January 8, 2006
To: Columbus Georgia City Councilors
From: Concerned Fortson Citizens
Subject: Proposed City Ordinance: Rezoning Property on Fortson Road and Smith
Road for Rock Quarry Expansion
Dear Councilors:
Thank you for the consideration given to Residents during the process of
Rezoning Property for the Rock Quarry expansion in North Columbus. We have
reviewed the proposed City Ordinance and associated Conditions and wish to
express the following concerns:
Florida Rock Quarry Rezoning Ordinance and Conditions
No. 5 Current
Any wetlands will be delineated by the Corp of Engineers and such delineation
shall be delivered to the Columbus Director of Engineering before construction
begins.
Concerns:
Isn?t approval required by the Director of Engineering, not simply a ?delivery?
of the delineation?
What is meant by the term ?construction?? Shouldn?t this reference be ?mining
activity and or preparation to mine??
Alternative Consideration to Current No. 5
Any wetlands will be delineated by the Corp of Engineers and such delineation
shall be delivered to the Columbus Director of Engineering before mining
activity and or any preparation for mining activity. The Director of
Engineering, along with any other relevant governmental authorities, shall
review and provide written approval of any activity that may affect the
wetlands.
No. 7 Current
Blasting particle velocity shall be limited to the US Bureau of Mines Standard
RI 8507 for all structures, including designated historic structures.
Concerns:
The quarry does not blast ?structures.? Wouldn?t it be more appropriate to
eliminate the reference to ?structures,? or replace it with ?property??
The EPD references other nationally approved standards. (Please see Concerns
of Residents document dated December 31.) The Quarry should use blasting
practices in keeping with the EPD with respect to blasting in the vicinity of
historic property.
Residents want to more fully understand the implications of RI 8507. We hope
that City Council Members will help us to ensure that this is indeed the
appropriate standard, and that the Ordinance Conditions apply the proper
references to the key aspects of the appropriate standard.
Alternative Consideration to Current No. 7
Blasting particle velocity shall be limited to no greater force than the
strictest standards of the US Bureau of Mines Standard RI 8507 generally, and
velocity shall be within the guidelines of the EPD, or any other state or
federal authority if more stringent, as it applies to restrictions associated
with historic properties.
No. 8 Current
If the existing crusher is moved or if a new crusher is installed, such crusher
shall be located in a pit.
Concerns:
It is the understanding of the residents that the crusher is to be moved into a
pit when any of the rezoned property is mined.
It was also our understanding that, should the existing crusher be replaced,
the crusher would be located in the pit. The current language may incorrectly
be read that a new crusher ? in a new location- would be required to be in a
pit.
Alternative Consideration to Current No. 8
If the existing crusher is moved or replaced, or if a new crusher is installed,
such crusher(s) shall be located in a pit. Upon the commencement of mining in
the rezoned properties, the Crusher will be installed in the pit at the
earliest possible time, but no later than six (6) months following commencement
of mining on any of the properties rezoned.
No. 9 Current
A minimum 30-foot high berm shall be constructed, planted and maintained by
Petitioner or its successor behind the Getzen House. After planting matures,
said berm shall reach a height of at least 40 feet. Said berm shall be located
in the buffer required by condition number 1.
Concerns:
It is the residents understanding that berms associated with historic
properties shall be subject to EPD standards.
Shouldn?t the Ordinance Conditions add that the berms must be in place prior to
any mining activity?
Alternative Consideration to Current No. 9
A minimum 30-foot high berm shall be constructed, planted and maintained by the
Petitioner or its successor along Fortson Road. After planting matures, said
berm shall reach a height of at least 40 feet. A berm shall be constructed,
planted and maintained by the Petitioner or its successor behind the Getzen
House, and such berm shall be constructed, planted and maintained by the
Petitioner in accordance with EPD requirements, but in any event will be no
less than the berm height along Fortson Road.
Said berms shall be in existence prior to any mining activity on the rezoned
properties.
No. 10 Current
The property subject to rezoning shall be restricted to the following uses:
a. Mining and extraction and accessory uses.
Concerns:
Residents do not understand implications of the term ?accessory uses.?
Residents understand that blasting is contracted to third parties. We would
like assurance that no explosives shall be stored on site.
Alternative Consideration to Current No 10
The property subject to rezoning shall be restricted solely to mining and
extraction and shall be used for no other purposes. No explosives shall be
stored on the site.
No. 12 Current
No more than one pit will be mined at the same time on any of applicant?s
property in Muscogee County bordered by I 185, Smith Road, and Fortson Road
except as required by good mining practices to blend material of different
quality to produce marketable product.
Concerns:
We do not understand the potential time period in which more than one property
may be mined, although we understand this need will exist at the outset of the
mining of the new property due to the cap stone. Consequently, we believe
there should be a maximum period of six (6) months for such mining overlap of
more than one property.
Alternative Consideration to Current No. 12
No more than one pit will be mined at the same time on any of applicant?s
property in Muscogee County bordered by I 185, Smith Road and Fortson Road
except for a period of six (6) months from the beginning of mining of any of
the rezoned properties so that blending of material of different quality to
produce marketable products can be done in accordance with good mining
practices.
General
It was our understanding that all Conditions would apply to all rezoned
properties.
Thank you for your kind consideration of these concerns related to the
Ordinance Conditions. We respectfully present these concerns and comments with
the hope that they will result in Ordinance Conditions that are more clear, and
reflective of City Councilors? intent.
Attachments
No attachments for this document.