Commission pauses review of Browns Canyon recycling permit amendment after contamination, storage and traffic concerns

The Eastern Summit County Planning Commission opened a public hearing on a proposed amendment to an existing Class 3 recycling conditional use permit on Lower Bowl/Browns Canyon Road that would remove prior restrictions limiting recycled materials to the applicant’s own projects.

Planner (Speaker 13) explained the original permit’s conditions limited recycled soils, concrete and asphalt to reuse on the applicant’s projects. The applicant, who operates a contractor yard on Norville Road, asked to remove language restricting material to the applicant’s own projects so that crushed concrete and asphalt could be reused and, in some cases, sold or otherwise redistributed.

Neighbors and landowners raised a range of technical and environmental concerns. Russ Huntsman (Speaker 18) told the commission he worried about piled fill, road safety and ongoing heavy truck traffic; he described wetlands, habitat and dust impacts along Browns Canyon Road. Glenn Watkins (Speaker 5), representing the Martindale trust, urged the commission to retain condition 3 (which restricts recycling to soils, concrete and asphalt) and objected to removal of conditions limiting contractor-yard use. Watkins requested mandatory testing protocols for any material brought to the site, clearer definitions of “long-term storage,” and specific measures for dust control, screening, and road maintenance by the applicant.

Applicant Mr. Myers (Speaker 20) said he has been testing incoming truckloads for contaminants twice monthly and reporting results, has built engineered roads and settling ponds, and is performing revegetation and mitigation as required by county permits. He said regional demand for crushed concrete and asphalt is high as older homes are demolished and materials need local reuse options.

Commissioners probed whether simply striking the words “from the applicant” from existing conditions would address parties’ concerns. Several commissioners expressed that the staff report did not yet fully address enforcement, testing protocols, long-term storage definitions or road impacts. Given the outstanding technical comments and the late submission of a comment letter by Martindale’s representatives, commissioners voted to continue the hearing to Feb. 1 to allow staff to work with the applicant on clearer, enforceable conditions.

No final vote on permit amendment language was taken at the meeting.