San Miguel County OKs wetlands permit for Telluride Regional Airport south-side hangar grading with conditions

San Miguel County commissioners on June 11 approved a wetlands special use permit for grading and erosion controls tied to a proposed south-side hangar and taxi-lane project at the Telluride Regional Airport, finding the work will occur only in wetland buffer zones and not within mapped wetland boundaries.

County senior planner John Huebner presented the application and told the board the project area covers roughly 35.1 acres on the airport’s main parcel. The planning staff report and supplemental materials said two jurisdictional wetlands and a series of compensatory mitigation cells are located within the project area; proposed grading and a new Taxi Lane B will come into the 100-foot county wetland buffer for Wetland 2 but will avoid wetland boundaries themselves.

Huebner said the applicant proposes permanent erosion-control measures — including riprap backed by filter fabric and gabion baskets along the downslope edge of the new taxi lane — plus a long organic filter barrier and other best management practices (BMPs). The county’s land-use code (section 5‑22) requires protection of wetlands and their buffers; planning staff, the applicant’s wetland scientist and the planning commission determined that, with the proposed BMPs and conditions, the project is unlikely to adversely affect wetland functions.

Why it matters: the airport south-side project has been controversial for years among nearby neighborhoods. Residents said the airport’s administrative review tracks for hangars and associated service‑road changes have not given affected neighbors adequate opportunity to review impacts. County staff said the wetlands permit is one discrete, public step in a larger, multi-stage permitting process that will include later development and grading permits.

Discussion and public comment: Several residents from the Meadows at Deep Creek Mesa told the board they have long-standing concerns about South Quarry Road access, a large vehicle-storage area referred to as “Lot R,” and whether administrative permitting will limit public review. Nick Farko, speaking for the neighborhood, asked the county to enforce prior resolutions requiring the quarry access to be emergency‑only and to address what the neighbors call nonconforming uses near the airport. Jamie Schueller and other neighbors said they support airport operations but want a dedicated public forum to review South Side changes because their homes will be most affected.

During the hearing county and airport staff clarified that (1) the wetland permit review focuses on construction activities within wetland buffer zones rather than review of a full development plan, (2) future development and grading permits remain subject to separate administrative review and additional technical submittals, and (3) the applicant must obtain any required FAA and state stormwater approvals.

Technical and mitigation details: planning staff and the applicant’s materials say the two on-site jurisdictional wetlands total about 1.51 acres (1.37 acres for one wetland and 1.51 acres for another area; the application also identified a 1.37-acre non-wetland water body). The project avoids direct impacts to mapped wetland boundaries and the compensatory mitigation cells implemented after prior airfield work, but grading and new taxi-lane surfaces intersect the 100-foot county buffer for Wetland 2. To minimize sediment and runoff the permit approval requires installation of construction fencing, organic filter barrier, graded inlet protection, and riprap with gabion baskets on the downslope side of the new taxi lane.

County staff showed maps indicating a closest construction edge of 63.12 feet from certain wetland boundaries as a result of a 31.5-foot grading band plus a 10-foot additional slope and a 21.62-foot distance to the gabion basket itself. The applicant also proposed long-term stormwater protection across the compensatory mitigation area; commissioners asked that the riprap/gabion erosion protection extend the full length of the compensatory wetlands between Wetlands 1 and 2 and made that an explicit condition.

Planning commission and referrals: the planning commission reviewed the application twice and recommended approval after the applicant provided supplemental maps and the wetland scientist answered technical questions about hydrology. Referral comments from residents and agencies focused on long-term stormwater routing, the operation of nearby service roads, and slope‑stability concerns. Planning staff said geotechnical and slope‑stability analyses will be required with the later development/grading permit; public commenters and the county’s engineering referrals asked that erosion and potential debris‑flow risks be addressed during the later permitting steps.

Commission action and conditions: The board approved the wetland special use permit (file wetland‑24‑0010, application submitted in 2024) and attached conditions requiring: compliance with the applicant’s written representations (application and supplements dated 12/03/2024 and 04/23/2025), installation of construction fencing and erosion‑control logs and graded inlet protection, photo documentation of BMPs upon installation to the planning department, revegetation of all disturbed soils with native species and post‑construction noxious‑weed control, a final inspection by the planning department to certify compliance, and a requirement that riprap and gabion baskets be installed along the full length of the compensatory wetlands located between Wetland 1 and Wetland 2. The motion passed unanimously among the commissioners present.

What next: the permit allows the applicant to proceed to the development and grading permit stage, both of which require administrative review and additional technical submittals (geotechnical reports, stormwater pollution prevention plans, and any federal/state permits). Commissioners and staff said they will continue outreach with nearby residents to address outstanding access and land‑use concerns outside the wetlands permit itself.

Key documents and references: San Miguel County Land Use Code section 5‑22 (Wetland Areas); project application and wetland reports (submitted 12/03/2024 and 04/23/2025); planning commission recommendation (May 8, 2025); US Army Corps historic compensatory mitigation approval (referenced in project materials); FAA and state stormwater permitting processes (required separately).