HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report PC 03.13.91REOUEST:
OWNERS:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
ACCESS:
PC 3/ L:t/9L
PROJECT INFOR],IATION AND STAFE' COMMENTS
Goose Creek Subdivision preliminary lrlan
Kent Jones, Priscilla prohl, Vince Gufino
A parcel of land situated in Lots 3 and4, section 35 and Lot 8, Section 34, ,!?5,
RBBW of the 6th p.U. ; Iocertedapproximately L/2 mile northeast ofCarbondale at 0L83 County Road 100.
The site consists of a 5L.29 acre parcel.
Individual Well-s
r.s.D.s.
Private access easement off C.R. 100.
EXISTTNG ZONING8 A/n/np
ADJACENT ZONTNG: A/n/no
I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSTVE PLAN
The site is located in the Carbondale Urban Area of Influence and --.-District F, River/Floodplain Severe Environmental Constraints asidentified on the Comprehensive PIan Management Districts, u.p.
rT. DESCRIPTTON OF THE PROPOSAL
A. Site Descriplion.: The site has gentle slopes and cons j-stsprimarily of low ly_ing land south of, and adjaceit to, the RoaringFork River. Several irrigati.on ditches and strecrms cross the site]rmprovements on the site consist of a single family residence.
Adjacent Land uses include single family residences and ranching.Approximately_1500 feet northeist of the proposed subdivision aiemunicipal wells, a portion of the Town oi Cirbondale,s municipalwater system
B. Projeq! Desgription: The applicant proposes to subdivide the siteinto five (5) lots ranging-in size frori 7.67 acres to 13.02 acresin size. The overall dehsity woul-d be one res.idence per 10.25acres.
c. Modificatioqs Sin-ce Sketch PIan: The sketch plan contemplat:ed t2lots instead of the current 5 lots. The applilants also iequestedapproval fo_r a quest house and an employ-eL unit in each 1ir:imarysingle family residence. References t-o these accessory units havebeen omitE,ed from the current application ( seel minutes fromNovember B, L989, pranning commissi-on Meeting page 1"2 I .
III. REVTEW AGENCY COMMENTS:
A. Mount--Sopris SoiI Conservation District: Expressed concernsregarding high water table, soils linitationi, wildlife andIivestock protection and ground water protection l iee exhib.i.L pagelL ).
B. Colorado Department of Health: Expressed concern about I.S.D.S.contamination of the Carbonrlale welLs and recommended connectingwith Carbondale water and sewer.
Division of Wildlife: Expressedprotection and potential impactst( ).
concern about weE,Iands/riparian
on wildlife (see exhibits on page
c.
--I e
D.Colorado Geological Survey: Stated thatrelated problems ( see exhibit on page JD 1
Division of Water Resources:submittal to date (see exhibitinformation has been submitted,received to date.
Can not recommend approval withon page e2 ). -- Subsequentbut no written response har; treen
there are no geology-
provideE. RE-1 schoor District: Requested impact fee and wil.r notbus service on private roads (see extriuit on page J I I
F.
t.Dan Kerst Letter: Cover letter
f. Resource Engineering: ExplainsI.S.D.S. systems and Basalt Water
J. Carbondale Rura1 Fire protecLion
provide adequate fire protect,lon
rV. ADJACENT LAND OWNER COMMENTS
addressing approval of Basalt Wat,erfor L.3 acre feet (see exhibltsl on
rel-ationship of non-discharging
Conservancy Contract.
District: Stating that they canfor the subdivision.
accesEi roadway,
(see exhi.bit on
H.
Conservancy District contractpages .?LJ'- 3t y.
Town of carbondare: Letter expressing concern about r.s.l).s.contamination of weII field. Second letter addresses Town spec:Lficrequest regarding r.s.D.s. approvar and,comments from Town,sconsulting engineer ( see exhiblts on pages ?A - 3t_) .
A. Assorted Letters: Expressed concerns aboutgroundwater contamination and wetrands protectionpage ! I ).
V. STAFF COMMENTS
A.Internal Roads/Access: Access to the proposed subclivision is viaone-third mile long private easement wh-ich-extends from C.R. 100 tothe Roaring Fork River. The roadway is an unimproved dirt/nativemateriar surface approximatery g, to Lo, in wi-ath. The roadwayfalls short of any current roatway design standard. An irrigatio-nditch and windbreak parallel the -road f5r much of the 1engthl rn"
-applicant has proposed that a maintenance agreement be established
!V afr parties using the roadway. No agreement has been adoptecl todate. Because the roadway - is ext-ernal to the subdivisionboundaries, thg coynt_y_ hds rimited authority to requireimprovements. . practicarry, the roadway width and- surfacing'mayrender it inadequate for the potential -35 to 40 additional [rip'sper day generateg UV the subdivision proposal. Concerns have beenraised over the legal- status of the aiceis easement. particularlyof concern is the issue of whether the applicant has the autnoiitjrto increase the usage of the easement. - Language in the easementdocument is vague in its intent. Additionai qi".tiorr. have beenraised regarding the existence of dedicatea rilnt-oi-looy from theapplicant's parcer to c.R. 100. rn the past, af,exemption h;rs beengranted relying on this easement for ac?ess.
There are two ( ? ) issues -regarding access for: the pl.anningcommission's consideration, reglr and- physical access. Bersed ontestimony and the advice of the count| Attorney, the comnrissionshould first be satisfied that there'is adequite regar access.This determin".d, !-1"1 the physicar adequacy of- the road to handlethe demand of 4 additionaL leiidences shluld be considered. rI: thephysical access is inadequate, then the Commission may considerrequiring improvements to the easement surface.
once at the subdivision boundary, access to 4 of the 5 lots w.Ll I bevia a 2000 ' rong cul-de-sac. hire proposed roadwiy meets rninimumcounty standards with the exception bt itre actual cril-de-sac 6esignand the-rength exceeding the 6bo' allowabre limit. waivers of cul-de-sac_Iength may be grlted with the consent of tho carbondale andRurar Fire District. Access to Lot 1 will be via the llrivateaccess easement which extencls north of the subdivi.sion.
Floodplains /WetIands :Thp property is traversed by reguJated
-fl?"9p1.".i"" and has res,rated *"'ir;;t". - r["-;r;;;;q -rLril:;;:,;;;;
trre n6r-Jn-ein;;;.'i"; ';'J#:T"J,.=n',iiiJj ,r"lff ,1"i1llnrrT"Hj"'.''";f;:
yI wqLsl
: "1.:: Y t^1ly1t i"-,, .ditc he s wrric rr' ;;;' a r s o ae s itnileJ - r r ooo r ri nse .
1^l^l?_1,1"1: p.T.d is tocar"d gt r,ot +. - A1i r;T"'6;;-;;;;;;';;acceptabre buirding sire outside tne rejuGJJliS5dprain.
,l."
B.
c.
Federally regulated wetlands parallel the watercourses on Eheproperty. The Army Corps has been on sit,e and have reviewerl Eheproposal. No 404 permit will be required for the access road asproposed. Since wetlands exist on each lot, any impact on weLlandson individuar lots wirr require approvar of- the Army cor:ps ofEngineers.
Fire Protection: The proposed development is located within t,heservice boundaries of the Carbondale and Rural Fire District. TheDistrict has indicated that they can provide fire protection.Their consent to the cul-de-sac design is required.
No- -fl.-" protection improvements have been proposed withj.rr thesubdivisj-on. Section 9t73 requires adequate fire protection waterstorage approved by the Fire District.
D. Utilities: The applicants aretelephone service to each 1ot.5 lots. No natural gas serv.ice
proposing to provide electric andExisting lines traverse each of the
' to the lots j-s contemplated.
Water: The applicants are proposing5 lots via a contract with the-gasalt
The existing residence (proposed Lotpermitted weII. An approved contract
In- i.ts original_response, the DWR did not recommend approval of thesubdivision. Their concern was based on the absence-6f a contractat the initial time of review. Subsequently, inverbal conments tostaff, DwR engineers have indicated that thL'contract for 1.3 a.f.is adequate for 4 residences. Lingering concerns remain about theadministration of the contract to -insurL its long term validity.
Because of the potential requirementswastewater systems, a modiflcation to therequired to provide suf f i.cient waterconsumptive use.
E.to provide water to 4 of theI{ater Conservancy Dist.rict.#1) is served by an existing
has been submitted.
for non-discharginglvater contract may befor the 100 percent
F. Wastewater: The proposed subdivision is located in an area ofseasonally high groundwater.Because of the proximity ofgroundwater, conventional septic tank/Ieach field systems areinadequate. Tlpi_ca1Iy, above gradient alternate systefis designedby a professional engineer such as a Wisconsin l,tound have beenrequired in this area. The wastewater disposal situatiol iffurther c_omplic_ated by the srrbdivi-sions locatidn up-gradient ( tG00to 2500 feet) frorn the Town of Carbondale wellfieid.' In orddr toprotect their wellfield, the llown Trustees have reguested that theCounty_place-? PIat note on the subdivision which w5uld requ.i.re anyf .S.D.S. built within the subdivision be subjected to applrorral bithe Town's staff . At this time, the Town i; requestiij that, airf.S-D.S. be a no:n-discharging system such as an E.T. bed usinghlpalon Iiners in lieu of polyethylene liners. However, ifsuperior technolog'y arises then the fourn would require its use forf.S.D.S. systems within the subdivision.
While. the.County is th9 agency responsible for issuing I.S.D.S.permit,s, the Town of Carbondale-appears to have statutory authorityto protect their wellfield from contamination. The reviLw arul vet6authority requested appears compatible with this st"i"toa'yauthority.
G. SoiLs: Due to soils linitations, namely proximity to grounclwaterand saturation, staff recommends that tolifs repor:ts, wastewatersystems and foundations shal-.l be prepared and designed for euch 1otby a registered professional. engl_ne6r.
VI. SUGGESTED FINDTNGSe@per.pub1ication,pub1icnoticeanrlpostingwere
provided as required by law for- the hearing befo.re ihe pfirnningCommission; and
B.That the hearingcomplete, that before the Planning Commission was extenslveal-1 pertinent facts, matters and j.ssuesthat all interested parties were heard aE,submitted andhearing; and
r EIld
werethat
C. That the proposed subdivision of land is in general compliance wi.ththe recommendations set forth in the Compiehensive plan for theunincorporated area of the County; and
,
That the proposed subdivision of tand conforms to the Garfj.eldCounty Zoning Resolution; and
That arr data, surveys, analyses, studies, prans and designs as arerequired by the state of colorado, and Gartierd county, have l>eensubmitted and, in addition, have been found to meet, arrrequirements of the Garfield county Subdivision Regulations.
VIT. RECOMMENDATIONff the Planning C_ommission is satisfied with the application, and thata1l issues and findings have been adequately addiessed and mnkes afavorable recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, l:henstaff recommends that approval be subject to the-followi.ng condi:t,ions:1. AII representations of the applicant, either within the applicationor stated at the public hearlngs before the Planning CommisriionshalI be considered conditions of approval unless otherwise stateby the Planning Commission.
All proposed utilities sha]l be located underground. AII necessaryaPPurtenances for individual service connection shall be prov.Ldedby the developer. Utility facilities shall be included In theSubdivision Improvements Agreement.
The applicant shall estabrish a Homeowner,s Association. TheHomeowner's Association shall be incorporated in accordance withthe Col-orado Revised Statutes. The protective covenants, articlesof incorporation and other Homeowner's Association documentsincluding by-raws wiII be submitted for review by the countyAttorney prior to the approval of the Final plat
The water allocation contract shall be transferred from thedeveloper to the Homeowner,s Association. The Homeowner,sAssociation shall enforce inclividual compliance through covenants.
5. AII cut slopes created during construction shall be revegetatedwith native grasses and shrubs with adequate weed control-. AII --seed shall- be certified weed-free.
The applicant "_tt"lf pay $200 per lot in School Impact Fees prior tothe approval of the Final pIaE,.
The restrictive covenants shall provide that thc.re will be noresubdivision of the lots.
8. Prior to the submittal of the Fina1 PIat, the applicant shallprovide adequate written verification from the oiv-iiion of W;rterResources documenting approvar of the domestic water supply.
The applicant shall provide documentation from the Carbondale andRural Fire Protection District approving the interior road clesignand fire protection plan prior to-the submittal of a F"inal plat]
A1l roads including the proposed cul-de-sac shalI be designed andconstructed in accordance wi.th minimum county standards.
11. Thg applicants shall submit improvement plans for alI roads,bridges, utilities and drainage structures irior to approverl of aFina} Pl-at.
D.
E.
2.
3.
4.
9.
10.
6.
7.
L2. The applicant shallthe maintenance of
demonstr;rte that procedures areall bri.dges, roadways etc. ,Homeowner' s Association.
establistrecl forincluding snowremoval, through the
13.The applicants shall provide a modified water alLocation contractfrom the Basa1t Water Cons_ervancy District to provide acleguatewater to accommodate the Lack of recharge for- non-dischaigingwastG:water systems prior to review by the BOCC if no modifl.cationto the contract is r:equired, then the applicant shall providesupporting documentation pr:lor to the preiiiminary plan revi-ew bythe Board of County Commiisioners
All -requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers shall be consideredconditions of approval. A covenant sfritf be included to requirethat p-rior to construction within identif ied wetlands, a1'rpioval
fTo* !!9 +=my cgrps of Engirreers shart be provided. wetra;as, asidentified on the Preliminary PIan and reviewed by the Army Corpsof Engineers, shall be derineated on the ninaj. prat with anappropriate plat note.
,l
14.
B.
E.
l-5 ' The a-pplicants .sha}l provide a L0' wide access easement connecting' arr rots to the north edge of the property (ie. noarinf i.orrRiver) .
L5' The following plat notes shall be included on the F.inal. pIaE:A' Prior to issuance of a l3uilding Permit the owner of each lotshall- prepare and submit a si-te specific soils repor:t andfoundation desig_n_ prepared and ce=lified by a proftssi<>nalengineer and all improvements shall be - conitructed' inaccordance with such measures which shall be a conditlon ofthe Building permit.
The reconmendations of the ColoradoU.S.F.S. wildlife prevention guidelinesthe construction of all structures.c' The subdivision- may be subject to prescriptive easements forirrigation ditches and .thelr maintlnance.
