Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/16/13 PUBLIC HEARING
July 16, 2013
Present: Sara Fisher Chairman
Jill Ryan Commissioner
Kathy Chandler-Henry Commissioner
Keith Montag County Manager
Bryan Treu County Attorney
Beth Ayres-Oliver Assistant County Attorney
Teak Simonton Clerk to the Board
Kathy Scriver Deputy Clerk to the Board
This being a scheduled Public Hearing,the following items were presented to the Board of County
Commissioners for their consideration:
Manager Update (recorded)
Keith Montag, County Manager
Communications Update
Discussion Items
Information Sharing
Meetings Attended/Future Meetings
1. Child Care Licensing, Toni Rosanski
2. Budget Forecast, John Lewis
Attorney Update (recorded)
Bryan Treu, County Attorney
Open Session
CenturyLink Update
Executive Session
Personnel issue relating to Eagle County Planning Department
Legal advice pertaining to Schmidt Application for Special Use Permit
Legal advice pertaining to Application for Wolcott Preliminary Plan for PUD
Consent Agenda
Chairman Fisher stated the first item before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows:
3. Approval of Bill Paying for the Week of July 15, 2013 (Subject to Review by the Finance Director)
John Lewis,Finance
4. Approval of Payroll for July 25,2013 (Subject to Review by the Finance Director)
John Lewis, Finance ,
5. Approval of the Minutes of the Eagle County Commissioner Meeting for May 7, May 14 and May 15, 2013
Teak Simonton, Clerk and Recorder
6. Agreement between Eagle County and Eagle County School District Project Management for System of
Care Expansion Planning Grant for Wayfinder Services to At-risk Youth
1
07/16/2013
Holly Kasper-Blank,Health&Human Services
7. Final Settlement of Contract with Old Castle SW Group, Inc.,DBA B&B Excavating for the Improvement
of Accessibility of Bus Stops Through Site Preparation,Road Base and Paving
Kelley Collier,ECO Transit
8. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Immunization Program Immunization Combined
Projects Task Order,Waiver 154
Rebecca Larson,Health&Human Services
9. Construction Agreement between Eagle County and Ewing Trucking and Construction, LLC for Eagle
County Colorado River Ranch Boat Ramp and Site Improvements
Rick Ullom,Project Management
Holly Kasper spoke to the board about the Wayfinder Services grant. The state awarded$50,000 for them
to develop a system of care for youth between 10 and 18 years of age. It included many services, including mental
health services. The goal was to get services to youth earlier. It was a cost based reimbursement.
Chairman Fisher expressed support for the program.
Ms.Kasper added that the goals also developed family and youth leaders.
Jenny Wahrer spoke to the board about vaccinations. She spoke about a grant that brought immunizations
to the community. It allowed the department to reduce preventable diseases and communicable disease spread.
Commissioner Ryan asked how the outreach would be occurring.
Ms. Wahrer stated that the un-insured or under-insured were the target. She was not sure of how the
outreach would be planned. She suggested that Becky Larsen be contacted for more information.
Rick Ullom spoke about the boat ramp at the,Colorado River Ranch construction. It would be called Horse
Creek River Access. The Road and Bridge Department built the access to the boat ramp area. Construction would
begin shortly and should be completed within two months.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the Consent Agenda for July 16, 2013, as presented.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Citizen Input
Chairman Fisher opened and closed citizen Input, as there was none.
Commissioner Ryan moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners and re-
convene as the Eagle County Housing and Development Authority.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Eagle County Housing and Development Authority
10. Automatic Operating Cost Adjustment Factor Rent Increase for Riverview Apartments
Jill Klosterman and Dan Murray,Housing
Ms.Klosterman explained that this was a standard agreement having to do with the housing
assistance payment contract at Riverview Apartments. The housing contract allowed tenants to pay 30%
of their income as rent and HUD subsidized the remainder. This was an automatic operating cost
adjustment factor increase and rents would increase by approx. 1%but would not affect the tenants. The
increase would go into place on November 2 and HUD would be making up the difference.
2
07/16/2013
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the operating cost adjustment factor rent
increase for Riverview apartments.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Housing and Development
Authority and re-convene as the Eagle County Local Liquor Licensing Authority.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Eagle County Liquor License Authority
Kathy Scriver, Clerk and Recorder's Office
Consent Agenda
11. Adam's Mountain Country Club,LLC d/b/a Adam's Mountain Country Club
#15-59226-0000
Renewal of an Optional Premises License in Unincorporated Eagle. There have been no complaints or
disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on
file and proof of server training has been provided.
12. Larkburger,LLC d/b/a Larkburger
#42-90984-0006
Renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant license in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances
in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on file and proof
of server training has been provided.
13. Daniel's Foods,Inc. d/b/a Mirabelle at Beaver Creek
#07-59554-0000
Renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant license in Avon(Beaver Creek). There have been no complaints or
disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on
file and proof of server training has been provided.
14. Top of the Rockies at Vail,Inc. d/b/a Top of the Rockies at Vail(Camp Hale)
#10-87789-0000
Renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant license in Vail. There have been no complaints or disturbances in the
past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol Management Plan is on file and proof of
server training has been provided.
15. Beaver Creek Food Services,Inc. d/b/a The Rendezvous Club
#04-51099-0009
Renewal of a Hotel and Restaurant license with 2-Opt.Premises on Avon(Beaver Creek). There have
been no complaints or disturbances in the past year. All the necessary fees have been paid. An Alcohol
Management Plan is on file and proof of server training has been provided.
Other
16. Piney River Ranch,LLC d/b/a Piney River Ranch
#42-82860-0000
Report of Change/Manager Registration-The applicant wishes to register Monique Busold as the new
manager,replacing Andrew Berst. Ms.Busold has no criminal history and was reported to be of good
moral character.
Commissioner Ryan moved that the Board approve the Liquor Consent Agenda for July 16,2013, as
presented.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
3
07/16/2013
Other Liquor Business — Special Events Permit
17. APPLICANT: Rink Productions, Inc.
REQUEST: Special Events Permit
EVENT: Beaver Creek Music Experience
DATE OF EVENT: Wednesday-July 31,2013
REPRESENTATIVE: Elizabeth Jones, Event Manager
LOCATION: Creekside Park,Beaver Creek Subdivision
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver
CONCERNS/ISSUES: None
DESCRIPTION:
The applicant has requested a permit for an event being held at Creekside Park in the Beaver Creek
Subdivision. The event will be held on Wednesday-July 31, 2013 from 3 pm to 10 pm(application times)
The applicant estimates approx. 300 attendees. Beaver Creek Security and staff will monitor access points and the
event boundaries. The boundary will be identified using fencing, ropes,barriers and tents. There will be three
entrances/exits into the licensed area. All staff assigned to handling alcohol will be server trained.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The applicant has submitted all the required documents and associated fees.
2. Public notice was given by posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises on July 5,2013, at least
10 days prior to the hearing.
3. No protests have been received in the Clerk's Office.
4. The applicant has provided an alcohol management plan,proof of server training and properly notified the
Eagle County Sheriff's Office per the requirements of the Eagle County Local Liquor Licensing Authority.
5. Staff has had no problems with events hosted by the applicant in the past.
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Scriver stated that she had no concerns about the request for the special event permit.
Elizabeth Jones explained that the gazebo area would be used and the gates would open at 5:00 p.m. The
show would last from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m.
Lauren Ciarallo, Event Manager stated that they had a master agreement of understanding that the Beaver
Creek Resort Company welcomed these types of events.
Commissioner Chandler—Henry moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for
the Rink Productions Inc. event being held at Creekside Park in Beaver Creek on July 31, 2013 from 3— 10 pm.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
*The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event.
18. APPLICANT: Rink Productions, Inc.
REQUEST: Special Events Permit
EVENT: Luncheon—Pre-Wine& Spirits Weekend Event
DATE OF EVENT: Saturday-August 10, 2013
REPRESENTATIVE: Elizabeth Jones, Event Manager
LOCATION: Strawberry Park,Beaver Creek Subdivision
4
07/16/2013
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver
CONCERNS/ISSUES: None
DESCRIPTION:
The applicant has requested a permit for an event being held at Strawberry Park in the Beaver Creek
Subdivision. The event will be held on Saturday-August 10,2013 from 10:00 am to 5:00 (application times)
The applicant estimates approx. 100 attendees. Beaver Creek Security and staff will monitor access points and the
event boundaries. The boundary will be identified using fencing,ropes,barriers and tents. There will be three
• entrances/exits into the licensed area. All staff assigned to handling alcohol will be server trained. The applicant
has been granted permission by Beaver Creek Food Service, Inc.to use the Osprey Optional Premises for certain
summer events in 2013.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The applicant has submitted all the required documents and associated fees.
2. Public notice was given by posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises on July 5, 2013, at least
10 days prior to the hearing.
3. No protests have been received in the Clerk's Office.
4. The applicant has provided an alcohol management plan,proof of server training and properly notified the
Eagle County Sheriff's Office per the requirements of the Eagle County Local Liquor Licensing Authority.
5. Staff has had no problems with events hosted by the applicant in the past.
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Scriver provided details for the event.
Elizabeth Jones spoke about the hike through the mountain and farm to table luncheon at the end. The
event requires a ticket.
Commissioner Ryan moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for the Rink
Productions, Inc. event being held at Strawberry Park in Beaver Creek on August 10, 2013 from 10 am—5 pm.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
*The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event.
19. APPLICANT: Vail Symposium
REQUEST: Special Events Permit
EVENT: Lecture Series
DATE OF EVENT: Wednesday—September 18, 2013
REPRESENTATIVE: Alby Segal,President
LOCATION: Colorado Mountain College-Lecture Hall
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver
CONCERNS/ISSUES: None
DESCRIPTION:
The applicant has requested a permit for an event being held at the Colorado Mountain College Campus in
Edwards. The event will be held,on Wednesday—September 18, 2013 from 5:30- 8:00 pm. The event reception is
from 5:30 to 6:00 pm. Finger food will be provided by the applicant. Beer and wine will be available,beer by the
can and wine will be served in small plastic cups. The applicant estimates approx. 80 attendees.
5
07/16/2013
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The applicant has submitted all the required documents and associated fees.
2. Public notice was given by posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises on July 5, 2013, at least
10 days prior to the hearing.
3. No protests have been received in the Clerk's Office.
4. The applicant has provided an alcohol management plan,proof of server training and properly notified the
Eagle County Sheriff's Office per the requirements of the Eagle County Local Liquor Licensing Authority.
5. Staff has had no problems with events hosted by the applicant in the past.
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Scriver described the event and location of the event. It would be similar to other lectures in the
Symposium series. They have had permits in the past with no issues. These were small events and the current
request was for a 30-minute reception before the lecture.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for
the Vail Symposium event being held at the Colorado Mountain College in Edwards on September 18,2013 from
5:30—8:00 pm.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
*The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event.
