdtions indefinitely '•
�' and that Pitkin County 5pecial Use Permit �86-139 is hereby
' suspended" pendinq certain actions.
' Mid-Continent objects to the amendment, ta tbe suspension as �
. � inappropriate, unnecessary and which we believe exceeds tha �.
autriority of the county. We have previously expressed our
ahjection to the procedures under which the County has adopted this
• resolution as failing to adhere to the procedural provisions of ,�
Speaial Use Permit IIa6-139 fvr amending the permit. �:;
. 's
; I wish by this letter to ea�plain, at least in part, in addition to
the procedural objections previously raised, our views concerning � ,
the Resolution 490-13 of February 26, 1991. �: „
I. Authority and durisQictio� �
Coal is produced at the Coal Basin Mines from botih private and �
federal leases." Mid-Continent does not believe that Pitkin County �
' � has the authority, thzough the special use permit, to impede or
I":: ,
place conditions upon the production of federal coal. °��
' f�
Further, the actual production of coal in the Coal Sasin operations ! __
occurs beneath Gunnison County and the Gunnison National Forest. '1i ,
' The coal is transported and processed itt Pitkin County, and then is '
transported to Garfield County and rail shipped to other states and
beyond the continental United States. Mid-Continent does not :�� .
� believe Pitkin County has the authority to impede or restrict �*
interstate commerce.
. �i'
1 '� � �,
� �i:F'.
. . ' ... .. . � :� � .... ... ..
j ...
'.3'T".��}: . . . .... . . ..�....�. . .. .... . . . . -.... . .
—_..' .x r�,� .. . . . +. �
�'4�i',�+,_ . . .
';�*>i` , .. . .
'�:�,c�:*n_^.+j,.: . .
��.,."` :��,.. . .
;-��?�tfi`;Si�._ ' . . ; . . .
�.'s..sf�r:I.:�'.��� . .
:Y'%HF;s%t=1.;. _ . � .
��,�wti�`;+,�+f;'-
��'�,�-��''`�� � f
.s ��ura , . .
�
�.o .
��
_'t s*
x
,..U:-�.
,��;�qJ
�"r�.� _ • ,
� ,
' ��� i�� ^4 x' L�y ��y �' � � tl �s �t.ie`'�j��++�����y�3' F.!� �� '��'+'�t t'tif� �y�'t'
�,e�r��,�9 r T.�1�'' r ,. '� '�y}k .�.4. �1 y� .Y� F� t� '�" �}`e �' v{�`�.-Y k��.w��✓�� L;��f1���4��s ��
:�r �
'��.��������.,'��� �z*�, -��.� �.�.� ,.���3,"-�n t� �f,�'+ :�, �
• 4��qi.'. - . .. ����1!r y17f��-.
�4
L . .. _ — . .. . . . . i �. . "
. . �_. . . � ..
y
MID-COFtTi[�EM' l3ESOURCES, 1NG. �'" •
�.••�. ..
Hoard oE County Comm'ra March 7, 1991 `�"`
Pitkin County, CO Page 2 4 ;;�.Q � • -
, ,� ..
Aativities in aonnection with the preparation and maintenance of � j�'<_��' �
ths Coa7. Basin pxoperties far the purpose o� coal productian have
been con�inuous and on-goiaq for some 38 years. This operation and ` �
use precedes all gresen� la»d use planninq of the county and the ;�j '
issuance of special use pelmits. Mid-Continent does not believe =
that the county has the authority to prevent oz impede the ' . ,
. con�inuation of such use through the speoial use permit process. R ,
� �
Pitkin County has heretafare acknowletlge the pre-emptiva �
jurisdiction of federal and state agancies in the Coal Basin mining �p ��
'. epezations. The overt preemptions of the federal Surface Mi.ning & t�%�;',
• Reclama�ion Act and Clean water A�t, as we21 as the Colorado Mined
Land Reclamation Act, allow the County � vexy narYOw range oY land
use anfl environmental regulation. The attempted suspension of coal
mining based on temporary aessation of use without violation of
matters over which the County has jurisdiction is clearly illegal
i and ult�a vires.
� The action and policy o£ the County should be coordinated with
fed2ral Office of Surface Mininq, Colorado Mined Land Reclamation �
i Division, the t3.s. Forest Service, the CoZorado Department of `
°1 Health, federai Mine SaYety anc3 Health Administration, and other � '
`,'� invalved agencies in a manner that will keep the County witriin ,
permissive areas of regulation.
ii. xin3ng operatioas �
Mid-Continent has not ceased active mining operations. The Coa2
Basin Mines are being maintained in readiness for the productian o!
aoal. At no time has this maintenance been suspended. Activities
� whleh are neaessary to the preparation and maintenance of the mine � .
as a productian unit have been continuous and on-going since 195].
