Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report - PC 2.28.01PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS PC 2l28l0r Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District Amended Service Plan The proposed district is located in portions of Sections 12 & 13, T.7S., R89 W; portions of Sections 18-20 and 29, TiS, R88W; more practically described as an area known as the portion of mid valley area of the Roaring Fork River around the CMCiCattle Creek area along Highway 82. and CR 109. PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCzuPTION The Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District is proposing to amend the existing district boundaries established in May of 1994, to address water and wastewater treatment needs of the Aspen Glen PUD. The District was required to be capable of providing regional wastewater treatment to the original development and two areas outside of the development. These two areas are identified as the Service Area and Extended Service Area. The Service area being the Crystal River Ranch, Coryell Ranch and the Burry Ranch. The Extended Service Area includes the Rose Ranch, Sanders Ranch and the CMC/Cattle Creek area along the Highway 82 corridor. Subsequent to the original District formation the Rose Ranch and Coryell Ranch have received approval oftheir Planned Unit Development with sewer service to be provided by the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District. Each of these developments were also approved with their own water systems. The original service plan required the District to amend the service plan to expand the water service beyond the original district boundaries to the Aspen Glen development. At the request of the developers of the Coryell Ranch and Rose Ranch PLIDs, the RFWSD is requesting an amendment to the District service plan to expand the water service to the Service Area and Expanded Service Area. The existing district has three wells that have a combined capacity of 1340 gpm to serve the Aspen Glen PUD, which will have an estimated 700 gpm demand at buildout. This leaves 6aO gpm or 92l,600 gpd of excess capacity to meet additional development demands. The District's engineer estimates that he excess capacity could serve an additional 1228 to 3072 EQRs, depending on actual water use within Aspen Glen and whether new developments provide for secondary irrigation systems. The District has easements for four additional wells -l- II on the Aspen Glen development site. The District has two storage tanks with a combined capacity of 1,000,000 gallons. Since the original approval, the Coryell Ranch and Rose Ranch PUDs have been approved, with their own wateisystems. The Coryell Ranch PUD water system has been installedwith a 200,000 gallon water storage tank and connected to the existing district systenl pursuant to the approval of the PUD by the County. The projected maximum demand of the Coryell Rancfr-ptlO is 53 gpm. The well supplying water to the development is capable of supplying 1000 gpm. Rose Ranch PUD was approved for approximately 322 dwelling units, which will be served by a water system supplied by two surface water diversions and a 300,000 gallon tank. The developers have entered into an agreement with the RFWSD for sewage treatment services and would be capable of connecting with the RRWSD water system, if the District amends its service plan to expand the water service area. In addition to the Coryell Ranch and Rose Ranch PUDs, the proposed Sanders Ranch PUD has requested that the RFWSD supply both water and sewer service. Based on these requests and the projected demand for water and sewer service, the District is proposing to expand the regional service area to include these developments and some additional areas. The District will not assume any indebtedness as a result of construction of the new water systems since any new area annexed to the District will have to pay for their own infrastructure and connections or pay the District to have all of the necessary infrastructure installed. All users will be responsible for paying monthly service costs and be liable for any future indebtedness approved by the voters in the District. ISSLE,S AND COMMENTS A Colorado Revised Statutes - C.R.S. 32-1-101, et. seq. Within 30 days of the filing of a service plan with the County Clerk and Recorder, the Clerk and Recorder is required to deliver the service plan to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. The Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to take one of the following actions. L Approve, without condition or modification, the service plan. 2. Disapprove the service Plan. 3. Corditionally approve the service plan subject to additional informationbeing submitted or the modification of the proposed service plan' The Board of County Commissioners "shall disapprove the service plan unless .| evidence satisfactory to the Board of each of the following is presented": I . There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized service in the area to be serviced by the proposed special district. Z. The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed special district is inadequate for present and projected needs. 3. The proposed special district is capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within its proposed boundaries. 4. The area to be included in the proposed special district has, or will have, the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis The Board of County Commissioners may disapprove the plan if evidence satisfactory to the Board of any ofthe following, at the discretion of the Board, is not presented. 1. Adequate service is not, or will not be, available to the area through the County or other existing municipal or quasi-municipal corporations, including existing special districts, within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis. 2. The facility and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facility and service standards of each County within which the proposed special district is to be located and each municipality which is an interested party under Section 32-1-204(1). 