No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/17/15 PUBLIC HEARING November 17, 2015 Present: Kathy Chandler-Henry Chairman Jeanne McQueeney Commissioner Jillian Ryan Commissioner Brent McFall County Manager Bryan Treu County Attorney Teak Simonton Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing,the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: • • 1. Resolution 2015-096 Designating December 8, 2015 as Colorado Gives Day Michelle Maloney,Vail Valley Charitable Fund Ms. Maloney explained that her organization had 41 members currently and it was an amazing coalition with shared marketing and teamwork. Contributions had increased dramatically in the last four years. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION NO.2015- Resolution Designating December 8,2015 as Colorado Gives Day WHEREAS, charitable giving in Eagle County, Colorado is critical to providing support that local nonprofit organizations need to make our community a desirable place to live; and WHEREAS, research shows an increase in online giving both locally and nationally, and many believe it is the future of philanthropy; and WHEREAS, Community First Foundation and First Bank have partnered in an effort to increase charitable giving in our community through the online giving initiative Colorado Gives Day; and WHEREAS, Colorado Gives Day in 2014 raised $26.2 million in a single 24-hour period via online donations, with $772,541 going to Eagle County nonprofits. A website, www.coloradogives.org, allows donors to direct their contributions to one or more of the thirty six (36) local, Eagle County charities featured on the site, making it an ideal resource for facilitating charitable giving to our locally-based nonprofit organizations; and WHEREAS, Colorado Gives Day is December 8th this year, and all citizens are encouraged to participate because all donations,large or small, can make a difference to nonprofits in need. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners hereby designates Tuesday,December 8,2015, as Colorado Gives Day in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado. MOVED,READ AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held the 17th day of November, 2015. Commissioner McQueeney moved to approve the resolution designating December 8,2015 as Colorado Gives Day. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 1 11/17/2015 Consent Agenda 2. Addendum No. 5 to Air Traffic Control Tower Services Agreement between Eagle County and Serco Management Services, Inc. Executed November 25, 2011 for 2015—2016 Seasonal Air Traffic Control Tower Extended Hours and Additional Controller Staff Greg Phillips,Airport 3. Amendment No. 1 to Intergovernmental Agreement between Eagle County and the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing for the Medicaid Incentive Program Kathy Lyons,Economic Services 4. Agreement between Eagle County and City of Aspen Concerning the Purchase of Large Transit Buses under the Colorado Mountain Purchasing Consortium Procurement Tracy Stowell, ECO Transit 5. Easement Agreement between Eagle County and Holy Cross Energy for Provision of Electrical Service to the Mid Valley Metropolitan District Sopris Well No. 6 Building Kelly Miller,Engineering Commissioner Ryan moved to approve the Consent Agenda for November 17,2015, as presented. Commissioner McQueeney seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Citizen Input Chairman Chandler-Henry opened and closed citizen input, as there was none. Business Items 6. Modification No.2 of the Statement of Work Reimbursable Agreement between Eagle County and Central Federal Lands Highway Division for Preliminary Engineering, Construction and Construction Engineering for Eagle County Bridge EAG-301-15.6 Replacement Ben Gerdes, Engineering Gordon Adams,Road and Bridge Mr. Gerdes provided some details about building the bridge in two phases to allow access on the road. This was part of the Federal Highway Division and the county was simply matching 17.21%of these funds. He explained that the bridge was about 15 miles up Colorado River Road, and was a single lane bridge which was built in the 1940s on a constrained site. There would be some daily closures but they would try to limit the closures. They were at 95%design phase and hoped to advertise the project for construction next spring. Commissioner Ryan wondered if the funds had been budgeted. Mr. Adams stated that he didn't believe so,but that funding would come out of the Road and Bridge fund. Commissioner McQueeney moved to approve the Modification No. 2 of the Statement of Work Reimbursable Agreement between Eagle County and Central Federal Lands Highway Division for Preliminary Engineering, Construction and Construction Engineering for Eagle County Bridge EAG-301-15.6 Replacement. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. America Recycles Day Display John Gitchell, Sustainable Communities Jesse Masten, Solid Waste and Recycling 2 11/17/2015 Commissioner Ryan spoke about Eagle County's recycling rate of 24%,but much of the remainder of trash,which was being buried,had value. In 2010, Eagle County opened a recycling facility due to resident's request. There were drop-off sites in many locations across the valley. There was a display of the different types of recyclable material bales outside of the Eagle County building. These displays indicate the way the bundles looked prior to selling them. She encouraged residents to recycle as these items truly did bring revenue to the county. Budget Public Hearing John Lewis and Tom Hyatt,Finance Chairman Chandler—Henry thanked the finance team, departments, directors and managers who worked so hard on their budget. She recognized Mark Chapin, County Assessor,Teak Simonton, Clerk and Recorder and other elected officials not present who helped. She stated the board was basing the budget on their strategic plan. Work started last summer thinking about strategies, goals,missions and vision. National studies and best practices informed this work. The mission was"to create a better Eagle County for all of us". This was the ultimate benchmark. Eagle County was made up of thriving communities for families and was home to a vibrant workforce with personal health and wellness achievable for all. The natural beauty was preserved through purposeful environmental stewardship. The county was an international year around resort destination with a diverse and resilient economy. Commissioner McQueeney spoke about the first strategic goal of"Eagle County was a great place to live for all". One of the objectives was to complete major traffic improvement projects. $900,000 had been contributed to the El Jebel intersection and$200,000 to Edwards improvements. They have funded design plans to finish the last 19 miles of unfinished trails in the Eagle valley. Finally, supporting children and parents along with childcare providers was important. Commissioner Ryan spoke about"Eagle County protects the natural environment". It included forest health,river health,and climate change and wildlife habitat. First, she noted the work Chairman Chandler—Henry had done working on the Colorado River Basin roundtable to represent Eagle County in discussions about future water use consideration. In the 2016 budget they would continue to contract with the Eagle River Watershed Council. The Open Space fund was focused on conservation and access. Renewable energy sources such as solar panels and was a tremendous investment. They would invest in other technologies reducing energy use. The waste diversion plan would be created to reduce waste. Chairman Chandler—Henry spoke about"Being a high performing organization". The value to residents included being responsive to needs, accountable for actions and giving good customer service. This was directly related to staff. Every department providing services at an exceptional level was important. Sustainable wages were critical to attracting and retaining competent staff. They wished to establish a culture of continuous improvement based on metrics to measure outcomes. There was an ongoing effort for the county to be transparent and the public could see every check written. Chairman McQueeney spoke about"Promoting a diverse and resilient economy". It was a strong middle class that creates a strong economy through job training, affordable housing options and trying to increase good jobs. One specific objective was to encourage opportunities for businesses such as the Vail Valley Partnership to the degree of$150,000 in the Eagle and$30,000 in the Roaring Fork Valley. The airport was incredibly important, generating$18 million in local revenues each year. The budget reflected$150,000 to the Air Alliance and many other organizations participated as well. To encourage competition and reduction of costs in health care each commissioner was meeting with legislators and working with the division of insurance to help them understand the challenges. Finally, she spoke about advocating decreasing congestion on 1-70. This congestion affected the economy. Commissioner Ryan and other staff sat on the I-70 advisory panel. Commissioner Ryan spoke about"Eagle County was financially sound". They were very serious about this goal and they must balance the budget. The cost of insurance had gone up 50%and construction costs had increased, yet revenues had not increased in several years. Based on five year revenue and expense projections they believed they were best prepared to plan responsibly for the future. Reserves were savings accounts which would be$13.1 million in 2016. Eagle County had an AA bond rating which was very good. In 2016 a service inventory would be performed to determine whether all services provided were still required. John Lewis spoke about financial realities. Revenues were increasing only slowly; 12% increase in 2016 following a 30%decline due to the recession. Sales tax revenues were finally back to 2007 levels. Other revenues 3 11/17/2015 were rebounding slowly and investment earnings were limited to approximately 10%of 2008 levels. Expenses were increasing rapidly due to health care costs,cost to provide services and limited availability of housing requiring higher wages to attract and retain quality employees. He thanked the county's financial advisory board including Frank Johnson,Rob Levine,Andrej Birjulin,Ellen Moritz,Mark Chapin,Ken Marchetti and others. They expected a$2.8 million dollar increase in revenues for 2016. 2016 projected expenditures were budgeted to decrease by$1 million,yet there was still a structural deficit for 2016. Chairman Chandler—Henry spoke about the community grant process and in good years these funds had been more generous as funds were available. Going forward they hoped to leverage these funds, and there would be some social investments working with United Way. Commissioner McQueeney stated that as a board and citizens of the area,they were involved in a variety of community boards,yet they believed they made objective decisions about the grant process. Brent McFall acknowledged that the board had developed and owned the strategic plan. Everything would be put through these lenses. In 2016 there would be a service inventory with mandatory and discretionary services identified. New processes for funding would be established and community partnerships would be examined such as contracted services. There would be incentives to employees to reduce the cost of their health insurance claims through cost comparison and shared savings of more expensive procedures. Analysis of fee revenues would be completed and leveraging other funds and grants. He spoke about elected officials and department heads for towing the line in expenses and doing everything possible to increase revenues. Commissioner Ryan spoke about staff cuts in 2009 and year after year the department heads had been asked to do more with less. Many departments have been cut to the bone with staff. Health care costs had impacted the increases in revenues. Mr. McFall spoke about health care increases of 3%of the entire budget. The reality was that the county was not yet out of the recession due to the increases in expenses and slow recovery of property values. He showed a chart of interest income by year and it was significantly reduced. Tom Hyatt provided some highlights for the budget in the General Fund and the biggest cost was in human costs. They would add six people next year including three in Human Services,two in the Sheriff's department and one for the Fair and Rodeo. The primary cost in each department was health insurance. They were expecting 24 large amount procedures this year, versus an average of 6 in past years. This was due largely to increased costs of procedures. Salary increase did not include any elected officials as their salaries were set by the state. Property values appeared to have bottomed out and were now heading higher; 12%for next year. Commissioner Ryan asked about the delay in getting property tax increases. Mr. Hyatt explained that valuations were based on comparative sales from 18 months prior. Mr.McFall indicated that 2016 values were based on 2014 comparisons and these were used for two years. He predicted that 2017 would also be a challenge in budgeting. Mr. Lewis provided a five year forecast chart. The national economy impacted Eagle County growth due to the nature of our tourism economy. A strong national economy improved the number of people visiting our county. Our unemployment rate was 2.4%vs. 3.3%in the prior year. In September of 2010 it was 10%. He was using conservative estimations,yet reserve funds would be needed through 2019 due to strategic priorities. Commissioner Ryan wondered when the excess reserves would run out. Mr. Lewis stated that at the end of 2019,the funds would be close to the minimum level. With refmancing arrangements the county was able to save$150,000 more than anticipated. Healthy reserves were necessary to cover unanticipated emergencies such as floods,no snow years or other expensive crises. Mr. Hyatt showed a slide with a chart of 2012—2016 expenditure comparisons. Even with health insurance increases,investments had been made in public safety and health and welfare. The biggest investment next year was in the Health and Welfare area. Commissioner Ryan spoke about departments leveraging with grants,yet the increase in health care costs must be backfilled through county revenues. A critical review of continuing costs was needed before trying to obtain grants. Chairman Chandler—Henry spoke about the fact that there was a$5 million reserve in previous years,and a$13.1 million reserve was significantly higher than previous administrations. Mr. Lewis stated that the risk analysis was based on a model recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association. Mr.McFall stated that the county also maintained a required Tabor reserve which was 3%of revenues. Mr. Lewis stated that these funds must be reimbursed within six months. 