HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.1 Supplemental App InfoSCHENK, KE,RST & dCWINTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CENTRAL BANK BUILDING
SUITE 310, 302 EIGIITH STREET
GLETIWOOD SPRINGS' COLOR.ADO 81601
TELEPHONE: Q03) 945-2447
TELECoPIER: A$) 945-2977
GAlit-lEl-D cout{Tt
IOHN R. SCHENK
DAN KERST
WILLIAM J. deWNTER, Itr
February 27, l99l
Garfreld County Planning Department
109 Eighth Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re:Goose Creek Subdivision
Gentlemen:
I have been retained by Dale Eubank, Len Truesdell, Peronnelle Robbins and Gary and
Lisa Carmichael to represent their interests in connection with the proposed Goose Creek
Subdivision. Although my clients have other concerns regarding the proposed subdivision which
have been or will be expressed to you, I have been asked to address the legal adequacy of the
access easement serving the subject property.
In my research to date I have been unable to find any express grant or reservation of an
access easement extending from County Road 100 over and across the property which is
currently owned by Paul and Celia Nieslanik. I have requested Kent Jones and his attorney Jerry
Hartert to provide me any evidence of an access easement across the Nieslanik property. Neither
Jerry nor Mr. Jones have had sufficient time to respond to my request and perhaps they can
provide evidence of an adequate easement for the proposed development. In the meantime, I
would request on behalf of my clients that the County require dehnitive evidence of a legal
easement of adequate width to serve the proposed development before proceeding further in your
review of the subdivision application.
If, as I suspect, no express easement exists across the Nieslanik property, then it might
be assumed, although it is not here admitted, that a prescriptive easement exists over the existing
one-lane road. If this is the case, the prescriptive easement may not be expanded in scope
beyond its historic use. In other words, neither the width of the roadway nor the intensity of its
use could be increased beyond what has been historically established. It would appear that the
one-lane road is physically inadequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the
proposed subdivision. In any event, the addition of at least four additional users on the road is
an impermissible expansion of its use.
27 tggt
,rO** 27, lggl
Page -2-
I request that the County assure that the applicant can provide adequate legal and physical
access before further action is taken on this subdivision request.
Please advise me if I can provide further information in this regard.
Yours
DIVkla
cc: Don Deford, EsQ.
Dale Eubank
Gerald Hartert, Esq.
Kent Jones
e*t of Carbondale
76 South 2nd St. Carbondale, Colorado 8L623 €,03) 963-2733
March 18, 1991
Don DeFord
Garfield CountY
Suite 300
Gl-enwood Springs, Co. 81601
Dear Don;
I understand that you had requested some information
regarding weII head protection at our Roaring Fork River
*rrrri"ipal weII fields and the Town's position on Goose creek
subdivision as it relates to watershed protection.
I believe that Mark chain recently mailed the county
Planning Office aII the materials covering review comments
from the Town.
In brief, the Town of Carbondale has requested the
opportunity to review building and septic permits requested
tL-Ue issued in the Goose Creek Subdivision, prior to
issuance, for purposes protecting our well field from
potential pollution resulting from inadequate septic systems
or other pollution sources.
The Town asked for and was granted, by the Goose creek
developer Kent Jones, the ability to enforce the terms of
the covenants rel.ating to sewage treatment systems and
household pollution. I suggest that the Town of carbondale
be named as a third party beneficiary to the section of the
covenants coverin$ potlut.ion of water. when the covenants
are in a final forrn, the Town requests the opportunity to
review them for that language prior to final approval of the
subdivi s ion.
I am enclosing a copy of the section of our existing
municipal ordinance that covers protection of the municipal
water supply from pollution sources. I am also enclosing a
copy of the newly revised water ordinance on the same topic
that the Board of Trustees is in the final stage of
reviewing. It is anticipated that the Board will adopt the
new ordinance in the next few weeks '
The Town of Carbondale appreciates Garfield County's
cooperation and interest in assisting with protection of our
municipal water supply. We would like to continue working
with you to establish specific guidelines for wellhead
protection. These nep;otiations coul-d serve as a model for
Lth". parts of Garfietd County where land use development
potentially conflicts with protection of pubfic water
suppl ies '
f hope this is thedo not hesitate toassistance.
i nfo rmat i on
contact me
requested. PIease
be of further
that you
if f may
-\SincereIy,
&r*r$'t-'^a-^\
Davis Farrar
Town Manager
xc: Mark Chain
Bob Emerson
Mark Bean
ROY ROMER
Governor
JERIS A. DANIELSON
State Engineer
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
1313 Sherman Street-Boom 818
Denver, Colorado 80203
(303) 866-3581
GAi(T IELU COUN i Y
DEt] 3 L lgsu
December 27, 1990
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, C0 8.l60.|
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
SWI/4 NWI/4, Section 35, T7S, R88t.l
Dear Mr. McGregor:
lrle have reviewed the above referenced proposal to divide 5l acres intofive parcels. There is an exist'ing house and well on the proposed Lot I
(Permit No. 158846). Th'is well is permitted as the only well on the 5l acresfor ordinary household purposes inside 3 single-fami'ly dwe'l'lings, theirrigation of not more than one acre of home lawn and garden, and the wateringof domestic animals. The applicant proposes to cancel this permit to obta'inthree household-use-only permits for three of the lots and obtajn l,later
Allotment Contracts from the Basalt Water Conservancy Distrjct to replaceout-of-priority depletions from the remaining two wells.
[.le cannot recommend approval of this proposal untjl Tt,lO separate tlater
Allotment Contracts have been obta'ined and subm'itted to this office forreview. }Je would like separate contracts for each of the lots whjch willrequire a well permit under the Basalt Water Conservancy Distrjct's substjtute
water supply p1an. The District's augmentation plan is still pending in Water
Court.
Well permits are issued by this office for the construction of new wells
as alternate points of diversion for water rights owned by the Distrjct
subject to a valid and continuing contract between the user of the well andthe District. All use of the well will be curta'iled unless the Water
Allotment Contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect.
Plat notes or covenants should be required to inform the two potentiallot purchasers of these obligations. We need to know whjch two lots are to be
issued well permits under the Basalt Water Allotment Contracts. Once we have
revjewed the jnformat'ion requested concerning these two proposed lots, we will
f#s '.fown of Carbondale
76 S<rurh 2nd St. Carbondale, Colorado 81623 GO3) 963-2733
Decemher 27, 1990
If r'. Andreru' McGregcr
Garf ield Count-v Planning Departmenl,
109 8th Street, Suite :i03
Glenwood Springs, CIO 81601
TRANS}lITTED VIA FACSTMILE LETTI]R TO 9,15-2379
Re : Goose C'reu-k Sr-rbdivision PreI imitrary Plan
Dear Andrew:
I have rer.iewed the inforrnaLion on the Gcose Creek Sutrdivision
Prelimi.nary Pl-an. As -worr-knov;1 tl^re Goose Creeh Subdi','isir:n is
just upstream of tkre Town of Carbor"idale I{oaring F:r'k Wel} Field
The Town presentll has tivo wef ls irr tLiat ,l ocatior' rvhiclt can
provide the T<-rwn rvi.th up 1-c,r orre mi1-Lion garlJons of'rvater'a t1a)-.
This supply is crtrcial for the Tor,in irr that rt ia.11ows 11s to meet
olir water' needs dtrri,ng tkre peak sLlmrner: mr:rrths, .I ,'r addition, this
rryater sclrrce is doub11- import.ant in that-. the rvel1 field could
potentially be erparided tc t en wel1s arrcl irelp Lls ITIe 3t cLl Ir f utttre
groh'th lreeCs. Tlre Towrl of Carboncia.le p,resent. Iy pror;icles;
munic ipal r'ater to Ei,pproximat elS ,l , C000 perrple.
The Colorado Department of Health hrls indicatecl to y.ru that ther'e
ma;* be a potenl-ial problem wj,tlr I.S.D.S. cont.arrrir-ia1-ing the Towtt's
wel] fields. It is the fown's strr:ng position not to recc,mmend
approving the project uirtil ttiere is a guarantee that l1o
possibility of contami nation e:list::. l'he Town has a1r-ead-r
encotrntered simi.lar probJ.ens with this weI-l f ielc-. As a resu-LL,
tire State Del,artmerrt of Heaitlr r'equir,:cl the Town to purchase an
easement f rom Perr3.- Robbirrs, which resulted irr livestock being
removed from a cerLairr areil. ancl that area being fenced to prevent
an). further ilse or possible contaminertion.
Prel iminary l nvestigations have inilica'Led tl-iat there is ;i
possibilit-v of nitrate pollutiorr f r,:m the I . S. D. S. rrs welI as the
possibility of some chemi<:al contamlnal,ion from imlrroper disposal
of motor oi. 1s, gasoline, et,:. Ewide-,nc-,e of alrJ- of thr:se
contamj nates will increase the monitr:ring cor;ts as well as
compliance ccsts for t.he 'llr>r,'n.
Lrrrllf irUU UUUNTY
The Town is retaining an engineer to Look at the technical
aspects of this proposal . The T'or.:n will give f urther conment cn
this project eitl-rer prior to or at the Jai-iuar-r- 9th public
hearing. Presently, it is against 'Iown policy to e.rtend
municipal utiliti-es outsjde the Town's corporate boundaries. The
Goose Creek area is iloL in any of or.rr service plarrs at this time.
I would like to thanh you fc,r giving the Towrr the opportunity to
respond to this deve-Lopment proposerl . F'1ease conterct me at 963-
27 33 i f -You have an5 que st ions .
Sincerel.y,
TnJ cC
Mark Chain
Town P-l anner
MClsd
Mr. Andrew McGregor
December 27, 1990
be abl e to descri be the procedure by
valid well permits. We ask that the
abeyance until we have received the
additional comments.
JCM/c1 f: 4837 I
cc: 0r1yn'Bell, Division Engineer
Bruce DeBrine
wh'ich the other three lots may obtain
county hold this preliminary plan in
'information requested and have formulated
Page 2
Sincerely,
CKGW
C. McDanold, P.E.
Water Resources Engineer
DEC 21 ',9? t2|t2 TOI^JN OF CRREONDHLE a3L PA?/43
Town of Carbondale
76 South 2nd St. Carbondale, C<llorado 81623 fi03t 961-2711
December 27, 1 990
llr. Andrew McGregor
Gar:f ield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite il03
G-lenwood Spr ings , CO 81 601
TRANSI.IITTED VIA FACSIMILE LETTER TO 945*2379
Re: Goose Creek Subdivlsion Prel-iminary PJ-an
Dear Andrewl
I have reviewed the information on the Goose Creek Subdivisiotr
Frelim1nary pIan. As you 'know, the Goose Creek Subdivision is
jrrst upstream of the Town of Carbondale RoarinB Fork Wel-I Field.
The Town presc+ntIy has two wells in that location which can
provide the Town with up to one mill-lOn gallons of lt'fl,t€I. a day'
ifri= supply is crucial for the Town i.n that it allows us to meet
or.rr water needs during the peak summer months. In addition, this
water $ouTCe i,s rtoubly impoi'tant in that t.he weIl field could
,.i*"tiaity be expanded to ten wells and heIP us meet' our future
Irowth needs. The Town of Carbondale presentlY Provides
ilrunicipal water to approximately 4r0000 people'
The colorado Department of Health has indicated to you ttrat there
may he a potentia,I problem w ith r . s. D. s. contaminatinS the Town' s
tr*il- f ields. It is the Town's strong posi'tion not to recommend
approvi.ng the proiect until there is a guarantee that t1o
p"r=iUifItV of-contamination exists. The Town has alleady
encountered simj-Iar probl.ems rvith this well field. A$ a re$ult,
tbe state Department of Health reguired the Town to purchase arl
easernept from Perry Robbirrsr Whlch resulted in Iivest'ock being
remover; from a certain area and that area beingf fenced to prevenl;
any further use or possibl-e contamination'
Px'elirrirrary investigations have indicated that there is a
p.==ibilitv of nitrite pollution from the I.S.D.S. as rvell as the
po=s j.bil it,y of s"*. chemical contamination f rom irnpr:oper disposal'of *otor oilu, gasoline I etc. Evidence of any of these
contamjnates w1l-1. increase the monltoring costs as weII as
compliance costs for the Town.
DEC 21 '92 t2=t3 TOL,JN 0F CHRE0NDIILE
The Town is retaining an
sspects of this ProPosal'
this project either Prior
heari.ng. PresentlY, it is
municipal utilities outside
Goose Creek area is not in
engineer to look at the technical
The Town will give further eomment on
to or at the January 9th Public
aElainst Town PolicY to extend
the Town's corporate boundaries. The
any of our service plans at this time '
aE1 PA3/83
I would like to thank you for gi','ing the Town the opportunity to
respond to this rlevelopment proposal. Please contact me at 963-
2733 if you have any questions.
Sincerei-y 'lrhJ c(*:
Mark Chain
Town P-l.arrner
I-lC / sd
Mou n rpris Soil Conservation District
P.O. BOX 1302 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
December 13, 1990
Andrew IvlcGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
1O9 8th Streetr Suite 3O3
Glenwood Springs, @ 81601
Dear Andrew:
At the regular meeting of the Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District the Board
reviewed the Goose Creek SuMivision preliminary plan.
Since this is a revision of a plan they have previously reviewed, some of theiroriginal concerns sti1l exist. They note that there is a high water table in thearea and would reconrnend that the foundations be carefully engineered and basementsalso be designed with the water table in mind if they are to be used.
Any cuts for roadsfor growth but for
The Board always ispotential for dogs
or utilities should be revegetated and nronitored, not only
noxious weeds. Weed free seed and rmrtch should be used.
concerned about animal control in a rural arear where theto chase wildlife or livestock is high.
Water q:ality is of prime interest to the soil districtr and they reconrnend closenronitoring of the mound system for waste disposal as well as the potential forflooding that might exist on portions of this property.
It is noted that the Redrob loam is poorly suited for homesites as is fluvaquents.
The Board appreciates the opportunity to conrnent and stresses that their interestis preserving the quality of natural resources in drr dr€Err with proper conservation
rlltjLrl()(,lEi -
Sincerely,&rd/;
Dee Blue, President
Mount Sopris SoiI Conservation District
CONSERVATION - DEVELOPMENT SELF.GOVERNMENT
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEATTH
222 So.6th St, Room 232
Crand Junction, Colorado 8'l 501
November 19, 1990
STATEOFCCLOTUDO
Telefax:
(303) 322-9075 (Main Building/Denver)
(301) 320-1 529 (Ptarmigan Place,/Denver)
(303) 248-7198 (Grand lunction Regional Officc)
Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Departnent
109 8th Street
Suite 303
Glenwood Springsr Colorado 81601
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan - Garfield County
Dear Andrew:-
I have reviewed the information on Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan
and offer the following conments:
1. The proposed development is upstrean of the Town of Carbondale water
welI. There is a potential problem with ISDS contaminating the Town's
well.
2. With high ground water, individual wells and septic systems are not a
good solution to water and wastewater services. I reconmend this
development contract with the Town of Carbondale for water and
wastewater services.
If you have any questions, please contact ne at (303) 248-7150,
Sincerely,
R ""! )J{fu-^'w*^-
Richard H. Bownan, P.E.
West Slope Unit Leader
Water Quality Control Division
RHB/csk
cc: Town of Carbondale
Planning and Standards, Denver
Fi Ie
Roy Romet
Governor
Thomas M. Vernon. M.D.
Executive Directo.
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Perry D. Olson, Oirector
6060 Broadway
Denver, Colorado 8O216
Telephone: (3O3) 297'1 1 92
October L9, 1990
Garfield Co. Planning Dept.
109 8th St., Suite 303
Glenwood Spgs., CO 8160I
Dear Mark Bean:
On tO/3/gO I met with Mr. Kent
division proposal just east of
since I commented L0/18/89 to
density will benefit wildlife
STATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer, Governor
DE-PARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
2.
3.
4.
Jones to review the Goose Creek Sub-
Carbondale. The proposal has been changed
the Planning Department. The reduced
in the area.
'g51ii ';---,riJttiTY
F-rn--.--
I0li, ;'
t,;.'
Il ilcT
G,s,fiF ji
The proposed Goose Creek subdivision contains valuable wetlands and
riparian areas as evidenced by the vegetation types and abundance of
waterfowl using the property. Other bird species including great
Blue Herons also inhabit this property. The property lies adjacent
to deer/eIk winter range and receives some minimal year long deer use.
Its greatest value is the wetlands and associated shrub clumps, alders,
cottonwoods, and wi1lows. Wetlands are considered crj-tical habitat
as the majority of all wildlife species utilize wetlands and riparian
zones.
The following will help minimize impacts to wildlife-
1. Preservation of all riparian and wetland zones.
a. 1OO' buffer zone be established along these areas where
there is no construction
b. No grazing within these areas
A11 feniing be 42", -strand or less or 48" 3-rail or less fence.
A11 dogs kenneled or chained.
Re-vegetate disturbed areas with native vegetation.
placement of homesites could impact wildlife use and building envelopes
should be reviewed once they are proposed. I also refer you to my
l0 / lB /89 letter regarding this subd j-vision.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you-
#g.w
Carbondale
dlife Manager
KW/l-mpxc: Kent Jones, PO Box L32, Carbondale, CO 81623
DEPARTMENT OF NATUBAL RESOURCES, Hamlet J. Barry, Executive Director
WILDLIFE COMMISSION, William R. Hegberg, Chairman o Dennis Luttrell, Vice Chairman r Eldon W. Cooper, Secretary
Felix Chavez, Member . Rebecca L. FranK Member o Gene B. Peterson, Member o George VanDenBerg, Member o Larry M. Wright' Member
REFER TOi
ffi
EfiJ+q'g
ROY R. ROMER
COVERNON
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING _ 1313 SHEBMAN STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (3O3) 866-261 1
December 17,1990 GA-91-0007
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planner
109 8th St., # 303
Glenwood Springs, CO E1601
Dear Mr. McGregor:
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision
We have reviewed the materials submitted on this proposal and the general and engineering
geology of the site.
We concur with the finding that there are no geology-related problems which would
adversely affect this subdivision.
As always, we recommend that radon abatement be incorporated into all occupied dwellings
regardless of the absence of evidence of radioactive materials at the particular site. Alluvial
gravels are demonstrated sources of radon gas.
Given this one cautionary note, we have no objection to the approval of this application.
Yours truly,
L
Senior Engineering
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST... KEY TO THE FUTURE
+*'
Geologist h
t=
ii..,
f-"f
GARFii,LTi Cu'utl'i y
STATE OF COLORADO
Boy Romer, Governor
DEFARTMENT OF NATURAL RE--dRCES
i., ii
i;:
ll,'i
.DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Perry D. Ol3on, Director
6060 Broadway
Oonv€r, Colorado 8O216
Telephone: (3O3) 297'1192
iil i t1l
(i,'i,i,,,
November 29, 1990
Garfield County Planning
109 8th St. Suite 303
Glenwood Spgs. , CO 81601
n^^- A=-.-l-.^--.!'Udr nlrul Ew.
On lO/3/9O I met wibh Mr. Jones for a Wildlife Revierv of his proposed
Goose Creek Subdivision. I refer you to my ]-O/18/89 and LO/LO/9O letters
to your office regarding ttris subdivision. As indicated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Bngineers and my letters, the property contains valuab-le
wetlands. I woul.d like to emphasize the importance of these and their
value to r^rildlife including many nongame species as well as r^raterfowl ancl
big game. The integrity of these weLlands as well as the riparian areas
along the Roar.ing Fork River and streams should be maintained by a I00
f t. no-developmenb buf fer z()ne aJ.clng these f eatures.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
the opportunity to comment.
Thank you for
Manager-Llnrbonda l.e
I(W/ lmp
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Hamlet J. Barry' Executive Director
WILDLIFE COMMISSION, William R. Hegberg, Chairman e Dennis Luttrell, Vice Chairman o Eldon W. Cooper, Secretary
Felix Chavez, Member o Rebecca L. Fran( Member o Gene B. Peterson, Member o George VanDenBerg, Member o Larry M. Wright, Member
REFER TOi
,6A4T
tuqru
I 'j
trr [i
Sinperql y,,/ Ik t,/,*,n )trI 1t,v.r vr-'v)tv\
Ke/vin Wr i4,frt
District WiIdIif
:: :.;t ' ', :.':i 'i: ' ' :.', ,, ',,.,.
' I :
Roarins r".*...*ffii,o*u*a....t=-,
' , ,:,
,,::,.,,.,,,
:,:.6ox.,,820;,:,: :::::::.::: : "
G lenw6odi, Slpri hgB,i:iirffildiedo:r:8:;t 602-0820
Telephone (303) 945-6558
.,:i;lii:lli::l:: "r::::; :' " :: '
.:1ii,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , "i:rr.::::::r:i:r:::::::i RoBEfrTrA. GOLEETTT, Ass istait'superintendent
; :::
::: ::: :: : RICHARD hl. HAyEsri:::Assrbtant Superintendent
,.i .: .
November L9 , 1990 "' ': ''' ;:i:''',:, :ri
,'
Mark Bean, Planner
Garfleld County
109 8th Street
clenwood Springs, Co 81601
Dear Mark:
tfe have reviewed the followlng project being considered:
Goose Creek Subdlvision
In the event bus servj-ce would be requested in the future,
applicants need to be aware of the following conditions:
As a general rule, school buses will only travel
federal, State, and county maintained roads.
There needs to be an adequate and well
maintained. turnaround.
tle would respectfully request any fmpact Fees that are
available.
RespectfuIIy,
)
James t. 'bader
Superlntendent
JLB/ jct
)
?-
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
May 7, l-991
Kent Jones
P.O. Box 1-32
Carbondale, CO 81523
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Dear Kent:
The Goose Creek Preliminary PIan has been scheduled for 1 pglllc
hearing before the Board of coultlr cornmissioners on June 3' 1991'-
at 2 :00 p.m. The hearing will -be held in Suite 301, Garf ield
Coorriy Cdurthouse, 109 8tfr Street, Glenwood Springs, CO. It is
recommended that you or your representative be in attendance'
In order to fulfill the public notice requirements for the hearing,
;;pi;; of th;-;;Iosed^ public notice form need to be mailed by
certified return-receipC to aII property owners- adjacent to or
within 200 ft. of your-property, n-o t6ss than l-5 day-s- prior I?-t!?hearing. In addilionr- the notice needs to be mailed certifiect
ieturnlreceipt to owners of mineral rightsr ot lessees of mineral
owners of record of the land proposed for subdivision, no less than
15 days, but not more than -30 -days, prior to the hearing' thg
receifti from these mailings need-to 5e presented at the time of
the hLaring or submitted t6 the Planning- Department.prior -to the
nearing. f-he public notice shoutd be submitted for publication one
time i; the Gienwood Post, 15 daysr but not more than 30 daysr-
prio" to the hearing with the proof of publication to be submitted
to the Planning Depirtment. it is your responsibility-to sub11!
the publicatiori of notice to the Glenwood polt in compliance with
noticing requirements .
The subdivision site must also be posted with the enclosed notice
posters, in accordance with Section 4z2lr Do later than 15 days
irior, but not more than 30 days prior to the hearing.
If you have further questions or concerns regarging the public
heaiing or public notite, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
Andrew C. McGregor
Planner
ACM/rIb
Enclosure
I09 8TH STREFT, STIITE 303 . 945-82121625-55711285'7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 8I601
N
N
N
B
s.
$}
\
NN
*lN R^,{}k$ T N\} L N
xl n'sT NR l'i I+$NIxSf
$\s$fNf$$sR{5
$) PI.t$'r\Nf $f $;P["fNL F$$ $flf$jLr NI
I ^F r
I
\\
0
FEB 18 1991
Len Truesdel I
0189 County Rd. 100
Carbondale, CO 81623
February 12, 1 99 1
Garfield County Planning and Zoning
Glenwood SprihgS, co
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision off County Rd
Carbonda I e .
Dean Sirs and Madam,
I have several concerns about the revision of the former
"GooSUm Creek" pr6ject, now referred to aS the "Goose Creek"
project. I talked wiih my neighbors last year when this project
was-f irst presented and we testif ied before the P&Z at that time
about numerous items. Neither Mr. Jones nor Mr. Gal ino have
ment ioned to me any P I ans to
de'l 'ineated.
mitigate the concerns alr eady
1. Water Qual jty
Canbondale has gone on record that any more development in
this area wj I I endanger the Carbondale town water supply wel ls
located a few hundred yards from the proposed development. lt
has been po i nted out that 'in add i t i on to the obv i ous concerns
about ="pti" treatment, there is considerable concern about
control of surface waters. Households wi I I produce 'increased
veh'icle oi'ls and f ue't spi I Is, garden pest'icides and chemicals,
increased fert'i l'izer use and other domest'ic chemical loads.
The soils in t.his area are extremely porous. ln fact,
irr igation water shows up in dra'inage ditches 50 feet away in a
mattir of minutes. The subsoil is essent'ially grave'l with
ay to impede water migration.
is located as close or closer
100 outside
than the Carbondale
I responsibi I ity for
I es, shou I d they be
of the area
almost no c
My wel
wells. Will Garfield County accept any lega
the integrity of my well, os well as Carbonda
pol luted?
2. Road Access
The present homes in this ar ea have easement rights down a
one lane, Frivate gnavel road off County Road 100. This road is
marginal iy' adequate for the current Ioad, 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 concenned w i th endanger i ng ch i 'ldren wa 1k'ing to schoo I
bus service on Co. Rd. 1OO. I am concerned about fire access on
this road 'if it is further degr^aded by this project. I am
concerned about emergency veh'ic I e access on th i s road.
Wi l l Garfield County assume l iabi l ity for f ire or other
damage that 'is increased by the impact of this project on the
"""""" road? Will Garfie'ld county insure my continued access
and cont'inued easement rights during any construction that the
Goose Creek project initiates on this road?
3. I rrigation Water
Th i s Goose Creek property i s crossed by 'irrigat i on d'itches ,
and the access noad closely paral lels an irrigation supply. I f
this water supply is interrupted by construction associated with
th'is project, there wi I I be considerable degradation of the
pastures and agricultural bus'iness in the area. Will Garfield
bounty assume liability for damage caused by interruption of the
i rr i gat i on water' supp I y?
4. Publ ic Access to the Roaring Fork River
During the Goosum Creek version of this proiect, the DOW
requested publ ic access be prov'ided 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 providjng publ'ic access to private
lands. The opening of my property to the publ'ic will 'increase
the jncidence of trespassing and 'l ittering. w'i 1l Garf ield County
provide cleanup and compensation for damage to private propert,ies
"aused by the creation of a public access?
Given the above concerns and the fact that I have heard no
suggestions for mitigation for Mr. Galino or Mr. Jones, I feel
that this area is inappropr jate for a development of th'is type. I
request that you deny approval of this proiect.
Sincerely,
il{,--^-
Len Truesdel I
i()HN H - .f .ACOEI. J]tlof_45 R,OAD 1.CJC)P O BO)< a_ 29
303-925-1470 303-963-3829
Eebruary 11, 1991
:f
Andrew McGregor,
Garfield County
Gar:fieId County
109 8th Street,
Glenwood Springs
Ref: Goose Creek
Dear Andrew,
P.[anner:
Planning Departmerrt
Courthouse
Suite 303
, co 81601
Sr-rbdivision
As an adjacent property owner I have two concerns abor-rt the
proposed Goose Creek Subclivision tirat I would ]ike to bring toyour attention.
The access road f rom Cor-rnty Road 100 i.s ba.rely adecluate for
the present use. When the construction equipment rreeded to
construct ttre j.nternal Cioose Cree,k Road and the buildi.ngs to be
built there star:t using the access road, tl'rey wj lI p.Lace an
unl:earable I oad on it . Thi s wi 1 I des Lroy the presen't road . Iwould ask tkrat the County requir:e ttre Goose Cr:eek Strbdivision
owners to prevent or repair the damage. As to t.he 5ub5sr;uent
maintenance ot^ the acc€ss road, I agree with the pr:oposal on pagt:
38 of the Prelinrinary PIan.
In the Goose Creek Subdivision itsel.f the proposed access
road borders on my property and will be very close to my house.This will cause dust from the gravel road to blow into my house.
AIso the noise from the trucks arrd cars will be ver.y annoyi.ng. .[would ask that the owners place their access rr:ad acljacent to andparalIeI with the existing Nieslanik irrigation diLch.
Thank you for your time and corrsi.deration jn t-,hi.s matter
Yours truly,
[t'r 11 1991
I ir.li.r i
FEB 12 1991
FebrttarY I l, t99I
Grr r:f leld (joun ty Plannl ng, li Zonl.ng Comm:Lsslon
To whom i[ maY con(:erl]:
I^le, rhe Nleslanlk Brottre16, :*':"s11 :lll:l:^:":..::::l:fl""'f'nlt.l,3o;:;.;
*oru Ii'r:L': Ii.illl':t::::il';l"t'ut L'' '"*"t'rng operaEron' .'Lhe r'adwuv re
^Iol- donoee ttre glvl rrg of la
H::,t:rl:'?":'*1:ilu"0'u:::iH,,:ii: ";.";:.,'i;i':;;;;s;;-;;P"*e ttre glvl,g of land
to wfaen and l.rnprove ttre road'
Irr:ll,attonoforrrpropcrtywot].rlhecomearealbttrdenwlthreltrcaElonof
dlr.chcs *rr.l d*t'tf e bloeking up c'trlverEs ' etc-'
operaE,lon and we' would bo strongly
iU"r* anlmals wotrld be de'stroyedl)ttg,s becomc ir factor wIEh out cat'tIe
oonostrd l-o peoPle who have uhese $Illmsls'
iil;;r;.;1v' 1f
' found cttasi'ng c-aEtre'
You wlro tcpresetr! G;rrf 1e'Id County
slrr-rr-rld rrrtl- I€t thts thlng traPl:trtr; af ter
C;arf j cld CounLY'
on the Plarrrrlng fv Zorrlng' ConrmlseLon
all we neetl to keep aBrlcttltttre In
S j.ncereI.Y r
Ntcslanlk' Brothers
(,tbtr /n*e-*&' Bob Nl-eslanlk
BNi dh
FEB t 2 1991
0181 10O Road
Carbondale, CO 8L623
FebruarY t!, 1991
NAPg-*srr BeanGarfield County Planning Departrnent
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
I am writing to express my concern with the development
proposed by Mr. Kent Jones on the 50 plus-acre parcel of land off
County Road 1OO, northeast of Carbondal'e.
I own a home and 9 acres adjacent to the proposed development
property. f feel that subdjvision or further development of any
fana in this vicinity should not be undertaken without extra-
ordinary scrutiny of the potential consequences.
The road which irccesses the proposed subdivision property is
unimproved and not maintained by the county. This road is sinply
not ible to handle any more traffic without substantial and costly
improvements.
Moieover, a large portion of the property in question is
wettand habitat. Development will not only have an impact on this
habitat, but afso present unusual and significant problems in road
building, drainage and $ewage management.
It is my reguest that the County Planning Department
thoroughly explore the potential consequences of development and
address these problems prior to granting permission for any
subdivision in this area.