3. The proposal is in substantial compliance with a master plan adopted pursuant to Section 30-28-108, C.R.S.. 4. The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted county, regional or state long-range water quality management plan for the area' 5. The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served. The following are responses to the statutory criteria: 1. There is sufficient existing and projected need.for orgonix,etl sen'ice in the area to be servicetl by the proposed speciol district' The proposed regional service area includes a number of developments that have been approved by the Board of County Commissioners (Coryell Ranch pUD, Rose Ranch PUD) or are in the process of trying to gain approval that have or will have their own central water supply (Sanders Ranch PUD) At this time, all of these developments will or would have their individual water system operated by a homeowners association. In addition to these larger systems, th.r" ur. a number of smaller systems in the area around the CMC turnoffthat are supplied by ground water from wells. These systems also have limited storage capacity, leaving them with limited fire protection water and on occasion, interrupted domestic water supplies' -J- 2 The existing service in the ureu to be sen,ed by the proposed special rlistrict is inarlequate for present und proiected needs. The larger community systems are physically and legally capable of providing adequate service to the various developments. Having a number of incorporated homeowners associations running the systems, is not as efficient as a single entity. The previously noted small community systems have had problems in the past delivering physical water to the area and there is very little physical supply in the area to provide fire protection. The proposed special district would provide a more dependable physical supply to the whole aiea for both the domestic and fire protection needs of the residents of the area. The single entity management of the system will also provide an economic benefit to the residents in the area. The propctsed special di.strict is capable oJ' providing econontical ctnd sfficient service lo the area utithin it's prutposed brtundaries' The District does not have any bonded indebtedness at this time and does not propose any indebtedness at this time. All of the proposed expansion will be funded by the developers of the projects to be brought into the district, either by construction the improvements and conveying them to district or by paying the District to construct the facilities. The District would have the ability to fund additional improvements through the use of general obligation bonds, should there be a need for that method of financing improvements. The existing water rights and physical supply capability of the District with their own water is suflicient to meet the needs of the proposed expanded district. With the additional water rights and physical supplies from the developments requesting annexation to the District will only enhance the service capability of the District. Michael Erion, Wright Water Engineers, Inc., has reviewed the application at the request of the Board of County Commissioners. (See pgs. 8-9) He notes that the proposed amendment to the service plan should be supported due to the many advantages of a central water supply for the area. But, he also states that the proposed district will have the ability to serve the areas with proposed or existing without any real definition of how the smaller systems and areas without service are going to be accommodated. To serve some of these smaller systems and areas without service, it will be necessary for the larger systems to have the infrastructure sized properly, to accommodate the other areas and systems Staff concurs with Mr. Erion, that the RFWSD needs to establish a procedure for the areas outside of the existing and J. -4- proposed developments with their own water systems to be able to pay an assessment for engineering, legal, water rights and construction costs to provide service. Additionally, the district needs to identiff the overall system design, so that water lines can be properly designed to accommodate other water users, outside the individual developments. The area to be included in the proposed specialdistt'ict has, orwill have, the financial abiliry tu discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonoble basis. The district has commitments from a number of the proposed landowners to pay for the cost of the capital improvements within the proposed their own development and then convey the facilities to the District. The District does not propose any indebtedness at this time. The following discussion addresses the reasons the Board of County Commissioners may deny a service plan: l. Adequate service is not, orwill not be, availqble to the area through the Coune or other existing municipal or quasi-municipal corporations, including existing special districts, within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis. There are no other special districts in the area that plan on or have the capability of providing water service to the regional service area on a comparable basis or within a reasonable time. 2. The facilie and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facilily and service standards rf each County within which the propctsed special district is to be located and each municipality which is an interested parQ tmder Sectiott 32-1-204(l). Garfield County does not have any facility or service standards that the proposed expanded water district has to meet. A11 of the municipalities and the districts in the area do have to meet the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment drinking water standards. 3. The proposal is in substantial compliance with a master plan adopted pursuant to Section 30-28-108, C.R.,y.. The Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000, Study Areas I-3 shows -5- 1. three different designations on the Proposed Land Use Districts Map. The majority of the proposed new service area is identified as being High Density Residential (less than 2 acldu), with a smaller areas identified as Low Density Residential (10 and Ereater acld,.) or Existing Subdivision. The present district is located in an area identified as Existing Subdivision . The projected densities do not appear to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan designations. The Water and Sewer Services Goal states the following: To ensure the provision of legul, urlequrde, dependuble, cost effective und ent ironmentully sourul sauer und woter services .for netv development. The following objectives are relevant to the proposed service plan : 7.1 Development located adjacent to municipalities or sanitation districts with available capacity in their central water/sewer systems will be strongly encouraged to tie into these systems. 7.4 Development will be required to mitigate the impact of the proposed project on existing water and sewer systems. i.5 Garfield County will strongly discourage the proliferation of private water and sewer systems. The following policies are relevant to the proposed service plan : 7.1 All development proposals in rural areas without existing central water or sewer systems will be required to show that legal, adequate, dependable and environmentally sound water and sewage disposal facilities can be provided before project approval. 