4 11/17/2015 Mr.Hyatt showed the General Fund bottom line from 2012 through 2016. He stated that the county was strong financially at this point. In 2009 there were 318 people in the general fund, and next year we would be at 252, which was still significantly less. All funds employed 524 employees in 2007 and next year the number would be 474. Mr. McFall presented an All Funds Financial Summary. Mr. Hyatt spoke about investments in the Solar Array. Mr.McFall stated that more than 50%of revenues came from fees, grants and intergovernmental revenues. Depending on the year, only about 12-14%of that amount stayed in the county to fund services. Mr. Hyatt spoke about the size of the county vehicle and equipment fleet. These were expensive to purchase,use and maintain. There had been 15 people in the department for seven years. Mr. Lewis spoke about the 800 MHz fund. The funds funded the two way radio technology and transmittal sights. He thanked Barry Smith and Kevin Kromer for their great work on this. It was very important and critical to public safety issues. The big challenge would be related to repeaters which needed to be replaced at six sites at a cost of over a million dollars. The funding model was sustainable with holding the line with subscriber fees. Mr. Lewis spoke about the airport,the goal of which was to be the airport of choice for the region. The airport and terminal were separate entities and was not taxpayer funded. Eagle County was targeting 175,000 enplanements in the coming year. Airline companies were trying to stay away from small airports,preferring to fly into hubs such as Denver. There were a number of improvements made through the airport fund including conversion to LED lights and work on the apron. The snow removal equipment building now housed large pieces of equipment making them more efficient. There would be a terminal expansion design project. There was an increase in revenues and expenditures in 2015 due to the incoming money from the federal government and subsequent outlay for apron improvements. Mr. Otzelberger spoke about the Eco Transit and Trails fund. This was funded by a .5%sales tax and donations and grants. Of the sales tax 10%was allocated to the Trails fund. Revenue would exceed expenses by about$400,000. He provided some additional detail on the types of services provided. The ECO trails fund would not be able to finish the trail system for 20 years at current funding levels. They were looking at all options available to speed up this timeline. Governor Hickenlooper had announced a funding opportunity"16 by 16" which could provide funding for the completion. Some revenues come from the fare boxes. Mr. Lewis spoke about the Housing Fund. The goal was to provide a higher quality of life through. innovative housing solutions. This fund used no taxpayer or General fund funding. It was self-supporting through resales and other sources. Mr.McFall spoke about aggressive efforts to add to the inventory of affordable rental housing in 2016. Mr. Lewis spoke about the addition of 500,000 square feet in a community center in the Lake Creek Village and it was used almost daily. He reviewed the Housing Operations Fund. The total Housing Fund had a net surplus of$1.5 million. He expected that to continue in the years to come. Mr. Hyatt explained that the Solid Waste and Recycling Fund actually made money and has a large fund balance dedicated to future projects. Mr.McFall clarified that trash collected in the county did not have to be kept in Eagle County so fees must remain competitive. Mr. Otzelberger spoke about Public Health and Human Services. In the last five years there has been a 50%increase to this fund from the General Fund. In looking at the levels of service some of these expenditures could be prioritized and leveraged. There was great complexity in this operation with 51 revenue streams and 50 different programs. It was important to be financially sustainable into the future. The county was looking at the best way to provide services to the community. There were some short term investments in Early Childhood programs with the intent of developing a long term plan. There were business process improvement evaluations going on currently. There were also many state mandates. Commissioner Ryan spoke about a deficit in the Public Services Fund. Mr. Otzelberger stated that this amount was approximately$2 million. There was a fund balance now,but in the long term this would be depleted. Mr.Hyatt stated that the expenditures for public health were about$3.8 million of which$1.8 comes from the General Fund. Mr. Otzelberger spoke about efforts towards sustainability for Public Health and Human Services. He spoke about Sustainable Communities and Animal Services funds.He spoke about shelter program improvements. Public and Environmental Health programs had much to offer. The employee increases were associated with grants. 5 11/17/2015 Mr. Hyatt explained the Road and Bridge fund major activities such as snow removal, dust suppression, asphalt overlays and maintenance of gravel roads. There were three bridges being replaced now; 80%of the cost for which was covered by other revenue sources. Mr. Lewis spoke about the Open Space Fund; funded by a mill levy of 1.5. Revenues and expenditures varied depending on when sales taxes were solid and when attractive purchase opportunities came up. Mr. Hyatt spoke about the Capital Improvements Fund. There was a designated amount of collected sales tax that went to capital improvements. Using these funds to pay for capital projects and items saved money in department budgets. Mr.McFall presented the proposed all funds budget of$109 million and some change inclusive of all funds. Chairman Chandler—Henry opened public comment. Chris Romer,Vail Valley Partnership spoke. He thanked the board and staff for the presentation and their historic and future commitment to the economic vitality of the county. He believed that consistency was paramount to progress being made. They provided low interest loans to local business which helped create jobs. To continue thareturn on investment consistency was necessary and not possible at a reduced funding level. He shared that county dollars were leveraged by private funding. He felt the investment was making a difference. This aligned well with the board's strategic plan. Investment in the Roaring Fork side of the county was solely supported by Eagle County. They reached out to the business community who had received help to contact the board. Mike Brumbaugh from the Vail Valley Partnership spoke. He reiterated the need for consistency. He felt that funding with community grants was paramount and also aligned with the board's strategic objectives. Having good paying jobs in a multitude of industries was critical. He wondered what message the board was trying to send with a cut of 40%. He strongly encouraged reconsideration. Kathryn Reggio with Colorado Mountain College spoke. She wished to speak in behalf of the Vail Valley Partnership. The impact this organization had on the future workforce was valuable. She recently moved to the area and found the VVP to be tremendously helpful. Jeremy Reitmann spoke. He has received positive responses to efforts they have made at the Vail Valley Partnership. He was frustrated because he felt there was a high quality partnership. The proposed 40%cut in investments reduced their ability to continue programs. He was frustrated that the board was not as tightly aligned with their goals. In 2015 they supported six new businesses. Chairman Chandler—Henry closed public comment. Commissioner McQueeney spoke about the Roaring Fork Valley and their attempts to fund economic development in that area. Commissioner Ryan stated that there were many community organizations that were funded, close to 70. In the context of other funding every request fit well into the strategic plan but the money was not available to continue funding at previous levels. Planning File 7. 1041-5335 Lake Creek Metropolitan District/Rebecca Anne Moores Family Trust Lake Creek Meadow Reservoir 1041 Permit Bob Narracci,Planning Ray Merry, Environmental Health Lake Creek Metropolitan District and the Rebecca Anne Moores Family,Applicant Daiva Katieb,Watershed Environmental Consultants Action: 1041 Permit to allow enlargement of an existing water storage system, operated by the Lake Creek Metropolitan District for augmentation purposes Location: 142 Polar Star Road,Edwards Area Land Owner: Rebecca Anne Moores Family Trust Applicant: Lake Creek Metropolitan District and the Rebecca Anne Moores Family Trust Repetitive: Daiva Katieb,Watershed Environmental Consultants 6 11/17/2015 Staff Contact: Ray Merry,Director of Environmental Health Bob Narracci, Planning Director Request: 1041 Permit to allow enlargement of an existing water storage system, operated by the Lake Creek Metropolitan District, for augmentation purposes. Policy Issue: N.A./The policy question is whether or not the Eagle County Permit Authority should approve this application. Strategic Plan Goal: Eagle County is a Great Place to Live for All and Eagle County Protects the Natural Environment Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with conditions. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Lake Creek Metropolitan District(LCMD)goal through this 1041 Permit application is to expand an existing reservoir system located on Block 1, Lot 6 of the Lake Creek Meadows Subdivision. The existing reservoir has been operating at a storage capacity of approximately 2.0 acre-feet since 1969. The proposed expanded reservoir system will have a total capacity of approximately 7.0 acre-feet within three connected storage structures, hereinafter referred to as the"Reservoir System"or"Project". The Project is to be located on contiguous Lots 4, 5 and 6,Block.1, Lake Creek Meadows Subdivision. The proposed Project involves the following designated Matters of State Interest: 1)Site selection and construction of major new water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems; and 2)Efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects. The proposed Reservoir System entails the construction of two augmentation reservoirs connected through a smaller reservoir and pipeline, as well as,relocation and upgrade of the District's existing surface water diversion structure and channel used to fill the proposed Reservoir System. Constructing the Reservoir System will increase the LCMD's total augmentation storage capacity to approximately 7.0 acre-feet by creating a Reservoir System that entails enlargement and improvement of the existing reservoir on Lot 6,as well as,two new interconnected reservoirs; one on each of two contiguous lots 4 and 5. This proposed expansion is in accordance with the 7.0 acre-feet of storage decreed to the Lake Creek Meadows Reservoir by the State Water Court in Case No.W-3587 in 1977. Water will be returned to West Lake Creek at a point approximately 1,600 feet downstream of the proposed point of diversion after flowing through the Reservoir System. The primary function of the Reservoir System is to replace out-of-priority depletions within the Lake Creek basin caused by the District's operations in order to assure reliable municipal water supply to District residents. Construction of the Reservoir System will provide a permanent replacement water supply to benefit the District's constituents while maintaining flows relied upon by senior water users in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during particularly dry times. The Reservoir System expansion is an important component of the District's overall water supply system. The LCMD has been seeking for years a location to perfect these augmentation water rights within its boundaries. The proposed Reservoir System presents a unique opportunity for the District to partner with a private property owner to construct this facility,which will build out facilities to exercise the water rights that were confirmed in the late 1970's. The LCMD will utilize water stored in the Reservoir System for augmentation in conjunction with its Colorado River Water Conservation District water supply contracts for the Eagle and Colorado rivers. 2. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED As set forth in the application,the LCMD has explored the following five alternatives,prior to moving forward with this proposal; which is Preferred Alternative 5. 7 11/17/2015 The selected Project was among a number of alternatives considered and studied by the District in 2010 and revisited in preparation for this application.Please reference Attachment F, Section 3 for specific details of the following alternatives considered, including: Alternative 1:No Action. While the District has not historically been subject to a senior downstream call in the Lake Creek basin,the likelihood of the development of such a scenario in the future is plausible.The development of undeveloped lots within the District and greater Lake Creek basin is probable.These additional developments will cause further depletions to the Lake Creek basin stream system increasing the scenario of a senior call within the basin potentially impacting District water supply. Under the No Action alternative,the District will only have 2/7 of the local replacement supply that may be required to operate its plan for augmentation to provide municipal service to its constituents.The No Action alternative will ultimately result in the permanent legal cancellation of a valuable public water right(i.e.the unbuilt portion of the reservoir water right). For these reasons,the No Action alternative was not selected. Alternative 2: Barry Parcel. Originally considered in 2010,the potential for a five-acre foot reservoir option was evaluated on the Barry Parcel situated between the Creamery Ditch and East Lake Creek. The reservoir would be filled from an extension of the Creamery Ditch Lateral or a new diversion structure from East Lake Creek, and the reservoir would release water through a buried pipe to East Lake Creek. This alternative was not pursued because it would require a substantial change to the District's water rights: the filling source would be changed from West Lake Creek to East Lake Creek,through the Creamery Ditch, and the location of the new storage structure and point of diversion would be approximately 1,500—2,000 feet away from the decreed locations. Stream conditions on East Lake Creek might be adversely impacted by moving the water rights to this location,and there would necessarily be diversions into storage from both creeks rather than only West Lake Creek. Also,utilization of the Creamery Ditch to deliver water to this reservoir would result in a longer affected stream reach than the Preferred Alternative.Finally,this alternative is not possible because no formal agreement or commitment from the landowner was secured by the District. Alternative 3:Nine Pines Parcel. Originally considered in 2010,the potential for a five-acre foot reservoir option was considered on the Nine Pines parcel, adjacent to and directly north of the Barry Parcel and which otherwise has all the same characteristics of the Barry Parcel option.Utilization of the Creamery Ditch to deliver water to this reservoir would result in a longer affected stream reach than the Preferred Alternative. Expenses associated with the changing the District's water rights would be significant. Stream conditions on East Lake Creek might be adversely impacted by moving the water rights to this location, and there would necessarily be in diversions into storage from both creeks rather than only West Lake Creek. Finally,this alternative is also not possible because no formal agreement or commitment from the landowner was secured by the District. Alternative 4: Hartland Trust Parcel. This alternative was considered in 2003 after the property owner expressed interest in accommodating a reservoir on the property.After design documentation,the parcel was annexed with consideration for a potential reservoir project("Gilbert"annexation on LCMD boundary map).The property is bisected by the Bert Siddel Ditch,located east and south of the Barry and Nine Pines parcels.The design and layout of multiple reservoirs were contemplated,with up to 22-acre feet of storage considered.The filling source for all considered options would be a lateral from the Bert Siddel Ditch and the release structure would be comprised of a pipeline or channel capable of delivering releases underneath the Creamery Ditch to East Lake Creek. Construction and utilization of the filling and release structures will be very costly. The release structure will be approximately 2,000 feet long. Both structures cross several other properties, and the District will need to negotiate or condemn easements through these parcels,thereby affecting landowners.Utilization of the Bert Siddel Ditch to deliver water to the reservoir(s)would result in a substantially longer affected stream reach than the Preferred Alternative.Like alternatives 2 and 3,this alternative would also require substantial changes to District Water Rights for the point of diversion for the supply source and location of storage water rights, and result in diversions from both West Lake Creek and East Lake Creek into storage. Preferred Alternative 5: Moores Combined Parcels.The preferred alternative and proposed Project was first considered in 2010,when lots 4, 5 and 6 were under separate ownership.Moores has since acquired ownership of these three adjacent parcels. The combined Moores parcels comprise the largest contiguous area within the District adjacent to the decreed source(i.e. West Lake Creek). Construction and operation of the Reservoir Project in 8 11/17/2015 accordance with the District's water rights is more easily accomplished, and can be completely achieved,within the three lots under Moores' single ownership. Constructing multiple reservoirs decreases the embankment heights of the dams,which is a safety benefit.The ability to construct connected reservoirs within the adjacent lots provides operational efficiency not afforded by isolated structures and maintains flexibility for Moores' future residential use of the properties.The locations of the Reservoir System and resulting point of diversion are near or coincident to the decreed locations of the District's water rights.This proximity minimizes changes that would need to be decreed in Water Court for any other alternative, and reduces if not eliminates changes to stream conditions posed by the other alternatives that could impact other water users.The proximity of the preferred alternative to West Lake Creek also provides for an easy and efficient means in which to make releases from the Reservoir System back to the creek,minimizing transit losses and reducing the length of affected stream reach. Finally,Moores has agreed to the construction of the Reservoir Project on its property, and agreed to a cost sharing arrangement that will substantially reduce design,permitting and construction costs to the District,and as a result,District taxpayers. For the reasons enumerated in this section and further detailed in Attachment F of the application materials,the Moores Combined Parcels is the preferred alternative submitted for approval through this Permit application. 