20. APPLICANT: Eagle Valley Land Trust
REQUEST: Special Event Permit
EVENT: Ed Fest Brewer and Music Festival
DATE: Saturday-August 17, 2013
REPRESENTATIVE(S): Scott Conklin, EVLT Programs Coordinator
LOCATION: 1st St.,2nd St., and Easy Street Riverwalk at Edwards
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Kathy Scriver
CONCERN: None
DESCRIPTION:
The applicant has requested a permit for the 2nd annual Ed Fest, a beer tasting festival hosted by Crazy
Mountain Brewing Company. The Ed Fest will feature craft beer sampling and live music. Beer and barley wine
will be served in"tasting"size glasses.This is a ticketed event open to all ages. There will be a kids area with
coloring books, arts and crafts,and other activities. Food vendors will include Local Joes' Pizza,Nicky's Quiches,
and Kaleb's Katch. The public will have the option of parking at Freedom Park and walking the path to Riverwalk,
utilizing public transportation, or biking in. The applicant has been granted permission by the Edwards Property
Owners Association to conduct the event on August 17 from 7:00 am to 10 pm in compliance with Riverwalk rules
and regulations.Temporary fencing will be erected to ensure no one enters or leaves the permitted area. Portable
restrooms will be available for public use. Citadel Security will provide event security. The applicant hopes to
attract 1,250 attendees.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. This application is in order,all requirements have been met, all necessary documents have been
received, and all fees have been paid.
6
07/16/2013
2. Public notice was given by the posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the premises,July 5, 2013, 10
days prior to the hearing.
3. No protests were filed in the Clerk's Office.
4. The applicant has provided an alcohol management plan and properly notified the Eagle County
Sheriff's Office per the requirements of the Local Liquor Licensing Authority
5. Proof of server training is pending.
6. Kevin Selvy from Crazy Mountain Brewery has gone through the Limited Review Process and a Mass
Gathering/Special Use Permit has been granted.
(Eagle County File No.LR-4217)
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Scriver described the event and location. The event will be closer to the Wells Fargo Bank in
Riverwalk. The event will be held on Saturday,August 17th.
Scott Conklin added some detail. It was the third annual event. They would have beer samples available
from local breweries and entertainment.
Chairman Fisher wondered about parking difficulties.
Mr. Conklin stated that the Riverwalk management did not have concerns about the parking. He explained
that it was a fundraiser for the Eagle Valley Land Trust.
Claire Plunkett,Crazy Mountain Brewery, Event Coordinator was also present.
Mr. Conklin provided some detail about the Eagle Valley Land Trust mission and scope of work.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved that the Local Liquor Licensing Authority approve the permit for
the Eagle Valley Land Trust event being held in the designated area within the Riverwalk at Edwards on Saturday,
August 17, 2013, from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
*The hours approved in the motion are the hours requested on the application and are not necessarily the hours of the event.
Commissioner Ryan moved to adjourn as the Eagle County Liquor Licensing Authority and re-convene as
the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
Planning Files
21. ZS-3521 Schmidt Special Use Permit 2011
Kris Valdez,Planning
Fritz Schmidt, Applicant
Terrill Knight: Knight Planning Services, Representative
Note: Tabled from 05/28/13
Action: The purpose of this Special Use Permit application is to request approval for certain uses, some of
which have historically occurred on Fritz Schmidt's property in the Commercial General Zone District.
Location: 71 Edwards Access Road, Edwards
OWNER: Fritz Schmidt Trust and Cecilia Schmidt Trust
APPLICANT: Owner
REPRESENTATIVE: Knight Planning Services, Inc./Terrill Knight
7
07/16/2013
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. SUMMARY: The purpose of this Special Use Permit application is to request approval for certain uses,
some of which have historically occurred on Fritz Schmidt's property in the Commercial General Zone
District.
In 2010-2011, Fritz Schmidt applied for a Special Use Permit and Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI)to recognize a pre-existing single-family residence, constructed in 1973,to remain as a legal use
in the Commercial General Zone District. The home was constructed prior to zoning being applied to the
subject property in 1974; the residence had been non-conforming in terms of zoning ever since.
During the 2010—2011 Special Use and FONSI process, some extraneous uses of the property were
identified by adjacent property owners and a Staff site visit. As a condition of the Applicant's requests
during the 2010-2011 Special Use Permit and FONSI, the uses of the property were required to be brought
into conformance with the provisions of the Commercial General Zone District and other regulatory
requirements.The Applicant is requesting the following uses be allowed:
• Seasonal plant sales,
• Christmas tree sales,
• Taxi storage,
• One plumbing truck,
• One towing truck, and
• Year-round used car sales.
Per the Eagle County Land Use Regulations, each of these uses in the Commercial General Zone District,
require a Special Use Permit approval.Also, since a majority of these uses occur within 75 foot streamside
setback, the Board of County Commissioners has the ability to amend streamside setbacks through the
Special Use Permit process. Below is the list of the proposed uses and impacts:
Business Dates of Operation Hours of Parking Spaces Type of Structure Signage
Operation
The Plant 20 ft.x 20 ft.plastic
Lady May 1—August 1 7 am to 7 pm 4 covered Quonset 4 ft.x 4 ft.
type building
Christmas November 23— 7 am to 7 pm 4 60 ft.x 60 ft.fenced 4 ft.x 4 ft.
Tree Stand January 1 area
18 vehicles/2 rows
Taxi November 15 July Whenever needed back to back— Not applicable None proposed
Vehicles 15 direct access not
necessary
Plumbing Operation year-round Whenever needed 1 truck Not applicable None proposed
Truck —as needed by clients
Towing Operation year-round Whenever needed 1 truck Not applicable None proposed
Truck —as needed by clients
As required by
Summer Hours: 12- the state and
6 M-F,Saturdays allowed within
Used car 10-4,Winter Hours: the existing
sales Operation year-round 1-5 M-F,Saturdays 13 spaces Not applicable sign code,no
10-3,Closed banners,
Sundays in Summer balloons,or
and Winter flags are being
proposed
B. SITE DATA:
8
07/16/2013
Surroundin l Land Uses/Zonin :
Land T9§e !.' ., Zoning ' Lind Use ZOuant
North: Old Edwards Estates Residential Suburban
Medium Density _
South: Mixed-Use Commercial General
Development
East: Riverwalk Mixed-Use Planned Unit CDOT Interstate Resource
Development Development Traveller Rest Area _
West: Eagle River Preserve Resource
EtisrIngZookT Commercial General
Proposed Zoning. : NA
Current=Delop .t:F Single-Family Residence
Site tntltns: Developed
Total Land.Mea: Acres: 2.426-acres Square feet: '' 105,684 square feet
Total Open Space: N/A
War en Public: ERW&SD Private:
Sewer: Ptbllu" ERW&SD Private:
Access; Via Edwards Access Road
C. CHRONOLOGY/BACKGROUND:
1973: Existing residence constructed
1974: Eagle County adopted and implemented zoning for all unincorporated lands.
1987: Subject property platted for first time.
1998: Subject property part of an amended final plat.
2000: Subject property defined in its current configuration via amended final,plat.
2010: Property owner discovers that the existing single-family residence has been considered legal non-
conforming by Eagle County since 1974;thereby making it impossible to refinance the residence
and property.
2011: Special Use Permit approved to allow residences in a commercial zone district and a FONSI
request for a stream setback variance.
2. STAFF REPORT
A. NECESSARY FINDINGS:
PROCESS INTENT
ECLUR Section: 5-250 Special Use Permits
Section Purpose: Special Uses are those uses that are not necessarily compatible with the other uses
allowed in a zone district, but which may be determined compatible with the other
uses allowed in the zone district based upon individual review of their location,
design, configuration, density and intensity of use, and the imposition of
appropriate conditions to ensure the compatibility of the use at a particular location
with surrounding land uses. All Special Uses shall meet the standards sett forth in
this Section.
Standards: Section 5-250.B. The issuance of a Special Use Permit shall be dependent upon
findings that there is competent evidence that the proposed use as conditioned,
fully complies with all the standards of this Section,this Division, this Article,and
these Land Use Regulations. The Planning Commission may recommend and the
9
07/16/2013
Board of County Commissioners may attach any conditions deemed appropriate to
ensure compliance with the following standards, including conformity to a specific
site plan, requirements to improve public facilities necessary to serve the Special
Use, and limitations on the operating characteristics of the use, or the location or
duration of the Special Use Permit
STANDARD: Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. [Section 5-250.B.1] The proposed Special Use shall
be appropriate for its proposed location and be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan and the FLUM of the Comprehensive Plan, including standards for building
and structural intensities and densities, and intensities of use.
EAGLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
i3
OD 8 U VN a FLUM
o o n .5 . R . Designation
as ° - D
Exceeds
Recommendations
Incorporates Majority of
X1 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9
Recommendations
Does Not Incorporate
Recommendations •
Not Applicable X X2 X3
Xl-The Plan indicates that growth should be managed toward future sustainability—a healthy balance between
economic success, quality of life and the preservation of the environment and that growth should be appropriately
designed and should be located within or immediately contiguous to existing town and community centers.This
proposal will not result in any additional development potential on the subject property. The uses proposed with
the Special Use Permit request are not increasing the developed area on the property,rather utilizing existing
impacted areas in the commercial center of Edwards.
X2—The Plan speaks to commercial uses should be appropriately scaled and should occur in towns and community
centers.The proposed uses are being located in the existing commercial center and are scaled appropriately for the
site.
X3—Due to the fact that this proposal does not entail additional commercial or new residential development,the
Housing Guidelines are not applicable.
X4—The subject property is served by public water, sewer and roads. The property is immediately adjacent to
existing commercial services. In the previous Special Use Permit and FONSI process, ECO Trails requested that
the Applicant provide a fifteen(15)foot wide trail easement across the subject property to accommodate the future
route of the Eagle Valley Core Trail through Edwards,connecting to the Eagle River Preserve. The final trail
design will accommodate and not block the driveway access to the subject property.
X5—The subject property is served with public water. The Plan speaks to protecting against source water
contamination; the Applicant has built a berm adjacent to the Eagle River to reduce the possibility of contamination
from snowplowing and other activities.The berm has been built with erosion control mat and seeded. Should the
seeding not become established,the Applicant will be required to reseed the berm. Staff is concerned about the
disposal of fertilized dirt and vegetation from the plant business due to observations by Staff of this practice in the
summer of 2012. Staff suggests that should any materials be disposed of near or in the Eagle River,the Special Use
Permit, if it is approved,may be revoked.
X6—Colorado Parks and Wildlife was sent a referral and no comment was received in regards to impacts of the
proposed uses.
X7—The proposed uses avoid areas of significant natural hazard.There are no known historical or archeological
resources on the property.
X8-The proposed uses do not generate any undue ocular,olfactory or auditory impacts which will compromise the
environmental quality of the property or surrounding areas.These uses are already taking place on the property and
this process is memorializing the uses.
10
07/16/2013
X9—The FLUM identifies the property as appropriate for mixed use development.
EDWARDS AREA COMMUNITY PLAN
0 FLum
5 c#) r i a 3 '5 1'
0
w a x H 4L G3 W W V W A p4 E• e Pa
Exceeds
Recommendation
Incorporates Majority
X1 X2 X3 X4
of Recommendations
Does Not Incorporate
Recommendations
Not Applicable X X X X X X X X
Xl - The Plan speaks to protection of natural resources and systems,balanced growth,protection of social, cultural
and historic resources, community character and mining activities. This Special Use Permit proposal will not
adversely impact natural resources, change growth patterns, alter social, cultural and historic resources or change
the community character. A berm has been constructed to minimize contamination to the Eagle River.
