HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application•
•
.,COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
0 Water Quality Control Division
4210 East llth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS: PHONE. .303-945-8691
1402 Blake Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Consulting Engineer's Name and Address: Jerome Gamba & Associates, Inc.
201 Centennial, Suite 306D, P.O. Box 1458, Glenwood PHONE: 303-945-2550
Springs, CO 81602
A. Summary of information regarding new sewage treatment plant:
1. Proposed Location: (Legal Description) NE 1/4,
Township 7 S
APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF:
A) DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS (INCLUDING TREATMENT PLANTS,
OUTFALL SEWERS, AND LIFT STATIONS) OVER 2,000 GPD CAPACITY.
B) INTERCEPTORS (IF REQUIRED BY C.R.S. 25-8-702 (3))
Colorado Mountain College
2. Type and capacity of treatment
Aereated Lagoon
facility
Hydraulic 52,000 Organic
gal/day
Present PE 320 (est)Design PE 520
3. Location of facility:
Attach a map of the area which includes the following:
(a) 5 -mile radius: all sewage treatment plants, lift stations, and domestic
water supply intakes.
(b) 1 -mile radius: habitable buildings, location of potable water wells, and
an approximate indication of the topography.
N/A
NE
Garfield
1/4, Section 9
, Range 88W,
County.
proposed: Processes Used
104
lbs. BODS/day
% Domestic 100
X Industrial 0
4. Effluent disposal: Surface discharge to watercourse
Subsurface disposal N/A Land N/A
Evaporation Yes Other
State water quality classification of receiving watercourse(s)
in conjunction with Planning and Standards
N/A
Proposed Effluent Limitations developed
Section, WQCD: BODS N/A mg/1 SS N/A mg/1 Fecal Coliform N/A /100 m1
Total Residual Chlorine N/A mg/1 Ammonia N/A
mg/1 Other N/A
5. Will a State or Federal grant be sought to finance any portion of this project? No
6. Present zoning of site area? CMC PUD
Zoning with a 1 -mile radius of site?
CMC PUD, Los Amigos PUD
7. What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest domestic water
Two Mile, Cattle Creek Water Association
supply intake?
(Name of Supply)
0554 County Road 110, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(Address of Supply)
What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest other point of
Non -discharging
diversion?
(Name of User)
(Address of User)
-1-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
• •
8. Who has the responsibility for operating the proposed facility?
Sanitation District Dean Gordon
9. Who owns the. land upon which the facility will be constructed?
Colorado Mountain College
(Please attach copies of the document creating authority in the applicant to
construct the proposed facility at this site.)
10. Estimated project cost: $36,000.00
Who is financially responsible for the construction and operation of the facility?
Colorado Mountain College
11. Names and addresses of all water and/or sanitation districts within 5 miles
downstream of proposed wastewater treatment facility site.
None
Attac a separate sleet o paper necessary.
12. Is the facility in a 100 year flood plain or other natural hazard area? No
If so, what precautions are being taken?
Has the flood plain been designated by the Colorado Water o Conservation Board,
Department of Natural Resources or other Agency?
(Agency Name)
If so, what is that designation? Quality Control
13. Please include all additional factors that might help the Water Q Y
Division make an informed decision on your application ssite
taapproval.rve the
]cation for site approval is for a lift
station This app-i
Veterinarian Medical Center at Colorado Mountain College.
liThe
ft statcity
of the Lift station is 4000 gpd. The construction of the
will allow for up to 40 more dorm units to utilize the
wastsesta
ter
ed
lant. These units are already included in
treatment p the plants estimated hydrauli
effluent and therefore will not increase
loading.
B. Information rega*'ding lift stations: developedgenerate the following
1. The proposed/1.1ft station when fully will 8 0
load: Peak Hydraulic (MGD) 0.008 MGD P.E. to be served
2. Is the site located in a 100 year flood plain? No
If yes, on a separate sheet of paper describe the protective measures to be taken.
3. Describe emergency system in case of station and/or power failure. Rental genera_
and rental um s for temporary use.
of facility providing treatment:
additio.
4. Name and address
District
5. The proposed lift station when fully developed will increase the loading of the
treatment plant to 77 X of hydraulic and 77 X of organic capacity and
S rin Valle Sanitation Dist .agrees to treat this wastewater? Yes X • No
reatment gency
Spring Valley Sanitation
ate
-2-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
gnature anl t. e
• •
C. If the facility will be located on or adjacent to a site that is owned or
Federal or State agency, send the agency a copy of this application.
D. Recommendation of governmental authorities:
Please address the following issues in your recommendation decis
facilities consistent with the comprehensive plan and any other
including the 201 Facility Plan or 208 Water Quality Management
quality? If you have any further comments or questions, please
5272.
1.
2.
3.
Recommend Recommend No
PAV9 .. Appr2vaJ. pisapprpval. Comment
4. 0//q/ x
5.
6.
7.
managed by a
ion. Are the proposed
plans for the area,
Plan, as they affect wat
call 320-8333, Extenaiot.
Signature o j�epre¢eatag1,_�
Management Agency
Local Government: Cities or Towns (Ii
site is inside boundary or within thre,
mil a), and Sanitati on j stri cta.
Board of County Commissioners
Local
�dti
iearth ufhority
�l�-nuu�nt�Y Planning Authority
Council of Governments/Regional Plannit
N T 2 I tib
State Geologist
(For lift stations, the signature of the State Geologist is not required. Applications for
treatment plants require all signatures.)
I certify that I am familiar with the requirements of the "Regulations for Site Application,
For Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works," and have posted the site in accordance with the
regulations. An engineering report, as described by the regulations, has been prepared and
enclosed.
DATE
Signature of Applicant TYPED NAME
-3-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
•
ATTACHMENT TO SITE APPLICATIO'
In accordance with C.R.S. 1981, 25-8-702 (2)(a), (b), and (c), and the "Regulations for Site
Applications for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works", the Water Quality Control Division mul
determine that each site location is consistent with the longrange, comprehensive planning f,
the
the area in which it is to located,
acts onat wa.tthe
er quality[, and mustoencouragewill
the consolidatio,
minimize the potential adversep
of wastewater treatment works whenever feasible.
In making this determination, the Division requires each applicant for a site approval for a
domestic wastewater treatment works to supply an engineering report describing the project ai
showing the applicant's capabilities to manage and operate the faility over the life of the
project to determine the potential adverse
process andwasea minimumquality.
shall addressThe report slthel be
considered the culmination of planning
following:
Service area definition including existing population and population projections,
flow/loading projections, and relationship to other water and wastewater treatment plant.
in the area.
Proposed effluent limitations atdevelopedm oinr coordcoordination
with
ttthee .Planning and Standar
Section of the Division. (Allow
)
Analysis of existing facilities including performance of those facilities.
Analysis of treatment alternatives considered.
Flood plain and natural hazard analysis.
Detailed description of selected alternatives including legal description of the site,
treatment system description, design capacities, and operational staffing needs.
Legal arrangements showing control of site for the project life.
Institutional arrangements such as contract and/ortcovcovenant terms for all users which wi
be finalized to accomplished acceptable waste
t.
Management capabilities for controlling le sworksnritlerouul8ertcontracts,treatment
operatingwithin
t
capacity limitations of the proposed treatment
agreements, pretreatment requirements.
Financial system which has been developetl1touprovide
lfor necessaryprcapitalj.Tand continued
operation, maintenance, and replacementBr
tinclude, for example, anticipated fee structure.
Implementation plan and schedule including estimated construction time and estimated
start-up date.
Depending on the proposed project, some of the above items may not be applicable to address.
In such cases, simply indicate on the application form the non applicability of those.
-4-
WQCD-3 (Revised 8-83)
JEROME GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS
201 CENTENNIAL, SUITE 306D
P.O. BOX 1458
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458
PHONE: (303) 945-2550 FAX: (303) 945-1410
July 24, 1991
Richard Bowman
Colorado Dept. of Health
222 S. 6th, #232
Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768
RE: CMC Vet Tec, Lift Station
Dear Dick:
i
- 52-11.'.-.7)• r:::,‘... . ,.. 4 I!
r,l
JUL 911991 11
GARITiELU COUNTY
Attached is a site application for a lift station to serve the new
Vet Tech Center at the Spring Valley Campus. The area served by the
lift station iswithin the existing sanitation district. The lift
station will prevent the additional use of septic tanks and leach
field systems over the Spring Valley Aquifer. The system will
collect' the existing leach field uses at the farm facilities. It is
our understanding that the Vet Center will not be expanding the
number of students or staff. The move will open up an additional
forty units for student housing that is now occupied by the Vet
Tech class rooms. We estimate the increase in waste water flow will
be 8, 000 gpd to the plant if all •of the new available dorm space is
occupied.
Spring Valley Sanitation District estimates the addition of 8,000,'
gpdwould bring the plant to 777. of its' rated 52,000 gpd capacity.
The district estimates the current sewage flow to the plant to be
32,,000 gpd. ;,In the original serviceagreement with Spring Valley
Sanitation District CMC was granted 113.5 EQR of capacity in the.•'
waste water treatment system. The District has agreed that these
units are within the original CMC EQR grant and have agreed to
serve the new CMC uses.
Please review and approve the site application for the new. lift,
station. If you have any. questions, please call. .
Very Truly Yours,
JEROME GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
%Ttd.K s5 A �.c(.401. eavgivelej
Thomas A. Znncanella, P.E.