Thank you for your consj.deration of this matter.
sir \
t'iffi\.,,0, ovYt-tlwv\-W. F. Duke
dulc-\lcGan
February 13, lggt
Garf ield County P & 7"
Glenwood Springs, CCI 81601
Dear Ladies ancl Gentlemen:
I own the 35 acres at 04gB
Goose Creek Subdivision.
Rose Lane which ad.-io ins the proposed
I feel that there are several inportant issues that mt:st be
addressed prior to approval of a subdivision of this maElnitude in
t his area:
1.
2.
J.
4.precedent for density in this
sensitive area sinee additional Landowners will want at
least as dense development approval for t.heir l-and
5. affect on the rural atnosphere of Iet,ting a subdivj.sion
be built in an area that was previousl.y rural in nature
6. affect on roads by substantial additional usage
result,ing from additional houses and people
affect on the water qualj.ty of the weIls in this area
by the addition of this many houses, people and septic
systens
affect on wildlife (B1ue Herrons, Efeese, deer, ete. ) of
substantial development in this area
affect on wet lands of building roads, houses, etc. in
these marshy areas
affect of setting a
I hope that as publ
of people who live
effects of this
mitiE,ated prior to
ic
in
and
any
officials whose job is to defend the rights
this area, you wi11 make sure that aLI the
future deve lopnents are addressed and
approva 1 .
6dGr^r]r6E) Td Pt\'.1 ^tr(IG to'n*'*o'o'!
2' 17'c/ /
Dale Euban
,,..1/, . t
{]ARBONDALE&RLIRALFIREPRoTECTIONDISTRICT
3OO MEAD()WOOD DR.
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 8T623
February t2, 1-991
Mr. Andrew McGregor
GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNTNG DEPT'
1_09 Bth 5t.
Glenwood SPrings. Colo ' 81601-
Dear Mr McG:regon
t have ]'evlewerl. the prelimina.ry plan for the proposed Goose Cr eek
sub-divisi.on. and would i ike to' of f er the f oI Iowinq comments to
voLl reqard.inqf fire protection for the oroperty. As I understand
it the property is to tre divided into 5 s jnqle f ami iy lots '
Access to the lots frorn county r^oad 1"00 is adequete for the
carbond.ale f ire trucks. The propc,sed. roads are wide enouqh and
turn around space is provided fbr the fire trucks' Irr addition'
access to }ot 1. owned Uy Mr- Kent Jones is Iikewise adequete for
the Carhonclale f ire trucks. Any progrosed hrirlges or culverts on
the proposed roads should hre capatrti of supportinq a 56.000 Ib
fire truck.
water suppllz for fire protection wili be provided with the water
carried. on the Carbonrlale f ire trucks which is 5 ' 50(l gal lons '
This is a suf f icierrt water supply f or a single f ami Iy house '
It should he noted that fire response wiIl be from the carbondale
f ire stati,en ancl the average response time to the proposed sub-
division is approximately 10 minutes"
If yog have any qr:esti.<:ns feel free to contact me at 963-249t-
Sincere Iy(u d----.-*
Ron Leach
Carlrondale & Rural Fire Protection District
Chief
Z
t
-rJ|3VIlTt€-D TO r.iALrLrr^.J6 Cohlntssroil z,rc.q/
IIIII-ITIIIIIIIIIIIIII III
FlEgc]UFlCT
ENGINEE RING INC
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Defartment
109 Eight Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Basatt Water Conservbncv District Water Allotment Contract
Kent Jones
February 12, 1991
as to the status of Mr. Kent Jones' water allotment
Conservancy District. Please be advised that Mr. Jones
allotment contract with the District for 1.3 acre feet of
water per year. The water s acquired to augment the stream system from potential
out of priority diversions with a four unit residential development located
near Carbondale, Colorado.The water under contract is available for release from
Ruedi Reservoir.
Dear Andrew:
You have previously
contract with the Basalt
does have an approved
Should
me.
Sincerely,
ln calculating the amount of water required for the contract we assumed that the
wastewater would be treated by individual E.T. type systems. These systems rely on
evaporation and ptant transpiration processes and are considered lOOo/o consumptive
(i.e. no return flows reach the stream system). Therefore, the water allotment
contract is sufficient to covei the subdivision's total diversions for in-house purposes.
you have any questiQns concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call
R ES O U n C E EN G tN EER tNG, iltt2.
R. Scott Fifer,
Hydrologist
RSF/mmm
033-10 bwcdt3G
CC: Mr. Kent Jones
Consulting Engineens and
GARFIELD COUNTY
BO2 Gnand Avenue, Suite SOP I Spnings, CO B'1EiO1 r [3O3] 945a6777 I Fex 9zl}=1137
CT,ARFIELD COUNTY
0181 10O Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
February 77, 1991
NA..tK*orr Bean
Garfield County Planning Department
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
I am writing to express my concern with the development
proposed by Mr. Kent Jones on the 50 plus-acre parcel of land off
County Road 1OO, northeast of Carbondale.
I own a home and 9 acres adjacent to the proposed development
property. I feel that subdivision or further development of any
land in this vicinity should not be undertaken without extra-
ordinary scrutiny of the potential consequences.
The road which accesses the proposed subdivision property is
unimproved and not mainfained by the county. This road is simply
not able to handle any more traffic without substantial and costly
improvements.
Moreover, a large portion of the property in question is
wetland habitat. Develqpment will not only have an impact on this
habitat, but also preserlt unusual. and significant problems in road
building, drainage and Fewage management.
It is my requesf that the County Planning Department
thoroughly explore the potential consequences of development and
address these problemq prior to granting permission for anY
subdivision in this area.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
dul€6\l3Gan
FEB 18 1991
GARF IELD CUUNTY Len Truesdel I
0 1 89 County Rd. 1 00
Canbondale, CO 81623
February 12, 1 99 1
Garf ield County PIann'ing and Zoning
G'l enwood Spr i h9s , CO
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision off County Rd. 1OO outside
Car bondaI e.
Dear Sirs and Madam,
I have severa'l ooncerns about the rev i s'ion of the f ormer
"Goosum Creek" project, now referred to as the "Goose Creek"
project. I talked with my neighbors 'last year when this proiect
was f i rst presented and we test'if i ed bef ore the P&Z at that t ime
about numerous 'items . Ne i ther Mr . Jones nor Mr . Ga] i no have
ment'ioned to me any p I ans to
del ineated.
m'itigate the concerns already
1. Water Qual ity
Carbondale has gone on record that any more development in
this area wi I I endangen the Carbondale town water supply wel ls
located a few hundred yards fnom the proposed development. lt
has been po i nted out that i n add'it'ion to the obv i ous concerns
about sept i c treatment, there i s cons'iderab'le concenn about
control of surface waters. Households wi 1 I pnoduce increased
vehicle oils and fuel sp'i lls, garden pesticides and chemicals,'increased fertilizer use and other domestic chemical loads.
The so'i ls in this area are extnemely ponous. ln fact,
irr igation waten shows up in drainage d'itches 50 feet away 'in a
matter of minutes. The subsoi I 'is essential ly gravel with
a'lmost no clay to impede water migr ation.
My we I 'l i s I ocated as c'lose or c I oser than the Car^bonda'le
we'l 'ls. Will Garf ield County accept any legal responsibil'ity for
the i ntegr i ty of my we'l I , 4s we'l I as Carbonda 1es, shou'ld they be
pol luted?
2. Road Access
The present homes in this anea have easement
one Iane, private gr aveI road off County Road 100.
margina'l 'ly adequate for the curnent load, but is
adequate for fire and/or emengency access.
The Goose Creek pro ject wi I'l doub'le the dens'ity
and doub I e the use of the access road.
I am concerned with endangering chi'ldren walk'ing to schoo'l
bus service on Co. Rd. 100. I am concenned about fire access on
this road if it is further degraded by th'is project. I am
concerned about emergency vehicle access on this road.
Wi'l I Garfield County assume Iiability for f ire or othen
damage that is incrgased by the impact of th'is project on the
access road? Wi'l 'l Gdrfield county insure my continued access
and continued easement rights dur ing any construct'ion that the
r i ghts down a
Th'is road 'is
questionably
of the area
I
t
Goose Creek project initiates on this r^oad?
3. lrrigation Wa,ter
Th'is Goose Creek property 'is crossed by 'ir-rigation ditches,
and the access road closely pana'l le'ls an ir^rigation supply. lf
this water supply 'is 'interrupted by constnuct'ion associated with
this pnoject, therd w'i I I be consider ab'le degradation of the
pastures and agricultural business in the area. Wil'l Gar f ie'ld
County assume liability for damage caused by 'intenruption of the
'ir rigation water supEIy?
4. PubI ic Access to the Roaring For k Rjver
Dur i ng the Goosuim Creek vers ion of th i s pr oiect, the DOW
requested publ ic access be provided to the niven on the develop-
ment p1ot. I would Iike to vigorously oppose this 'idea. THERE lS
NO PUBLIC LAND ALONG THE RIVER lN THIS AREA. Please do not
create a precedent f or prov'id i ng pub f ic access to pr i vate
lands. The opening of my property to the public w'i 1l 'increase
the incidence of trespassing and l'ittering. Wi'l 'l Garfie'ld County
pr ovide cleanup and oompensat'ion for damage to private properties
caused by the cneation of a publ ic access?
Given the above concerns and the fact that I have heard no
suggestions for mitigation fon Mr. Gal'ino or Mr. Jones, I feel
that this anea 'is inqppropliate for a development of this type. I
r^equest that you deny approval of this pro ject.
Sincerely,
il{,--^-
Len Truesdel I
J()HI{ H - JACOBI=dNo1a5 R,OArf f-(J(fP O BO)< 7.29
303-925-1470 303-963-3829
February 11, 1991
Planner'
Plannind Department
Courthouse
Suite 303
3
Andrew McCiregor,
Garfield County
Garfield County
109 8th Street,
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Ref : Goose Creek Surbdivision
Dear Andrew,
As an adjacent
proposed Goose Creek
your attention-
The access road
would ask that the
paralIeI with the
Thank you for
property owner I have two concerns about the
Subdivision that I would Iike to bring to
owners place their access road adjacent to and
existing Nieslanik irrigation ditch-
your time and corisideration in this matter-
from County Road 100 is barelv adequate for
the present use. When the construction equipment needed to
construct the internal Goose Creek Road and the buildings to be
built there start using the access road, they wiII place an
unbearable load on j.t. This will destroy the present road' I
would ask that the County require the Goose Cr:eek Subdivision
owners to prevent or repair the damage. As to the subsequent
maintenance of the accs$s road. I aBrfee with the p::oposal on paEle
38 of the Preliminary P1an.
ln the Goose Creek Subdivision itsel f the proposed access
road borders on my prolpert:y and wiII be very close to my house.
This will car-rse dust from the gravel road to bl-ow into my house-
AIso the noise from the trucks and cars wiII be very annoying. I
Yours truly,
11
i.:,. ._
5illl;I-'
fi''' :'
ir ' f-FE
L,,^',
(.:1,f\i;i.
n,,l
1 :I iI
, : l.l.,i .t,i. i;'',. 'i .J
I r'
LZz1,L SECRETRRIRL SUC 383-953-2398 P.A4a2/12/91
Febrrtary I I, I99I
()arf teld (jounty Planning & Zorrl'ng Commlsslon
To whom iL mElY conc:erl):
We,t.}reNle.glanlkBrottrerE,str(}ltglyoppo$etltedeveloPmentof50acre.s
rilore. or lesg of l';rrrd dlrec'Uly easi of i" rarrchlng operaElofl' 'l'he roadwuy ls
unsul-[able for $uch a devel-opurent. We wotrl 11 s croirgty oppo*" the glvl rrgl of land
to wlden and l.rnProve Ltre road'
Irt:J-5.,,atlurr of orrr Propcrty wou]-rl hecome a reirl btrrtlen r.l1 th relclcatlon of
c{Irchesanddehrl-eblocklngupcrrlvertB'etc-.
operaElon and we- would be strorrgJ-y
il',*** arrlmals wotrld be de'stroyedl)ogs beerrmc rr facttlr wl-Elr our cHf,t-Ie
oppostltl l-o perrple wtro have theee rrtlmsls'
r*."irra*1y tf found ctrasi'hg c'at'El-e'
You wlto tepresetrl GarEleld county
slrr.rtrlrl rrr:L 1eE ttlls thtng trapl:rrrr; af ter
(;a rf i eId Coun tY .
on the Plarrrrlng & Zorrlngi Cofirmteel-on
aII wc nee<l to keep agrl-culEltre 1n
S j.ncereJ.y r
111"slanlk Brothets
b,fi /nH-*#
' B,rl, Nl.eulanlk
BN/dh
FEB 12 1991
t?:89 SECRETTqRIFL SUC 343-953-2398
February I2r 1991
P.41.z2/12/97
Mr. Andrew Mccregor
Garfield County Planning DePartment
109 8th Street, Suite 303
GLenwood Spr i,11$3 r Colorhdo 8160I
Dear Andrew;
Thank you for your time in explaining the various aspects of
the piopos"a coose-Creek Subclivislo., to me. I am pleased t'hat the
Clty'(Cirbonaate Board of Trustees) passed a motion asking
Garfield Couniy to place a plat restriction on sehrage disposal
methods in this area. As tire clogest landowner to Carbondalers
well- f ie]-ds, I have learned f lrst hand how very easily this. wat35
cL-rn hqrcorle polluted by graz itrg l-ivestock ' etc ' I suggest that the
most sLrinqent controls wiII be necegsary to protect the growlng
;;.-.-.--.-?+.-popul-atron ot=ciitonOii*,- and I cannot help but woncler how
Carbondale wfli *nfot"" the sewer disposal and other form6 of
contamination that inevttab]y result wfen humans and Lheir
livestoclr move into an area,*strch as this. fhis will be a major
treadache for carbond.rle, and probably f?t existlng horneowners
,,clownstream,,"t the suhdivisitn. r envision the Possifrility of
Iawsuits and more state control '
.fhe other maJor prob1em, which has not beert addressed' is
g"g3g, the accesB-to thiE Pf,oposed <levelopment'
Wren rlack ,Jacot>*on andl I bought our Properties here' f if taen
""*'I"Io";
-i;t- ;;i ; i i,,s'o*a Yi= i.-1i :I -i:l:T^:nif .:i::"o ^:3oIIi#.,"83'ro"i=,.o;^i"IiiiH.-;;;";;; una-if ioili"l^1i"::1::., "*1, ?'oiuffi;;;-*;;*;:--i; "pii"q, rour-wireer drive wa* mandatory. werl,
a !rrr^ -^-.f, !.:aa lrsa l.raon l,e{ffiIir;;";;i *;;-f,;;--iit""s"a. A rlttte road baee has been rald 'F rt i- lLi *a+'hnlae h^r, hfff!!qr,r&r' of fish rive in the Pothores now' butand only smal-.1,eE varieties
the road is, and aLwaYe has been'mess I
Two f actore contribut e tcr ttre problem. The f i rst is the
mos t
roadlrro*i'iliar-"i"a year-round stream wf,i"t, parallels the road fot
LL ^ ! +1^ ^ ^-^"-i rr nrilar {. het;;"i;;'i'*"gi1l ';h; *Iioi*-"t'"ur"" that the sround under the
rL^- - --l-i= ii"u*I"iJi""t state of tota:- absorption. After a raln, oY
i""ri"g-"-"[ii"g me]tr great- amounts of water s1t upon the road
bed, unable to be absotrl:ecI . ThiE water quickly washes away the
road base meterial and huge potholes are t'trus createrl'
city r:f carbondale (punric works) tries val-iaritly to.help
occasional qrading, trut can do little good as there is no
to work wi{n. rlfr.re irrigation <iitches run under the
ihr;;-price.), there is a continulng problem in the
the
The
rrs wi ch
material-road ( in
iiiigit ing seas6n of overflow created by bl.ockage from objects
carelessly allowed to enter the ditches- uPEtreamr of from careless
irrigati,rn pra"'hicee on Mr ' Jones' property'
FEB 12 1991
a2/L2/91 12;78 SECRETRRIHL SUC 383-953-2398
i.ncrease ln traffic here
ancl ridlculous, givert the
P.A2
would be lrrto.l-eratrlle, and
current state of the road '
Mr. Andrew McGregor
nebruary L2, 1991
Page Two
The second problem is the narrow aspect of the road, ol1g IaI)g
for moEt of its l.etrgth. we cannot count the times when a vehicle
has becolile stuck, or tempoioiirV ai":Pl:d' and we are effectivery
shuL in, or "Ii"6f-"r.:-"5iio,-r=
-ptopert1es' Nor can wGI count the
Limes wtren we have had to dive iort'he Russian olive bushes to
avoirt col-lisionl--CoIlisions rlo oceur' and wE J'oee our mirrors to
bushes arrd trees, and our car bodies are scratched and dinged'
Cars age quicklY down herel
' A 3OO8
dangerous,
Letmegiveyouapersonal,trueexampleofdangerouEi.Ilour
yeaf,s aqo a tri.e-ne an<1 I ,*tn-tiait'l in otr Paature= ' My f riend
was thrown from hls horse and sustained a Eeverely fractured
femur. It t"[t tyt" 6iiUo"Oai." am'bulance one hour to arrive'
a"iavea solefy Uy !h; condition of this roadl In a
life-ttrrear,e*'irrg'uif u.tion'i aelay like thls could be fatal ' In
another instance, seven years aqo, a grags fire f,aged out of
corrtror on our ranch. Herf ***-again-derayed by the rough
condition of lni" r""a and we aLmost lost our home'
suppose the chlorine tank at the carbonclale weII Pump station
sustained a leak and evacuation became tlecessary' Aly vehlcle
Ieft unattenOifi ;" Ehe roadway,.oE a coltisionl could effectively
ctose off our escape rout;. ittt= pr:otratririty exists now, of
courEe, but would }re greatLy gTplifled bv ttre additional- nultrbers
()f people ir, .r,-iaditlonal S-rO-homes. it is obvloue that a two
Ianefoadrofanal-ternateacce6sismarldatory'
Mr.rJonesprobabtyhaswonderfu].intentlong,andwouldliketoallay your "orr!*irr* (ancl ort=) about the road with a complicated
scheme for homeowner agsessment' -If a d'ecent road were in
existence, homeowner as".=E;ents for peTibtTE*frETfrtenance and
repair worr].cl be approPriate. At this Point, however, homeowner
assessments WOuld lre comparable to General SChWartzkOpfrs
,,mo*qriito on'I"--riphil;" ;;;i;gti and do litt're gooil to cure the
prolrlem.
develoPment lsVisualize t].e situ'at'iorr, when and if this development 1st
rhava ^nmac a stream of real estate peOp1e' and
"ppro*r*J. First there comes a stream of real estate peopre' a
than ,-rrmF the survevors and the engineers ' Tlhen';f,:i;";;v*t",-.rt*., come the surveyors and the- -{--r-i^i-x:lfiL'.i,E':;ltr;'J;;r;;"'Eui1,I*[;;;;' E r""ti i c i ans , wer r <r r i t rer s ,
. J ^L^+Einapectofs,pI trrnhers , rocl(-#;;;;, ro-of ers, l-umber trucks, inapectof t,
=nn erei ^ . .t". Dependinq uFotl how quickly t'hese[ilil;;;;*;;-".". , eti ' , etc ' DePendi"g- uFon how quicIlY.::
r --r ,:^rr^1^hd,l u,a .,.rl-E I oOkinq at an eNCeSSlVei;I;";;II'Iora a"a ctevetoped, we are lookins at an e*-cesslve
---i.--^ -.# +--rr.in /\rr.r the next three to tive yeare.--TfThTB road;;i;*;=;; i'"iti" over .hL next three te- rive
_ _ --7----it::*:illI:'ffi .;ir';;;;;;";;;- r"'-ti-,"'-i*;-=ffinTEE*ilfro res ide here now'
t1tt1 SECRETHRIFL SUC 383-953-2.-:t8
ThanH you for your interest and concern'
( r"rs . ) Peronel Ie Robbins
P. A3a2/12/9t
Mr, Andrew McGregor
FebruarY L2, 1991
Page Three
how carl it be used for H volunle of traf f lc such a3 this
<levelopment woufd generate?
After the selling and hruilding has settlerl down, each single
fa*if,-awel1.ing woulE generate a minimum of four tripe per day'
AE guest housei coulrl be a Fermlt!*g rr:"*, thie could add another
four tri_ps pe; ,1ay mini[rrum. r\{urtipry this hy_1 facr_or of f lve
anrl we have a mininum of 40 trips pei day. Add to thj.s meter
inspect-ors, teTE[ffiE repair trucks, horse trailers, garbage
clisIr6Sa.l., gue€tts'and fri-enclS, Ownerg of boarded hOraes' UPS
trrrcks, ancl ="-ioilr,. Thie Wil_l_ all occl-ln on a one l-ane road.
I believe that the Cotlnty muat take fuII f,esponsil>ility for a
<leci s ion regar<ling Mr . Jon€E I Goose creek subdivis ion ' To apProve
this subdivision without looking at this more seriously atLendant
iI"[r"*-6i *"""=" could ]re cleembrl irresponsible, and
short*s i ghted, [" p"t lt rni ldly. I f any members of thi s
Comrnission have not Perl Sonally observerl this road ln its entirety'
r wourd encourage thim to .1o io b"fP=g ="X-$ESiEj-q!-iF. ,rendered'
Evory man has a right to develgP his pr-operty^ for its pJ-anned
and *ppiiruua uses. euf every man d6es no1 have the rtght to
;;;p;';iiiie trre-quarity of ri?e of the peopre who were here trefore
him, an<l to knowingly proceed with a use plan Ehat. is untenable'
anrl unworkab L;-, ;;d ir"Ls ib) y, in th is i nstance, potenti aJ-l-y
dangerous to the peoflla of t-he City of Carbondale'
I,andmyneighbor$lwouldencouraget,hemelnbersofthig
commission to maXE a ciecigion that wil-I be enlightened and
projresrive, in dlrecting future development in the marly
*rrrironmentalty delicate areas of this type in our area.
PR: cf
.w.
FEB E6 '91 13:45 T0|.,JN 0F CHRBONDIILE 729 PA?/45
Town of Carbondale
76 Souttr 2nd St. Carbondale, Colorado 81623 GOil 961-2733
February 6, lggt
Mr . Andrew McGregor (rAKf lE LlJ vvlJlr I I
Garfield County Plannirng Department
1Og 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
TRA,NSMITTED BY FACSIMILE LETTER ON Z/6/gL
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Pl-an
Dear Andrewl
The Carbondale Board of Trustees reviewed the above referenced
project at its January 22r 19911 meeting and its possible impact
on the Town's Roaring Fork Wellfield. Applicants present were
Kent Jonee and Priscilla Prohl. As you know, the Town and the
State Department of HeaIth have concerns that the existinB Town
wellfield wiII be impacted by the proposed development, The Town
has three existing shaI1ow, high aa1racity municipal welIs which
hawe a caps.city of 300 to 350 g.p.m. This area has also been
targeted for nine additional wel1s to eupplement our wster supply
as the Town grows. These welIs have conditional decrees.
After a long discussion, the Board of Trusteee unanimously passed
a notion which asks Garfield County to place a pl-at restriction
on the subdivision whtch woul-d require any I.S,D.S. built within
the Goose Creek Subdivision to be constructed subject to Town
approval. At this point in timer the Town would reguest that any
I.S.D.S. be a non-discharging systern such a.s an E.T. system u5lng
hypalon liners in Iieu of polyethylene liners
The Tou,n would also like to have a working rel"ationship with
Garfield County in this general area in the future so that our
wells can continue to be protected, Irr the best of worldsl the
Town would know precisely how far of an area away from the ToHrI's
wellfield needs to be protected. It wilI be difficult to obtain
this information since such a stucly would be expensive and the
results would be highly interpretive. The Town i.s currently
investigating with the State Department of Heal-th the Possibility
of the Town beconing a pilot proiect for the state's Wellheadprot,ection Program. We wiII keep you informed about this matter.
6 i991
FEE krir '91 13:45 TI]uJN fIF CHREI:IIDHLE 1c.9 PlJiztro
the Town Board has instructed rne to investigate with the County
the possibility of Towln review and a.pproval of any I.S.D.S. being
constructed in this generrtl area. I s.m including a }etter from
Louis Meyer which proVides documentation that 95?6 of groundwatef
contamination cases result from contamination within two miles of
the (round water source. We hope that a working relationship
with the County will gesul-t in a Sati3factory Solution to
protecting our domestic water supply from poll-ution,
The Town would like to thenk Garfield County for the opportunity
to review thls &nd othet proiects which may impact the Town of
Carbondele. You can contact me at 963-e733 if you have any
questions about the Town's comgents on the Goose Creek
Preliminary PIan. I Look forward to discussind with you in the
near future the issue of protecting our ground water supply.
Sincerely I
,ry^.| c(-:
Mark Chain
Tourn Planner
MC/sd
Encl .
FEB EE '91 13:45 TEI,JN OF CFREONDRLE
scHi" tfi 60FDOililEYEn
t29 PA4/46
1001 Grand Avenue, Suits 2'E
Glenwood SPrirrgs, Colorado 816O1
(303) S4S1oo4 (303) 92s{727
Fil( (3O3) S45€S46
January 7, 19gl
Mr. Mark Chain, Town Plarrnar
Town of Carbondale
76 South Second Street
Carbondale, CO 81623
ut"t
nfCEfVfO JAN09lsgl
RE:Goose Greok Subdivision Pralimindry Ptan
Dear Mark;
As requested, I have reviewed the Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Pl8n. The purpose
of this tetter is to comment of the relationship between the Goose Creek Subdivision and the
Town's well field.
The relationships betwoen municipal well fields arrd point sources of poltution are extremely
.on1pi.* and highly irrterpretive. To definitively determine the relationship would require in-
depth groundwatei modeting and actual in-ptace monitoring so that groundwat€r mov8mBnt
and potlutant transport can be defined
$hort of doing this in-depth analysis, certain facts can be raised at this time on the
relationship between the 6oosB Creek Subdivision and the Town of Carbondale's wells.
Those facts are as follows:
l. The proposed five lots for Goose Creek Subdivision are located between 1600
and 250o feet away from the Town of carbondale well field.
2, Generally, the gr6undwater gradient, or direction of flow, in the Roaring Fork
alluvial is towards the river and downstream. Therefore. upon information and
belief, the Town 0f Carbondale's well field is down gradient from the proposed
Goose Creek Sutldivision.
3. Currantly, the Town's well field is used as a peaking source of water to handle
irrigation saason water damands.
4. ThiS welt field haS been identified as the future source of Town of Carbondale
watEr. As the Town grows, more wells can be drilled in the Roarirrg Fork
alluvial. These wplls wiltgonerally parallelthe Roaring Fork Hiver and be spaced
35O feet apart. Enclosed as Figure 1 is a map propared for Carbondale by WME
which shows the area identified as the future well field corridor. Also,
according to WME, the cone of depression for these wells is * 500 feet. The
WME su[gests a total of nine wells will be required to moet future demands.
E. The.Town,s threp existing wells are shaltow, high-capacity municipal wells-
The wells are drilled to approximately 36 feet in dapth and havo a screened
intervat ol +. 22 to 35 feet, and have a capacity of * 300 to 350 gpm-
COiJSUI"TII{G EA'6'I'EEf, E & SUEYEYOHS,
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page two
FEB EE '91 1324?TDI^IN 0F CFREONDHLE
,'t Gerashtv and Mitler, lnc. performad a national survey. for USEPA
.t-,/' lreaJq ui rters, 9! 98 I r1 un dyta te r c o n tam h! t!_o:,
-"!'?l- -^
T!l:,:':d!
ln a letter to Garfield county from Richard H. Bowman, dated November 19,
1990, Mr.Bowman stated there was a potentiol problem with ISDS's
contaminating th6 Town'S wells. CaSe histories back up Mr' Bowman's claim'
Casa histories in pollutant transport theory indicate that viruses and organics
cur, rnigrate lorrg d'istances in shallow groundwater with coursB alluvialaquifers.
pistanies cited in Case histories suggest these pollutants can travel distances
iong.r than that encountered in thislituation (l can suppty these casa histories,
if necessarY).
The preliminary plan report indicates that engirteered ISDS's will be designed
for each lot. Theretore, it can be argued that tha lsDS's will be built to Garfield
Cornty and Color4do bepartment of Health standards and meet all setback
requirements. However, individual Sewage disposal regulations, both on a
county and state levsl, do not take into consideration proxirnity to hign-capacity
municipal wells.
The State Health Department has adopted the BaSiC Standards For
Groundwafer. Tahle 1, attached, lists the standards for discharge to d-omestic
use ctassified groundwater. Table 1 limits the discharge of total coliforms to
ons organism per 'tOO mils. Thase limitations are to be met at the point ot
cornplilnce. The point of compliartce for the Town of Carbondale's well field
has not been established. However, the data used to compile the basic
standards indicate that point of compliance should ba within a two'mile radius
of tha'Town,s wells. Below are references from that Basrc Standards for
Groundwater:
A conservative aria of two taterat mites aro.und the activity in questions will
presumptively be Used as ifie initialspecified area, The Commission finds this
arca to be reason4lsla fot the followirtg reasons:
\ l.J,4.
\r, l
lt
tr]- '!-)
No'
'.,:"'iiiia-tii lirii SgW oi the plumes of contamination werc limited tor. .x.l'rSVEOIEA mal J?-/b Of UrH ptulllel ut Livtt'e'ttt"o"u" r'7e'v """'vr' ,)i within two miles of the source. Geragthy and Mlller, lnc. performed an
--rt--t ---Lt-L ^t^^
si
in-house survey of 73 more such itam la total of t4l s[es/ which also
revealed that 950rt af these plumes of contaminatiott were limited to
two miles from the source;
The tcF corporation pterfotmed a national sLttvEY, for U$EPA
i"idqiunarsi of t 5gO frCRA sifes. ln this studY, ICF fourtd that 95%
of tha distflnCe1 frOm the SOUrce to groundwater discharge houndaries
were within two miles;
GOBDON MEYER, INC.
129 pgc_t/26
7.
g.
8.
FEE E6 '9L 73'-4?TOLlN OF CHREENDFILE
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page three
Geraghty 1nd Milter, lnc, perforfied a national suryeYt for USEPA
Healguartars, of large groundwater pumping sysfems lmunicipal water
suppty wetlil. This suruey revealed that epproximlely 95% of these
*uil"-had A ca1tura zona li.e., zone of influencd within a two'mile
radius.'
10. Accordirrg to Courrty staff , there are approximately fifty residents in this genaral
aroa. Mogt of thete are farthar away from the Town's wells but, nonetheless,
can contribute to aquifer contamination'
Given the above-merrtiorred fact$,1 concur with Mr. Bowman's concern over the potentiel for
p-oltution of the Town of Carbondale's water supply. Continued proliferation of ISDS's in this
area will severely curtail the Town's ability to expand the well field in the future- Certain
steps can be takerrto mitigate or lessen the risks associated with the development such as:
construction of non-discharging lsDS's, such as ET (evapotranspiration) beds
using hypalon liners irt lieu of polyethylerte liners'
Corrstruction of on-site monitoring well drilled down gradient of the ISDS.