State Forester andshal-I be followerl in
D. Prior to any development within anregulated wetland, the tot owner shallCorps of Engineers. Documentation of
identified federallyconfer with the Armytheir review shall be
Arl r-s.D.s. systems shatr be designed and their instaLrationcertified. by a registered professionar engineer. prior toconstruction, review and comment by the Town of carbondaLe
provided to County staff.
vvrtgg+g?l:ll 1"-"Ppti?l: }-l?i giscr,aitini _".f. system wth hyparon
*r*::=^.o=^^:1"-f_"_1!_demgn"t=ii"ae;.;1i+L-i;il";;;"if -i;;
"' 1#"i-.t"5.s.
h 7*
q[]
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
November 8, 1989
ttr', ;1
ti;-1
couNTY sTArE PRESEIIT
Mark Bean, Dlrector
BIdg. San & PIan.
Don DeFord, County
Attorney
t'
I{ET{BERS PRESENT
LaVerne Starbuck
Bob Myere
Ellee LInk
cregg Velaaguez
Stephanle Beerman
DIck Stepheneon
Lavern€ Starbuck called the meetlng to order. RoII call waB taken wlth
Peter NIchoIe abeent.
Ihe minuteg of September 13th were recommended for approval by Bob Myere,
aeconded by Gnegg Velaaguez with unanimous approval. The October 1lth
mlnutes were recommended for approval by Bob Hyers, seconded by Gregg
Velaequez wLth unanimoue approval.
GOOSE UM CREEK SUBDIVISION SKETCII PLAN
Mark Bean sald the Sketch PIan procese ie baelcally a conceptual revlew
and there wLII be no approval or denl-al of the proJect at thle meetlng.
The developer Ie glven the opportunlty to hear comments about the project
and identlfy lesrree that need to be looked at more cloeely before the
Prellmlnary PIan. Mr. Bean brlefly deecrlbed the proJect as follows: It
!e proposed to dtvlde a 51.29 acre parcel lnto approxlmately 12 lote
ranglng In slze from 3.1 acreg to 7.2 acree. It le propoaed to allow for
a guest houee and a domeetlc employee unlt ln each elnglo family
reeLdence, maxtmum denalty, lncludlng gueot houses and excludlng accessory
employee unite, Ie 1 unit per 2.1 acree. Ur. Bean then eummarlzed the
Staff comments.
Mr. Bean aeked Ur. Jonee tf he had any commente and Mr. Jones aald he dtd
not that he Juet came to llgten and develop the comments he heard and try
and develop them lnto a rlght Program.
cregg Velasquez questloned Mr. Jones regardlng any cost reeearch that had
been done to tle lnto the Carbondale Santtatlon Distrlct. Mr. Jonee eaid
there has been no real reeearch at thle time.
Laverne Starbuck commented that access on the road wlll need to be
expanded and that It l-e noted that widenlng wlII be ll-ml-ted due to the
dttch on one elde and vegetatlon on the ot,her. !lr. Jones eald there le
the neceBBary eagement on the road at thie tlme but that he intende to go
out and measure the road wlth an englneeir to eee what le there. Ur. Jones
eald that lt le 5O'.
DIck Stephenaon noted that decreaelrrg the denalty would Ieeeen the
Impacte.
Bob Myers remarked that the accees eaeements ehould be simllar stsandards
ae the lnternal roadg.
Stephanle Beerman aeked how many welle were planned. Mr. Jonea eaid there
waB an exlstJ-ng well and the State has told hlm that l-t could be ueed for
three. regldences. The Town of Carbondale's Planning Commleelon sald that
It would be posslble to uee Carbondale water. He wlII need to go to the
Town Councl-I ae a 6tep further.
- l)-
,.:.i:,,, ,r,1., ,rtiii9 [li;./
gregg Velaequez queatloned why gueet housee/employee houelng on theee
Iote? Mr. Jonee fett that one could apply for aII the rlghte to whlch one
l-s entltled ln the County and aleo there Ie a market for t,he avallabillty.
Bob Myere sal-d there lg need to consLder school dletrlct ablltty to get
echool bueee to the area.
Gary Carml-chael, adjolntng property owner, wanted to brlng up the Issue of
the htgh water table as noted Ln the lettere whlch l-s not evLdent at thle
tlme becauee of lrrlgation water belng shut off.' There Lg a confllct wlth
the Town of Carbondale, one hand decldlng to eell water tape and on the
other hand concerned about thelr welI belng contamlnated.
Len Truesdale, adjolnlng proPerty owrler on the rLver elde, eald he le
concerned about the Department of Wlld1tfe requeetlng a publlc access and
expoelng hla property and neJ.ghbora to treepaealng. Aleo a concern about
the floodplaln data - ownerB can no longer control the flow of the rtver.
HIa home and hte neighbora are now exposed to a "dlfferent river" than aII
the data deals wlth. (Reference belng made to the Gerbaz property) Mr.
Trueedale aleo commented that he believes the denelty aPPears to be
lnapproprlate for an agrlcultural area.
Llea Carmlchael noted that the echool chlldren ln her area are drlven to
school elnce It ie a dlstance to the echool bue.
DaIe Eubank, Ilvee eaet of the property, le concerned wlth water and gewer
problems ae weII as the flood probleme. 36 unl-ta wlll have a dramatlc
affect on the rural aepect of'the area.
Mark Chain, Carbondale's Town Planner, queet,ioned the guesthoueee. Mark
Bean replled that they were aubJect to SpecIaI Uee permlt. Mr. Chaln sald
that the Plannlng and Zonlng Commleelon ln Carbondale felt that the plan
was In conformance wlth the Carbondale l.laster Plan for that area and wlth
County zonlng. They aleo wanted the appllcant to addreee the concerne of
the State Department of Health. glhen the town wae flrst approachod wlth
the poaetbllity of providlng water, thle wae only for a couple of lote.
The Carbondale Board of Trugteea are the only onee that can authorl.ze the
town to provJ.de water to thls eite. Mark Chal-n then read a letter from
the Carbondale Town Admlnletrator dated lL/8/89 Into the record regardlng
water and eanltatlon ln that area.
Perry Robblng 0189 C.R. 1OO, noted that there are three wells that
Ctty of Carbondale hag on her property and the water ende up down Ln
area of the welle. Potentla} lncrease l.n denelty wIIl create potentlal
addltlonal pollutton around the wellheade from polluted groundwater-
the
the
of
Kent Jonee added that l-n hle convergatlcln wlth the Town of Carbondale
waB at the tlme he was applying for exemptlon not reallzlng he waa
requlred to go for full eubdlvlelon.
Dave Murray, 855 Highway 82, gald that l(ent Jonee would do a good job wlth
the eubdlvlelon becauee Kent was golng to llve there.
Laverne Starbuck eaid there were etll.L qulte a few
be addreseed at Prelimlnary PIan. WIth that, the
continued to the next item on the agenda:
RED HILL P.U.D ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT
Mark Bean explalned the appllcatLon and stated the
request ls to accommodate a uae that waa not deflned
the prevlouB P.u.D. text, epeclflcally, fabrlcatlon
type of use.
thlngs that needed to
PIannIng Commlselon
primary purpose of the
, ae bel-ng allowed ln
and manufacturlng ae a
Mr. Bean sald there were two recomrnendablone to be made. One wlII be
related to the P.U.D. Zone Dletrlct Text Amendment, the other ls to add
the language 'fabrlcation and manufacturlng" to the ueee allowed In the
uees of the P.U.D. The Town of Carbondale reeponded favorably to the text
amendment and dld requeet that a number of usee be deleted from P.U.D.
zone dlstrlct as It ie preeently wrl-tten.
- l3-
-', -. ,.:
',,i
:,,;'r
RED l{ouNTAIN P.u.D.- App}lcante: Ray Fender, Kent Pflelder
Mark Bean explalned the appllcatlon as a parcel of land located in Lote 7,
g, 9 and 21 of Sectlon 28rT7S, R88!{ Iocated at the northr.reBt corner of the
lntereectlon of State Hlghwaya 133 and 82 at Carbondale. The lower
portion of the elte wae prevJ.ouely graded to create a development area.
ihe remaLnlng portlon of the elte ie very eteep terraln wlth pinon and
junlper vegetatlon. There ie a emall bench on the upper portion of the
property. The proposed facllity on thls eite would employ 5 people with
an antlclpated 5 to 10 customers a month. The proposed etructure would be
a 75, x 160, ahop,/fabrlcation area and a 50 x 35 foot offtce/dleplay
area. There ls also a proposed 50 x 1OO foot exPanaion aroa to be
conatructed at an lndeflnite future date. Mr. Bean eaLd that any approval
glven at thls meetlng would Include the expanslon area also. He eaid that
preBentlyrln Reeolution No. 85-137, It stateB that "No addltlonal
excavation of the hllletde will be allowed". The following l.anguage
ehould be added ',unlesB approved durlng the development Plan revlew".
Aleo, the Hlghway Department ls not as concerned with the proposed acceBB.
Mr. Bean gald what he ie reconunending
recommend approval of proposed P.U.D. Zone
the condltione noted to the text:
le that the Plannlng Commleelon
DIstrlct Text Amendment with
That a letter be eubmitted to the Plannlng Department, wlth the
butldlng permlt appllcatlon, etatlng that the state Hlghway
Department has revlewed the propoeed development plan and any
requlrement of the Department have been, or wiII be, met'
the bulldlng permlt appllcatlon lnclude a eolls etudy performed
by a quallfied englneerlng geologiet that addresEres eolle
compactlon, drainage, slope etabtllty and any reconunended
etructural requirements for the butlding and/or eite.
Laverne Starbuck asked Ron Liet,on about a culverE to handle the run-off tn
the Sprlng.
l.[r. Lleton reeponded that It wi]I be culverted underneath to handle the 2
to 5 year etorm. Anythlng over would bet overflowed onto aephalt.
Laverne Starbuck agked If there were any new dlscugslon wlth the Hlghway
Department.
Ron Lieton sald he trled to talk wlth Chuck Dunn but wlth hls prevlous
experlence of talklng with eome of tlre engineerB, the real lasue ie the
trafficr and wlth the llmlted amount of trafflc golng in and out of that
elte there le no anticlpatlon of requlremente from the Hlghway Department.
If they do, the crlterla eet wlII be met.
Dlck stephenson aeked what klnd of bu,Llding.
would be prlmarlly steel fabricatLon.
Ron Liston replled that lt
1.
2.
cregg Velasquez agked what the water requi-rementa would be.
explalned that It would be a well and there le very
regulremente.
Laverne Starbuck lnquJ-red about etorage of marble outelde.
gald everythlng le done inelde, even pollahlng the marble
boothe.
Mr. LLeton
Ilmited waEer
Ron Lleton
In control.led
Laverne had concerns about the cut above the property, could anythlng be
done? Mr. Lleton replled that there will mlnlmal change, perhape eome
eeedlng.
Dlck Stepheneon eaid he sras concerned about the rocks rolling down off
that rough elope lnto the bullding. Ur. Lleton eald that waa part of the
reason for the need of the eolle englneerlng analyeia, not only for the
rock, but for the basic etabtllty of the elope and that wlII be doalt wlth
on the back el-de of the bulldlng re concrete and setbacke-
Etlee Llnk had a queatlon about the expanelon area ag to what lt was for
and what effect there would be on wagtewater production. The expansion
area, Mr. Llston replled, would relate to the employee eituatLon. At moet
gotng to 10 employees ao tt wlII not create an enormous expanglr:n to the
whole operation.
- f {'
[j;i:'')
r::i :'.)t'.ri !'
about damage to hle
suggested that Mr. GoodTed Good, owner of adjolnlng property, had concerns
property and whether lt wae ealeable' Mr' Bean
talk wtth Mr. Llston after the meetlng'
Hark Chaln, Planner with the Town of carbondale, eald the Town hopee that
thle propoeal can strike a reaaonable eolutlon to what hae been a property
controveray over the laet ten yeara or ao. Mr. Chaln aeked the Plannlng
Commleslon to conelder deletlng.some of the more harmful and hlgh lmpact
uBes on that slte, from the htghway commerclal text, auch as faet food
reBtaurante, vehlcular equlpment rental and especially anythlng that would
have a hlgh trafflc volume.
stephanle Beerman asked If anythlng was propoeed for the remalnlng twenEy
acreB. The rePly was that the property waa OPen Space'
Bob Myers made a motlon that the Plannlng Commieelon recommend approval as
propoaed ln Sectlotr V of the Staff Comments. Mark Bean added that prlor
to certlficate of occupancy, Iandecaplng aB propoeed shalI be complet'ed or
a bond In an amount acceptable to the County Commleelonere ehall be placed
wlth the county to guarantee completion ln the next year. Gregg velaaquez
geconded the motlon. AIl aYee-
The meetlng !{aB adjourned.
Reapectfully submltted,
,?lA-4---)
st hanle Beerman, secretary
SB/emh
z;F-
- l5-
Mounffirpris Soil Conservation District
P.O. BOX 1302 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLOBADO 81601
December 13, 1990
Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
1O9 8th St,reet r Suite 303
Glenwood SPrings, C0 8160I
Dear Andrew:
At the regular meeting of the Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District the Board
reviewed the Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan'
Since this is a revision of a plan they have previously reviewed, some of their
original concerns still exist- They note thtrt there is a high water table in the
1fl,I'-lipjtEli\'lllETRIJIt,:" ilu
-ontrrieLD tiuLiltTY
arei and would reconrnend that the foundations
also be designed with the water table in minrl
Water quality is of prlme interest, to the soLI districtr
be carefully engineered and basements
if they are to be used.
and they reconunend close
, as the potent.ial for
Any cuts for roads
for growth but for
The Board always is concerned about animal control in a rural area, where the
potential for dogs to chase wildlife or livestock is high.
or utilities should be revegetated and monitoredr noL only
noxious weeds. Weed free seed and mulch should be used'
nonitoring of the mound system for waste
flooding that might exist on portions of
disposal as well
this property.
It is noted that the Redrob loam is poorly suited for homesites as is fluvaquents.
The Board appreciates the opportunity to comment and stresses that their interest
is preserving the quality o-f-natural resources in dD dr€Br with proper conservation
n-reEirods.