, �� During those nearly four decades there have been »umerous perlods ,
� during whlch actual coal production was suspended for a variety of
reasons. ,
Thera has been a downsizinq o£ the workfozce, and thc nine i�
' presently not producing coal. This certainly does notcconstitute
��'� a cessation of active mining operations as defined in .pecial L'sc E•
-,� Pe�rmit #86-139. Specifical2y:
,:;;� 24. Record Made - Mid-Continent's Permit Application , �`
as noted above in Paragraph 3 shall constitUte M'zd_
- ?j Continer�t�s minina nian. [�nphasis s�pplied.]
'±�" 3. �tPelamation Rev� ea tation and General Onerations - i
�;��� i
� � ' . .
�?'�u� �
;���
-�-- •+*,•.
,�� •,p.e.�.. . _ :. ..
°� . . - . . - �
�'" �
`k s��i ..
�;�:-�;..:: . .
,.3:+�„;.,�,�. .
:,*�:;�:;,�;�.� .
�?..,
S..Mi'-�'4i'a�. � ' .
:,�'�"`'�^3�'; '
�;,���.;;; �
��;
�,�.
��; ,
�a
• ,� .
9r�,
-���i:
���
n
'�i?�4 - . ' .. .. . .� • ' . . ' . . . .. .�. .
/
.� � '-, � . . �.', 1 .�. tid Y tw��, 71t � .�- �j� +�) � ,p.���syt��- �
!r e �'� 'h' m L; . „„� ,y",,,fi �1.��rb�� �5��'"'��� . �p 4� ��i"ra�fki�G �.
n„y•��.+'�{� �7„ .���`� --r,��, ' ° .;�� ��'''� 3.,4 ' 1'�.Pr e; u ;�t .[
�t t t;Jj t qr w� k ra•.�.. ����i,L,��t� z y
. �-r����W�lA��ils��t35���^y�k..+';� ' -a��;m.. � �����.'�,.•i4".K."'`..'.� � n �
� .":�.,, _
-- �
' MID-COM'iNENT RESOURCES, 1NC. • •
- Board of County Comm're March 7, 1991 •
Pitkin County, CO Paga 3 �_,
. Y ...
' Mid-Continent shall reseed and revegetate disturbed
areas of the mine site according to the plan . "•`i='.• �
described in Volutne 7, Chapter 5 oY the Coal Basin ' ` �°{
Mine Permit Application oE January 26, 1981 �:�"--
� (hereinafter known as "The Permit Application") or � ''�
acoording to relevant sections oP any subsequently _ ; �
approved permit....Mid-COntinent will further ��
conduet operations�according to the Operating Flan �; rt .
Contained in the Permit Application . . . . � ; �
�.: •� ....
' The application xeferred in Paragraph 3 of Specia2 Use Permit �86- � � '``
139 is required under the Colorado Sur£ace Coal Mininq Recla�mation �; ,;;-,
Act, which regulates "the surface effects of underground coal � � `+ : .
mining," 14 Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-33-121 (1984 Repl. Vol.). The -
"Operating Plan contained in the Permit Application" is, as
provided in the § 2.05.2 of the regulations of the Mined Land
• Reclamation Board, '�[A} general description of all surPace coal •
mining operations proposed to be conducted during the li.fe of the
� operation." +
The point is that active mining operations are not defined as
� continuous coal production under Special Use Permit ;�86-139, and
. the mining plan referenced in yq 3 and 24 is a description of •
surface activities and ePfects, Which are ongoing and continuous, I�
ltot of coal production, Which occurs underground. • • •• �•
Further, interruption or suspension of coal production for ��
indefinite periods occurs during the life of any coal mine
� operation for a variety ef reasons. In the past several decades of , �
Mid-Continent's operations at Coal Basin, numerous interruptions �,
p have oecurred as a result of the normal mining cyele which
requires, among other things, movement of longwall or other coa2 � ,
� � production equipmeht sets, strikes at our own and our customers'
facilities, and various mining events such as equipment ,
� malfunctions, roof fall, fire, market loss, and other causes.
i . �
' At no time has Piticin County ever before suggested or found that an �
� � interruptivn of production was a reason for suspension of the
; permit. While Mid-Continent has announced that our intention is to
; ; sell the property, no such sale has in fact occurred. Any action I
a ,i by Pitkili County which is premised on a change of ownership is ; k
i � premature, to say the least. .i -
� 'tl �
I7[. The Amendatory Rosolution is Impracticable :j �
� � � aad IInwozkablo, aAd, Therofore� i� ;
; substantially Impedes Mid-Coatinent's ri '�
- . . � �j
:t + �
, __ � ..
