Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20102696.tiff LOHF SHAIMAN JACOBS HYMAN & FEIGER PC ATTORNEYS AT LAW h 950 SOUTH CHERRY STREET,SUITE 900 2,,3'' _� ��� '" GO DENVER,COLORADO 80246-2666 FACSIMILE 303.753.9997 TELEPHONE 303.753.9000 www•lohfshaiman.com CHARLES H.JACOBS cjacobs@lohfshaiman.com November 4, 2010 VIA EMAIL: comments-rocky-mountain-arapaho-roosevelt-Pawnee i)fs.fedus FEDERAL EXPRESS AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Lori A. Bell, District Ranger U.S. Forest Service Pawnee National Grassland 660 "O" Street Greeley,CO 80631 Re: Newly Proposed Developed Shooting Area Coal and Wildhorse Our File No. 5250.01 Dear Ms. Bell: We represent Roger and Gail Dieckhaus, who own and use a residence at 29899 County Road 88, Ault, Colorado 80610, and Albert Kane, who owns and uses a residence at 29400 County Road 88, Ault, Colorado 80610. By our letter dated October 4, 2010, we expressed our clients' objections and comments to your Proposed Developed Shooting Areas("PDSA")to be located in Sections 24 and 36 near County Road 88. We now have received your letter dated October 15, 2010 and its enclosed map, in which you propose a PDSA either in the areas marked as "Coal" or "Wildhorse." According to your letter, you have changed the proposed PDSA locations to "mitigate some of the concerns raised by nearby residents regarding the original proposed locations." Our clients appreciate your careful consideration of their comments, the comments of other neighbors, and the resulting new proposed PDSA locations. They particularly appreciate your selecting the Wildhorse site for the PDSA. If this is the area you choose to develop, and if you conform to the necessary good practices for supervision, environmental protection and traffic control, our clients will not object to the site. On the other hand, our clients vigorously object to PDSA proposed for the Coal site on many of the same grounds set forth in our October 4, 2010 letter. They have asked us to urge you to select the Wildhorse site for the PDSA. Q2O-O win WA-von- 2010-2696 0- 10 - 0 Lori A. Bell, District Ranger Re: Newly Proposed Developed Shooting Area Coal and Wildhorse November 4, 2010 Page 2 Mr. and Mrs. Dieckhaus and Dr. Kane have asked us to reiterate their objections and comments to the extent they are applicable to the newly proposed PDSA described in your October 15, 2010 letter. I enclose a copy of that letter for your reference. The Dieckhaus and Kane residences lie in Sections 25 and 35 respectively, and are depicted on the enclosed copy of the map you included with your letter. As you can see, the Coal PDSA is close to our clients' residences. The Wildhorse PDSA does not share this problem. Our clients continue to be surprised that you would propose to develop the Coal PDSA so close to their residences, or for that matter, to any private properties, when there is such a vast expanse of uninhabited land in the Pawnee National Grasslands. Our clients object to you placing the PDSA on the Coal site on numerous grounds and have questions and concerns regarding the social, economic and environmental impacts of both PDSA sites: 1. Nothing in your letter commits the Forest Service to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") for either PDSA. Our clients anticipate substantial environmental impact on both PDSA sites arising from the imported dirt to be used to build the berms, the increased automobile and pedestrian traffic, the landscaping and the general construction. Our clients request that the Forest Service prepare a formal EIS for review. If you believe that the Forest Service is not required to prepare an EIS, our clients want to know the basis for that belief. Furthermore, even if applicable regulations do not require a formal EIS, our clients request that the Forest Service prepare one informally so all can determine the nature and scope of the environmental impacts that the Forest Service reasonably expects. Our clients believe that all of these impacts will be negative, and at least for the Coal PDSA, intend to pursue whatever remedies are available to them if the EIS or similar evaluation such as an Environmental Assessment suggests otherwise. 2. In addition to other environmental factors, if PDSAs are developed and become popular, our clients anticipate that the traffic in their vicinity will increase substantially, creating noise, litter, dust, fumes and other social and environmental effects detrimental to the quiet enjoyment of their property. The traffic impact created by the Wildhorse site will be remote from our clients' residences, and promises to be acceptable assuming proper Forest Service management and supervision. The traffic impact created by the Coal site is closer to our clients' properties, and likely will affect their properties adversely notwithstanding Forest Service management and supervision. 3. The Environmental Protection Agency recommends that plans for lead abatement and periodic lead removal be included in the design of any designated shooting area such as the each of the PDSAs covered by your letter. Our clients want to know if the Forest Service has included these abatement plans in its development process. 