Extensiort of Town wastewater facilities
I hope this information has beem of uss to you. t would be happy to follow up this memo or
attend any public rneotings as rlecessary.
Sincerely,
scHMuEsER GORDON MEYER|
Louis Meyer, P.E.
LM:lc/9218-17
Enclosures
Peter ware
Davis Farrar
1.
.t
Lt
a
SCHMUESEH GORDON MEVEB' INC.
129 PA5/45
F*-_
GARRfl[GHAEL GONSTRUGTION IN@"
,:
Andrew McGregorGarfield County PI
1O9 8th Street, Suit
Glenwood Springs, Co
ing Department
303
81601
January 25, 1991
FEB 7 1991RE: Goose Creek Subd
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for your ti
Subdivision submitta
vl's]'on
,r -::'--i-.: - ^:t.:AKTIE,LLJ CUUNTY
and asslstance in reviewing the Goose Creek
As an adJacent Land r this subdivislon raises elmlfar concerns
Goose Um Creek subdivision.as dld the previousL proposed
It seems inpossible these days to leave a large parcel of land
intact, to leavevalleyrs few fragi
Land areaa as they are or to leave this
agree that there arefurther development.
natural habitats undlsturbed. I hope you
nappropriate areas wlthin Garfield County for
As we are all. awarelrrigation ditches
domestlc wells are
water levef ln this area ls very high and
isscross the entire valley floor. Because
shall.ow (4O') the high water and ditchee
make accidental con inatlon of this entire area a very real.possibility. At pr ,ent there ls thls posslblllty wlth the few
I see no reason to nultlpJ.y this factor byexlstlng residences,
100s.
In discusslng thisexisting regulationsrequire improvements
lan it became apparent that there are no
enabling the P & Z or Commissionera to
made to the existing access road. Although
this was a strong ln the firet proposed development, lt haE
by the appllcant. There appears that noagaln been slde steffort wiLl be madethey wish to double
the applicant to improve the road on whlch
the f low of traf f lc. Their sol.utlon is a
sinply maintenance ment and does not address the improvement
of or access onto Co ty Road 1OO. Thls is disturbing ln that it
shows a Lack of re ibility to a very real problen that there
my reasoning that lf the county has thecreating. It wouldauthority to grant tinued development of an area, they must
insist on the lmp t of access to that area, fo? emergency
vehicle use if for other reason.
Having reviewed aIL erial on file I feeL that even at reduclng
P.O. BOX 445
P. O. BOX 9071
CAR LE, CO 81623
ASPEN,o 81612 303-963-1436
the scale of thls proJect the appllcant 1s trylng to force a
subdivision onto a- parcel that is just not suited denographically
or geographically for such a subdlvlsion. ThiE land should be left
as your predecessors' have zoned it.
I have full faith that the Planning and Zoning Department as well'
as the County Commisslonersi having seen many self serving
developers pfairs cross their deskE have now the insight/foresight
to realize the continuing potential impact of such development.
Thank you for your interest and support of our concerns.
sidcerl.,L? , .l
*?fu t%u,rtr4
Gary carr(chaet
G9fC/ tc
CARBONDALE & RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
3OO MEADOWOOD DR.
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 8L623
February L2, 1991
Mr, Andrew McGregor
GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPT.109 Bth st.
Glenwood Springrs. Co jo. 81601_
Dear Mr. McGregror
t have reviewed the preliminary plan for the proposed. Goose Creeksub-division. and would I ike to of f er the rot towinqr comrnents toyou regarding fire protection for the property. As r und.erstandit the property is to be divided into s singie'family lots.
Access to the lots from county road 1 00 is aclequete for theCarbondale fire trucks. The proposed roads are wide enough andturn around space is provided for the f ire trucks. Irr addit.ion,access to lot 1" owned by Mr. Kent Jones is likewise adequete forthe Cartrondale f ire trucJ<s. Any proposed bridges or culverts onthe pr^oposed roads should be capitrtl of supp6rtingr a 56,000 lbfire truck.
Water supply for fire protection wili be provided with the wateicarried on the Carbondale fire trucks wfricn is 5.500 gallons.This is a sufficient water suppty for a single family houie.
It should be noted that fire response will be from the Carbondalef ire station and the averag'e response t,ime to the proposed sub-division is approximately 10 minutes.
rf you have any qr-lestions feel free to contact me at 963-2491..
Sincere Iy,
(7-- al --------
Ron Leach
Carbondale &. RuraI Fir e protection Distr.ictChiet
Zogiopoulos ond Associotss, lnc.
Engine ering C onsultonts
1011 42ND STREET . EVANS, COLORAOO 80620 ' PHONE 352-6000
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
L09 8th st., Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 8L60L
Dear Mr. McGregor,
we would. Iike to address your additional engineering
concerns in regard.s to the Goose Creek Preliminary Plan'
L/2L/et
the
tangent
be one small
beyond the
Exhibit B for
shown on
section 4.50 N, The_'lapproximateil road grade is +/- L%,
ffii is 335r , the length is 238,25' and the
is L24.42' .
Section 4.80 C. The
10 acres per
site levels.
Computation.
Secti-on 4.80 D. The existing drainage facilities have been in
@aSt10oyearSandarequiteadequatetoprotectthis develoPment.
1. ) Areas subject to inundation are shown on site inventory map
Exhibit B and on preliminary plat map'
Iot will
PIease
d.evelopment of 4 residential lots averaging
not create run-off in excess of historic
see Exhibit A for Improvement Ratio
2.) A1I existing culverts are adequate. There will
d.itch culveited by an 18" culvert extending 3 'driving surface on each side of the road' See
Iocation.
section 4.92 D. Percolation test hole l0cations are
attafie-d-Effiffit B.
\*>
Sectlon 4.93 Please se€: attached Exhibit C, road cross section
ffi roa cifications to be used.
ASSOCIATES, rNC.
a"asreQ,
\p,.:zovroPoQ#
t.';j.o:-l?l^tJ%
.E.
$
\(,f
Iogiopoulos ond Associolcs, lnc.
ImProvement Ratio ExamPIe
The approximate percolation rate of 45% per square foot can be
ippfiltf t" ttre-m'ajority of land. in the eoose Creek Subdivision'
Tha remaining 55% is run-off.
The proposed. improvement of a 4,ooo square foot residence and
driveway to "n "*r"r"g" lot size of 10 acres will produce the
following:
L. ) The 4,000 square feet of land improvements will produce
a 95% run-off and a 5% percolation rate'
2.) A 10 acre lot equals 435,600 sgu3f9 feet of surface
area with a hisforic run-off of 55%- Subtracting t'he
4rOO0 square feet of CoVered surface area from 435,600
would. leave 43L,600. Multiplied by .55% the hj"storic
run-offareaequals23T,3SOsquarefeet'Wethenmultiply the 4,OOO square feei of improvements by .95%
run-off created. The result would be 3,800 square feet
of affected ground percolation. Dividing 3,800 square
feet by 237 ,18O squlre feet gj-ves us an improvement
ratio of .02 percent decrease in the percolation rate
of said lot.
3. ) We could not desi-gn anY
to deal with this small
off.
add.itional drainage facilj-ties
a change in the historic run-
Exhibit A
/,i,-/t,4/
(ox
6t53.7 .
t,
i
)E/-@',iO
.6,
nt,
q
r?o\J
t
rtf:I
G;
tt\)
E#>,-"' =I
oi;l
d' l r'( L/,; it i I
go:.rt:
6t47.8
h\i\
Jr,
lt
//t
'(t
).(
GARFlELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFF]CES AND PERSONNEL
January 3, 1991
Kent Jones
P.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 81523
RE: Goose Creek Preliminary Ptan - Planning Commission Hearing
Dear Mr. Jones:
Due t.o deficiencies in your application, we wiII be un;rbl.e to hold
a public hearing before t.he Planning Commission on January 9, 1??1.
Th-esel deficienCies, outlined in my letter of December 2L, 1990,
need to be addressed prior to the coilImencement of the public
hearlng. Perhaps the fo.remost issue is that cited in the enclosed
letteir from the Office of the State Engineer and required in
Sectlon 4:91 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. The
rescheduling of the public hearing will require repeating thg
publlc notiie publication notifying land owners within 200' and
postlng of the proper:ty. I wiII provide the public noticing
mater:iils when we-determine the completeness of the application and
an a(:ceptable date for the public hearing.
I wotrld be glad to meet with you to discuss these matters. Please
caII and we can schedule a meeting to avoid derailing your schedule
any further.
Sincerely,
Z*,/.-r-Z?-5*v--
Andr<lw C. McGregor
Planner
ACM/rIb
xc3 Vince Gulino
lo9 BTH STREET, SUtrE 303 . g45-82t21625-557t1285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
.i.:.
STAIE OFCOLOTUDO
COTORADO DEPARTMENT OT HEALTH
222 So.6th St, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
November 19, 1990
Telelax:
(303) 322-9075 (Main Building/Denvet)
(303) 320-1 529 (Ptarmigan Place/Denver)
(301) 248-7198 (Crand lunction Regional Oflicc)
Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street
Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Re: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliurinary PIan - Garfield County
Dear Andrew:-
I have reviewed the information on Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan
and offer the following comments:
1. The proposed development is upstream of the Town of Carbondale water
welI. There is a potential problem with ISDS contaninating the Town's
welI.
2. With high ground water, individual wells and septic systems are not a
good solulion to water and wastewater services. I reconnend this
developnent 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"tu0 /fftu-**-*
Richard H. Bowman' P.E.
West Slope Unit Leader
Water Quality Control Division
BHB/csk
cc: Town of Carbondale
Planning and Standards, Denver
Fi Ie
,t
dtii:
BASALT WATDR CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
WATEIT ALLOTIVIENT CONTRACT
Pursrrant to C.R.S. 1n3r 3745-131
Kent Jones (hereinafter "Applicant') has applied tothe Basalt Water conservancy District
(rereinafter ttre 'pistrict"), a potiticat subdivision-of the State of colorado, organized pttrsuant
to and existing uy-virtui'of col,,r.,lo Revised Statutes, 1973,37-45-101, gtr S9Q., for an
allotment contract r- u.nrrr.ial use of water rights owned, leased, or hereafter acquired by the
District. By execution of this Contract, Applicint agrees to the foliowing terms and conditions:
Domestic/Municipal
-
Industrial/Commercial -
Agricultural
l. OUANTffy: In consideration of the covenants and conditions herein containe/,
Appricant ,t utt u"6iitt.o to receive and apply to -beneficial
use .033 cubic feet of water per
second from the District,s direct flow rights ina r.l acre feet per year of storage water owned
or controlled bY the District.
2. sotrRcE oF AILOTTED WATER: water rights allotted pursuant to this
Contract shall be fronr thcnistrict's rr^trr righ. d;reed to the Basalt Conduit, Landis Canal,
stocknran,s Ditch Extension, or ottrer a."r."ior water rights hereafter acquired by the District,
including the pistJci', .ontru.tual right to receive storage water [rom ].uedi Reservoir' The
District shall have the right to designa'te the water right oiDecree of the District from which the
Appricant,s attottJrighis sha[ uelutaineo. The Appricant's use of any of the District's water
rights shall be ,ub3..t-to any and all terms and conaitions imposed by the water court on the
use of the DistrictJr-oia ,idr,tr. Ilxchange releases made from the District's storage rights in
Ruedi Rescrvoir o, othff w6rks ano racitiiies of the District shall be delivered to the Applicant
at the outret works of said storage facility and release of water at such outlet works shall
constitute fuu performance of the-District's derivery obrigation. Derivery.of water from the
Distrir:t,s storage rilnts in Ruedi Reservoir shall be iubjeci to the District's lease contract with
the united states B-ureau of Reclamation and any rulei and regulations promulgated pursuant
therettl.
3. plrBposE AI.ID I-OCATION OF [ISE: Applicant will-use the waters herein
granted forb"n"fiitfrfrffiir-"1 -h".,,grr*ration otLxisting and future wells and other
water sources, *iihil oi tt rough facilities oi upon tands owned, operated, or served by
eppiirunt, whlch tands are *ott tutty described
-on
n*niUit 'A' attached hereto; provided that
the location and p"tp.r" of Applicant's use of said water shall be legally recognized and
permirted by the applicable gor"*rrntal authority having jurisdiction gveJ the property served'
Applicant,s conteiit.tra uig" for the water alloited hereunder is for the following use or uses:
J-
Other
Applicant acknowledges that usage of the District's water rights as herein contemplated
shall be in lieu or oi ruppleriental to ,\f,plicant obtaining or adjudicatinq, o1 its own, the right
to uso certain waters.. ii is actnowreOgeo that certain l&ationi within the District may not be
susceptible to service solely by the oistfrct's water rights allotted hereunder or the District's said
blg-
',.::}ti.l . I
'.1; '
:T-.':ir't..
'rrti' 'r'r,1 t,t-J
(+i)
water rights may not utisfy Applicant's needs and purposes. To the extent that service cannot
be achieved by use of thl pistrict's allotted *.iff rights, or in the event said service is
inadequate, Applicant may, utilizc such other water rights, by way.of supplementing. the
District,s water rights, or otherwise, as is necessary to assure water service sufficiently reliable
ioi eprrri*t's iniended purpose or purposel Ail lands, facilities and areas served by water
rights allotted hereunderut.tt u* situated within the boundaries of the District. The District
reserves the exclusive right to review and approve any conditions which may be atlach-* to
judicial approval "irA;fi;ris use of the oiiirict's witer rights allotted hereunder. Applicant
agrees to defray any out-of-po ket expenses incurred by the oistrict in connection with-the allot- '
ment of water rigirts-t tt"under, including, but not tirit a to, reimbursement of legal and
.ngin.*ring "ortr'inrurred
in corinection with any wat91 rights adjudication necessary to allow
Applicant,s use of such allottea water rights;'provided, however, in the event any suclt
adjudication involves more of the Districtis waier righti than are allotted pursuant to !h]s
Contract, Applicant shall bear only a p--ot" portion of iuch expenses. Applicant shall be solely
responsible ror provioing works and faciliti"r, if any, necessary to utilize the District's water
rigirts allotted hlreunder 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 ttroie entitled to utilize the District's decrees, ffioY callol any greater amount
at new or alternat" pri"ir oi diversion. The District shall request the colorado state Engineer
to estirnate *y .oni"y-", losses between the original point and any alternate pint and such
estimate shall be deducted from this amount in each caie. The District, or anyon-9 using the
District,s decrecs, may call on any additional souroes of supply that-may be available at an
atternate point of 4iversion, but not at the original point of divirlion, only as against water rights
which ari junior to tt. daie of application for the alternate point of diversion'
In the event the Applicant intends to develop an augmentation ptan and institute legal
proceedings for the approval of such augmentation ptan to allow the Applicant to utilize the
water allotted to efpli'cant hereunder, trrJepplicant rit"tt gir" the District written notice of such
intent. In the "urit'the
Applicant develops ano adjudicates an augmentation plan to utilize. the
water allotted hereunder,'ipplicant shail not be obligated to tear or defray any legal or
engineering ,*p"nr. of ttre Oirrri"t incurred by the Di_strict for the purpose of developing and
ali,Oicatirig . pt.n of augmentation for the District. In any event, the District shall have the
right to approve the Applicant's augmentation plan and the Applicant sh-all provide-the District
copies of such plan and of all pleadings and bther papers ritea wittr the water Court in the
adjudication thereof.
4. pAyI\iENT: Applicant shall pay annually for the water service described herein
at a price to b"-Eiil-ffidly'by the Board of Directors of the District for such service. The
initial annual payment shall bL made, in full, within 15 days after the date of a notice from the
District that the iliti.l payment is due. Said notice wili advise the Applicant' among other
things, of the water delivery year to which the payment shall appty ancl the price which is
applicable to that year. Annu"fpryrrnts for each year thereafter shalt be made by the Applicant
-JO TD
.-::\,.': i:.,t
on or before each March l. If an tnnual payment is not made by the due date, written notice
thereof will be sent by the District to the ipplicant at Applicant's address set forth below' If
payment is not maae witfrin ten (10) day14#said written notice, the District may, at its option'
elect to terminate "rioitr,r
Applicant's right, title, or interest under this contract, in which evelt
the water right a[otted hereunder rnay 5" ionrreoro, reased or otherwise disposed 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 with some
other person, corporation, quasi-municipal entity, ot-gori*mlntal entity, and in the event the
Applicant fails to make payments ., ,"quir.O hereundJr, the District may, at its sole option and
request, authorize said person or errtity to curtail the Applicant's water service pursuant to this
contract, and in such event neither tne nistrict nor such llersons or entity shall be liable for such
curtailment.
5. APPROPRIATION OF FTINDS: The Applicant agrees-that so.long..1t^:h::
contraJti,,budget*d.pp'opiatefromsuchsourcesof,- -l-^ ^L^ ^--..^lilffi; ;"r ffi#'i.g.uy.r,iir.'rii['i" ure Applica:nt the fun.is necessary to make the annual
n- - ^ --t:..--t ..,ill Iralrl;ffiiit?H';;;ffiai.;ilir..v prr'{-,.. rhis contract. rhe Applicant witl hold
rL^ l^t!..^-' ^f rrralor nrrrcttanl tn lhiqffiilffi,i; ffift, and any person oi.ntity involved in the tlelivery of water pursuant to this
contract, for discontinuance in service due to the failure of Applicant to maintain the payments
herein required on a culrent basis.
6. BENEFIT OF CONTRACT: The water right allotted -hereunder
shall be
beneficiallyus€dfffimannerspecified[ereinandthisContractisforthe
excluslve benefit "itilrippiicant ano shall not inure io the benefit of any successor' assign, or
lessee of said Applicant without rhe frior written approval of the Board of Directors of the
District.
In the event the water right allotted hereunder is to be userl for the benefrt of land which
is now or will hereafter be subdlvirled or otherwise held or owned in separate ownership interest
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 and
sanitation tlistrict o.ott., speciat itirtririprop"rly organized and existing under and by virtue of
the laws of the state of Colorado and then onty il sulh osro.iation 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 oblig.tionr under this contract. In no event shall
the owner of a portion, but less than all, of the-Applicant's property t9 be served under this
Contract, have any ritit, t tt.under, except as such rights rnay exist through a homeowners
association or rpo'irl Jistrict as above provided. Anyasignment of the Applicant's rights under
this Contract shalibe trrr.i*, to and must comply with such requirements as the District may
hereafter adopt regardini assignment of Contract rights and the assumption of Contract
obligations by assignees and succtlssors, provided-that such requirements shall uniformly apPly
to all allott*, ,*"ilinfniriri"t seruice.' The restrictions on ar.ignr"nt as herein contained shall
not preclu<te the pisirict from holding the Applicant, or any successor to the Applicant'
-91-
1'1" rj'
"iir
t.iD
ffi;
responslble for the performance of all or any part of the Applicant's covenants and agreements
herein contained.
7. OTHER RULES: Applicant's rights under this Contract shall be subject to the
Water Service rm
"r
roopt a Uy rh; bistrict and amended from time to time; provided that.such
Water Service plan shall .pply uniformly throughout the District among water users receiving
the same service from the tiirtri.t. Applicant shall also be bound by the provisions.of-t!9 Water
Conservancy Act of the State of Colorado, the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Directors
of the District, the plumbing advisory, water conservation, and staged curtailment reBulations,
if any, applicaLle *ittrin thJCounty in which the water allotted hereunder is to be used, togetlter
with-all amendments of and supplernents to any of the foregoing.
g. CURTAILMENT OIr UsE: The water service provided_hereunder is expressly
subject to the prr"iri."r "f th.t "irtuin Stipulation in Case No. 80 CW 253 on file in the District
court in water Division No. 5 of the stati of colorado, which Stipulation provides, in part, for
tf,e p"ssiUle curtailment of out-of-house municipal and domestic water demands upon the
o.rurr.n., of certain events and upon the District giving notice of such curtailment, all as more
fully set forth in said Stipulation.
g. oPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Applicant shall enter into
an 'operation anO t t.ir,t"n..nce Agreement' with the District if and when the Board of Dirertors
finds and determines that such un agr.ement is required by reason of additiorral or special
services requested by the Applicant and provided by the District or by reason of the delivery or
use of *ut", by the eppticant for more ih* on" oi the classes of service which are defined in
the Rules and Regulaiions of the Board of Directors of said District. Said agreement may
contain, but not UE nmitea to, provision for water delivery at times or b1 means not provided
within ihe terms of standard allotment contracts of the District and additional annual monetary
consideration for extension of District services and for additional administration, operation and
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 Airapprow ury propor.d change in use of the water right allotted hereunder. Any
use other than that set fortfi hlrein or *y lease or sale of the water or water rights allotted
hereunder without the prior written approval of the District shall be deemed to be a material
breach of this Contract.
l l. PRIOR RESOLUfl()N: The water service provirted hereunder is expressly subject
to that certain nr*futi* pmsed by the Board of Directors of the District on September 25,
lg7g, and all amendmenti thereto, as the same exists upon the date of this application and
allotmgnt Contract.
lZ. NO FEE TffLE: It is understood and agreed that nothing herein shall give the
Applicant any equitaUlC or legal fec title interest or ownership in or to any of the water or water
}J}.D
:\.
1lt':l.j'.i.i"
rights of the District, but that Applicant is entitled to the right to use the water right allotted
hereunder, subject to the limiations, obligations and conditions of this Contract.
13. CONSERVATION PRACTICES: Applicant shall implement and use commonly
accepted conservation practices with respect to the water and water rigtrts allorted hereunder ani
shall be bound by any conservation plan hereafter adopted by the Diitrict, as the same may be
amended from time to time.
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF GARFIELD )
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
Jones
PO Box 132
Carbondale, CO 81623
d^v orn rtwrx,blzL , leeo.
WITNESS my hand and official seat.
My commission expires:,r%tqffiT
- -r?. DelJ
5
ORDER. GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ALLOTMET{T CONTRACT
KENT JONES
Application having been made by or on behatf of Kent Jones and all parties interested in
the foregoing Water Allotment Contraciand hearing on said Application having been duly held,
it is he[by ordered that said Application be granted and that the foregoing Water Allotment
Contract for .033 cubic feet of *it*r per 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 Uitr*f of the Basalt Water Conservancy District, for the
blneficial use of the water allotted in the foregoing Contract, upon the terms, conditions and
manner of payment as therein spccified 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 paynrent of charges due under the approved Contract following
subdivision of the prodrty Oiririt eO in the Application on file with the District and the
Applicant shall givi noti.i to purchasers of all- or any part of the :lbjTt propell of the
obligation of thiJContract, and shall record such notice in the records of the Clerk and Re:order
of darfield County, Colorado. Applicant and his successors and assigns shall cornply with all
rules and regulations now existing or hereafter adopted by the District to enforce payment of
charges dueinder the approved Contract by presenl and 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 proposul land use of the
land to be benefitted 6i tt e water allotted hereunder has been approved by the applicable govern-
mental authorities Saving 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 and
attacherl Contract is described as follows:
see Exhibit nA" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
r,y: d,|n'ln ,- ,&nr,'-?
President
I hereby certify that the above Order was entered by the Directors of the Basalt Water
Conservancy District on the 12bh day of November , 1990.
ATTB$T:
Secretary
- rq-
'lr
ri,iJ
,
A parcel of land altuated ln l.otn 3 and 4, Sectton ]5 and LoE 8, Sectlon J4,
Tounshlp 7 SouEh, Range 88 Hest, of the Slxtlr Prlnclpal Herldlan. Sald parccl of
land 1g descrr.bed ag followar
Beglnnlrrg at thc lfltness Corner for Lhe South Quarter corner ol aald Sectton 351
thence ll. 53'30tit'll. 4278.58 feet to the Trus PolnE of Deglnnlng, aald polnE
also belng the NTI corner of ttrat parcel conveyed to John ll. ilaeobaen by Docrtment
No. 2?1155 of the Garflcld County recordal thence N. 00'49r0O" E. 930.90 feet, to
tftc gw corncr of that prrccl cont'cycd Eo llavld Eurnford, et al by Document llo.
276611t thence E. t33?.67 fect along bhe SouEh llne of eald parccl to Lhe SE
corner thercoGl thence North 1247.ll feet, along Lhe Eaet llno and East llno
. extenrlerl of aald Burnford, et, al parcell thence N. 89"23f39" E. 446.97 feet,t
thence $ouEh 2182,67 feot Eo a pol.nt on the tlorth llne exEended Eart of that
parccl conveyed to Jacobsen, thenee lfesE l797.OO feet, along the llorth llno
extended and North llne of sald Jacobaen parcol to the True Polnt of Beglnnlng.
,2 J?
EKHTBTT "4"
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
FIESLIUFICE
ENG!NEEFIING INC
13 1991
GARFIELD COUNTY
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 Eight Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado B160l
February 12, 1991
RE: Basalt Water Conssrvancy District Water Allotment Contract
Kent Jones
Doar Andrew:
You have previousty inquired as to the status of Mr. Ksnt Jones', water allotment
coptract *itn the Basalt Water Conservancy District. Please be advised that Mr' Jones
doos Jrave 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 from potential
out of priority diversions associated with a four unit residential development located
near Carbondale, Colorado. l'he water under contract is available for release from
Ruedi Reservoir.
ln calculating the amount of water required for the contract we assumed that the
wastewater would be treated by individual E.T. type systems. These systems rely on
evaporation and plant transpiraiion processes and are considered l OO% consumptive
(i.e. no return fiows reach the stream system). Therefore, the water allotment
bontract is suf ficient to covor the subdivision's total diversions for in-house purposes'
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, ptease do not httsitate to call
me.
Sirrcerely,
RESOUNCE ENGINEEBING, INC.
R. Scott Fifer,
Hydrologist
RSF/rnmm
033-10 bwcdr3o
C(l: Mr. Kent Jones
Consutblng Engineens and Hydrologists ^ ^e 6-- r Eav
EtO2 Gnend Avenue, Suite gop r Glerrwood Spnings, C(] El1601 I [3ogl 94ffi777 r Fex *x*1137
c
ORDER NUMBER:
CONTINUATION SHEET
SCHEDULE B SECTION 2
900L7232 COI"IMTTI'IENT NUMBER: N/A
12. ttap and Statement of the Union Ditch filed January L4, ttl9l as
Reception No . L2L74.
1-3. Road Viewerts Report recorded JuIy 31, 1BBB in Road Record Book
1 at page 93 as RecePtion No. 7363.
14. Right of way an<I easement as granted to Mor:ntain States Telephone
and teiegraph bi document recorded Novemtrer 19, 1970 in Book
4L5 at page 93 as Reception No . 2481-69.
s 'l' E \t'A [t'l' T I a' L E
OUARANTY COIIPANY
3
\r1,, tJ l{
u
ry
May 31, 1991
Garfield County Commissioners
C/O Andrew McGregorGarfield County Planning Department
1O9 8th Street, Suite gO3
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision
Dear County Commissioners,
Most of the other concerns inproperty still need to be addressedplain, high water table, Carbondale'sI still feel, ds do my neighbors, thatLocation for further development.r question the ability of Mr. Jones to finance thls project.To date Mr. Jones has invested in turning the sma1l barn into frisresidence and placing 9 i1legaIly parked old junk vehicles and anunsightly dumpster on the property. He froods the dirt road andnever repairs the damage that he causes. If you do find that thisproperty shouLd be developed r hope you will require adequatesecurity bonds to assure a quality development
fr
1 1991
bnnt truu
regards to this piece ofsuch as wet Lands, floodwater resource, wiLd life.this is not an appropriate
r am sorry that, due to a medical emergency, Gary and r willnot be able to attend the meeting Monday. we have given perri
Robbins permission to speak on our behalf at the meeting. you havein the files previous Letters from myself and the adjoiningproperty owners. I feel, €rs do the neighbors, that most of ourpreviously addressed issues in reference to this proposedsubdivlsion have not been appropriately addressed.r was very concerned after the Last p&.2 meeting as to theadequate and legal access to this subdivision. AJ you know,Garfield County has a very qualified staff and attorney hired toadvise the P&Z and County Commissioners on what their expertise andresearctr tell them is in the best interest for the county. It wasamazing to me that the P6rZ completely ignored the adviCe of yourattorney in reference to the questionabLe and adequate access.Dick stevenson made a motion, which was approved, that theyrecommend approval of the Goose Creek Subdivision deleting th;reguirement made by vour attorney, that the developer have thecourts make a decision on the legality of the access. Mr.Stevenson stated that the burden of the access legality should beplaced on the existing property owners. I can't believe that thecounty woufd expect the existing property owners to bare theexpense of proving legal access for the developer. Even thedeveloperts attorney was not opposed to your attorney'sreguirement.
)xr""r)'
-,'/l t -'(. \ a'a'-
.-'-f,isa Carmichael-
.' ,,1 |
,l/'*.
CC
Btrot( E06 pffizE4
EXHIBIT A
:.
A parcel of land siE,uabed In Lots 3 and 4, section 35 and Lob g,Section 34, Township 7 South, Rangre 88 Wept of the Sixth prlncipalMeridian, said parcer of land is described as forrows:
Beginning ab the Wltness Corner for the South Quarter corner ofsaid Section 35;thence N. 53030'43" W. 4278.58 feet to the True Point of B'eglnnlng,laid point also being the NW corner of that parcel conveyed.-ioJohn H. Jacobsen by pssrrmsnt No - Z7LL1S of bire Garf ield. Lounbyrecords;
thence N. 00o49'O0it E. 930.90 feet to the SW corner of thab parcel iconveyed to Davld Burnford, et al, br Document No. z7664Li Ithence E. L337.67 feet along the.south line of said. p.r".i to theSE corner thereof tthence Norbh L247.L4 feeb along the East line and East line :ext,ended of said Burnford, €t aI parcel ithence N. 89023' 39" E. 446.91 f eeb ithence Souttr 2L82.67 feet to a point, on the North line extended' East of that parcel conveyed. to Jacobsen-thence ?{est 1797.88 f eet alongr Ehe North line ertend,ed. and Northline of said Jacobsen parcel to the point of beginning.
COUI.ITY OF GARFIELD
STAIE OF COLORADO
\_._
shaIl not entit,le the' ,€D. irrigation usag'e is
,r?Ait shall be in eifectox lssuance only, unlessdue to the establishmentand use.
customer to irrigate during any period,
-entirely prohibited. ThL exeiptionfor the restriction period of the yearsooner terainated- by the Town ttanigerof further restrictions on irrigation
CHAPTER 13.32
POLLUTION OF WATER AI{D WASTEWATER SYSTE},TS
Sections
13.32.O10 pollution of Water Systeu13.32.020 pollution of Wastewaier System13-32-03o porlution of water correciion system13.32.040 pretreatment for Grease Removal13 ' 32 - o5o Manufacturing and rnd,ustriar uses
L3.32.010 pollution of Water
A) rt is unlawful for any p"r=o.r,' to discharge or alrow thedischarge in the Townrs ya!"r system any substance or materialwhj-ch will in any Eanner injure "i LGtnlct inl-iv=ten, or whichwill contaainate or pollute -tfr" water,- g! in any minner, pollute,obstruct or contaminate the water in said, wateiio;k;.