• � -
��
,.� __. � . I.
v
. ' - - .
_' r1 .
.:ta�s�, '
. .j�:w.�1:e . . _ . .
-.y;wlL,;,:.,
*''4L<-r�3, . ' . .
`��c:.i�.�_z'a
t y: s�. .
`��
��,�` , , .
y�z'Y:d�-,�a .. � . .
.`���'�,' � '
•;�,��_
.. a�,.�;ti: . ,
�i-a,
<!Rn�..,, ..::t:.� .
��'�Ma
Yc'. C'.}��., . .
�{J�� �
V �
���:.
,.�`�',.;�:;t`
,
=x�'r� , , , _ �
..1 � ' �: . -.; A .
1 � ���`' � " �� � �'� ����� �,� � �1 2 `w �'�t�r� t t(
'J` � �� ':iy 7 J hv k. i � .. , � �s �trM'4��u f � �� ���•r� i yrvA �� ��YC�' lt1Fl.(i/f :
��� ��� 1�'�j, t f,s�. . � 1 p t �r 4' � ���,J t���
l� � y`�t�C d� 4p,�vt y �� Al���ry e.. �.< w ru�r��k\U�nc �.a �` u j� r �..
. r. }.�"�A '��i3'� i i, i i •1h:�, r�, y r °��'y . �'w ; rf.�L,y `�k3' " a
� ' � .. .�«k'� .f�������� �6 �1�+�. .�.{����Y �� ( �
. '-��,M A.�y°y�i!Clx.�7v,e "'..�"_J*a� � ..�-�.ar+lw.�a•�:?:
`� �I I .
s I
-
, �. �
Mio-Conrr[NeNr R�sou�cES, INC. _
��; 3oard o£ County Comm!rs March 7, 1991" . .
- Pitkia County, CO page 9 -� -
; .
?}.'r
� �"'' Abilitp to seii the Property � �
_ � The new paragraph 28, which is adopted by Resalution #90-13 of `, ,
- February 26, 2991, provides as folZows:
"''� '= Pnragraph 28. Suapension of Permit for Mining Operationa.
' �' Those aepects of thia Permit aridreesing mining and its
_ ,,� ,. impacte will ba conaidered suapended if active crtini.ng
.,:.� operations at the Coal Sasin Mine ahouid ceasa tor an
.:•.i �' indefinite period of time without specific arranqements for -�
,.`�� continuation o# the full Permit having been made beforehand.
__�; -� In the oase of suapension� the County wilJ.� at its
' �-0 disczetion, establish pxeconditions for cuncellation of the ,
, _� suapenaiott. . . non-mining activitiea, will be allowed during ;i
-� .: the suspension, but other sctivitiea will ba considered
_� grounds for revocation of tLe Pezmit. •
�-� � While the resolution of February 26, 1991 estabZishes a list o£ ' `.
,� conditions for this pax-ticular period during which mining activity � '��
, •? has been suspended, the pextinit amendment presumably remains in ;��
- . a effecti and applies to unanticipated interruptions in production s�'
� �y. i ' which ma occur in the future and in turn leaves va �% �
y , gue and ��.
� � unspecified "preconditions'� for canceZlation oP a suspension. :���
Para ra h 23 of S ecialt7se Permit �86-139 •i`�
; � g p p provides that additional �t,
• �.��� - conditions may be attached to the permit which are "reasonable" and .