X2—The existing commercial uses are served by public water and sanitation facilities.
X3—The Plan speaks to ecosystem management, storm water drainage systems, clean mountain air, scenic vistas,
protecting unique natural resources,protection of riparian,wetland and aquatic habitat, and protection of rare and
endangered flora and fauna. With the installation of the berm,the Eagle River is protected from contaminates.
X4-The FLUM identifies the property as appropriate for mixed use development.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Compatibility. [Section 5-250.B.2] The proposed Special Use shall be appropriate for its
proposed location and compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.
Potential
Compatibility
Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning! Issues
Yes No
Old Edwards Residential
North: Estates Suburban X
Medium Density
South: Mixed Use Commercial X
Commercial General
Mixed Use Planned Unit
East: Commercial X
Riv '" Development aik
West: Eagle River Resource X
Preserve
Focusing only on the Special Use Permit request to memorialize the uses already occurring on site,no new
compatibility issues should arise.
11
07/16/2013
In 1981 when Old Edwards Estates received county approval,presumably consideration was given to
potential conflicts between the single family residential development on the north side of the Eagle River
and the existing commercially zoned property on the south side of the river. The Commercial General
designation was assigned to the subject property in 1974.
As of the writing of this report, Staff has received one opposition letter with concerns about noise in
regards to the commercial operation and the other three letters received from the owners of property in Old
Edwards Estates indicate that there is not a compatibility problem with the extraneous uses existing on the
property.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Zone District Standards. [Section 5-250.B.3] The proposed Special Use shall comply with
the standards of the zone district in which it is located and any standards applicable to the particular use,
as identified in Section 3-310, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Residential, Agricultural and
Resource Uses and Section 3-330, Review Standards Applicable to Particular Commercial and Industrial
Uses.
The uses being proposed for this property are listed as special uses in the Land Use Regulations since they
deserve a higher level of scrutiny to ensure the impacts from the uses do not diminish enjoyment of the
land.
As stated previously, these uses are existing on the property and as a requirement of the 2010-2011 Special
Use Permit and FONSI, the Applicant was required to legitimize the uses. As of the writing of this staff
report, no negative comments have been received about the uses by the adjacent property owners, except
the Edwards Metro District has concerns about the impact of parked cars adjacent to the Eagle River. The
property owner has addressed this concern by working with the Engineering Department after constructing
a berm along the Eagle River then adding erosion control mat and seeding it.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Design Minimizes Adverse Impact. [Section 5-250.B.4] The design of the proposed
Special Use shall minimize adverse impacts, including visual impact of the proposed use on adjacent lands;
furthermore, the proposed Special Use shall avoid significant adverse impact on surrounding lands
regarding trash, traffic, service delivery,parking and loading, odors, noise, glare, and vibration, and shall
not create a nuisance.
an`
Fs o
Exceeds ECLUR
Requirements
Satisfies ECLUR X X X X X X X
Requirements
Does Not Satisfy ECLUR
XI
Requirements
Not Applicable X
12
07/16/2013
Xl -The existing uses are provided with adequate services, and parking. Based on one letter of opposition,
an adjacent property believes the generator from the Christmas tree lot,taxis leaving the lot and the beeping
of commercial vehicles backing up create noise pollution for the neighbors.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Design Minimizes Environmental Impact. [Section 5-250.B.5] The proposed Special
Use shall minimize environmental impacts and shall not cause significant deterioration of water and air
resources, wildlife habitat, scenic resources, and other natural resources.
oi
a o
Exceeds ECLUR Requirements
Satisfies ECLUR Requirement X X X X X
Does Not Satisfy ECLUR Requirement X
Not Applicable
Recognition of the existing uses on the subject property, if the conditions of approval are adhered to, is not
anticipated to cause significant deterioration of water and air resources,wildlife habitat, scenic resources,
and other natural resources.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Impact on Public Facilities. [Section 5-250.B] The proposed Special Use Permit shall be
adequately served by public facilities and services, including roads,pedestrian paths,potable water and
wastewater facilities,parks, schools,police and fire protection, and emergency medical services.
.5'i
a a C^Y r yyc t1 4 tS, c^%O W t c
J 1 Uc5 S+ y %4
..
Exceeds ECLUR
Requirements _
Satisfies ECLUR X X X X X X
Requirements
Does Not Satisfy ECLUR
Requirement
Not Applicable X
The subject property is adequately served by public facilities and services including roads,pedestrian paths,
potable water and wastewater facilities,parks, schools,police and fire protection and emergency medical
13
07/16/2013
services. In the previous Special Use Permit and FONSI process,ECO Trails requested that the Applicant
provide a fifteen(15) foot wide trail easement across the subject property to accommodate the future route
of the Eagle Valley Core Trail through Edwards, connecting to the Eagle River Preserve;this is a suggested
condition of approval.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Site Development Standards. [Section 5-250.B.7] The proposed Special Use shall
comply with the appropriate standards in Article 4, Site Development Standards.
y }� W o z I' Article 4,site Development Standards
iHt d o
wax rw z
X Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards(Division 4-1)
X Landscaping and Illumination Standards(Division 4-2)
X Sign Regulations(Division 4-3)
X Wildlife Protection(Section 4-410)
X Geologic Hazards(Section 4-420)
X Wildfire Protection(Section 4-430)
X Wood Burning Controls(Section 4-440)
X Ridgeline Protection(Section 4-450)
X Commercial and Industrial Performance Standards(Division 4-5)
X Noise and Vibration(Section 4-520)
X Smoke and Particulates(Section 4-530)
X Heat,Glare,Radiation and Electrical Interference(Section 4-540)
X Storage of Hazardous and Non-hazardous Materials(Section 4-550)
X Water Quality Standards(Section 4-560)
X Roadway Standards(Section 4-620)
X Sidewalk and Trail Standards(Section 4-630)
X Irrigation System Standards(Section 4-640)
X Drainage Standards(Section 4-650)
X Grading and Erosion Control Standards(Section 4-660)
X Utility and Lighting Standards(Section 4-670)
X Water Supply Standards(Section 4-680)
X Sanitary Sewage Disposal Standards(Section 4-690)
X *Impact Fees and Land Dedication Standards(Division 4-7)
*to be applied to new structures only.
14
07/16/2013
The existing parking on the site is adequate for the proposed uses. Landscaping and illumination are
installed on site.The proposed signage will require a sign permit in conformance with the Land Use
Regulations. Staff received no comments from Colorado Parks and Wildlife in regards to wildlife impacts
from the uses. All water and sewer are served by Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and in an email
correspondence stated the District had no comment on the project. The Applicant has worked with the
Engineering Department on grading and erosion control on the property for the berm.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
STANDARD: Other Provisions. [Section 5-250.B.8] The proposed Special Use shall comply with all
standards imposed on it by all other applicable provisions of these Land Use Regulations for use, layout,
and general development characteristics.
The existing uses satisfy all applicable provisions of the land use regulations with the exception of the non-
conforming stream setback. As stated previously, the Board of County Commissioners has the ability to
amend the stream setback through the Special Use process.
EXCEEDS MINIMUM STANDARDS
X MEETS MINIMUM STANDARDS
MEETS THE MAJORITY OF MINIMUM STANDARDS
DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS
B. REFERRAL RESPONSES:
Eagle County Engineering Department: In the attached response dated,January 28, 2013, Eagle County
Engineering reviewed the information presented during the re-referral and has no comments on the
additional information provided. The November 26, 2012 comments still apply and are provided below:
Eagle County Engineering has reviewed the information provided by the Applicant on February 21, 2012
with the understanding that the Eagle County Land Use Regulations now allow the BoCC to approve a
variance to the 75-foot stream setback that is not limited to a 50-foot stream setback.
The Applicant is requesting a variable stream setback as defined by Exhibit A of the submitted information
with a minimum setback of 10-feet. This setback would not impact the defined floodplain(see attached).
During the summer of 2012 the Applicant constructed a berm adjacent to the river. This berm should
provide some protection in preventing plowing of the parking lot into the river. In addition,the berm
provides some visual relief from the property owners across the river.
The berm was seeded and protected with erosion mat. However,the Applicant will need to continue to
work to minimize weed growth until the native vegetation is established.
ECO Trails: As part of the 2010-2011 Special Use Permit and FONSI process ,ECO Trails requested a
15 foot wide trail easement to accommodate the future route of the Eagle Valley Core Trail through
Edwards,connecting to the Eagle River Preserve. The final trail design will accommodate and not block
the access driveway to the residential property. This easement has not been provided yet,therefore it is a
condition of approval on this file as well.
Eagle County Department of Environmental Health: Adam Palmer reviewed the special use application
for plant sales/storage,taxi storage,used vehicle sales and Christmas tree sales on the subject property. As
15
07/16/2013
part of Eagle County's commitment to preserving the health of the natural environment and protecting air
and water quality,there is particular sensitivity to uses near live rivers and streams, including surrounding
riparian areas. While some of these areas have already been altered or impacted from past uses,there exists
an opportunity to not only reduce impacts from future uses,but mitigate previous impacts as well through
implementation of best management practices along the Eagle River. To this end,Adam had the following
comments:
• "A detailed plan showing the retention and treatment from vehicles being washed/maintained on
the property is recommended in order to protect the adjacent riparian area and water quality of the
Eagle River. In addition,the Sustainable Community Index recommends best management
practices such as bioswales and other natural retention features to reduce suspended solids and
other pollutants for projects within 200 feet of a live stream.
• Please provide a comprehensive list of soils, amendments, fertilizers,pesticides,herbicides and
storage plan for such materials which will be used on the property, as well as spill prevention
control and countermeasures plan. Storage and use of such materials is discouraged in or near
riparian areas.
• While a FONSI was granted in 2011 to recognize the existing residence on the property,
Environmental Health advocates for the protection of Eagle County's riparian areas through strict
application of the stream setback provision which requires that a 75-ft. strip of land on either side
of the high water mark remain in its natural state. Where previous impacts have altered the natural
state in these areas, it is recommended that they be reclaimed and revegetated with native plant
species accordingly.
• A landscape design which provides effective visual screening for the taxi and boat storage is
recommended.
• Please provide proposed comprehensive signage and lighting plan for all of the proposed uses,
either seasonal or ongoing."
The Applicant has provided a written response to these comments. Please see the attached correspondence
dated,February 20, 2013.
Edwards Metropolitan District: "The Edwards Metropolitan District reviewed the Fritz Schmidt Special
Use Permit to allow temporary use on the existing parking lot within the 75 foot streamside setback and the
Special Use Permit to allow temporary uses on a seasonal basis. While the District respects Mr. Schmidt's
historical use of his property and recognizes that his site has severe constraints due to the shape and size of
the property,the District would like to express its concern about the manner in which some of Mr.
Schmidt's property is being used particularly where its use is located in close proximity to the Eagle River.
The Edwards Metropolitan District would like to express concern about parked vehicles which are located
in close proximity to the Eagle River.The Board is concerned about how those vehicles may be impacting
the environment of the Eagle River. The Edwards Metropolitan District Board of Directors looks to Mr.
Ray Merry to continue to oversee and enforce County regulations concerning present and future
environmental impacts to the Eagle River."