Sincerelv,er&;
Dee BIue, President
Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District
-lb-
COI\SFN\/NTIONI NI:\/FI OFt\4I:t\IT SFI F GOVFRNMFNIT
',r I
ii
.)"-, .'r.'j:i i._..\.-,
,.1',. 1;':t :r:':
, ,, .,4'j.i ,; i ', ; ii''l:'ri,, , ',ll
: ,,i.1 r. l '.'j'
,.ii. ,l l j,ii' ':." I .iii .
ij;r:;i;.J t ii:,,
r'.,,iir.; l. :,";.t.
,';11 ;,' f i' i:
,*i;;, .'
i'i
, ',;lii :;;:..:f :,'. :,.'.il!' ', ,.4 ?.,, r.: t::
,,i; jri" ,:' ,;'1;
ij'iiil ''r. r.','r'' ."':'.i..r, l'ri.
:';:,i{t., .',, ,, '.,r' t:.: r'"' ' r_ ,{'
,,ili'!ii.i.', rl
i.={ ,
..1,i;ii1l :r..'..r.1
r?t,i
l'0.. i-.i. i,,.-;,
't ir''. r'
il I r:i
iiiii
. r.'-.;:;d
.?i'i
i'fif
,il ;:,, .i; i!
; ir ,,,i
'r ti::.,';;,
.':!.:r. l
',irt'i:it
i:
''.i.-
':tt;.
i;i:t i,i:4:l.l i.ir
:il -' r::..,i I i .
{ri::.r.:-i: j'
STA|EOFCOLOMDO
COTORADO DEPARTMENT OI HEAITH
222 So.6th St, Room 232
Grand lunctlon, Colorado 81501
November 19, 1990
Tclelax:
(1031 322-9075 (Main Building/Dcnvct)
(103) 3m-1529 (Ptarmitan Placc/Denverl
(l0ll 248-7198 (Grand lunction Regional Olliccl
GaHFIeID COUNTY
Colorado 81601
Subdivision Preliminary PIan - Garfield County
Roy Romcr
Covernor
Thornar M. Vernon, M.D.
Ererulivc Director
Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Departncnt
109 8th Street
Suite 303
Glenwood Springs,
Re: Goose Creek
Dear Andrew:_
I have reviewed the inform&tion on Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
and offer the following comments:
l. The proposed development is upstream of the Town of Carbondale waber
well. There is a potential problem with ISDS contaminaLing the Town'g
welI.
2. With high ground water, individual wells and septic systems are not a
good solution to water and wastewater services. I recommend this
development contract with the Town of Carbondale for water and
wastewater services.
If you have any questionsr please contact me at (303) 248-7150.
Sincerely,
R"A*0 ilf'd^'"*-
Richard H. Bowman' P.E.
West Slope Unit Leader
Water Quality Control Division
RHB/csk
cc: Town of Carbondale
Planning and Standards, Dertver
Fi Ie
N0v 23 1990
-l-l-
$ffi
srArE oF coLoRADo fiii;
BE'rXf, +ffi ! n$"b?i8i'u BA L Hi 3 o, ""' "DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
iH eourl oppoaruNlrY EMPLoYER
PerrY D. Ollon. Oltector
SOOO Broldway
Danuot. Colorado 8O216
iitoptr6ne: (3o3) 2s7'1 1s2
October L9, 1990
Garfield Co. Planning DePt'
109 Bth St., Suite 303
Glenwood SPgs., CO 81601
Dear Mark Bean:
: tr
'!
'Si11'";-
REFER TO:
ffi
' '":ir-'.' r".'ll,,iil
2r; ,:tfitl iti.
.- i,i.,i, r..;Iii('i'\I
lolIi'i':,,
l{[' ,"
G/,,Iii:iL;
on:Io/3/golmetwithMr.KentJonestoreviewtheGooseCreekSub-division proposal just .u"L of Carbondale' The proposal has been cSanged
since I commented Lo/:-:B/89 to the Planning Department' The reduced
aensity will benefiL wildlife in the area'
The proposed Goose creek subdivision contains valuable wctlands and
riparian areas as evidenced by the vegetation types and 'rbundance of
waterfowl using the property.- Other Uira species including great
Blue Herons also inhabit th'is property' The property lies adjacent
to deer/elk winter range and rlceives- some minimal year tgtg deer use'
Its greatest value is the wetlands and associated shrub clumps' alders'
cottonwoods, and wiltows. wetlands are considered critical habitat
as the majority of atf wifaiiiu species utilize wetlands and riparian
zones.
Thefollowingwillhelpminimizeimpactstowildlife.
I. Preservation of all riparian and-wetland zones'
a. I00' buffe=orr"-b'u'""t.bti=h"a along these areas where
there is no construction
b. No grazing within these areas
2. AIl fencing be 42", a-slr.na or less or 48" 3-rail or less fencc'
3. AIl dogs kenneled or chained'
4. n.-r"g6late disturbed areas wi.th native vegetation-
P}acementofhomesitescouldimpactwildlifeuseandbuildingenvelopes
should be reviewed once they are proposed' I also refer you to my
io/fi/eg r"it". regarding this subdivision'
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact nte' Thank you'
'#rpx;ut*
District vf{fafife Manager
Carbondale
KW/IMPxc: Kent Jones, PO Box L32' Carbondale' CO 81623
DEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOI''RCES'HamletJ'Barry'ExecutiveDirector
wILDLiFE COMMlssloN, wiiliam R. Hegberg, chalrman o Dennls Luttrell, Vlce chairman r Eldon w' cooper' secrelary
Fellxchavez,MemberoRebeccaL.FranKMemoer.GeneB.Peterson,Member.GeorgeVanDenBerg,Member.LarryM.Wrlght,Member
- l$-
/r !i.'., r:r.r' :,': : l{{ i...' a'.i.|
,,firr*l
iiiiitfig
iiiiliil:iil
., -j: i
^,ti
r : ij ,r-..i:s
r r::: r_a 5 .:r,;..rrr.:i
ii rri:':i..;il-i?il'ffiffi
r, ,:i";'i ): 'ri r ')i
i,.i, ',: I ; '.r l'il
,.,:liiri ii,::iliii
STATE OF COLORADO f '::,
Boy Bomer, Governor ii1';'1 _ -oeFlntueNT oF NATUBAL BEL:/uRcEs
.DIVISION OF WILDL!FE
AN EOU^L OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Porry O. Olron, Dlrector
6O6O BroadwaY
Denver, Colorsdo 8o216
Tolophono: (3031 297'1192
ii i,,il
il
ffi$
It Itt;
i.,....r. ... .^'r.i, J i Y
November 29, 1990
GarfieJd County Planning
109 8th St. Suibe 303
Glenwood Spgs., Co 81601
Dear Andrew:
On l-O/3/90 I met with Mr. Jones for a Wildlife Revietu oll lris proposed
Goose Creek Subdivision. I refer you to my I0/I8lBg attd I0/lO/9O l.ctl-ers
to your office regarding ttris srrtrrlivision. As indicated by Lhe t,.S. Arnry
Corps of Eng ineers and my Iett.r:rs , t-he property corttai.ns va I ttable:
wetlands. I woul.d .[i.lre to em;rhasize t]re irnportance of t,ltese nnd l"lrr:ir
valtre to r.rildli f e irrcl.r.rding many nongame species as r.reI I as t.raLet'f otll arrtl
big game. 'Ihe integrity of l;he.se rvel.lands &s ruelI. as Ltrr: r'i.parinn ureas
along l-[e Roaring Fork River anrl st.r'ennrs s]rould be maintainetl by a 1.00
f t. no-developmetrt, buf f e r z()Ile nl ong t.ltese f eat ures .
If you have any quesl-iorrs, pIease f eeI f ree to conl-acl. rte. 'l'ltarrl( yotl l'or
the oppor tun i ty t.o contmen t. .
Distri.ct hriIdl i lfe Ilanager-Cnrtronrlo I e
I(W/ Imp
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOTJRCES, Hamlet J. Barry, Executlve Director
WILDLIFE COMMISSION, William B. Hegberg, Chairman . Dennls Luttrell, Vlce Ghairman o Eldon W. Cooper, Secretary
Fellx Chavez, Member . Rebecca L. Frank Member o Gene B. Peterson, Member r George VanDenBerg, Member r Larry M. Wrlght, Momber
-19-
"K;;;;,*
ffi
.1 .;.,, r;l
ri3.'
):.:
rrJfi SQprn
^.
($iiii'
s@q',t[5Q&ND@
ROY R. ROMER
oorEnNon
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SUBVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATUBAL RESOURCES
715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING _ 1313 SHERMAN STREET
DENVEF. COLORADO 8O2O3 PI1ONE (3O3) 866-261 1
December 17,1990 GA-91-0007
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planner
109 8rh St., # 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. McGregor:
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision
We have reviewed the materials submitted on this proposal and the general and enginecring
geology of the site.
We concur with the finding that there ilre no geology-related problerns wltich would
adversely affect this subdivision.
As always, we recommend that radon abatement be incorporated into all oc:cupied clwellings
regardless of the absence of evidence of radioactive materials at the particrrlar site. Alluviitl
gravels are demonstrated sources of radon gas.
Given this one cautionary note, we have no objection to the approval of this application.
Yours truly,
A/M,"l,ffi^f W-
Senior Engineering Geologist hw
-)@-
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST... KEY TO THE FUTURE
GARI-lt-l-[i (:uiJl't I t'
: j': r::, i
.",t i i.l';
. i.'!.'f
, I i,'ttjj:ij
r'j' :ii'..'ir:i'l
yT:li:r *1t{
i NOV
UAiri tLLi-r
Mark Bean, Planner
Garfle1d CountY
109 8th Street
Glenwood SPrlngs, Co 81501
Dear Mark:
We have revlewed the followlng project belng consldered:
Goose creek Subdlvlslon
In the event bus servlce would be requested 1n the future'
appllcantsneedtobeawareofthefollowlngcondltlons:
Asageneralrule,schoolbuseswlllonlytravelfederal, stafe, and county malntalned roads'
There needs to be an adequate and weII
malntalned turnaround'
tlewouldrespectfullyrequestanylmpactFeesthatare
avallable.
ctfully,ResPe
\j\e=a/
James L. -Bader
Superlntendent
JLB/lct
B UUUI\ iY
-Al-
'i:.
ROY ROMER
Governor
i l.,i:':".)
JERIS A. DANIELSON
Stale Engine()r
ffiir
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENG!NEER
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
1313 Sherman Street-Room 818
Denver, Colorado 80203
(sos) 866-3581
December 27, 1990
Gni([ IELD COUN i y
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, C0 8.l60.|
Re: Goose
shll/4
Dear Mr. McGregor:
Creek Subdivision Prel iminary Plan
Nt,lI/4, Section 35, T7S, RBSI.I
We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to d'ivide 5l acres into
five parcels. There is an existing house and well on the prgposcd Lot I
(Permit No. 158846). This well is permitted as the only well on the 5l acres
for ordinary household purposes jns'ide 3 single-fam'ily dwel'l'ings, the
irrigation of not more than one acre of home lawn and garden, and the watering
of domestic animals. The appficant proposes to cancel this permit to obtain
three household-use-only permits for three of the lots and obtain Water
Allotment Contracts from the Basalt Water Conservancy Distrjct to replace
out-of-priority depletions from the remaining two wells.
l'le cannot recommend approva'l of this proposal until IUq separate Water
Allotment Contracts have been obtained and subm'itted to this office for
review. }le would ljke separate contracts for each of the lots which will
require a well permit under the Basalt Water Conservancy District's substitute
water supp'ly plan. The District's augmentation plan is still pending in Water
Court.
}lell permits are issued by this office for the construction of new wells
as alternate points of diversion for water rights owned by the District
subject to a valid and continuing contract between the user of the well and
the District. All use of the well will be curtailed unless the Water
Allotment Contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect.
Plat notes or covenants should be required to'inform the two potential
lot purchasers of these obligations. We need to know which two lots are to be
issued well permits under the Basalt Water Allotment Contracts. Once we have
reviewed the'information requested concerning these two proposed lots, we will
-aa-
0El] :} 11990
, --.1'-r
i ,'l ,lii
Mr. Andrew McGregor
December 27, 1990
be able to describe the
valid well permlts. We
abeyance until we have
additional comments.
which the other three lots may obtain
county hold this pre'liminary plan in
information requested and have formulated
{li.i,
Page 2
procedure by
ask that the
received the
S'i ncerel y ,
,L^rfLG.a),
/James C.' McDanoI d, P. E.' Senior Water Resources Engineer
JCM/cl f: 4837 I
cc: 0rlyn Bell, Division Engineer
Bruce DeBrine
-)3-
fii;ii
r;r!; tl
.:.,8.! |
Re:BasaltWaterConservancyDistrictAllotmentContract
Dear Mr. Jones:
IOHN R. SCHENK
DAN KERST
IVILLIAM t. doWINTER' III
Mr. Kent lones
PO Box 132
Carbondale, CO 81623
SCHENK' KERST & deWINTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CENTML BANK BUILDINO
SUTTB 3tO, 3M EIOITTH STREET
GLENWOOD SPRTNOS, COLORADO 8T60I
TELEPHoNE: O03) 945-2447
TELECoPIERT (303) 945-29?7
November 15, 1990
At its meeting on Novemb er 12, 1990, the Board "l 'li1':1.tjll'TlT:y?::l
con *.ff'nil ;'#ilil;"* ffi ,ruli * i: l l yl':: tlly* :1*fi' j:: i ; 1 3fi Ii iTi
;:ff;':"?;":,H;l#;i:;df:lll':"1'Y:l'I.'^"^1':ffi ::::li1'*f :f 'f, :'S1r'::f,:,I31; "lJffi|}Hffi"ffiilffi.
please note the conditions set forth on the order'
-^--^--:Lr^ f^- nnrfnrrnqnee- of tlte?IJT'fi ;Jffi:t'#'.Ut1#:#,ffi;'o*ir *4.*itt be responsible ror perrormance or tlte
i ^r- rt^-.-^^r io oooionprl lrr ilre
UXJ:I,liuiT't""",i,H;;".r1.i;ffi,il'i' .'Luri'r,.o .nd th. contraci is assigned to trre
rr--^^...aa-to Aocmialinn cn'tlrel Ii:l#ftJJ:'r1"il;:filnl,,irT";'pon forn"tion or the Homeowner's Association so that I
. i - ---t^.^l ^-,1 rahrrnerl tn me
lrffifil"J: y*1,il#Jfr';r;[de,'t f***r,i.t must be completed and returned to me,
tog"lt "t with the assignment fee of $50'00'
any you desire to sell one of the subdivided lots withoutIf at time
norn*linli,, o'r#;;d:;;,r,*t ltren apply for a separate conrract for ttre individual lot at
. ---r:--r:^- f^^ a0 it than erielcffi[filJ:'r:f"JtrT}A,ffi;;;; tne'diitrict's contract application ree at it then exisrs'
lf the enclosed contract is acceptable you, please sign all of the enclosed copies otl page
5, have you signature notarized -O ,rtu* onl frif, signed-copy to me for the District's records'
please contact me if you have any questions regarding this matler'
DIUkla
Enclosures -one to be returned
/r/r r/4"
,/hArZ -J{-
rl'.
