Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.06 Rifle WatershedJUL-24-1997 09:15 CITY OF RIFLE 970 625 3210 P.01 Post -W Fax Note 7671 Dale I 'Ane-5° 5 m Co./DB>l. Fro LI&, 1VL4x4 ‹'. Co. BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIFLE, COLORADO OCONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR A WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMIT OF: TIM D. FRASE; STACEY D. ERASE; DAVE P. FRASE; CLAY K. TUCKER; SHARON L. TUCKER; PAUL R. QUATRARO; AND KAY QUATRARO FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND APPROVAL OF WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMIT NO. 1-97 I. BACKGROUND 1. On May 28, 1996, as supplemented by a letter dated July 17, 1996, the Tucker and Frase Partnership filed n application with the City of Rifle pursuant to Ordinance No. 22 (Series No. 1994). The application was filed on behalf of the Applicant by David E. Levy, Professional Forester, 305 Railroad Avenue, Suite 7, P. O. Box 1797, Nevada City, California 95959. By letter dated May 6, 1997, the Applicants, Tim D. Frase and Stacey D. Frase, Dave P. Frase, Clay K. Tucker, Sharon L. Tucker, Paul R. and Kay Quatraro, whose address is clo Tim Frase and Dave Frase, 1805 Hilltop Drive, Redding, California 96002 (phone number 9116-223-2900), were substituted as applicants for the former applicant Tucker and Frase Partnership. Accompanying the application was a document entitled Tepee Park Forest Management Plan, Garfield, County, Colorado, prepared by David Levy Forestry Services dated March 1995. Following the receipt of the application, the Applicant's representatives have met with the staff and consultants of the City of Rifle, Colorado, including without limitation Tim Moore, City Engineer, and Paul Bussone and Scott Fifer, Consulting Professional Engineers, Resource Engineering, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. A public meeting for informational purposes was held October 2, 1996. Because the Applicant also needs a Special Use Permit from the U.S. Forest Service to allow for the construction and realignment of an existing road through Forest Service land, as well as a Special Use Permit from Garfield County to allow the Applicant to conduct logging activities on the property, action on the Watershed District permit was held in abeyance with the Applicant's consent pending further progress on the other permits. As a result of the need for other permits, the City and the Applicant have worked closely with the U.S. Forest Service and Garfield County staff to coordinate their respective permitting processes. To date, the U.S. Forest Service has not entered a decision on the Special Use Permit request. The Applicant did obtain a favorable recommendation from the Garfield County Planning and Zoning Commission. To date, the Board of County Commissioners has not yet acted on that recommendatio n, and the request for a Special Use Permit from the County is still pending as well. IT_ FINDINGS OF FACT 2. A portion of the proposed activity is within the defined boundaries of the City's Watershed District as defined in Section 10.05.020 of the Rifle Municipal Code (hereinafter "Rifle Code"), specifically the Beaver Creek drainage above and within five (5) miles of the E:IRIFLED.2MS May 9, 1997 3 Inv JUL-24-1997 09 15 CITY OF RIFLE 970 625 3210 P.02 City's Beaver Creek municial diversion structure. The proposed activity within the Watershed District cannot be functional y or practicably separated from the activity outside the District. 3. The applicati consists of correspondence Management Plan (Garfield Nevada City, California, da April 1996, prepared by accompanying Water Quali submitted which supersedes as supplemented by the Wat• Applicant to mitigate any a Ordinance. a 4. The Applican 5. A duly notice Applicant presented the Tep Plan as proposed by the Ap Engineer, and Scott Fifer, testified that, pursuant to his a foreseeable and significan City's water supply, and rec' set forth in Scott Fifer's lett expert hydrologist and pre July 31, 1995, April 12, 19 regarding modifications to together with his expert op mitigate impacts to the Bea activity and the need, under 6. Mr. Fifer al conditions of the Manageme 31, 1997, (copy of which is be exercising Best Manage. water works and pollution t testified and introduced exh proposed by the Applicant the rising side of the hydro: late irrigation season or win negotiating modifications to 7. Mr. David Le Fifer's testimony and also a help in fighting forest and E: \RIFLED.2MS May 9, 1997 n as supplemented by the Applicant is complete. The application ated May 28, 1996, and July 17, 1996, the Tepee Park Forest County, Colorado) prepared by David Levy Forestry Services, March 1995. Also, a Tepee Park Forest Management Plan dated avid Levy Forestry Services, Nevada City, California, and an Plan for Tepee Park Forest Management Plan (undated) was he March 1995 