B) As used. j.n this Tit1e, the teras rpollute, r rrcontamj-nate, rrand rrcontaminated, i.nclude the nannaa6, Dan-'ind,uced,, animar_inducedr or natural alteration of the physical, chemical,biological, and rad.iologicai i"t"grity of water.
13.32.O2O . The d,ischarge of non_acceptab1ewastesintoffi.*"t"i.!}Jt",,whetherdirectly or indirectly, is pr"-rr-iliteJ, and where- investigationrevears the presence of non-icceptable wastes enanating-f;;;-;;;1ot, land buildine
- or premi,.es; ih; .;;; G;;;=, renrer oroccupant of. such lot, 1and,, Luilding or prenises shaI1 berequired at }i= own expense to treat, neutralize, re,over oE i.nother ways to ^ prepar6 the noxious sr:bstance therein to thesatisfacti-on of - thl rown in "=i". to convert the same intoacceptable waste. The following .." d,eened to be non-acceptabrewastes:
A) Any liquid.or vapor having a temperature higher than 105degrees Fahrenheit.
B) Any water or waste having a five .(5) day biological oxygendemand which may contain uore Lhan one thou=.r,t Jr, ooo) parts peruillion by weight ^averaged. d,uring ""t-twerve (L2) hour period and.
$!fi..""t exceed zso Pph at wa=l"witer ptani influend samprini
19
c) Any gasoline, benzine, fuer oir, flamrnable or e:rylosiveIiquid, solvent or gas.
D) Any residential garbage which has not been properly shredd,edby a residentral gari:ige ai=p"=ir; "--
II=."HL.3TlinS"n"ti11*.t. comnerciar operations, includ,ins
F) Any ashes, cinde,rs, s_and,r- mud,, tar, straw, shavings, metal,g:rass, rags, feathers, plasticsr' manurer ro6a, -gritr-'
"E ""Elbrick, onYx, carbider oE 8tn". ="iia "" viscous subJtance capableof obstrrrcti'on of the floor of the wastewater ti"ain"nt works orany other interference with tr,. -l.oper operation of thewastewater works.
G) Any water or waste havJ.ng a pH concentration lower than sixand one-harf (G L/z) or rrigrr-i ini" ;i;" (e) o= rr.ring any othercorrosive property-causing d,anage o, Lazard to stnrctures,equlpnent or personnel of the Townis wistewater facilities.
H) Any water or wastes containing a toxic or poisonoussubstance in sufficient quantiti;s-"i;=.injure or interfere withthe wastevater treatment process, constj.tuting a hazard, to hr:mansor animars or creating aiy hazard in-iire receiving of waters ofthe wastewater treatme-nt plant
r) Any waters or wastes co.ntaining the suspend,ed sorid,s of suchcharacter or quantity that un.r=uir attenlion ; expense isrequired to hand.le sucl ,"i".iJ= "rine sewage treatment p'ant.
J) Any noxious or malod,orous gas or substance capable ofcreating a public nuisance.
K) Any surface or g:round water.
ll*rliilH:, or anv nature in vioration or applicable srare
M) Any other substance which cannot be discharged, underapplicable state Department of Eealth ilg,rr.tions.
13.32.030
.
A) rt, is unrawfur for any person or entity to porlute orcontaminate, or to keep or haintain any bui.rding, privy, pe',yardr oE corrarr o.. to- uaj.nBf."--;;-'graze any livestock, or tokeep or conduct any businEss which *ir'i contamin"E o= porlute orlead to the contanination or pollution of ___
1) Any we$ site operated, by !h". town in connection withthe Town waterrworts, whethlr rocateh insia" .= "-utlIie the Town,snunicipal boundaries any of tfr" fofiowing ___
20
said parcel of land is describect as follo"us: Beginnrn$ ab
the Witness Point to the Sorrth Ottarter Corner of Section 35
in Township 7 Sor-rth, Range BB West, thence N. 33o06'37" W.
5478.17 feeb to the true 1>oint of beginning; thence West
25,00 f eet ; thence North 25.00 f eet i r-hence East 25.00 f eet;
thence South 25.00 feet to the true point of beginning.
3. I{e1I Site No. C. A parcel of land srttt.ated in Lot 3 of
Section 35, Township 7 South, Range Bg West of the Sixth
Principal I'{eridian, County of Garf ieId, State of Coloracio 'sarid parcel of land is described ils follows: Beginning at
the Witness Point to the Scuth Quarter Corner of Section 35 'Township 7 Sout,h, Range 88 Wesh, thence N" 30o09'53" w,
51- 91 . 52 f eei- to the true poinb of, beginning ; thence N.
77o59'0C)" W. 25.00 feet; thence N. 12o01-'00" E. 25.00 feet;
thence S. i7o59'C0" E. 25.00 feet; thence S. 12o01'00" N.
25.00 feet, more or less, to the irue point of beginning.
4. Well Site No. D. The point located in Ehe SW l/1
of Section 3, Torvnship 8 South. Range 88 West of the
Principal Meridian, 1900 feet west of the east line
1,300 feet north of the sottth line of said Section 3
Torvnship 8 South, Range 88 Nest of the 6th Principal
Ileridian, Cottnty of Garf ie1d, State of Colorado.
SE 7/4
S irth
and
,
C. As used in this section, the terms "pollute,"
"contamina'Le," and "contaminated," include the manmader man-
in,luced, animal-induced; op natural alteration of the
physical, chemical, biological, and radiological- integrity
of water. (Ord. 1-1980: Ord. 9-1970 #6).
*G.,,^
o -),' LJ i v\C\r-r C ci
C;,-A*-.1^l*'
1 3 . 04 . 040 .L[t!e--Efe.Ee,]qe*!i.it,h wa-t-eruor-k-s- It i s un.lawfu1 f or
any person, ttnless authr:rized b-v bhis chapter, to trespass
upon the grottnds of the Carbondale waterworks or to in,iure
or in an-r' r,iay danage or interf ere with any pipes ' mains,
proper.+-y or appliances constituting or being a part of the
Carbondale wa|erworks, ou any fence, guard r.aii, br:>l cover'
or builrlinq: or []111r other structure constrrrcted or used in
connection with seicl waLer-.rorks. (Ord. 9-1970 #4 ) "
13.04.050 Pl>fh$J_On_qtl r.ra'L..er" It is unlawful for any person
to cast, place, dump or deposit in said r.vaterworks any
subs'tance or material wirich wiIl in aIIy lna,nller initrre or
obstrrrci: the wor'I<sr oI r.ihich wiii contaminate or pollr.rt.e the
rv4'Ler, or in an-Y menner, poIltrte, obstrttct or conLaminabe
tire r!'ater in said rtaterrtor:ks. (Orci. 9-1970 #5).
13 .04 .060 P-ef-lrit-.i-o-rr-qi :ra!-e-rrgo-'rks-E:l,t=:!de-J.he t owrr.
A. It is unl-awf,ll for any person tc pollute or contaminate
the water of Nettle creek, its tribularies, or its adjacent
springs or to keep or maintain, d'u, along; or near the banlis
of Nett,le Creel<, its tributaz'ies, or i Es ad jacent springs
fr:r a distarlce of f ive rniles above bhe intake of +-he
pipeline of the town at Netrle Creek any building, privlr,
perrr yardr or corral- or to keep, maintain, or gteze any
livestock, or to have, keepr 01. conduct any business near
NettIe Creek which contaminates or pollutes the waters of
Nettle Creek, its 'tribtttaries, or its adjacent springs r or
which will render such water unfit for domestic use.
B. It is unLar+ful for any person to pollute or contaminate
any of the followinq described rvell sites from which the
town takes water for its town waterworlcs, or to keep or
maintain any buil-ding r Privy, P€o, yard r or corral f or
stockr oi +.c mailltain o-r' graze an.v l-irrestock or to keep or
conduct anl, business which will cause to be contaminated the
water tairen at the f ollorving well- sites, which well sites
are described as follows:
1. WeIl Site No. A. A parcel of land situated in Lot 1 of
Section 34, Township 7 South, Range 88 West of t,he Sixth
Principat Meridian, county of Garfietd, state of colorado,
said parcel of lanC described as follows: Beginning at the
Wiiness Point to the South Quarter Corner of Section 35 in
Township 7 South, Range 88 Nest; thence N. 35o25'38"w.
5836. 71 f eet to the ti'tte point of beginning; thence S.
00o49'00" w. 25.00 feet; thence S. 89o11'00" E. 60.00 feet;
thence N 00o49'00" E. 25.00 feet; thence N 89o11'00" N.
60.00 feet, more or less, to the true point of beginning'
2. WeII Site No. B. A Parce1
Section 34 , TownshiP 7 Sorrth,
Princ ipaJ- Ileridian, Count-r- of
of lan<J situat,ed in Lot 1 of
Ranq'e 88 West of the Sixth
Garf i-el-d, State of Coloraclo,
I hope this is thedo not hesitate toassistance.
^\SincereIv.I.,1,,,f \./'(.acatft-'L tct''..=
Davis Farrar
Town Manager
xc: Marli Chain
Bob Emerson
Mark Bean
information
contact me
requested. PIeasebe of furLher
that l-or-rif I may
Jwn of Carbondale
76 South 2nd St. Carbr>ndale, Colorado 81623 (]03) 963-273i
EEMarch 18, 1991
Don DeFord
Garfield Countv
Suite 300
Gl-enwood Springs,
Dear Don;
I understand that yoLr had reqltested some information
regardi-ng rr'e1J- head protecticn at our Roaring Fork F-iver
municipal well fields and the Town's position on Goose Creek
Subdivision as it relates to watershed protection.
I believe that Mark Chain recently mailed the County
Planning Office all the materials covering review comments
from the Town.
fn brief, the Tortn of Carbondale has requested the
opportunity to review building and septic permits requested
to be issued in the Goose Creek Subdivision, prior to
issuance, for purposes protecting our well field from
potential pollution resulting from inadequate septic systems
or other pollution sources.
The Town asked for and was granted, by the Goose Creek
developer Kent Jones, the ability to enforce the terms of
the covenants relating to sewage treatment systems and
household pol]ution. I suggest that the Town of Carbondale
be named as a third party beneficiary to the section of the
covenants covering pollution of water. When the covenants
are in a final form, the Town requests the opportunity to
review them for that language prior to final approval of the
subd iv i s ion .
I am enclosing a copy of the section of our existing
municipal ordinance that covers protection of the municipal
water supply from pollution sources. I am also enclosing a
copy of the newly revised water ordinance on the same topic
that the Board of Trustees is in the final stage of
reviewing. It is anticipated that the Board will adopt the
new ordinance in the next few weeks.
The Town of Carbondale appreciates Garfield County's
cooperation and interest in assisting with protection of our
municipal water supply. Irte rvould Iike to continue working
with you to establish specific guidelines for wellhead
protection. These neqotiations could serve as a model for
other parts of Garfietd County where land use development
potentiallr- conflicts with protection of public water
strpplies.
MAR 21 1991
GARFtcuui
Co. 81601
UOUNTY
i). Any well or well site used or operated, by theconnection with the Toun waterurorks, incruding uy wiy ofand not by way of linitation, those werls operated at orcrystar River and those wells operated aC or near the
Town in
example
near the
Roaring
which water is
Townrs Nettlethe Town takes
Fork River i
ii) Nettle Creek, its tributaries,and its adjacent spring;
iii) Any area five niles above the point fromtaken FV any well operated by the Town, by theCreek intake system, or any other point from wnicnwater for the Town t s watelslorks.
1. werr site No. A. A parcel of rand situated in Lot 1 ofsecti.on 34, Tow.nship 7 south, Range gg west of the sixthPrincipal Meridian, -ounty of carfier-d, state of col-orado, said,parcel of land descrj.bed as follows: Beginning at the WitnessPoint to the South Quarter corner of se6tion is in Township 7s-outh, Range 88 west; thence N. 3s degrees 25 r 3g, w. 5836.71feet to the true point of beginning,'thence S. OO d,egrees 4gt OOnw. 25.00 feet; thence s. g9 degrees, 11r oo, E. Go.oo feet;thence N. oo degrees 4gt oo, E. zs.oo feet; thence N. g9 d,egrees11 | 00n N. 50. 00 feet, more or ress, to the t:rre poinl 0fbeginning.
' 2. well site No. B. A parcel of Iand, situated, in Lot 1 ofsection 34, Township 7 south, Range 8g west of the sixthPrincipal Meridian, county of Garfier-d,, state of cororad,o, saidparcel of land is described as follows: Beginning at'the WitnessPoint to the south Quarter corner of seciion 3s in rorrnsnif-is-outh, Rangie 88 west, thence N. 33 deg:rees oE r 37n w. s47g.a7feet to the t:rre point of beginning; thence west 25.00 feet;thence North 25.00 feet; thence rasl 2s.oo feet; thence south25.00 .feet to the t:rre point of beginning.
3. I{ell site No. c. A parcer of rand, situated. in Lot 3 ofsection 35, Tovnship 7 south, Range gg west of the sixthPrincipal Meridian, county of Garfiel-d,, state of cororad,o, saidparcel of land is described as folLows: Beginning at the WitnessPoint to the south euarter corner of settion 3s, Township 7south, Range 88 l{est, thence N. go d,egrees 09 r 5g, w. 519i. s2feet to the tnre point of beginningi thence N. 77 d,egrees 59 | OOllW. 25.00 feet; thence N. L2 degreei Ot-' OOrr E. 25.OO feet; thencesl 77 degrees 59t ootr E. 2s feet; thence s. L2 d,egrees o1r oo, N.25-00 feet, more or less, to the t:rre point of belinning.
4. well site No. D. The point rocated in the sw L/4 sE L/4of secti.on 3,. Township 8 south. Range 88 west of irre sixthPrincipal Meridian, 19bo feet west of the east rine and, 1,300feet north of the south rine of said. section 3, Township e south,Range 88 West of the 6th Principal Merid,ian, iounty of Garfield,State of Colorado.
21,
!=!!!FIESOUFlCLIIIIIIIIITE N G IN E E FI IN G INC
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 Eight Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
February 12, 1991
RE:Basalt Water Conservancy District Water 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 from potential
out of priority diversions associated with a four unit residential development located
near Carbondale, Colorado. The water under contract is available for release from
Ruedi Reservoir.
ln calculating the amount of water required for the contract we assumed that the
wastewater would be treated by individua! E.T. type systems. These systems rely on
evaporation and plant transpiration processes and are considered lOO% consumptive
(i.e. rro return flows reach the stream system). Therefore, the water allotment
bontract is sufficient to cover the subdivision's total diversions for in-house purposes.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to catl
me.
Sincerely,
NESOUBCE ENGINEERING, INC,
R. Scott Fifer
Hydrologist
RSF/mmm
033-10 bwcdt3o
CC: Mr. Kent Jones
C,onsulting Engineens and Hydrologists
BOP Grend Avenue, Suite 3O2 I Glenwood Spnings, CO El160l r [3O3] 945A777 I Fax 9zl+1197
FEB 13 1991
GARFIETD COUNTY
FEB 18 1991
t, "r
Len Truesdel 1
0189 County Rd.
Carbondale, co I
February 12, 1 99
00
623
Garf ieId County PIanning and Zoning
Glenwood SprihgSr Co
Re: Goose Cneek Subdivision off County Rd
Carbonda I e.
Dear Sirs and Madam,
100 outside
of the area
I have several concerns about the revision of the former
"Goosum Creek" project, now referred to as the "Goose Creek"
project. I talked with my neighbors last year when this proiect
was f irst presented and we testif ied before the P&Z at that time
about numerous items. Neither Mr. Jones nor Mr. Galino have
ment i oned to me any p I ans to
del ineated.
m'itigate the concerns already
1. Water Qual ity
Carbondale has gone on record that any more development in
th'is area will endangen the Carbondale town water supply wells
Iocated a few hundred yards from the proposed development. lt
has been po i nted out that 'in add i t'ion to the obv i ous concerns
about sept'i c treatment, there 'i s cons i derab I e concern about
contnol of surface waters. Households w'i I I produce increased
vehicle oils and fuel sp'i 11s, garden pesticides and chem'icals,
increased fert'i lizer Lrse and other domestic chemical loads.
The soi ls in this area are extremely porous. ln fact,
irrigation water shows up in drainage ditches 50 feet away in a
matten of minutes. The subsoi I is essential ly gravel with
almost no clay to impede water migration.
My we I 'is I ocated as c I ose or c I oser than the Carbondale
responsibi I ity for€s, shou I d they be
wel ls. Wi l l Garf ielcl County accept any legalthe integrity of my well, os well as Carbondal
pol luted?
2. Road Access
The present homes 'in this area have easement rights down a
one lane, Frivate gravel road off County Road 100. This road is
marginal Iy adequate for the current load, but is questionably
adequate f or f i re andr/or emergency access .
The Goose Creek pro ject wi I I double the dens'ity
and double the use of the access road.I am concerned with endangering children walking to schoo'l
bus serv i ce on Co. Rd. 100 . I am concerned about f i r^e access on
this road 'if it is further degraded by th'is project. I am
concerned about emergency vehicle access on this noad.
Wi'l I Garfield County assume liabil jty for fire or other
damage that 'is i ncreased by the impact of th i s pro ject on the
access road? Will Garf ield county 'insure my continued access
and continued easemerrt rights dur ing any construction that the
l
GARI-IELD
(r.,)
Goose Creek proiect initiates on this road?
3. lrnigation Water
Th i s Goose Creek property 'is crossed by 'irr i gat i
and the access road closely paral lels an irrigation
this water supply is interrupted by constnuction assoc
this project, there w'i ll be cons'iderable degradat
pastures and agricultural business jn the area. Wi 1
County assume I iabi l'ity for damage caused by interrupt
irrigation water supply?
ment plot. I would like to vigorously oppose
NO PUBLIC LAND ALONG THE RIVER IN THIS
create a precedent for providing publ ic
Iands. The opening of my pr operty to the
the incidence of trespassing and littering.
prov'ide c I eanup and compensat i on f or damage
caused by the creation of a public access?
on ditches,supply. 1fiated with
ion of the
I Garf iel.d
ion of the
4, Public Access to the Roaring Fork River
During the Goosum Cneek vension of this proiect, the DOW
requested publ ic access be prov'ided to the ri ver on the develop-
this idea. THERE lS
AREA. P I ease do not
access to pr ivate
publ ic wi I I increase
Will Garfield County
to pr i vate propert'ies
Given the above concerns and the fact that I have
suggestions for mitigation for Mr. Galino or Mr. Jones
that this area is 'inappropriate for a development of this
request that you deny approval of th'is pro ject .
heard no
, I Feeltype. I
S'incere I y ,
/{,-**-
Len Truesdel I
JC)FII{ H- ..rACOBI-IIN(fl_a5 RC)AD f.CJC,P O BC))< :t_ 2ICA]i,BC)b.T])ALE, C()- AL62303-925-1470 303-96:t-3S29
Eebruary 11, 1991
:-l
Andrew McGregor,
Garfield County
Gar:field County
1C'9 Bth Street,
Glenwood Springs
Ref: Goose Creek
Dear Andrew,
Planner:
Planning Depetrtmerrt
Courthouse
Suite 303, co 81601
Surbdivi sion
As an adjacent property owner I have two concerns about Lheproposed Goose Creek Suhclivision that I would like t,o bring toyour attention.
The access road f rom count,y Road 100 j.s barely adecluate forthe present use.When the construction equipment rreeded tr:construct ttre i.nternal (-ioose Creek Road and the br-rilrli.ngs t;o bebuilt there start using the accelss r:oad, thery wi t L p].ace anunbearable l.oad on it. This wiII desLroy the preserrt road. Iwould ask that the County requir"e ttre Goose Cir:eek Subclivisiorrowners to prevent or repai.r the damage. As to t.he suhsequentmaintenance of the access road, I agree with tlre pr:oposal on paEtts38 of the Preliminary Plan.
fn the Goose Creek Subdivisi on itsel f the proposerl accessroad borders on my proprrrty and will be ver:y close to my house.This will callse dust from the gravel road to blow into my hotrse.Also the noise from the trucks arrd cars wilI be very anrroyi.ng. Iwould ask that the owners place tlreir access road acljacent to arrdparal).el with the existing Niesrarrik irrigation diLch.
Thank yorr f or vour Lime atnrl (,onsj.deratjon in t,his nratter-
Yotrrs truIy,
i. Jiri.l !./ \
GARFIELD COUNTY
0181 10O Road
Carbondale, CO 81623
February !7, 1991
Nnze*oa BeanGarfield County Planning Department
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
I am writing to express my concern with the development
proposed by Mr. Kent Jones on the 50 plus-acre parcel of land off
County Road 1OO, northeast of Carbondale.
I own a home and 9 acres adjacent to the proposed development
property. I feel that subdivision or further development of any
land in this vicinity should not be undertaken without extra-
ordinary scrutiny of the potential conseguences.
The road which accesses the proposed subdivision property is
unimproved and not maintained by the county. This road is simply
not able to handle any more traffic without substantial and costly
improvements.
Moreover, a large portion of the PropertY in question is
wetland habitat. Development wiLl not only have an impact on this
habitat, but aLso present unusual and significant problems in road
building, drainage and sewage management.
It is my request that the County Planning Department
thoroughly explore the potential conseguences of development and
address these problems prior to granting permission for any
subdivision in this area.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
d,ukc\lrGan
FEB 12 1
l;
FebruarY I2, 1991
Mr. Andrew MeGregor
C"rf ielcl County Planning Department
109 Bth St'reet, Sulte 303
Glenwood SPr i,ngs, Colorado
Dear Anclrew:
The other maJor
Lg94, the access to
Thankyouforyourtirleinexplainingthe-variousaspectsofthe proposed Coose- Creek Subtiivisl.r., to me. I am pleased that the
city (Carbonclale Board of ti"*tees) passed a motlon asking
Garf ield County to place " pfut r*it-rlction on sewage disposal
methods in ttris area. As tl're cl0ses L lancl0wner to carbondale t s
weLl fielcls, i-huu. learned flrst hand how very easily this water
ean l)ecoure polluted by grazi ng livestocl< ' etc ' I Euggest that the
gg-B.I=8!Ilgggg;-;""it"i""wiI1 l:e neceasarv to protect the growing
noDu].atlon or=ciiuonO"r*, ""a i cannot help bYt wonder how
'd;Iffi;;;i; ;iti-';;i"i"" i,r'"-'".*er disposal-and other forms of
conta,mi.nationt,hatlnevltablyresult.,rl"nhumansandtheIrlivestocl< move lnto an at*i--'=,r"f, ds this ' fhie will lre a rna jor
headaclreforCarbond.r'Ie,an<lpr<rbablyf?'exisrlnghomeownerg,,qlownsLream" rf the subdivf -f'"". r -*ttt'ision the posgibility of
I;;;"its and nore state control'
8I6OI
problem, which has not' been addressed'
it is proPosed develoPment '
is the
Mrerr r]ack ,-Tacobaon and I bought 9uI propertles here' f if teen
ycars actor the exlstlng 'o*d *tt-a dirt Lraek that zioootd and
zagged to foriow -i^ciefrt teil"e", ana irtiq"ti"n Oitcrr6i' and avoid
boggy area8. -i; sprirrg, t""i-*i-r"er drive wae mandatory. well,
f ranlcly, not much has ctta"g;d' A ltttle road base has been lald'
and only smal.r,er varieties of fish live ln the Potholes now' but
;h; ;;;a is, and arwaYs has bee'' a tnessl
Two factors contrihut'e to the problen' The f irst is the
1:roximity of i-y."r-round stream wfrictr parallels the road f'ot most
of its length. Tho stream-"r,"rt"" that the ground under the road
ls irr a constant state of r.;;;i iu"orption. Af ter a raln, oE
duringaspringmeltrgreat-amountsofwatersituPontheroadl:ed, unabre to be absoibecl . Thla water quickly washes away the
roacl trag@ material and huge potholes are t'hus creabed'
The ciry of carbondale (purric works) tries valiantly to help
,s wirh occasional grading,'L;l-cgn dg rictte good aE there is no
material- to hrork wi[n. Wft"re irrigatiol clitches run under the
road ( in trrrei frice"l, trreie is a continuing probrem in Ehe
i r r iga t ing seas^on of overf low created by lrlockage f ront ob ject s
carelessly allowed to elrtei- lt " ditches- upstreamr Qts from carelegs
irrigatioir lrracEicee on Mr ' Jones' property'
FEB t2 1991
|
'u\'
Mr. Andrew McGregor
rebruary L2, 1991
Page Two
Thesecondproblemi'sthenarrowaspectoftheroad'onelane
for mo6t of its length. we cannot count-the times when'"-vI'nTE-IE
has becotne stuck t ot tempoioti:-y ai?:?l:d' and we are elff,ectively
sttuL ln, or out of our varir.-:us |roperties. Nor can we count the
times whcn we have had t<: clive fotthe Russian olive buehes to
avoid col_lisionl--c"irisions rlo occrrr, and we loae our mirrors to
bushes attcl trees, and our clr Uc'Aiti are scratched and dinged'
EJro a(re quicktY down herel
.:.A3oosi.ncreaseintrafficherewouldbelnto].erab]Le,and
dangerous, o.,a ridlculous, giverr the current state of the road.
Let me glve you a personal' Lrue example of.dangeroua' Four
years ac-,o a tr.e-nO an. I ,;;;- iiaitg in otr Pa.ture' ' My f riend
was tlrrown from hIS hOrSe ".ra sustalnecl a u"verely fractured
fenrrr. It took the Carbondai.'i^U"fance one hour'to arrive'
a"riv*a sor"i| uv lhe gSnattion of thls roadl rn a
life-tlrreatetringsituation-a-aet.rylikethiscouldbefatal'In
another instanee, seven years "go' a 9ra9s fire raged out of
conrror on our ranch. H.if,-;.;_isain.clerayed by the rough
condition ot-lrris road arrd we almost 10st our home.
sut)pose the chlorine tank at the carbonclale well Pulnp station
susLainedaleakarrd.evacuationbecametleceasary.-_1'yvehlcleIeft unattenii['- orr-tt" roadway,.or u' "ottisionl could effectively
crose of f our e'cape ,ou[ul' -itr" pr:obahirity exists now, of
courre, bur would be gr*-iiy lT;lified bv the additional nulnbers
,-rf people irr".r,-ioaitionar s-ro-homes. it is obvious that a two
Iane road, or in alternate acceEs is malldatory'
Plr.ilonesprotrabtyhaswonderfu].intentlone,andwouldliketo
al)_ay your "o'l*irr* (incl ;";;) about the road with a complicat'ed
scheme for honeowner agsessment' If a decent road were in
existence, homeowner asseis;ents for pefiffiTfi--nETfrtenance and
repair woula-ue-appropri"[e. At thls polnt, however, homeowner
aEEe6smerrt8 would he conparable to Genoral Sclrwartzkopf rs
,,mo*qrlito or,*I[-"fipni;;t-;;;.r"gyi and ao rittle gootl to cure the
probiem.
Vlsualize the si Euat iorr ' wlren and if this development 1s
a1>provecl.E'irsttherecomesastreamofrealestatepeople'andthelr buyers, then come the surveyors and the engineers' Then'
come ttre contractorE, "*tpI"[uia" "l""Lricidtlsr well <lrillerE'
pI tttntrers , rock masons , roif ers ' lumbe r trucks ' inspectof s r
Iandscap€rs, etc . , ete . , ';;;: oepending uPoII l"* s:-1:I1Y.:,1""'
Iots bJere =old-and <leveloped, we are Iooking at an excegglve
volume of t;;iti"-over rh; next lhree to fiyg years'--EAhTs road
is rota1Iy inadequate tot-tf," fefr-?Emlfits*ifro reside here now'
i
Mr. Andrew McGregor
FebruarY L2, I99L
Page Three
how catl it be used for a volunte of traf f lc such a3 this
<1 evelopment would generate?
After the selting and building.has seLeled down' each single
tarr,iiy-awelt.ing wottld generate a irinimun of four tripe per day'
As guest houeel coulrt be a perrnit!"g':""' this could aild another
four rrri.ps pe; d;y ;i"imum:* r\,l,rltlply thts by_1 fact-or of f lve
an<r we have a mininum of 40 trips ie-r day. Add to thi.e meter
I nspect-ors, teTEfrffiE -repair trttcks ' horse tra I I-ers ' garbage
clisJ-rosaI, gue=t"'.rr.t frilncls, ownerE of boarded horses, UPS
trucks, ancl ,"-t"rtr,. - Thi;- wirr a1I occtlr on a one lane road.
I believe that the Cotlnt-y must' take full responsibility for a
clccieion regarcling Mr. JoneEr Goose creek subdivision' To apProve
this subclivieion without ro"xing -at this more seriously attendant
ii"[f*-i-ot """""" could be cleembtl irresponsible, and
short-siqhted,toputltrni}dly.Ifanymembersofthis
Comrnission havc not p"rsorritly c:lrserverl this road in it's entirety'
r woul<t encourage ttrem to ,3o -so befPlg-enI jg9igj-oJ-i9--"aergg'
Every man has a right to deveIQP his pr-operty. for its planned
and aplrr.ved uses. eut "rJiy-ma! dies not have Lhe rlght to
comprolnise th; [uaf ity of f tfe of the peopte wtro were ]rere ]-refore
him,arr<lLoknowinglyproceedwitha',.seplatt'that.ieuntenable'
anrl unworkabi;; ;;6-ir"esibly, itr thls instance, pot'entiaIIy
dangerous to the peoirle of t-he City of Carbondale '
r, and my neighbors, would encouraqe the members of this
commisslon to maXE a clecision t'hat wil-l be enlight'ened and
pr(]st"*=ive, in dlrecting future deveLopmont in tho mally
environmentall-y dellcate areas of this type in our area'
Thank you for your interest and concern'
(r'rs. ) PeroneIIe Robbins
PR: cf
il-_*"ff;il"
FEB 12 1991
GARFIELD COUNTY
Febrttary I I, t99I
Cltr rf letcl (joun tY Plannlng & Zonl.ng Commlsslon
To whom it mBY concertl:
I,le, t-he Nieslanlk BrottrefE, strorrgly oPI)o$B rhe rlevelopment of 50 Rcres
nrore. ot Lese of Ilrnd dlrec'tly easi of i" rairc-lrlng operaE'lon"'l'h'e roadway le
unsurt*ble for *uch o dever,opurerrL. i,le worrl rl *rroirgry oppo*c! ttre grvlngl of land
to wllen and l.mProve Ehe toad'
Irr:lp,atlt>n of orrt Propcrty wotrl.1 hecome a reirl burtlen w1 th reltrcqElon of
dlr.clresan<ldebrteb}ockl.ngupc.ulverf,s'etc.
l)ogs becomc ir facttlr wlEh our c6ttle
opposcrd Lo peoP1e wlto have Eheee itrtlmals'
i**"lrra"Iy tf found chasi'ng c'attle'
You who rcpresent Garf Je'Id CorrnLy
stroultl rroL Iet ttrls tl'rlng ttaPl:trrrl irfter
(;arf I eld Coun I-Y '
operaEton and we- r'rould be strongJ-y
it,"** arrlmals wotrld be de'sEroyed
on the Plarrlrlng fv Zorrln8 CornmLes{on
all wc need to tceep ag,rlcttluttre in
S j,ncereJ,y r
Nteslanlk Brothers
(t)tr /il*4-*&' 8,, l, Nl-eulantk
BN/dh
GARFIELD COUNTY PI,ANNING COMI'{ISSION
AGENDA
TIME: 7 :00 P.M.