.,c
'I
, i ,' ';,' 1.
' rii t I t, I
'It,i;,ffift#fi
:, ::1..
i iil' ,
rii)
BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
WATER ALIOTN,IET{T CONTRACT
Fursuant to C.R.S. 19731 3745-131
Kent Iones (hereinafter ,Applicant') has applied to the Basalt Water Conservancy District
(hereinafter the 'District,), a political subdivision of the State of colorado, organized pursuant
|o ana existing by viilu;'of Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973,37-45-101, Qt seg', for an..
allotment Contract for beneficial use of water rights owned, leased, or hereafter acquired by the"
District. By execution of this contract, Applica--nt agrees to the following terms and conditions:
l. OUANTITY: In consideration of the covenants and conditions herein contained,
Applicant rt.tt U" *tittra to receive and apply to benefrcial use .033 cubic feet of water per
seclna from the District's direct flow righti ina t.3 acre feet per year of storage water owned
or controlled bY the District.
2. soIrRCE OF ALLoTTED WATER: Water rights allotted pursuant to this
Contract stran Ue from tte pirtri.t's water ri[hts decreed to the Basalt Conduit, Landis Canal,
Stockman,s Ditch Extension, or other decreeior water rights hereafter acquired by the District,
in.ruaing the District's contractual right to rcceive storage water {rom }'.uedi Reservoir- The
District shall have the right to designale the water right or Decree of the District from which tlte
Applicant's altotted righis shall bJobtained. The Appticant's use of any of the District's water
,iiirts shall be subjecito any and all terms and conditions imposed by the Water Court on tlte
use of the Districtis said ri[nts. Exchange releases made from the District's storage riglrts in
Ruedi Reservoir or other wirks and faciliiies of the District shall be delivered to the Applicant
at the outlet works of said storage facility and release of water at such outlet works shall
constitute full performance of thJuistrict;s delivery obligation. Deli-very_of water frorn the
District,s storage rights in Ruedi Reservoir shall be iubject to the District's lease Contract with
the united States n-ureau of Reclamation and any rules and regulations promulgated pursuant
thereto.
3. puRposE AND LOCATION OF USE: Applicant will use the waters lterein
grantedfo,u"n@h"aug*"ntation:|"li:Ilg.i1l:::"*l,'":i1.:.n::
water sources, within or through facilitiies oi upon lands owned, operated, or servcd by
nffti.rnt, which lands are *orr-fully described on rxhibit 'A" attached hereto; provided tltat
the location and purpose of Applicant's use of said water shall be legally recognized and
permitted by the applicable governmental authority having jurisdiction gveJ the property scrvcd'
ipplicant'icontemptated uige for the water allotted hereunder is for the following use or rtscs:
Domestic/Municipal
-
Industrial/Commercial
-
Agricultural_-r_
Other
Applicant acknowledges that usage of the District's water rights as herein contemplated
shall be in lieu of or suppleriental to Aflplicant obtaining or adjudicating, on its own, the right
to use certain waters.. ii is actnowtedgea ttrat certain locations within the District may not be
,ur.rptiuf" to service solely by the Distict's water rights allotted hereunder or the District's said
-^Jf -
';:tii
water rights may not satisfy Applicant's needs and purposes. To the extent that service catmot
be achiJved by use of thL District's allotted water rights, or in the event said service is
inadequate, Applicant may, utilize such other water rights, by way of supplementing lhe
Distriit's water rights, or otherwise, as is necessary to assure water service sufficiently reliable
for Applicant's intended purpose or purposes. All lands, facilities and areas served by water
rights allotted hereunder shall be situated within the boundaries of ttre District. The District
,ese*es the exclusive right to review and approve any conditions which may be attached to
judicial approval of Applicant's use of the District's water rights allotted hereunder. Applicant
agrees to defray any out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the District in connection with the allot- "
rn'ent of *"to rights hereunder, iniluding, but not jimitea to, reimbursement of tegal and
engineering costs incurred in connection with any water rights adjudication necessary to allow
Afplicant'i use of such allotted water rights; provided, however, in the event any suclt
adjuaication involves more of the District's water rights than are allotted pursuant to this
Contract, Applicant shall bear only a pro-rata portion of such expenses. Applicant shall be solely
responsible for providing works and facilities, if any, n@essary to utilize thc District's water
rights allotted hereunder for Applicant's beneficial use.
Water service provided by the District shall be limited to the amount of water available
in priority at the original point of diversion of the District's applicable water right and neither
the District, nor those entitled to utilize the District's decrees, may call on any greater amount
at new or alternate points of diversion. The District shall request the Colorado State Engineer
to estimate any conveyance losses between the original point and any alternate point and such
estimate shall be deducted from this amount in each case. The District, or anyone using the
District's decrees, may call on any additional sources of supply that may be available at an
alternate point of div"riion, but not at the original point of diversion, only as against water rights
which are junior to the date of application for the alternate point of diversion.
In the event the Applicant intends to develop an augmentation plan and institute legal
proceedings for the approval of such augmentation plan to allow the Applicant to utilize the
water alloited to Applicant hereunder, the Applicant shall give the District written notice of such
intent. In the event the Applicant develops and adjudicates an augmentation plan to utilize the
water allotted hereunder, Applicant shall not be obligated to bear or defray any legal or
engineering expense of the District incurred by the District for the purpose of developing and
adjudicating a plan of augmentation for the District. In any event, the District shall have the
right to approve the Applicant's augmentation plan and the Applicant shall provide the District
copies of such plan and of all pleadings antl other papers filed with the Water Court in the
adjudication thereof.
4. PAYIviENT: Applicant shatl pay annually for the water service described herein
at a price to be fixed annually by the Board of Directors of the District for such service. The
initial annual payment shall be made, in full, within 15 days after the date of a notice from the
District that the initial payment is due. Said notice will advise the Applicant, among other
things, of the water delivery year to which the payment shall apply and the price which is
applicable to that year. Annual payments for each year thereafter shall be made by the Applicant
2
-lL-
1:i:..
../.:l'' ..;...',
on or before each March l. If an annual payment is not made by the due date, written notice
ttrereof will be sent by the District to the Applicant at Applicant's address set forth below. If
payment is not made within ten (10) days after said written notice, the District may, at its option,
elect to terminate all of the Applicant's right, title, or interest under this Contract, in which event
the water right allotted hereunder may be transferred, leased or otherwise dispsal of by the
District at the discretion of its Board of Directors.
In the event water deliveries hereunder are made by or pursuant to agreement witlt some
other person, corporation, quasi-municipal entity, or governmental entity, and in the event the
Applicant fails to make payments as required hereunder, the District may, at its sole option and
request, authorize said person or entity to curtail the Applicant's water service pursuant to this
Contract, and in such event neither the District nor such persons or entity shall be liable for such
curtailment.
5. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS: The Applicant agrees that so long as this
Contract is valid and in force, Applicant will budget and appropriate from such sources of
revenues as may be legally available to the Agrplicant the funds necessary to make the urnual
payments in advance of water delivery pursuant to this Contract. The Applicant will hold
harmless the District and any person or entity involved in the delivery of water pursuant to this
Contract, for discontinuance in service due to the failure of Applicant to maintain the payments
herein required on a current basis.
6. BENEFIT OF CONTRACT: The water right allotted hereunder shall be
beneficiatly used for the purposes and in the manner specified herein and this Contract is for the
exclusive benefit of the Applicant and shall not inure to the benefit of any successor, assign, or
lessee of said Applicant without the prior written approval of the Board of Directors of the
District.
In the event the water right allotted hereunder is to be used for the benefit of land which
is now or will hereafter be subdivided or otherwise held or owned in separate ownership intcrest
by two (2) or more uses of the water right allotted hereunder, the Applicant may assign the
Applicant's rights hdreunder only to a homeowners association, water district, water antl
sanitation district or other special district properly organized and existing under and by virtue of
the laws of the State of Colorado and then only if such association or special district establishes
to the satisfaction of the Basalt Water Conservancy District that it has the ability and authority
to assure its performance of the Applicant's obligations under this Contract. [n no event shall
the owner of a portion, but less than all, of the Applicant's property to be served under this
Contract, have any rights hereunder, except as such rights may exist through a homeowners
association or special district as above providul. Any assignment of the Applicant's rights under
this Contract shall be subject to and must cornply with such requirements as the District ntay
hereafter adopt regarding assignment of Contract rights and the assumption of Contract
obligations by assignees and successors, provided that such requirements shall uniformly apply
to all dlottees receiving District service. The restrictions on assignment as hereln contained shall
not preclude the District from holding the Applicant, or any successor to the Applicant,
3
-*,1? -
I
. -:'^
. ":; lil
responsible for the performance of all or any part of the Applicant's covenants and agreemetlts
herein contained.
7. OTHEIf RULES: Applicant's rights under this Contract shall be subject to the
Water Service Plan as adopted by the District and amended from time to time; provided that such
Water Service Plan shall apply uniformly throughout the District among water users receiving
the same service from the District. Applicant shall also be bound by the provisions of the Water
Conservancy Act of the State of Colorado, the Itules and Regulations of the Board of Directors
of the District, the plumbing advisory, water conservation, and staged curtailment regulations,
if any, applicable within the County in which the water allotted hereunder is to be used, togetlter
with atl amendments of and supplements to any of the foregoing.
8. CURTAILMENT OF USE: Thc water service provided hereunder is expressly
subject to the provisions of that certain Stipulation in Case No. 80 CW 253 on file in the District
Court in Water Division No. 5 of the State of Colorado, which Stipulation provides, in part, for
the possible curtailment of out-of-house municipal and domestic water demands upon the
occurrence of certain events and upon the District giving notice of such curtailment, all as more
fully set forth in said Stipulation.
9. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Applicant shall enter into
an 'Operation and Maintenance Agreement' wilh the District if and when the Board of Directors
finds and determines that such an agreement is required by reason of additional or special
services requested by the Applicant and provided by the District or by reason of the delivery or
use of water by the Applicant for more than one of the classes of service which are defined in
the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Directors of said District. Said agreement ntay
contain, but not Ui timitea to, provision for water delivery at times or by means not provided
within the terms of standard allotment contracts of the District and additional annual monetary
consideration for extension of District services and for additional administration, operation iurd
maintenance costs, or for other costs to the District which may arise through services made
available to the Applicant.
10. CHANGE OF USE: The District reserves the exclusive right to review and
approve or disapprove any proposed change in use of the water right allotted hereunder. Any
use other than that set forth herein or any lease or sale of the water or waler rights allotted
hereunder without the prior written approval of the District shall be deemed to be a matcrial
breach of this Contract.
I l. PRIOR RESOLUTION: The water service provided hereunder is expressly subject
to that certrain Resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the District on Septetnber 25,
1979, and all amendments thereto, as the sarne exists upon the date of this application and
allotment Contract.
12. NO FEE T[LE: It is understood and agreed that nothing hercin shall give the
Applicant any equitable or legal fee title interest or ownership in or to any of the water or water
4
-h.8-
:ir.
, r{i;l +r.u,"
,i'r
4fti
rights of the District, but that Applicant is entitled to the right to use the water right allotted
hereunder, subject to the limitations, obligations and conditi[ns of this Contract.
13. CONSERVATION PRACTICES: Applicant shall implement and use commonly
accepted conservation practices with respect to the water and water rights allotted hereunder and
shall be bound by any conservation plan hereafter adopted by the Diitrict, as the orr ,ry U.
amended from time to time.
PO Box 132
Carbondale, CO 1623
STATE OF COLORADO )
couNry oF GARFTELD i ss'
subscribed and sworn to before me this d^y or I rW <k/zL , 1990.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:*%tq/a3
- a?-
.'rr'.I..'. ..i';': I
' ,-i'.: i . . ''\, ,t ', '
' 'ri,.l, r; ' :.':t":'
;'fi: L.iiilj .ii.:ii r.
,
i$1it$i1;
:iffi[t[
'.; ll: i;r. :.:,.i.(.. i l"r
i$t+i'iitii,
:rlitJl r:,r i1r,i::i:.rrr,:1,..i..1 i,.r.,.ii,\'
r |."{#ii, iri+'.,r'rii;,
i.',i;:$i::1j )iijii.
ffiiiii
' i'1li;:.i.|'i;,';ii, :, l:
,: r:|'il!,':. 1: . "l i,,,.';:,
,ltii,^l..,' I' i:,i.,
(.sj,
,i;:.; i
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ALIOTMENT CONTRACT
KEI{T JONES
Application having been made by or on behalf of Kent Jones and all parties interested in
the foregoing Water Allotment Contraciand hearing on said Application having been duly held,
it is heriby-ordered that said Application be granted and that the foregoing Water Allotment
Contract for .033 cubic feet of *it r p"r second from the District's direct flow rights and 1.3
acre feet of water per year of storage water owned or controlled by the District is hereby
approved and executed
-by
and on Uendf of the Basalt Water Conservancy District, for tlte
beneficiat use of tfre water allotted in the foregoing Contract, upon the telms, conditions and
manner of payment as therein specifiul and subject to the following specific conditions:
l. The Applicant shall establish a Homeowners Association or other entity acceptable
to the District for thi ongoing payment of charges due under the apprgyed. Contract following
subdivision of the prodrty -Oit.riU.O in the Application on file with the District and the
Applicant shall give notic" to purchasers of all- or any part of the llbjTt propelJ of lhe
obtigation of thiiContract, and shalt record such notice in ttre records of the Clerk and Rrorder
of darfield County, Coloiado. Applicant and his successors and assigns shall comply with all
rules and regutations now existinj or hereafter adopted by the District to erforce payment of
charges due-under the apprwed Contract by preseniand future owners of all or any part of the
real property served under the Contract-
Z. The Applicant shall provide the District proof that the proposed land use of the
land to be benefitted 6i tf,r water allotted hereunder has been approved by the applicable govern-
mental authorities tr*irg jurisdiction over such land use, including evidence satisfactory to the
District that each lot or parcel to be benefitted hereunder is legally subdivided.