3. CHRONOLOGY 1974: The Lake Creek Metropolitan District is a quasi-municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the State of Colorado,originally formed on October 1, 1974 as the Lake Creek Meadows Water District. 1977: The LCMD has a 7.0 acre-foot storage right known as the Lake Creek Meadows Reservoir. The water right associated with the surface water diversion used for filling the reservoir is known as the Lake Creek Meadows Ditch with a decreed flow rate of 2.0 cubic feet per second. These water rights were decreed in Water Court in 1977 through Case Numbers W-3590 and W-3588. To date,the LCMD has constructed only 2.0 acre-feet of the available and decreed 7.0 acre-feet. 1996: On December 30, 1996,the Lake Creek Meadows Water District was converted into the Lake Creek Metropolitan District. 2003: LCMD evaluated Alternative 4: Hartland Trust Parcel as a potential location for the Project. 2010: LCMD evaluated Alternatives 2: The Barry Parcel, as well as,Alternative 3: The Nine Pines Parcel. 2015: Application received by Eagle County for this proposed 1041 Permit application and the companion Location and Extent Application(Eagle County File No. LEA-.747). Due to the fact that the LCMD is a governmental entity in the State of Colorado,it is statutorily obliged to submit to Location and Extent review. On November 4, 2015, the Eagle County Planning Commission unanimously approved the companion Location and Extent application. 4. REFERRAL RESPONSES This 1041 Permit application was referred to the following departments and agencies with request for comment: • Eagle County Attorney's Office • Eagle County Engineering Department • Eagle County Department of Environmental Health • Eagle County Road and Bridge Department • Eagle County Noxious Weed Program Manager • Eagle River Fire Protection District • Holy Cross Electric • Eagle River Watershed Council 9 11/17/2015 • Eagle County Historical Society • Eagle Park Reservoir Company • Colorado Department of Local Affairs • Colorado State Department of Public Health and Environment(Air Quality and Water Quality Divisions) • Colorado Parks and Wildlife • Colorado Geological Survey • Colorado Historical Society • Colorado Division of Water Resources • Colorado River Water Conservation District • Colorado Water Conservation Board • US Army Corps of Engineers • Natural Resource Conservation Service • Northwest Colorado Council of Governments • Lake Creek Meadows HOA • Creamery Ranch HOA • Cattlemen's Club HOA • Palmerosa Ranch HOA • Pilgrim Downs HOA • Edwards Community Authority As of this writing,the following responses have been received: Eagle County Engineering Department: In the attached memorandum dated October 8t', 2015,the Engineering Department provided the following comments: 1) Please confirm all activities are outside of the FEMA floodplain and the 50 foot stream setback. A Floodplain Development Permit will be required for activities within the floodplain. 2) A Grading and/or Building Permit will be required prior to construction. Application shall include but not be limited to: a. An approved USACE Nationwide Permit#29 for the subject scope of work. b. Engineered(sealed)construction plans. Eagle County Department of Environmental Health: In the attached memorandum dated October 9, 2015,the following comments are provided: 1) Please provide the 1996 Water use Efficiency Plan referenced in the application for Lake Creek Metropolitan District, as well as,any implementation efforts and/or results to demonstrate efficient utilization of the domestic water system to support 6.04.02 of the 1041 standards. 2) Please provide some narrative as to the potential feasibility of micro-hydroelectric generation for the project. 3) Lake Creek is currently listed by CDPHE on the 303d list of impaired streams for aquatic life. Please describe whether the project might exacerbate or improve conditions contributing to this listing. 10 11/17/2015 Eagle River Watershed Council: In the attached letter dated October 5, 2015,the ERWC sets forth the following comments and recommendations: 1) Eagle River Watershed Council finds this application highly relevant to our mission to advocate for the health and conservation of the Eagle River basin through research, education and projects. 2) Eagle River Watershed Council staff have generally found that the companion 1041 Permit application is satisfactory; however,the section of the application considering impacts to water quality was rather vague The Applicant identifies that the proposed project responds to specific policies of the Regional Water Quality Management Plan,the 208 Plan, specifically,Plan Policies 1, 2 and 3. 3) It is unclear how the applicant intends to evaluate whether or not the anticipated 12-16%reduction of streamflow during low flow months positively or negatively impacts downstream water quality. The segment of Lake Creek that.flows from the confluence of the East and West Forks of Lake Creek to the Eagle River is listed on the Clean Water Act's 303(d)list of impaired waters due to aquatic life impairment. Incremental impacts to the Creek from multiple land uses along the river corridor likely contribute to current conditions. Recent studies on Gore Creek indicate the prevalence of human activity in close proximity to the stream and the degraded condition of many riparian areas contributes significantly to the degradation of aquatic life conditions. The stressors on water quality on Lake Creek are likely similar to those on the Gore Creek, owing primarily to the similarity in patterns of land use that place an abundance of structures in close proximity to the stream. Reductions in late season stream flows caused by the project may reduce their diluent effect on pollutants in the water column, further exacerbating water quality degradation. 4) The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek,the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to"minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore,the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Lake Creek Metropolitan District(LCMD) values a clean, high quality drinking water supply and decided to work collaboratively with area stakeholders to develop a Source Water Protection Plan. The source water protection planning effort consisted of public planning meetings and individual meetings with water operators, government, and agency representatives, inclusive of Eagle County and the Eagle River Watershed Council, during the months of March, 2015 to July, 2015 at the Eagle County Health Services District in Edwards, CO. During the development of this Plan, a Steering Committee was formed to develop and implement it. Colorado Rural Water Association was instrumental in this effort by providing technical assistance in the development of this Source Water Protection Plan. This Source Water Protection Area is the area that LCMD has chosen to focus its source water protection measures to reduce source water susceptibility to contamination. The Steering Committee conducted an inventory of potential contaminant sources and identified other issues of concern within the Source Water Protection Area. The Steering Committee developed several best management practices to reduce the risks from the potential contaminant sources and other issues of concern. The best management practices are centered on the themes of building partnerships with community members, businesses, and local decision makers; raising awareness of the value of protecting community drinking water supplies; and 11 11/17/2015 empowering local communities to become stewards of their drinking water supplies by taking actions to protect their water sources. In the interest of Source Water and Aquatic Health Protection, Eagle County and the applicant will work collaboratively to implement the Best Management Practices delineated in the Lake Creek Metropolitan District Source Water Protection Plan, dated October 12, 2015. Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG): In the attached memorandum dated October 6, 2015,NWCCOG provided an evaluation of the proposed project against the provisions of the Regional Water Quality Management Plan(the 208 Plan), as follows: 208 Plan Policy 1. Protect and Enhance Water Quality The surface and ground waters of the region shall be protected to minimize degradation of existing water quality and maintain existing and designated uses of those waters; waters not currently supporting designated uses shall be restored as soon as financially and technically feasible. Findings: The potential for water quality impacts from the proposed project is largely limited to erosion and sedimentation during construction and until disturbed soils are stabilized. Compliance with the submitted erosion control plans and CDPHE Stormwater Regulations will address this issue. One other concern is the potential for eutrophication in the reservoir after it is complete. The applicant has proposed a more or less continuous flow through the system to help minimize this possibility. This application is in compliance with Policy 1. 208 Plan Policy 2. Water Use and Development The project developer shall mitigate the impacts to water quality and the aquatic environment caused by water projects. Findings: As stated in the finding above,mitigation for potential water quality impacts are proposed for this project. This application is in compliance with Policy 2. 208 Plan Policy 3. Land Use and Disturbance Water quality,including wetlands,floodplains,shorelines and riparian areas,must be protected from land uses and development so that significant degradation of water quality is prevented. Findings: The applicant indicates there will be limited and unavoidable wetland disturbance. Some disturbance should be expected due to the location and nature of the project. It appears that most permanent impacts are avoided and measures such as providing water to maintain Wetland F minimized the impacts to wetlands and riparian areas. This application is in compliance with Policy 3. 208 Plan Policy 4. Domestic,Municipal, and Industrial Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Decisions to locate water supplies,wastewater treatment systems,and other water and wastewater facilities shall be made in a manner which protects water quality and the aquatic environment. Where growth and development requires the need for additional facility capacity,existing facilities 12 11/17/2015 should be expanded in lieu of developing new facilities,unless expansion is not feasible because of technical,legal or political reasons. Findings: The applicant contends that the project complies with this policy because of the choice of the alternative to locate the reservoir in an area where there is existing water storage facilities. This is somewhat a stretch interpretation of Policy 4 which is meant to encourage non-proliferation of water and wastewater treatment facilities,however,the proposed alternative does make sense in terms of minimizing impacts overall. This application is in compliance with Policy 4. 208 Plan Policy 5. Chemical Management The uses of pesticides,fertilizers,algaecides,road deicing and friction materials, and other chemicals which would temporarily or permanently cause a significant degradation of water quality or impair the current or designated uses of these waters should be regulated to the extent allowed by law in a manner that minimizes potential for degradation of water quality. Findings: Page 31 of the application states that no storage of hazardous or toxic,hazardous or explosive substances will occur. If fuel storage onsite is necessary, a fuel containment system will be identified as part of the building permit application and construction staging plan. This application is in compliance with Policy 5. 208 Plan Policy 6. Management System Management agencies are designated to best reflect their legal and jurisdictional authorities. The waters of the region shall be protected by a management agency structure within the existing governmental and regulatory framework that allows decisions to be made at the most appropriate level of control. For nonpoint source pollution the recommended level of management is at the watershed level. Findings: Eagle County is the designated Management Agency to oversee the potential water quality aspects of the land development aspects of the proposed Lake creek Meadows Reservoir Expansion. Eagle County's 1041 permit requirements and other measures in the Eagle County Land Use Regulations will effectively minimize the risk of any water quality issues. This application is in compliance with Policy 6. Colorado Geological Survey: In the attached letter dated October 9, 2015,the Colorado Geological Survey(CGS) set forth the following observations and recommendations: 1) The site is underlain by Eagle Valley Evaporite, composed of water-soluble gypsum and limestone,and characterized by subsurface voids and fissures. HP Geotech notes in the Subsoil Study for Foundation Design provided with the application,"During previous work in the area, several sinkholes were observed scattered throughout the Lake Creek Valley". Piping(internal erosion)of embankment material into the dam foundation material, and subsequent embankment failure, is therefore of significant concern, as is subsidence and ground deformation from collapse of solution voids. HP's geotechnical report was completed for planned residential construction on Lots 4, 5 and 6,but includes a brief"Lakes and Embankments"section(Pages 11 and 12 of the HP Geotech report dated September 26, 2013). HP makes valid embankment recommendations,but does not adequately characterize dam foundation conditions,nor is it clear that their subgrade/foundation preparation recommendations are 13 11/17/2015 sufficiently detailed for the planned ten foot embankments. A more comprehensive dam foundation investigation is needed at each of the proposed embankment locations to characterize and design mitigation for,or confirm the absence of subsurface voids and cavities. 