TAZ/ pf \91038\Appl. l.tr
Enclosures
cc; Dean Gordon
Greg Boecker
Rick Avery
Glenn D. Chadwick
BillBowden
JEROME GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS
JEROME GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS.
Tuesday, October 2, 1979 - Glenwood Springs (Colo.) POST
Sanitation district approved
The Spring Valley Sanitation District received unanimous approval
from Garfield County Commissioners Monday, paving the way for a num-
ber of planned residential developments on what is now farm land five
miles southeast of Glenwood Springs.
Colorado Mountain College (CMC) and developers of Los Amigos Ran-
ch reached an agreement earlier this month that expands the existing
sewage treatement plant at CMC to provide service to the expanding
college and the planned 568 units at Los Amigos.
District backers say a bond issue estimated at $1.8 million will be
required next year to finance the initial phase of the district's develop-
ment.
Representatives of a neighboring development, Lake Springs Ranch,
assured county officials they would petition to join the district as soon as
their plans are finalized. State and county authorities had stressed the
necessity for a joint effort in sewage treatment that would limit the valley
area to one treatment plant.
Spring Valley is projected as a prime growth area by Garfield County.
l
• •
COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE
April 26, 1982
Spring Valley Sanitation District
P. 0. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Attention: F. Malcolm Wall
Dear Mr. Wall:
Colorado Mountain College continues to encourage the development of the Spring
Valley Sanitation District facilities to accommodate present and projected
growth in Spring Valley.
To the extent possible and feasible, Colorado Mountain College encourages the
inclusion of future Spring Valley developments in the Spring Valley Sanitation
District. It has been and continues to be the interest of Colorado Mountain
College that the Spring Valley aquifer, the source of domestic water, be pro-
tected and preserved.
The continued development and/or expansion of the Spring Valley Sanitation
District facilities should be to the benefit of all users of water from the
Spring Valley aquifer.
Sincerely,
-(1
/ RODNEY D. ANDERSON
Vice President,
Spring Valley Campus
gg
cc: F. Dean Lillie
William A. Bowden
James M. Larson
WEST CAMPUS
3000 114 COUNTY ROAD
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
303-945-7481
July 29, 1982
t
41882
4414141 flaw -
Mr. Dennis Stranger
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Stranger:
It is the intent of Spring Valley Sanitation District to an-
nex Lake Springs Ranch and other potential users of the facil-
ity.
Spring Valley Sanitation District opposes proliferation of
sanitation districts in the Spring Valley, Red Canyon areas.
Please note enclosed copies of letters which are from the
current users of the district. These letters have been forwarded
to the commissioners in the past.
Sincerely
-7./' W4: L4(
F. Malcolm Wall
Spring Valley Sanitation District
enclosures
FMW:sos
1 •
COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE
April 26, 1982
Spring Valley Sanitation District
P. 0. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Attention: F. Malcolm Wall
Dear Mr. Wall:
Colorado Mountain College continues to encourage the development of the Spring
Valley Sanitation District facilities to accommodate present and projected
growth in Spring Valley.
To the extent possible and feasible, Colorado Mountain College encourages the
inclusion of future Spring Valley developments in the Spring Valley Sanitation
District. It has been and continues to be the interest of Colorado Mountain
College that the Spring Valley aquifer, the source of domestic water, be pro-
tected and preserved.
The continued development and/or expansion of the Spring Valley Sanitation
District facilities should be to the benefit of all users of water from the
Spring Valley aquifer.
Sincerely,
RODNEY D.'' ANDERSON
Vice President,
Spring Valley Campus
gg
cc: F. Dean Lillie
William A. Bowden
James M. Larson
WEST CAMPUS
3000 114 COUNTY ROAD
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
303-945-7481
•
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and
environment of the people of Colorado
Grand Junction Regional Office
222 S. 6th Street, Rm. 232
Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768
FAX: (303) 248-7198
September 13, 1994
j - -1
AEP 2 0 1994
.'Out, Y
Roy Romer
Governor
Patricia A. Nolan, MD, MPH
Executive Director
Greg Boecker, President
Spring Valley Sanitation District
2929 County Road 114
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: Wastewater Discharge Permit Application For the Spring Valley Sanitation
District Wastewater Treatment Facility, Ground Water Discharge, Garfield
County
Dear Mr. Boecker:
The permit application that was submitted for your wastewater treatment facility
was previously returned to your engineer until such time as the permit
regulations were modified to reflect discharges to ground water. These changes
to the regulations were effective July 1, 1993 and our permit application form
has since been modified to include discharges to ground water.
Now that the amendment to the site application for your facility has been
approved, please complete the new permit application form enclosed with this
letter. Once the application is returned to the Division and the design review
is complete, a permit can be drafted for your facility to bring it into
compliance with the discharge permit regulations.
A condition of the site application approval was that the design must be
submitted to the Division for review. The design should be submitted to Dwain
Watson in the Grand Junction office for this review and does not need to be
attached to the permit application as stated in Section V -15.A of the permit
application.
If you have any questions, please call me at 248-7150.
Sincerely,
•
R. 4-.4.,
John R. Blair, P.E.
Permits & Enforcement Section
Water Quality Control Division
cc: Dean W. Gordon, P.E., Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc.
Garfield County Sanitarian
Dick Bowman/Dwain Watson, Field Support
Dave Akers, Permits & Enforcement, Denver
File
® huffed on PPapw
STATE OF!OLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and
environment of the people of Colorado
4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Laboratory Building
Denver, Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E. 11th Avenue
Phone (303) 692-2000 Denver, Colorado 80220-3716
(303) 691-4700
May 11, 1994
Greg Boecker, President
Spring Valley Sanitation District
2929 County Road 114
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: Site Application #3278
Garfield County
Dear Mr. Boecker:
MAY 2 5 1994
GAFiFiELD GOUNTY
y Romer
rvemor
ricia A. Nolan, MD, MPH
Executive Director
The Water Quality Control Division has received and reviewed your
request to amend the above referenced site application to permit
the construction of an additional percolation pond. As this new
percolation pond will merely compensate for reduced exfiltration
from the existing percolation pond and no increase in hydraulic
or organic treatment capacity will be realized, the Division has
no objections. Therefore, the Division hereby amends Site
Application #3278 to include one additional percolation pond.
This amendment is subject to the following conditions.
1. This amendment will expire one year from the date of this
letter if the construction of the project has not commenced
by that date. If expiration occurs, you must apply for a
new approval. Construction is defined as entering into a
contract for the erection or physical placement of
materials, equipment, piping, earthwork, or buildings which
are to be a part of a domestic wastewater treatment works.
2. The design (construction plans and specifications) for the
treatment works must be approved by the Division prior to
commencement of construction and all construction change
orders initiating variances from the approved plans and
specifications must be approved by the Division.
3. The applicant's registered engineer must furnish a statement
prior to the commencement of operations stating that the
facilities were constructed in conformance with approved
plans, specifications, and change orders.
In accordance with Colorado Water Quality Control Commission
regulations, this approval is subject to appeal as stated under
Section 2.2.5 (7) of "Regulations for Site Applications for
Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works".
• •
Page Two
May 11, 1994
Spring Valley Sanitation District
This approval does not relieve the owner from compliance with all
county regulations prior to construction nor from responsibility
for proper engineering, construction, and operation of the
facility.
Sincerely,
J: David Holm
Director
Water Quality Control Division
JDH:TLB:cm/Siteapp.5-60,61
xc: Schmueser Gordon Meyer - Attn: Dean Gordon
Garfield County Sanitation & Planning Department - Attn:
Mark Bean
Thomas Bennett, Sr. Planner, WQCD
Dwain Watson, District Technician, WQCD
David Akers, Permits & Enforcement, WQCD
COLORADO
^SAM
O
DEPARTMENT
O F A H E A L T H (719) 543-8441
February 6, 1992
•
4210 East llth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220-3716
Phone (303) 320-8333
Telefax Numbers:
Main Building/Denver
(303) 322-9076
Ptarmigan Place/Denver
(303) 320-1529
First National Bank Building/Denver
(303) 355-6559
Grand Junction Office
(303) 248-7198
•
Pueblo Office
Mr. Richard W. Avery
Director
College Facilities
Colorado Mountain College
1402 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
ROY ROMER
Governor
JOEL KOHN
Interim Executive Director
ll,
C OUN Y r
FEB 2 1 1992
RE: Site Application #4015
Garfield County
Dear Mr. Avery:
The Water Quality Control Division has reviewed and evaluated your site
application and plans and specifications for a domestic wastewater lift
station and interceptor which were constructed without site application and/or
plans and specifications approval in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9,
T7S, R88W, to serve the Vet Tech Center at the Spring Valley Campus and to
discharge to the Spring Valley Sanitation District's wastewater collection and
treatment systems.
Although construction of these facilities was undertaken in clear violation of
provisions of Section 25-8-702 of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, the
Division finds your application to be in conformance with the Water Quality
Control Commission's "Regulations for Site Applications for Domestic
Wastewater Treatment Works". The Division also finds the plans and
specifications to be in substantial compliance with the Colorado Department of
Health "Design Criteria for Wastewater Treatment Works" and those variances
therefrom to have been satisfactorily resolved. Therefore, the site
application and plans and specifications are approved with the following
conditions listed below.
1. Based upon application information, the system design will be for:
Average Daily Flow Capacity - 3,000 gpd
Peak Daily Flow Capacity - 4,500 gpd
Treatment Processes to be Used - Lift station and interceptor
Failure to comply with any conditions contained herein will render this
approval void and another site application will have to be processed.