DATE: February 13, 1991
PLACE: Commissioners Hearing Room, 109 8th
Street, Suite 30L, Glenwood Springs, CO
1) CaII to Order
2l RoIl CaII
3) Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan
Applicant: Kent Jones, Priscilla Prohl and
Vince Gulino
4) Adjournment
t.. '
A
b(
M,r$
'.'P /
\l\9rd
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III
FIESOUFICL
ENG!NEEFIING INC
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 Eight Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
February 12, 1991
RE: Basalt Water Conservancy District Water 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 lrave an approved water allotment contract with the District for 1.3 acre feet of
water per year. ihe water was acquired to augment the stream system from potential
out of
'priority
diversions associated with a four unit residential development located
near Carbondale, Colorado. The water under contract is available for release from
Ruedi Reservoir.
ln calculating the amount of water required for the contract we assumed that the
wastswater would be treated by individual E.T. type systems. These systems rely on
evaporation and plant transpiration processes and are considered lOOo/o consumptive
(i.e. no return flows reach the stream system). Therefore, the water allotment
bontract is sufficient to cover the subdivision's total diversions for in-house purposes.
Shoutd you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call
me.
Sincerely,
RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC.
R. Scott Fifer
Hydrologist
RSF/mmm
033-10 bwcdl36
CC: Mr. Kent Jones
Consulting Engineerrs and Hydrologistss
BO2 Gnend Avenue. Suite 3OP r Glenwood Spnings, CO El1601 r [3O3] 9458777 I Ftx 9&1137
FEB 13 1991
I
FebruarY L2, I99l
Mr. Andrew Mccregor
cjirrielcl County ilanning DePartment
109 Bth Street, Sutte 303
Cienwooa SPr i,h9s, Cotorado 8160l
Dear Andrew:
Tharrk you for your !iI" in explaining the various aspects of
Ltre proposed Coose'Creek SuUaivisi,r., bo me. I am pleased that the
city (carnonaaie Board of T;;;tees) passed a motion asking
Gartierd county to prace "-piit r*itrlctlon on sewa9le rlisposal
method' in thii area. As tir* closes L lanclowner to Carbondale' e
weII fie.l-cts, I have l"art=d flret harrd how very easily this water
c.1n hst.-oule polluted by gr"ri"g Iivestock, etc' I suggest that the
nrost sLringent controls will be necegEary to protect the growing
iffiu-#iiiffif.iiiono"ie, ""a. i cannot rrerp byt woncler howtd;".#;;;i; ;;lr--eni"i"" ii""""iui-,lisposal- and other forms of
contami,nation t}rat inevltably resu}t.*r1"n humans and t.helr
livestoclt move into an .t*I--'=,r"t, aa this' fhis wiII be a ma jor
lreadache for carbond.rle, an<l probably fOr exisE'lng homeownerg
,,qtownsrream,,;i if,* suUai*rIiitrr. r invision the possibifity of
f "t *"its and more state control'
The other maJor problem' which has not been addressed'
g.gag;' ino access" to itris Proposed deveropment '
is the
ffiren ,Jack ,,TacObEOn ancl I bought 9uI Properties here', f ifteen
ycars asor the exlstlng to*a *""-* dirt iraet that zigge<l an<l
zaggecl to foriow -inci"fit fences, and irrigation ditches' and avoro
boggy areas. -;;
=pii"g, t""i-ni',""r drive wae mandatory. welI,
franl<Iy, not muctt tas ctra"g;a' A llttle road base has been lald'
ancl only smal.i,ui u"tieties of f ish live in the potholes Dowr but
;h; i""ir is, ano always has been' a messl
Twofactorscontrihut.etotlreproblem.Thefirstistheproximity of a year-round stream wiictr Para}lels the rOad for most
of its length. Tho stream-"r',"ut." that the ground under the road
ls in a constant state of t"t"i absorption' After a raln ' oY
cluri.g a spring melt, great- amounts of water slt uPoII the road
t:ed, unabre to be absoibecl . ThIs waLer quickry washes away the
roacl trase material and huge potholes are thus createrl'
TheCityofCarbondale(punticWorks)triesvaliantlyto,l"lB
rrs wittr occasional gradi.g,'lrtl-cgn a9 f iCtfe good aE there is no
naterial- to work wi[n. Wtt"tl irrigation <litches run under the
road ( in airrol-f r"lu"t, theie is a continuing pror)lem in the
irrigating eeas-on ot overf low created by bloCkage front objects
carelessly aliowed to errtei the ditches upstreamr oE from careless
irrigati,rr:', pracE icee on Mr ' Jonest property'
Mr. Andrew t'{cGregor
rcbruarY L2, 1991
Page Two
Thesecorrd,problemisthenarrowaspectoftheroad.one}anefor most of its l.ength. we eannoL "orrrrt-irre times when a-vffiiE16
has becornc stuck t ot tempoiolify-ai*:Pl:d' and we are ef fectivelv
shuLln,oroutofourvari(lus.properties.Norcanwecountthe
gimes wtten we l-rave harf to dive ior the Russian olive buehes to
avoirl collisionl'-cof f isions <1o oceur ' and we loee our mirrors to
busles a.ct trees, and our cir-UoOi.i are scratched and dinged'
iurs agre quicklY down herel
.'A3ooBi.ncreaseintrafficherewouldbelntol.erab]Le'and
dangerous,orraridlculous'giventhecurrentstateoftheroad'
Let me glve you a personal' Lrue example of.dangeroua' Eour
years aqo a trienA anrl I ,;;;- i'iai"g in otr pa'ture= ' My f riend
was thrown from hls horse ^"4 sustained a "everel'V fractured
ft:nur. rt toi't tfr* 6iiUo.aife- imfulance one hour to arrive'
J"rivua sor.i| uv !h; condttion of thls roadl rn a
life.tlrreatetringsituationa-ae:.aylikethiscouldbefata}.Inanottrer instance, seven yeara ago' a grass fire raged out of
66nlrol on o,ri ranch. HLfp- ru"-igain-delayed by the rough
condition "f
-init-'io"a
an<1- we almost lost our home'
Suppose the chlorine tank at the Carbonclale well puillp station
susLained a leak and evacuation became lreceBsary' Any vehlCle
Ief t unattenilJ .r1r t,he roadway, . or t toitisionl could ef f ectively
close of f our escape rout;: --if,f u pr:ot>abili ty exists now' of
c.,ur'e, but would be gr"-iiy lTplified bv the additional nuutbers
r:rf people irr'.r,-ioaitlonar s-ro-homes. it is obvioue that a two
Iane road, or an aLternate access is mandatory'
D,Ir.,Jonesprobabtyhaswonderfu].intentlonglandwouldliketoallay your "or,!*irr* (-a'<1 ;,r;;i about the road with a complicaeed
scheme for homeowner agsegsment' -If a decent road were in
existence, hom@owner *""""t**nt* for pe7iotiEfrEiltenance and
repairwoula-ue"pp,op'iate.Att'hlspolnt,however,homeowner
assessmentg would be conParable to Genoral Sclrwart'zkopf 's
',mogqrrito o.,"I"-ufupn";ti'-;;;t"gvi and do Iittle gootl to cure the
probiem.
Vlsualize the situatiorr' wlten and it tlris development 1s
a1>provecl.F.irstttrerecomesasLreamofrealestatepeople,andthelr buyers, then Come the Eurveyors and the engineers' lfhen'
come ttte contractorg, ""tpl"[uill' "r""tricialler we1I <Irillers'
pl tttntrers , roc'K l$asons, rolf ers ' Iumber trucks ' inapectors '
landscap€f,s, erc.7 €tc.r ;;;.- oepending gPon how uu1111Y.:.1""*
tots were =ota-i"a cleVeloped, we are looking at an excesslve
votume of t;;fti" ouer th; next threlto ti-vg years'--Tf-tETE road
is rotally inadequate for-tt" fefr-TamIfiEE-frfro reside here now'
Mr. Andrew Mccregor
February L2, 1991
Page Three
how carl it be used for a volume of Eraf f lc such as this
rlevelopment would generate?
Afrer the selling and huilding.has settled down' each single
farniJ-y dwerl.ing woul<1 g"""iul"-i iri"i*um of four tripe per day'
As gue6t houeel coulrt ue " ["i*iti"a r?3, this could add another
four tri-ps per clay minituT:. -ou'ltlpfy thls by-1 factor of f lve
ancr we have a'-minimum of 40 trips iei day. Add_to thi.s meter
l nspect-ors, "J"p6.rt* -repalr trlcks ' horse tra{ lers ' garbage
rJisposa)., qr"=["'.,,a rriinJs ' o!,nerB of boardecl horses' UPS
truc.tcs, anct "i-to.[n.
--ft,i*-wiii all occrlr on a one lane road '
I believe that the cottnt-.y must take full resPonsibility for a
clecision regarrling Mr . ,Jones-' Goose creek subdivision ' To aPprove
this subclivieion without fo"f.iig,t khis more seriously attendant
iiii[r"*-;f ";;;;" """ra ]re c1eem6t1 irresponsible, and
short-sighted, to put
't
rniitif,' rf an! members of this
Comrnission have not p"rsor,"iiy'ofserveri this road ln its entirety'
r would encourage ttrem t" a" 'oo bef9rg-qnl-ggslsjgLis rendered'
Every man has a right to develgP his pr-operty" for its pJ'anned
and approved uses. eut uuJiy-*"q dies noi t,ave Ltre rlght to
compromise th; [uarity of rlte of the people who were trere before
Irim, ancl to knowingly proceed with a u"u.pla', E,hat ie untenable,
anrl unworkaSle, and possiUiy, in this-instance, pot'ential-Iy
dangerous ro-it" puopf" of i-f,* City of Carbondale.
T, and my neighhors, would encourage the members of thig
commisslon to maxE a deeision t'lrat wili ne enlight'ened and'
;;;;;;;;ive, irr-arrecting furure deveJ.opment in the malry
environmentally delicate areas of this type in our area'
Thank you for your interest and concern'
(Ms.) Peronelle Robbins
PR: cf
PI'BLIC NCITICB
TAKE NOTI(:E that Kent Jones has applied to the Planning Commission,
GarfJ.eld County, State of Colorado, tb grant a Preliminary PIan approval
for Goose Creek in connection with the following described property
situitted in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to-witc
Legal Description: A parcel of land situated in Lots 3 and 4, Section
35- and Lo'b 6, Section 34, T7S, R88W consisting of 51.09 acres and a
parcerl of land situated in tot 3, Section 35, T7S, R88W of the 5th P.U.
cons-tstinq of .2 acres.
Practical Description: The property is located approxirnately one half
(L/2) milers northeast of downtown Carbondale off C.R. 100.
Said Prellminary PIan is to allow the Petitioner to subdivide the
folk>wing: A 51.29 acre tract into 5 single family lots on the above
described property.
AII persons affected by the proposed Subdivision are invited to appear
and state theLr views, protests or obJections. If you cannot appear
personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by
Ietter par:'ticularly if you have obJections to such Preliminary Plan as
the Plahnlng Commission will give consideration to the comments of
surroundirrg property owners and others affected in deciding whether to
grant or cteny the request for Preliminary PIan. This Preliminary Plan
application may be reviewed the office of the Planning Department
locatea at Caffield County Courthouse, 109 8th Street, Suite 303,
Glenwood $iprings, Colorado, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., Monctay through Friday.
That publJ-c hearing on the application for the above Preliminary Plan
has been set for the 13th day of l{arch at the hour of 7:00 p.m. at the
Garf.Leld County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs'
Colorado.
Planning DepartmentGarfield County
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
February 20, 1991
Kent Jottes
P.O. Box L32
Carbond;r1e, CO 81623
RE: Gor:se Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan
Dear Keltt:
The Goor;e Creek Preliminary PIan has been scheduled for a public
hearing before the Plannin! Commission on March 13, 1991, dt 7:00
p.m. tthe hearing wiII be held in Suite 301, Garfield County
Lourthotrse, 109 gttt Street, Glenwood Springs , CO ' It is
recommerrd.ed that you or your rePresentative be in attendance'
In order: to fulfilf ihe public notice requirements for the hearing,
copies of the enclosed- public notice form need to be mailed by
ce-rtifi,-'d return-receipt to all property owners adjacent to or
within 200 ft. of your -property, no less than 15 days- prior t9-!h9
hearing. In additionr- tlie n6tice needs to be mailed certified
returnlreceipt to owners of mineral rightsr or lessees of mineral
owners ,>f reCord. of the land proposed for subdivision, no less than
15 days, but not more than 30 days, prior to the hearing.- Th9
receifts from these mailings need-to Ue presented at the time of
the hLaring or submitted to the Planning Department-plior-to the
heraring. ft" public notice has been submitted for publication one
ti.me iir the Gienwood Post, 15 days, but not more than 30 daysr-
prior to the hearing with the prooi of publication to be submitted
to the planning Depirtment. lt is your responsibility -to verify
the publicatiori of notice with the Glenwood Post in compliance with
noticing requirements .
The Subdivision site must also be posted with the enclosed notice
pcrsters, in accordance with Section 4z2Lr Do later than 15 days
!r:ior, but not more than 30 days prior to the hearing.
If you have further questions or concerns regarding the public
heaiing or public notice, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
.- hl.qt-'
Arrdrew C. McGregor
Planner'
A(lMlrIb
Enclosure
109 8l.H STRE ET, SUtrE 303 . g4582l2t625-557tt285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
t-)
2014 Grand Avenue
Glenwood SPrings,
94+8515 Box 550
Colorado 81602
uEnnirrlb r;r:uNrY
. Kent Jones
P.O. Box 132
Carbondale, CO 81623
Date
2-25-9t
DescriPtion
46 Llnes @ .43
Charges
$ 19.78
Bal. Due.
8+Tra
-<>--
Pt\ru \3-l -\ '14 " t* -fuf
Legal # 22840
Proof of Publication Mailed T
Andrew C. IulcGregor
d"tfield CountY Reg' Office
109 8th Street, Glenw.oo.d.bPrl- - - lf f Accounts Due and Payable Monthly
01Bs, C0 8t
PR(X)F OF PT'BLICATION
GLENW(X)D PGiT
STATE oF CoLoRADo, \ r..
COUNTY OF GARFIELD.
'
N9 22840
ffi&I861H,ffi1ffiffiHHHffi
illET::f.,,r FrDC.r, stt<fttier an
h'tJISlT! o'r.cbd6-d P,.dilil fii-J-H31::'ll1i3t.relr-r.*,J*riilfti.r.;ffiffi:ffi,ffiflffi
WrtSdtS0.q*r"d-8.,;L
m riiii i*il;,#i1n' c*t*", bdu€.n
i,tlFl - " a sB .- 'rn p''nr l'otd'r+uurgrr
#flffiffiffidffi
.i'.
.funhg_D"eirt.r,r
l*Fl -+".- a'Tl ; *"",ffi:*
r- R08.E.8T....L.,.....K.8.E 9.K.L0.W...........'....... do solemnlv
swear that I am ...................P.U8.1,.L.S.H.E-R............... of the
GLENWOOD POST; that the sarne is a newsPaper printed, in whole
or in part, and pulilished in the Countl' of 9arfield, State of Colo-
rado and has a general circulation therein; that- said neursPaper has
iriE" puUfitncd Eontinuouily and uninterruptedly in said eognty of
Garfi6ta for a period of moie than fifty-trvo consecutive weeks next
aiilor to the firlt publication of the anr1-e-xed iegal nolice or advertise-'neent; that said iewspaper has been admitted to the United States
;;ii; ;; ieiona-class' iratter under the provisicns cf the Act of
March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof . and that said newspaper
ii i-""i".prplr duly qualified for publishing legal notices .qnd ad-
,".tiii*c,its within ihe meaning'of the larvs of the State of
Colorado.
That the annexed legal notice or advertiseme-nt was published-in
ttre icguiar and entire-issue of every nunrber of said newspaper for
the oeriod of .....1......... consecutive insertions; and that the first pub-
iii,.tI.n of said, notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated
P.e.9.r-.s.e. r v. ..-?.I..,...r.p.,the last publication of said
notice was in the issue of said newspaper a.t"a ..8.-e-h..,....?.5'..'a'p',
In witness whereof I have hereuuto set my hand this ?.:J.|.'.'..""
day of
General Manager / Publisher
Subscribed and sworn to ber'ore me, a notary public in and for the
County of Garfield, State of Colorado. this ..........2.5.th..'.'....."""' day
E.e.h.rs.e.r.v-........... A.D., Ie.....2.1..
Qrtr* 1 ti"&;aP
ruELIO!ErEE
h torg,
of ..........................H.e.h.r..u.4r.v............4\D., 19.'....9-.1. ./ / ,af('EAL) ffiryl(W{,f;,r__
rliy commissbn'e<Piros )vvtl, l9f6.,
My Commission Expires
2014 Grand Ave., Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601
..v.ffi..
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
December 4, L990
Kent JonesP.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 81523
RE: Goose Creek Preliminary plan
Dear Mr. Jones3
the Goose Creek preliminary
hearing before the planninj
p.m. The hearing will be
PIan has been scheduled for a
Commission on January 9, 199L,held in Suite 301, Garfield
public
at 7:00
CountyIt iscourthouse, L09 8th street, Grenwood springs, cororado.recommended that you or your designated representative(s)attendance.be in
rn order to fulfill- the public notice requirements for the hearing,copies of the enclosed public notice form need to be mailed bicertified return_-receipt to a1t property owners adjacent to oiwithin 200 ft. o-f your property, no less Ehan 15 days-prior to thehearing. rn addition, the notice needs to be maifeO certifiedreturn-receipt to owners of mineral rightsr or lessees of mineralowners of record of the Iand proposed for subdivision, no less than15 days, but not more than 30 days, prior to the irearing. Thereceipts from these mailings need-to be presented at the iime of
!h" hearing or submitted to the Planning Department prior to theHearing. The pubric notice must be puuriinea one -time in theGrenwood Post, -15 days, but not more than 30 days, prior to thehearing with the proof of publication to be suUmiltea to thePlanning Department. It is your responsibility to submit the legalnotice to the Glenwood Post- The Post requirels aII public notiIesto be submitted by 10:00 a.m., the day pr-ior to pubiication.
The Subdivision site must also be posted with the enclosed noticeposter no later than 15 days prior, but not more than 30 days priorto the hearing.
ff you have further questions or concerns regarding the publichearing or pubric notice, prease contact this dttice.-
Sincerely,
Andrew C.
Planner
ACM/rIb
Enclosures
-a42fTIvlcGregor
109 8TH STREET, SUIrE 303 . 94582t21625-55711285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
GABFIELD COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SIIBDIVISION REVIEI{ AGENCIES
Andrew McGregor, Planner
November L6, 1990
kr^
Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
TO:
FROIT:
DATE:
RE:
If you have any questions or concerncall or write to Andrew McGregor or
ACM/rlb
Enclosed is a copy of the Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plansubmittal. Per the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984and C.R.S. 30-28-136, L977r ES amended, these documents areprovided to you for your review and comment. Based on the abovenoted C.R.S. Statute, your comments should be back to this officeno later than December 22, 1990, unless you want The County toconsider your non-response to be approval of the p1an.
about this submittal, you may
Mark Bean.
109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 945-8212 / 625-5571 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
January 25, 199L
Kent Jones
P.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 8L623
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision PreLiminary PIan
Dear Kent:
The Goose Creek Preliminary PIan has been scheduled for a public
hearing before the Planning Commission on February 13, 1991, dt
7:00 p.m. The hearing wiII be held in Suite 301-, Garfield CountyCourthouse, 109 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, CO. It is
recommended that you or your representative be in attendance.
In order to fu1fiII the public notice requirements for the hearing,copies of the enclosed public notice form need to be mailed bycertified return-receipt to al-l- property owners adjacent to orwithin 200 ft. of your propertyr no Iess than 15 days prior to thehearing. In addition, the notice needs to be mailed certifiedreturn-receipt to owners of mineral rights, or lessees of mineral
owners of record of the land proposed for subdivision, no less than
15 days, but not more than 30 days, prior to the hearing. Thereceipts from these mailings need to be presented at the time ofthe hearing or submitted to the Planning Department prior to thehearing. The public notice has been submitted for publication onetime in the GLenwood Post, 15 days, but not more than 30 days,prior to the hearing with the proof of publication to be submittedto the Planning Department. It is your responsibility to verifythe publication of notice with the Glenwood Post in compliance withnoticing requirements .
The Subdivision site must also be posted with the enclosed noticeposter no later than 15 days prior, but not more than 30 days priorto the hearing.
If you have further questions or concerns regarding the publichearing or public notice, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
Andrew C. McGregor
Planner
ACM/rIb
Enclosure
109 8TH STREET, SUTTE 303 . 94582121625-55711285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
PUBLIC NOITICE
TAKE NOTICE that Kent Jones has applied to the Planning Commission,Garfield County, State of Colorado, to grant a Preliminary Plan approvalfor Goose Creek in connection with the following described propertysituated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to-wit:
Legal Description: A parcel of land situated in Lots 3 and 4, Section35 and Lot B, Section 34, T7S, R88W consisting of 51.09 acres and aparcel of land situated in Lot 3, Section 35, T7S, R88W of the 5th P.I{.consisting of .2 acres.
Practical Description: The property is located approximately one half(L/2) miles northeast of downtown Carbondale off e-.n. 100.
Said Preliminary Plan is to allowfollowing: A 51.29 acre tract intodescribed property.
the Petitioner to subdivide the5 single family lots on the above
AII persons affected by the proposed Subdivision are invited to appearand state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appearpersonally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views byIetter particularly if you have objections to such Preliminary Plan asthe Planning Commission will give consideration to the comments ofsurrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether togrant or deny the request for Preliminary Plan. This Preliminary PIanapplication may be reviewed the office of the Planning DepaitmentIocated at Garfield County Courthouse, 109 8th Street, Suile 303,Grenwood springs, colorado, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00p.m., Monday through Friday.
That public hearing on the application for the above Preliminary Planhas been set for the 13th day of February at the hour of 7:00 p.m. atthe Garfield County Courthouse, Suite 301, 109 8th Street, GlenwoodSprings, Colorado.
Planning DepartmentGarfield County
f."lL-/
L'
1"1r. Andrew McGregor
Garf ield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision
Dear Andrew:
We are in receipt of your letters
discussion in your office we will
P.O. Box 132
Carbondale, C0 81623
Jawary 24, 1991
of December 2l and January
address each concern.
3.As per our
4.50 1. (B) A copy of the preliminary plan certified by a registered surveyor
is attached.
2. (D) A11 mineral rights belong to owners of record. (Unless exception
is shown on Title Page 14, which it does not).
3. (f) e copy of all property owners within 200' is attached.
4. (H) A11 easements known or proposed by us are named and shown Lo width
on attached Preliminary P1at.
(f,) Section 9.80, Section B will be provided for in deed restrictions
or monetary payment will be made to the school district, Section C.
(N) "Approximate street grades and road centerline radii of curvaLure
data" shown or attached Preliminary Plat.
(0) A11 easements are now shown on Preliminary Plat. A11 names,
addresses and lega1 descriptions of easements are shown in Preliminary
Plat booklet pages 5-10.
4.80 Please see attached report from our Engineer. Access to 1ot 5 is by the
easement road. Constraints for building on said 1ot are deed restricted
and plat noted per Army Corps of Engineerrs request, i.e. before any
house is built they must be contacted on whether a permit for wetlands
disturbance is needed.
4.91 1. (A1) A copy of Basalt Water Conservancy Contract was given to you at
our last meeting and one was forwarded to I1r. l4cDanold Division of
Water Resourses. 0n page 33 exhibit A in the Preliminary plan booklet
is a copy of our well permit.
3. Enclosed with this information is a copy of the amended new per:rnit
from the Division of Water Resources stating the right of holder to 3
in-house use only.
(a) We will only use our well amendment as backup to the 4 lots that
Basalt tr'Iater Conservancy has sold us an augumentation contract
for.
5.
6.
7.
4.92
4.93 1.
1. (D) Soil percolation test data is on Page 17A of Certified
Professional Engineers reports on Preliminary plan booklet.
(t) Perc test holes shown on Professional Engineers reports included
with this letter.
(S) I'{aintenance of septic system addressed in deed restrictions page
37 of Preliminary Plan booklet.
Utilities in place as shown on Preliminary Plat or available to buyer
of lot, i.e. will water, augmentation, previously documented.
Please see attached engineering report on road p1an.,)
KJ/dh
e1
Jones
i.)
2.)
3. )
4.)
5.)
6. )
7.)
8. )
e.)
ADJACENT LANDOWNERS
CARMICHAEL, LISA
P.0. BOx 445
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623
DUKE, WILLIA},I F. AND SHEILA
O1B7 COUNTY ROAD lOO
CARBoNDALE, C0L0RAD0 8t623
EUBANK, DALE
731 EAST DURANT AVENUE UNIT 7A
ASPEN, C0L0RAD0 81611
JACOBSEN, JOHN I1. AND KAREN
P.0. BOx 129
CARBONDALE, C0L0RAD0 8t623
NIESLANIK BROTHERS
0560 COUNTY ROAD 165
CARBONDALE, C0L0RAD0 81623
ROBBINS, PERONELLE
P.O. BOX 932
CARBoNDALE, COLORAD0 8L623
TAYLOR, RAY AND CAROLYN
O4B9 ROSE LANE
CARBONDALE, CoLORADO 81623
TRUESDELL, LEONARD C. AND SHERRIE
O1B9 COUNTY ROAD 1OO
CARBoNDALE, C0L0RAD0 8t623
MORROW, RoBERT T.
240 MARY STREET
HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY 07601
(0469 ROSE LANE)
FOLEY, CHARLES C. AND LELA P.
P.0. BOX 72
CARBONDALE, COLORADO 8t623
10. )
Page 4
January 30, 1991
Andrew McGregor, Mark Bean
Garfleld County Planning Department
1O9 8th Street, suite 3O3
GLenwood SPrings, CO 81601
RE: Proposed
Dear Andrew
Goose Creek Subdivision
and Mark,
Gary and I sent a ]etter dated November 3, 1989, a copy of
which is enclosed, with regards to the Goose Um Creek proposal'
Most of our concerns still apply, please refer back to this letter'
We understand that this is a scaLed down vereion, but the
subdivision still faces most of the same concerns and issues. These
issues have not been adequately addressed.
Mr. Jones suooests a maintenance agreement for the access
road, this road neeas to be widened and upgraded with a proper
gravel base before it can be maintained. As stated by ourselves
ind all the neighbors, the access road is a narrow single lane farm
road that has J dangerous entrance onto County Road 1OO. The road
aLso has no maintenance agreement. This single Lane drive in itrs
present conditlon can not withstand any increased usager *:r* If
Garfield County is unable to resuire, ds a provision of this
subdivision that the access be brought up to adeguate county road
standards I strongly recommend the subdivision be turned down
because it is not an apPropriate or safe area for further
development.There is still the issue of potluting the ground water. As
discussed at the Goose Um Creek meeting most neighbors lncluding a
representative of the Clty of Carbondale stated that any further
growth in this area jeopardizes the quality of existing wells as
wel] as the backup system for the Clty of Carbondale. At the last
meeting Carbondale requested a €Juarantee from the County that their
wetl's supply woul.d not be contaminated. I have encLosed a more
current article in reference to Carbondal'e's concerns.
There are several. lssues that will be hard to regulate such as
the issue of wetlands. As stated by the Corps of Engineere in
there letter dated November 5, 1990, there are wetlands in each
platted Lot. It would be extremely difficult to police these
wetlands to make sure they are not harmed.please consider all of the expressed concerns as reasons to
not permit this land to be subdivided. It is not in an appropriate
location for further development.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
-- /t ft
-_- )it. (q-,,'i, irtJ'
enclosures
Lisa Carmichael.
GAHFIT.LU UIJUI\
r+ ;-
Ja: -
)' t:a -
'rr/ -=,=?'.- :?a:,aqF'l c:"all\'-:llcll
:;-:.:lr:- :-::.. i-'=.'s.- .-:-- -., 39eg l: -..:.':.
,nt ,r
<:-
's::-.-:.=5 ,:-.-:L l-:ltle lll-3
5,: - .., : -. -;,- :; .- ::- "
t1 .,
: ,-- ---. - .1 E
i, -_ ^*L_
.-!-+---
i!
- "-- "'*"-ll
!'
-t .=.:O - t:L..- -
-1, - -fi- .
-_ ._ l. (:
r:
DEC 21 ,98 L2ZE9 TOtlN EF CHREONDH.c EEE PE1IE3
Tr*m oi Carbcmeh
.rm*"rsm
TOWN OF CAEBONDALE
FAX COVER SHEET
FAX # 963-9140
TO:Name
Comparry
Fax # , qas-'t179
FROM:ttame -*---Ma-fk-Chain''----i---:.--;
Dept/TitIe Tnr^r
Total number of pagee includin$ eover sheet 3
-Remarks
If you havi problems receiving this f ex, PIease cel-I 963-2733 '
I
I
'i
I
DEC 21 '98 t2tt2 Ttllrjl.r uF CFREONDRLE zEt Pa7/43
ffihffi-
TOWN OF CAR,BONDALE
FAX COVER SHEET
FAlt # s63-S140
TO:
Mr. Andrew McGre-gor . ----.
-
Name. ,.. H
companY ,Gatfi'el d CoU
Fax*", -q4
FROFI:Name
Dept/title,T+wn Pl anner
Tota1 rrumber of pages including cover sheet _3-'---
Remarks
If you havi brobl-ems receiving this fax'please call 963-2'133'
TrO:
FROI{:
DATE:
RE:
GARFIELD COUNTY
PLANN!NG DEPARTMENT
ST'BDI\ruSION REVISW AGBNCIES
Andrew McGregor, Planner ,trlr\
November 16, 1990
Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
;iCN
Enclosed is a copy of the Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIansubmittal. Per the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984and C.R.S.30-28-L35, L977r ds amended, these documents areprovided to you for your review and comment. Based on the above
noted C.R.S. Statute, your comments should be back to this officeno later than December 22, L990, unless you want The County toconsider your non-response to be approval of the plan.
If you have any questions or concern about this submittal, you maycaII or write to Andrew McGregor or }lark Bean.