Colorado Parks and Wildlife: No comments were received back from this referral agency.
Adjacent Property Owners:
1) Debbie K.Marquez
128 Old County Lane
In the attached e-mail dated February 1, 2012,Ms.Marquez states she doesn't hear any commotion of
the Schmidt property and thinks a Special Use permit is going overboard.
16
07/16/2013
2) Andrea Burrows
172 Old County Lane
In the attached letter dated January 25, 2012,Ms.Burrows believes the Schmidt's commercial property
is grandfathered in, due diligence before buying is the responsibility of the buyers, any changes made by
residents in the Old Edwards Estates are the responsibility of that resident, living in the center of
Edwards comes with positives and negatives in regard to the activities of the commercial properties.
3) Tim O'Donnell
180 Old County Lane
In the attached letter dated February 2, 2012,Mr. O'Donnell states he has no complaints with the current
level of use. As long as he(Mr. Schmidt)reasonably respects the interests of adjacent property owners
before making any changes to the use of this property.
4) Chris Cooper
202 Old County Lane
In the attached email dated March 26,2013,Mr. Cooper is concerned about the hodgepodge nature of
the uses,noise and light pollution,and the aesthetics of locating vehicles along the Eagle River corridor.
C. PLANNING COMMISSION:
On May 1, 2013,the Planning Commission voted 3 to 1 to deny the project.
At the April 3,2013, hearing,the Planning Commission and Eagle County agencies made the following comments:
• Environmental Health would prefer to see further restoration of the Eagle River Corridor and have the
opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of restoring the 10 foot setback area.
• A Planning Commissioner asked if the dry well and swale were already in place?
o Applicant response: Yes,the dry well and swale are in place.
• A Planning Commissioner asked is the gravel area going to be used for taxi storage or will the
miscellaneous items be brought back, such as boats and trailers?
o Applicant response: No, the boat and trailers will not be brought back. The gravel area will be for
the taxis,The Plant Lady and Christmas tree sales.
• A Planning Commissioner questioned if the lighting for Christmas tree sales is operating. There are
complaints from neighbors concerning the noise of the generator. Can an electrical hookup be installed
outside?There should be a condition that an electrical hookup be installed.
o Applicant response: The lighting will still be there and we can arrange for an electrical hookup.
• A Planning Commissioner made the statement that the dry well is point source pollution and wants a
condition that the dry well be tested on a regular basis.
• Martha Miller from Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) made the comment that she is
concerned about water quality and that the parking lot wasn't there 15 years ago. She questioned if there is
an access permit for the site?
o Engineering Department response: The access permit is very general and it could be updated, but
they do have an access permit.
• Martha Miller also stated that the pavement on the east side of the applicant's property and the property has
been changed without permission from CDOT. Ms. Miller was concerned that the total parking count
included the pavement on CDOT's property.
o Applicant response: The parking on CDOT's property has not been counted in the parking totals.
CDOT has every right to take back use of the property.
o A Planning Commissioner asked if CDOT could take the property back?
o CDOT Response: We will wait until the Edwards Access Road expansion.
• A Planning Commissioner stated that the applicant has done some things on the property that has improved
the property. The Eco Trail could be better located. There is better placement for all these uses. This could
17
07/16/2013
have been a great application but by approving this, we are eliminating our ability to make this a better
project.
• A Planning Commissioner stated that the impaired status of the Eagle River cannot be overstated. A dry
well is a direct connection to the Eagle River and is not a protection mechanism from runoff on the site. If
the commercial use of the land was better we wouldn't need to be farming the property out to these
different uses in the parking lot and adjacent to the river which further impacts the river corridor. We can
no longer say that a special use permit can be withdrawn within a couple of years because the impact from
the special use, especially in an area adjacent to the river corridor,has already taken place.
• A Planning Commissioner stated that in the Eagle-Vail Commercial Area Plan, we are trying to clean up
impacts to the Eagle River corridor through mitigation measures during redevelopment. The point being
that 61/4 miles downstream we are looking at a special use permit to allow just what we are trying to clean
up in Eagle-Vail. We should be consistent in what we're trying to accomplish. This project is an example
of poor planning.
• A Planning Commissioner stated that the whole plan needs a major redo and the Planning Commission
needs a site visit.
• The applicant would not agree to redo the project and would not reschedule the project until June to
accommodate a site visit.
• The applicant requested a vote on the project,but there was no longer a quorum.
• The project therefore was tabled to April 17th for a vote.
At the May 1,2013,hearing,the Planning Commission and Eagle County agencies made the following comments:
• A Planning Commissioner stated that there are too many proposed uses and issues associated with those
uses on the property. He went on to say the existing design has maximized the commercial opportunities at
the expense of the environmental impacts. All the uses would adversely affect the public's health, safety,
and welfare and the proposed uses do not comply with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan or the Eagle
River Watershed Plan. The final comment was that the trail alignment should be determined prior to the
project being approved.
• A Planning Commissioner stated that the highest and best use of this property is commercial. While the
parcel was developed with challenges, the environmental concerns are overwhelming. The dry well is a
direct link to possible contaminants in the Eagle River and he would prefer that the dry well be reanalyzed
for water quality and runoff. This project would cause further detriment to the endangered Eagle River. A
condition should be added that would eliminate the ability of the applicant to pave any closer to the river.
D. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OPTIONS:
1. Approve the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT FILE NO.ZS-3521] request without conditions if it is
determined that the petition will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and the proposed
use is attuned with the immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal
is in compliance with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle
County Comprehensive Plan(and/or other applicable master plans).
2. Deny the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT FILE NO.ZS-35211 request if it is determined that the petition will
adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare and/or the proposed use is not attuned with the
immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is not in compliance
with both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County
Comprehensive Plan(and/or other applicable master plans).
3. Table the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT FILE NO.ZS-35211 request if additional information is
required to fully evaluate the petition. Give specific direction to the petitioner and staff.
4. Approve the [SPECIAL USE PERMIT FILE NO.ZS-3521] request with conditions and/or
performance standards if it is determined that certain conditions and/or performance standards are
necessary to ensure public,health, safety, and welfare and/or enhances the attunement of the use with the
immediately adjacent and nearby neighborhood properties and uses and the proposal is in compliance with
18
07/16/2013
both the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and with the guidelines of the Eagle County Comprehensive
Plan(and/or other applicable master plans).
E. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS:
1. Except as otherwise modified by this development permit, all material representations
made by the Applicant in this application and in public meeting shall be adhered to and
considered conditions of approval.
2. Per the comment letter from Eagle County Engineering, should the seeding on the berm
not establish,the berm shall be reseeded until such time as vegetation is established.
3. The Applicant shall work with ECO Trails to define and convey to Eagle County a fifteen
(15) foot wide trail easement across the subject property for future connection of the
Eagle Valley Core Trail to the Eagle River Preserve. The final trail alignment and design
must accommodate and not block the driveway access to the subject property. The
Property Owner shall submit a legal description for the easement and a survey accurate
map to Eagle County for review and approval by September 30, 2013.
4. Per the recommendation of the Environmental Health Department,the applicant shall submit a
stormwater management plan to Eagle County for review and approval which incorporates Best
Management Practices (BMPs)designed to intercept site drainage for the purpose of keeping
pollutants from entering the groundwater regime.
5. Per the recommendation of the Environmental Health Department,the applicant shall provide
Eagle County with a report generated by a qualified professional experienced in stream bank
restoration that evaluates the feasibility and cost of improving the existing deteriorated stream bank
and riparian area. Implementation of a restoration plan will enable the proposed uses to occur
within the 75'stream setback.
6. Per staff's observations during a site visit, should any materials be disposed of in the
Eagle River corridor,the responsible party may have the Special Use approval revoked.
7. The applicant shall not pave within the environmental treatment area up to and around the
dry well.
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Valdez presented the request. The applicant was requesting various uses and per the Eagle County
Land Use Regulations, each of the uses in the Commercial General Zone required a Special Use Permit approval.
A majority of the uses occurred within the 75 ft. stream setback. The applicant was requesting a variable stream
setback of 10-feet. The uses were ongoing and there had been impacts to the area.The Planning Commission
denied the request 3 to 1. Environmental Health would prefer to see further restoration of the Eagle River Corridor.
Commissioner Ryan asked about the last condition and who would be the responsible party,the business or
the applicant.
Ms.Valdez stated that it would be the businesses responsibility. She would ask the applicant what his
contract entailed.
Terrill Knight spoke on behalf of the applicant. He believed the applicant was trying to do the right thing
and was willing to follow the new regulations as they changed. The property was in the community center and
conformed to the Master Plan. He spoke about the issues with the river setback. The applicant had conformed to
the intent of the regulations. The applicant had graded the property, increased vegetation and built a berm. He
presented photos of the property and explained the history of the site. The stream bank had been altered on both
sides of the river many times over the years. There was excess parking on the site and the uses were seasonal.
Commissioner Ryan asked about the number of parking spaces and whether they were owned by the
applicant.
19
07/16/2013
Mr.Knight stated that the applicant had provided additional parking. He believed there were 34 more
spaces onsite than the county required. The applicant was also committed to working with the county to put in a
bike trail. Vail Valley Auto Sales,LLC-Mark Heinbaugh had committed to the conditions and would comply with
summer and winter hours of operation. In 2011,the BoCC granted a 50-foot setback for the existing home and
requested an additional special use permit for the additional existing uses. The parking summary indicated that
there were 193 spaces and the county regulations required 92. The parking area includes unpaved areas as well.
Commissioner Ryan wondered how many cars would fit in the unpaved area.
Mr.Knight estimated 12-14. The lot was triangular shaped and the current buildings were built based on
the setbacks at the time. The applicant had all the amenities and parking and requested approval of the lower
restricted uses.
Mark Heinbaugh spoke about his used car sales business. His business was recently approved by the state.
His inventory would include premium used cars already detailed.
Commissioner Ryan spoke about the importance of the maintaining the health of the river.
Mr. Heinbaugh stated that he had high quality standards and none of his vehicles would leak any type of
fluids.
Commissioner Ryan wondered when the regulation went into place that required a special use permit for
these commercial uses and why the permits were not applied for earlier and why there was so much lap time.
Bob Narracci stated that for at least 14 years the operations had been a special use.
Mr.Knight stated that the applicant would like to maintain the operations on the property. The property
was in a community center and believed the mix of uses were appropriate for the area.
Mr. Schmidt spoke about the 75' setback and how it had affected his property. It did not make sense to him
and he hoped that the board would keep things simple.
Chairman Fisher believed the regulations were created to protect the environment.
Commissioner Ryan stated that the county was trying to protect the river.
Mr. Schmidt liked the river too but his future was dependent on the approval.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry stated that the board supported local business but understood the concerns
with the river.
Ms.Valdez summarized the request.
Chairman Fisher thought that a site visit would be helpful. The board had another site visit on August 12th
at 9 am.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry like the idea of a site visit and thought it would be helpful to have Ellie
Caryl and Toby Sprunk present as well. She was also interested in hearing from Adam Palmer as he expressed
several concerns.