Plan. The April 1996 Forest Management Plan, Quality Plan, constitutes the revised and complete proposal of the verse water quality impacts under the City's Watershed District has paid all fees required by the Ordinance. Public Hearing was held on April 16, 1997. At the hearing, the Park Management Plan in detail, together with the Water Quality licant. In addition, testimony was presented by Tim Moore, City onsulting Hydrologist to the City of Rifle. The City Engineer review under Section 10.05.050(2)(e), the proposed activity posed risk and injury to the City's water works, and pollution to the mmended that the City Council issue the permit with the conditions r dated March 31, 1997. Mr. Fifer detailed his credentials as an ted into evidence letters dated August 5, 1996, August 7, 1995, 5, and March 21, 1995. Mr. Fifer presented extensive testimony e Water Quality Plan and recommended conditions of approval, ons as to why those conditions of approval were necessary to er Creek Watershed that may occur as a result of the proposed Ordinance 12, to require such conditions of approval. o testified that, if the Applicant complies with the terms and t Plan the Water Quality Plan, and Mr. Fifer's letter dated March ttached hereto and incorporated by reference) the Applicant would nt Practices and that the potential for risk and injury to the City's the City's water supply would he mitigated. Mr. Fifer further bits regarding studies that demonstrate that, the type of logging ould actually increase the quantity of water by increasing flows on aph and by slightly increasing peak flows, without any decrease in er flows. Finally Mr. Fifer indicated he and the Applicant were 'aragraph 3(B) of his March 31, 997, letter. y, on behalf of the Applicant, presented testimony confirming Mr, serting that the construction of the proposed logging roads would ild fires and help reduce fire danger risks. -2- JUL-24-1997 09:16 CITY OF RIFLE 970 625 3210 P.03 8. In addition to the testimony of the City staff and the City's consulting hydrologist, testimony was also talren from members of the public. Testimony from the public was both in favor and against the proposed activity and issuance of the Watershed District Permit, Testimony against the activity was lay testimony only and questioned and challenged the effect of the proposed activity on water quality and water quantity. 9. By letter dated April 22, 1997, (a copy which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference) Mr. Fifer modified Condition No. 3(B) of his letter dated March 31, 1997, and represented that this modification was consistent with Best Management Practices and had been agreed to by the Applicant. 10. The City Council finds that the Applicant's water quality mitigation plan, and as outlined in the Tepee Park Management Plan dated April 1996 and supplemented by the Water Quality Plan, and as supplemented and modified by the conditions of approval contained in Scott Fifer's March 31 and April 22, 1997, letters constitute the Best Management Practices for the proposed activity. 11. City Council hereby finds and determines that the issuance of the permit requires the inclusion of conditions, as more fully set forth in Scott Fifer's letter dated March 31, 1997, as modified by Mr. Fifer's better dated April 22, 1997, and that such conditions are necessary to prevent a risk of injury to the City's water works and pollution of the City's water supply, and that such conditions are authorized pursuant to Sections 10.05.050(4) and (5) of the Rifle Code. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ISSUANCE OF PERMIT 12. The foregoing Findings of Facts are incorporated herein by reference. 13. The City Council of the City of Rifle has jurisdiction over the proposed activity pursuant to Section 10.05.C20 of the Rifle Code, Because it is impossible to differentiate between the activities within and outside the Watershed District and because the activity constitutes an integrated actvity, this permit shall apply to all the activities of the Applicant within the Beaver Creek Watershed. 14. Based on the evidence presented at the Public Hearing and, in particular, the testimony and exhibits of Tim Moore, City Engineer, and Scott Fifer, the City's Consulting Hydrologist, the City Council hereby determines that this decision shall constitute a watershed district permit for the proposed logging activity as more fully outlined m the Tepee Park Forest Management Plan (Garfield County, Colorado) prepared by David Levy Forestry Services (Nevada City, California) dated April 1996, together with the accompanying Water Quality Management Plan, as modif ed by the conditions of approval recommended by Mr. Fifer in his letter dated March 31, 1997, as modified for condition 3(B) by Mr. Fifer's letter of April 22, 1997, which conditions of approval contained in said Ietter are hereby approved and adopted by the City Council as conditions of approval of this permit. 