4. The Coal area is known to accumulate standing water during the spring and summer months. This is undesirable in areas that will potentially accumulate lead material, and our clients are concerned this may have negative consequences for nearby riparian areas, raptor nesting areas and raptor breeding areas that seasonally include large numbers of hawks, eagles and other raptors. Our clients want to know what the Forest Service intends to do about these negative environmental impacts. 5. The Forest Service apparently still does not intend to staff either of the PDSA sites with attendants or trained range safety officers. People with rifles, handguns or shotguns likely will Lori A. Bell, District Ranger Re: Newly Proposed Developed Shooting Area Coal and Wildhorse November 4, 2010 Page 3 congregate in the PDSAs to shoot without supervision. They have an open invitation to congregate and create unacceptable risks of personal injury and property damage to themselves, each other, our clients and other bystanders. Failure to provide staff for PDSA sites violates the express provisions of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, particularly Section 23-4-370 (copy enclosed for reference), and violates the letter and spirit of other industry standards and best practices presentations. 6. For example, the National Rifle Association recommended guidelines for safe shooting ranges, suggest training for persons using shooting ranges and staffing by certified Range Officers. Our clients want to know what provisions the Forest Service has made to provide such training or safety supervision. The Forest Service should not develop and operate either PDSA without providing an adequate staff of qualified,trained supervisory personnel. 7. We understand that packages of most rifle cartridges, even as small as 22 caliber cartridges, contain warnings that the range of their projectiles is 2 miles. With ricochet, these bullets, and certainly bullets of larger calibers, can and do travel even farther. The prospect of inadvertent casualties related to the Coal PDSA this close to our clients' properties is not tolerable. 8. Our clients run cattle on their private properties or leased properties near the Coal PDSA. There are and will be windmills, gates, farm roads, cattle and their attendants relatively close to the Coal PDSA,which will create unacceptable danger to all of these structures, animals and people. 9. Our clients are concerned about insurance requirements and responsibility for any harm that comes to their property, themselves, their families or their guests. They want to know whether the U.S. Forest Service provides insurance that protects adjacent property owners from harm in the event that permitted shooters cause personal injury or property damage. This is a particular concern in relation to the Coal PDSA, but our clients also are interested in the general welfare of the overall community. Accordingly, they want information about insurance for both the Coal and Wildhorse sites. 10. Our clients believe that developing the Coal PDSA so close to their residences will have a substantial negative effect on the value of their properties and other private properties immediately adjacent to the Coal site. 11. Your letter suggests that you will be using an existing road and constructing an informational kiosk, benches, shade cover and a bermed shooting area. Our clients would very much like to see the actual plan for construction, particularly for the Coal PDSA. The plan for construction should include barrier landscaping, something to protect our clients and others from errant bullets, and should have other suitable components, including trash receptacles and bathroom facilities. Our clients believe that the plans also should include descriptions and indefinite funding to maintain these facilities. 12. In view of the fact that both PDSAs will be unstaffed, our clients want like to know the plan for maintaining and cleaning the areas, and policing improper uses, such as after-hours shooting, parties, drinking and anything else that might intensify the already unacceptable level of danger such areas will present to nearby residences. 13. Our clients also would like information from you about the experience and locations of other Shooting Areas in the Pawnee National Grassland and other Forest Service lands in Colorado. In particular, we are interested to know whether there have been accidents and/or injuries caused at those Lori A. Bell, District Ranger Re: Newly Proposed Developed Shooting Area Coal and Wildhorse November 4, 2010 Page 4 locations, police activity, citations issued by the Forest Service or other law enforcement authorities, and whether there are any other shooting areas as close to residences as the ones proposed. We hope that you will take our clients' objections, comments and questions seriously and rethink and then reject the Coal PDSA. As we stated in our October 4 letter, our clients do not object generally to the concept of controlled Shooting