2. The applicant's registered engineer must furnish a statement prior
to the commencement of operation stating that the facilities were
constructed in conformance with plans and specifications, provided
to the Division. Any variances from these documents must be so
noted and justified by the engineer and/or the applicant prior to
initiating operation.
Mr. Richard W. Avery
February 6, 1992
Page 2
3. Satisfactory resolution of issues with respect to site approval,
plans and specifications approval, and discharge permit issuance
for the Spring Valley Sanitation District's facilities shall be
achieved in conformance with all provisions of the Colorado Water
Quality Control Act.
This approval does not relieve the applicant from liability for any violations
of the Water Quality Control Act which precede the date of this letter. The
Division reserves the right to take enforcement action for any and all such
violations as have occurred to date.
In accordance with Colorado Water Quality Control Commission regulations, this
approval is subject to appeal as stated under Section 2.2.5 (7) of
"Regulations for Site Application for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works".
This approval does not relieve the owner from compliance with all local
regulations prior to construction nor from responsibility for proper
engineering, construction, and operation of the facility.
Sincerely,
477,,L -T2. -E42 -
.
z. David Holm, Director
WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION
JDH:TLB:jf/SITAPP-24,25
xc: Jerome Gamba & Associates, Inc.
A.
Garfield County health Department ATATTN:TTN: TrJimsMcMurrycanella
Spring Valley Sanitation District
Thomas Bennett, Sr. Planner, WQCD
Dwain Watson, District Technician, WQCD, Grand Junction
4,
COLORADO
DEPARTMENT
•
Grand Junction Regional Office ■ .•
222 S. 6th Street, Room 232 (J CE !
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2 .
Telefax Number: (303) 248-7198
NOV 2 0 1991
Gird- tt.IL.i COUNTY
ROMER
ernor
L KOHN
rim Executive Director
OFAHEALTH
November 18, 1991
Schmueser, Gordon, Meyer Inc.
1001 Grand Ave., Suite 2-E
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Spring Valley Sanitation District, Request for Amendment to previously
issued Site Application.
Dear Dean:
We are in receipt of the subject document. We are unable to process this request
because of the following:
1. No information was provided regarding the existing wastewater treatment
plant's organic and hydraulic capacities. Please submit this information.
2. No information was provided regarding the present organic and hydraulic
loadings on the existing wastewater treatment facility. Please submit this
information.
3. No information was provided regarding the distance to and quality of the
groundwater in the vicinity. Since the district intends to discharge effluent
to the groundwater, the background groundwater quality will need to be
established. Please submit upstream and downstream groundwater quality and
distance information. Please also submit downstream and downslope users of this
aquifer, possible effects the groundwater discharge may have on those users, and
justification for impacting this resource. If the existing treatment facility
also discharges effluent to groundwater, we will also need complete quality and
quantity information on this discharge. Before an amendment to a site
application can be approved, the district will need to apply for and receive a
discharge permit for discharge of effluent to groundwater. Discharge permits
typically take 180 days to process.
4. We are aware that construction of the additional cell is already completed.
This is a violation of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act. Please be aware
that prior construction without approvals is no guarantee of approvals after -the -
fact.
5. Please be aware that we are also in receipt of a site application request
from Colorado Mountain College for a liftstation and interceptor. Since this new
construction will impact the sanitation district, this request cannot be
processed until the above issues have been resolved.
printed on rec)cled paper
• •
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, please
contact me at 248-7150.
Sincerely,
Dwain P. Watson
West Slope District Technician
Water Quality Control Division
DPW/csk
County Sanitarian
Garfield County Building Official
David Akers, Permits and Enforcement Section, CDH
Tom Bennett, Site Applications, Planning & Standards, CDH
Colorado Mountain College
Spring Valley Sanitation District
EPA, Region VIII
Field Services Section, CDH
File
COLORADO
DEPARTMENT
OFAHEALTH
Grand Junction Regional Office
222 S. 6th Street, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2768
Telefax Number: (303) 248-7198
•
ROY ROMER
Governor
JOEL KOHN
Interim Executive Director
November 19, 1991
Jerome Gamba & Associates, Inc9g07
0NOV
211991
201 Centennial, Suite 306D "
P.O. Box 1458
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-1458 (�t\R1 ILIACOUNTY
It1
'L.
RE:
Colorado Mountain College, Liftstation & Interceptor.
Dear Jerry:
We have reviewed the subject site application and plans and specifications and
have the following comments:
1. Please provide the following information regarding the grinder pumps in the
liftstation:
a. State Design Criteria calls for pumps with 4" intakes and outlets and
that the pumps be capable of passing a 3" sphere. The grinder pumps
depart from established design criteria. Please furnish a request and
justification for variance to design criteria.
b. Please provide
c. Please provide
d. Please provide
the pumps.
the pump curves.
static and friction head at the pumps.
information regarding the check valves as integral to
2. Please provide information regarding velocities in the force mains.
3. Please provide wet well volumes and average duration of electrical power
outages. Please also detail whether the volume of the wet well can
accommodate the average duration power outage or whether emergency backup
power will be provided. Please advise whether the high level alarm of the
liftstation will operate during a power outage.
4. Wet wells that can be entered should have ventilation of 12 complete air
changes per hour for continuous operation of the ventilation equipment or
30 complete air changes per hour for intermittent operation of the
ventilation equipment.
printed on recti a rd paper
•
If you have any questions, please contact me at 248-7150.
Sincerely,
(/.._;;)
w atson
West Slope District Technician
Water Quality Control Division
DPW/csk
• Colorado Mountain College
arfield County Sanitarian
Field Services Section, CDH
File
To
LAW OFFICES
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
86 SOUTH THIRD STREET
C A R B O N D A LE COLORADO 61623
(303) 963-3700
ROBERT B. EMERSON
April 28, 1982
Mr. T. Peter Craven
Attorney at Law
P. O. Box 1105
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
Re: Foster Petroleum Corporation -Spring Valley Sanitation
District
Dear Peter:
Since I haven't heard from you regarding my letter of April 22, 1982,
I am assuming that the terms and conditions set forth therein are
acceptable to your client.
We would appreciate receiving as soon as possible a written response
to the petition for annexation and proposed annexation agreement
submitted by Foster Petroleum Corporation prior to the meeting held on
November 20, 1981.
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
RBE/jc
cc: Duncan Sinnock
Tom Preston
Jerry Raisch
Garfield County Commissioners
Davis Farrar ✓-
Robert B. Emerson
D Wror:-...w.-y-rc-7,3
s ,SUN 21982
May 25, 1982
Mr. Davis Farrar.
Garfeild County Planning Office
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
Dear Davis;
Please find enclosed letters from the users of the
Spring Valley Sanation District.
It is the intention of the Spring Valley Sanation
District to follow the wishes of both of it's users
Los Amigis Ranch Partnership and Colorado Moutain College
in the annexation of Foster Petroleum's developement
into the district.
Si.cere y/7
4/Lt_ (--L;?
F. Malcolm Wall
President
Spring Valley Sanation District.
FMW: fs
CC: County Commisioners
• •
LAW OFFICES
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
86 SOUTH THIRD STREET
CARBONDALE COLORADO 81623
(303) 963-3700
ROBERT B. EMERSON
April 22, 1982
Mr. T. Pater Craven
Attorney at Law
P. 0. Box 1105
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
Re: Foster Petroleum Corporation -Spring Valley Sanitation
District
Dear Pete:
On behalf of Foster Petroleum Corporation, I met with several of the
members of the Garfield County Planning Department staff and Malcolm
Wall on April 21, 1982. Mr. Wall produced the tape recording of the
meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District that was held on
November 20, 1981. The portion of the tame recording dealing with the
deposit of $3,000.00 to be applied against attorney and engineering
fees incurred in connection with the Foster Petroleum Corporation
petition for annexation was reviewed by Davis Farrar, Malcolm Wall,
Duncan Sinnock and myself. The tape recording indicated that the
District required Foster Petroleum Corporation to deposit the sum of
$3,000.00 to be applied against the reasonable attorney's fees and
engineering fees incurred by the District directly in connection with
the review of the petition for annexation submitted by Foster
Petroleum Corporation. The only fees to be paid from said sum are
fees incurred after November 20, 1981. Any unused portion of the
funds so deposited are to be promptly returned to Foster. Petroleum
Corporation.
I am enclosing herewith my trust account check in the amount of
$3,000.00. This sum is tendered in accordance with the action of the
Spring Valley Sanitation District as evidenced by the tape recording
of the November 20, 1981 meeting and on the terms and conditions set
forth herein. In addition to the terms and conditions outlined above,
it is my understanding that you will provide me with an itemization of
all attorney's fees, engineering fees, and costs deducted from the
$3,000.00. Further, Foster Petroleum Corporation may, at any time
hereafter, withdraw its petition for annexation, and in said event,
Foster Petroleum Corporation will be billed only for the actual
attorney's fees and engineering costs incurred to the date of
withdrawal. Any remaining funds will be promptly returned.
•
Mr. T. Peter Craven
April 22, 1982
Page 2
If the terms and conditions set forth herein are unacceptable for any
reason, please notify me in writing immediately and return the
enclosed check. If the check is negoti,,It-xd, negotiation constitutes
acceptance of the terms outlined herein.