2) Embankment foundation excavation and preparation, liner subgrade preparation and liner construction, and embankment placement and compaction activities should be inspected,with periodic materials testing to ensure compliance with density criteria,by a qualified geotechnical engineer with embankment construction experience. 3) Trees and woody vegetation should not be planted or allowed to grow on any embankment, as their root systems can cause significant internal damage, and uprooting/overturning of trees can breach the embankment. Colorado Parks and.Wildlife: In the attached letter dated September 24, 2015,the CPW set forth the following observations and recommendations: 1) This proposal seeks to expand the existing reservoir and create two additional reservoirs along West Lake Creek in Eagle County. The impacted section of West Lake Creek contains trout and native fish species including sculpin. To best avoid impacts to fish spawning and reproduction, CPW requests that all in-stream work be conducted between August 15th and September 30th Recommendations `2' through `9',below, are a list of Best Management Practices for this project in an attempt to avoid,minimize, and mitigate impacts to fish and wildlife species and their habitats: 2) Screen water intake structures in the stream to prevent fish passage. Construct screens in a manner that does not cause fish mortality through impingement. 3) Disinfect all equipment that will come in contact with water in the stream. Follow the attached disinfection procedures before and after performing in-stream work. 4) Mitigate for the loss of all wetland and riparian habitats that are impacted by the project. 5) Implement effective storm water management and erosion control measures to eliminate sediment from entering the stream during and after construction. 6) Reseed disturbed areas with native specifies occurring in this area. Emphasis should be on species currently present rather than drought tolerant species. 7) Develop an invasive weed monitoring and control plan to eliminate the establishment and spread of noxious weeds. Treat any weeds that are present before construction to reduce spreading seeds. 8) Consider providing one bank on each reservoir/pond with at least a 4:1 slope for more efficient ingress/egress for terrestrial wildlife. 9) Ensure earthen fill material remains in place on top of the pond liner to allow ingress/egress for terrestrial wildlife. Although there are no minimum instream flow rights associated with West Lake Creek, impacts from reducing flows during low water years and winter months will be unavoidable. CPW recommends minimizing the rate of withdraw during these periods to reduce stress on fish and the aquatic ecosystem within West Lake Creek. If the reservoirs are to be stocked with fish after construction,a stocking permit from CPW is required. 14 11/17/2015 Eagle County Planning Commission: On November 4, 2015,the ECPC as a referral agency, agrees that the proposed 1041 Permit makes sense for creating in-basin water storage,the proposal has been well vetted with the community, is supported by the community, is non-contentious,has the support of county staff, and will enable the LCMD to perfect water rights it has possessed since the 1970's,to achieve the District's operational goals. 5. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations, Chapter VI, Section 6.04.01,Permit Application Approval Criteria for Matters of State Interest, and as more specifically described in the application materials,the following analysis is provided. The Approval Criteria is numbered and indicated in bold font. A summary response is provided with staffs evaluation. A Permit to conduct a designated activity of state interest or to engage in development in a designated area of state interest shall be approved if the Project complies with the following general criteria and any additional applicable criteria in Sections 6.04.02 or 6.04.03. If the Project does not comply with any one or more of these criteria,the Permit shall be denied or approved with conditions. In determining whether the Project complies with these criteria, or if conditions should be imposed,the Permit Authority may utilize the considerations set forth in Chapter VI,Appendix `A' of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. (1) Documentation that prior to site disturbance for the Project the applicant will have obtained all necessary property rights,permits and approvals. The Board may, at its discretion,defer making a final decision on the application until outstanding property rights,permits and approvals are obtained. Per the application, "The Project is located entirely on private property(Lots 4, 5 &6,Block 1, Lake Creek Meadows Subdivision) owned by the Rebecca Anne Moores Family Trust. The District has the unique opportunity to partner with a private property owner to construct this facility. A copy of the agreement regarding reservoir ownership, construction, operations and maintenance responsibilities between the two parties is provided in Attachment B (of the application materials)". All necessary approvals will be obtained prior to any site disturbance. The following permits will be needed for the Project,including: ,t,. ,�.f° 14.10,0 ,}�4 , 37 � . ...._„ i ,r. ., a ro� ,�. ....w Eagle County Stream Setback FONSI Approved June 16,2014 Eagle County Building Permit Not yet submitted. Eagle County Grading Permit Not yet submitted. Lake Creek Meadows Home Plan Approval Approved May 14,2014 Owner's Association _ Colorado Division of Water Notice of Intent to Construct Submitted March 2,2014,no Resources a Non-Jurisdictional Water further action required. Impoundment Structure U.S.Army Corps of Section 404 Nationwide Submitted,pending Engineers Permit#29 (Residential approval. Developments) _ U.S.Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species Act, Approved July 25,2014 U.S. Service Section 7 consultation on the Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery Implementation Biological Opinion Letter. Program for Endangered Fish (Attachment H of the Species in the Upper application materials) Colorado River Basin. 15 11/17/2015 Staff concurs that the above itemized list of permits and approvals required prior to site disturbance is all encompassing. It should be further noted that on November 4, 2015, the Eagle County Planning Commission unanimously approved the companion Location and Extent application which accompanied this 1041 Permit application. The Location and Extent review was statutorily necessitated because Lake Creek Metropolitan District is a governmental entity in the State of Colorado. (2) The Project will not impair property rights held by others. Per the application,"The Project will not impair property rights held by others. The Project will take place entirely on private land with the permission and cooperation of the property owner and approval by the Lake Creek Meadows Home Owner's Association". Staff concurs that the Project will not impair property rights held by others. (3) The Project is consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans. Per the application,"The Project is consistent with relevant provision of applicable land use and water quality plans, including the 2012 Eagle River Water Quality Management Plan(208 Plan),the 2013 Eagle River Watershed Plan and the 2005 Eagle County Comprehensive Plan. The Project complies with Policy 4 of the 208 Plan by expanding storage in an area of existing developed facilities instead of developing new facilities in another location within the drainage. The Project complies with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan Goal 3.6.2 of developing sufficient domestic water sources while maintaining healthy natural riparian and aquatic ecosystems. The Project will provide additional in-basin augmentation to replace out-of-priority depletions during low flow periods, which will benefit water interests in downstream reaches of Lake Creek and the Eagle River. The Project complies with the Eagle River Watershed Plan Objective 2.1, including strategies and actions to expand existing in-basin storage or water supply operations to provide for local stream flow augmentation". Staff concurs that the Project is consistent with the relevant recommendations of the aforementioned plans, as follows: Earle County Comprehensive Plan (2006) Part III, Section 3.5,Infrastructure&Services, 3.5.3, Emergency and Community Services, Policy k "Adequate and efficient infrastructure should exist within community centers and suburban neighborhoods for the delivery of domestic drinking water and for the treatment of domestic sewage". This project is integral to the Lake Creek Metropolitan District's overall water and sewer system efficiency, and is the mechanism for perfecting water augmentation rights that the District has possessed since the late 1970's. Part III, Section 3.6, Water Resources, Goal 1, "Source water in Eagle County is protected, and contributors of surface and ground water pollution are identified and eliminated to the fullest extent possible". Per the ERWC response, it is unclear how the applicant intends to evaluate whether or not the anticipated 12-16%reduction of streamflow during low flow months positively or negatively impacts downstream water quality. The segment of Lake Creek that flows from the confluence of the East and West Forks of Lake Creek to the Eagle River is listed on the Clean Water Act's 303(d) list of impaired waters due to aquatic life impairment. Incremental impacts to the Creek from multiple land uses along the river corridor likely contribute to current conditions. Recent studies on Gore Creek 16 11/17/2015 indicate the prevalence of human activity in close proximity to the stream and the degraded condition of many riparian areas contributes significantly to the degradation of aquatic life conditions. The stressors on water quality on Lake Creek are likely similar to those on the Gore Creek, owing primarily to the similarity in patterns of land use that place an abundance of structures in close proximity to the stream. Reductions in late season stream flows caused by the project may reduce their diluent effect on pollutants in the water column,further exacerbating water quality degradation. The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Part III, Section 3.6, Water Resources, Goal 2, "Sufficient domestic water is available to all developed areas so long as requirements for maintaining healthy natural riparian and aquatic ecosystems are being met". The LCMD intends to implement the project in a manner that will maintain and protect natural riparian and aquatic ecosystems. Part III, Section 3.6.2, Water Quantity, Policies `a'through `c': a. "The long term viability of both ground and surface water sources should be protected". The primary function of the Reservoir System is to replace out-of-priority depletions within the Lake Creek basin caused by the District's residents. Construction of the Reservoir System will provide a permanent replacement water supply to benefit the District's constituents while maintaining flows relied upon by senior water users in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during particularly dry times. The Reservoir System expansion is an important component of the District's overall water supply system. The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. b. `Minimum in-stream flows should be maintained and efforts to establish optimum in-stream flow standards in Eagle County should be supported". The project is aimed at replacement of out-of- priority depletions within the Lake Creek basin caused by the District's residents; and the provision of a permanent replacement water supply to benefit the District's constituents while maintaining flows relied upon by senior water users in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during particularly dry times. As such, this policy will not be directly supported; although the intent of this project is partly to ensure minimum in-stream flows. 17 11/17/2015 c. "Water conservation efforts by all water users in Eagle County should be implemented". The following conservation techniques are to be employed during construction and operation of the project: • Efficient water delivery systems will be used; • Soil amendments will be made to areas where the water holding capacity of the soil needs improvement; • Landscaping will preserve or replace existing trees, shrubs, and ground cover in areas disturbed by development to the greatest extent practicable with consideration of wildfire • • hazards; • New plants and groundcover(seed revegetation)will consist of hardy and drought tolerant species and will be grouped according to sun and moisture needs; • The use of water intensive landscape and turf treatments are not required for the expanded reservoir construction and will not be utilized; • All construction equipment employed will be kept in good condition to avoid spills or other contamination of water resources; • The washing of construction equipment and vehicles(on-site)will be discouraged; and • The cleaning of construction areas with water will be discouraged. If construction area requires cleanup, the area will be swept or vacuumed first. • Stormwater management BMP's will include low impact development measures intended to conserve water and minimize stormwater impacts to West Lake Creek. These BMP's were reviewed and approved as part of the 2014 FONSI(Eagle County File No. FNZ- 4841)application and made conditions of approval. (The purpose of this referenced FONSI application was to allow for the construction, both grading and vertical construction, of a small portion of a proposed single-family residence on Lot 6, while also accommodating construction or, in one instance, re-construction and expansion of water impoundment reservoirs on Lots 4, 5 and 6. The existing reservoir on Lot 6 is to be expanded.) d. "New water diversions and water storage projects should result in positive impacts to Eagle County's economy and environmental quality". The primary function of the Reservoir System is to replace out-of-priority depletions within the Lake Creek basin caused by the District's residents. Construction of the Reservoir System will provide a permanent replacement water supply to benefit the District's constituents while maintaining flows relied upon by senior water users in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during particularly dry times. The Reservoir System expansion is an important component of the District's overall water supply system, and should result in positive impacts to Eagle County's environmental quality. e. "Collaborative efforts on regional land and water use planning efforts to address future growth, 18 11/17/2015 water supply and stream flow protection should be encouraged". For years, the District has been looking for a place to construct an expanded reservoir system within its boundaries in order to develop its augmentation water supply. The Reservoir System presents a unique opportunity for the District to partner with a private property owner to construct this facility, which will build out the facilities to exercise water rights that were confirmed in the late 1970's. The District will use water stored in the Reservoir System for augmentation in conjunction with its Colorado River Water Conservation District(CRWCD)water supply contracts for the Eagle and Colorado rivers. Part III, Section 3.6.3, Water Quality, Policy `g': g. "Surface