Areas on the vast uninhabited areas of the Pawnee National Grasslands. They are comfortable with your choice of the Wildhorse site assuming proper supervision, environmental protection and traffic control. Nevertheless, they object vigorously to placing the PDSA on the Coal site, which is too close to their residences and other private properties. They intend to pursue all avenues available to them to oppose the Coal site if you choose to move forward with it. Please respond as soon as you can and post these comments on the Forest Service website, as indicated in your letter. Very truly yours, LOHF SHAIMAN J COBS HYMAN & FEIGER PC C/ikt I harles H. J obs CHJ:slf Enclosures cc: Clients Addressees on following Distribution List DISTRIBUTION LIST By First Class Mail: Weld County Board of County Commissioners Governor Bill Ritter,Jr. 915 Tenth Street 136 State Capitol P.O. Box 80632 Denver, CO 80203-1792 Greeley, CO 80632 Senator Michael Bennett Senator Mark Udall 1200 S. College Avenue, Ste. 211 801 8th Street, Ste. 140A Fort Collins, CO 80524 Greeley, CO 80631 Congresswoman Betsy Markey 822 7th Street,449 Greeley, CO 80631 Lori A. Bell,District Ranger Re: Newly Proposed Developed Shooting Area Coal and Wildhorse November 4, 2010 Page 5 By Email: Commissioner David Long, dlong@co.weld.co.us Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, dademacher@co.weld.co.us Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, bkirkmeyer@co.weld.co.us Commissioner Sean Conway, sconwav@co.weld.co.us Commissioner William"Bill"Garcia,wgarcia;co.weld.co.us Senator Mitchell Shawn, shawnmitch@aol.com Senator Scott Renfroe, scott.renfroe.senate@state.co.us Representative B.J. Nikkei, rep.nikkel@gmail.com Representative Dianne Primavera, dianne.primavera.house@state.co.us Representative Jim Riesberg, iim.riesberg.house@state.co.us Representative Jerry Sonnenberg, ierry.sonnenberg.house@state.co.us Representative Glenn Vaad,glenn.vaad.house@state.co.us WELD COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE Sec.23-4-370. Outdoor shooting ranges. A. A Special Review Permit to operate an outdoor shooting range, if approved, shall be conditioned on a requirement that every ten(10)years the safety of the design of the range shall be reviewed and changed, taking into account the history of the operation and changes in surrounding land uses and the relevant provisions of Subsections B.2, C.2 through C.6 and D below. Review of the safety plan shall be accomplished using the Site Plan Review process and such changes shall not constitute a major change from the Special Review Permit. The Department of Planning Services may waive the review if the surrounding property within one-half(%a) mile has not significantly changed since the recording date of the original application.The applicant shall provide evidence for this determination.The operator, if he or she chooses not to accept the staff determination under the Site Plan Review process,may request that the matter be determined by the Board of County Commissioners which shall hear the matter in accordance with the procedures for considering a Special Review Permit; provided, however, that no fee shall be charged. B. Application for a Special Review Permit to operate an outdoor shooting range shall be accompanied by the following information: I.Topography at two-foot intervals. 2. Plan of range with supporting data on safety factors. C. The following minimum standards shall apply to all outdoor shooting ranges: I. Minimum land requirements shall be set by the Planning Commission for each application. 2. Shooting ranges shall, when possible, be located to take advantage of natural terrain barriers. The entire range (including danger area if range is not of the "Safety Range" type) shall be fenced and warning signs posted every two hundred(200)feet. 3. Line of fire shall be as nearly horizontal as is practicable and never below horizontal. Ranges may be constructed so that the firing point is below the target, provided that the gradient between the firing point and target does not exceed two percent(2%). 4. The perimeter of the range shall be LANDSCAPED to provide natural noise barriers. The remainder of the range shall be planted and maintained with grass or other suitable ground cover. 5. If the shooting range is used by more than four(4)individuals on a regular basis,shooting shall be supervised by a range officer or instructor qualified by the National Rifle Association, military service or other similar training. 6. In addition to firing lines or fields, adequate space for danger areas, parking, equipment, storage building,clubhouse and latrines shall be provided. D. Provisions for pistol,small-bore and high caliber rifle ranges: 1. "Safety Range" requirement. If the range is constructed in an urbanized area, when area is developed, or when natural terrain does not offer adequate protection, overhead safety baffles may be required. 2. Firing points shall be four (4) to five (5) feet apart for shooting distances up to two hundred (200)yards. 