RBE/jc
Enclosure
cc:
Duncan Sinnock
Tom Preston
Garfield County Commissioners
Davis Farrar ✓
Jerry Raisch
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
Robert B. Emerson
• •
4..7,,,WME 4.-1W • ',1-7,"7‘1311TRI[StUISIRIEZNLragaMrialigg,7:44:4",74...MC:"..1:..'=jt(I440M
ROBERT B. :EMERSON
TRUST ACCOUNT
1494
7/82-193
014./7 03/4/e kteen fetertnir:le" 134.14,14 ,44,4004-*Ifo-N-.4"..3ex,0
).Ay 19 .7527-8
TO 'I'11E /. ,7„/
744-te) 7`4410,4444 --
Roaring Fork
BookCarbondale,
Colorado 81823
11'00 94115 A: /0 2 LO /9331: 00 6 2 L LH'
DO L LA R S
••
LAW OFFICES
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
86 SOUTH THIRD STREET
CARBONDALE COLORADO 81623
(303) 963-3700
ROBERT B. EMERSON
April 22, 1982
Mr. Davis Farrar
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake Ave.
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
`, APR 2 3 1982
Re: Foster Petroleum Corporation Petition For Annexation -
Spring Valley Sanitation District
Dear Davf
1 wanted to take a minute to thank you for the time that you spent
conducting the meeting held on April 21, 1982, regarding Foster
Petroleum Corporation's petition for annexation into the Spring Valley
Sanitation District.
The point that the Planning Department has raised regarding t'i i.,3ck
of written policies or procedures for annexation is certainly a valid
one. The policies and procedures of the District have seemed to
change with the substitution of Board members and attorneys. in
checking with the Carbondale Sanitation District, there is a written
policy, a copy of which is enclosed with this letter. 1 might add
that the requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 have been accomplished by
Foster Petroleum Corporation regarding its proposed annexation into
the Spring Valley Sanitation D.isLr c t.
1 thought it was interesting that Malcolm Wall stated that he had
reviewed the tape recording of the November 20, 1981, public hearing
on the day before our meeting. He told us that no mention was made of
the fact that Foster was being asked to pay attorney's fees for only
the period subsequent to November 20, 1981. When we listened to the
tape later in the meeting, Mr. Wall's recollection WAS clearly
contradicted. This probably gives you an idea of the kind of dealings
that we have been faced with from c;., outset.
• • •
Mr. Davis Farrar
April 22, 1982
Page 2
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to Peter Craven wherein Foster has
deposited the $3,000.00 in accordance with the conditions stated at
the November 20, 1981, public hearing.
RBE/j c
Enclosure
cc:
Duncan Sinnock
Tom Preston
Garfield County Commissioners
Jerry Raisch
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
Ry:
Robert B. Emerson
• .
LOS AMIGOS RANCH
327 SOUTH LASALLE STREET
SUITE 1724
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
(312) 630-5226
April 21, 1982
Mr. Malcolm Wall
President
Spring Valley Sanitation District
P.O. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, CO
Dear Mr. Wall:
It has been brought to my attention that another sewage
treatment plant is being considered in the Spring Valley. As
both a land owner in Spring Valley and user of the Spring Valley
Sanitation District, I urge you and the Sanitation District
Board to do everything possible to annex any potential users
into the district rather than allow other treatment plants to
proliferate.
The maintenance.of the Spring Valley aquifir is of para-
mount importance to all land owners in the Valley. This was
one of the main reasons the Spring Valley Sanitation District
was formed in the first place. We must insure no harm or dis-
turbance to the aquifir.
On a practical note, additional users of the district in-
sure the economic viability of the district. The economies of
scale provide for a much more efficient operation with addition-
al users in the district. I feel that all would benefit from
the annexation of others who need sewage treatment in the Spring
Valley.
Sincerely yours,
Thomas E. Neal
TEN:kit
Mr. T. Peter Craven
Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 1105
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Spring Valley Sanitation District
Dear Pete:
I received your letter of March 10, 1982 regarding the Spring Valley -
Sanitation District. I was somewhat astounded at the figures that Mr.
Wall claimed are owed by Foster Petroleum Corporation.
At the meeting held on November 20, 1981, the Petition for Annexation
filed by Foster Petroleum was not considered, At that meeting the` -
Board of Directors indicated that they: would take no action on the
Petition until an agreement was worked out whereby Foster Petroleum
Corporation would pay for the attorney's,' fees and engineering costs
incurred in connection. withthe'Annexation Petition. My recollection
is that the Board required reimbursement for fees incurred subsequent
to the November 20, 1981 meeting. Because the. Board took.theposition
that it would notconsider the Annexation Petition without agreement'.
as'to attorney's fees at the outset of the November 20, 1982 meeting,
the Foster Petroleum Corporation representatives left the meeting.
after being present for only a few' minutes. I believe that the
proceedings in thismeetingwere tape recorded. I'm sure that a
review of the tape recording (which we requested and have never
received) would confirm my recollection.
- - i
Thus, I am surprised to see that Mr. Wall wants Foster Petroleum
Corporation to pay for all of Mr. Friedman's'travel time from Denver
to Glenwood Springs on November 19, 1981 ($225.00); all of.Mr- -
Friedman's travel time from Glenwood Springs to Denver on November 20,
1981 ($225.00); all of Mr. Freidman's time for attending the Board
meeting on November 20, 1981 ($375.00); and all of Mr. Friedman's time-
\ for preparation for .the Board meeting on November 20, 1981 ($82.50).
From the list of expenses provided, it would appear to me that the
attorney's fees incurred from November 21, 1981 forward should be paid
kr•
a..
r. T. Peter Craven
:,arch 15, 1982
Page two
by Foster Petroleum Corporation. These attorney's fees amount to
$127.50. Foster Petroleum Corporation would also pay for the
publication cost, $42.78. Regarding the fees charged by Dean Gordon,'
Engineer, $315.00, I would like to see some itemization; regarding the
basis of these fees. ,._, ,
The long and short of it is that it seems a little ridiculous to ask
Foster Petroleum Corporation to pay some $907.50 for attorney's fees
in connection'with,the November.20, 1981 meeting when all that` ,
happened at that meeting_ was"my 'client was advised that it would have
to reimburse the District for attorney's fees incurred 'th connection -
with the Annexation Petition after November 20, 1981.
look forward to hearing back from you regarding this matter. Ifyou
have access to a copy of the tape recording of the November 20, 1981
reeeting, I would appreciate it if you would provide me with a copy. I
will be happy. to reimburse you for any expenses incurred in copying
the tape recording.
Sincerely,
ROBERT' B . , EN;ERSON , P.C.
Robert B. Ererson
RBE ;kam
cc: Duncan Sinnock`
Garfield County Commissioners
Jerry Faisch" -
T. PETER CRAVEN
Lola Ey at 2L%J
POST OFFICE BOX 1 105
GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601
TELEPHONE 303 - 945-8571
March 10, 1982
Robert B. Emerson
Attorney at Law
86 South Third Street
Carbondale, CO 81623
Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District
Dear Bob:
I am transmitting to you a letter from Malcolm
Wall to me, which contains the breakdown of expenses for
publication, engineering, and legal fees incurred by the
District in connection with the Foster Petroleum Annexation
proceedings.
The District will continue with the negotiations
if Foster Petroleum deposits $3,000.00 in the District's
Trust Account, out of which the enclosed expenses would be
paid, together with all other expenses incurred by the Dis-
trict in the future in connection with Foster's application.
Mr. Wall informs me that this is a condition precedent to any
further negotiation.
Very truly, yours
-^T. Peter Craven
TPC/da
Enclosures
March 5, 1982
Peter T. Craven, Esquire
811 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Craven:
The following is a list of expenses which the Sanitation Di.-
trict has incurred on behalf of Foster Petroleum. The total is
$1,511.00. I am enclosing copies of invoices which itemize the
figures. I should like to note that the Foster Petroleum Annexa-
tion Agreement was discussed at several meetings. However, the
November 20th meeting was for the primary purposes of reviewing
Foster Petroleum's Annexation Agreement. I am not including
charges for previous meetings but feel Foster Petroleum should
accept full responsibility for the November 20th meeting. The
other charges are for phone calls between Foster Petroleum organ-
ization and Alan Friedman, District Engineer and for notices in
the Glenwood Post.
Please require that Foster Petroleum deposit $3,000.00 in the
Spring Valley Sanitation District trust account before further
review of their annexation agreement.
Sincerely,
F. Malcolm Wall
Spring Valley Sanitation District
cc: Flaven Cerise, Garfield County Commissioner
Eugene "Jim" Drinkhouse, Garfield County Commissioner
Larry Velasquez, Garfield County Commissioner
FPM: sos
• •
LIST OF EXPENSES
Dean Gordon, Sanitation District Engineer $ 315.00
Glenwood Post (notices) $ 42.78
Alan Friedman (calls and November 20th meeting):
6/30/81 $ 19.00
7/1/81 9.50
8/11/81 22.50
8/24/81 7.50
11/12/81 22.50
11/19/81 37.50
11/19/81 52.50
11/19/81 225.00
11/20/81 30.00
11/20/81 225.00
11/20/81 375.00
12/7/81 82.50
12/18/81 15.00
12/18/81 30.00
TOTAL $1,511.28
r •
FRIEDMAN. HILL & R013BINS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
220 EQUITABLE BUILDING
730 SEVENTEENTH STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 00202
303 572-8300
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
711 MAIN
Carbondale, CO. 81623
c/o Mason & Moore Realty Co.