3. The applicant has acknowledged that the land to be benefitted by the foregoing irnd
attached Contract is described as follows:
See Exhibit nAn attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
r,yz A.!..,nh'r* ,&nr, .f
President
I hereby certify that the above Order was entered by the Directors of the Basalt Water
Conservancy Iiistrict bn the l,2b}l. day of -
November , 1990'
ATTEST:
Secretary
-3D-
i1:"..i.,i
j : .'':'. j
,
t'1 r,
Sectlon 3{
Sald parcel of
Beglnnlng at the lfltness corner for the south euarter corner o! sald sect,lon 3Slthence N. 53'30t43" t{. 4278.58 feet to the True polnt of lteglnnlng, eald polnEalso belng the Nlf corner of that parcel conveyed to John tt. ilaeobaen by DocrrmentNo. 271155 of the Garfleld County records, thence N. 00.49r00" E. 930.9O feet, toof that
276641t
tlre 9ll corner of that prreel conteycd to ttavld Burnford, et al
276641t thenee E. 1337.67 tecE along the south llne of aald papareel to the SE
by Document llo.
corner thereoft thence North 1247.14 feeE al.ong the East llno and East llne
. extenrled of aald Burnford, eE al parcel, thence N. 89.23r39" E. 446.97 feetr
thence South 2192.67 feot Eo a polnb on the llorth llne extended Eaat of thatparcel conveyed to Jacobeenl thence l.test 1797.oo feet, along Ehe ilorth tlno
exbended andl North llne of aald Jacobeen pareol to the True polnt of Beglnnlng.
. 3/ -
EXHrBrf "4"
A parcel of land altuatsed ln Lotn 3 and 4, Sectlon 35 and Lot B,
Tounshlp 7 south, Range EB llest of the slxth prlnclpal Herldlan.land ls descrlbed as follorat
,:i:
.',
t.r.( r:.1
)i
it_
,li_\'.,
'. : r1"'Town of Carbondale
76 Sor.rrh 2ncl St. Carbondale, Colorad<> 8l(r23 Go3) 963-2713
f)ecemtrer' 2l , 1990
I.l r'. Andt:erv l.tc(iregol
Garfield Corrnt.y Pl.anrring I)eparLrnerrl
109 Stlt Streel., Suibe:i03
Glenvroorl Spri.ngs, C:() 8 t 60 I
TNANSI'IITTED VIA FACSII'III,T: I.ET LII,I 1.0 9,I5-2379
Rt? ! (ioose Cret--li SuLrclivi sion Plc' l.i.mintrry Pl an
1990
uurii{
1U
IY
Dear ltnrlrew:
I have revierve.l 1.he i nllorrna'Li ori
Pre.[ irninary P] an. As 5,orr 'linori,
provide the'l'u[,Jlt rui.th rrp [.<-l olt(]
This supply is cruciarl. for tlre
otrr rvaterl nee:cls rlrrrirrg t.lir: peal;
The Colorerdo I)epart-rnent r:f Heal
nra)- be a pot.e,rit.jal. problerr rvi t,lr
tverll fields. Il, is Lht:'l'or',n's sl t. l'O l) g
approving Lhr,,r projt:cl. rrntil l.lre't"<-" is a
possibil it5, cif crlntaminat-ion er;iliL:;.
Lrritrr iLLU
on t.he: (,ioose Creelt Srrli,livi.s.iorr
1-lic' Goose Crr+eli Srrl.rrl i visi r:n i s
t.lr htrs irrdicat.erl tt-'r v.iu t ha l. l lre,r.t:
I . S . D. :-, . con t.ar,ri nal1. irrg l-lrr-. 'I'orvlr' :j
lrCrs;i. 1- iC)f, tr<tt. t.(] rer::(:'mlt(.tt(l
gltarant.ee tlrr-r l. nr:
'l'h<: 'IoL,n lras; ir I r.ea.,:l 5'
jrrsl- rtpstream of tl're'Iot';ll of Carbc,rrdale Iloar'ing Forli l{elI Ficld.
The 'fotvn prescnl-J-y l-ias t.rvo r"'t--l I s in thrrt. locatiorr rvlrir:lr (ia)i
mi ll i,;n grrl J ons oI' t"ir l.er' ;r r,lrr) .
'l'r:r"'n i rr t-haL it r,rl .l rirvs us l-o rn(:e t
sltmn)er lnont-lrs. In arltlition, l,l-riswat.er'sotlrce is rlortbl.y i.nr1>r:rr'1'.arrl. in LlrrrL tlie rvetl. J'ir::ld c,)ulcl
PoteIrLietIly br: e-':;patrrriecl Lo 1-eti nrel I.s arict lreIli us n)e()1. ol,lt- f rrtrrr.egrorvt.lt ueer.l s. 'l'lre 'fow)r ,tf Citr'lir:,nrln.l.t: f)I.€:sent. l)' I)r.o\,,i <lesr
muni c iperl t'rat.er to zrppl ox i mat-o I y I ,00()0 I,eopIe .
erlcoltrrtered sinri,.l.ar pr-rrbJerns wi1. Ir t.lris r,el[ fljefcl . ,\s ^ r.csrrll.,
Llre S1:.trLe Dclrat't,tnetrl. o[' IIea] t.lr I'eclu ir,:cl the 'for"rn 1.o lirrrcrhasr: ,,rn
easeutellL frorn Perry l?obtrirrs, tvlrich rt:sr.r,l.1-erl irr l-i'r,er;lock belrrgi
t'etnoved f ronr it ccrl.a j.rr arcrl itn<l t.lLat i)l'ea bei ng fel'rc,:,il tr: f)r(,\:r:f 11 Lan), f'ttrthei: use or possibl.e. c<.rrrl.arnlrterLjorr.
Prel jmina,ry i.nvest.igatjonr; havr.. irr,licaLeil 1.hzrt tlier"e is ;lpossibilil-y of tiit.t'al.e poIIttl-i<>n fr,:m t-he I.S.D.S. rrl.i rv<-,1-l as t.lre
f)ossi bil it.)' of sonre chemi r:al crivlInpintrt..ion f rc,rn i rn1,1'r,I;st. rii slro:ia1oll m<>1.or oi ) s, gaso Iine, e1.c. Iividc'ncel oI' ally of l-hrrse
c:crn1,aminates rvj.Il. j.ricretrse t.he rnoniL-ori.rrg c(rsts as wt:.1.I as
c)ornPl i.anc:e cos1.s filr t.lte 'l','>rvn,
- 3)'
1;'1;:.i..
i. 1. .'r', '
( ',i .'.
i'rrl: l.'
t:..i . .
i'i,,, l
i.:.,' 1. -
l,'l l',ri
.
t .,1
1
i,l,'l.;r'
r, i; ' ,
r't i.fi
:i!; '. ',.'r.r.', ir!
;lil. ili:'.!r:iiii
li:':.
'i:r
.:,n:,
,iili
\,t.1
,:..r
.) ..
.., i,.,
,': i
.,/
( iP
Tlre Town is reLaining arr engilre€-.r to looli at bhe tc'clr6ica.l
asPecl,s of 1-Lrj s proposa).. The 'l'orv-n rui l.l give f rrrtl'ier oollrnr:]11 1. c,nthis project either pri.:r to or tlt t.lre Jantrarl'gt)r prrblic
hearing. Presentl y,
rnnnicipal trtiIitjes
Goose Creeli are€r i s
I worrld like to thanli you for giving l-lre Torvrrrespond to this clevelopmerrt. proposal. Please
27 33 i f: you hzrve any clllost ions .
SincereJy,
i1; i.s a.glrtitrst 'Iorvn pol icy t,o e_x1.encl
ottLsi <le t-lre 'l'own's corporat-e bcrundirries. 'l'lre
not j.rr ally r-rf ollr serv-i ce plans at, thi:; t.jrrre.
Llre (rplrort-un it,y lo
conLatcl. lnt) zrt 06:l-
TnJc( -
Marl< ClTai n
Town P-l anrrer
I'lClsrt
- 38-
FEB AE '91 13:45 OF CRRBTJI{DRLETOI^IN 129 Peil!/A6
Town of Carbondale
76 South 2nd Sr. Grbondale, Colorado g1623 (303) 963-2731
February 6, 1gg1
ffisMr. Andrew McGresor GARFIELD COUNTYGarfield County planning Depar.t.ment109 8th Street, Suite 903Glenwood Springs, CC) 91601
TRANSMITTED BY FACSIMILE IETTEII ON 2/6/97
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision pr.eliminary plan
Dear Andrewl
The Carbondale Board of Trrrgteera revi_ewed the a.borre referenccdproiect at its Jenuary 22, lggl, meeting and its possible impaeton the Townrs_Roaring Fork Well.fieId. inrficants present wereKent Jones a.d priscirla prohr. As you tiow, [h; i;;" and urestate Department of Hearth have conclrrr* thai the e*i utirrg Townrcerlfierd wirr be rmpacted by i;he proposea deveropme,t. The ,fow'has three existing shalIow, liigh ".p"iity murricipal wells rshlchhave a capacity of 300 to gSO ii.p.^. This area has also beentargeted for rrine additional we}ls to eupplernent our- water er.rpplyas the Town grows. These werls have "onditionat au""""=.
AfLer a long discussion, the Board of Trustees unaninously passeda motion which asks Garfield county to prace
" pl;t-r:estrictionon Lhe subdivlsron which wourd r.qrire *ny r.s.D.s. truirt rtrithinthe Coose Creelr Subdivision tcr be constructed subject to Townapproval. At this point in tirnel the ?own would i*qu."t that, &nyI'S'D's. be a non-discharging nysten strch ns an E.T.- system usl,ghypalon Iiners in Iieu of polv"ihy1"ne iirr""=
The Towp would also like to have a working relationstrip withGarfield County in this genera.l- area in the future "u tf,ut ourwerrs carr continue to be protected. rn the best of worrdsr theTowrt would know precisely how far of an area "'way f rorrr t1e Towrr, swellf ield needs to be protecterJ. It will be dif ficu.Lt to obtainthis information since such a etucly wourd be expensive and theresults would be trighly interpretive. The Town is currentlyinvesti6ating wi.Lh the State Department of nealtf, tno possibilit-yof the Town becoming a pirot prb ject for ilre state, s l,/errheadProtection Proflram. we r.rill. keep you informed about this matter.
-3(-
FEB kb '91 I0t^rr.l OF CHREtrr-tDFiLE
iil:ji):.lL
13:46
The Town Board has instructed rne to investigate with bhe Count;y
the possibility of Tovrn review and approval of any I.S.D.S. bei.ng
constructed in this generel area. I &m including a letter from
Louis I'Ieyer which provides documentation that 95% of groundwater
contamination cases result from contaminat,ion within Lwo niles of
the (round water source. We hope that a working rel.ationshipwith the County will result in a satisfactory solution to iprotectlng our domesttc water supply from PoIItttion.
The Town woufd like to thank Garfield County for the opportunity
to review tl'rls atrd other projects which may impact the Town of
Carbondale. You can contact me at 963-2733 if you have any
questions abottt the Town's comments on the 0oose Creelt
Preliminary Plan. I look forward to discussing with yott in ttre
ne&r future the isstte of protecting ollr Sround water supply.
Sincerely r/h,l
Mark Ch
Town PI
D,lClsd
Encl.
.,cL-
ain
anner
-35-
FEB A6 '91 13:45 TOt^lN OF CARBONDRLE
Janr:ary 7, 199l
Mr. Mark Chain, Town Flannar
Town of Carbondalo
76 South Second Street
Carbondale, CO 81623
t)9 P6tl/O6
1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2'E
Glenwood 6pringc, Colorado 81@1
(303) 94$1004 (303) 925.6727
Fax (3O3) S456S4B
coH8ut7,il6 Erro,rrEEns t
Yt," ' -'
RECEIVEnJAN0s lssl
RE: Goose Creak Subdivision Prolimin6ry Ptan
Dear Mark
As requasted, I have reviewed the Goose Cresk Subdivision Preliminary Plan. Tlre purposc
of this tattar is to comment of the relationship between the Goose Creek Subdivlsion and the
Town's well fleld.
The relationships betwoon municipal well fields arrd point sources of poltution are extromely
co,nptex and highly interpretive. To dafinitively determine the relationship would require in'
Oept'fr groundwater modeting and actual in-place monitoring So that groundwater movBrnant
and pollutant transport can be dcfincd.
Short of doing this in-depth analysis, certain facts can be raised at this time ort tho
relationship between the Goose Creek Subdivision and the Town of Carbondale's wolls-
Those facts are as follows:
The proposed {ive lots for Goose Creek Subdivision are located between 1600
and 250O foot away from the Town of Carbondale well fieltl.
Genorally, the groundwatsr gradient, or direction of flow, in the Roaring Fork
alluvial is towards tho river and downstrgam. Thorefore, upon information and
belief, the Town of Carbondale's well fiald is down gradient trom the proposed
Goose Creek Subdivision.
Currontly, the Town's well fi.rtd is used as a peaking source of water to lrandle
irrigation saason water demands.
This welt field has been identified as the future source of Town of Carbondolo
watar. As tha Town grows, more wells can bo drilled in the Roarin6l Fork
alluvial. These wolls will gonerally parallel the Roaring Fork River and be spaccd
350 feet apart. Enclosed as Figuro 1 is a map propared f or Carbondale by WME
which shows tha area iderrtified as the future well field corridor. Also,
according to WME, the corre of depression for these wells is t 500 feer. l'lte
WME suggests a total of nine wells will be required to m6et future demands.