3. Rifle or pistol ranges shall not be permitted without bullet stops. Natural or artificial bullet stops shall be provided. a.Natural bullet stops. Only slopes of hills shall be used for natural bullet stops.The crest of the hill used for a bullet stop shall be at least thirty (30)feet above the level of the firing point for a one-hundred-yard range. An additional ten (10) feet of hill shall be provided for each additional one hundred (100)yards of range.The slope of the hill shall not be less than two(2)to one(1). A vertical cut shall be taken out of the face of the hillside used for a backstop to provide a nearly perpendicular face to catch bullets and prevent ricochets. b. Artificial bullet stops. For up to a three-hundred-yard range, an earth embankment at least twenty-five (25) feet in height, well sodded to retain a slope of thirty-five(35)degrees from perpendicular and topped by an earth-filled timber barricade at least fifteen(15)feet high, shall be provided. Stones shall be removed from the face of the embankment to a depth of eighteen (18) inches. For each additional one hundred (100) yards of range, ten (10) feet in overall height of the bullet stop shall be added. The bullet stop shall extend approximately one hundred sixty (160) feet beyond the ends of the target line for high-caliber ranges; and twenty-five (25) feet for small-bore rifle and pistol ranges. E. Provisions for trap and skeet fields. I. A danger zone of one hundred (100)yards by three hundred (300)yards shall be provided for trap fields. 2. A danger zone of three hundred (300)yards by six hundred (600) yards shall be provided for skeet fields. 3. Trap and skeet fields may be combined (traps layout superimposed on skeet field) where a danger zone of three hundred(300)yards by six hundred(600)yards shall be required. 4.The trap field layout shall meet the requirements of the American Trap Association. 5. The skeet field layout shall meet the requirements of the National Skeet Shooting Association. (Weld County Codification Ordinance 2000-1; Weld County Code Ordinance 2003-10) United States Forest Pawnee 660"O"Street USDA Department of Service National Grassland Greeley,CO 80631 Agriculture Voice:(970)346-5000 TDD: (970)346-5015 Web: www.fs.fed.us/r2/arnf Fax: (970)346-5014 File Code: 1910-6 Date: October 15, 20.10 Dear Interested Party, The Pawnee National Grassland(PNG) is open to recreational shooting on 99.8%of the 193,060 acres managed by the U.S. Forest Service within its larger Administrative Boundary. The highly fragmented land ownership pattern within this Administrative Boundary shows that only 25% of the land is in Federal ownership, 66.5%is in private ownership, 6.5%is in State ownership, and 2% is managed as experimental grassland. The PNG is proposing to improve an area within the Federal ownership where recreation shooting is currently occurring.This proposed shooting area would provide the opportunity for a safer shooting environment that could be more easily monitored and maintained. The Pawnee National Grassland is resoliciting public comment for this proposal,which is located west of Briggsdale, CO (see attached map). Based on previous public comments received during the scoping period, which ended October 7, 2010, I am considering two additional locations. It is my intent that the new location may mitigate some of the concerns raised by nearby residents regarding the original proposed locations. These are both areas currently being used by recreational shooters. The rest of the proposal is the same as previously scoped: a 100-yard range with eight to ten shooting positions,the site would be open to the public seven days a week from dawn until dusk, and the area would include an existing road, a parking area,bermed shooting area(side berms and a backstop), informational kiosk,benches, and shade cover, if constructed as proposed. Public comments and collaboration, as well as input from U.S. Forest Service specialists,will be used to analyze the effects of this proposed action. To provide input on this proposal, please send comments to Lori Bell at the address on this letterhead, or email to: comments-rocky- mountain-arapaho-roosevelt-pawnee@fs.fed.us. To keep the planning process on schedule, please respond by November 5, 2010. As information becomes available, it will be posted online at www.fs.usda.gov/arp. Sincerely, tal vvV LORI A. BELL District Ranger Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper O , I 1 I _ :C M QI .. .� .N N e \/1 Z M• ' i �_ _ an J o M J SJ: .. p, 1 W k m ^, a in .. ; - Z N { _ �I W aL. -- 2 " oa r • - - „ M o N Q eAA'p`p I e d 0 M �yJ .. n .... 'd. P I I. w- M cm a m o N Q Q AAA�6AA l N o OO i.0 o z Ai i ...?._ .� I.I co ,. { r, ., TS a, N o Z y1 aqi ¢` • ti ® > M v m a o W • .. .. 4 r_ .. ..Lt, f/.N x Ni13 CD GI • { i O 3 v Ano 4 o N - , O ?, m CO . .. — a _ _ o ft { N 3 .-a @ c !R 11litil a) m in 0 a rn C0O \ 1 ..!', — F oM i . .I NI «Ρ : :: I n ' Ct 1.......... I °; m ni o rn N Q r-+ an li N N O .O r.r--r�.o r-34.t.•.._.!.�.t-_�...et..w...�s- -� __— _—_ _ _—_..___� N 7 W 43 La J". O O N V O c .. m m o �Q C!1 .`n+ O - M v O . . Tiii 0 O o-Itlire _ U v y m W �. . y u v v v a, ... - 00. ✓ ✓ 77 4 T _ Hello