and groundwater supplies should be protected from agricultural, industrial and development related impacts." The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Ptan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Edwards Area Community Plan(2003) Goal 7: `Natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas, surface water reservoirs and well-field zones are protected from environmental degradation". The proposed water storage pond system is not anticipated to degrade groundwater aquifer recharge areas, surface water reservoirs or well-field zones. Objective 11.3: `Identify Water Resources and Facilities. Assess the quantity and quality of surface and groundwater resources within the Edwards portion of the Eagle River watershed, and determine appropriate actions to conserve water quality and quantity". The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities(through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data Objective 14.1: "Wetlands. Maintain freshwater wetlands so that there will be no net loss of the functions and values due to urban development, commercial agriculture, or other activities". The applicant indicates there will be limited and unavoidable wetland disturbance. Some disturbance should be expected due to the location and nature of 19 11/17/2015 the project. It appears that most permanent impacts are avoided and measures such as providing water to maintain Wetland F minimized the impacts to wetlands and riparian areas. NWCCOG has indicated that this application is in compliance with Policy 3 of the 208 Plan. Objective 14.2: "Riparian Areas. Protect and enhance the functions and values provided by riparian areas". The applicant indicates there will be limited and unavoidable wetland disturbance. Some disturbance should be expected due to the location and nature of the project. It appears that most permanent impacts are avoided and measures such as providing water to maintain Wetland F minimized the impacts to wetlands and riparian areas. NWCCOG has indicated that this application is in compliance with Policy 3 of the Regional Water Quality Management Plan (the 208 Plan). Objective 14.3: "Aquatic Habitat and Fisheries. Protect and enhance aquatic habitat and fisheries by implementing the water conservation objectives of this plan and by coordinating with relevant agencies to enhance and expand aquatic habitat within the Edwards area". The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macro invertebrate health data. Objective 14.5: "Endangered and Threatened Species. Protect and preserve endangered, threatened and rare species and habitats critical to their existence as identified by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program, the Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Trout Unlimited, and other relevant agencies". The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Eagle River Watershed Plan(2013) Water Quantity Goal: "Streams, rivers, lakes and reservoirs in the watershed are managed and cared for in a manner that insures adequate amounts of water for domestic, agricultural, recreational and ecological needs at all times of year". The construction of the expanded Reservoir System will enable 20 11/17/2015 the District to permanently provide water storage to its constituents and to make its existing conditional storage water rights absolute through construction and public use for the decreed purposes. The primary function of this water right is to replace out-of-priority depletions to Lake Creek caused by the District's operations. The Reservoir System expansion completes an important component of the District's augmentation supply, which supports its overall water supply system. Objective 2.1: "Manage water storage, water diversions and water releases within the Eagle River watershed in a manner that sustains or enhances stream health and recreational uses". The construction of the expanded Reservoir System will enable the District to permanently provide water storage to its constituents and to make its existing conditional storage water rights absolute through construction and public use for the decreed purposes. The primary function of this water right is to replace out-of-priority depletions to Lake Creek caused by the District's operations. The Reservoir System expansion completes an important component of the District's augmentation supply, which supports its overall water supply system. Objective 2.2: `Minimize and/or mitigate adverse impacts to aquatic habitat and stream health from existing development and future growth". The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Water Quality Goal: "Water in the Eagle River and its tributary streams is of the highest quality, providing excellent drinking source water and supporting healthy and self-sustaining trout populations as indicators of a healthy watershed". The ERWC recommends that the County carefully consider its commitment to reduce or eliminate water quality impacts in the Eagle River and its tributaries—as documented in the Eagle River Watershed Plan—as it works to promote sustainable patterns of development. While this application does not directly respond to the expected causes of water quality degradation on Lake Creek, the Applicant does indicate that some effort will be made to "minimize degradation of existing water quality". Therefore, the ERWC recommends that Eagle County use this application process as an opportunity to engage with the Applicant regarding opportunities (through this project or others)for improving downstream water quality. Furthermore, ensuring that reductions in streamflow do not further degrade water quality may require the Applicant to periodically collect, analyze, • and publish upstream and downstream aquatic macroinvertebrate health data. Land Use Goal: "Land uses in Eagle County are located, designed, occupied and operated in a manner that minimizes impacts to water quality and water quantity in the Eagle River and its tributary streams". The project will have minimal impact on land use patterns, as it will be constructed on essentially the same property that currently serves as the site of the existing District reservoir, and the expanded storage is being designed and constructed cooperatively with the owner(Moores) of that property. The project is not associated with a land use or development proposal. 21 11/17/2015 Regional Water Quality Management Plan(the 208 Plan) 208 Plan Policy 1. Protect and Enhance Water Quality The surface and ground waters of the region shall be protected to minimize degradation of existing water quality and maintain existing and designated uses of those waters;waters not currently supporting designated uses shall be restored as soon as financially and technically feasible. Findings: The potential for water quality impacts from the proposed project is largely limited to erosion and sedimentation during construction and until disturbed soils are stabilized. Compliance with the submitted erosion control plans and CDPHE Stormwater Regulations will address this issue. One other concern is the potential for eutrophication in the reservoir after it is complete. The applicant has proposed a more or less continuous flow through the system to help minimize this possibility. This application is in compliance with Policy 1. 208 Plan Policy 2. Water Use and D evelopment The project developer shall mitigate the impacts to water quality and the aquatic environment caused by water projects. Findings: As stated in the finding above, mitigation for potential water quality impacts are proposed for this project. This application is in compliance with Policy 2. 208 Plan Policy 3. Land Use and Disturbance Water quality, including wetlands,floodplains,shorelines and riparian areas,must be protected from land uses and development so that significant degradation of water quality is prevented. Findings: The applicant indicates there will be limited and unavoidable wetland disturbance. Some disturbance should be expected due to the location and nature of the project. It appears that most permanent impacts are avoided and measures such as providing water to maintain Wetland F minimized the impacts to wetlands and riparian areas. This application is in compliance with Policy 3. 208 Plan Policy 4. Domestic, Municipal, and Industrial Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Decisions to locate water supplies, wastewater treatment systems, and other water and wastewater facilities shall be made in a manner which protects water quality and the aquatic environment. Where growth and development requires the need for additional facility capacity, existing facilities should be expanded in lieu of developing new facilities, unless expansion is not feasible because of technical,legal or political reasons. Findings: The applicant contends that the project complies with this policy because of the choice of the alternative to locate the reservoir in an area where there is existing water storage facilities. This is somewhat a stretch interpretation of Policy 4 which is meant to encourage non-proliferation of water and wastewater treatment facilities, however, the proposed alternative does make sense in terms of minimizing impacts overall. This application is in compliance with Policy 4. 22 11/17/2015 208 Plan Policy 5. Chemical Management The uses of pesticides,fertilizers, algaecides, road deicing and friction materials, and other chemicals which would temporarily or permanently cause a significant degradation of water quality or impair the current or designated uses of these waters should be regulated to the extent allowed by law in a manner that minimizes potential for degradation of water quality. Findings: Page 31 of the application states that no storage of hazardous or toxic, hazardous or explosive substances will occur. Iffuel storage onsite is necessary, a fuel containment system will be identified as part of the building permit application and construction staging plan. This application is in compliance with Policy 5. 208 Plan Policy 6. Management System Management agencies are designated to best reflect their legal and jurisdictional authorities. The waters of the region shall be protected by a management agency structure within the existing governmental and regulatory framework that allows decisions to be made at the most appropriate level of control. For nonpoint source pollution the recommended level of management is at the watershed level. Findings: Eagle County is the designated Management Agency to oversee the potential water quality aspects of the land development aspects of the proposed Lake creek Meadows Reservoir Expansion. Eagle County's 1041 permit requirements and other measures in the Eagle County Land Use Regulations will effectively minimize the risk of any water quality issues. This application is in compliance with Policy 6. (4) The applicant has the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the Project consistent with all requirements and conditions. Per the application, "The applicant has the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the project consistent with all requirements and conditions. The significant economic contribution by Moores provides the District with additional storage facilities for a reduced cost. The District has dedicated capital funds to the project and has established a proven record of financial and technical capability to develop and operate the enlarged Reservoir System". Staff concurs that the applicant has the necessary expertise and financial capability to develop and operate the project consistent with all requirements and conditions. (5) The Project is technically and financially feasible. Per the application,"The project is technically and financially feasible. Engineering teams representing the interests of both parties,Moores and the District,have reviewed and approved the plans for the project. Notice of intent to construct the Reservoir System has been submitted to the Colorado Division of Water Resources (CDWR), and no further action is required of CDWR for construction. The investment of private money by Moores for the design and construction of the project has limited the District contribution to$85,000. The District is financially solvent and able to meet financial commitments related to project operation. Staff concurs that the Project is technically and financially feasible. 23 11/17/2015 (6) The Project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards. Per the application,"The project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards. The project is designed outside of the 100-year floodplain except for the intake and associated outlet structures,which by design necessitate construction within the floodplain. Geologic and soil conditions have been considered during the design of the project. In the attached letter dated October 9, 2015, the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS)set forth the following observations and recommendations: The site is underlain by Eagle Valley Evaporite, composed of water-soluble gypsum and limestone, and characterized by subsurface voids and fissures. HP Geotech notes in the Subsoil Study for Foundation Design provided with the application, `During previous work in the area, several sinkholes were observed scattered throughout the Lake Creek Valley". Piping(internal erosion) of embankment • material into the dam foundation material, and subsequent embankment failure, is therefore of significant concern, as is subsidence and ground deformation from collapse of solution voids. HP's geotechnical report was completed for planned residential construction on Lots 4, 5 and 6, but includes a brief"Lakes and Embankments"section (Pages 11 and 12 of the HP Geotech report dated September 26, 2013). HP makes valid embankment recommendations, but does not adequately characterize dam foundation conditions, nor is it clear that their subgrade/foundation preparation recommendations are sufficiently detailed for the planned ten foot embankments. A more comprehensive dam foundation investigation is needed at each of the proposed embankment locations to characterize and design mitigation for, or confirm the absence of subsurface voids and cavities. Embankment foundation excavation and preparation, liner subgrade preparation and liner construction, and embankment placement and compaction activities should be inspected, with periodic materials testing to ensure compliance with density criteria, by a qualified geotechnical engineer with embankment construction experience. Trees and woody vegetation should not be planted or allowed to grow on any embankment, as their root systems can cause significant internal damage, and uprooting/overturning of trees can breach the embankment. Applicant's Response to CGS comments: "The partnership constructing this project will ensure a qualified geotechnical engineer will assist the project team with any final design mitigation or confirmation of subsurface soil conditions, as may be required for construction. A note already exists on the plans regarding planting on embankments." Staff concurs with the applicant's analysis that the Project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards, as the final designs will be properly engineered by a qualified geotechnical engineer. (7) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. Per the application,"The project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns. The project is contained on the Moores Property, all within the Lake Creek Meadows Subdivision. All property rights and uses of the Moores Property and neighboring lots will remain intact with the development of the proposed project. The land use patterns in the vicinity will not be altered by the development of the enlarged Reservoir System. Staff concurs that the Project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns, and in addition to the goal of providing additional water augmentation capacity for