ACM/rlb
109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 945-8212 / 625-5571 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
January 3, 1991
Kent Jones
P.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 81623
RE: Goose Creek Preliminary PIan - Planning Commission Hearing
Dear Mr. Jones:
Due to deficiencies in your application, we will be unable to hold
a public hearing before the P1-ahning Commission on January- 9, 11?1.fhlse deficiencies, outlined in my letter of December 2L, 1-9?9,
need to be addressed prior to the conmencement of the public
hearing. perhaps the f6remost issue is that cited in the enclosed
Ietter from tha Office of the State Engineer and required in
Section 4c91 of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations. The
rescheduling of the public hearing wiII require reqeat^i-ng thq
public noti6e publicition notifying land owners within 2OO' and
|osting of the- property. I witt -provide the public noticing
inateriils when we-deiermine the completeness of the application and
an acceptable date for the public hearing.
I would be glad to meet with you to discuss these matters. Please
ca1l and weLan schedule a meeling to avoid derailing your schedule
any further.
Sincerely,
q
t
r.,t
t
tt:'
l:"
l$
I
I,'I,
h,.
I
I
fiLt
li '
ttI
tt
,
I
,.
,'I
L,r
I(j
'i
,1
ttI
f.l
t
a
i"rii
ft
I
'L
b
I\'
,-2"*Lr,rfE%
Andrew C. IttcGregor
Planner
ACI{/rlb
xcs Vince Gu1ino
:
I
8TH STREET, SUtrE 303 . g4582t21625-55711285-7g72 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS' COLORADO 81601
GARFIELD COUNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
December 2L, 1990
Kent Jones
P.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 8L623
RE: Goose Creek Preliminary PIan
Dear Mr. Jones:
We have received your preliminary plan application and have
noted the following concerns or deficiencies. The citations listedbelow refer to the applicable section of the Subdivision
Regulations.
4:50 PRELIMTNARY PLAN MAP
B. A copy of the preliminary plan certified by a registered
surveyor was not included in the application.
No reference was made to owners or Iesees of mineralrights.
AII property owners within 200 feet were not included onyour list. I counted 10 parcels. This is imperative due
to the public notice requirements. This must be
accomplished 15 pays prior to the hearing.
No easements, except the existing road easement, are
accurately shown on the plan map. No other easements are
being proposed?
No corrmon open space is shown on the plan. Seerequirement in Section 9:80.
"Approximate street grades and road centerline radii ofcurvature data" are not shown.
"Any existing easements, along with name(s) and addressesof the entity having an easement and lega1 description of
those easements. " The applicable easements need to be
shown on the plan map.
D.
H.
L.
N.
o.
109 8TH STREET, SUIrE 303 . 94582t21625-557L1285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
F
t
4:80 SUPPLEMENTAL INI'ORMATION: DRAINAGE PI-,AN
No computation of expected tributary flows shown in
drainage information.
No "Design of drainage facilities to prevent storm waterin excess of historic run-off from entering, damaging or
being carried by existing facilities...." are shown.
f-) Areas subject to inundation.
2) Location and size of proposed culverts, bridges,ditches and channels.
Are there no drainage structures proposed? What about
access to lot #5 through 100 year flood plain? Ditch
_ 1os s ings ?
4:91 WATER SUPPLY PLAIiI
A.1_.right of acquisition is unclear.the Basalt Water Conse:nrancyavailability of water. AIso,well permit.
3. There is no evidence from Division of Water Resourcesregarding the "amenability of existing rights to changein user" i.e., the change from one (1) domestic to three(3) in-house wells
4292 SA}IITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAL PLAN
c.
D.
D.
Evidence of ownership orThere is nothing fromDistrict regarding thethere is no copy of your
There is no specific evidence of soil percolation testsincluded in the application.
f-) Perc test hole are not located on the plat.
2l Test results need to be performed and certified bya professional engineer.
No maintenance plan for on-site systems in included.
utility or road plans are included.
E.
4:93 - No
These deficiencies in your application need to be resolvedrym9{iatglY: without this informal-ion it will be impossible forstaff to make -any kind of favorabre endorsement of y6ur project.rn-addition, without adequate public notice ""O "aj".6nt lalna
-rrp to
.200 .feet) land owner n-otiti6ation between 15 ind 30'days;- ;;hearings can be held.
I s=uggest you contact me at your earliest convenience todiscuss these isiues
Sincerely,%fr42r.-,
Andrew C. McGregorPlanner
ACM/rlb
Forrt3 No.
GWS-25
OFFICE OF T' STATE ENGINEER
COLORADO Dr,,slON OF WATER RESOURCES
810 C.ntonnlat 8Hg., 13t3 Shstqun St. tlonttr. Colorado 0()203
(3O3) 886-3s0r
OWNEH'S COPY
APPLICANT
KENT JONES
BOX J.32
CARBONDALE, CO 8L623
CHANGE/E(PANSION OF USE
EXST
WEII. PERMIT NUMBER 15884C
DIV.5 CNTY. 23 WD 38 DES. BAS]N
-
MD
-
APPROVED WELL LOCANON
COUNTY.GARFTF:T,D
sw U4 }{If 1/4 Section 3s
TwpT--9-, RangeS,R w s P.M.
DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES
16L-I Ft. lrom North SeAion Line
r oo Ft. from t{oct Sec{ion Une
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERM]T DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT
@NDITIOT.IS OF APPROVAL
This wel! shall be used in such a way as to cause no m*erial lnjury to existing wder rigirts. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant thd no lnjury will (rctur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking reli€,f ln a c-ivil court action.
Approvedforexpandeduseof thewellconstructedunderpermit15436l andpursuanttooRsST-92€02(3)(bX0(A)
as the only well on a tract of land d 51 acres described as thd ponbn d the E 1P,d sle NE U4 d sec. 34 and
the W 112 ot the NW 1/4 sec. 35, Twp. 7 S., Rng. 88 W. d ths 6th P.M., Garlield County, belng more particularly
described on the attached exhibft'N. lssuance d this p€rmit cancels permit 154861.
The use of ground water trom thls well ls llmlted to firs protectlon, ordinary household purposss lnslde 3 single
lamily drrellings, the lrrigation of not more than one (1) acre of home gardens and larrvns and the watering of
domestic animals.
The return flow from the use of this well must be through an lndividual was{e wder dlsposal system ol the
non-evaporative typ€ where the water is retumed to the same stream system ln which the well ls located.
The maximum pumping rate shall not exceed 15 GPM.
This well shall be constructed not more than 20O feet from ths locafion specified on thls permit
72,m-//-22-?o
?ROVED:
tl
A. lw;J..,
]t0v.r.0318535 DATE ISSUED t990 EXPIHATION DA
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planni-ng Department
109 8th St., Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. McGregor,
we would like to address your additional engineering
concerns in regards to the Goose Creek Preliminary Plan.
Zogiopoulos ond Associotes, lnc.
Engt ne ering C onsultants
1011 42ND STREET . EVANS, COLORAOO 80620 ' PHONE 352-6000
L/2L/9L
The "approximate'r road grade is +/- L%, the
is 335' , the length is 238,26' and the tangentcenterLine radiiis L24.42' .
Section 4.80 C. The@twilrsite leveIs. Please
Computation.
of 4 resj-dential lots averaging
run-off in excess of historic
A for Improvement Ratio
developmentnot create
see Exhibit
Section 4.80 D. The existing
place for at least 100 Yearsthis development.
1. ) Areas subjectExhibit B and
drainage facilities have been in
and are quite adequate to Protect
to
on
inundation are shown on sj-te inventory map
preliminary plat map.
Z.) A11 exlsting culverts are adequate. There will be one small
ditch culverted by an L8" culvert extending 3 ' beyond the
driving surface on each side of the road. See Exhibit B for
location.
PercoLation test hole locations are shown on
B.
Sectj.on 4.93 P]ease see attached Exhiblt C, road cross section
and roaa specifications to be used.
ASSOCTATES, rNC.
Section
attached
\r>
i. ):lR.'ZOYrOltr .-'. i.
\."4i.-rn*o,-\.''f ;;:-=
fmprovement Ratlo Example
rhe approximate percolation_ rate of 45? per sguare foot can beapplied to the-m3:oriiy-"i-1r"o-*"-trrl'Goo"" creek subdivision.rhe remainj_ns 5s%-i;-;i":;ri.--- --' e"s ,i
The proposed improvemertl'of^._
1,920.:quare foot resid,ence anddriveway to an averag'e loi siEe of ro -acres
wi-r-r produce thefollowing: J- :,;,,.., . r, .
Zogiopoulot ond Associolcs, tnc.
df_l-u*g improvements will producetrlercolation rate2') A 10 acie lot.esuals 4,:,ggg sguilg feer of surfacearea with a rris[oiic iun*ort ;f-5;{.. subrracring the4'000 ssuare reet-oi ;diied ;;.;;;" 3rea rrom a3s,ooowourd leave 431,e,0,0.;, -$!giiriil-;;,
.ss? the historicrun-of f area equals zzi)lao-"-iiI.I'reet. we thenmuttiply the 4,-000 "eu"i" i";i-;"i*oro.r.menrs by .95%run-of f created. rn6 i6s"r.I-ii"iliart. 3,800 =euii. feerof affected grouna-;ercoaati"il--iiiidins s, edo_=quarefeer bv zgz,58o "euli.,f;.[-;1\r.""i" an improvemenrIi.llrirr;:: p.r..r,[-de"re"=" in trre percoration rate
L. ) Thg_4,000 square feeta y5% run-off and a 58
We could not desj_gn anyto_deaI wirh rhis-"*.iioff.
additional drainage facilitiesa chanse in the r,i"t"iiE-;;"_
3.)
Exhibit A
H
TYPICAL COI'NTY ROAD SECTION
30r
R.o.vr.
TYPICAL FILL SECTION
TYPTCAI, CUT
SECTION
15rPe
A = AsPhalt chiP & seal Surfacing
B = Base Depth Determined By Soil Analysis
C = Sr:bbase Depth Determined By Soil Analysis
TYPICAI COUNTY ROAD SECTION
17:
c
WITH ON ST
R.O.W.
Typical Cut
Section
[=
le
l'e
Asphalt Chip. e Seal Surfacing
Base Course Depth Deterrnined. By
Subbase Course Depth Determined
EXHIBIT C
SoiIs Rnalysis
By Soils Analysis,.
5
A
[pical FilI
Section
A:I
t.
GItIiF I t t.D COUNTY R()AD SPi'C I t'l CAi I
a
Rt Gt tI -0t-l{lY
A. Ihe rlght-of.xry wli.l[h shell bc d nrlnlniuri of 60 fcet.
B. Iho rlght-of-rvly for thc constructloll of a rodd or brldre firust exlst bcforrr acceptance of the road lnto the county systcnr.
C. Depaltures irmr thc 60 foot rlght-of-Hly Hldth rcqulrenEnt may be autho|lzed by the County Road Supervlsor wlth the approvrl of thc Bodti of
County Connrl ss loners.
ROAO COHSTRUCTIOI{
A. Subbase rnd bnse coursc deptns wlll bo based upon a cartlfled solls analysls subnrltted by the proJect doveloper. fhc depths must riEct or
exceed the follotring standards.
B, The subbase courso shill conslst of plt run gravel or mlchlne crusheJ aggregate, conforrnlng to thc follrrvlng dopth requircnents: Corpdcted
deFth of pit run gravcl shall be r ilini0rum of 9 lnchcs Nith the largest stone bolng 2/3 of the subbase dcpth, 1.e,, 6'stonc / 9'depth rnd
8' stoue / 12- depth. Thc presencc of ndtive grdvel ln the subgrade nray be reason to dalete tire subbase frorl the road section, providcd the
natlve soil ls s'.able. The declslon as to the deletion of the .subbJse rests xlth the County Road Supervisor. ln case of disagleonEnt, the
project developcr nay submit a certificd soils analysis to declde the lssue.
C. The base course shall be a crushed gravol aggregate Eateriai placod to a conpacted mininJm dcpth of 3 lnches, upon the subbase. The denslty
of the base course shall be 955 Proctor Density (MSHO T18074). l{her€ no surface course is required, the base course shall be construed to be
tlp surface course.
D. The surface course shall be a mlnlmun of asphalt chip seal rat v.rlth nlninum 3/4'aggregate material, meeting Colorado State Highuay specifications
for rnterial and construction r.rethods.
I I I. UTILITIES
A. Ihe utllities that are to be burled vithin the roadbed proper, 1.e.,20' elther slde of template centerline, shall be placed at such time and by
such rpthods so as to not disturb the paved surface of the roadway.
B. 0verhead utlllty servlce shall be clear of vehicular traffic and as near the rlght-of-Hay line as posslble.
C, All xater and sewer'line cmsslngs shall have a ninlrnum of 5 foot of cover above the top of tie pipe.
D. All burled utlllties whlch lntersect a culvert shall be placed a nlnlnum of 1.0 foot belorr the culvert.
IY. RO'J},{AY DESIGI{ CRITERIA
..,A. Haxlmum centerllne road grade shall not exceed 8.0 pcrcent.
B. llinlmum roadbeC w{dth shall be 26 feet and constructed rs per attached typical sectlons. '
C. Slopes for cuts and fllls shall not be less than 1.5 to 1.0 except ln rock cuts vhlch shall be appmved by the County Road Supervisor
D. No dead end roads wlll be accepted unless a cul-de-sac or turnaround ylth a minlnum of 45.00 foot radius curve ls provlded.
E. The mlnlmum radius for a cunye sha'll be 150.00 feet.
F. All road lnt€rsections sha'll {ntersect at ! 9Oo ang'le and provlde for adequate slght distance.
Y. PROJECT PLNIS
A. Corplete proJect plans shall be submltted to the CountJ Road Supervisor for approval prior to conmencement of construction.
B, ProJect.plan and profile sheets shall be scaled: Plan view l" = 100'; Profile I'.100'; l'= l0r vertlcali or larger.
C. All dralnage and lrrlgatlon structures shall be shovrn on the plan and profile sheets, reflecting the flor ilne elevatlon at center'line of road,
the c.f.s. capaclty,type of structure materla1,the dlrection of flow and the slze of the area being dralned by drainage structures.
D. Exlstlr,g utilitles shalI be sho{n on the plan sheets,
YI. DMINAGE STRUCIURES
A. .r.ll lrr{gation and dralnage structures shall be ln place before the rcceptance of the road lnto the county systcm'
B. Standard corrugated rctal pipe or concrete pipe of sufficlent 1cngth to span the entlre roadbed (plus such addltlonal vldth as may be necessary
by constructlon standards) ls requlred, The m{nlmum pipe diameter shall be 18" mlnlmurn vlth a mlnimum of lg" of cover. The dlaneter of tie
p{pe and the lnstallation thereof, must be rpproved by the County Road Supervlsor or Eoard of County Connlssloners.
C. tf surface lrrlgation ls used for Iavns, fie'tds, etc., the dralnage from this lrrlgatlon must be provldcd so that the head ditches and draln
dltches Hlll not be on the road rlght-of-way and drainage Hater rlll riot flol{ {nto the roadxay.
Departuresfrornthc.bovcstandardsmoybeauthorlzcdbytheCountyRoadSupervlsorHlthtleapprovaloftheBoardofcountyCormlsslcncrs.The
county, !t lts dlgcrctlon, shall not 6ccept r road for malntcnance untll the develcpnrent or ychlcular usage of that road ls sufflclent to larrant
county nalntenance.
IHE AEO1/E STAilOARD POAD SPCCIFICATIONS TOR ROAO DESIGII AIID CCIISIRUCTIOTI IITVT BTTII OFFICIALLY Aflo E!{ACTE0 IutS 24TH DAY 0F APRIL. 1978, 0Y
lt.
IHI BOARD OF COUNIY COI,iI.IISSIONERS, GARFIELD COUiITY, COLOIIADO.
|/;
a
I'-ai \' , i.' t-
i
[ \,,\ . eARFTELD couNTY
REGULATORY OFFICES AND PERSONNEL
December 21, 1990
Kent Jones
P.O. Box L32
Carbondale, CO 8L623
RE: Goose Creek Preliminary Plan
Dear l,lr. Jones :
We have received your prelirninary plan
noted the following concerns or deflciencies.below refer to the applicable section
Regulations.
,,;
4:50 PRELIMINARY PLAN IIIAP
application and have
The citations listedof the Subdivision
A copy of the preliminary plan certified by a regi-stered
surveyor was not included in the application.
No reference was made to owners .or lesees of mineral
rights . 2e ill* r"7or* /.1. t t/-
AII property owners within 200 feet were not lncluded on
your fist. I counted 10 parcels. This is imperative due
Lo the public notice requirements. This must be
accomplished 15 pays prior to the hearing.
No easements, except the existing road easement, are
accurately shown on the plan maP. No other easements are
being proposed?
No common open 6pace is sbpqn gn , the- . Plan. - See
requirement in Secfion 9 z8O. fu14.^rL',{4+;Js**7yt'F"w 5
"Approximate street grades and road centerline radii of
curvature data" are not shown
uAny existing easements, along with n.rme(s) and addressesof the entity having an easement and legal description of
those easements." The applicable easements.need to be
'showrr on the plan map.
B.
D.
F.
H.
L.
N.
o.
lo9 8TH STREET, SUTTE 303 . 9458212 t625-55711285-7972 . GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
\"/
4 g 80 SUPPI,EI.{ENTAI, INFORUATION: DBAINAGE PI^A}I
No computation of expected tributary flowg shown in
drainage information.
No "Design of drainage facilities to prevent storm waterin excess of historLc run-off from entering, danaging or
being carried by existing facilities...." are shown.
1) Areas subJect to inundation.
2l Location and slze of proposed culverts, bridges,
ditches and channels.
Are there no drainage structures proposedl--What about
access to lot #5 thrpuqh 100 .year flood plaln? Ditchcrossings? Cula( ob,- J{ H[, qp ;,.,, -..
"
4:91 WATER SUPPLY PI,AIT
A.l.Evldence of ownership or right of acquisition is unclear.There is nothing from the Basalt [f,ater ConsenrancyDistrict regarding the availability of water. AIBo,there is no copy of your weII permit
lfhere is no evidence from Division of l{ater Regources
regarding the "amenability of existing rlghts to changein user" 1.e., the change from one (1) domestLc to three(3) in-house wells.
4292 SAIIITARY SEWAGE DISPOSAI. PIJAI{
There is no speciflc evidence of soil percolation tests
Lncluded in the application.
1) Perc test hole are not located on the pIat.
2l Test results need to be performed and certifled by
: a professional englneer,
No maintenance plan for on-site systems in included.
No utility or road plans are included.
c.
D.
3.
D.
E.
4r93
TAKE NOTICE thatGarfield County,for Goose Creek
PI'BLIC NOTICE
Kent Jones has applied to the planning Commission,State of Colorado, to grant a preliminary plan approvalin connection with the following desciibed piopertysituated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to-wit:
!99"f Descri-ption: A parcel of land situated in Lots 3 and 4, Section35 an_d Lot 8r_ Section 34, T7S, R88w consisting of 51.09 acres and aparcel of land situated in Lot 3, Section 35, T7S, R88W of the 5th p.M.consisting of .2 acres.
Practical Description: The property is located approximately one half(L/2) miles northeast of aovmtown clrbondare off L-.n. 100.
Said Preliminary Plan is to allow the petitioner to subdivide thefollowing: A 51.29 acre tract into 5 single family lots on the abovedescribed property.
All persons af.fected by the proposed Subdivision are invited to appearand state their views,anct sEate t,heir views, protests or objections. rf you cannot appearpersonally ?t ruch meeting, then you are urged to stite your vieiv3 byyou are urged to state your views byIgttel particularly if you have o5jections to such preliminary plan asthe Planning Commission will give consideration to the coriments ofsurrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether togral! or-deny the- request for Preliminary PIan. This preliminary planapplication may be reviewed the offic6 of the planning oepaitmentIocated at Garfield County Courthouse, L09 8th Street, Suite 303,Grenwood springs, cororadol between the hours of g:00 a.m. and 5:00p.m., Monday through Friday.
That public hearing on the application for the above preliminary planhas been set for the 9th day of January at the hour of Z:00 p.m. it tneGarfield County Courthouse, Suite 30L, tO9 8th Street, Glenwobd Springs,Colorado.
Planning DepartmentGarfield County
\fl
\o4'
:
: llhese defLciencies in your application need to be resolvedLmmediatelY: I{ithout this informa-tion it will be imposslble forstaff to make -any kind of favorable endorsement of y6ur proJect.In^addltion, wlthout adequate. public notice and adJac6nt laina irp to
?00 feet) rand oh,ner notification between 15 ind 30'daysr- nohearlngs can be held.
discuss these isEues. -,;
Sincerely,
Andrew C. McGregor
ACM/rlb
:....
. :" i'
l
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
STATUS OF GOOSE CREEK SUBDIVISION CONSIDERATION -PI,ANNING COMMISSION
}Tay 2, 1991
MEIt{O
AIIDREW UCGREGOR, PIJAI{NER
DON K. DEFORD, COUNTY ATTORNEY F{D\T/
either to our meeting or myyour earliest convenience.
Pursuant to our discussions of Apri-I 30, 1991 with Gerry Hartert,attorney for the developer, and Dan Kerst, attorney for theobjectors, r have the forlowing comments. rn sum, r informedcounsel for both sides of the proposed subdivision that in orderto move Planning Commission consideration to the recomnendationstage, I would reconunend as follows in regard to the questionableroad.
It is my recorrunendation that the Planning Connrission recormend tothe Board of County Commissioners that they condition approval ofthe preliminary plat upon presentation to Lhe Board of l-verifiedcourt order declaring the extent and nature of the questioned road.I belj-eve such a condition may be attached pursulnt to Sections
!r??; !? 13 (") , 4:_33 (Jc) , 4:33 (d) and 9:30 of the Garf ield CountySubdivision Regulations. Further, that the Board conditioitapproval of the preliminary plat upon that verified court orderstating that the questioned road is either public in nature orprivate in nature but permitting an additional burden of trafficadeguate to accept the anticipated increase of traffic from thissubdivision. rf said court order finds the road to be public, ottt]is juncture, no improvements may be required as part ot- the finalplat.--If.the_ court finds that the road-is privatle but acceptablefor additional burdens of traffic, the road must be improved to theinternar standards of the subdivision. Both of the formerpositions concerning -improvement of roads are contingent upon theCounty's failule t^o a-dopt standards for external improvementl priorto the approval of the preliminary plat.
If you have any questions in regardrecoflunendation, please contact me at
DKD:mls
ST{|E OFCOLOIUDO
COI.ORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEATTH
421 0 East 1 'l th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 8O2ZO-}7 1 6
Phone (303) 320-8333
Telefax:
l.3031 322-9076 (Main Burldi nglDenver)
(301) 120-1 529 (Ptarmigan Place./Denver)
(3011 248-7198 (Crand Juncrion Regional Office)
Jarruary 4, 1991
l,lr. Davis Famar, Ivlanager,
Town of Carbondale
76 South Second Street
Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Roy Romer
Covernor
Thomas M. Vernon.
Executive Director
JAN
COUNTY
RE: Wellhead Protection proposal for the Town of Carbondale's r.rater supply
Dear l\lr. Farrrar:
Tttis is written as a followup to the telephone conversations I had with you
and with DCr. [4ark Chain last week regarding the possible threat to
Carbondale's drinking water wells posd by the development of the Goose IJm
Creek subdivision in unincorporatd Garfield Cor-rrty.
It is my understarding from our conversation, that the developers are
proposing to install mounded ISDS (individual ser"'age disposal systems) or
septic systems for each of the homes to be constructed in the subdivision.
Ttre mounded systems have been selected as an alternative to conventional ISDS
treatment because the water table in the area is Ltnusually high, and the
proposed subdivision is upstream of the Tor.'n of Carbondale's subsr:rfa.ce
drinking water supply. Combined, these factors have the potential of
polluting the town's drinking water wells.
I should mention that I have also read the reviews and recorunendations on the
proposed subdivision prepared by the division's district engineers, Mr. Bowman
ard Mr. Irlatson. Both nrahe the point that the use of an aquifer for r^rastevsater
disposal in close proxfunity to an est^ablished drinking water source is not a
desirable situation, anci recommenci. ttrat, the sublivisicn oeriously consider
connecting to the Carbondale Sanitation District for water and wa-stewater
services. Quite frankly, this makes a lot of sense, but as you pointed out,
would likely open up the area in question for more intensive develolment. I
gathered that such an outcome is not desirable to the Town of Carbondale, and
contradicts the rnaster plan adopted for the town.
In evaluating other options, I suggested that the town miEht rsant to
investigate the possibility of applying some of the management approaches
developed for the wellhead protection program as a compromise. You will
recal-l that we discussed Town support of or neutrality on the proposed mor-srded
systems provided that the developer was willing to inst-a1l monitoring wells
between the leachfields and the Town's wellfield, and to ensure, thror:gh
legally binding covenants or some oLher device, that the systems w-ould be
properly installed and maintained in accordance with appropriate county ISDS
regulations, and the manufacturer's recomrnendations. There are other
nanagement approaches that might be considered - these are just suggestionsfor you to consider.
HTILLU
94ffi
hffinJNWI
Town of Carbondale
Page 2
For your reference, I am enclosing a copy of an PA docr-unent entitled
"Wellhead Protection Programs: Tools for Local Governments" that describes a
variety of approaches that conrnumities might consider to protect their
subsurface drinking water sources.
I trust the proposal we discussed, and those found in the booklet will foster
some constructive dialogue between the Town and ttre Cou:ty regarding the most
advisable approach to handling raater and r*astewater service for the proposed
subdivision. I confess that I do not have a technical background, and
therefore arn not in a position to make any specific recomnendations.
If, after reviewing the enclosed nraterial, you would like to discuss any of
the approaches fi:rther, or would like to consider pursuing a wellhead
protection pilot project for the town, please contact me; I can be reached at
331-4573.
T look fon*ard to hearing from you, and sincerely hope that the tor"'rn and the
county, working together, will find a very safe and suitable solution to
protecting your drinking water source, and managing developrnent of the area.
Sincerely,
I{athleen Reilly, Administrator
Wel-Ihead Protection Program
ItIATm QUALITY CONTROL DMSION
Enclosure
xc: }dayor William Gray
ltark Chain, Tor+n of Carbondale
Dick Bowrnan, WQCD, Grand Junction
Dvain Watson, I'JQCD, Grand Jr-rnction
,/l,l^rX Bean, Garfield County
, {i$nr:dls]{:i',/n /^'o^. ,
/lu.{*iu-f--
//
/,1
i, |'' '/ -iF'.'rfiOY ROMER'{ Ciovernor
P" ?oiten
JERIS A. DANIELSON
Stale Engineer
cEoF;KEENGTNEER I[,)
DrvrsroN oF wArER RESoURCES
llii"",:ff:lHiJl:::?Ufr"' ' .
(303) 866-3581
J,,{4",1 ,', ?4?
,:{J*,:r."t^\*'
December 27, reeo -rq#i
11 ,. r-. *t;',.;,.;
McGregor ';.;; t.^ *-/'f'
Re: Goose Creek Subdiv'ision PreI iminary pl an
SWI/4 N!lI/4, Section 35, T7S, RBBt,l ,,\
Dear Mr. McGresor | ((ly^ (ur#1,, lr tI -l '
llle have reviewed the above referenced propos{l to dividL st acres jntofive parcels. There is arl existing house aird i.rell on the proposed Lot I(Permi! No. 158846)._ This well is-permitted as the only wLll'on the 5l acresfor.ordinary_household purposes insids 3 single-fanrilv itweil ingi, theirrigation of not more than one acre of home-lawn and"garden, ;nd t.lie wateringof domestjc animals. The applicant proposes to cancel this fernrit to obtainthree household-use-only perinits for'thi^ee of the lots and obtain WaterAIIotment Contracts from tlre Basalt Water Conservancy District to replaceout-of-priority depletions from the remaining tlvo weiIs.
.{1-';pt1o*',
n"'i'r{)t1
Mr. Andrew Mc
(.&,rt""t A" I u.{_-F tr,/
,
',/i!
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, C0 81601
We cannot recommend lpproval of this proposal until Tl,lO separ:tte WaterAllotment Contracts have bbbn obtained and'submitted to tfris office forretriel. lrle t'rould Iike sepa'r'ate contracts for each of the Ioti whir:h wiIIrequire a wel'l_permit. under the Basalt tlater Conservancy District,s subsLitute
I1l:I supply plan.. T,he District's augmentation plan is still pending in WaierLK"AL*L(J, V +5
-illell permits are issued hy this office for the constructjon of newas.alternate points of diversjon for water rights owned by the Districtsubject to a valid and continuing contract be[ween the us-er of ine wettthe Dlstrict. AII use of l-he weil will be curtailed unless the Wat.erAllotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect.
'V. o.tat-ngI,es-,or*covenant.s shouldIot 0UrChEders of these oblioations
Court.
r^tel I s
and
be required to inform the two potentialpflrif3ger$ of lhesq obt'isations. tle rieed [o inow *ni.r'' ir;'iol;-;;;'ia unfssued rybl:l permiti under t.hi Basalt }latei Alloiment Contracts. 0nce we havereviewed the information requested concerning these two proposed lrrts, we wiil
..1,.c.,.{1' dr.
Mr. Andrew McGregor
December 27, 1990
be able to describe the procedure by
valid well permits. l.le ask that the
abeyance until we have received the
addi t;i onal comments.
Page 2
which the other three lots may obtain
county hold this preliminary p'lan in
information requested and have formulated
Sincerely,
1/,*rfi"G,.'l-
JJames C.' McDanoId, P.E.
' Senior Water Resources Engineer
JCM/cl f:4837I
cc: 0rlyn Bell, Division Engineer
Bruce DeBrine
r'leu.lrtot)o" 0r(. 'l'/{- s66s
YGL- ,3s8'f {o, /'i:f"fr{ot,-',., (i. *rrr,]*t 111,Gil,f
f"-'t .'' c A
--.{ti*tr*''
Form No.
GWS-25
OFFICE OF THE . \TE ENGINEER
COLORADO DIVIS I OF WATER RESOURCES
818 C€ntennial Bldg., 13f3 Sherman St' D€nv€r. Colorado EOaXl
(3O3) &te3581
APPLTCANT
W KENT JONES T KEVIN L PATRTCK PC
205 S MILL ST STE 3OO
ASPEN, CO 8L611
303/920-1028
PERMT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL
LIC
COUNTY l?APT'TET.D
-iII- 17a Nw Ua Section ?q
Twp-7S ,Range88w 6thP'M'
82O. Ft. lrom North SeAion Line
77O Ft. from Wcc,t Section Line
WELL PERMr NUMBER 041.?-92 - I -_
DM.' 5 cNw. 23 wo 38 DES. BAsIN
-
MD
-
Lot:5 Block Filing:SuMiv: GOOSE CREEK
APPROVED WELL LOCAT1ON
2l
3)
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT
CONDMONS OF APPROVAL
This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant tnat no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action.
The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction and Pump lnstallation Rules
2 CcR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well
Construction and Pump lnstallation Contractors in accordance with Rule 17.
Approved pursuant to CRS 97-90-132(2) for the construction of a well, appropriating ground water tributary to the
Roaring Fork River, as an alternate point of diversion to the Basatt Conduit on the condition that the wellshall be
operat;d onlv when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the Basalt Water Conservancy District
for the release of replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation.