Commissioner Ryan moved to table the file no.ZS-3521 Schmidt Special Use Permit 2011 until
September 3,2013 and scheduled a site visit for Monday-August 12,2013 at 10 am.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
22. 1041-3084 LEDE Reservoir Enlargement
Bob Narracci,Planning
Ray Merry,Environmental Department
Jeff Shroll: Town of Gypsum,Applicant
Tim Beck: Zancanella&Associates,Representative
Ramsey Kropf: Waterlaw,Representative
Action: The purpose for the 1041 Permit is to allow enlargement of LEDE Reservoir.
Location: In the White River National Forest on Gypsum Creek, approximately 18.5 miles south of the
Town of Gypsum
APPLICANT: Town of Gypsum/Jeff Shroll,Town Manager
REPRESENTATIVE: Zancanella&Associates/Tim Beck
REQUEST: 1041 Permit to allow enlargement of LEDE Reservoir
20
07/16/2013
1. SUMMARY
LEDE Reservoir is located in the White River National Forest on Gypsum Creek, approximately 18.5 miles south
of the Town of Gypsum. The existing LEDE Reservoir was originally constructed in 1931. The name 'LEDE'
reflects the four families who originally decreed and historically used the reservoir; Elmer&Minne Lundgren
(`L'),Ed Erickson(`E'), Charles Doll(`D'),and Mrs. EP Engstrom(`E').
The reservoir as currently constructed has a capacity of 431 acre-feet, and surface area of 24.8 acres. The reservoir
is filled from in-basin runoff plus a decreed diversion and pipeline from Antones Cabin Creek. The existing
spillway is an unlined, 16 foot wide, open-cut channel on the right abutment,with concrete grade control structures.
The outlet works consist of an 18 inch riveted steel pipe and corrugated metal pipe below the dam, regulated by a
mechanically operated gate. The estimated capacity of the existing outlet works is 30 cfs.
The existing LEDE Reservoir Dam is a homogenous earth embankment dam with a rock toe drain. The dam was
originally constructed to a height of 15 feet in 1931,and was raised to its present structural height of 44 feet in
about 1940. The present hydraulic(jurisdictional)height of LEDE Reservoir Dam is 39 feet,the crest length is
about 340 feet, and the crest width varies from 8 to 12 feet. The reservoir maximum pool elevation is 9,524 feet
and has a Colorado Dam Safety Bureau hazard classification of high hazard.
The existing reservoir does not have sufficient storage capacity to accommodate the Town's existing water rights or
meet the Town's projected water demands for municipal, agricultural, industrial and other associated needs. The
enlargement proposal is also designed to provide reliable dry-year carryover storage,help meet minimum in-stream
flows on Gypsum Creek and the Eagle River and to enhance the fishery and recreational opportunity provided by
the reservoir.
The overall Project purpose is to provide Gypsum with a water supply of an additional 516 acre-feet of firrn yield
water for use in its service area,by expanding the existing reservoir site. The Needs Analysis and preliminary
Alternatives analysis clearly point to expansion of in-basin storage as the only cost-effective and practicable
alternative to addressing Gypsum's water supply issues. Based on the existence of LEDE Reservoir in the basin,
water rights held by the Town and potential to expand this facility to capture physically-available water,multiple
alternatives were considered.
The Town evaluated five alternatives prior to choosing the preferred course of action. Alternative 1 was the `No
Action' alternative; Alternative 2 would repair the dam to existing storage capacity only; Alternative 3 entailed
repairing the dam and increasing storage capacity to 685 acre-feet; Alternative 4 entails repairing the dam and
increasing storage capacity to 947 acre-feet (this is the option that the Town is pursuing); Alternative 5 entailed
repairing the dam and increasing storage capacity to 1040+/-acre-feet.
The Project and associated permits are also to authorize necessary reconstructive work on the LEDE Reservoir dam
and spillway to meet current safety standards mandated by the State of Colorado. The Town has requested that the
USFS authorize enlargement of LEDE reservoir from its current size of 24.8 surface acres and 431 acre-feet of
storage capacity to 32.2 surface acres and 947 acre-feet of storage capacity. This meets the Town's identified need
for an additional 516 acre-feet of stored water supply for projected municipal growth.
This 1041 Permit application by the Town of Gypsum proposes to enlarge LEDE Reservoir. Specifically, the
request is to:
1) Expand the reservoir from its present size of 431 acre-feet to 947 acre-feet;
2) Modify and enlarge the existing spillway to comply with state dam safety regulations;
3) Raise the current dam face to an additional 18.7 feet to meet storage and safety freeboard requirements, and
the dam crest is to be widened by a minimum of 22-feet;
4) Replace the outlet pipe due to deterioration and to meet the design requirement of reducing the water level
in the reservoir by five(5) feet over five(5) days;
5) Replace the dam outlet gate and trash rack due to their age(78-years), and deterioration.
21
07/16/2013
Construction is slated to commence in late summer of 2013.
2. BACKGROUND& CHRONOLOGY
1931: Water rights decreed for LEDE Ditch and LEDE Reservoir. Original Reservoir constructed.
1940: Dam expanded to existing configuration.
2005: Town of Gypsum decreed use for recreational,aesthetic,piscatorial purposes, domestic, commercial,
industrial, street cleaning/washing, fire protection, all other municipal uses,augmentation and exchange.
2007: The Town of Gypsum Public Works Department in conjunction with Zancanella and Associates has
maintained and operated LEDE Reservoir and LEDE Ditch since acquiring those water rights and securing the
initial special use permit for the Project in 2007.
2013: Application for this 1041 Permit received by Eagle County.
3. REFERRAL RESPONSES
This 1041 Permit application was referred to the following departments and agencies with request for comment:
• Eagle County Engineering Department
• Eagle County Attorney's Office
• Eagle County Planning Commission
• Colorado State Department of Environmental Health(Air Quality and Water Quality Divisions)
• Colorado Parks and Wildlife
• Colorado Geological Survey
• Colorado Division of Water Resources
• Colorado River District
• Water Conservation Board
• State Historical Society
• United States Forest Service
• Army Corps of Engineers
• Natural Resource Conservation Service
• Eagle Park Reservoir Company
• Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
• Eagle River Watershed Council
• Northwest Colorado Council of Governments
As of this writing,the following responses have been received:
Eagle County Engineering Department: In the attached memorandum dated June 28, 2013,the Engineering
Department has offered no comments.
Eagle County Planning Commission: In the attached memorandum dated July 3, 2013,the Director of
Environmental Health summarized the comments of the Eagle County Planning Commission, as follows:
1) As with the approval of the Homestake Reservoir expansion,the Planning Commission suggested that
Eagle County be compensated for any damage or premature wear and tear due to the added construction
traffic.
2) It would be beneficial to have a conservation pool maintained to avoid seasonal fluctuations in water
elevations that have previously made the reservoir unsightly and unusable at times.By maintaining a
conservation pool,the USFS may consider reestablishing the camp ground.
22
07/16/2013
3) It is recommended that more information be provided regarding how private properties are affected beneath
the reservoir within the inundation zone if the dam fails.
4) It is recommended that additional information be provided regarding the Project's influence on the
groundwater system around the reservoir.
5) It is recommended that the applicant discuss the operation and potential improvements to the ditch that
carries water from the Brush Creek basin from Antone's Creek.
Colorado Geological Survey: In the attached letter dated June 27, 2013,the CGS indicated that they have no
objection to the proposed 1041 permit application,as submitted.
Colorado Parks and Wildlife: In the attached letter dated May 24, 2013,the CPW identified four impori,ant
wildlife issues in relation to the proposed LEDE Reservoir Enlargement Project:
1) Riparian areas provide important wildlife habitats, migration corridors,breeding,nesting, fawning and
calving areas.
a. The habitat downstream of LEDE reservoir has been maintained by seepage from the reservoir and
some bypass flow. CPW would like to see that this habitat is maintained with continued seepage
and bypass flows.
b. Concurrently,protecting and enhancing riparian habitat supports the Eagle River Watershed Plan
developed and agreed to by many communities in the Eagle River watershed.
2) In-stream flows in Gypsum Creek below LEDE Reservoir are necessary to preserve and improve the
natural environment to a reasonable degree.
a. Seasonal hydrograph can be mimicked providing some peak flow periods during spring non-off to
support hydrologic maintenance of the stream channel and maintain in-stream habitat for fish.
b. Bypass flows can also be utilized to support CWCB's ISF (Case#5-80CW117)or peak flows when
possible.
3) Fisheries and angling in the Eagle Valley are important values for residents and visitors alike. These values
contribute to the quality of life important to the community, and provide a significant economical input to
local businesses. LEDE Reservoir has provided popular put-and-take trout fisheries during warmer
months. Gypsum Creek and the Eagle River have downstream fisheries that offer excellent angling
opportunities. As well,the larger watershed is home to endangered native fishes in the Colorado River that
are intrinsically important to Colorado.
a. CPW would like to see that angling recreation is maintained in LEDE Reservoir,but we also
believe there is opportunity to enhance the fishery and angling by providing for winter carryover of
fish. This will permit fish longer residence time in the reservoir to grow after being stocked,
providing a better fishing experience for anglers. Also,there may be the possibility of ice fishing
that will increase recreational opportunities for anglers.
b. CPW believes the expansion of LEDE Reservoir will benefit downstream fisheries. The release of
water for irrigation and municipal purposes during summer and early fall will subsequently benefit
fisheries in Gypsum Creek by providing water during low flow,high temperature periods..
c. CPW supports the participation of LEDE Reservoir operations in the Upper Colorado Endangered
Fish Recovery Program by signing an agreement to coordinate water releases with the US Fish and
Wildlife Service to help protect our downstream endangered fishes in the Colorado River.
4) Wildlife communities exist throughout the Gypsum Creek drainage. It is important to minimize impacts to
their natural foraging areas and behaviors.
a. Eliminate human food sources for bears and other wildlife in order to minimize human-wildlife
conflicts and protect the wild foraging behavior of bears.
b. Avoid introducing invasive species or disease to the Gypsum Creek drainage.
CPW would like to see the Town of Gypsum take advantage of the expected flexibility in the manner of s1 orage and
release of water with the LEDE Reservoir expansion project to benefit both the Town and the Gypsum Creek
watershed. In the State of Colorado Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan submitted to the CPW, we would like to see
specific mitigation activities defined,rather than generally referring to the Environmental Assessment(EA).
Furthermore,to protect the Gypsum Creek watershed intrinsically,recreationally, and economically important
23
07/16/2013
wildlife and fishery resources, CPW offers the following suggestions foryour consideration and inclusion in the
mitigation plan:
• Maintain or improve downstream riparian habitat condition by releasing water to mimic flows native to the
creek, and meet ISF or peak flows when possible.
o CPW supports bypass flows (0.1 —0.3 cfs) identified in the EA during reservoir filling. However,
we would like to see those minimal discharges extended to periods when other active releases are
not occurring at times of the year when the stream would not otherwise be frozen(March-
November). We recognize that during exceptionally dry years,little to no bypass water will be
available.
o CPW suggests meeting or exceeding ISF or average peak flow(3.5 cfs)during run-off when
possible during average and wet years to provide downstream flushing flow and channel
maintenance. Again,we recognize that exceptionally dry years may not allow for such releases.