>r� � : "necessary to protect the health and safety of the present and
=-`'� � future inhabitants of Pitkin County . . . ." '
`.�. Y
�'� '� '` The amendment is not reasonable. As noted previously,
'=�`� ` � interruptions in coal production for 3ndePinite periods of time •
- " :=� ' have occurred on many oeeasions in the past, and will occur in the
`; � ' future at the Coal Basin Mi»es. It is critical to the economic ,
' ;i viability of the operation that coal produotion, when interrupted,
. �_;f ;; should !�e resumed qui.ckly. No operator can afford to wait for the
'� county,to set conditions and in turn deliberate on whether the
conditions ha�e been met so that the suspension can be lifted and
���`;'� � aoal production can resume. It is not workable. Furthermore, no �;
'• ;i permittee shouicl LC Lt�ui..ra L� ��.ciatt urilar vague end urdefired '"
.- ' �
future ��precondiCions." ;�
:-_1 � The amendment is not necessary to protect the health and safety of s�"� , '
`�"�) �� the inhabitants of Pitkin County. Pitxin County�s residents have +.�
�"j"`�� ; thrived and prosperet over the several decades of operations in i>
Coal Hasin in which the county has made no effort to impede or �:
" ;:=...;� ; place oonditions and restrictions on the resumption of coal T`
,'x��<< production after periads of znterruption. �,
K�-.'� .
Y!C I ' .�2
. . :;,vtiH � ' . ��.Z,
v'4`'r; � '�
;•�•��' ��
—_.. .r�; �
—
�.' . . _ .
5��"
,w�':�1.,,,. • . .. .
xT:,ru;;: .
:��£-;:'��- .
t�;: -
2a;,-w
t ��' .
r �, ,
.n" H
'tio��+�'^j . .
'�.t� '
...-'�,�F{!f'`u�
i.r:'R�F:;l ti � �
� .__1�r;�;� .
���' �F
xg' `+�� .
���
.7.
�yx.;.
, ,;.; . �
w :
�=:� �
a 4
`:y��� ���!�A'+ i �i._...� '' f �. '� .�� �_-.�, r�: ,� y 47,n'.,C ' hi� '�.��iY��s
��f `, �i� .1 ,w� r�, f� �� � ' Sy � , ax�i3rf/t-��k �•! k:_. {�l,�y1 'y �� �j ` �'�z����r�,( :
+ �4 � ..��A ., k 'Y. ,j .��a �ti � ��' ���
= fi,�'?r , p.,,� s r� i: '� 'v�! 'tF�r�_,, � t�` ..',.,�M`��j., L!.:
:Y �- .
. .... . . .. ���. --------..............
. . �s..- � �.
s' . � ' ' �...� , .
_� �� MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES, 1NC.
Board of County Comm'rs �x�b 7, 1991 PN�
': � Pitkin County, CO Page 5
;� �,�.: -.�'�
_ _ � •; The Caunty sBeks, through Resolution �90-13 of February 26, 1991, ,�
to ensure that specific concerns- oP the County will be known to a �
new owner oP the Coal Basin Mine. 4iowever, the mechanism of
� suspending the permit to address these specific concerns oE the
county is unnecessary and premature.
, .
'i -±� Very truly yours,
_ =' �� MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES� INC. '
��a� . BY �����.s r 11�-�--�Qi�1.V "'•' `
.:�j Diane Aelaney� Governtaential '` F
Affairs Representative .���,
DD:em ��
� �
.;�.,� ' Y
. .�� '�
` � i
` �;� � .
;y:� � ,:.,
�';�: i . . .
�-��:
-:�< ;
;�, , .
�'� . . ; .
`,`�
��� � j� —
,,_:� � �
-�� ; . ..
=_� � ; .
�� � � . " � s: �
� � _
. ,;�t=� t - , `l'I �� ..
�r ''
�
�� _
_� f..a„ - . . . .. ,,.. ...�._. . . :....,. ...,._c. ,:.3..�� i . ._ . ..
'..� _..�. ,,..... ....w,. �,_.._,�...
_...._.. _._......... ..
. i4,.;• i�. . . . .. . . . � .' ...
`�; .. � . . � � � . � , � .
:��.'` . - � �� � . . . '
�i
�,�°l��,.�,�.'��'��`k .. ' . .
� •
.'M rF'
�:-
_.T,:;
�� : ' �
��vt ;,� . c� +� � t �rt 1 � �•. .� t c� "'i'z'� } �
_{ � .�° 1K�`r g .,� ' �li�i!*�
1`, `� �����^� M�Q'J� �l. L�`' h ���r e , . ', �, '����4������5!'t'�� e°"�s�. ����� r�4is�� �.
�.a-v,1a��.�X^'�� 1 y�'�."1�� ���������� �'����+?t "i� �a�`�rrN,,�� e1.
i�� � ��°�-°�••. �� :� �
: -
f� BOHtiD OF CU.GOt�1PA'R'S �
PITKIN COiJ�:IY
Pub!ic H�aring E.xhibiis �
- Date:__�s �?-�`��� �- .