The.Town's three existing wells are shallow, high-capacity municipal wells.
The wells are drilled to approximately 36 feet ln daprh anrl havo a screened
interval ol *. 22 to 35 feet, and have a capacity of * 300 to 35O gpnl.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
- 3L-
FEB A6 tgL L3t4?
JanuarY 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page two
6.
7.
lnalettertoGarfieldCountyfrrlmRichardH.Bowman,datedNovembgrl9,
1990, Mr'eowm#;ttt;d' there- #;;'potential problem wittr lsDs's
contaminatlng th6 io*"{*.tfs. Case ntsiorias back up Mr' Bowman's claim'
.
,29 Pgc'L/65
CORDON MFYER' INC.
8.
9.
Case lristories in pollutant transport theory indicate.that virusss and organics
can migrate long Oistancei in shailow di"'iiO*iter with course alluvial aquif t:rs'
Distances cited in iasafristories s.uggtiitnttt pollutants can travsl distances
longar than that -";;;i;;;o in tnitlituttio" ti"un supplv these case histories'
lf necessarY).
Thepreliminaryplanreportinrilcatesthatengineergq.lsDs,swillbedesigned
for each lot. rnarJi.rr,li.rn u. .rguri ti'tui in. rsos's will be built to Garfield
county and cotor-aJo b"partmglt "i[;;iil-siandards
and meet all setback
requirements. H;;;r;;-inoiuiouar *;;;& disposal regulatlons, both on a
county and state l"rlf , J. n"t take tnto cons-tOeration proxirnity to high-capacity
iirni*ipur wells.
The state Health Dapartmont ..has adopted Ih9 Basic standards For
Groundwat"r- ruui. r, Lt..t't-a, ri*i""*t-t tt-anOarOs- for discharge to domcstic
use ctassifieO grolni*ut.r. Table iliiiitt ihe discharge of total colif orms to
one organirrn p", iOO ,nif.. 'l-hesa limltations are to ie "t at tho poi.t of
compliance. The point of .conrplia#'i;; .il i*n of Carbo.dale's well field
hasnotbeenestabtishod.However,thodatausadtocompilothebasic
standards indicate that point or "o*p'ii.nce
strouto hs.within a two-mile radius
of the'Town's wells. Below ut. t[ititntes-from that Basrc Standards for
Griundwut"r,
.A conservative aria of two lateral milas around the-activity in questions'wlll
Nesumptpeu b;-;;; ui trt," i7illat'"i'iiiriiiirur. rhe comnrtbsron finds this
area to be reasonaltla for thc following rcasons:
p';,n'('fl :',3J,?,;{!,!ii+,;fii;^flit":txii!:i1:;i:trilTi,:{i*
,,nfl,t ,:l*' rur 'ii:;,':i-!:';,,:: :l io;,;;r;;. Garastnl i'ii myr9" !nc., oerrormcrl an
v. ,\r" \:\, in-thtouso survay of iiiiu such itai d total of t4t sites/ which also
ilr' ii,, ,r;;;t"; iot'gso/o ,'t';';;;;;ir^"" of conarnination ware timited to
t ,,' two miles from the source;
B,ThelCFCorporationp)9(9ry1d'a-nationalsutveY'forUSEPAHeadquarters,oflsgbficiisites.tniiiiitudy,tCFfoundthat9s%
of tha distartces from the source to groiii*iter discnarge boundaries
wara within 1Y1s rniles)
TOUN OF CARBONDALE
F=-.-
FEB 66 '9t !3:4?TOtAIN OF CAREOI.IDALE 1:l9 PE6/@6
C' Geraghty and Miller, lnc, perfotmed a nailonal survoy, for IJSEpAHeadquarters. of rarye groundwater pumping sysfems (municipat watersupply wells)- This suruey revealed tnrt rppiximatety gs?i of rn"ruwells had a captura zone ff.a-, zona of influencel within a two-miie,radius. '
10' Accordirrg to County staff , there are approximately fifty residelrts in this gonarataroa. Most of thoss are farthar away from the Town'i wels but, noneti.iil;can contributo to aquifer contamination.
Given the above-montiorred facts,l concur with Mr. Bowrhan,s concorn over the potontial forpollution of the Town of Carbondale'g water supply. Continued proliferation of ISDS,s in this;area will severely curtail the Town's ability to expand the weli field in the future. Certainsteps can be taken to mitigate or lessen the risks associated with the Jeretopment sucn as,
1' Construction of non-discharging ISDS's, such as ET (evapotranspirotion) bedsusing hypalon linors in tieu of polyothylerre tiners.
2, Construction of on'site monitoring wel! dritled down gradient of the ISDS.
3. Extensiorr of Town wastewater facilities-
I hope this information has been of use to you. t would be happy to folow up this rner.no orattend any public moetings as nocessary.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESEH GORDON MEYER, II..IC,
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page three
Louis Meyer, P.E.
LM:lc/9218-17
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Peter Ware
Mr. Davis Farrar
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYEB, INC.
- 3$-t
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
FIESC]UFlCE
ENGINEEFIING INC
Mr. Andrew McGrogor February 12, 1991
Garfield County Planning Department
109 Eight Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Basalt Water Conservancy District Wator Allotment Contract
Kent Jones
Dear Andrew:
You have previously inquired as to the status of Mr. Kent Jones' water allotment
contract with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. Please be advised that Mr. Jones
does have an approved water allotment contract with the District for 1.3 acre feet of
water per year. The water was acquired to augment the stream system fronr potential
out of priority diversions associated with a four unit residential development located
near Carbondate, Colorado. Tho water un<ler contract is available for rolease from
I::.l,i::il. amount or water requirod ror the contract we assumed that the
wastowater would be treated by individual E.T. type systems. These systems rely on
evaporation and plant transpiration processos and aro considered 100% consumptive
(i.e. no return flows reach the stream system). Therefore, the water allotment
bontract is suf ficient to cover tho subdivisiolt's total diversions for in-house purposes.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call
me.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE ENGINEENNG, INC.
R. Scott Fifer,
Hydrologist
RSF/mmm
033-10 bwcdl36
CC: Mr. Kent Jones
Consulting Engineens and Hydrologists -39-
FEB t3 1e9l
GARFIELD COUNTY
BOp Gnend Avenue. SulEe 3OA I Glenwood Spnin1ls, CO 816C)1 f [3OS] 94ffi777 I Fax 19,75-1137
5rb,,r{/< t /" Fc t' q/
CARBONDALE & RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
3OO MEADOWOOD DR.
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
February t2, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor
GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPT.
1 09 Bth st.
Glenwood Springs, CoIo. 81601
Dear Mr. McGregor,
I have revlewed. the preliminary plan for the proposed Goose Cr^eek
sub-division, and would I ike t,o of f er the f oI Iowinq comments to
you regard.ing fire protection for the property. As I understand
it the propel^ty is to be dividerd into 5 single f ami ly }ots.
Access to the lots from courtty r oad 100 is adequete for the
Cai^bondale fire trucks. The proposed roads are wide enough and
turn around space is provided for the fire trucJ<s. In addition,
access to lot 1 owned by Mr. I(ent Jones is likewise adequete for
the Carbondale fire trucks. Any proposed bridges or culverts on
the proposed roads should be t:apable of supportingr a 56. OO0 Ib
fire truck.
Water supply for f ire protecti,:n wilI be provided with tho water
carried on the Carbondale fire trucks which is 5.500 gaIlons.
This is a sufficient water supply for a single family house.
It. should be noted that fire response will be from the Carhondale
fire station and the average respollse time to the proposed sub-
division is approximately L0 minutes.
If yor-r have any qrlestions feel free to contact me at 963-2491 .
Sincere ly .
(l-- ol ---------
Ron Leach
Carbondale & RuraI Fire Protection District
Chief
z-/.'
6,ffi
- {10'SJT3ytlll€P T() p1r,1,.rrr-rr,.l 6 (on.n)rs:,rotf 2,t3,1/
.,Il!$iii ffi*rii,i:,iil'i'. 'i.it=
fit;{;i' ; ,};,',: . ri.,.:, :lj.iii:l':ri r::j .;." ji..i
iffi i:: t.ii;,;,:.i,;i:,,
$iil ,; :;.;'i ,, : ':,
,,
$;1i[j"ii,; ii;..,
lo$I.
ffiffi
1001 Grand Avenue, Sulte 2-l:
Glenwood Springs, Colorado gl60l
(eos) slgr004 (sm) szs$zzz
Fax (303) 945 5948
corvsulrrlrc Errrc,NEEnS r sufl yEY0RS
February 7, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor, planner
Garfield County
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 8160.|
RE:Goose Creek Subdivision - Town of Carbondate
an ET system. ET systems tend to roquiro a slightly targer area and are sliightly more costlythan conventional systems.
Dear Andrew:
Mark chain, with the Town of carbondale, asked that I respond to your concerns over tlreissue of installing non-discharging evapo-transpiration (ETI systemi for the Goose crecl<Subdivision.
An ET bed can be used to dispose of wastewater to the atmosphere so no discharge tosurface or groundwater is required. on-site ET'disposal normatly consists of a sandberl withan impermeable liner and wastewater distribution piping (see aitached figure). Tlre surfaceof the sandbed may be planted with water-intensivsvegetation. wastewaier entering the bedis normally pre-treated to remove settteable and float-abte solids. An ET becl functions byraising tho wastewater to the upper portion of the bed by capillary action in the sand, andthen evaporating it to the atmosphere. ln addition, vegetaiion ir.nrport. *utu,. from the rootzone to the leaves where it is transpired. ln westein Colorado, ih. ,r.poration exceedsproclpitation plus water from the ET systom every month of operatioo, so that tong-termstorage capacity is not required.
ET systems are generally located in areas that do not have adequate percotation ratcs,encounter high groundwater conditions or whers discharge to groundwater is not allowod.lf any of the above-mentioned criteria are not encountereo, tren there is no reason to instalt
Schmueser Gordon Meyer has designed numerous ET systems ail over Western colorado, butprimarily concentrated in Pitkin county. Many of the soil types encountered in pitkin county,(o.9., in tho Starwood or Little Elk Creek aroa) do not hivo aoequate p.r. ,utr.. To ourknowledge, we havo had no failures of any of the ET systems wo dosigned. Although ETsystems are not the system of first choice, given the alternative in this in-stanr:e, they are anappropriate system to install.
I am attaching a reforence from the EPA Design Manuat on "on-Site Wastowater Treatmontand Disposal Systems" for evapo-transpiration systems". I am also attaching the section fromthe Pitkin County Regulations on tndividual sewage Disposat systeri (5-13) on the"Requirements of Evapo-Transpiration systems for Disposal of Effluent',.
-L{l-
FEB B 1991
GARFIELD COUNTY
February 7, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Page two
From a water rights perspective, ET systems aro 100% consumptive. lf the subdivision entors
into a water allotment contract with the Basalt Conservancy District for legal water supply,
then the amount of water purchased should reflect ET systems.
ln summary, ET systems are an accepted ISDS ln our area. Given the risk involved in possitrlo
contamination to the Town of Carbondalo's drinking water through discharging systems, ET
systems are an industry-wide accepted alternative.
information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
lf we can provide any additional
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYEB,
'-- .;- ,?.4,.c-
Louis Meyer, P.E.
LM:lc/9218-17
Enclosures
Mark Chain, Town Planner
-{r-
SCHMUESER GORDUN MEYER, INC.
/-i,ii''r.i;lr
]ilTfn
GAHI-IELU
1991
January 3O, 1991
Andrew McGregor, Mark Bean
Garfleld County P1annlng Department
1Og 8th Street, eulte 3O3
Gl.enwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Proposed Goose Creek Subdivision
Dear Andrew and Mark,
Gary and I sent a letter dated November 3, 1989, a copy of
which is enclosed, wlth regards to the Goose Um Creek proposal.
Most of our concerns stlll apply, please refer back to thls ]etter.
We understand that this ls a scafed down verelon, but the
subdlvlslon st1ll faces most of the same concerns and lssues. These
issues have not been adequately addressed.
Mr. Jones suqqests a malntenance agreement for the access
road, thls road needs to be widened and upgraded wlth a proper
gravel base before it can be malntalned. As stated by ourse.Lves
and all the neighbors, the access road ls a narrow slngle lane farm
road that has a dangerous entrance onto County Road 10O. The road
al.so has no maintenance agreement. This single Lane drive in itrs
present condltlon can not wlthstand any increased rrsager *** If
Garfield County is unable to require, BS a provision of thls
subdlvlslon that the access be brought up to adequate county road
standards I strongly recommend the subdivision be turned down
because lt is not an approprlate or safe area for further
devel.opment.There ls stlll the issue of pollutlng the ground water. As
discussed at the Goose Um Creek meetlng rnost neighbors lncluding a
representatlve of the Clty of Carbondale stated that any further
growth in this area Jeopardizes the quallty of existlng wells as
well as the backup system for the Clty of Carbondale. At the last
meetlng Carbondale requested a guarantee from the County that their
well's supply would not be contamlnated. I have enclosed a more
current artlcle i.n reference to Carbondalers concerns.
There are severaf lesues that will be hard to regulate such as
the issue of wetlands. As stated by the Corps of Engineers in
there letter dated November 5, 1990, there are wetl.ands in each
platted Lot. It would be extremely dlfflcult to police these
wetlands to make sure they ar:e not harmed.
Please conslder all of the expressed concerns as reasons to
not pernlt thls land to be subdlvided. It ls not 1n an approprlate
location for further development.
Thank you for your time.
Slncerely,
-;-i:?"Q,,,;. /,o{
Llsa Carmlchael
-13-enclosures
r ti.T,
':ii;fr
I :1 ii!
llsrl; Beei:
Girl: j.:lC C;,::::1 1' ?.l i::,-:::.g
1C9 3'ih St:'e.'t
Gieil.voorl S;:::1;,9:;, Colol'aoir 8lt:( -
rlE : tlQolE !rl1 ls(111i-. _PBp_IpiEl . :ruli!!l/I sloll
Je-. :: i{::Q;:rr
C;O:It
referettce'-c tl:e Cc,oce Ui:, (:l:(,lcl:.
t{e a j'e ',t=t,l co:1c.j-:;:{:rl t,l .'.-:
[: ll {1 ]rr r') :--: t r {1
Coose U::: Creel.r pr'();)cJ9es to h + r-\.. --h r. Ll:U
1:r":v:tely ovr;'red. s:rgle l a.r:,e rl:
other rra,,y yci: l:arze tc bacll:rp t..r
roG.d i.s nc1: i::lrfer a ifiii:I:,t-e::la::,:..:r
tr J,)
-..,, -5i1^i{..
ii:int::al ti"afi:.c tl:e .fr)erd :S ;)'l c i'
/1 ..\.. ..r- 1.. ..