the LCMD, the water storage ponds and ancillary wetland/riparian areas will provide an aesthetically enhanced setting in the Lake Creek Meadows residential subdivision. The subject property and surrounding lands have been entitled for residential development since May 6, 1974, when the Lake Creek Meadows 24 11/17/2015 subdivision was approved and recorded. In this instance, Lake Creek Meadows subdivision was vested prior to zoning being enacted in Eagle County; which was in October of 1974. (8) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the capability of local governments affected by the Project to provide services,or exceed the capacity of service delivery systems. Per the application,"The project will not have a significant adverse effect on the capability of local governments affected by the project to provide services. The project is specifically designed as a water augmentation project to assure a reliable municipal water supply for District residents. The District will have enhanced ability to replace out-of-priority depletions in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during low flow conditions through the development of the enlarged Reservoir System". Staff concurs that the Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the capability of local governments affected by the Project to provide services, or exceed the capacity of service delivery • systems. (9) The Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. Per the application: "The project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County. The cost estimate for the project construction is approximately one million dollars. The property acquisition, design and construction of the project is largely being funded by the property owner,thereby significantly reducing typical capital costs on the taxpayers of the District. Operations will be funded through the District's operating costs to its members and is currently budgeted". Staff concurs that the Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the County, given the collaboration between the Moores and the LCMD to realize mutual goals. (10) The Project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. Per the application, "The project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. The primary purpose is to enable the District to provide a reliable municipal water supply to residents. Replacement of out-of-priority depletions through operation of the Reservoir System could benefit fish habitat on West Lake Creek,Lake Creek and the Eagle River by increasing flows during times of low flow." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local economy. (11) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities and experience. Per the application, "The project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities or experience. The project site is located on private land surrounded by similar private lands thus limiting recreational opportunities in the vicinity of the site. Recreational opportunities in the Lake Creek watershed will not be affected by this proposal." Staff concurs that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities and experience. None of the privately owned lands located in the Lake Creek Valley adjacent to Lake Creek or West Lake Creek are publically accessible for recreation, as 25 11/17/2015 such the proposed Reservoir System will have no net effect on the quantity of recreational opportunities. Replacement of out-of-priority depletions through operation of the Reservoir System could benefit fish habitat on West Lake Creek, Lake Creek and the Eagle River by increasing flows during times of low flow, and may have a positive effect on the quality of downstream recreational opportunities for anglers. (12) The planning, design and operation of the Project shall reflect principals of resource conservation,energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. Per the application,"The planning, design and operation of the project reflects principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse as evidenced in this application. Developing the enlarged Reservoir System on the same site of an existing reservoir will conserve natural resources of the watershed and avoid unnecessary disturbances to another property in the drainage. Currently,the existing facility includes unlined ditches to transmit water from West Lake Creek to the unlined reservoir and back to the creek. Greater efficiency of the water resource will result through project implementation. Synthetic liners in the reservoirs will minimize water loss. Also, the unlined ditches will be replaced with buried piping to minimize maintenance and maximize efficiency and conservation of the water resource." Staff concurs that the planning, design and operation of the Project shall reflect principals of resource conservation, energy efficiency and recycling or reuse. As included in the application submittal materials, the following conservation techniques are to be used in the construction and/or operation of the project: • Efficient water delivery systems will be used; • Soil amendments will be made to areas where the water holding capacity of the soil needs improvement; • Landscaping will preserve or replace existing trees, shrubs, and ground cover in areas disturbed by development to the greatest extent practicable with consideration of wildfire hazards; • New plants and groundcover(seed revegetation) will consist of hardy and drought tolerant • species and will be grouped according to sun and moisture needs; • The use of water intensive landscape and turf treatments will not be required for the expanded reservoir construction; • All construction equipment employed will be kept in good condition to avoid spills or other contamination of water resources; • The washing of construction equipment and vehicles will be discouraged;and • The cleaning of construction areas with water will be discouraged. If the construction area requires cleanup, the area will be swept or vacuumed first; • Stormwater management Best Management Practices will include low impact development measures intended to conserve water and minimize stormwater impacts to West Lake Creek. (13) The Project will not significantly degrade air quality. Per the application, "The project will not significantly degrade air quality. Minimal effects on air quality will be realized during construction. Best management practices (BMP's)will be incorporated, including the watering of areas of soil disturbance for dust suppression to minimize effects on air quality during construction,vehicle track pads, and reseeding and landscaping that employs both temporary and permanent irrigation to minimize fugitive dust impacts. Once the Reservoir System is built, operations will not significantly degrade air quality." 26 11/17/2015 Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade air quality. (14) The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality. Per the application, "The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality. An expanded reservoir will be built in the same location of the existing reservoir thus not significantly altering the appearance of the lot. The additional reservoir will fit the character of the property. The proposed expansion of the existing reservoir, and the addition of a new reservoir will not affect any ridgelines nor will it impede the vision of distant ridgelines. The proposed expanded Reservoir System is consistent with the present zoning and built environment and does not represent a `ridgeline' development from any identified viewpoint provided by the ECLUR. The Lake Creek Homeowner's Association(LCM HOA)Board of Directors has fully reviewed the proposed Project. At their May 14, 2014 meeting,the LCM HOA granted final approval of the plans for the reservoirs. Neighbors have had opportunity for input throughout the review process; no objections by the neighbors concerning visual quality were raised during the review process. A letter of approval from the LCM HOA President and one the Manager is attached in Attachment C". (Attachment C of the application materials). Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment that the Project will not significantly degrade visual quality. In addition to the goal of providing additional water augmentation capacity for the LCMD, the water storage ponds and ancillary wetland/riparian areas will provide an aesthetically enhanced setting in the Lake Creek Meadows residential subdivision. (15) The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. Per the application, "The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. Best Management Practices will be employed pre-and post-construction to avoid stormwater runoff from the Project site to the creek." Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment that the Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality. In its referral response, NWCCOG provided the following evaluation of the Project's compliance with the Regional Water Quality Plan (208 Plan)Policy 1. Protect and Enhance Water Quality: The surface and ground waters of the region shall be protected to minimize degradation of existing water quality and maintain existing and designated uses of those waters; waters not currently supporting designated uses shall be restored as soon as financially and technically feasible. NWCCOG Findings: The potential for water quality impacts from the proposed project is largely limited to erosion and sedimentation during construction and until disturbed soils are stabilized. Compliance with the submitted erosion control plans and CDPHE Stormwater Regulations will address this issue. One other concern is the potential for eutrophication in the reservoir after it is complete. The applicant has proposed a more or less continuous flow through the system to help minimize this possibility. This application is in compliance with Policy 1. 27 11/17/2015 Additionally,the LCMD,in collaboration with stakeholders inclusive of Eagle County,just completed creation of a Source Water Protection Plan. This Plan delineates Best Management Practices aimed at source water protection and is summarized in the following table: (16) The Project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality. Per the application, "The Project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality. The expanded Reservoir System is piped and lined thus limiting interaction with groundwater." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade either surface water quality, or groundwater quality. NWCCOG's evaluation of 208 Plan Policy 1, above, is applicable to this criterion as well. (17) The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands, and riparian areas. Per the application,"The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas.Wetlands and riparian areas have been avoided by project development to the extent practicable.Minimal impacts to both have been identified in Attachment J and are summarized as follows: Wetlands The activity will affect wetlands and the aquatic environment by discharging fill for permanent impacts to 0.099 acres of ditches, 0.369 acres of open water and 0.078 acres of riverine riparian and lacustrine fringe wetlands.The activity has been designed to have minimal adverse effects on wetlands and the aquatic environment. Two of the existing unlined, surface water ditches(Wetland B and Wetland E)constructed in uplands will be filled and the rock armored(riprap)outfall of the expanded reservoir will place fill within another ditch.The permanent impacts to ditches include an area of 0.099 acres. Permanent impacts to 0.369 acres of open water habitat associated with the existing reservoir will result from the project development. The existing reservoir will need to be drained,regraded,built and lined prior to reestablishing the aquatic habitat.An additional creation of approximately 0.969 acres of open water habitat will result from the enlargement of the existing reservoir and development of the new reservoirs. The highest quality wetlands and waters on the site include: •Wetland F: slope,wet meadow •Wetlands A and G: riverine riparian, forested wetlands •West Lake Creek Proposed development will entirely avoid impacts to Wetlands F,Wetland G and West Lake Creek. However, limited impacts to Wetland A have been identified.These include: 1)the removal of the existing intake structure and reclamation of the bank in that area(temporary), and 2)the development of the new inlet diversion structure with an associated continuous sediment return structure and a portion of a spillway which occur along West Lake Creek(permanent).These facilities must necessarily occur along the creek side within Wetland A and will include permanent impacts to 0.009 acres and temporary impacts to 0.001 acres of riverine riparian-forested wetlands. A narrow lacustrine fringe wetland(Wetland C)associated with the margin of the existing reservoir has developed. The enlargement of the existing reservoir will include 0.069 acres of permanent impacts to this fringe wetland.However,a new limited wetland fringe will likely develop along the margin of the two proposed reservoirs and ditch feature. 28 11/17/2015 Indirect impacts to existing wetlands have also been considered in the design of the project.Wetland F, slope,wet meadow includes 0.16 acres of wetlands oriented downslope of the existing unlined reservoir. Hydrology to this area is supported by groundwater potentially sustained by water seeping from the upslope,unlined reservoir. In order to avoid possible indirect impacts to this wetland, source water will be maintained by installing a buried pervious pipe. The pipe will draw from water from the bottom of the spillway of the reservoir, as necessary, and will continue to provide water to maintain Wetland F. Impacts to wetlands and aquatic resources have been avoided and minimized to the greatest extent practicable.The wetland impacts associated with the project development may be permitted under two Nationwide Permits with the USACE. The permits,application(number SPK-2014-00401),have been submitted and are currently being reviewed by the Grand Junction field office. Riparian Impacts to the riparian.area have mostly been avoided by the project design. Construction of the new intake and grading for a portion of each of the reservoirs will include limited permanent riparian impacts, as indicated in the figure below.Temporary riparian impacts will take place in three locations: 1. The installation of the water transmission pipe from the new intake to the upper reservoir will necessarily cross the riparian area; 2. The removal of the existing intake structure and associated inflow ditch; and, 3.Re-grading of the secondary outlet ditch from the existing Lake Creek Meadows Reservoir. Once the water transmission pipe is installed and the 2 ditches are regraded,the areas will be revegetated and left without further disturbance unless required for maintenance." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade wetlands, and riparian areas. NWCCOG's evaluation of 208 Plan Policy 3 Plan Policy 3 likewise opines that wetland and riparian areas will not be degraded as a result of the Project. NWCCOG's 208 Plan Policy 3 evaluation, as follows: Land Use and Disturbance Water quality,including wetlands,floodplains, shorelines and riparian areas,must be protected from land uses and development so that significant degradation of water quality is prevented. Findings: The applicant indicates there will be limited and unavoidable wetland disturbance. Some disturbance should be expected due to the location and nature of the project. It appears that most permanent impacts are avoided and measures such as providing water to maintain Wetland F minimized the impacts to wetlands and riparian areas. This application is in compliance with 208 Plan Policy 3. (18) The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. Per the application,"The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or habitat. The primary habitats on the site include uplands,riparian wetlands,riparian uplands and aquatic habitats, including the creek and the existing reservoir. The upland area on the property has been manipulated to accommodate the existing residences, out building,reservoir,and landscaped areas. The riparian wetlands and uplands along the west bank of the creek have been left mostly intact. The riparian area along the east bank of the creek is encroached and impacted upon by West Lake Creek Road. The region around the study area is home to many wildlife species. Some of the wildlife with 29 11/17/2015 greatest implication includes American elk(Cervus elaphus),mule deer(Odocoileus hemionus), black bear(Ursus americanus),mountain lion(Felis concolor),peregrine falcon(Falco pergrinus anatum),trout(Oncorhynchus mykiss, Salvelinus fontinalis, Salmo trutta), and potential lynx (Lynx Canadensis), among others. These animals and others reside in the surrounding area, and find forage and protection on the site. The area where the proposed reservoirs will be built is uplands with limited riparian disturbance. The riparian and aquatic areas provide the richest wildlife habitat on the property. These habitat types and values will be mostly maintained or enhanced by the expansion of the existing reservoir and construction of the new reservoir. The project will result in the creation of 0.969 acres of open water habitat through expansion and addition of reservoirs. Small fish including trout and sculpin(Cottus bairdii);reside in West Lake Creek on and near the Project site. There will be a short reach of West Lake Creek between the headgate of the Lake Creek Meadows Ditch and the outlet of the expanded Reservoir System, in which the flow will be reduced by the rate at which water is diverted through the Reservoir System,up to 2 cubic feet per second (cfs). Currently the reach of reduced streamflow is approximately 540 linear feet;under the proposed plan,the affected segment will include approximately 1,600 linear feet in order to allow for gravity feed throughout the expanded Reservoir System. The quantity and depth of pool habitat may be diminished at times in this segment; however, a net benefit to the fishery will be realized downstream of the Reservoir System when releases are made to replace out-of-priority depletions during times of low flow. There is no in-stream flow water right associated with this segment of West Lake Creek. Any private stocking of the creek or reservoirs will be coordinated,as required,through CPW. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)have issued a final Biological Opinion(BO)for depletions associated with the Project (Attachment M of the application materials). The USFWS has determined that the Project fits under the umbrella of the Colorado River Programmatic Biological Opinion(PBO),would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or adverse modification of critical habitat for depletion impacts." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats. In the attached letter dated September 24, 2015, the CPW set forth the following observations and recommendations intended to minimize undue impacts upon terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats as a result of the Project: 1) This proposal seeks to expand the existing reservoir and create two additional reservoirs along West Lake Creek in Eagle County. The impacted section of West Lake Creek contains trout and native fish species including sculpin. To best avoid impacts to fish spawning and reproduction, CPW requests that all in-stream work be conducted between August 15th and September 30a". Recommendations `2'through `9', below, are a list of Best Management Practices for this project in an attempt to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to fish and wildlife species and their habitats: 2) Screen water intake structures in the stream to prevent fish passage. Construct screens in a manner that does not cause fish mortality through impingement. 3) Disinfect all equipment that will come in contact with water in the stream. Follow the attached disinfection procedures before and after performing in-stream work. 4) Mitigate for the loss of all wetland and riparian habitats that are impacted by the project. 5) Implement effective storm water management and erosion control measures to eliminate sediment from entering the stream during and after construction. 30 11/17/2015 6) Reseed disturbed areas with native specifies occurring in this area. Emphasis should be on species currently present rather than drought tolerant species. 7) Develop an invasive weed monitoring and control plan to eliminate the establishment and spread of noxious weeds. Treat any weeds that are present before construction to reduce spreading seeds. 8) Consider providing one bank on each reservoir/pond with at least a 4:1 slope for more efficient ingress/egress for terrestrial wildlife. 9) Ensure earthen fill material remains in place on top of the pond liner to allow ingress/egress for terrestrial wildlife. Although there are no minimum instream flow rights associated with West Lake Creek, impacts from reducing flows during low water years and winter months will be unavoidable. CPW recommends minimizing the rate of withdraw during these periods to reduce stress on fish and the aquatic ecosystem within West Lake Creek. If the reservoirs are to be stocked with fish after construction, a stocking permit from CPW is required. (19) The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. Per the application,"The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. The majority of the study area can be classified as a dry upland meadow vegetative community, which is adapted to low precipitation, cool temperatures, and relatively fine-textured soils. Slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus),muttongrass (Poa Fendleriana), and other upland grasses dominate the herbaceous plants within this community. A wooded riparian zone along West Lake Creek occurs on the site. The riparian zone is greatly comprised of woody plants dominated by aspen(Populus tremuloides), serviceberry(Amelanchier alnifolia), and narrowleaf cottonwood(Populus angustifolia). Included is a shrub and herbaceous layer of plants dominated by mountain alder(Alnus incana),river hawthorn(Crataegus rivularis), and wild rose (Rosa woodsii). The USFWS has identified one federally listed threatened plant species as potentially occurring in Eagle County,the Ute ladies' tresses orchid(Spiranthes diluvialis). The site does not qualify for suitable potential habitat for the Ute ladies'tresses orchid; it includes generally steep stream banks which transition abruptly from stream margin to upland areas. No Ute ladies' tresses orchid plants or populations have been identified as occurring on or near the site as tracked by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program(CNHP). No occurrences of the Ute ladies' tresses orchid plants or populations were identified nor was any suitable habitat for the Ute ladies' tresses orchid identified during field observation conducted July 2013. Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat. (20) The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. Per the application, "The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. A site-specific geologic investigation was conducted for the area of the proposed reservoirs and is included in Attachment K of the application materials. Results of the geologic investigation were considered during reservoir design. No further consideration is warranted." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions. In the attached letter dated October 9, 2015, the Colorado Geological Survey(CGS)set forth the following observations and recommendations: 31 11/17/2015 1) The site is underlain by Eagle Valley Evaporite, composed of water-soluble gypsum and limestone, and characterized by subsurface voids and fissures. HP Geotech notes in the Subsoil Study for Foundation Design provided with the application, "During previous work in the area, several sinkholes were observed scattered throughout the Lake Creek Valley". Piping(internal erosion) of embankment material into the dam foundation material, and subsequent embankment failure, is therefore of significant concern, as is subsidence and ground deformation from collapse of solution voids. HP's geotechnical report was completed for planned residential construction on Lots 4, 5 and 6, but includes a brief"Lakes and Embankments"section (Pages 11 and 12 of the HP Geotech report dated September 26, 2013). HP makes valid embankment recommendations, but does not adequately characterize dam foundation conditions, nor is it clear that their subgrade/foundation preparation recommendations are sufficiently detailed for the planned ten foot embankments. A more comprehensive dam foundation investigation is needed at each of the proposed embankment locations to characterize and design mitigation for, or confirm the absence of subsurface voids and cavities. 2) Embankment foundation excavation and preparation, liner subgrade preparation and liner construction, and embankment placement and compaction activities should be inspected, with periodic materials testing to ensure compliance with density criteria, by a qualified geotechnical engineer with embankment construction experience. 3) Trees and woody vegetation should not be planted or allowed to grow on any embankment, as their root systems can cause significant internal damage, and uprooting/overturning of trees can breach the embankment. In the Applicant's attached letter of response to the referral agency comments received, the applicant has responded to CGS's recommendations as follows: Colorado Geologic Survey Comments: "A more comprehensive dam foundation investigation is needed at each of the proposed embankment locations to characterize and design mitigation for, or confirm the absence of subsurface voids and cavities. Trees or woody vegetation should not be planted ... on any embankment." Applicant Response: The partnership constructing this project will ensure a qualified geotechnical engineer will assist the project team with any final design mitigation or confirmation of subsurface soil conditions, as may be required for construction.A note already exists on the plans regarding planting on embankments. (21) The Project will not cause a nuisance. Per the application,"The Project will not cause a nuisance. Temporary disturbance associated with construction is expected; however,the contractor will coordinate work hours with the Lake Creek Meadows Homeowner's Association. Construction of the reservoir and associated facilities is expected to take approximately seven months. Depending on timing,the two reservoirs may be built over two phases or seasons, such as during the fall and the following spring. The existing reservoir functions with regular maintenance and operations management. The expanded Reservoir System will function similarly to current conditions." Staff concurs that the Project will not cause a nuisance. 32 11/17/2015 (22) The Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological,historic,or archaeological importance. Per the application,"The Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological,historic or archaeological importance. No paleontological,historic or archaeological resources were identified on the site or during the zoning or subdivision approvals for the property, as reviewed. The original Lake Creek Meadows Subdivision Environmental Impact Report(EIR, 1973)did not identify any areas of paleontological,historic or archaeological importance. No further site-specific study has been conducted for the purposes of this application." Staff concurs that the Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological, historic, or archaeological importance. Additionally, this 1041 Permit application was referred to the Colorado Historical Society, and the Eagle County Historical Society; neither of which provided response. (23) The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. Per the application,"The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. Construction, operations or maintenance of the Project are not expected to utilize materials or fuel that is uncommon to construction; water storage on the site will not require treatment to drinking water quality,therefore,no chemicals are being stored for operations." Staff concurs that the Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials. It must be noted that storage of fuel on the site during construction of the proposed Reservoir System shall be provided proper secondary containment. (24) The benefits accruing to the County and its citizens from the Project outweigh the losses of any natural, agricultural,recreational,grazing,commercial or industrial resources within the County,or the losses of opportunities to develop such resources. Per the application, "This Reservoir System expansion provides benefits to the County and its citizens,which outweigh the minimal impacts to other resources. The Project will not result in a loss of existing natural, agricultural,recreation, grazing, commercial or industrial resources or the opportunities to develop such resources,as it is entirely located on private land. The primary function of the enlarged Reservoir System is to assure a reliable municipal water supply to the District. The Project will augment out-of-priority depletions to the West Lake Creek and Lake Creek caused by the District's operations. The development of the Project will enable the District to permanently provide water storage to its constituents and will help to maintain flows in West Lake Creek and Lake Creek during particularly dry times when releases are made for the benefit of senior calling water rights,a benefit to the County and its citizens." Staff concurs that the benefits accruing to the County and its citizens from the Project outweigh the losses of any natural, agricultural, recreational, grazing, commercial or industrial resources within the County, or the losses of opportunities to develop such resources. B. 6.04.02 Additional Criteria Applicable to Municipal and Industrial Water Projects. In addition to the general criteria set forth in Section 6.04.01,the following additional criteria apply to municipal and industrial water projects: 33 11/17/2015 (1) The Project shall emphasize the most efficient use of water,including the recycling,reuse and conservation of water. Per the application,"The Project will maximize efficiency and conservation of the water resource by installing pipe to transmit water and synthetic liners in the reservoirs. Overall,the District strives for the most efficient use of water. This is reflected in its policies and operations. First,the District meters the water use of each home within the District inclusion area; the meters are read monthly. Additionally,the produced water from the District's wells is metered.Accordingly,the water produced is compared to the water consumed each month to detect possible leaks and identify high water use.A tiered rate structure is employed to promote water conservation and maintenance of fixtures by the water users within the District. Homes within the District that are directly adjacent to streams are allowed to pump irrigation water directly from the streams under the District's water rights and plan for augmentation,thereby reducing the energy and chemicals associated with using treated water for irrigation. The District has recently installed metering devices on each of these pumps to accurately meter water consumption. As such,the District is equipped to advise each owner on proper water amounts for irrigation. In the case of shortage or scarcity,the District implements the following Water Use Restrictions as outlined in its Rules and Regulations for Water Service(2011): 4.6 Water Use Restrictions The District is responsible for protecting an adequate supply of water to its consumers.The District recognizes that certain conditions may exist when water supply is temporarily limited. At the sole discretion of the Board,this Section 4.6,Water Use Restrictions,will go into effect for limited periods of time. 4.6.1 Waste Water shall be used only for beneficial purposes and shall not be wasted.Any instance of flagrant runoff or waste will be considered a violation of these Water Use Restrictions and subject to the penalties provided for in Section 4.6.5. Water for irrigation of lawns and other outside uses shall be used pursuant to regulations of the District. 