• Provide overwinter habitat for fish in the reservoir and sustain the downstream fishery.
o CPW supports the development of a dead pool, at best,and the carryover of water for a
conservation pool, at least. We assume that during exceptionally dry years, complete drawdown
may be necessary to fulfill water demands and will eliminate carryover storage;therefore,we
believe a dead pool could protect the fishery and we encourage its consideration during this
construction occasion to realize the fishery and angling potential for the community.
o To protect the fish downstream,we request ramping of flows(gradually accelerating and
decelerating water releases)occurs if flows exceed 3.5 cfs to prevent flushing fish downstream, or
conversely, stranding fish with flow stoppage.
• Protect local wildlife.
o Require the use of bear-proof containers for food and trash storage during construction. Also,
promote the use of such containers and responsible food storage for campers and recreationalists
around the reservoir. If waste receptacles are provided on-site for recreationalists,require them to
also be bear-proof
o Avoid the spread of Aquatic Nuisance Species and diseases(e.g., invasive animal and plant
species, whirling disease, chytrid fungus, etc.)by cleaning and disinfecting construction equipment
used in wet areas and allowing it to dry between watersheds.
*The Town of Gypsum responded to CPW with a revised mitigation plan on June 17, 2013, and is being
considered for adoption on July 11, 2013. The permit then goes to the Colorado Water Conservation Board on
July 17, 2013.
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District: In the attached email dated June 14,2013,the ERW&SD indicated
that they have no comment on the proposed LEDE Reservoir expansion.
Eagle River Watershed Council: In the attached letter dated June 28,2013,the ERWC set forth the following
recommendations:
1) The application generally complies with the strategies stated in the Water Quantity section of the recently
adopted 2013 Eagle River Watershed Plan(ERWP). Additional in-basin augmentation, including
carryover storage to dry year conditions,will enhance stream health and aquatic habitat in Gypsum Creek;
2) The existing reservoir is being expanded,providing additional recreational opportunities as supported by
the ERWP.
3) The expansion of existing in-basin storage operations to provide for local stream flow augmentation is also
supported by the 2013 ERWP.
4) According to the application and Town water schedule,raw water irrigation is encouraged to reduce
treatment costs and practice wise use of resources. In the future,the Town may revise service costs, as
deemed necessary, to account for expanded augmentation water available through this Project.
5) The 2013 ERWP encourages all water providers to adopt a strategy whereby augmentation water must
come from an in-basin source when the CWCB rights are in priority. The Town's 1999 Foundation Plan
also provides a strategy to meet or exceed minimum instream flow requirements at all times in order to
protect the aquatic habitat of Gypsum Creek. The application appears consistent with both strategies.
24
07/16/2013
6) We agree with the Town's suggest language about protecting Colorado Water Conservation Board/In
Stream Flow rights in response to the US Army Corps of Engineers/Environmental Protection Agency
request for streamflow monitoring. This approach will result in an accounting of releases from LEDE to
Gypsum Creek, as suggested by the Town.
7) The applicant has implemented tiered rate structures and other conservation techniques that provide for
efficient use of treated water, also in compliance with the 2013 ERWP.
8) As opportunities for new growth arise post expansion of LEDE,the Town could require further water
conservation planning for new developments for efficient use of in-basin water resources.
Northwest Colorado Council of Governments: In the attached memorandum dated June 18, 2013,NWCCOG set
forth the following recommendations in terms of the Regional Water Quality Management Plan(the 208 Plan):
1) 208 Plan Policy No. 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 existin and designated
uses of those waters; waters not currently supporting designated uses shall be restored as soon as is
financially and technically feasible".
The project will disturb areas for the construction of the dam and reservoir. This could lead to nonpoint
sources of sediment from erosion of the disturbed areas. The applicant has proposed Best Management
Practices to address this and will have a Stormwater Management Plan as part of their compliance with the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment requirements. This Stormwater Management Plan
should include provisions for post construction soil stabilization.
Releases of water from the reservoir will be of the same quality as current conditions,therefore should not
diminish water quality and may actually help improve stream temperatures during low flow periods. The
applicant has submitted the project to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for 401
Certification of compliance with water quality standards. The proposed LEDE Reservoir expansion
complies with Policy No. 1.
2) 208 Plan Policy No. 2,Water Use and Development. "The project developer shall mitigate the impacts to
water quality and the aquatic environment caused by water projects".
The project will reduce runoff volumes in the upper reaches of Gypsum Creek during periods when it is
storing water. A USFS bypass flow will improve connectivity in the stream channel during periods that the
creek is currently dry. BMP's to protect the short term impacts from the construction of the reservoir are
proposed. Therefore, any water quality impacts will be insignificant and the proposed project complies
with Policy No. 2
3) 208 Plan Policy No. 3, Land Use and Disturbance. "Water quality, including wetlands,floodplains,
shorelines and riparian areas, must be protected from land uses and development so that significcrnt
degradation of water quality is prevented".
The project will destroy 1.91 acres of wetlands. The applicant and the Army Corps of Engineers have
proposed offsite mitigation at a 2:1 ratio. Offsite compensatory mitigation is not NWCCOG's preference,
but the 1041 application indicates the site for these compensatory wetlands is nearby and is intended to
replace lost wetland functions. The application is in compliance with Policy No. 3.
4) 208 Plan Policy No. 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".
25
07/16/2013
The LEDE reservoir is an expansion of the existing reservoir on the same footprint. Growth and
development associated with the reservoir expansion would occur within the Town of Gypsum. Therefore,
the proposal is in compliance with Policy No. 4.
5) 208 Plan Policy No. 5, Chemical Management. "The use 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".
The Stormwater Management Plan should identify appropriate handling of any chemicals associated with
the construction project, such as temporary storage of diesel fuel on site. Review of this document would
occur at a different stage in the planning process. Therefore,the proposed project complies with Policy No.
5.
6) 208 Plan Policy No. 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 control the recommended level of
management is at the watershed level".
Eagle County and the USFS are the designated Management Agency to oversee the potential water quality
aspects of the land development aspects of the proposed LEDE project. Eagle County's 1041 Permit
requirements and other measures in the Land Use Code and the USFS Special Use Permit Process will
effectively minimize the risk of any water quality issues. The Town of Gypsum is the management agency
for impacts associated with growth and development that stem from the increased availability of water for
domestic purposes. Therefore,it is my finding that this management agency structure is adequate and
provides the most appropriate framework for oversight of pollution control associated with the proposed
LEDE Reservoir expansion; the proposed project complies with Policy No. 6.
4. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Pursuant to Eagle County Land Use Regulations, 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 the recommendation indicated in the findings box.
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. 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 in Appendix `A'.
(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: A Special Use Permit has been obtained from the United States Forest Service
(USFS),White River National Forest. An Environmental Assessment has been performed and a
Decision Notice, as well as, a Finding of No Significant Impact has been issued. Other required
permits and approvals have been ongoing for a significant period of time and are expected to be issued
shortly. The permits and approvals in question have been documented in the application submittal
information. Currently,the required permitting is listed below:
• U.S. Forest Service Special Use Permit,Final Permit Amendment 5/15/13
26
07/16/2013
• Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Individual Permit,Final Permit Pending
• State of Colorado Dam Safety Permitting,Final Permit Obtained
• State of Colorado Wildlife Mitigation Permit Application,Final Permit Pending
• This Eagle County 1041 Permit,Pending Approval
• Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 401 Water Quality Certification,Final
Permit Pending
• Stormwater Management Permit,Final Permit Pending
Staff agrees the Applicant has identified all permits necessary for this Project that must be obtained
prior to site disturbance but many are still pending. It is the discretion of the Permit Authority to defer
making a final decision on this permit application until outstanding permits and approvals arc
obtained. Permits that provide supporting documentation for approval criteria allow the Eagle County
Permit Authority evaluate the adequacy of proposed mitigation so significant impacts can be avoided.
(2) The Project will not impair property rights held by others.
Per the application: The USFS owns the property upon which the historic LEDE Reservoir is located.
The proposed enlarged reservoir is at the same site. Property rights have been addressed by obtaining
the Special Use Permit from the USFS.
Staff agrees.
(3) The Project is consistent with relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans.
Per the application: The Project is merely an enlargement of an existing use and is consistent with the
relevant provisions of applicable land use and water quality plans. The Project does not require a
change in the existing land use, and does not conflict with the Eagle County Comprehensive Plan.
In addition,the Project will implement specific Best Management Practices to protect local water
quality in Gypsum Creek during construction,which are noted in the USFS Final Decision Notice and
FONSI. It is expected that between the required mitigation and Best Management Practices(BMP's),
that the Northwest Colorado Council of Government's relevant Water Quality Protection Standards
will be met. Pursuant to the goals of the NWCCOG 208 Plan,the project is not expected to increase
nutrient loads or sediment discharge. In fact,the enlargement project should improve instrearn flow
protection,due to the bypass requirements and the expected reservoir releases during low flow periods.
BMP's will also protect against sediment loading during the construction process. The contractor will
be required to provide various BMP plans to Gypsum not less than seven days prior to site
mobilization. Gypsum's engineers and involved state agencies will monitor under the permitting
requirements, including required inspections and logging of inspections. Any changes to BMP's are
generally required to be made to the project map that will be on site.
Staff agrees.
27
07/16/2013
(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 Town of Gypsum has the financial capability and financing in place, and has
hired appropriate expertise to design, develop, finance and operate the Project. The total estimate for
the LEDE Reservoir and LEDE Ditch work is$5,017,900.00, with$933,001 expended toward the
permitting and initial ditch repair work as of August 2012. The Town is relying on the following
funding sources:
• Loan from CWCB in the amount of$2,690,100.00
• CWCB Grant of$225,000.00
• Specifically reserved water right dedication fees of$1,065,177.00.
• Additional reserves over$1,200,000.00.
• Budgeted funds for the Project from the Town's 2013 budget for$536,433.00.
• Anticipated water rights dedication fees for approved developments of approximately$7.4 M.
The Town of Gypsum Public Works Department in conjunction with Zancanella and Associates has
maintained and operated LEDE Reservoir and LEDE Ditch since acquiring those water rights and
securing the initial special use permit for the Project in 2007. The Town has an in-house licensed
engineering staff within its Public Works Department, in addition to long-time engineering consultants.
Zancanella&Associates is the lead engineer for the LEDE Reservoir expansion. HP Geotech, Inc.
provided geotechnical engineering services. Environmental Solutions, Inc.performed the
environmental studies and wetlands permitting the Project,and W.W. Wheeler&Associates assisted in
the design and analysis of the dam structure. Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc.provided a
Cultural Resources Inventory, and J&K, Inc.provided the surveying for the Project. Patrick,Miller,
Kropf,Noto,P.C. is the legal consultant. The Town of Gypsum also operates other water projects
including:
• All pond storage at the Town of Gypsum Golf Course
• Water Treatment Plants at two locations
• Over six million gallons of treated water storage for the Town of Gypsum
• Water storage oversight for 60 acre-feet at Buckhom Valley.
Staff agrees.
(5) The Project is technically and financially feasible.
Per the application: The Project is technically and financially feasible. The Project has been designed,
costs estimated, and financing is committed and in place. From a technical review perspective,the
Colorado State Engineer's Office,under the Colorado Dam Safety Branch has jurisdiction over the
engineering review for this Project. Final design and construction contracting documents are before the
final review by the Colorado Dam Safety Branch.
Staff agrees.