Advice to Sanitation District
06/03/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with Dean Gordon
06/09/81 AHF Review
statutes and files
06/09/81 AHF Prepare for Hearing
board meeting
06/10/81 AHF Conference
Board meeting
06/10/81 AHF Travel Time
Boulder/Denver/Boulder
06/19/81 AHF Review
files
06/19/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
bills, minutes
06/22/81 AHF Drafting
Minutes
06/22/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with D.Gordon
06/24/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Leavenworth; Jeff Bier;
Dean Gordon and Debby
06/25/81 AHF Correspondence
with Lee Leavenworth; Bill
Bouder
06/26/81 AHF Correspondence
with B.Bowden; L.Leavenworth
0.30
1.40
0.50
3.00
6.50
0.40
0.90
0.20
0.10
0.70
July 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
28.50
133.00
47.50
285.00
617.50
38.00
85.50
19.00
9.50
66.50
0.40 38.00
0.20 19.00
• •
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
711 MAIN
Carbondale, CO. 81623
c/o Mason & Moore Realty Co.
Advice to Sanitation District
06/26/81 AHF Correspondence
Board members with minutes
06/26/81 AHF Review
Edwards Water District Re-
covery Agreement; correspon-
dence
06/30/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with J.Raisch
CURRENT CHARGES
Previous Balance
Payments Received
Retainer Applied
Adjustments
Current Charges
Amount Due & Payable
2,736.63
1,882.40
0.00
0.00
1,453.50
2,307.73
0.2.0
0.30
July 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
19.00
28.50
0.20 19.00
15.30 $1,453.50
FRIEDMAN, I-III.L & RQI3I3INS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
220 EQUITABLE I3i'IILDINO
730 SEVENTEENTH STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 802O2
303 572-8300
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
07/01/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with J.Raisch
07/02/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
Invoices
07/02/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Leavenworth
07/07/81 AHF Review
of file
07/07/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with Greg Hoskins
07/10/81 AHF Correspondence
to Glenwood Spgs. bank
07/13/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Zierk
07/13/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
banking
07/13/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with Holy Cross Electric
07/20/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins
07/21/81 AHF Review
House Bill 1320
07/21/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with W.Brown; G.Hoskins
August 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
0.10 9.50—
0.10 9.50
0.20 19.00
0.30 28.50
0.50 47.50
0.10 9.50
0.10 9.50
0.30 28.50
0.30 28.50
0.20 15.00
0.30 22.50
0.40 30.00
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
07/22/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Special Meeting
07/23/81 AHF Review
House Bill 1320
07/24/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Leavenworth
07/28/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with J.Bier; L.Leavenworth;
and G.Zierk
07/29/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Leavenworth; G.Zierk
07/30/81 AHF Review
House Bill 1320
07/30/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Leavenworth; G.Zierk
R.VanPelet; G.Hoskins; and
P.Miller
07/31/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with D.Gordon; L.Leavenworth
TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
0.40
0.40
0.10
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.70
August 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
30.00
30.00
7.50
22.50
15.00
7.50
52.50
0.50 37.50
5.60 $460.00
06/19/81 AHF Long Distance Tele. Calls 0.75
June long distance calls
07/31/81 DWR Postage/Overnight Delivery 4.07
May - July
07/31/81 DWR Long Distance Tele. Calls 10.95
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $15.77
•
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
Previous Balance
Payments Received
Retainer Applied __
Adjustments
Current Charges _
Amount Due & Payable
2,307.73
0.00
0.00
0.00
475.77
2,783.50
August 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
DAVID W. ROBBINS
ROBERT F. HILL
ALAN H. FRIEDMAN
FRIEDMAN. HILL & R0f313INS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
220 EQUITABLE BI'ILDINO
730 SEVENTEENTH STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80202
303 672-8300
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
08/04/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with P.Miller, G.Zierk and
V.Lykou
08/04/81 AHF Review
Recovery Contract
08/04/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins, W.Brown,
Van Pelt, and Miller
08/04/81 AHF Research
H.B.1320
08/04/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with VanPelt and Miller;
with Raisch
08/05/81 AHF Review
Agreements
08/05/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins
08/06/81 AHF Attend Meeting
Board Meeting
08/06/81 AHF Conference
with G.Hoskins
08/10/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins re Recovery
Agreements
08/11/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with Sinic ?
J. EVAN OOL:LDINO
OP COUNSEL
September 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
0.40 30.00
0.40 30.00
0.40 30.00
0.30 22.50
0.60 45.00
0.70 52.50
0.10
0.50
3.00
0.20
7.50
37.50
225.00
15.00
0.30 22:50L
Spring Valley Sanitation September 15, 1981
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623 DWR 81NQB-000
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
08/17/81 AHF Review
file
08/17/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Notices
08/17/81 AHF Telephone Conference
Garfield County Commission
08/17/81 AHF Research
Publication, Oaths
08/17/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with R.VanPelt; P.Miller;
V.Lykou;
Glen -Bell Agency
08/18/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with M.Wall, G.Zierk,
G.Hoskin
08/18/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
Minutes, Notice, correspon-
dence, Affidavits
08/18/81 AHF Review
Petition and Notice
08/18/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with P.Miller, V.Lykou
08/19/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
Meeting notice
08/24/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with J.Raisch
0.20
0.60
0._0
0.20
0.50
15.00
45.00
22.50
15.00
37.50
0.40 30.00
1.80 135.00
0.30
0.40
0.30
:0.10
22.50
30.00
22.50
7.50
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
08/25/81 AHF Review
files re disclosures
08/26/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins
08/26/81 AHF Review
Agreement
08/27/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Hoskins
08/27/81 AHF Review
LARP Agreement
08/28/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with M.Wall
08/30/81 AHF Travel Time
Boulder to Glenwood Springs
08/30/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Board Meeting
08/31/81 AHF Travel Time
Carbondale to Boulder
08/31/81 AHF Conference
with G.Hoskins
08/31/81 AHF Attend Meeting
Board Meeting
TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
September 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
0.10
0.10
0.40
0.40
0.50
0.10
3.20
0.50
4.00
2.20
6.00
29.50
7.50
7.50
30.00
30.00
37.50
7.50
240.00
37.50
300.00
165.00
450.00
$2,212,50
FRIEDMAN, HILL Sc ROBBINS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
220 EQUITABLE BUILDING
730 SEVENTEENTII STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80202
303 672-8300
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
09/01/81 AHF Conference
with D. Robbins
09/01/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G. Hoskin
09/04/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with D. Gordon
09/04/81 AHF Review
bank account
09/09/81 DWR Conference
with A.Friedman
09/10/81 AHF Research
penalty
09/10/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G. Hoskins, P. Miller,
G. Zierk
09/10/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
Minutes, Affidavit
09/17/81 AHF Travel Time
Denver -Aspen
09/18/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
of the Board
09/18/81 AHF Attend Meeting
of the Board
09/18/81 AHF Conference
with R. Anderson, B. Bowden,
M. Wall, G. Hoskin
October 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
0.20 15.00
0.30 22.50
0.20 15.00
0.10
0.50
2.20
1.20
0.90
2.50
1.30
1.60
1.50
7.50
37.50
165.00
90.00
67.50
187.50
97.50
120.00
112:50
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
October 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
09/18/81 AHF Conference 1.80 135.00
M. Wall, G. Hoskin, D.
Gordon, V. Lykou
09/19/81 AHF Travel Time 3.30 247.50
Aspen -Glenwood Springs -Aspen -
Denver
09/23/81 AHF Telephone Conference 0.20 15.00
with M. Wall, G. Hoskin
09/30/81 AHF Review 0.40 30.00
past bills
09/30/81 AHF Correspondence 0.30 22.50
with CMC
TOTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 18.50 $1,387.50
07/31/81 DWR Long Distance Tele. Calls 7.32
July 19, 1981 statement
08/31/81 AHF Photocopy 1.35
August
08/31/81 DWR Long Distance Tele. Calls 143.97
August 19, 1981 statement
09/30/81 DWR Photocopy 29.85
September
09/30/81 DWR Postage/Overnight Delivery 9.40
September
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $191.84
CURRENT CHARGES $1,579.39
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
Previous Balance _
Payments Received
Retainer Applied
Adjustments
Current Charges
Amount Due & Payable
5,003.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,579.39
6,582.59
October 15, 1981
DWR 81NQB-00J
October 28, 1981
Spring Valley Sanitation District
c/o Malcolm Wall
P. 0. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Bills Due as of 9/30/81:
. 1. Dalby, Wendland & Co., P.C. .
2. Glenwood Post - publication for
Public Meeting on Foster's
Annexation Petition
3. Schmueser & Associates
engineering services
4. Leavenworth, Patrick & Lochhead
- remainder of legal fees
5. Friedman, Hill & Robbins -
legal fees and cost reimbursement
through 9/30/81
6. Eldorado Engineer Co.
enginer:ring services
TOTAL DUE:
S 101.50
42.78
454.00
1,404.56
6,582.59
342.00
$8,927.43
1
FRIEDMAN. HILL & DOBBINS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
220 EQUITABLE: lit)ILDINO
7.O SI \ETF NTl1 STIiE T
1)HN\'1i12. (:Ol. I2A1)O HO'2O_
:41):I t,72-11:11)()
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 81623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitation District
11/11/81 AHF Review
of Recovery Statement
11/11/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with B.Bowdin, D.Gordon,
Dalby, Wendland
11/12/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with L.Krugerud, J.Raisch
11/13/81 AHF Correspondence
with M.Wall
11/16/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with M.Wall
11/17/81 AHF Correspondence
with P.Miller
11/19/81 AHF Conference
with D.Robbins
11/19/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Bo rd Meeting
11/19/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with G.Zierk, M.Wall,
B.Emerson
11/19/81 AHF Travel Time
Denver/Glenwood Springs
December 17, 1981
DWR 81NQB-000
. 20 15.00
. 70
. 30 22.