The use of ground water from this well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family
dwelling, anJ shall not be used outside the house for any purpose. All use of this wellwill be curtailed unless the
water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in etfect.
The ma<imum pumping rate shall not exceed 15 GPM.
The average annuat amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 0.325 acre-foot (105,918 gallons).
A totalizing flow meter must be installed on this welt and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of
all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division
Engineer upon request.
The well must be constructed not more than 2oo feet from the locatiorr specified on this permit, being on lot 5,
Goose Creek Subdivision, Garfield County.
The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permh number(s), name of the aquifer, and court
case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to Preserve these
4)
5)
6)
n
8)
s)
'"t*'nntlD G-g-1l
TOPY0V-uhiiliE'$
(Acting)
J UNDATE ISSUED \1o 1992 |"r,*or,o* oor=
OFFICE OF THE \TE ENGINEER
COLORADO DlVl ,.1 OF WATER RESOURCES
8tB C€ntonnid 8ldg., 1313 Shetman St, Oenver. Colorado 8&203
(3O3) Eo&3r'{11
W KENT
205 S
ASPEN,
303/920-1O28
PEHMI TO CONSTHUCT A WELL
JONES Z KEVTN L PATRICK PC
MILL ST STE 3OO
co 8L6l_t-
LIC
WEII PERMTT NUMBER 041293
DM. 5 oNTY. 23 wcl 38 DES. BASIN
-
MD
-lot: 4 Block: Filing:Subdiv: GOOSE CREEK@
COUNTY GARFTELD -
SW 1/4 Nw 1/4 Section ?q
Twp 7 s, Range RR w -6thP.M.
DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES
2OOO Ft. from North Sedion Line
i(;q Ft. from Wpst Sedion Line
1)
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT OOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT
CONDMONS OF APPROVAL
This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action.
The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well rlonstruction and Pump lnstallation Rules
2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well
Construction and Pump lnstallation Contractors in accordance with Flule 17.
Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) for the construction of a well, appropriating ground water tributary to the
Roaring Fork River, as an atternate point of diversion to the Basalt Conduit on the condition that the well shall be
operated onM when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the Basalt Water Conservancy District
for the release of replacement water from Buedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation.
The use of ground water from this well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single lamily
dwelling, and shall not be used outside the house for any purpose. All use of this wellwill be curtailed unless the
water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect.
The maximum pumping rate shall not exceed 15 GPM.
The average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 0.325 acre-foot (105,918 gallons).
A totalizing flow meter must be installed on this well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of
all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division
Engineer upon request.
The wel! must be constructed not more than 2OO leet from the location specified on this permit, being on lot 4,
Goose Creek Subdivision, Garfield County.
The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with welt permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court
case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these
markings.!h G-?-1?-u'-
s)
6)
7)
8)
s)
t)iiiirji:i:i',5 -C.)
3"..,-€.#%r'*
State Engine€r (Acting)0338s73c DA,E rssuED JUN 10 1992 llr,*o,o* DATEJUN 1 0 1993
F
APPROVED:
JD2
, Form'No
G\^/S-25'
OFFTCE OF THE : JE ENGINEER
COLORADO DIVI| N OF WATER RESOURCES
8tE C€ntonnial 8ldg., 1313 Shetman SL. Denvec Colorado 802oll
(3O:t) 86e3li8l . ,
APPLICANT
W KENT JONES T KEVIN L PATRICK PC
205 S MILL ST STE 3OO
ASPEN, CO 81611
303/920-1028
PEBMTT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL
WELL PERMTT NUMBER O4L29E
Dv. 5 cNTY. 23 wo 38 DES. BASTN
-
MD
-Loc 3 Block:Filing: Subdiv: GOOSE CREEK-@
LIC
COUNTY GARFIELD
--${- 17a Nw 1/a Section ?E
Twp 7 s, Flange 88 w -6thP.M.
DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES
L55o Ft. from North Seaion Line
52O Ft. from West Section Line
1)
2)
3)
4)
s)
6)
n
]SSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFEH A WATER RIGHT
CONDMONS OF APPROVAL
This well shal! be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action.
The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction and Pump lnstallation Flules
2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well
construction and Pump lnstallation contractors in accordance with Rule 17.
Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) for the construction of a well, aprpropriating ground water tributary to the
Roaring Fork River, as an ahernate point of diversion to the Basalt Conduit on the condition that the well shalt be
oPerated onlv when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the Basalt Water Conservanry District
for the release of replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation.
The use of ground water from this well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family
dwelling, and shallnot be used outside the house for any purpose. All use of this wellwill be curtailed unless the
water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in etfect.
The maximum pumping rate shall not exceed 15 GpM.
The average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 0.325 acre-foot (1os,glg gailons).
A totalizing flow meter must be installed on this well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of
all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) ind submitted to the Division
Engineer upon request.
The well must be constructed not more than 2OO feet from the location specified on this permit, being on lot 3,
Goose Creek Subdivision, Garfield County.
The owner shalt mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name ol the aquifer, and courtcase number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to'preserve these
markings.8 D b_S -1:-
COPYCIii'Vl\fHffi'$
0338e;5'L'"n'"*r (Actins)
E rssuEDJUN 10 1992. llr,*oroN DArE JUN i 0 igg3
cu€-tfu&,i*
F
8)
.Form No.
GWS.25
OFFICE OF THE S IE ENGINEER
COLORADO DIVII. { OF WATER RESOURCES
818 C€ntonnial Bldg., l3l3 Sherman SL. Donvor, Colorado 8O2Gl
(3oil) 866-3ItEr
APPLICANT
W KENT JONES Z KEVIN L PATRICK PC
2O5 S MILL ST STE 3OO
ASPEN, CO 8L611_
303/920-1028
PERMTT TO CONSTHUCT A WEII
:,
v,rELL PERMIT NUMBER 041295 - F
Dv.' 5 cNw. 23 wo 38 DES. BASTN
-
MD
-Lnt:Z Block Filing:Subdiv: GOOSE CREEK
APPHOVED WELL LOCAT]ON
COUNTY GARFIELD
___gE- 17a NE l/a Section 3a
Twp 7 S, Range 8R w -6thP.M.
DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES
18OO Ft. from North Sedion Line
21O Ft. from East seAion Line
1)
ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFEFI A WATER RIGHT
CONDMONS OF APPROVAL
This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of the
permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another
owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action.
The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction and Pump lnstallation Rules
2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well
construction and Pump lnstallation contractors in accordance with Rule 17.
Approved pursuant to cRS 37-90-137(2) for the construction of a well, appropriating ground water tributary to the
Roaring Fork River, as an alternate point of diversion to the Basalt Conduit on the condition that the well shall be
operated onlv when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the Basalt Water Conservancy District
for the release of replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation.
The use of ground water from this well is timited to ordinary household purposes inside one (1) single family
dwelling, and shallnot be used outside the house for any purpose. All use of this wellwill be curtailed unless the
water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in efted.
The ma:<imum pumping rate shall not exceed lS GpM.
The average annualamount of ground waterto be appropriated shallnot exceed 0.325 acre-foot (10s,918 gallons).
A totalizing flow meter must be installed on this well and maintained in good working order. permanent records of
all dMersions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division
Engineer upon request.
The well must be constructed not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit, being on lot 2,
Goose Creek Subdivision, Garfield County.
The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and coun
case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserue these
markings.
m 6-t-?r-
U
2l
3)
4l
s)
6)
n
8)
e)
01}ihli:il'$CCPY
orrrri'li'"n''*' tn""";'or.
rssuED JUN 10 1992 llr,roT|o* oorE JUN 1 0 1993
lr
,OHN R. SCHENK
DAN IGR,ST
WILLIAM I. deWINTER, Itr
SCHEI\IK, KER.ST & deWINTER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CENTRAL BANK BUILDINO
SUTTE 3IO, 3OZ EIGIITH STN.EET
GLENWOOD SPRTNGS, COLORADO il601
TELEFHoNE: 891945-241
TELECOPIER: Qgl) 945-2977
November 15, 1990
Mr. Kent Jones
PO Box 132
Carbondale, CO 81623
Re: Basalt Water Conservancy District Allotment Contract
Dear Mr. Jones:
At its meeting on November 12, 1990, the Board of'Directors of the Basalt Water
Conservancy District approved your application for a Water Allotment Contract for 1.3 acre feet
per year. I enclose three copies of the Water Allotment Contract to which are attached the
District's Order granting you application. Please note the conditions set forth on the Order.
You will be considered the contracting party and will be responsible for performance of the
Contract until a Homeowner's Association is established and the Contract is assigned to the
Association. You should notify me upon formation of the Homeowner's Association so'that I
can provide you the necessary assignment form which must be completed and returned to me,
together with the assignment fee of $50.00.
If at any time you desire to sell one of the subdivided lots without forming a
Homeowner's Association, you must then apply for a separate contract for the individual lot at
which time you will be required to pay the District's contract application fee at it then exists.
If the enclosed contract is acceptable you, please sign atl of the enclosed copies on page
5, have you signature notarized and return one fully signed copy to me for the District's records.
Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this matter.
DIUkla
Enclosures -one to be returned
"4:1"
BASALT WATER CONSER,VANCY DISTRICT
WATER ALII)TMEIYT CONTR,ACT
hrrsuant to C.R.S. 19731 3745-l3l
Kent lones (hereinafter 'Applicant') has applied to the Basalt Water Conservancy District
(hereinafter the 'District'), a political subdivision of the State of Colorado, organized pursuant
to and existing by virtue of Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 37-45-101, g seq., for an
allotment Contract for beneficial use of water rights owned, leased, or hereafter acquired by the
District. By execution of this Contract, Applicant agrees to the following terms and conditions:
l. OUANTITY: In consideration of the covenants and conditions herein contained,
Applicant shall be entitled to receive and apply to beneficial use .033 cubic feet of water per
second from the District's direct flow rights and 1.3 acre feet per year of storage water owned
or controlled by the District.
2. SOURCE OF ALLOTTED WATER: Water rights allotted pursuant to this
Contract shall be from the District's water rights decreed to the Basalt Conduit, kndis Canal,
Stockman's Ditch Extension, or other decrees or water rights hereafter acquired by the District,
including the District's contractual right to receive storage water from Ruedi Reservoir. The
District shall have the right to designate the water right or Decree of the District from which the
Applicant's allotted rights shall be obtained. The Applicant's use of any of the District's water
rights shall be subject to any and all terms and conditions imposed by the Water Court on the
use of the District's said rights. Exchange releases made from the District's storage rights in
Ruedi Reservoir or other works and facilities 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 the District's delivery obligation. Delivery of water from the
District's storage rights in Ruedi Reservoir shall be subject to the District's lease Contract with
the United States Bureau of Reclamation and any rules and regulations promulgated pursuant
thereto.
3. PURPOSE AND LOCATION OF USE: Applicant will use the waters herein
granted for beneficial purposes limited to the augmentation of existing and future wells and other
water souroes, within or through facilities or upon lands owned, operated, or served by
Applicant, which lands are more fully described on Exhibit nAn atcached hereto; provided that
the location and purpose of Applicant's use of said water shall be legally recognized and
permitted by the applicable govemmenal authority having jurisdiction over the property served.
Applicant's contemplated usage for the water allotted hereunder is for the following use or uses:
Domestic/Municipal
-
Industrial/commercial
-
Agricurtural
Applicant acknowledges that usage of the District's water rights as herein contemplated
shall be in lieu of or supplemental to Applicant obaining or adjudicating, on its own, the right
to use certain waters. It is acknowledged that certain locations within the District may not be
susceptible to service solely by the District's water rights allotted hereunder or the District's said
x
Other
Iatet rights may not satisfy Applicant's needs and purposes. 'fo the extent that service cannot
be achieved by use of the District's allotted water righs, or in the event said service is
1}daryte, Applicant may, utilize such other water rights, by way of supplementing the
District's water rights, or otherwis, 8!t is necessary to assure water service sufhciently r"ii.trt"for Applicant's intended purpose or purposes. A[ hnds, facilities and areas servedby water
rights allotted hereunder shall be situated within the boundaries of the District. rne bistrict
rcserves the exclusive right to review and approve any conditions which may be atAched tojudicial approval of Applicant's use of the District's waier rights allotted hereunder. Applicant
agrees to defray any out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the District in connection with tt i attot-
ment of water rights hereunder, including, but not limited to, reimbursement of legal and
engineering costs incurred in connection with any water rights adjudication nec€ssary to Ato*
Applicant's use of such allotted water rights; provided, however, in the event any such
adjudication involves more of the District's water rights than are allotted pursuant io this
Contract, Applicant shall bear only a pro-rata portion of iuch expenses. Applicant shall be solely
responsible for providing works and facilities, if any, n@essarJ to utilta the 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,-f,1y call on any greater amount
at new or alternate points of diversion. The District shall request the Colorado State Engineer
to estimate any oonveyance losses between the original point and any alternate point anJ such
estimate shall be deducted from this amount in each case. The Diitrict, or -yone using the
District's decrees, may call on any additional souroes of supply that may be ivailable at an
alternate point of diversion, but not at the original point of diviriion, 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
Jvater allotted to Applicant hereunder, the Applicant shall give the District written notice of such
intent. In the event the Applicant develops ana aaluAicates an augmentation plan to utilize the
water dlotted hereunder, Applicant shall not bc obligated to bear or defray any legal or
e1giryeri1g expense of the District incurred by the District for the purpose of aeveiopirt and
adudicating 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
co.pi91 of such plan and of all pleadings and other papers frteO wittr the Water Court in the
adjudication thereof.
4. PlvMEn't: Applicant shall pay annually for the water service described herein
at a price to be fixed annually by the Board of Directois of the Dishict for such service. The
!iti.! anlual payfgnt shall be made, in full, within 15 days after the date of a norice from theDistrict that the initial payment is due. Said notice wif advise the Applicant, among other
things, of the water delivery year to which the payment shall apply *O ttr price w-trictr is
applicable to that year. Annual payments for each yeir thereafter stratt-Ue made Uy ttre Applicant
on or before each March l. If an annual payment is not made by the due date, written notice
thereof 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 disposed 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 with 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 agre,es 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 Applicant the funds necessary to make the annual
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
beneficidly used for the purposes and in the manner specifid herein and this Contract is for the
exclusive benefit of the Applicant and shdl not inure to the benefit of any sucoessor, 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 interest
by two (2) or more uses of the water right dlotted hereunder, the Applicant may assign the
Applicant's rights hireunder only to a homeowners association, witer district, water and
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. In no event shail
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 provided. Any assignment of the Applicant's rights under
this Contract shall be subject to and must comply with such requirementi as the Diitrict may
hereafter adopt regarding assignment of Contract rights and the assumption of Contrait
obligations by assignees and successors, provided that such requirements shall uniformly apply
to all allottees receiving District service. The restrictions on assignment as herein contained iliait
not preclude the District from holding the Applicant, or any su@essor to the Applicant,
responsible for the performance of all or any part of the Applicant's covenants and agreements
herein contained.
7. OTHER RULES: Applicant's rights under this Conhact 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 Rules and Regulations of ttre 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; togethei
with all amendments of and supplements to any of the foregoing.
8. CURTAILMENT OF USE: The 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 demanis upon-the
occurrenoe of certrain 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" with 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 rcason of the deliviry 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 may
contain, but not be limited to, provision for water delivery at times or by ,*i not provided
within the terms of standard allotment contracts of the niitrict and additiLnal annual monetary
consideration for extension of District services and for additional administration, operation ani
maintenance costs, or for other costs to the District which may arise through r"*i."r made
available to the Applicant.
10. CHANGE OF USE: The District reserves the exclusive right to review and
approYe 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 witer or water rights allotted
hereunder without the prior written approval of the District shall be deemed to be a material
breach of this Contract.
I l. PRIOR RESOLUTION: The water service provided hereunder is expressly subject
to that cerlain Resolution passed by the Board of Direciors of the District on September-21,
1979, and dl amendments thereto, as the same exists upon the date of this
"pptir"tion "rdallotment Contract.
12- NO FEE TffLE: It is understood and agreed that nothing herein shall give the
Applicant any equitable or legal fee title interest or ownJrship in or to an! of the water or water
rights of the District, but-that Applicant is entitled to the right to use the water right allottedhereunder, subject to the limitations, obligation, *a *ditions of this contract.
13' GONSERVATIoN PRACTICEq.' Applicant shall implement and use commonlyaccepted conservation practices with respect to the t"li", and water rights allotted hereunder andshall be bound by anY Tnservation plan hereart i "JrG by the oi-rt i.i., the same may beamended from time to time.
srATE oF coLoRADo )
arbondale' co 81623
couNry oF .ARFTELD i ss'
Subrcribed and sworn to before me this ,5*, ot n UZrXlb/rU , 1990.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
"r%tqt
5
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ALI./ONVTEI\TT CONTRACT
KENTT JONES
Application having been made by or on behalf of Kent fones and atl parties interested in
the foregoing Water Allotment Contract and hearing on said Application having been duly held,it is hereby ordered that said Application be granted and that the foregoing Water Altotment
Contract for .033 cubic feet of water per 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 Distriit is hereby
approved and executed by and on behalf of the Basalt Water Conservancy District, for thl
beneficial use of the water allotted in the foregoing Contract, upon the terms, conditions and
manner of payment as therein specified and subject to the following specific conditions:
1. The Applicant shall establish a Homeowners Association or other entity acceptable
to the District for the ongoing payment of charges due under the approved Contract following
subdivision of the property described in the Application on file with the District and the
Applicant shall give notice to purchasers of all or any part of the subject property of the
obligation of this Contract, and shall record such notice in the records of the Cleik and Re:order
of Garfield County, Colorado. Applicant and his successors and assigns shall comply with all
rules and regulations now existing or hereafter adopted by the District to enforce piyment of
charges due under the approved Contract by present and future owners of all or any pirt of the
real property served under the Contract.
2. The Applicant shall provide the District prmf that the proposed land use of the
land to be benefitted by the water allotted hereunder has been approved by the applicable govern-
mental authorities having 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 and
attached Contract is described as follows:
See Exhibit nA" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
BASALT WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
sv, Ai.rJ,,,u'- ,Anr, -?
President
_ I hereby certify that the above Order was entered by the Directors of the Basalt Water
Conservancy District on the 12th day of Nov#r , 1990.
ATTEST:
Secretary
,
A parcel of tand eltuated ln Lotn 3 and {, Sectton 15 and Lot g, Sectlon 34,
Tounshlp 7 SouEh, Range 88 tlest of the SlxEh Prlnclpal Herldlan. Sald parcel ofland ls descrlbed aa follorsr
Beglnnlng at the l{ltness Corner for Ehe South Quarter corner o! aald Seetton l5r
thence N. 53'30r43't{. 427t3.59 feet, to the True polnE of lleglnnlng, eald polntelso belng the Nll eorner of that pareel conveyed Eo John lt. ilaeobaen by DocrrnentNo. 271135 of the Garfleld eounty recorda, thenee N. 0O.4grO0, E. 9!0.90 feeE, tothe Sll corner of that prreel convcyed to Davld Burnford, et al by Doeument lto.
276641t thenee E. t337.67 feet along the SouEh llne of eald parecl to the SE
corner thereofl thence North l?47.14 feet along Ehe East llno and Eaat llno
extended of aalcl Burnford, et al parcell thenee N. 89o23r39" E. 446.92 feetl
thenee South 2182,67 feot Eo a polnt on the llorth llne ext,enrled Eaat of thatparcel conveyed to Jacobsen, thenee t{est l797.OO feet, along the ltotth ttne
extended and North llne of BaLd Jtcobaen parcol to the True polnt of Beglnnlng.
EXTIrBTT XAX
JP GOROOTV MEVEN
'NC.
1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 94S1004 (303) 92ffi727
Fax 945.59A
February 7, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor, Planner
Garfield County
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision - Town of Carbondate
Dear Andrew:
Mark Chain, with the Town of Carbondate, asked that I respond to your concerns over the
issue of installing non-discharging evapo-transpiration (ET) systems for the Goose Creek
Subdivision.
An ET bed can be used to dispose of wastewater to the atmosphere so no discharge to
surface or groundwater is required. On-site ET disposat normally consists of a sandbed with
an impermeable liner and wastewater distribution piping (see attached figure). The surface
of the sandbed may be planted with water-intensive vegetation. Wastewaier entering the bedis normally pre-treated to remove settteable and floatable solids. An ET bed funclions by
rqising the wastewater to the upper portion of the bed by capillary action in the sand, andthen evaporating it to the atmosphere. ln addition, vegetation transports water from the root
zone to the leaves where it is transpired. ln Western Colorado, the evaporation exceedsprecipitation plus water from the ET system every month of operation, so that long-term
storage capacity is not required.
ET systems are generally located in areas that do not have adequate percolation rates,
encounter high groundwater conditions or where discharge to groundwater is not allowed.lf any of the above-mentioned criteria are not encountered, then there is no reason to install
an ET system. ET systems tend to require a slightly larger area and are slightly more costlythan conventional systems.
Schmueser Gordon Meyer has designed numerous ET systems at! over Western Colorado, butprimarily concentrated in Pitkin county. Many of the soil types encountered in pitkin county,(e.g., in the Starwood or Little Elk Creek area) do not hive adequate perc rates. To ourknowledge, we have had no failures of any of the ET systems we designed. Although ET
systems are not the system of first choice, given the alternative in this instance, they ire an
appropriate system to install.
I am attaching a reference from the EPA Design Manual on "On-Site Wastewater Treatment
and Disposal Systems" for evapo-transpiration systems". tam also attaching the section fromthe Pitkin county Regulations on lndividual Sewage Disposal Systeri (5-13) on the"Requirements of Evapo-Transpiration systems for Disposat of Effluent".
B 1991
'dAr,r,u-u couNli
CO'VSULI'A'G EA'G'A'EERS & SUEYEYOPS
FEB
February 7, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Page two
From a water rights perspective, ET systems are lOOo/o consumptive. lf the subdivision enters
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 in our area. Given the risk involved in possible
contamination to the Town of Carbondale's drinking water through discharging systems, ET
systems are an industry-wide accepted alternative. tf we can provide any additional
information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
:?-.1// .;7+.2-
Louis Meyer, P.E.
LMtc19218-17
Enclosures
cc: Mark Chain, Town Planner
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
s 5-12.3
5-12.3 All of the gravel or stone shall pass h lwo and a half inch (22")
screen and shall bL retained on a three-fourths inch (%") screen. Fine
giru"r o;"lourth inch (y;,)insize orless may be used above and around
in" "o"6" material, boih at the distributor and underdrains. The separ-
"tint Oirt"n"e between parallel distr.ibu.tion. lines shall not exceed six
f""iiO;1, and a distribution tine shall be located within three leet (3') of
"""n'fif
ibr sidewall. Pipe for gravity distribution shall be no less than four
inCn"r (4,') in diametei. tne!tope of the distributors shall be four tenths
;i;r; |"rb"nt (0.40lo) where dosing tanks arenot used, and the slope of
the underdrains f ive ienths of one percent (0.5olo) to one percent (1.0:/o)
it Lleqrir"O that the sand be thoroughly settled by flooding or.other
.n""niiitor" the distributors are placed at the final grade. The distrib-
,toi anO underdrains shall be perforated plastic pipe orother materials
approved bY the DePartment.
5-12.4 The top of the sand bed shall be no less than four feet (4') above
tn" nign grornb water table for installations in which effluent percolates
downward through the soil.
5-l2.5Theminimumareaforasandfiltershallbecomputedasa
irn.rion of the maximum daily sewage tlow according to the following
maximum loading rates.
s 5-13.3
pertinent data used in the formula, shall be submitted'
(b)Soecificationsshallbefurnishedtoinclude'butnotbelimitedto:
ii;!r";;d;.,"t-and-protection of tiner, soit anatysis of setect material,
;;;" ;iz;, soil deicription, and provision for vegetation cover'
{c)whenhiohqroundwatertable,bedrock,fracturedrock,orhighly
i,l*lor, ,"i"riil 1a percolation rate faster than f ive [5] minutes oer
;;; i^"h i1;il Lriodng"r the underground water' a durab' c
in.'o"i.""6f u iiner snatl Ue installed in the bed to prevent the s . . .,e
;iii';;ii;;; enteri ng the undertying f ormation or g roundwater table.
(d) An evapotranspiration system shall be located in an area where
in6re is suliicient exposure to sunshine, as determined by the health
oflicer or his authorized representative'
(e) The following lormula shall be used as a minimum guide to
ietermine the area necessary for total evapotranspiration.(except
*n"n ,n engineer shall ceriify that less area is required for an
individual sYstem):
Area (in square leet) = 9-
(Where O is the calculaled average daily sewage llow from the structure')
fi) where oermitted, combination systems utilizing both percolation
Iio'6rlx,itrnsplraiion may be used' Partial or no liners may be
""r-itt"b. Catcutations submitted for rates of effluent dispo-sal shall
ffii;;;; l";;hi;s -rate and the percolation rate as well as the
evaPoration rates.
5-13.3 Material and Construction Bequirements
(a)Seotictanksandaerationplantsshallmeetalloltherequiru.,rrts
i" pioiriO"O for in Sections 5-2 and 5-3'
Ib) Liners. when used, shall be impervious to the chemical reaction
;;t;;;;;;; oi t"*"g'"' and shall not deteriorate when exposed to
,ii"ri;li. F6rvvinyrcn16rioe ptastic.tining,.manutactured f rom domes-
iii p,irvri"vr6ntolio" resin 6f ten (10) mil.thickness' butyl rubber' or
oinEi 6on-ioxic equivalent materials shall be used'
tc) The liner shall be sealed at all openings to the.bed and shall be
L,#pr"t"rv-rno"i in" matrix of the evapotranspiration bed. Any
;;ilg;16 the liner shall be repaired using the proper solvent or
;;;ti;;"d a patch of the same material as the liner. Liners shall not be
laid directly on any sharp rocks or. obiects' Two inches (2")ol sand or
Jlrt tiiiinuir u" ad'ded a6ove and betow the liner to prevent punctur-
i"g. WotL;""snlp inirr be of sullicient quality as to mainlain the
inteoritv ol the tineiio its ipecitications. Liners are required in high
*llJr'iJui" ;;r"ti;".s, in ;.Jint"o rock, or where leachins is prohib-
ited.
(d) Matrix material above the distribution lines shall be resistant to
Appllcallon Rale
TvDe ol Serulce (gal'/sq' lt'/dsy)
--witnort gerUage grinOe, l::
5- 12.6 A dosing tank will be provided where the total f ilter area exceeds
.ioht""n hundrdd square tedt 1t,800 sq. ft.) or where the distributors
"*1""J three hundreb tgOO) lineal feet. The size of the dose and the net
"rpriltV oLtne dosing t'ant inatt be at least seventy-f ive percent (750/o) of
the volume of the distributors.
5-12.7 when disinfection of sand f ilter effluent is required, it shall meet
the requirements of Section 7-2.1 ol this regulation'
5-13 Requirements ol Evapolransplratlon Syslems lor Dlsposal
ol Ellluent
5-13.1 Evapotranspiration systems may be used where soil absorption
It "rirr".tt
ii not possible and where high water table, bedrock,lractured
io"t, oi nignty pbrvious material precludes the use of a soil absorption
,t;i;;. irip5ti"n.pirarion may b.e used in combination with absorption
i,ii".s *nbre watertable elevhtions and soil conditions permit leach-
i,iS, brt percolation rates may not be satisfactory or acceptable'
5-13.2 Design Requirements
(a)Allsystemsshallbedesignedbyare.gisteredprofessionalengi.
Ider. n 6esign lormula thatLalculates the rate of evaporation, the
iiiing ot thievaporation bed and the design load, along with the
423 Silnp 4
l.t
s 5-13.3
chemical decomposition and the formation of colloidal particles' The
matrix shall be *"li;;;i;;;no-*ltnlrt" proper sizing to accomplish
the speciric prrpoJ"',oi",i"'i"l'ig;. in; c'ontbnt of lin-e particles shall
be limited to tne JitJni'ih;iih;' do not inhibit capillarv action or
PermeabilitY'
(e) The matrix shall be installed..with.care so that the liner is not
oerforated. Heavv i'L"hi^iiv tnatt n.ot be permitted tg dIiYl?J-:lth"
matrix. The srrt""" oiihtti'lti* in"rr.u"."on'"' so as to permit runoff
of rainwater and t;-in;r;ase the air turbulence over it'
(f ) The system bed shall be crown.ed and covered with a minimum of
iJr; i;;h; ia"loiseiected backfill m.aterialand with a srass cover'
and any otner pranti"sJJ"itLi uv t "
designer shall be maintained as
designed.
(g) Bed area shall be protected to prevent damage from vehicular or
oedestrian travet. ilJ';;;;-J.rit""" shall be grad.ed to dellect
PplJ',i"p1,'iiit";;;
"i;;-, 6r1.io" water away f rom the disposal area.
Since the network is pressurized, small elevation differences along the
length of the lateral do not affect the uniform distribution signifi-cant'ly. However, these variations should be held within 2 to 3 in. (S
to 8 cm). The rock is p'laced in the absorption area first, to the ele-vation of the distribution laterals. The rock should be leveled by
hand, maintaining the same elevation throughout the system, before lay-ing the pipe. After the pipe is 1aid, additional rock is placed over
the pipe.
c. Distribution Boxes
If used, distribution boxes should be installed level and placed in an
area where the soil is stable and remains reasonably dry. To protect
the box from frost heaving, a 6-in. (15-cm) layer of L/?- to Z-l/Z-in.0.2- to 6.4-cm) rock should be placed below and around the sides of thebox. Solid wall pipe should be used to connect the box with the distri-bution laterals. Separate connections should be made for each lateral.To insure a more equal division of flow, the s'lope of each connectingpipe should be identical for at least 5 to 10 ft (1.3 to 3.0 m) beyondthe box.
7.3 Evaporation Systems
7.3.1 Introducti on
Two basic types of onsite evaporation systems are in use today:
Evapotranspiration beds (with and without infiltration)
Lagoons (with and without infiltration)
The advantages of these systems are that they utilize the naturai energyof-_the sgn and, optiona'l'ly, the natural purification capabilities oisoil to dispose of the wastewater. They must, however, be located infavorable climates. In some water-short areas where consumptive wateruse is forbidden (€.9.1 Colorado), they may not be al'lowed.
i.
?.
Mechan_ical evaporators are in the experimental stage, and are not com-mercia'l'ly avai'lable. For this reason, they are not inc]uded in thisdi scussi on.
300
7.3.2 Evapotranspiration and Evapotranspiration/Absorption Beds
7.3.2.1 Introduction
Evapotranspiration (ET) beds can be used to dispose of wastewater to the
itmSipfrere so that no discharge to surface or groundwater is required.
E;6i;;,,ipiration/absorptton jftl) is a modification of the ET concept
in wnicn di scharges to 'both the aUnosphere and to the groundwater are
incorforatea. gotn ff and ETA have been utilized for onsite wastewater
aiipoiaf to the extent that severa'l thousand of these systems are in use
in the United States (33).
