9/21/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK 96 pvf F.199 The larger question of siting mining operations remotely and the previously discussed issues of noise, traffic, groundwater impacts, and timeframes all affect compatibility. In addition, buffering and separation distance requirements affect compatibility. Current regulations require a Type A buffer where mining operations abut a residential zoning district. Typically, such a buffer involves a grassed, earthen berm and trees. Also, based upon the Board's action at the May 31st LDR amendment hearing, a 300' separation distance is now required between occupied structures and mining pits, on-site haul roads, and stockpiles. Current county regulations require buffering between mines and adjacent residential zoning districts. However, Palm Beach County requires buffering (6' berm and vegetation) between commercial mining operations and adjacent agricultural designated properties to protect residences on adjacent agricultural properties. If the county determines that, even in agricultural designated areas special buffering should be required to protect agricultural residents, a regulation could be added to the LDRs as follows: 1. Require berming and vegetation where mining operations are adjacent to residences, regardless of the zoning or land use designation of the adjacent property. •Significant Mining Incidental to Project Construction As previously discussed, the LDRs allow significant quantities of fill to be exported from construction project sites subject to tight timeframes and under certain conditions. In terms of impacts on surrounding property owners, such operations are de -facto commercial mining operations that are limited to a 2 month period. None of the zoning, mining operation, setback, or buffering criteria applied to commercial mining operations are applied to these "incidental to construction" mining operations. The county currently allows such operations to accommodate legitimate needs of some construction project operators to practically dispose of excess material generated from approved construction work. Staff has been approached by parties interested in mining and exporting fill from construction sites for a period of time well in excess of the current 2 month limitation. In staff's opinion, the 2 month limitation is necessary to protect surrounding property owners in residentially zoned areas and to limit significant mining activities within the urban area. Limiting such activities in the urban area prevents conflicts between residential and mining uses. It is also staff's position that increasing the 2 month time period would provide a significant loophole in current mining regulations by allowing de -facto mining operations in urban areas without the normal protection required for commercial operations located on agriculturally zoned land. Engineer Dean Luethje of Carter Associates wishes to address the Board -on this issue during the workshop. Staff has included a letter from Mr. Luethje in this report's attachments (see attachment #6). SUMMARY Mining operations are a necessary activity in the county due to the enormous need of fill material for private and public development projects. In the past, staff has not received a significant number 10 SEPTEMBER 21, 1995