C�s=��' • r V
' - SUbjCCL'�D�/ �� '; '
� Ex1t. �iu. .��- (..'j,•:-.;;. .
;.:
{�' '
�
• ,1 .
R
F '�
� �
�', i:.
_ 1'1(:
� . . . .� :�i r .
ffiSTORY: In the summer of 1988, approximately 5 iZlegal cabins
located on the backside of Aspen Mountain were "red tagged" by
the Suilding Department for being constructed without building ' �
i permits or land use approvals. The applicant was notified by
i certified letter on September 14, 1988 that the cabin was in
_ � violation of Pitkin County land use regulations and that the
applicant was required to submit a land use application
requesting approval of a cabin on the property.
On April 4, 1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the
, application and tabled action to a date uncertain. The applicant ��
• had not adequately addressed many of the issues raised by staff �;
` which included: access, water, sewage, wildfire, merger, mine �
waste and buildinq permit. This information has since been
` further addressed by the applicant but several issues remain
�
unresolved.
, The 1041 and General Submission application was heard by the � � '
Planning and Zoning Commission on october 2, 1990, at which time
the applicant requested that the Planning Commission consider the .
, proposed cabin as a special review use for a "recreational
limited use cabin" as opposed to a "single family residence."
The Commission stated that they did not want to consider the � ,
"recreational limited use cabin" and denied the request by the '�4 `
applicant. The Commission directed the applicant to return with 'r
a request for a "single family residence." r�� �
s � �
on January 8, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Commission considered j�",
the applicant's request for a single family residence, and denied k..!� .
� the 1041 and recommended denial of General Submission, in a 2-2 '�*
vote. This resolution will be brought to the meeting.
:�...
' k '
. �1',
. :F:
�. • '
. i':��% . . • . '
.�q�:��' '
�R�}
.���y,,.S� , , .
� {� . �
�.♦��
��% '
�.U...
�
�
�
��
:e.::.:-
��
:."�;� . , ,
'��''� - „ _. ,
; �:; ,
,. :,, �
�
i`. � ..,, � � a
���!t , � � ,r��,•�, '�� r
�r�l�-j'� ' ��� �r ; L �l��� ' t4y`t� ,T�I�a� H }f��,�,'� ;�3 ,t������r`���4a;:
, � .
�'r ., � xr S� ��.:.5 � i� �i P[� h'.�'•
' .. ..�• .# �.�. �tl:S����s�i�`��• �. -*� �"���4... 1� La;�i7�j�.
'�5��' .. u �;•��,3���1.
. .. ..{;iA�- . ' • - �L .�N"�V6s�ti���.�
l..
.
♦ • '
• n ,
.� ..
�o�kn oF co. co��r,;�'�'s ,�,,}: ,�, :
p►i;�►t•t r,o!�sa�' � > .,�
r;�':i�,Hf:�ri�,r Eh`:i�:is
L�::.. __�Q_a!-��-�'j� `,�
,^rr�i �.�L-�_---"-� �(.xJ :. .
. ::U�i.;�t._..- �-e,L/L 5 � . .
L;`.. �.
-' t:-`� 'ri9. .��f_L..it- -------- �� ,
f ;
�1'i,�
I
i _ . ;.
+ .
� SUHHARY: The Planning and Zoning Coa�ission has approved the �
Trails Plan. I� is recommended that the Board endorse the P2an. !
. A Resolution of endorsement has been attached for the
; Chairperson's signature.
i
i .
ISSIIES: The Planning Commission has reviewed numerous drafts of
. � this Plan�at regularly scheduled public meetings, during which f
, public comments were heard and concerns of the Commissioa Ij
� expressed. Staff has revised the Plan to its firal fo�-n which �`
� reflects resolution of co�cerns ex.gressed by the Comiaission and ,
menbers of the public at the meetings. Primary issues were as (�
,� follows: • •
a i
�� - It was deternined that an emphasis should be placed on the need }.
to balance trail development with the need to preserve
��i significant wildiife habitat, including riparian habitat areas;
� Trail review criteria was revised to clearly stipulate that, '
�;.� where public use of a trail vill have a detriment�l ir„pact on
,j wildlife/riparian habitat, whzch cannot he avoicied through the ,.
implementztion of � management plan or conditians of approval, an
,,� easement shall not be exacted; (see P�an page 3, paragraphs A.
�` and B.)
�.