-,,- = ^hiis
ml. -.:l::: aiUL: ulia.: Oi:IC
1f :'i-).'. ^*r:1. CO;i.:::E
cc::ili'rg .l.a-..: ::-, :.le}c '
il.saig(: t.r:.'..!: e. sr:hrclj'"ric :.,.1:i
t^,:cle:11i:U, ;IJU1"ad inE .:l: i
:r vlj.dc :.:::Eatic:r :l:'.r:.: \i:r
.: t1,'
:'.-i I r.i
I iire e.iltf .L:','',.rgt or:l: r.r.1 -lilb-",'.:rL:
i*(ii:LtL i--i: Li::tC.::i:,\re i-rr).ri Cc.rsl- Iy, ir: ir.,ei(i'i
r'^r..\r-rL,,./l..rrq'/
#"'.^:, l-lr:,
-t\5 F."^1,t,I tl:e i€-r--rf.-lt
I;ir-t. tt
i tr:
),,:)!,c:_
Ccr::rt:y l:i,cacl I Oi;, '::'ai: i.l (:
sitt:atio:: i'rr.I !.i, Il-.i.r.
.-'..r,.^-,,.ir, i.. .,-- I
;;;:; ;,.,. 1." ' ;;;
].'e(1lj' l:'e arl.L1 I'i:t:uj'r.7r:; f,r::tt :;:'1i,.',-;'lr-'':1{-i:t l-:",:-- 1,-,- 1',,
LL]
,. ,. i -r
.t.,..., -
tl-l tu-.
llea I tI: i::
i,r.. ,i I' ". l
Jl(.l-ri
i't
=1a::,.1Srt:: U.:'t(i,ij j
Yci
['J i-
I
L t,..
5 l'()'.-I:il \,/:
::^- i a:ilii'e a:'t3 :d'i =.^:.'. Fq\.Jq,.,v..!
r.Ct.t
tl:e
i,:':rL,C -' i - l:u :.. ... ,. :--.r-i :-:- -. i.
frc.rr:l p.itt;:rg .i;: JLi-'
l;l;krtl i.v: s it-:rr r.:(-r'J 1(1
Carl.,cl,:'la Ie rJ:. te-" .:r._iitl,,. ?l;: l
i,': 1!:t: [il:: t:.: ]iu::ri:,,::.: st : ..t:.
.: -,. L'
-l
,t:
-{tl-
+'
:.-
4.,i,i
i.;
, 1-
,iL it
:....;,'..
,';..1;.ti
. l.;. !
' i; -,i1.'
ir l.'. 'I
r-li; ji;,
th-e natui'a1 u:
ii.r: i:ili: I colr:::c, l
ri:is i ty of
;- I i:rc,'j ;,,t a .i -:
at tl:e pcscikr:
Ilt: tlc,;]l'.
''\ '; t 1- ,r --. *.,' -l 'rrl (-"e lJ- \JJ\-
verbe l
+ IrI. t.,'.'
-. Fe. * h:{-
''. ::' 'i , l,
t l.={ h=rr-:.
.1.';e 1<rp= l'r;
i.l.j E...t,. ,_: :
\-i ',.ll-
.-il i *r-!:.. -.-^.-,,. ...
-.-.,-)-lr;i)i.,i
'* fr . .", i.
1:.) i r
l.r (: r, :.
-1r.,.-
. ::;. ] ,:'li
1 F+
I,--: i i j-.,,-.
! . ., !.. ...y
r-r.: .. :-. : -r r-
,c.-f .-l- .t.
c.--\.1 ,.-:
.l- -r-(
);te i!: :, ;.
r'r (j I
,.. I 1
(-(-,'i" r':i,:: ii
. . r. l.a (l--
I ,., ) r .r\ i:l
r'J. ,,..-1.i.- i :rrJl--(-i
bet:;,, r:sc o i' I:e - E: l;, ..' : ::; ..
s",:ir a t.:l)c'l :v.'ir:o;: --: i.:i:l;
['{,: til.:il .] (i I i l.
1 :.!.r. .- t +. 1,. i
--.,t tJ; t.:...J
i.... . r- Fr J.j .- l: r-, r
l-1.. - 1,^,f.t-:-c .: !,v
I (-. :J U, ,9 ti,:. '-
'r .. i:11:..
L ,.+ l .r l.J
.,, ! --.r. r:, .
lr,:., l'._."'.
..1-._ -1...r il[I
'Dut:.ii: S: C:. r. t liil:iill ;:;.i;:.,'. j :. -
i.L ia =r-,ir.':,1 !^r.l-ri+:.t-l.- 4J ga. qr-Jrrr\4r
i,.,
s:J r e u
,;'l I
a:1C are in 1:
')
!J - f Lr:
:.r-r.inr._- -r-..- .,-.-.- |,r(-r +uLle l-,s..- \.,--.-. f
nrl..-. - l-
^ I - .:i.1, . .: .-, L-
't-ltr::se is:iuel l-rc
-- :- i- i .::a
l-,.. .i.-.(- \- \ lJ
ru r,. I l-j .
i , i r' : '-lr
i;)r'ii:g ur:r
-1.,- I .^
,.. . j I ,, .f i t\a\rrt.,- !-f.r.
a(lja(lerrt i.o
,.:.L
,'l .i, -i (i -.1_/ !
i .: [: .:.]l -I Y
.- i. l : .'(i--..,:. ! -. -.:J
I .' .. .i i:,. ,
-...,) J.il-
. t.l .., ^,,-/__,_ l-.
.-.--'t .,-... : .:-. \.:.i -. .. (/; r.l:.. t .
!; i.,l;
+ i. +
.r'1,: r:\-.^-tl r-rl
-J,
l. (,a\.
-{5-
:-
|,
* 'i'rtl:, :r.
r' rl
GARMIGHAEL GONS.}TRUGTION ING",-==:-
Andrew McGregor
Garf teld County Plannlng Depar.tment
1Og 8th Street, Sulte 309
Gl.enwood Sprlngs, Co 81601
January 25, 1991
RE: Goose Creek
Dear Andrew,
Subdivlslon
Thank you for your tlme and asslstance ln revlewlng the Goose CreekSubdlvlslon submlttal .
As an adJacent land oelner thls subdlvlslon ralses slmllar concernsas did the previously proposed Goose um creek subd,ivlslon.
It seems lmposslble these dayslntact, to leave wetland areasvalleyre few fraglle natural habltats undlsturbed. I hope youagree that there are Lnapproprlate areas wlthln Garfield County forfurther development.
As we are all. aware the water level. ln thle area ls very hlgh andlrrlgatlon dltches crlescross the entlre valley floor. Becausedomestlc wells are very shal.low (40, ) the hlghmake accldental contamlnatlon of thls entlre water and dltches
areaposslblllty. At preeent there ls thls posslbll1ty a very realwlth the fewexlsting residences, I see no reason
100t.
to nultlply thls factor by
rn dlecusslng thls plan 1t became apparent that there are noexletlng regulatlone enabllng the p & z or commlselonera torequlre lmprovements be made 'to the exlstlng access road. Althoughthls was a strong concern ln the flrst proposed development, ft hisagaln been elde stepped by the apprlcant. There appears that noeffort wllL be made by the appllcant to lmprove the road on whlchthey wlsh to double the flow of trafflc. Thelr solutlon ie aslmply maintenance agreement and does not address the lmprovementof or acceas onto County Roarl 1OO. Thls ls dlsturblng ln that ltshows a lack of responsJ.blllty to a very real problem that therecreatlng. rt would be my reasonlng that lf the county hae theauthorlty to grant contlnued development of an area, they muetlnslst on the lmprovement of accees to that area, for emergencyvehlcle use lf for no other reason
Havlng revlewed all materlal on flfe I feel that even at reduclng
-'lL-
CARBONDALE, CO S1623
to .leave a large parcel of landaa they are or to feave Hrls
P.O. BOX 445
FEB 7 19el
GAIITILLU COUNTY
iiii;111i1
iii[i]n$i+ii
'titiitif
',;.!iti
. i:\l.i
i !.r(t.
lilt it,,l
l,;rl.":
the scale of thls proJect the aPpllcant ls trylng to force a
subdlvl.sl.on onto J parcef that lL Just not sulted demographlcally
or geographlcalfy f6r such a subdlvlslon. Thle tand should be left
as your predecessors have zoned lt. t
I have full faith that the P.Iannlng and Zonlng Department as well
as the county commleslonera havlng seen manY self servlng
aevefopers plaie croas thelr desks have now the lnslght/foreelght
to reailze the conttnulng potentlal lmpact of such development.':i
Thank you for your lnterest and eupport of our concerna'
GWC/1c
sfncerel2 i-7
#q t6r'n,
Gary carr6chaet
--47-
[.r \
li',
.l ri
:,i1
0181 1OO Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
FebruarY 11, 1991
Nngr*sn Bean
Aarf ield County Planning -Departmerrtilenwood' SPrings, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
IamwritlngtoexPressmYcon-cernwiththedevelopmentproposedbyMr.Kent.rone=.onthe.soprus-acreparceloflandoff
County Road ioo, northeast of Carbondale '
Iownahomeandgacresadjacenttotheproposeddevelopment
property. I'6-;;l in.t subdivision or furthei development of any
land in this -.ri-ilrrit, sfrouf a not be undertaken without extra-
ordinary scrutiny of ifre potentlal consequences'
The road which 6'ccesses the proposed subdivision property is
uninprovua "ia"rroi--mafnt"i".a
Uy tfre--""""t,' This .r.oad is simply
not able to handle any to""- G"if jc withou{ suUstantial' and costly
lmprovements.
Moreover, a large portion r:f the property in question ls
wetland habitat. Development wil.I not oniy i"*,"-an impact on thls
habitat, but also present-rrrrr"o"r and signif lcant problems in road
-u"iiai"g', drainage and sewage management'
ItismyrequestthattheCountyPlanning.Depar:m:::
thoroughlyexplorethepotentialto""tqt'"t1t=-:i-.T""lopmentand
address these problems prior to gr.nting permission for anY
subdivision in this area'
Thank you for your consideration of this matter'
FEB 12 1991
Onnftf,m COUNTY
d,ukc\lccan
- 4?r-
lt: :
.*i :'jlrl ,
i;'l'!r
t'r;::,{
(ili.' I
"
11.:rl
t'iit;
-.::/r
r:.1;.
il 'r:
itiiil'
i;i,.ii;.i r
rtlliI ri[;ii: r:
,iil:iri,'
:{:i!;l'"}'
'iiii+t'ililrlli
ffi
Mr. Andrew Mccregor
G"tri"fa County Flanning Departmenl:
iog 8th street, sulte 301
Ci.nwooa SPr1D95, Colorado 8160r
Dcar Andrew
Tlrank you for your !i,1" in explaining the various aspects of
the proposed C""u"'Creek SuUEl"islon t. me. I am pleaserl that tlte
cit,y (Carbonaaie Board of t't.r"tees) paosecl a motion asking
carfield co,r.iy to place r-piut restrtctlon on sewage tlisposal
nte thods in tllis area ' As tlre clos es L Ianclowner to Carbondale ' s
weII .fields, I have l"arned flrst hand how very easily tl'ris waLer
can l)ocorrre polluted by gr.ri r',g livestock, etc ' I Euggest that tho
rroer sLrinsen;-;;;at;i"-riIt lre neceaEary to protecb t'he growing
----.-=.--=--:-z=Cirton.1^fe, "r,a f cannot help bYt wonder how
E:?[]15:?3 iiu enrorce ttre-'s.wer oisposar'and other rorms or
conLAtni.naLion that, lnevltably regttlt wlren humatrs and thetr
livestoc]< move lnto u., atul-'."u.tt rILr Lhis ' fhie will be a mu jor
l.readache for carbond.rle, an<l probi,rbry for exisclng homeownere
,,,jlownsLream" of the subdivisiln. r envision the possibrility of
f .r*r"its an,:l nrore state conbrol '
rebrLrarY L2, I99I
The otlter maJor problem, which htrs noE been ad<lressed'
Iggg;' ir,c access-to ttri6 ProPosed cleveropment'
Mren .fack ilacot:con and I boushc 9uI ProP:-t:l:: l:1"^:^t::,:""n
,"",:"::;"1 lil:" ;;;;;i;s
-
;:tl :: " i-i, I :. t: l:T.:nii.:i:: :o .lloIlili.,"E3''iii"i-lililiH.- i;;:;;i lf ,i: ::;:: :":.gl:?l:::'ilt,iY"'u;l?A;' ullull'-;; ;;;i;s; r""i-wi'u"1, :Il:'-:l: H::""'::';."I"1] i?::3ilr;:.fi3; *iln-f,.i"ii";;;g :li-' I !:1... :"i*-o'^::":?:"o::1 .'ilt'fii":i{i lill,'ill"r"iiuiii=="r rlsh rive in Ehe porhorcs now, hut:
ls the
ati; toa& is, and always has t:eert' zr tttessl
Two factors contribul-e to Lho problen. The firsL is the
proximity of .-y""t-tound 'tream wi',i.t parallels the road for most
of its length. The stream.i',"rru" that the ground un6er the road
ls in a constant state of rr"tii irbsorpLion. Af ter a rnln, oE
clurlr:g a spring melt, great- irnounts of waLer slt' upotl the road
lred, unable to-be absoiberl . Thls water quickly wasl'Ies away the
road bas€ material and huge potholes are thus creaberl'
The city of carbondale (purric works) tries valianbly to help
'$ with occasional gradi.g,'L"l can do little good as there is rlo
'
material to ,;;). wi[n. W-tt*re ir rigaUigl clitches run under the
road ( in .nroi-pril""t, th;;; is a conLinuing problem in the
irrigaLing seas'on of overflow created by blockage front objects
curelussly aliowed to elltei the di tchec upstreamr or f ronr car@1esg
irrigatio-n 1>racEicea on Mr ' Jones' prol:erty'
FEB 12 1s9l
_.t,g-
Gnnrtrup couNTY
..,u,ii,,::ii.I,;:
iii,i.:iiii
|"\i
:i r,
i , .:,i;l
,r*'liti
, .:!