4.6.2 Restrictions of Use If conditions of supply so limit the water supply of the District's water system that unrestricted water use may endanger the adequacy of that supply,the Board of Directors, exercising its discretion in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare,may by resolution adopt the following emergency water use restrictions and such additional regulations and restrictions as are reasonably calculated under all conditions to conserve and protect that supply and to insure a regular flow of water through that system. Emergency water use regulations and restrictions shall remain in force and effect until the Board determines that the conditions requiring their imposition no longer exist. Subsequent to adoption by resolution of the Board and commencing June 1, and continuing through September 30,no water shall be used for lawn irrigation or other purposes outside the residence, apartment building, commercial building, or other structure(hereinafter referred to as the"Building") except as follows: A. Premises with even-numbered addresses may use irrigation water on said premises outside said buildings on Sundays,Wednesdays, and Fridays. 34 11/17/2015 B.Premises with odd-numbered addresses may use irrigation water on said premises outside said building on Tuesdays,Thursdays, and Saturdays. C. Swimming pools will be limited to one filling unless draining for repairs is necessary. D.No irrigation shall be permitted at any time by use of free running hose without nozzle or sprinkler. E.Nothing herein shall prevent the imposition of a total ban on outside water use in the event of an extreme emergency,nor to further create an exception to meet a specific water supply condition. 4.6.3 Remedies for Unauthorized Use Any unauthorized use of water shall be paid for at the same rate as if that use had been authorized together with the costs incurred by the District in discovering and collecting for the unauthorized use. Such payments shall not in any way affect the right of the District to disconnect or suspend water service to any customer for unauthorized use, or to charge additional penalties or pursue such other remedies as may be authorized by law or approved by the Board of Directors of the District; nor shall it affect any criminal liability which may have attached by reason of such authorized use. 4.6.4 Seals and Detection Devices The District may require that seals be attached to any water using system in or about a customer's premises in order to detect any unauthorized use of water from that system. If necessary,the District may also require that mechanical devices be attached to any water using system in or upon a customer's premises in order to detect any unauthorized use of water from such system. Such mechanical devices may be inspected on behalf of the District at any reasonable time. 4.6.5 Violations The violation of any water use regulation or restriction or waste of water shall be considered grounds for the disconnection or suspension of water service to any customer,premises, building or water facility. The customer using the premises,building, or facility shall be responsible for complying with the regulations and/or restrictions and violators of said regulations and/or restrictions will be subject to the following actions and penalties: 1. In the event of a first violation,the customer will be advised in writing of said violation and informed that a monetary charge will be added to the water bill for subsequent violations. 2. In the event of a second violation at the same location,the customer will be advised in writing of said violations and a$25 charge will be added to the water bill for said location. 3. In the event of a third or any subsequent violation at the same location,the customer will be advised in writing of said violations and a$50 charge will be added to the water bill for said location. 4. Continuing waste of water or willful violation of any regulation and/or restriction is cause for disconnection or suspension of water service. 4.6.6 Special Permits The District may issue special permits as follows: 1. When there are circumstances which do not permit a water user to comply with the regulations and restrictions and deliver one inch(1") of water per week on landscaped grounds of the premises, provided the customer submits a plan describing the area to be served and the method to be used to deliver an adequate amount of water. 2. For watering newly-sodded lawns and newly planted trees and gardens each day for a period not to exceed 14 consecutive days, and at a rate not to exceed one inch(1")per week or for watering newly seeded lawns each day for a period not to exceed 25 consecutive days and at a rate not to exceed one inch(1")per week. 35 11/17/2015 3. For neighborhood gardens, and if water for such gardens is obtained from a nearby residence, additional watering days may be allocated to that particular residence for the watering of such garden. 4. For daily watering of outside stock at nurseries, greenhouses, and stores. 5. There shall be a charge of$15 for each permit issued. 6. Violation of the terms of a permit will be cause for immediate revocation of the permit. 7. The District shall have authority to interpret, apply, and enforce the Board's Rules and Regulations for water use restrictions to prevent undue commercial or business hardship and may issue special use permits in furtherance of this authority. 4.6.7 Water Use Efficiency Plan On July 1, 1996,the Board of Directors or its designated representative dispersed to its users a water use efficiency plan which addressed the following issues: 1. Water efficient fixtures and appliances including toilets,urinals, showerheads, and faucets; 2. Low water use landscapes and efficient irrigation; 3.Water efficient industrial and commercial water using processes; 4. Water reuse systems,both potable and non-potable; 5. Distribution system leak repair; 6. Dissemination of information regarding water use efficiency measures, including by public education, customer water use audits, and water saving demonstration; 7.Water rate structures designed to encourage water use efficiency in a fiscally responsible matter; 8.Regulatory measures,including standards for the use of water use efficiency fixtures and landscapes, and ordinances, codes, or other law designed to encourage water use efficiency; and 9. Incentives to implement water use efficiency techniques,including rebates to customers or others to encourage the installation of water use efficiency measures. Upon its dissemination,the plan shall become the policy of the District and a part of these Rules and Regulations." Staff concurs that the Project shall emphasize the most efficient use of water, including the recycling, reuse and conservation of water. (2) The Project will not result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. Per the application, "The Project will not result in excess capacity in existing water services or create duplicate services. The District includes an area of approximately 623-acres;the District inclusion map is provided in Attachment D of the application materials. The existing reservoir has about 2 acre-feet of storage;the expanded Reservoir System will have approximately 7 acre-feet of storage. The proposed expanded reservoir storage is the only storage within the District for augmentation purposes and is a critical part of the District's decreed water supply." Staff concurs that the Project will not result in excess capacity in existing water or wastewater treatment services or create duplicate services. NWCCOG's evaluation of 208 Plan Policy 4,follows: Domestic, Municipal, and Industrial Water and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Decisions to locate water supplies, wastewater treatment systems, and other water and wastewater facilities shall be made in a manner which protects water quality and the aquatic environment. 36 11/17/2015 Where growth and development requires the need for additional facility capacity,existing facilities should be expanded in lieu of developing new facilities, unless expansion is not feasible because of technical, legal or political reasons. NWCCOG Findings: The applicant contends that the project complies with this policy because of the choice of the alternative to locate the reservoir in an area where there is existing water storage facilities. This is somewhat a stretch interpretation of Policy 4 which is meant to encourage non- proliferation of water and wastewater treatment facilities, however, the proposed alternative does make sense in terms of minimizing impacts overall. This application is in compliance with 208 Plan Policy 4. (3) The Project shall be necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project. Per the application,"Construction of the expanded Lake Creek Meadows Reservoir system will enable the District to permanently provide water storage to its constituents and to convert its existing conditional storage water rights to absolute. The primary function of the Project is to replace out-of- priority depletions to West lake Creek and Lake Creek caused by the District's operations. This Reservoir System expansion provides an important component of the District's overall water supply system." Staff concurs that the Project shall be necessary to meet community development and population demands in the areas to be served by the Project. (4) Urban development,population densities, and site layout and design of storm water and sanitation systems shall be accomplished in a manner that will prevent the pollution of aquifer recharge areas. Per the application,"This criterion does not apply to the Project." Staff concurs that this criterion is not applicable to the proposed Reservoir System Project. C. Special Use Permit Waiver: In accordance with Chapter II,Article 3, Section 3.310.1.2, Waiver Provision, of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations,the Special Review Use Permit application for water and sewer projects may be waived in whole or in part by the Board of County Commissioners upon a written petition by the applicant showing that: 3.310.2.a. A permit application pursuant to Chapter 6, Sections one through five of the Eagle County Guidelines and Regulations for Matters of State Interest has been submitted to the Eagle County Permit Authority relative to this land use which would be the subject of a special use permit application. 3.310.2.b. Compliance with the Special Use Review Permit requirements would be unreasonably burdensome for the applicant. The applicant has requested a waiver of the Special Use Review Permit requirements as such application would be redundant with this 1041 Permit process and would serve no further legitimate planning, zoning or other land use objective. 37 11/17/2015 DISCUSSION: Mr.Narracci showed a vicinity map of the property on Lake Creek Rd. The map showed existing conditions. The proposal would expand the size of the pond on lot six and add two additional ponds. The existing reservoir had been in place since 1969. This proposal offered a unique opportunity for the district to partner with a private owner. He reviewed the referral responses. Tambi Katieb spoke to the board. He introduced two members of the Lake Creek Metro board. He reviewed some of the details of the proposed partnership. In 2010 the two lots became under a single ownership making this project more feasible. Depletions to the stream were out of legal priority. Tom Kinella spoke and said that depletion was water that evaporated or removed from the stream. Out of priority meant that there was someone further downstream with a more senior water rights calling for this water. Mr.Katieb spoke about runoff filling the reservoir in about 2—3 days. In dry years diversions might cease temporarily. The district,Eagle River Watershed Council and the county had drafted an agreement. The project complied with the county's 1041 approval criteria. • Commissioner McQueeney asked for clarification about the Watershed Council's opinion. • Mr.Narracci stated that the Watershed Council was okay with the application. Chris Geiger stated that the proposal simplified the changes required by the district. The water court applications were filed at the end of October. Ray Merry stated that the finding was proof that permits would be obtained prior to implementation. Mr. Geiger stated that if the district did not receive a final permit it would prevent the district from moving forward. Mr. Merry explained the purpose of a 1041 project. There were ancillary impacts that could be considered. All findings must be positive in order to receive approval. The work that was done addressed water quality and efficiency plans. Chairman Chandler—Henry wondered about water temperature rising requiring increased storage. Mr.Katieb stated that this had not been identified as an issue. Chairman Chandler—Henry asked about the engineering concerns. Eva Wilson confirmed that their concerns had been addressed. Chairman Chandler—Henry asked about the conditions of the dam. Mr.Katieb requested that rather than condition five,his edited verbiage was suggested. The recommendation was that condition two and four were not necessary. He felt that the conditions provided more requirements than satisfying the Colorado Geographical Society. He offered to have a letter submitted from their engineer. Chairman Chandler—Henry opened and closed public comment as there was none. Commissioner Ryan felt that the request made sense for creating in-basin water storage and per the referrals it was not controversial. Commissioner McQueeney agreed. Chairman Chandler—Henry felt it met the criteria and commended the metro district, owner and consultants for putting this together. Commissioner McQueeney moved that the Eagle County Permit Authority APPROVE File No. 1041- 5335,waiving the requirement for Special Use Review Permit, authorizing the Chairman to sign the Resolution, and incorporating staff findings with the following revised conditions: 1) Except as otherwise modified by this development permit, all material representations made by the Applicant in this application and in any public meeting shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval. 2) Prior to any site work commencing, all requirements set forth in the Engineering Department Memorandum dated October 8, 2015 shall be addressed to the County Engineer's satisfaction. 3) The partnership constructing this project will ensure a qualified geotechnical engineer will assist the project team with any final design mitigation or confirmation of subsurface soil conditions, as may be required for 38 11/17/2015 construction. Applicant will submit a letter from the project geotechnical engineer confirming final design mitigation with application for grading permit. 4) During site construction, all recommendations and Best Management Practices set forth in the Colorado Parks and Wildlife letter dated September 24, 2015, shall be implemented; with the exception of constructing the pond embankments at a 4:1 slope. Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 4 4 4 ak i .f_ C. .- There being no further business before 0; . .,the meetin_ as adjourned until Decemb-. 8,2015. Attest: '� I r� AI /A_i_Lid . ./ A' Al '' Cler'to the Board C airm ( 39 11/17/2015