�_� - Very soecific criteria was developed to be used as a guideline
:.�.� by the Board, the Commission and Sta:f for determining r:he�her
proposed public access in an area is appropriate; (page 3 of
-- ;�; text)
��
�,. - A section which listed subdivision exemptions which were to be
'�,-� exempte.: fron trail exaction requirements wes deleted, The Land
�{ Use Code rewrite will reflect same; It was de*_e.^mzne3 that no
�r�� land use reviews shouZd be "exempt" from trail exaction if it is
�'3; �
—___ �.x',�,,
�
F � i
�� ....� � : � . ... ._ .. : �. . . . ... . . � ...... . .. . � . � ... � . . . .. . . .
ly�-.. . .���_�,� '.. ..�.....:... . :.�...
���f� ,
;.
a��(S��yX�"�y ' , .
.�:iL4"'Y � 7; ... . , . _
C�����.,- . . . � .
f���y �,
�s� �
!� '
y •
�_�
..x,
.�., �
�a
��, .
�'r�`a � .. . . — . . _ . . .
%tib"�+. t _
' a
� � �'` . t �,'�a�,-.1- r e _ 'c �� - �h�.t�r,r
� � ���� ��' ��� ` . .�. '�':.b ��''�'+�-,��'����r , �L�'{fl"�h.� ���,���{'i�4'$�h, .
!. _ �y,C � �}'A��.�#.",,4�k7�' �rl �.�:�`:' y �� t k tw: f�tp,"fk ;�rA'�i ;� �� "i' .,4�11� }'I..�,
. , °�•�4�..,:.r .tiG.u����.�Jn_���b��5tl�'.'a#�«�.'�:�.�..^��ft�x'..�^m.._'�: . .�Y,:-� . . ���A�(�i.�Fi.t�' 1ti�
. . M�.3'�14:Y,4�.1�...
l
I
determined, throuqh review of the criteria in the Plan, that the
trail is desired for public purposes. .
i . .
- She text was revised to stinulate that a trzil easement may be
exacted, but that trail development shall be conditioned upon the '
eaistence of a funding and management plan for it'e installation;
- Trail Standards are to be referred to as "GUidelines", rather ;•r "
„ than "Standards". When warranted, given site specific
environmental, physical or legal limitations, the Guidelines may ... i ,
be varied by the Commission and/or Board; � � ,�'
- The Commission endorsed a recommendation made by the public �
' that a specific Trails and Environmental Coordinator position be
created by the Board. There was a desire to have an individual ;
or Board charged with the responsibility of being responsible for • -
the implementation of recommendations made in the Plan. � '
Finally, the Plan is a cumulative effort of the Planning �, �'.
- Commission, Staff and some devoted members of the Public who have � -
spent a significant amount of time creating a working document ��''��'
` which will continue to evolve to meet the needs of the Community. � ",`
, Plan maps will be presented at the meeting.
Within three months of adoptian of the Trails Plan, Staff will
develop an implementation work proqram. This program will be
presented to the Board at a future worksession late this Spring.
y ALTERHATIVES: The resolution of final approval will remain '
pending until endorsement of the Board has been given. If the
- Board recommends major revisions, Staff will recommend that the
Commission schedule an additional public hearing to review h �
proposed revzsions. If the Board endorses th2 Plan, no further ��
meetings or public hearings will be required and Staff will have � .
the Planning Commission and Board Chairpersons sign the
resolutions of approval and endorsement, respectively. -
Alternatives are as follows: ��
`�
�
j 1. Endorse the attached Trails Plan and associated maps; � ,
Chairperson sign the attached Resolution of endorsement; ,
' 2. Direct Staff to take recommended changes back to the �� �
, Planning Commission for review at continued public �
' meeting(s);
RECOl4�TDATION:
Staf£ recommends that the Board: ;�
! 1. Endorse the Trails Plan and associated maps; E� ,:
2. Chairperson sign the attached Resolution of endorsement. '
i 2 y�
' 1'
t
�
)
li;...:',.
� - -- .. _ .
��. ,..: .._. , ., •, _ _ '�
e ` _
—� fi .��
ti'�`���.` . .
s�;r. .
1 Y�
! .Y.�^k.=� .
.+L�%�tJ ' . , ' .
_a,.✓'•lv 7' . " ' ' ' �
•:_x�iti:•��;'. , .
"e'C'+Ilr' � .
't i4t:.r„„;�,� � �
'>� _ .
rM a�.
:'���°..�y.
�� ;?��:y:. '
��:.���n.:tr;� � �
��•
a+.�
Y�
Fc
t� '
:w
a•�'
.:Y,..•.
r