(6) The Project is not subject to significant risk from natural hazards.
Per the application: There are no significant risks from natural hazards at the LEDE Reservoir site.
The Project has been evaluated via geological and geotechnical studies which have also been reviewed
and approved by the Colorado Dam Safety Branch. Once complete,the engineering reviews indicate
28
07/16/2013
that there is no significant risk from natural hazards such as snow slides or wildfires. The existing
Project dam has been unaffected by natural hazards since construction in approximately 1931.
Staff agrees.
(7) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on land use patterns.
Per the application: Land use patterns do not change under this Project, and there is no risk of
significant adverse effects. The land use patterns for the area have already been established by the
existing reservoir, and further down-gradient on Gypsum Creek for agricultural uses. This Project does
not involve a change in proposed use at the site for land use, and therefore is considered consistent with
the planned use for the area. In addition,the reservoir enlargement is being undertaken in part to better
provide a safe water storage condition under State standards,review and approval.
Staff agrees.
(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 is expected to have a positive effect for the Town of Gypsum to better
deliver water service to its expected future population,while maximizing existing water rights in its
portfolio, and providing better protection for instream flows in Gypsum Creek. The LEDE Reservoir is
designed to improve the irrigation and domestic water service capability in the Gypsum Creek.Valley.
The additional water storage supply will be integrated into Gypsum's management of all water supplies
for its population. Thus,no significant adverse effects upon local government or on Gypsum's water
service capacity are expected.
Staff agrees.
(9) The Project will not create an undue financial burden on existing or future residents of the
County.
Per the application: Over the last ten years Gypsum has doubled in population within an estimated 7.5
square miles. Additionally,projected growth expected from already approved development projects
either underway or expected to start soon will add another 6,000 people to Gypsum's population over
the next 10 to 15 years. Gypsum's municipal code already provides that new growth must `pay its own
way' for water rights and water service. Therefore, funds already received and/or required from
existing approved developments have been set aside in part to fund this project.
Gypsum performed extensive needs analysis for expanding the LEDE Reservoir for the Colorado
Water Conservation Board(CWCB)in order to secure its loan for the Project. In addition,during the
USFS and Army Corps of Engineer's reviews, a Needs and Alternatives Analysis was performed.
These assessments provided background demographic data that supports the Town's estimated growth
and water needs for at least 50 years into the future. Finally, as noted previously,the Town has
29
07/16/2013
demonstrated existing funding for the Project, so that it is not expected to put any undue burden on
future County residents.
Staff agrees.
(10) The Project will not significantly degrade any current or foreseeable future sector of the local
economy.
Per the application: The Project is expected to upgrade,not degrade,the local economy by providing
additional water supply options for the areas downstream. In addition,the Project will provide
immediate employment in the area, and water supplies required for Gypsum's long term growth in
Eagle County. It does not displace any existing economic sectors and should add to Gypsum's and
Eagle County's recreational draw,in addition to upgrading the existing water storage.
Staff agrees.
(11) The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the quality or quantity of recreational
opportunities and experience.
Per the application: Present and potential recreational uses have not been quantified,but are not
anticipated to change dramatically. This is because there is a current reservoir at the site. In addition,
while the LEDE Reservoir expansion will significantly increase the amount of water stored,there is not
a similar impact on the surface area. Rather,the surface area is to be expanded only 7.4 acres around
the perimeter of the existing reservoir, due to the additional storage gained mostly by increasing the
reservoir depth. The Project should improve recreational opportunities as there will be more water
storage and thus more water will remain in the reservoir for longer periods of time, which is expected
to improve the fishing opportunities at the reservoir site.
Staff generally agrees. Issues were raised by Colorado Parks and Wildlife so staff recommends
additional evidence be provided by the applicant to support this approval criterion. The State of
Colorado Wildlife Mitigation Permit application was filed on June 17, 2013, and is being considered
for adoption on July 11, 2013. The permit then goes to the Colorado Water Conservation Board on
July 17, 2013.
(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 Project will allow more efficient use of the water resources available to the
Town of Gypsum due to additional storage and scheduling options. The water will be delivered by
gravity flow in an existing waterway; therefore additional energy requirements are not expected.
30
07/16/2013
Resource Conservation during construction will be implemented by the Town. The Town expects to
use on-site material for the vast majority of the construction of the new dam embankment. This will
reduce the need for transporting material, and reuses the material contained in the existing darn
embankment. Approximately half of the cleared and grubbed vegetative materials are expected to be
reused during reclamation activities to provide additional habitat areas for small mammals.
Conservation Techniques will be implemented by the Town during operation. Gypsum has already
implemented significant water conservation measures in its existing code and tiered-use water rates.
Gypsum expects additional future demand reduction may be achieved through these water conservation
measures, and the Town Code and water rates encourage conservation by escalating fee structures. In
particular,the Gypsum Municipal Code, Sections 13.04.350, 13.04.360 include specific water
conservation provisions, and Section 13.04.070 is a tiered-rate structure so that water service charges
increase with additional use. Further,Gypsum has incentives for new development which provides
economic incentives for development to use local raw water supplies rather than public potable
supplies for irrigation use; Section 13.08.060. Additional efforts to promote maintaining or exceeding
minimum in-stream flows are part of Gypsum's 1999 Foundation Plan.
Staff generally agrees and recommends the applicant provide additional evidence to support this
approval criterion. Specifically, to explain in greater detail the Town of Gypsum's conservation
approaches toward raw water conservation, i.e. how programs are structured and implemented to
accomplish conservation of water resources.
(13) The Project will not significantly degrade air quality.
Per the application: The Project will have no effect on air quality, except for a short time during
construction. The Project is located in Area 12 of the Colorado Particulate Matter 10 PSD Baseline
Area. There are no Federal Class I or II areas near the Project area. The finished product will be an
enlargement to the existing reservoir and is anticipated to have no effect on the airshed or seasonal
patterns of air circulation or micro-climates. During construction dust will be minimized with water
applied to disturbed areas as needed and idling of construction equipment will be minimized. The net
effect from construction of this Project will be negligible on air quality under both average and worst
case conditions. The operations of the reservoir,post construction, will have no change on current air
quality. Gypsum's engineers and involved state agencies will monitor under the permitting
requirements, including required inspections and logging of inspections. Any changes to BMP's are
generally required to be made to the Project map that will be on site.
Staff agrees.
(14) The Project will not significantly degrade existing visual quality.
Per the application: The Project will look quite similar to the existing dam and reservoir, as the
increase in areal coverage is modest.
Staff agrees.
31
07/16/2013
(15) The Project will not significantly degrade surface water quality.
Per the application: The LEDE Reservoir expansion Project is being managed so that the expansion
activities will not significantly degrade surface water quality, and surface water quality will not be
degraded over the long term. The location of the Project is in the upper reaches of Gypsum Creek
(portion of Eagle River Segment 10a)per the 2012 Eagle River Water Quality Management Plan; the
upstream reach of Gypsum Creek has water of suitable quality for all uses. The Project will improve
flows from Gypsum Creek and the stream's health. There are no off-site discharges to surface water
related to the Project.
All construction activity discharge will be conducted in accordance with the Colorado Department of
Health and Environment Stormwater Associated Construction Activities Permit(SWMP). Stormwater
BMP's to be implemented will likely includes but are not limited to: the installation of engineering
controls such as silt fencing or straw bale checks to minimize the transport of sediment and control
erosion; revegetation of all bare soil areas exposed during construction,unless the disturbed area is
intended as a driving surface; weekly inspections; and the proper management of all petroleum
products or other potentially hazardous materials used during construction. The contractor will be
required to provide various BMP plans to Gypsum not less than seven days prior to site mobilization.
Gypsum's engineers and involved state agencies will monitor under the permitting requirements,
including required inspections and logging of inspections. Any changes to BMP's generally are
required to be made to the Project map that is required to be on site.
Finally,the USFS Notice of Decision requires specific mitigation including implementing a bypass
flow during spring runoff when the reservoir is filling in the amount of 0.1 to 0.3 cfs, with exact
amount dependent on the water-year. This will keep water in the intermittent section of the Gypsum
Creek channel when it has historically dried up. Enlargement will also allow for late summer and fall
releases to Gypsum Creek which are not possible under current storage quantity limitations. Other
operational activities, including fish stocking and dry-year carryover storage, will serve to compensate
for and further reduce environmental effects of the enlargement on the Gypsum Creek stream channel.
Staff agrees as the Project requires a Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Water
Management Plan. However, compliance with this Permit and SWMP is the responsibility of a
contractor who is yet to be selected. Town of Gypsum engineers will be tasked to oversee
implementation of the SWMP to assure Permit compliance.
(16) The Project will not significantly degrade groundwater quality.
Per the application: No wells are to be drilled and no other aspect of the Project is expected to impact
groundwater quality.
Staff agrees.
(17) The Project will not significantly degrade wetlands,and riparian areas.
Per the application: The Proposed Action includes off-site mitigation of wetlands restoration,to
account for 1.91 acres of potential wetland effects (the majority of the 1.91 acres is inundation or
`wet'). According to the functional assessment methodology employed by US Army Corps of
Engineers,the proposed mitigation measures are expected to greatly improve the functional condition
of the restored area, and may exceed the goal of no net loss of wetlands on the White River National
Forest. The cumulative effects of the Proposed Action are therefore expected to result in a net benefit
32
07/16/2013
to wetland function in the watershed context. Gypsum has a pending wetlands permit application under
consideration by the US Army Corps of Engineers,which implements a wetlands restoration project in
Eagle County being spearheaded by the USFS. Thus the Proposed Action will include off-site
wetlands mitigation in Eagle County, including stream channel restoration and wetlands restoration that
would fully replace the food chain,water quality and wildlife habitat functions of the wetlands
impacted by the reservoir enlargement. The wetlands mitigation plan includes off-site stream channel
re-construction and re-establishment of emergent and shrub-scrub vegetation adjacent to the stream
channel. Based on this plan,the USFS issued its Decision of Notice and FONSI,which determines that
the Project will not significantly degrade wetlands and riparian areas on an overall basis in Eagle
County. The Army Corps of Engineers is working closely with the Town of Gypsum to finalize
wetlands permitting and the mitigation described. The Applicant has requested that this 1041 Permit be
authorized with a condition that the final Army Corps wetlands permit must be submitted to Eagle
County prior to the final 1041 Permit issuance.
Staff generally agrees. The Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit and CDPHE, WQCD 401
Certification have not yet been secured for this Project so it is difficult to come to a conclusion about
the adequacy of the mitigation plan. Staff recommends additional evidence be provided by the
applicant that details the mitigation plan to support this approval criterion and/or defer making a
determination until the 404 Permit and 401 Certification have been issued.
(18) The Project will not significantly degrade terrestrial or aquatic animal life or its habitats.
Per the application: The Environmental Assessment for the Project has made a finding of no
significant impact(FONSI) on the environment after an extensive review of all terrestrial and aquatic
animal life and related habitat. In addition,the Town of Gypsum submitted a related permit application
to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife for appropriate permitting. The Town has received comments from
the Colorado Parks and Wildlife and is in process of providing additional information requested, and
will update Eagle County as the permitting proceeds. The Town expects this permitting to be
completed prior to the 1041 Permit hearing. The Applicant has also provided appropriate mitigation
for the existing endangered fish species in the Lower Colorado River Basin,by the Town of Gypsum
entering into a Recovery Agreement with the US Fish&Wildlife Service as required under the
management of those species. This allows this Project to be within the umbrella Recovery Plan that is
managed by the US Fish&Wildlife Service.