.:ri.,{
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Fcbruary L2 t 1991
Page Two
The secOnrl problem ls the narr:ow aspect of the road, one, ]g?g
for rno6t of itg lertgth. We cannot- "o,rnt Lhe times when a vehicle
tras becornc stuckr of tempoioiily ilisabled, and we are ef fectively
shuL in, or out 6f our vLrious irr,rperties, Nor can we count the
Limee wlrcn wc have harl to clive fol'h'he Russian olive bttghes to
avoi<l col1i"I""l'-Coif isions (lo occtlr, and we lose our ntirrors to
bushes arld treeE, and our car bodLes are scratched and dinged'
cars age quicklY tJown herel
': A 3OO* !.ncrease in traffic here woulrl be lntol'erab'Le' and
dangerous, orra ridtculous, given the current state of tl-re road '
LeEmegtveyouapersonirl,Lrueexampleofdangeroua.Ilour
years ago a trieia and I;;;. riilinq in otr Pa.ture.. My frienct
was thrown frorn hIs horse and sustaine<l a severel'y. fractured
f entur. It took the Carbonalaie- inrUulance one hour' to arrive'
J"riyea solely lry !h" condlrion of this roadl In a
lite-Utrreacerlrirr!'"iIuotion a deJ..:r/ like thls could be f ata] ' Itr
anottrer instance, seven yearg a$Qr a grass fire raged out of
control on our ranch. HeIp 'i\,as-i\gain-delaye<l by the rough
".,',aition of tlris roar] and ule alutoet lost our home.
Suppose the chlorine tank at the Carbonclale weII pulflp Station
sustained a real< and evacuation l>ecame lreceBsary. A1y ve-!t"19
Ieft unattended on bhe roaclway,.or a cOIIision, could effectlvely
close otf our escape roua;; it,tu protrability exists now' of
course,bubwouldbegreatlygTP}ifiedbyt}naiditional.ntttntrerg
r-rf people in in addibional B-f O-'homes. f t is obvlorrs t-hat a two
tanl r-oaa, ot an alternabe acce's is martdatOfY.
D1r. Jones probably has wonderf uJ. intentlono, and would Lil<e to
allay your .o.X.irt, (irr<l ""it) about the road with a complicaged
acheme for honeowner a8sessment. If a decent road were in
existence, homeowner *"""i"*ents for peTTod1c frETfrtenance and
repair woul.rl-be approPriate. AL thls polnt, however' ltomeowner
assessmerrts would be conrparable tO Genoral SchwarCzkollfrs
,,mosqrlito on an elephantil-in"r."{lvl and do Iitt'Ie gootl to cure Lhe
. problenr.
Visualize the si LuaLionr wllr:n and it this developmenb ls
a1>1>rovecl . I,irst there cornes ir stream of real estate people' and
thelr buyers, then colne the Burveyorg and the engineers' Then'
cone btre contractof,s, ""if""["is,' elect'riciBtlsr well <Iritler6'
pl rlnlbers , rock masons , ro6f ers , Lumbe r trucks ' inspector6 '
Ianclscapersr etc., etc., etc. Depending uPorl how quickly these
Iots r,,rere sold and developed, we it* foof ing at an excessive
volume of traf f ic over the nexb !I5Sg .ql*iyg yeareT--TF1'hi-e road
is LotaIIy inadequate for the reil--76mlTTEE-ifro reside here now'
--q'A-
i' !:;}i
:':1,'t !i
i i$,il
;'ir",,T:
':i'#
\a
1,.
F:
i{o
i'r
Mr. Andrew McGregor
February L2, 1991-
Page Tltree
how can it be used for a volune of Erafflc such ae thle
development would generate?
After ilre selling and building has sobEled down, each single
fa,nify-awef t.ing wotrfa generate a urinimum of four tripe per duy'
A; gulut housei coulrl ne a permit!*!,?.., this coul<I add another
iori rrips pe; day minimum. l{ulttply thls by 1 fact-or .E f lve
an<l we have a minimum of 40 trips pei clay' Add to t'hj's meter
I nspech-ors, teTE-pTffi ,repair trlrclcs, horse tral lers ' garbage
dispoSat, guests ancl friEncts, oWnerB of boardecl hOrees' UPS
truclcs, anrl ""-i"iif,. tSie will irII occllr on a one l-ane road '
I helieve tlrat the Cotrrrt:y musl: Lake fuLl resPonsibiLity for a
<lccision regirrrling Mr. Jones-r Goo$e Creek Subdivision ' To approve
this sub4ivision tiitt,o,rt looking at this more seriously at'tendanL
pioUf o*-"i """L"" could be clcernbrl irresponsible, and
itroru-.gighted, to put lt rnilrll-y. If any members of this
Cornrnission havc l)ot Personally crbrerverl this road ln iLs etrLiretY'
t would encourage thim to do io befgrg_iny_ggglgl-on-]e renderod'
Every man has a right to <level9P his pr,operty- for. ils plarrned
and "pfrifirua uses. eu[ every 'ran does not hAve the rlght to
""*pitiirii. th; quality of ltfe of Lhe peopte who were ltere ;-refor:o
hin, arrd Lo knowingly proceed with a use plan that ie untenable,
and unworkafte, a"6 po-t.ibly, itr Lhis instance, potentially
dangerous Eo the people of the ci ty of Carbondale.
I,andmyrreighbors,woutdellcouraqethemembersofthis
Commlsslon to maXi a declsion Llrtrt will- be enlighLened and
piosi"uriru, in dlrecting fuLure development in tho mally
ur,rironmenLally dellcate areas oli this type in our area
Thank You for Your i nter est ilnd concern .
'il;ii, [llrt---
( Prs . ) PeroneIle Robbins
PR: cf
-(/ -
;!.,.r:i.'
L\:::t:'i:'
iiilt
i',,,i'li:
IiH;
{1;i+r,
i,ffit
Febrtrary lI, l99I
(lar:f teld (jounty Plannl ng ti ZonI'n6; Comnrttrslon
To whom iL may concerll:
Wo, f 5e Nleslanlk Brothers, strorlgly oppose tlte development of iO acrelr
rrore. or lese of, .l.rrrrrl dlrec.rry east or iu. r[nchl,rg operaE lon. -
'l'he roadwuy I o
unuultdble for lirrcl't a developllrsrtl-. l'te wotrl rl srroigly o1'pottot ttre glvl ng of l-and
ro wlden and tmPruvc t'lte road'
Irrlgotlon of orrr proPcrLy wotrl.d hccoile a rcal burtlen wl th relttcatlon of
dl r.c.[rcs and dehtle blocktng up c'rrlve rE tl ' etc'
l)og,sbec.omcirfa.cEorwlElrourcaEl:l.eoperaEtonandwe.r,roul<lbeetrongly
opposrrrl uo pec,ple wlto have Eheec itrthta.[s. Ttteee anlmals wotrld be tle'sEroyed
i*ro"afuuely tf found clraeing e'atEIe'
You wlto rcpreselr! Garf 1'eId Counl;y on tlte
shoultl nttL let. thls thlng ltuPprrtrl irfter alI wc
carfJcld counLY.
Plarrrrlrrg t, Zorrlng, Conrnl-oolon
need to lteeP agrJ-r:ttlUttre 1n
Si.ncerel.Y '
Nlcslanlk Brothers
fib,
Rob
/+e,"*f,
NJ-e.utarrllc
sN/dh
FEB 12 1991
GARTIELD COUNTY
-(il)-
FEB 18 19el
l-en Truesdel I
0189 County Rd. 100tlarbondale, CO 81623
February 12, 1 99 1
Garfield County Planning and Zoning
G I enwood Spr i flgs , Co
r.
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision off County Rd. 100 outside
Carbonda I e.
Dear Sirs and Madam,
I have several concerns about the revisjon of the former
"Goosum Creek" project, now referred to as the "Goose Creek"
project. I talked with my neighbors last year when this project
was f irst presented and we tostif ied before the P&z at, that time
about numerous i tems . Ne i ther Mr . Jones nor Mr . Ga I 'ino have
mentioned to me any plans to mitigate the concerns already
del jneated.
1. Water Qual ity
Carbondale has gone on rocord that any more development in
this area wil'l endangen the Carbondale town water supply wolls
located a few hundred yands l'rom the proposed development. lt
has been pointed out that irr addition to the obvious concernsabout septic treatmeint, thr:re is considerable concern about
control of surface waters. Households wi I I produce increased
vehicle oi ls and fuel spi ) lr;, garden pest,icides and chemicals,
increased f erti I izer^ Lrse and othbr domest jc chemical loads.
The soils in this arrla are extremely porous. ln fact,
irrigation water shows up in drainage ditches 50 feet away in a
matter of minutes. The subsoil is essentially gravel with
almost no c ay to impede watet'migration.
My well is located as close or closer than the Carbondale
wel
the
pol
ls. Wi I I Garfjelcl County accept any legal responsibi I ity for
integrity of my wr:llr BS well as Carbonda'les, slrould they be
I uted?
2, Road Access
The present homes 'in th i s area have oasement r i ghts down a
one lane, private gravel road off County Road 100. This road is
marginal ly adequate for the current load, but is questionably
adequate for fire and/or emergency access.
The Goose Creek project will double the density
and double the use of the access road.I am concerned with endangering children walking to school
bus service on Co.Rd. 100. I am concerned about fire access on
this road if it js further degraded by t,his proiect. lam
concerned about emergency vehicle access on this road.
Wi I I Garfield County assume I iabi 1 ity for fire or other
damage that is incneased by the impact of this project on the
access road? Will Garf ie'ld county insure my contintted access
and continued easement right;s during any constt'uction that bhe
of the ar ea
Gnnr IELD cuuNTY
..tiil
.t t",
,t:rlt
{'i
,).
Goose Creek proiect in'itiates on this road?
3. I rr i gat i on Waten
This Goose Creek property is crossed by irrigat'ion ditches,
and the access road closely l)arallels an irrigation supply. 1f
this water sr.rpply is interruptrrd by construction associated with
this project, there will bo considerable degradation of tlre
pastunes and agricultural busitress in the area. Will Garfiel,fl
County assume liability for damage caused by interruption of tlre
irrigation water supply?
4, Publ ic Access to the Roaring For k River
Duning the Goosum Creek version of this proiect, the DoW
requested public acc.is be provjded to the river on the develop-
ment plot. I would like to vigorously oppose this idea. THERE lS
NO PUBLIC LAND ALONG THE RIVER IN THIS AREA. PIEASE dO NOt
create a precedent for providing publ ic access to private
Iands. The opening of my property to the public wjl'l increase
the incidence of trespassing and littering. Will Garf ield County
provide cleanup and compensation for damage to private pt operties
caused by the creation of a prtblic access?
Given the abovo concerns and the fact that I have heard no
suggestions for mit,igation for Mr. Galino or Mr. Jones, I Feel
that this area is 'inappropriate for a development of this type. I
request that you deny approval of this proiect.
Sincerely,
(,--^-
Len Truesdel I
- si4.-
il
J C)t-]}iI H . .:' ACOBSEh{o1a5 R,C-)AD f.CJC,P O BC))< 129CAR,BOT{1)ALE, CO. A:I.62.i03-925-1470 303-96:t-3829
Eebrr.rary 11, 1991
Andrew McGregor, Planner:
Garf ield County Planning DepatrtmerrL
Gar:f ield County Courtl:ouse
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Ref : Goose Creek Surbdivision
Dear Andrew,
As an acljacent property ownor I have two concerns arbout Llre
proposed Goose Creek Suhdivision that I would lilse Lo bring 'Lo
your attention.
The access road f rom County Roar.l 100 j.s barely acleqr-rabe for
the present use. When the construction equipnent needed 'l:<:
constnrct ttre i.nternal Cjoose Crr:erk Roacl and the br-rilcli.ngs t;o be
built there star:t using ttre acce,ss ::oad, tlrey wi I L pl.ar:e iin
unbearable l"oad on it. This wi I I des broy the presen l, road . I
woul.d ask tLra'b the Coun'l-y regtrJ re the Goose C!r:ee[< Sirrbclivisi.orr
owners to prevent or repaj.r tho damage. As to t.he subsequen'E
maintenance of the access road, 1 aEiree with tlre proposal on patle
38 of the Prelinrinary Plan-
fn the Goose Creek Subdivj.:;jon iLsel.f the proposed accessroad borders on my property and vlil. I be vel'y clo.se bo nry lrouse.
This will caLlse dust from the gravel road to blow into nry hc>use-
AIso the noise fronr the trucks and cars wilL be vely anrr.ryi.ng. Iwould ask that the owners place t-Ireir access road adjac:errl; to andparaIIeI with the exi.sting Nieslarrik irrigation dit;ch.
Thank you for yoLrr bime arncl (:orrsi.deratjon jn t-,his nrartter.
Yours tlrrly,
3
Ifl)l'Jf;firl,[\W
Jll[ tt, 11 lser
l:riti I li. I l.; i..1.11 1,,u
_4',
/i
I t'* er-.,
/
GARFIELD COUNTY
SCALE:1'= 200'
CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS
l-EGENp
C;ITY LIMITS
AREAS TO ]IEMAIN
TIESIGNATIiD AS
F:LOODPLAIN
AREAS TO BE
NEMOVED FROM
T'LOODPI.AIN
IIESIGNATION
MITCHI:LL CFEEK FLOODPLAIN
PROPOSED MAP REVISION
FEBHUARY,1991
l-:*--I -rnI .anr
I
fNTEnsreo roENA RTECH lnc.corvslfl. t,rvo ErvcrrvEEas ArvD flyoaotoorsrs
P.O. OAAWER t6o
oLt Nwooo sPNNos. cotoFAoO
',6112pN) e.5.2236
-fi.^o-
B
-=SS
Yoc ATr.atr NT-