7 .2 Where logical, legal and economic extension of service lines from an existing water andlor sewage system can occur, the County will require development adjacent to or within a reasonable distance, to enter into the appropriate agreements to receive service. The burden of proof regarding logical, Iegal and economic constraints will be on the developer. The proposed service plan amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of developing a central water system for an area. The proposal is in crntpliance with uny duly adopted cotttly, regional or -6- lil slate long-ronge utaler quali4t managentent plon for lhe area. The Water Quality Management Plan for Region I l(208 Plan) identifies a need for an analysis of the area populations, consolidation of facilities and treatment requirements prior to the approval of any additional site applications. This application is not subject to a site application, since the proposed facilities are drinking water facilities. The District will be subject to a site application for any expansion of the existing sewage treatment facilities owned by the district. 5. The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served. The provision of a central water supply to the area in question will meet an existing need for good quality drinking water, as well as improved fire protection water. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed service plan amendment provided the District develops a better overall system design to establish water line sizes and a method for smaller systems and other areas to be able to pay an assessment for engineering, legal, water rights, and construction costs to provide water service.. -7- Wright Water Engineers, !nc. BlBColoradoAve. P.O Box 21 9 Glenwood Springs. Colorado B I 602 1970) 945-7755 TEL 1970) 945-9210 FAX 1303) 893- r 608 DENVER DTRECT UNE February 21,200L Mr. Mark Bean, Planner Garfield County Building & Planning Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District - Service Plan Amendment Dear Mark: At your request, Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (WWE) has reviewed the proposed Service Plan Amendment for the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (RFW&SD). Based on our review, we offer the following comments: l. Consolidation of water service into one district has many advantages and should be supported by the County. 2. The existing and proposed water supply sources should be more than adequate to serve existing, approved, and proposed development within the District. 3. The policies regarding water service in paragraph V.8.1 through V.B.10 are appropriate for new development such as Rose Ranch, Coryell Ranch, and Sanders Ranch. However, as noted in the plan, it is not appropriate for existing developed areas that have no central organizational structure. The RFW&SD would become the central governmental agency responsible for coordinating and organizing water service in these areas. The policies should identiff a mechanism by which these areas can be included in the District and pay an assessment for the engineering, legal, water rights, and construction costs to provide water service. The map in Exhibit G is very difficult to read and does not appear to show the schematic infrastructure necessary to serve all of the Regional Service Area, especially in existing developed areas. Consistent with comment 3 above, the Financial Plan in Chapter VII does not address existing developed areas. In addition, this section of the plan should include any projected capital expenditures, operations and maintenance costs, and the project source of income (tap fees, service fees, mill levy, etc) to cover the District's costs. 4. 5. DENVER 1303) 480-r 700 DUMNGO (9701 259-7411 BOULDER - (3031 473-9s00 Mr. Mark Bean February 21,2001 Page 2 6. The existing, approved, and proposed PUD projects have decreed water augmentation plans or can develop a plan to provide a legal water supply. The District service plan should identifr an alternative approach such as a cash-in-lieu of water rights dedication for existing developed areas. The District would then obtain an augmentation plan and/or Basalt Water Conservancy District Water Allotment Contract to provide for the additional use of the system. Please call if you have any questions or need additional information. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. cc: Larry Green, Esq., RFW&SD Wright Water Engineers, lnc. B lB Colorado Ave. P.O. Box 219 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-775s TEL 19701 945-9210 F,ax (303) 893- r 608 DENVER DIRECI LINE February 21,2001 Mr. Mark Bean, Planner Garfield County Building & Planning Garfi eld County Courthouse 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District - Service Plan Amendment At your request, Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (WWE) has reviewed the proposed Service Plan Amendment for the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (RFW&SD). Based on our review, we offer the following comments: 1. Consolidation of water service into one district has many advantages and should be supported by the County. 2. The existing and proposed water supply sources should be more than adequate serve existing, approved, and proposed development within the District.3. The policies regarding water service in paragraph v.8.1 through v.B.i0 are appropriate for new development such as Rose Ranch, Coryell Ranch, and Sanders Ranch. However, as noted in the plan, it is not appropriate for existing developed areas that have no central organizational structure. The MW&SD would become the central governmental agency responsible for coordinating and organizing water service in these areas. The policies should identify a mechanism by which these areas can be included in the District and pay an assessment for the engineering, legal, water rights, and construction costs to provide water service. The map in Exhibit G is very difficult to read and does not appear to show the schematic infrastructure necessary to serve all of the Regional Service Area, especially in existing developed areas. Consistent with comment 3 above, the Financial Plan in Chapter VII does not address existing developed areas. In addition, this section of the plan should include any projected capital expenditures, operations and maintenance costs, and the project source of income (tap fees, service fees, mill levy, etc) to cover the District's costs. 4. 5. DENVER {303) 480-t 700 DURANGO (970) 259-741l BOULDER (3031 473-9s00 Mr. Mark Bean February 21,2001 Page 2 6. The existing, approved, and proposed PUD projects have decreed water augmentation plans or can develop a plan to provide a legal water supply. The District service plan should identi$ an alternative approach such as a cash-in-lieu of water rights dedication for existing developed areas. The District would then obtain an augmentation plan and/or Basalt Water Conservancy District Water Allotment Contract to provide for the additional use of the system. Please call if you have any questions or need additional information. Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. cc: Larry Green, Esq., RFW&SD tJ