. 20 15.
. 40 30.
Advice to Sanitation District
11/20/81 AHF Tele hone Conference
withi`B.Emerson
11/20/81 AHF Travel Time
Glenwood Springs/Denver
11/20/81 AHF Attend Meeting
Board Meeting
11/20/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Board Meeting
11/23/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with M.Wall, G.Hoskin
11/25/81 AHF General Documents & Agreements
Notice of Special Election and
Resolution 81-2
11/25/81 AHF Prepare for Meeting
Special Meeting
11/25/81 AHF Research
re election statutes
11/30/81 AHF Telephone Conference
with M.Wall
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11/30/81 AHF Travel Expenses
Ck. #3975 to Master Travel
11/30/81 DWR Long Distance Tele. Calls
9/19/81 long distance stmt.
11/30/81 DWR Postage/Overnight Delivery
November
40
3. 00
5 00
1.10
30
1.00
50
80
20
18.
30.1:4ra-
225.0
375.0
82.5
22.50
75.00
37.50
60.00
15.00
70 $1,402.50
80.00
7.94
4.08
Advice to Sanitation District
11/30/81 DWR Photocopy
November
DISBURSEMENTS
PREVIOUS BALANCE
PAYMENTS RECEIVED
RETAINER APPLIED
ADJUSTMENTS
NEW TIME & DISBURSEMENTS
AMOUNT DUE & PAYABLE
17.55
$109.57
$7,640.33
$1,101.07
$0.00
$0.00
$1,512.07
$8,051.33
Fi i -,m AN, HILL 8C ROBBINS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
22C) EQPITADLE 19L'ILDINO
730 SEVENTEENTH STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80202
Spring Valley Sanitation
District
c/o P. 0. Box 671
Carbondale, CO. 8'623
Jeffrey M. Bier
Advice to Sanitati
District
303 572-8300
12/07/81 AHF Te',ephone Conference
wi 'h J.Raisch
12/10/81 AHF Teephone Conference
wi'h V.Lykou, M.Wall
12/11/81 AHF Telephone Conference
wi h G.Hoskin
12/15/81 AHF Te'ephone Conference
wih M.Wall
12/16/81 AHF Te'!ephone Conference
wi h M.Wall
12/18/81 AHF Co respondence
wish M.Wall
12/18/81 AHF Te:'ephone Conference
wi,h B.Emerson
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
12/31/81 AHF Po"tage/Overnight Delivery
De ember
12/31/81 AHF Ph
De
tocopy
ember 1981
DISBURSEMENTS
January 18,
DWR 81NQB-
. 20 15. aG"
. 50 37.
.30 22.'p0
. 20 15..00
. 30 22.'0
. 10
.40 30.
2.00 $150.
_ ::: =
$3.
z
Advice to Sanitati
t •
on Distri
PREVI
PAYME
RETAI
ADJUS
NEW T
AMOUN
ct
OUS BALANCE
NTS RECEIVED
NER APPLIED
TMENTS
IME & DISBURSEMEN1
T DUE & PAYABLE
11
$8,051.33
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$153.01
$8,204.34
Peter T. Craven
811 Blake Avenu
Glenwood Spring
Dear Mr. Craven
The followi
trict has incur
$1,511.00. I a
figures. I sho
tion Agreement
November 20th m
Foster Petroleu
charges for pre
accept full res
other charges a
ization and Ala
the Glenwood Po
Please requ
Spring Valley S
review of their
cc: Flaven Ceri
Eugene "Jim
Larry Velas
FMW: sos
March 5, 1982
Esquire
CO 81601
•
is a list of expenses which he Sanitation Dis
d on behalf of Foster Petrole`m. The total is
enclosing copies of invoices which itemize the
d like to note that the Foster Petroleum Annexa
s discussed at several meetings. However, the
ting was for the primary purposes of reviewing
s Annexation Agreement. I ani not including
ous meetings but feel Foster Petroleum should
nsibility for the November 201h meeting. The
for phone calls between FostLr Petroleum organ
Friedman, District Engineer aLd for notices in
e that Foster Petroleum depos:t $3,000.00 in th
itation District trust account before further
nnexation agreement.
Sincerely,
F. Malcolm Wall
pring Valley Sanitation District
, Carfield County Commissioner
Drinkhouse, Garfield County Commissioner
ez, Garfield County Commissiorer
Fo
Mr. Davis Farrar
Garfield County P
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs,
Dear Davis:
•
ER PETROLEUM CO='i!,17,)-,_,_
POR Ti l
242 MAIN STREET
CARBONDALE. COLORADO 81623
303-963-3200
nning Department
0 81601
Foster Petroleum Corporation appreciated the time whic
planning personnell devoted to the Spring Valley Sanita
ation request by Foster.
I certainly hope that such efforts will result in Fost
the District on th;e terms and conditions I outlined in
office.
Thanks again for your assistance in this matter, and I
seeing you again soon.
DLS:jc
Sincerely,
Duncan L. Sinnock
Real Estate Investm
APR 2 61982
I .Q c
April 26, 1982
you and the other
ion District annex -
is acceptance into
the meeting in your
looking forward to
t Manager
1o 5-1
,� FEB 1
GARFIELD CO. ?LAO
ROBERT B. EMERSON
February 10,
Mr. F. Malcolm
Post Office Bo
Glenwood Sprin
Re: Spri
Corp
Dear Mr. Wall:
I've heard noth
1982 requesting
the Petition fo
Corporation. A
willing and anx
willing to pay
incurred by the
petition, and a
deposit in my t
LAW OFFICES
OBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
86 SOUTH THIRD STREET
CARBONDALE COLORADO 81623
(303) 963-3700
all
1506
, CO 81602
Valley Sanitation District -Foster Petroleum
ation Annexation Petition
ng from you since I wrote you on January 20,
once again, that the Board take action on
Annexation filed by Foster Petroleum
I indicated in that letter, Foster remains
ous to resolve this matter. Foster is
or attorney's fees and engineering fees
District in connection with the annexation
you know, I have the sum of $3,000.00 on
ust account for this purpose.
Once again, on Behalf of Foster Petroleum Corporation I
request a respoIse from the Board concerning Foster's
Petition for An '-xation. If I don't hear from you, I will
assume that the,i:oard has determined that Foster's Petition
for Annexation could be denied.
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
RBE/kam
cc: Board of Cmy Commissioners
Earl Rhode
Duncan Sin `ick
Jerry W. R. `', sch
Tom Presto
Davis Farr
Robert B. Emerson
CZ. 1(d 4.e 1" w• civ . c.e_
1:.
January 20,
Mr. P. Malco
Post Office
Glenwood Spr
Re:
c
01,)
Co
Dear Mr. Wal
When we last
advised me t
1981 for det
Annexation P
that the pub
continued to
It was my un
that the Dis
attorney to
contact me t
fees and eng
Since that t
Foster's pos
for attorney
in connectio
the opportun
prior to pay
$3,000.00 is
easiest meth
billing sent
agreement tli
the criteria
position is
Foster's con
problem has
Mr. Fredman
make sure th
work directl:
m Wall
ON 1506
ings, CO E1602
•
ring Valley Sanitation District -Foster Petroleum
rporation Annexation Petition
1:
talked by telephone regarding this matter, you
1 ,at a meeting was not scheduled for -December 31,
'rmination on the Foster Petroleum Corporation
tition. This was contrary to -ay understanding
dc hearing regarding this.matter has been.
'that date.
erstandir,
rict woul
replace Al
0 work out
ineering f
ire, I ha
tg after our teleph
.d be retaining the
.an Friedman. The
the details of pa
ees related to the
re heard nothing co
ition rem
's fees ar
n with its
ity to re
ment of th
now on de
ad of hand
directly
at attorne
outlined
not to try
cern arise
eveloped
s attorne
t its fun
involved
sins the same. It
A engineering fees
Annexation Petiti
view and approve an
hese fees. Since t
posit in my trust
ling this matter i
to me, with the un
y's fees and engin
above will be prom
to avoid payment
:s because of its u
regarding payment
y's fees. Foster
ds are used only i
. with the annexati
one conversation
services of an
new attorney would
yme t of attorney's
Fo ter Petition.
nce ning this matter
is
in
on.
it
he
acc
s s
der
ser
ptl
of
nde
illing to pay
urred directly
I would have
mized billing
equested sum of
unt, perhaps the
mply to have the
tanding and
ng fees meeting
paid. Foster's
ttorney's fees.
standing that a
by the District of
simply wishes to
n connection with
on.
1.0
it
Mr. F. Malc
January 20,
Page two
m Wall
982
I would hops' to hear from you or your attorney in the near
future. As e have repeatedly advised you, Foster anxiously
awaits the :•ard decision concerning the Petition for
Annexation.