Staff generally agrees. Issues were raised by Colorado Parks and Wildlife but negotiations continue to
resolve the issues so CPW can issue their Mitigation Permit. Staff recommends additional evidence be
provided to support this approval criterion and/or defer making a determination until the Wildlife
Mitigation Permit is available. The State of Colorado Wildlife Mitigation Permit application was filed
on June 17, 2013, and is being considered for adoption on July 11, 2013. The permit then goes to the
Colorado Water Conservation Board on July 17, 2013.
(19) The Project will not significantly deteriorate terrestrial plant life or plant habitat.
Per the application: Similar to the above determination for animal life,the USFS Decision Notice and
FONSI made a finding of no significant impact on terrestrial plant life or plant habitat if all mitigation
33
07/16/2013
requirements are met. In particular,no endangered or threatened species were identified on the site;
there is no evidence of any fens or Harrington Penstemon in the involved area.
Staff agrees.
(20) The Project will not significantly deteriorate soils and geologic conditions.
Per the application: After construction,the Project is not expected to significantly deteriorate soils or
geologic conditions due to the relatively minor increases in areas covered by the proposed dam and
reservoir. Soils, Geologic Conditions and Natural Hazards—Geotechnical and Geological
investigations were performed at the reservoir site by HP Geotech. The reports were reviewed and
approved by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Dam Safety Branch in its review during
the permitting process. The final State permit will include this information to approve the final and
appropriate design criteria for the storage structure.
Staff agrees.
(21) The Project will not cause a nuisance.
Per the application: During construction,the on-site equipment and activity will be managed to ensure
safety and lack of access to hazardous conditions. Once the LEDE Reservoir expansion is complete, it
will be a reservoir,with inherent risks of a water body. The design for Dam Safety includes features to
ensure safe access to the water.
Staff agrees.
(22) The Project will not significantly degrade areas of paleontological,historic,or archaeological
importance.
Per the application: No significant paleontological,historic, or archaeological sites were found during
the Cultural Resource Inventory performed in the Environmental Assessment process with the USFS.
The Colorado Historic Preservation Office signed an approval on this inventory that was acceptable to
the USFS in issuing its Decision of Notice and FONSI.
Staff agrees.
(23) The Project will not result in unreasonable risk of releases of hazardous materials.
Per the application: No hazardous materials are expected to be used on site, with the exception of fuel
and lubricants for equipment during the construction phase. It is anticipated that the only hazardous
material to be stored on site is fuel for construction equipment. The amount of fuel onsite will vary and
depend on the amount of construction equipment onsite as well as the phase. Fuel storage will be in
accordance with the Stormwater Management Plan BMP's.
34
07/16/2013
Staff agrees. The Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) includes provisions for the control of a
hazardous material release. It is noted that the responsibility to obtain the Construction Stormwater
Discharge Permit and implement the Storm Water Management Plan is that of the contractor who is
yet to be selected. Town of Gypsum engineers will be tasked to oversee implementation of the SWMP to
assure Permit compliance.
(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: No significant loss of any agricultural,recreational, grazing, commercial or
industrial resources is anticipated. The benefits of additional water available and the additional options
for water scheduling outweigh any associated losses. Again,the change to the surface acres with water
inundation is limited to 7.4 acres at the site of the existing reservoir on USFS property: The T'own's
specifications include monitoring requirements and on-site logging and project map to ensure BMP's
are being enforced.
The Project will actually improve benefits to the county and its citizens through increased recreation
opportunity, as well as, irrigation water for agriculture purposes.
Staff agrees.
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:
(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 provide additional options to allow more efficient scheduling of
water for irrigation and Town uses thus making the most efficient use available water supplies. The
Town has previously enacted conservation and billing practices that require and encourage the efficient
use of water. Gypsum has significant water conservation measures in its existing code and tiered-use
water rates. Gypsum expects additional future demand reduction may be achieved through these water
conservation measures, and the Town Code and water rates encourage conservation by escalating fee
structures. The Gypsum Municipal Code includes specific water conservation provisions and a tiered-
rate structure so that water service charges increase with additional use. Further, Gypsum has
incentives for new development which provides economic incentives for development to use local raw
water supplies rather than public potable supplies for irrigation use.
Staff generally agrees and recommends the applicant provide additional evidence to support this
approval criterion. Specifically, to explain in greater detail the Town of Gypsum's conservation
approaches toward raw water conservation, i.e. how programs are structured and implemented to
accomplish conservation of water resources.
35
07/16/2013
(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 or duplicate services for either water
or wastewater. Water stored in the reservoir has already been released and used in drought years and
during certain times of the year when other existing water rights are not sufficient. The Town has
analyzed various alternatives and made a population analysis that supports the Project for water
service. No additional wastewater services are required.
Staff agrees.
(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: The Project is necessary to meet the expected population demands of the Town of
Gypsum and the Project is based upon responsible planning for expected growth in population and the
attendant water demand for such growth.
Staff agrees.
(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: As this type of development is not proposed as part of a project,this is not an
issue. The LEDE Reservoir expansion is entirely a raw water storage Project.
Staff agrees that this criterion is not applicable.
C. Special Use Permit Waiver: In accordance with Chapter II,Article 3, Section 3.310.I.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.
36
07/16/2013
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.
D. Recommended Motion:
It is the discretion of the Permit Authority to defer making a final decision on this permit application until
outstanding permits and approvals are obtained. It is the county's common practice to have all necessary
permits in place prior to approving 1041 Permits, especially those permits that provide supporting
documentation for approval criteria to know that adequate mitigation of significant impacts can be
achieved. It remains the Permit Authority's discretion to use whatever evidence is provided during the
1041 Permit hearing to make positive findings for all approval criteria.
I move that the Eagle County Permit Authority APPROVE File No. 1041-3084,waiving the
requirement for Special Use Review Permit and incorporating the following conditions:
1) That except as otherwise modified by the Permit, all material representations of the Applicant in this
permit application, correspondence, and all public meetings shall be adhered to and considered
conditions of approval,unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
2) The Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit and mitigation plan will be submitted to Eagle County.
Annual reports on mitigation success will be submitted by December 31st of each year until a 1:1
replacement of functional wetlands is achieved.
DISCUSSION:
Ray Merry provided a general overview of the 1041 permitting process.
Mr.Narracci presented the request. The proposal would expand the existing LEDE Reservoir Dam. The
reservoir was located in the White River National Forest on Gypsum Creek. The reservoir was constructed in 1931
and raised 44 feet in 1940. The Planning Commission findings were positive. He presented the referral responses.
Expansion of the reservoir would expand the reservoir,modify the existing spillway to comply with state:Dam
Safety Regulations,increase storage, and replace a dam outlet gate. He presented the 2 proposed conditions.
Ramsey Kropf,Attorney for the Town of Gypsum spoke explained the town's mission and made a plug for
Gypsum Daze. She provided a photo of the dam and reservoir. Gypsum owned the water rights and operated
pursuant a special use permit with some conditions. The project would ensure dry-year carryover storage, protect
the towns existing water rights,provide water supply for expected municipal growth, and help meet minimum in-
stream flows, enhance fishery and recreational opportunities and meet Colorado Dam Safety Regulations.
The request would expand the reservoir from 431-acre feet to 947-acre feet to modify and enlarge the existing
spillway and raise the current dam height to an additional 18.7 feet to meet the storage and safety requirements.
The outlet pipe was 70 years old and would be replaced as well. Construction was slated for this summer. The
town purchased the water rights in 2006 and had maintained and operated the reservoir since them. She reviewed
the road concerns expressed by the Planning Commission. The town requested that the board not require a charge
. by the county to the town of Gypsum for road wear and tear.
Chairman Fisher suggested that there be an agreement between both parties before the project began so
once complete, if there were improvements required an agreement would be in place.
Ms. Kropf spoke about the Conservation Pool proposed by the town of Gypsum and the comments made by
the Planning Commission. The main goal was to have carry-over storage every year. The town supported a future
campground. /,'-',„,-,- , ".
Jeff Shroll explained the Gypsum population prjectic . The reservoir would be for future growth and
better protect Gypsum Creek. :, 4 `� }� . ,,Ms.Kropf reviewed some additional informatrii regpdie high hazard dam category. The closest
property was 3.5 miles downstream. They had an emergency-act" plan in place. Expansion was on the same
footprint as the existing reservoir and they did not expect a change in groundwater.
37
07/16/2013
Tim Beck explained that the dam basin would be relined and re-compacted.
Mr. Merry stated that the Planning Commission's role in 1041 as a referral agent was to help the board
provide some evidence towards the approval criteria relative to land us patterns.
Ms. Kropf stated that the Town of Gypsum responded to Colorado Parks and Wildlife(CPW)by revising a
mitigation plan on June 17,2013. They expected that the Colorado Water Conservation Board would approve the
plan soon. She spoke about the specific mitigation activities recently adopted by CPW.
Chairman Fisher asked if there was a way to launch a boat on the reservoir.
Mr. Shroll stated that there were no ramps and motorized vehicles were not permitted.
Chairman Fisher wondered about the zebra mussel problem.
Ms.Kropf stated that any construction equipment used in wet areas elsewhere would be disinfected and
dried before use.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry asked if the mitigation activities were part of the 1041 application.
Mr.Merry stated that the staff report, draft mitigation plan,and PowerPoint would be included as exhibits.
Ms.Kropf reviewed the findings and recommendations. The applicant was requesting approval of the
project conditioned on securing all the final permits.
Mr. Merry stated that there was information provided by staff and information in the application that
supported the approval criteria. The key was to review those with a plus/minus so that the record was built to
support the approval criteria.
Ms.Kropf requested an approval with conditions so they could move forward with construction.
Commissioner Fisher reviewed the findings.The presentation with a list of the permits still outstanding was
a part of the record.
Mr.Merry believed it was important that the board review the findings and recommended that there be as
much information on the record as possible. It was also important for the board to agree with the recommendations
of the Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit and mitigation plan.
Chairman Fisher opened and closed public comment, as there was none.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry wondered what population this would support in the future.
Ms. Kropf stated that just the storage alone would support about 60 days of Gypsum's needs at a larger
population of approx. 30,000.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry believed that Gypsum's approach to raw water was progressive. She asked
about the agricultural lands and if converted to development,whether the water rights would go into Gypsum's
portfolio.
Ms. Kropf stated that it did and any new developments would be required to pay their way.
Chairman Fisher wondered if there was a way to use raw water for outdoor watering in certain areas of
Gypsum.
Mr. Shroll believed there may be some opportunities for some areas but most of the multifamily
subdivisions used raw water.
Commissioner Ryan noted that the Planning Commission supported the application.
Commissioner Chandler-Henry moved to approve the file no. 1041-3084 LEDE Reservoir Enlargement
with conditions.
Commissioner Ryan seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous.
There being no further business before the Board,the meeting was adjourned until July 23, 2013.
Attest:' - • A
Clerk to the Boa d * Chairman
38
07/16/2013