DCPCUP-2017-02405 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dave County Zoning & Land Regulation Committee January 38, 21118 Pageg floes Us& LLP Thecontnete batch plant CUP, granted in 2011, contains numenms conditions, including restrictive days and hours of opemti= specific soil erosion, landscaping, and fcrecing requirements; and compliance with local, state and federal regulations including DNR particulars emissions standards. Mr. Cate11 has not consistently followed these restrictions, particularly as to hours of operation and dust mated from haul roads and driveways. (AttachmentI at 2 -33 Gas. A, lit GA.) The proposed CUP for the mine site contains some of rise same conditions For example, as to: dust control from haul roads raising concern that this provision will rat be enforced at the new site, either, to the neighbors' dearment. 'Ibe hours ofoperatinn issues have been compounded by the County's r vcdy- genceus interpretation of the permit. For example, the CUP provides that the plant may operate 6 AM -6 PM Monday dnrough Friday, 6 AM 4 PM on Saturdays, and that operation out of those hours "shall he limited to no more than 6 projects nor in exceed 30 total days /year," and shall require seven days' notice to the Town and neighbors. Mr. Dan Everson has interpreted Mils as allowing the plant to operate at any lime outside of designated hours up to 30 days /year. This has initialled intolerable noise, light, and other notation at all boll". The County says it does not have Zoning itaffworkingon weekends to impart violations at those times. As in the existing mine site, the Takicndorls acknowledge it is an exisdng non - coroun ming use. However, it is not without licans. It received an erosion Control plait and approval from Dane Canary land & Water in 2012 that called for reclamation in begin on the northern half of site (the area closers to the expand d mine area) in 2014. Reclamation has ant recreant, to die dismay of the site's neighbors. (Xg.. Attachment 3 at 21 4, cuuments rfOtto Dineen and Andrea Fanatics.) It al n requires afence anti tracking pad, which would reduce dust, but has neither . (See Attaehmem 4.) Mr. Tuktcndorfand his neighbors have long questioned she she's compliance with and the County's enf rcxmcot ofthe erosion amtrol plan. (dig., Attachment 2, comments of Andrea P.nrigtmz, 4/22/15 Town Bmrd mwling.) More recently, when Mr. Tukiendnrf has raised this issue, Dane County %oning staff— auonishingly�clahned that the operamr did not need to comply with its cession comml permit. (Comments of Dan Ennson,'I'own of Cottage Crow Plan Commission meeting, November 75, 2017; ran also "asclu cid 4.) Corporation Counsel footnote changed course and described the violations as "technical deviations" and therefore not "material." (Sec Attachment 4 at 20- 21.)'rhe Tukimrdoris experience the effects of these violations every single day, which ate, in fact, material.