RBE/kam
cc: Board
Earl R
Duncan
Jerry t
Tom Pr
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
County Commissioners
des
innock
Raisch
ton
Robert B. Emerson
December 28, 15
Mr. F. Malcolm
P. O. Box 1506
Glenwood Spring
Re:
Spring
Corpor
Dear Mr. Wall:
have received
have also receiv
crossed in the m
Your letter of D
Foster Petroleum
deposited in my
and engineering
annexation petit
necessary for yo
the history of ti
itemized billing
attorney or engi:
for annexation a
prior to payment
promptly refunded
As I indicated i
Corporation woul
writing, to the
not know if a me
can give me the
for this meeting
RBE/lc
cc: Board of Cou
Earl Rhodes
Duncan Sinn
Jerry W. Rai
Tom Preston
11;
•
11
Colorado 81602
Valley Sanitation District -Foster Petroleum
tion Annexation Petition
ur letter of December 18, 1981. I assume that you
[.
my letter of December 22, 1981, our letters having
1.
•
ember 18, 1981, does not address certain concerns o
orporation concerning the use of the $3,000.00
ust account. Foster will pay for attorney's fees.
es incurred directly in connection with the
n. This will not include travel time or the time
new attorney to familiarize himself generally with
District. I will be provided with a copy of an
howing exactly what work has been done by your
er in connection with the Foster Petroleum petition
will have the right to review and approve the same
Any unused portion of the retainer deposit will he
to my client.
mv letter of December 22, 1961, Foster Petroleum
appreciate it if the Board would simply respond, in
tition for annexation. At this point in time, I do
ing is scheduled for December 31, 1981. Perhaps you
ard's position prior to that time E41 that the need
s eliminated.
y Commissioners
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
Robert B. Emerson
December %, 1981
Mr. Rober B. Emerson
86 South ird Street
Carbondal:l CO 81623
Dear Mr. erson:
As decided
November 2
Petroleum
account fo
annexation
The Board
for the re
attorney,
and other
such as pu
The three
Spring Val
of Glenwoo
Please not
for the da
Sincerely,
F. Malcolm
Member
Spring Vall
MW/1s
cc:
Larry
Flaven
Eugene
Earl G
Leanne
by the Spring Valley Sani
th meeting, the Board is
posit three thousand dol
the payment of bills rel
f Foster Petroleum.
to use th
ew of the
r any engi
ems relati
ishing not
ousand dol
y Sanitati
P.O. Box
this is a
to day bus
tation District at their
requesting that Foster
lars ($3,000) in a trust
ating to the proposed
e three thousand dollars ($3,000) to pay
agreement by the Sanitation Board's
neering work relating to the annexation,
ng to the annexation of Foster Petroleum,
ices.
lars ($3,000) should be deposited in the
on District Escrow Account 11093-72-6, Bank
520, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601.
special checkir
iness of the Sz
Sanitatio
n District Boa
g account and is not used
nitation District.
rd
lasquez, County Commissioner
. Cerise, County Commissioner
rinkhouse, County Commissioner
Rhodes, County Attorney
leland, Secretary to Commissioners
December 22, 1981
Mr. Malcolm -Wall
P. 0. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, Col
orado 81602
RE: Spri g Valley Sanitation DiStriC
Fost r Petroleum Corporation Ann
Dear Mr. Wa 1:
Per your re
of my lette
Friedman ha
Spring Vail
oration is
on deposit
paying for
himself con
Foster Petr
would be re
generally ith the D
incur these fees.
reasonable attorney'
connecti
is my un
ngineerir
and the on y thing t
Board to determine
rn enclosing with t
-ober 2, 1981, to Al
me that he has res
tion District. FOE
ng to have any port
st account used fo/
ttorney hired by tl
11 that has transpi
etition for Annexal
spend this time t
istrict anyway, an
Foster Petroleum
s fees and enginee
.on with the annexa
Lderstanding that v
ig work has been do
:hat remains to be
ind annouce its pos
uest, I
of Decei
advised
y Sanita
ot willi
n my tru
nother a
erning
leum'sP
a
uired to
t
exation Petition
his letter a copy
an Friedman. Mr.
igned as counsel for
ter Petroleum Corp.
ion of the $3,000.00
the purpose of
le District to update
red to date. Absent
:ion, your attorney
D. familiarize himself
a the District would
s willing to pay for
ring fees incurred
tion petition.
irtually all of the
ne regarding this,
finalized is for the
ition.
directly i
However, i
legal and
)u in our recent te
)et with you to try
?.r further. Foster
)0 much time and ef
rd. We would apprc
1 to our petition i
whether you accept
roposed terms, whet
As I indicated to yc
I am unwilling to ME
negotiate this matt(
has already spent tc
position to the Boa
would simply respon
like itouttd)itell us
Annexation on the p
lephone conversation,
to discuss or.
Petroleum Corporation
fort presenting its
ciate it if the Board
n writing. We would
our Petition for
her our Petition for
• •
December 22, 1981
Mr. Malcolm Wall
P. O. Box 1506
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
RE: Spring Valley Sanitation District
Foster Petroleum Corporation Annexation Petition
Dear Mr. Wall:
Per your request, I am enclosing with this letter a copy
of my letter of December 2, 1981, to Alan Friedman. Mr.
Friedman has advised me that he has resigned as counsel for
Spring Valley Sanitation District. Foster Petroleum Corp=
oration is not willing to have any portion of the $3,000.00
on deposit in my trust account used for the purpose of
paying for another attorney hired by the District to update
himself concerning all that has transpired to date. Absent
Foster Petroleum's Petition for Annexation, your attorney
would be required to spend this time to familiarize himself
generally with the District anyway, and the District would
incur these fees. Foster Petroleum is willing to pay for
reasonable attorney's fees and engineering fees incurred
directly in connection with the annexation petition.
However, it is my understanding that virtually all of the
legal and engineering work has been done regarding this,
and the only thing that remains to be finalized is for the
Board to determine and annouce its position.
As I indicated to you in our recent telephone conversation,
I am unwilling to meet with you to try to discuss or.
negotiate this matter further. Foster Petroleum Corporation
has already spent too much time and effort presenting its
position to the Board. We would appreciate it if the Board
would simply respond to our petition in writing. We would
like Ioutecoltell us whether you accept our Petition for
Annexation on the proposed terms, whether our Petition for
Mr. Malcolm Wall
Page 2
December 22, 1981
Annexation is being refused, or if the District has a counter-
proposal. If you would give me this position prior to
December 31, 1981, the need for another meeting may be
eliminated.
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By:
RBE:cs
cc: Duncan Sinnock
Jerry Raisch
Tom Preston
Robert R. Emerson
December 2, 1981
Mr. Alan Friedman
Friedman, Hill & Robbins
730 - 17th Street
Denver, CO 80202
Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District/
Foster Petroleum Corporation
Annexation Petition
Dear Al:
This letter will confirm the occurrences at the last boa±d
meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District held
Novdmber 20, 1981, together with our telephone conversation
of that date. The Board has required that Foster Petroleum
Corporation deposit the sum of $3,000.00 to be applied
against the attorney's fees and engineering fees incurred by
the District in connection with the review Foster Petroleum's
petition for annexation. Fees to be deducted from this
amount will be based at the normal hourly billing rate for
you and Dean Gordon, and will include only time incurred
directly related to the petition for annexation beginning
November 21, 1981. My understanding is that fees will not
include travel time incurred by either you or Dean if those
expenses and time are required for other business of the
District. It is also my understanding that both of you will
prepare itemized billings reflecting the amount of time
actually spent in connection with the petition for annexation
and will provide copies of such itemized billing to me. In
addition, any unused portion of the retainer deposit will be
refunded through my client.
I have received the sum of $3,000.00 from Foster Petroleum
Corporation and have it on deposit in my trust account. I
will await your instructions on how and with whom this money
should be deposited. If for any reason you believe that the
statements contained in this letter are incorrect, please
respond in writing. Otherwise, I will presume that you
agree with the terms and conditions outlined herein.
Page Two
Mr. Alan Friedman
December 2, 1981
As 1 mentioned to you before, Foster Petroleum Corporation
is scheduled to meet with the Garfield County Commissioners
on December 7, 1981, for final plat review. If you can
advise me of the Board's position regarding Foster's petition
for annexation prior to that time, I would greatly appreciate
it.
Sincerely,
ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C.
By
RBE/gsv
cc: Duncan Sinnock
Jerry W. Raisch
Robert B. Emerson
•
,,ti tiw.rn,ae�.: .e4,0 43 oozes. ooaszt, /5, /9 V OcA
9/1A- Ct""0 1•Zt .JC_e-A2.)6f)01N1C2e-OP -44A-;*
-*C
okal). ri-el9+4 Al.;600
'ZC' GOIACtVIAT,A-
(AZ/1242 el-;:)
Cc ------
c_v_o
DUSt—
14-‘144.4.r.
L_/ -s t -A-,
ILr/?cS--€A AY -14„.„, 74,,A„acze
A:41Ex,,..
073--t---4-,—,---C . ,
V.‘,,,-t-ca,-() —._ ic ,
d-- et ---1 oez,,7 v",e,,,„ „_,___A e(,),..--(0-J2-e-LJ
c.„... . , //a.,,,,,_,z,/ e,f-- ez„e Ut._.e..„„ /
c7 c‘ -„e
: fr.k eti ?4
>L1 --t . ,,et. i 4€ '4 TeICA4 ) 4 ).