7.3.2.3 APP1 ication
0nsite systems util izing ET disposa] are primari'ly used.where geological
limitations prevent thiuse of'subsurface dis_posa1, and where discharge
to surface wateri is not permitted or feasible. The geologlc1l condi-
tions that tend to favor the use of ET systems include very shal-low soil
mantle, h'igh grounawater, relativ-ely impermeab'le soi1s, or f-ractured
bedrocli. ffn iystems are generally-used where slow1y permeable soils
are encountered.
7 .3.2.2 Descri Ption
onsite ET disposal normally consists of a sand bed with.an impermeable
liner and wastewater distriiution pip1ng (see Figure 7-35). The surface
of the sand bed may be planted with vegetation.- Wastewater entering the
bed .i s norma'l 1y pietreateO to remove settl eabl e and fl oatabl e sol j ds.
An ET bed functi6ni UV iaising the wastewater to the upper portion of
tne uea by capi'l1ary.-ction in the sand, and then evap_orating it to the
atmospner6. in addition, vegetation transports-water from the root zone
to the leaves, where'it is iranspired. in ETA systems,.t-h. impervious
liner is omitted, and a portion of the waStewater is disposed of by
seepage into the soil.
Various theoretical approaches are used to describe the evaporation
p"o..ii. Thit trgg.tlt tnut there may be some uncertainty associated
*itf, a precise quintitative description of.the process. H.owever, cur-
r.n[ lrictice i! to limit the uncertainties by basing.designs on a
correl at'ion Uetween avail abl e pan evaporation data and observed ET
iates, thereby minimizing assumptions and el imina.ting the .need to aver-
ug.-iong-1.*-ct'imatic dita. References (33)(34)(35) and (36) provide a
m6re delailed discussion of the corre]ation method.
301
7
FIGURE
CROSS SECTION OF
7-35
TYPICAL ET BED
Topsoil (Varies O-a,:)
lmpervious.
Liner
Filter Cloth or Equivalent
Sand
o
ao:l\rN
2"Rock.Perforate
Pipe (4")
ot
Although ET systeml-may be used.where the application of subsurface dis-posal systems is rimiied, *r.r.ur. not witnout rimitations. As withother disoosa'l methods ilrat ""0'rir. u""iintln-r'ive construction, the useof ET svstemr can uJ-.;;;;.;;n'ed uv- tri,ii.o i-d avair abir ity and sitetopography. Based o, .*f."i"n.. to date with Elsiirsie-iiiliry"ilor.s, approximately 4,000.t0 6,0J0d;;l"iilotll ;;;r;liijlavailable rand is tipilariv'"iqut.eo. The maximum srope at which an ETsystem is applicabl6'rras n6t u.tn estabrisrrea, Lut use on sropes greaterthan Ls,, may be possible if-ierracing, i."iir distribution, and otherappropriate design features u..- iniorf6ia;;;. -'
By far the most significant constraint on the use of ET systems is cri_matic conditions., -The .rip=..iiio, -..i.-i'r ioni.ored primariry oy cr i_matic factors such as p;.;ip;;;ll6q,-;l;-rp..j, humidity, sotir radia_tion, and temoerature. " R;;;;i-studie_s i;di;;;;.that essintialry ar1 ofthe precipitalion that fiir;;r-an.ET ueo iniirtrates into the.bed andbecomes Dart of ilre -rrvara,iii. "r *a -ir,.t*r.qri'r.,
evaporation (33) (34)(37)' provisions ror iong-;rin storage or'e-rh'uent and precipitation inET systems during .periodj oi nega-tive n.t-eriporation, and.for subse_quent evaporation during period;"ri poriiir.=i![ .ruporation, are expen-s'rve' Thus' the year-aiound use of ionoiiir,..ir'rg ET systems appears tobe feasible onlv.-in tn"-i.ti'.-ni-t.il;;;il"il;l'ion, of the *eiiern andsouthwestern uni"ted siiies';.; evaporation exteeas precipitation dur-ins every month or ope.ii;o;:'";; th;t-1oig-[.;"storage capacity is not
302
required. ET systems for summer homes may be feasible in the more tem-
perate parts of the country. For ETA systems, the range of applicabil-ity is less well defined, but the soils must be capable of accepting allof the influent wastewater if net evaporation is zero for any signifi-
cant periods of the year.
In addition to c'l imate and site conditions, the characteristics sf
wastewater discharged to an onsite disposal system may affect its appli-
cation. For ET disposal, pretreatment to remove settleab'le and float-
able solids is necessary to prevent physical clogging of the wastewater
distribution piping. The relative advantages of aerobic versus septic
tank pretreatnent for ET and ETA systems have been discussed in the
literature (33)(35)(37)(38). Although each method has been supported by
some researchers, reports of well-docunented, control'led studies indi-
cate that septic tank pretreatment is adequate (33)(34)(37).
7.3,2.4 Factors Affecting Performance
The following factors affect the performance of ET and ETA systems:
1. Cl imate2. Hydraul ic loading3. Sand capil 1 ary ri se characteri stics4. Depth of free water surface in the bed5. Cover so'il and vegetation6. Construction techniques7. Salt accumulation (ET only)8. Soil permeability (ETA only)
As noted previously, climate has a significant effect on the application
and performance of ET and ETA systems. Solar radiation, temperature,
humidity, wind speed, and precipitation al1 inf'luence performance. Since
these parameters fluctuate from day to day, season to season, and year
to year, evaporation rates also vary substantially. To insure adequate
overal 1 performance, these fl uctuations must be considered in the
design.
The hydraulic loading rate of an ET bed affects performance. Too high a
loading rate results in discharge from the bed; too1ow a loading rate
results in a lower gravity (standing) water level in the bed and ineffi-cient util ization. Several researchers noted decreased evaporation
rates with decreased water levels (33)(34)(35). This problenr can be
overcome by sectional construction in level areas to maximize the water
level in a portion of the bed, and by serial distribution for sloping
si tes.
303
The capillary rise characteristic of the sand used to fill the ET bed isimportant since this mechanism is responsible for transporting the watert0 the surface of the bed. Thus, the sand needs to have i capil'laryrise potential at l.east qs great ai ttre depth of the bed, and yet shou'ldnot be so fine that it becomes clogged by sol ids in th; appl iedwastewater (33).
Significant seasonal fluctuations in the free water surface are normal,necessitating the use of vegetation that is tolerant to moisture ex-tremes. A variety of vegetation, including grasses, alfa]fa, broad-leaftrees, 9ld evergre-ens, have been reported [o-increase the average annualevaporation rate from an ET bed to above that for bare soil (rfi.- 6;-ever' grasses and alfalfa also result in nearly identica'l or reducedevaporation rates as compared to bare soil in thl winter and the springwhen evaporation rates are normally at a minimurn (33)(34i. Simlfirfv,top soil has been reported to reduce evaporation rates. Certain ever-green shrubs, on the other hand, have been shown to produce s'l i ght'lygreater. evaporation rates than bare soil throughout'the- yeu. (gji".Thus, there are conflicting views on the benefiis of covei soil andvegetati on.
Although ET system performance is nleneral1y affected less by construc-!lo^ techniques than most subsurfaci dispoial methods, sore-uspe.ts ofET construction can affect performance. Insuring the'i;itariiy of the
-impermeable I iner. and selecti!9 _t!e sand to provlde for maiimun capil-l ary-rr'se properties alg typical'ly the most important considerations.For ETA systems, the effects of construction teinniques liJ Jtrttar tothose discussed previoy-sly with reference to subsurfate diipotit systemsin slowly permeable soils.
Salt accumulation in FI disposal systems occurs as wastewater is evapor-ated. Salt accumulation is particularly pronounced at the surface ofthe bed during-dry periods, although it is redistributed in.oultout thebed by rainfall. Experience to aite indicates that salt accumulationdoes not interfere.with -th. operation of nonvegetated ET systems (39)(40). For ET systems with surface vegetation, salt accrmilation mayadversely affect performance after a'lon-g period'of use,-irirtorlh obser-vatio.ns .of ET systems that have been iri dperation for 5 yeu.i"indicateno .significant. problems (33). In order to minimize poleniiat futureproblems associated with salt accumulation, the ET or EiA-pipiig systemmay be designed to pennit f'lushing of the bed. -
Since ETA systems util-ize s.e_epage into the soil as well as evaporationfor wastewater disposal, soil_'permeability is also a factor in tne per-fonnance of these systems. Discussion oi tfris factor relative to sub-surface disposal systems (Section 7.2) appliei nere.
304
Y-
Data that quantitatively describe performance are not available for ETor ETA disposa'1. However; the technical feasibility of nondischarging
ET disposal has been demonstrated under experimenta'l conditions (33)(34). In addition, observations of functioning ET systems indicate that
adequate performance can be achieved at least in semiarid and aridareas. The performance of ETA systems depends primarily on the rel a-tionship between climate and soil characteristics, and has not beenquantified. However, the technical feasibility of such systems is we'll
accepted.
7.3.2.5 Design
ET and ETA systems must be designed so that they are acceptable in per-
formance and operation. Requirements for acceptability vary. 0n one
hand, acceptable performance can be defined for an ET system as zero
discharge for a specified duration such as 10 years, based on the wea-ther data for a similar period. Alternatively, occasional seepage or
surface overflow during periods of heavy rainfal'l or snownelt may be al-
lowed. In addition, physical appearance requirements for specific typesof vegetation and/or a ffrm bed surface for norma'l yard use (necessita-
ting a maximum gravity water level approximate'ly 10 in. [25 cm] below
the surface) may also be incorporated in the criterja.
Appropriate acceptance criteria vary with location. For examp'le, occa-
sional discharge may be acceptable in low-density rura'l areas, whereas
completely nondischarging systems are more appropriate in higher density
suburban areas. Thus, acceptance criteria are usually defined by 'local
health officials to reflect local conditions (33).
Since the size (and thus the cost) of ET and ETA systems are dependent
on the design hydraulic loading rate, any reduction in flow to those
systems is beneficial. Therefore, flow reduction devices and techniques
shoul d be consi dered an i ntegral part of an ET or ETA system.
The design hydraulic loading rate is the principal design feature affec-
ted by the acceptance cri teri a. Where a total - evaporat-ion___sys_!_e!1js \required, the loading rate must bef'low 6nough to prevent the bed floln_/fil l ing comp'l ete'ly. Some discrepahcy in acceptable- loading-lates has
been reported. A'lthough reports of system designs based on higher load-ing rates have been presented in the literature (35)(37), other data
obtained under controlled conditions indicate that pan evaporation must
exceed precipitation in all months of a wet year (based on at'least l0
years of data) if a total, year-round evaporation system is uspd. Under
these cgnditions, loading rates between 0.03 and 0.08 gpd/ftz (1.2 and
3.3 1/ncldayl were found to be appropriate in western states (Colorado
and Arizona) ( 33) ( 34) .
305
T
The hydraulic loading rate is
net ET ([pan evaPoration x a
rienced in the wettest Year
;h;lji;"u."unuivi.o""-ii i..v inrrequenf uut' larse precipitation events
---.1 I ..^-..1 $ ia rranrr;;;";; &#i;;'.;d Lr;; ul.iiie of-ihe systel lhat would result in verv
6-^a trT crrctam icT;+.;;r;f ;i;;;;g..- wr,..e occa-sional. iisch.fs:-lIoI^3I-1r..:,y^'l:T.,:'
;U:;ffii;,"i;;;i;i"..t.''*.v-!;.;;6l^.*ln'a 1a-.].es.11e.'.-'Il'.t:':.::tl:;;;:;t;:"*=l?,i,n"* ,.'.iniv -n.I'Ei-in a orv v99r' -If the tllt .l:,ut^:l^l?"i.iionir app'lication, ihen only those months of
tute the basis for design.
occupancy wi'l 1 consti -
The assumptions for a sample ET bed design are given below:
determined by an analysis of the monthly
local factorl minus precipitation) elpe-
of a lO-year period. Ten years of dala
The loading rate for ETA systems is determined in the same manner' ex-
i.pt it'it in additional factor to account for seepage in the soil is
inc]uded. Thus,
-the loading rate for an ETA system i! genera'lly greater
than the loading iut. for an ET system in. the same climate' The avail-
able data indicate that ETA systems can be used with a wider ragge of
cl i4atic conditi;;s. ro. .*utipi., lf io-il. can acc.ept O'2 gp.dlf tz (8'1
ii#7 jivt ,
-i.a -the-mi
nimum monih'ly let ET. i s..zero (determi ned -as neces-
;;;y';;".;iaing to $he acceptglge Lrjteria), the loading rate for desisn
i s it so 0.2 spo/ f( (8.1 I ln(/ dav) .
g)
In addition to loading rates, the designer must also consider selection
of fill materiaf, covdr soi1, and vegetition. The role of vegetation in
providing additi'oni1 transpi'ration ior ET systems is uncertain at this
time. During the growing season, the -impact of vegetation. could be
;ig;ificant. -Howevei, qriing tne nongrowing season, the effect of vege-
tation has not been wel] documented. sand available for ET and ETA bed
construction snoui] U. t.tted for capillary -rise he1ght and rate before
on. is selected.- in. general-,- c'lean and uniform sand in the tti:r?l.Btg
= 0.1- *rn lSOz Ov n.lfif,ri traiter than or equa'l to 0.1 mm) is d
(33).
1.
2,
3.
4.
5.
5.
Four occupants of home
45-gpcd design flow (no in-home
Location: Boul der, Col orado
Critical months: December 1976 (see Figure
precipitation: 0.01 in./day (0.25 mm/day).
pan evaporation: 0.07 in.lday (1.7 mm/day)
water reduction)
7-36)
An ET bed must be able
to it as well as any
design of an ET sYstem
the di fference between
to evaporate the household wastewater discharged
rain itrat falls on the bed surface' Thus, the
i i Oased on the estimated fl ow from the home and
the precipitation rate and the evaporation rate
306
l
FIGURE 7.36
CURVE FOR ESTABLISHING PERMANENT HOME LOADING RATE FOR BOULDER, COLORADO
BASED ON WINTER DATA, T976-L977(331
mm/day
Pan Evaporation
Precipitation
t^/. ,t
i "'<
.t I r I t I I
307
JJ
1 976
/dmma
JJ
1977
during the critical months of the year. In this examp'le, we are assum-ing _an average household flow of 4- persons x 45 'g.pd, or 1g0 gpdtotal. Past work has shown that actual'evaporation fr6m'ari fr system-isapproximate]y the same as the measured pan evaporation rate i; winter(33). Summer rates are approximately ldr, or the measured pan evapora-tion rates in this area, but excessive evaporation potentidl more thanoffsets this condition. Therefore, the des'ign is based on pan evapora-tion (in./day) minus precipitation -(in./day).- In this exampie,
(0.07 in./day) - (0.01 in.ldayl = 0.06 in./day
This equates to a rate of 0.04 gpd/f*.
In-this example, then, the required area for the ET bed is finally cal-cul ated:
To al I ow^a
7,500 fr:
6,000 ftt ,practi ced ,
achi eved.
7.3.2.6 Construction Features
A typical ET bed installation was shown previously in Figure 7-35.Characteristics of an ETA bed are identical except that th; liner isomitted. Limited data are available on optimum construction featuresfor Er and ETA disposal units. The following construction features aredesi rabl e:
1go gpd o = 4,500 ftZ
0.04 gpd/ft'
factor of safety, the size could be increased to as much as
based. on { sncd. A more realistic size would be 5,000 towhich would insure no overtrows. If water conservation isdirect significant savings in size and costs could be
Synthetic liners should have a thickness of at least l0 mil; itmay be preferable to use a double thickness of liner mateiialso that the seams can be stagoered if seams are unavoidable.
Synthetic liners should be cushioned on both sides with layersof sand at least z in. (5 cm) thick to prevent puncturtng iur-ing construction.
Surface runoff from adjacent areas shoul d be diverted aroundthe system by berms or drainage swales.
1.
2.
3.
308
Crushed stone or gravel placed around the distribution pipes
should be 3/4 to 2-L/2 in. (2 to 6 cm).
Filter c'loth or equivalent shou'ld be used on top of the rock or
gravel to prevent sand from settling into the aggregate, thus
reducing the void caPacitY.
Care should be exercised 'in assembling the perforated distri-
bution pipes (4 in. [10 cm]) to prevent pipe g'lues and solvents
from contacting the synthetic 'liner.
The bed surface should be sloped for positive drainage'
A relatively porous topsoi'|, such as loamy sand or sandy 1oam,
should be used if required to support vegetation to prevent
erosion, or to make the appearance more acceptable.
The bed shoul d be 'l ocated 'i n conformance wi th 'l ocal code re-
qui rements.
Construction techniques described previously for subsurface
d'isposal systems, where soil permeabil ity may -be decreased by
pooi^ constructi on practjces , shoul d be used for ETA systems
(3e) (40) (41).
7.3.2.7 Operation and Maintenance
Routine operation and maintenance of an ET or ETA disposa'l unit.consists
;;iy oi typical yard maintenance activities such as vegetation trimming.
pretreatment uniis and appurtenances require maintenance as described in
Chapter 8. Unscheduleil'maintenance requirements are rare, and stem
*aiirty frorn poor operating practices such as failure to pump out septic
tank so] i ds.
7.3.2.8 Considerations for Multi-Home and commercial
l.lastewaters
ET systems may be applicable to small housing clusters .und commer-
ciat/instituti6nal estiUtishments, but'large area requirements may 1 imit
in.i. practicality. Adjustments in the type of pretreatmert used may be
requireO depending on lfre wastewater characteristics. For example, a
grease trap is nofrnally required prioy t_o septic tank or aerobic treat-
ment of restaurant wastewater disposed of in an ET system.
4.
5.
5.
7.
8.
o
10.
309
t-
ffi Town of Carbondale
76 South 2nd St. Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Go) 963-2733
February 6, 1991
Mr. Andrew McGregor
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
TRANSMITTED BY FACSIMTLE LETTER ON 2/6/9I
RE: Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary PIan
Dear Andrew:
The Carbondale Board of Trustees reviewed the above referencedproject at its January 22r 1991, meeting and its possibre impacton the Town's Roaring Fork well-field. Applicants present wereKent Jones and Priscirra Prohl. As you know, the Town and theState Department of HeaIth have concerns that the existing Townwellfield will be impacted by the proposed development. The Townhas three existing shallow, high capacity municipal wells whichhave a capacity of 300 to 350 g.p.m. This area has arso beentargeted for nine additional weIIs to supplement our water supplyas the Town grows. These werrs have conditionar decrees.
After a long discussion, the Board of Trustees unanimously passed
a motion which asks Garfield County to place a plat restrictionon the subdivision which would require any r.s.D.s. built withinthe Goose Creek Subdivision to be constructed subject to Townapproval. At this point in time, the Town would request that anyr.s.D.s. be a non-discharging system such as an E.T. system usinghypalon Iiners in lieu of polyethylene liners.
The Town would also like to have a working rel-ationship withGarfield county in this general area in the future so that ourwells can continue to be protected. rn the best of worlds, the
Town wourd know precisery how far of an area away from the Town'swellfield needs to be protected. It wiII be difficult to obtainthis information since such a study would be expensive and theresurts would be highly interpretive. The Town is currentlyinvestigating with the State Department of HeaIth the possibilityof the Town becoming a pilot project for the state's wellheadProtection Program. We will keep you informed about this matter.
ffiFffi
GARI-IELD COUNTY
-
The Town Board has instructed me to investigate with the Countythe possibility of Town review and approval of any I.S.D.S. beingconstructed in this general area. I am including a letter fromLouis Meyer which provides documentation that 95% of groundwater
contamination cases result from contamination within two miles ofthe ground water source. We hope that a working relationship
with the County will result in a satisfactory solution toprotecting our domestic water supply from pollution.
The Town would like to thank Garfield County for the opportunityto review this and other projects which may impact the Town ofCarbondale. You can contact me aL 963-2733 if you have anyquestions about the Townts comments on the Goose CreekPreriminary Plan. r rook forward to discussing with you in thenear future the issue of protecting our ground water supply.
Sincerely,
/1vj cL-
Mark Chain
Town Planner
MClsd
Encl.
SCHffUE--,( GOPOOTY l{EYEn lNC.1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(303) 94$1 004 (3031 92ffi727
Fax (303) 94$5948
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain, Town Planner
Town of Carbondale
76 South Second Street
Carbondale, CO 81623
V a t it
RECE|VED JAN0g lssl
RE:Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Dear Mark:
As requested, I have reviewed the Goose Creek Subdivision Preliminary Plan. The purpose
of this letter is to comment of the relationship between the Goose Creek Subdivision and the
Town's well field.
The relationships between municipal well fields and point sources of pollution are extremely
complex and highly interpretive. To definitively determine the relationship would require in-
depth groundwater modeling and actual in-place monitoring so that groundwater movement
and pollutant transport can be defined.
Short of doing this in-depth analysis, certain facts can be raised at this time on the
relationship between the Goose Creek Subdivision and the Town of Carbondale's wells.
Those facts are as follows:
1. The proposed five lots for Goose Creek Subdivision are located between 1600
and 25OO feet away from the Town of Carbondale well field.
2. Generally, the groundwater gradient, or direction of flow, in the Roaring Fork
altuvial is towards the river and downstream. Therefore, upon information and
belief, the Town of Carbondale's well field is down gradient from the proposed
Goose Creek Subdivision.
Currently, the Town's well field is used as a peaking source of water to handle
irrigation season water demands.
This well field has been identified as the future source of Town of Carbondale
water. As the Town grows, more wells can be drilled in the Boaring Fork
alluvial. These wells willgenerally parallelthe Roaring Fork River and be spaced
350 feet apart. Enclosed as Figure 1 is a map prepared for carbondale by wME
which shows the area identified as the future well field corridor. Also,
according to wME, the cone of depression for these wells is r 500 feet. The
WME suggests a total of nine wells will be required to meet future demands.
The.Town's three existing wells are shallow, high-capacity municipal welts.
The wells are drilled to approximately 36 feet in depth and have a screened
interval of *.22 to 35 feet, and have a capacity of + 300 to 350 gpm.
3.
4.
5.
CO'VSUTI'IVG EA'G"VEEFS & SURYEYORS
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page two
ln a letter to Garfield County from Richard H. Bowman, dated November 19,
1990, Mr.Bowman stated there was a potential problem with ISDS's
contaminating the Town's wells. Case histories back up Mr. Bowman's claim.
Case histories in pollutant transport theory indicate that viruses and organics
can migrate long distances in shallow groundwater with course alluvialaquifers.
Distances cited in case histories suggest these pollutants can travel distances
longer than that encountered in this situation (l can supply these case histories,
if necessary).
The preliminary plan report indicates that engineered ISDS's will be designed
for each lot. Therefore, it can be argued that the ISDS's will be built to Garfield
County and Colorado Department of Health standards and meet all setback
requirements. However, individual sewage disposal regulations, both on a
county and state level, do not take into consideration proximity to high-capacity
municipal wells.
The state Health Department has adopted the Basic Standards For
Groundwafer. Table 1, attached, lists the standards for discharge to domestic
use classified groundwater. Table 1 limits the discharge of totat coliforms to
one organism per 100 mils. These limitations are to be met at the point of
compliance. The point of compliance for the Town of Carbondale's well field
has not been established. However, the data used to compile the basic
standards indicate that point of compliance should be within a two-mite radius
of the Town's wells. Below are references from that Basrc Standards for
Groundwater:
'A conservative area of two lateral miles around the activity in questions witl
presumptively be used as the initial specified area. The Commission finds this
area to be reasonable for the following reasons:
Geraghty and Miller, lnc. performed a national survey, for tJSEpA
Headquarters, of 68 groundwater contamination sites. The study
revealed that 95% of the plumes of contamination were limited to
within two miles of the source. Geragthy and Miller, rnc. performed an
in-house survey of 73 more such item (a total of l4l sites) which also
revealed that 95% of these plumes of contamination were limited to
two miles from the source;
The ICF Corporation performed a national survey, for USE?A
Headquarters, of 159O RCRA sftes. ln this study, tCF found that gS%
of the distances from the source to groundwater discharge boundaries
were within two miles;
A.
SCHMUESER GOROON MEYEF, INC.
7.
9.
8.
January 7, 1991
Mr. Mark Chain
Page three
Geraghty and Miller, lnc. performed a national survey, for USEPA
Headquarters, of large groundwater pumping systerns (municipal water
supply wells). This survey revealed that approximately 95% of these
wells had a capture zone (i.e., zone of influence) within a two-mile
radius.'
According to County staff , there are approximately fifty residents in this general
area. Most of these are farther away from the Town's wells but, nonetheless,
can contribute to aquifer contamination.
Given the above-mentioned facts, t concur with Mr. Bowman's concern over the potentia! for
pollution of the Town of Carbondale's water supply. Continued proliferation of tSDS's in this
area wil! severely curtail the Town's ability to expand the well field in the future. Certain
steps can be taken to mitigate or lessen the risks associated with the development such as:
Construction of non-discharging ISDS's, such as ET (evapotranspiration) beds
using hypalon liners in lieu of polyethylene liners.
Construction of on-site monitoring well drilled down gradient of the ISDS.
Extension of Town wastewater facilities.
I hope this information has been of use to you. I would be happy to follow up this memo or
attend any public meetings as necessary.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
Louis Meyer,
LM:1c19218-17
Enclosurescc: Mr. Peter Ware
Mr. Davis Farrar
10.
1.
2.
3.
GORDON MEYER,INC.
,
},t
I
F\
a
ORDER NUMBER: 90017232
i
Q
SEHEDULE A
COMMTTMENT NUMBER: N/A
L2, 1-989 at 7:45 A.M.
ISSUED: AMOUNT oF TNSURANCE
$ 400,000.00
R. NTESLANIK
Contj nued on next Page
1.
.,
EFFECTIVE DATE: Deeember
POLTCY OR POLICIES TO BE
A. ALTA OWNERIS POLICY
PROPOSED INSURED: PAUf.
AND EELIA R. NIESLANIK
ALTA LOAN POLICY
PROPOSED TNSURED: AI,EX CRETON AND
ROSE CRETON
ALTA LOAN POLTCY
PROPOSED TNSURED:
$ 275,O00.00
c.
D.
3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE I,AND DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO IN
THIS COMMITMENT AND COVERED HERETN IS FEE SIMPI,E AND TITI,E THERETO
IS AT THE EFFECTTVE DATE HEREOE VESTED TN:
ALEX CRETON AND ROSE CRETON
4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS EOMMITMENT TS DESCRIBED AS EOI,LOWS:
TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST.OF THE 6TH P.M.
AII that. part of Lr:ts 1"6 and 17 of Seeti.on 34 and Lot 17 of
Section 35 that lies north of the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad
right- of wdlr exeept that part eonveyed to Garfield County by
deea recorded December 2L, 1.925 in Book L42 at page 581 as
Reception No. 93486.
COUNTY OF GARFTELD
STATE OF COLORADO
PURPORTED ADDRESS: 04Bl ROAD l-00
B.
OWNERS:
MORTGAGEE:
TAX CERT.
$ 890.00
$ 50.00
$ 10.00
S'I'E\vAR.T TITLII
OUARANTY C()MPANY
ARSTRACT SURRENDER
I
a
.-
SCHEDULE B SECTTON 2
EXCEPTIONS
j
oRDER NUMBER I |OOL7232
ir
THE POLICY OR POLICTES TO
FOLLOWING UNLESS THE SAME
THE COMPANY:
COMMITMENT NUMBER: N/A
BE TSSUED WTLL CONTATN F:XEEPTIONS TO THE
ARE DISPOSEb OF TO THE SATTSFACTION OF'
PARTTES TN POSSESSTON NOT SHOWN BY THE
OF EASEMENTS, NOT SHOWN RY THE PUBT.,IC
1.
2.
RIGHTS OR CI,AIMS OF
PUBLIC RECORDS.
EASEMENTS, OR CLATMS
RECORDS.
3. DISCREPANETES, EONFLTCTS IN BOUNDARY I,TNT:S, SHORTAGE TN ARF:A,
ENCROACHMENTS, AND ANY FAETS WHICH A CORRECT SURVEY AND
INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES hIOUI,D DISELOSE AND WHICH ARE NOT
SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS.
4. ANY LIEN, OR RIGHT TO A LIEN, EOR SERVICES, LABOR OR MATERIAL
HERETOFORE OR HEREAETER FURNISHED, TMPOSED BY LAW AND NOT
SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS.
5. DEFECTS, LTENS, ENCUMBRANCES, ADVERSE CLATMS OR OTHER MATTERS,
IF ANY, CREATED, FTRST APPEARTNG IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OR
ATTACHING SUBSEQUENT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BUT PRIOR
TO THE DATE PROPOSED INSURED ACQUIRES OF RECORD FOR VAI,UL'
THE ESTATE OR INTEREST OR MORTGAGE THEREON COVERED BY THIS
COIVIMITMENT.
6. UNPATENTED PlINING CI,AIMS; RESERVATIONS OR EXEEPTIONS IN
PATENTS OR AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF; hIATER
RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TTTLE TO WATER.
7. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax
sa les.
8. The effect of inclusj,ons in any
conservaDClr fire protection, soildistrict or incJusjon in any water
area.
general or specific water
conservabion or otherserviee or st-reet improvement
9. Atl existing roads, highways, ditehes, utilities, canals,pipelinesr pow€rlines, telephone lines, wat-er lines and rightsof way and easements therefore established and or exist-ing as
same may cross subject property.
10. Right of the proprietor of a vein or Iode to extraet and remove
his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or
intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in Uni.ted
States Patent recorded July 21, L892 in Book L2 at Page L77 as
Reception No. L4307 and recorded April 27, 1931 in Book 73 at
page 189 as Reception No. 109769.
11. Right of way for ditches or canals eonstrueted by the authority
of the United Statesr €rs r:eserved in United States Patent
recorded July 2I, L892 in Book 12 at Page \77 as Reception No.
L4307 and reeorded ApriT 27, 193L in Book 73 at lBatr(E19h.mf TITLE
c (500M 10 89)
Reception No. LO9769.
Continued rrn next page
GUARANTA COHPANY
rEoS Eat -
?t3
F..i.--; ltar5 , -i -- i-
F.d.- ,, ) .!j
.".t..1i.. ;*- *rt -'J' --'-'1 't .Y'".-''.\-1. 1.' ,,.1 ,\- ,-. i:- - t-._. *.\i .
t
al.1
:
t
Il'
i{il{-fl
.'..
I
a-aaa.tllaDa Ir nstc I
I
t-!Dlat
IruDH $l;rL
Dttr
-
Faltts" rla,ir a, t0
I
3txlrA xloxllY rrt
GANNELD COUNTY
COLORADO
tllla Ii.'It' v #irlo r -r!.r4 .'^rl , ^-.!
J \ tryrtlt' t .tt:2 ... \,t 1.\ .id. alat -.'.r' . I
tt
a
I
,
I
.tt5d
\It
t?
--a\tGI
t
FlF
t
FtD
\
r'
;i
l' rnr
r -:.*.:
I /l l
\ - i",,
i
t
'. I'l
aaltoaaa
a.,fc atrla .'
tt
.
t
'
r .->-' i.'':4t''
- l"' .''-l' .' '