15. The bond required by condition 3(F) Mr. Fifer's March 31, 1997, letter shall be E:\RIFLED.2MS May 9. 1997 -3- JUL-24-1997 09:17 CITY OF RIFLE in the initial amount of $1 adequate for the first year o part of the annual meeting decreased as appropriate. prior to the commencement 16. Any violatio Quality Plan, the conditions letter of April 22, 1997, or cured or removed within to this Permit entitling the City limitation calling on the su Applicant shall be solely res action by the City, includin 6 17. The forest m' will be monitored for co Commissioners and the City 18. Pursuant to S expiration date, if the propo 12 months from the date of 19. Acopyofthi requested, to the Applicant. 20. The City rese 10.05.090 as additional rem 970 625 3210 P.04 ,000 which the City Council hereby finds and determines to be the proposed activity. The amount shall be reviewed annually as and operating plan required by condition 3(E) and increased or he form of the bond shall be first approved by the City Attorney f any activity. 1 21. This permit s and approved by the City C hearing of the Applicant's c required by Condition No. agreed upon amount for a p all revegetation and require • 22. This permit written consent of the City. 23. This permit s as evidenced by its signatur EIR1FLED.2MS May 9, 1997 of the terms and conditions of the Management Plan, the Water f Mr. Fifer's letter of March 31, 1997, as modified by Mr. Fifer's y other terms and conditions of this permit, which default is not (10) days after notice by the City shall be deemed a violation of o take any pursue any and all remedies available, including without ty bond to undertake remedial work; provided however that the nsible for all the costs of such remedial work and any enforcement reasonable attorney fees and costs. • gement practices of the Applicant and compliance with this permit 6liance by a consultant agreed upon by the Board of County of Rifle and the Applicant, and paid for by the Applicant. ction 10.05.050(6), unless an extension is requested prior to the activity for which this permit is issued is not commenced within s permit, this permit shall expire and become void. Decision and Permit shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt ves all remedies contained in Sections 10.05.060, 10.05.070, and ies for violations of the permit conditions. 1 expire on December 31, 2003, unless an extension is requested •uncil prior to the expiration date, following a review and public mpliance with the permit conditions; provided, however, the bond in the Fifer March 31, 1997, letter shall remain in effect in an iod of two years after the termination of all activity to ensure that mitigation continues. ay not be assigned or conveyed by the Applicant without the prior all not be effective until agreed to and approved by the Applicant below. -4- 4. JUL-24-1997 09:17 CITY OF RIFLE Dated this 1- day of May, 1997. ATTEST: City Clerk By 970 625 3210 P.05 CITY OF RIFLE, COLORADO Ma Accepted and agreed to this , day of May, 1997. APPLICANTS: Tim. D. Frase StaceP. y y se Dave P. Erase Clay K. Tucker • E:IRIFLED.2MS May 9. 1997 Sharon L. Tucker Pa 1 R. Quat aro Kay Qu%trar TOTAL P.05 United States Forest White River Rifle Ranger District Department of Service National 0094 County Road 244 Agriculture Forest Rifle, CO 81650 Reply to: 2720 / 1950 Date: June 9, 1997 Dear Reviewer: Enclosed is a copy of the Tucker and Frase Road Right -of -Way Draft Environmental Assessment proposed in T.7 S., R.94 W., Sections 24 and 25 on the Rifle Ranger District. Acting Forest Supervisor Ben L. del Villar, is the Responsible Official for this proposed road right-of- way. Based on the analysis presented. in the,Environmental Analysis (EA), he is considering selecting Alternative 3 for implementation. In Alternative 3 the road would be realigned and most of the existing road would be closed. A geotechnical engineer would be on-site while construction was taking place. If you have any questions about this project or need further information, contact Cindy Hockelberg, Rifle Ranger District, 094 County Road 244, Rifle, CO 81650, (970) 625-2371. Comments are invited on this analysis. To ensure consideration in the decision, comments must be postmarked or received by July 11, 1997. Please address your comments to Cindy Hockelberg at the above address. Persons commenting should include 1) Name, address, telephone number, organi- zation represented, if any; 2) title of the document on which the comment is being submitted; and 3) specific facts and supporting reasons for the Responsible Official to consider. Copies of the Decision Notice will be mailed to those people who have submitted comments either before or during the comment period and to those who request a copy. Sincerely, DENNIS L. JOHNSON District Ranger enclosure Caring for the Land and Serving the People air. y• 1