)
6-4
5-4-4c,.
tt
•
CARBONDALE SANITATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
RE: POLICY FOR PROCESSING PETITIONS FOR INCLUSION IN THE
DISTRICT,
1. The petitioners are responsible for preparing the Petition,
the Notice of Hearing for publication, the Order for In-
clusion for the Board of Directors signature, and the Order
for Inclusion for the signature of the Judge of the District
Court,
2. With each petition there shall be two copies of a map
containing the following information:
a. A written legal description of the boundaries of the area
proposed to be annexed;
b. The map shall show the boundary of the area proposed
for inclusion;
c. Within the boundaries of the map there shall be shown
the location of each ownership tract in unplatted land, and if
part or all of the area be platted, then the boundaries and the
plat numbers of plots or of lots and blocks shall be shown;
d. If the area proposed for inclusion within the district is
contiguous to the district the contiguous boundary of the
district shall be drawn on the map together with the dimen-
sions of the contiguous boundary;
e. The map shall bear the certificate and seal of the registered
engineer of land surveyor.
f. The map shall show the dimensions of the boundaries and
tracts, plats, lots and blocks within the area, if any, and the
bearings of the boundaries of said area.
3. All publications and costs shall be paid by petitioner.
4. A handling charge of $50,00 shall be remitted to the Secretary
for the District along with all documents mentioned in Item
No. 1 above at the time of presentation of petition.
ATTEST:
Secretary
/,<
President, Carbondale _anitation District
• •
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of
1981, between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (hereinafter
referred to as "District"), a sanitation district organized
pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32-4-101, et seq., and FOSTER
PETROLEUM CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "Foster"), a
Delaware corporation licensed to do business in the State of
Colorado.
WITNESSETH:
Foster is the sole owner of the Lake Springs Ranch
property (hereinafter "Lake Springs Ranch"), more specifically
defined as follows:
A parcel of land described as Lots Five
(5) and Six (6) of Section Thirty -Two
(32) ; Lots Seven (7) , Eight (8) , Nine
(9) , Ten (10) , Eleven (11) , Twelve (12) ,
Thirteen (13), Fourteen (14), Fifteen
(15) , Sixteen (16) , Seventeen (17) ,
Twenty (20), Twenty -One (21), Twenty -Two
(22), Twenty -Eight (28), and the
Northeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter (NE 1/4 SE 1/4) of Section
Thirty -Three (33); and the Southwest
Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4
SW 1/4) of Section Thirty -Four (34), all
in Township Six (6) South, Range
Eighty -Eight (88) West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian. Also Lots Two (2),
Three (3), and Nine (9) of Section Four
(4), Township Seven (7) South, Range
Eighty -Eight (88) West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian, County of Garfield,
State of Colorado.
Foster intends to construct approximately 210 single
family dwellings on this property.
An annexation petition has been filed by Foster with the
District seeking the annexation of the above-described property
into the District. The District and Foster deem it advisable and
advantageous to join in and execute an agreement to specifically
set forth the terms and conditions upon which the annexation of
Lake Springs Ranch shall occur into the District pursuant to
C.R.S. 1973, 34-4-122(1)(a).
• •
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing mutual
covenants contained herein and the previously filed petition for
annexation, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
Section I: ANNEXATION
The District shall annex Lake Springs Ranch provided that
Foster fulfills the following conditions:
0 A. District Organization Costs
As of this date, the District has paid approximately
$ 105,868.00 for the organization of the District. Provided
that the Los Amigos Partnership pays an equivalent amount, Foster
will pay to the District one half of the reasonable and necessary
organization costs of the District. Organization costs shall
include, but not be limited to, such items as legal and
engineering fees directly associated with the formation of the
District. Organization costs shall not include any costs
associated with the collection, transmission or treatment of
sewage attributable to Los Amigos.
B. Foster shall pay all reasonable and necessary costs
incurred by the District associated with this annexation. Such
costs shall include, but not be limited to, legal, engineering
and publication costs as well as costs incurred in revising or
amending the District Service Plan if revision or amendment is
required by county or state government.
Section II: SEWER SERVICE
The District shall provide sewer service to the
approximately 210 units of the Lake Springs Ranch provided that
Foster fulfills the following conditions:
2
A. Construction of Collection and Transmission Lines
1. Foster will construct and pay allcosts of sewer
collection lines within Lake Springs Ranch as well as all costs
of a sewer transmission line to convey the sewage from the Lake
Springs Ranch to the existing District Wastewater treatment
plant.
2. Prior to commencing construction, Foster shall submit
plans and specifications for the collection and transmission
lines to the District for review and approval by its engineer.
Foster agrees to pay all reasonable and necessary costs incurred
by the District for such review.
3. The District's engineer shall, at Foster's expense,
inspect and approve all collection and transmission lines
constructed by Foster.
4. Upon completion of construction Foster shall deed such
lines to the District together with any easements necessary for
the future operation, repair and maintenance.
5. Upon acceptance of the collection and transmission
lines by the District, the District shall assume responsibility
for operation, repair and maintenance of the lines, provided that
Foster shall be responsible for a period of one year from date of
acceptance for all repairs necessitated by defective materials or
workmanship.
B. Construction of Wastewater Treatment Facilities
1. The District shall be responsible for construction in
a timely fashion of wastewater treatment facilities to serve the
Lake Springs Ranch. The District:s engineer has estimated that
cost of such facilities at $ 325,000.00 . Foster agrees to pay
such costs to the District in advance of construction or in
accordance with a schedule of payment to be mutually agreed upon
by the parties.
3
• •
2. Any subsequent prospective users of the District shall
similarly pay for the cost of expansion of the District's
wastewater treatment facility. In the alternative, the District
may charge such prospective users plant investment or tap fees
sufficient to cover the capital cost to the District of
providing such service.
III. Monthly Service Fees
A. Operation and Maintenance
The District shall be responsible for all operation and
maintenance of the wastewater treatent plant. The costs of such
operation and maintenance shall be borne by the users of the
District based on their proportionate share of use of the
District's facilities.
B. Administrative and Other Costs
Foster recognizes that Colorado Mountain College may not
be obligated to contribute to the ongoing administrative and
other costs of the District. Foster shall pay its share of such
costs based on its proportionate share of use of the District's
facilities (ignoring the use contribution by Colorado Mountain
College).
C. The District covenants that under no circumstances
shall Foster or its successors in Lake Springs Ranch, be
obligated to pay any costs attributable to expansion of
facilities to serve any new service area within or outside of the
District. This shall not prohibit the District from issuing
bonds to finance such expansions; however, such bonds shall be
paid off solely by the residents of the new service area
benefiting from the expanded service.
4
• •
IV. Tax Assessments
Foster agrees to pay its share of all general tax
assessments associated with the District. The District covenants
that under no circrostances shall general tax revenues be used to
finance, either directly or indirectly, any expansion of
facilities to serve any new area within or outside of the
District.
V. Miscellaneous Covenants
A. The District shall establish reasonable rules and
regulations concerning the use of the system by all customers
and all users. Such rules and regulations shall be uniformly and
fairly enforced. Further, the District may establish standby
charges, service charges, and plant investment fee charges in
accordance with Colorado statutes as the District deems necessary
for its operation.
B. The District shall at al]. times operate the entire
system properly and in an economical manner, making repairs and
replacements to assume the continuous operation of the system.
The District shall at all times operate the system to the best of
its ability in conformance with all federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations applicable to such facilities.
C. There shall be no competing private systems
constructed within the boundaries of the District, including the
Lake Springs Ranch property, and all residential, commercial,
industrial, and municipal structures wherein wastewater is
produced therefrom shall be connected to the District's
facilities.
D. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that this
Agreement constitutes full agreement between them and that
neither parties rely upon any oral representation made by a party
or an agent or officer of a party.
5
•
E. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement shall
be in full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement
by the parties hereto or as provided by law. The effective date
of this Agreement shall be the day of
1981, and this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and
• assigns of the parties hereto.
F. This Agreement is made and delivered within the State
of Colorado and the laws of the State of Colorado shall govern
its interpretation, validity, and enforceability. This Agreement
shall not be varied or terminated except by the written agreement
of both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have
executed this Agreement as of the date and year First above
written.
ATTEST:
Secretary
SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT
By
6
President
(303) 945-1004
FAX (303) 945-5948
Sr'M
SCHMUESER
GORDON MEYER
ENGINEERS
SURVEYORS
•
1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2E
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
October 11, 1993
Mr. Dwain Watson
Colorado Department of Health
222 South 6th Avenue, Room 232
Grand Junction, CO 81501
iir .: 22.077 tOCT 1 4 1993
RFIELD COUNTY
p
RE: Request to Amend a Previously -Issued Site Application
Sprine Valley Sanitation District, Glenwood Springs
Dear Dwain:
The Garfield County Commissioners, at their regularly -scheduled October 4, 1993 meeting,
reviewed the above -referenced application. This review was part of their published agenda that
appears weekly in the Glenwood Post.
The Commissioners did not receive any public input. Mr. Mark Bean, Planning Director,
indicated that no formal action was taken by the Commissioners because of no requirement for
such action by the Department of Health.
Mr. Bean indicated he would provide you written documentation of the meeting if you so desire
for your files. Please let me know if that is a requirement of your review process.
I also informed Mr. Greg Boecker, Chairman, that you expected to review the Site Application
shortly.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
.�LFiyt c+.2
t
Dean W. Gordon,
President
DWG:lec/1503.2
cc: Mr. Greg Boecker, Chairman, Spring Valley Sanitation District
Mr. Mark Bean, Garfield County Planning Director