Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOCC.packet. 05142014 River Rock CorporationMEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting — May 14, 2014 F Or THRU: Cindy Houbemunity Development Director FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Senior Planner RE: River Rock Corporation, Luzern Corporation and Basel Corporation Minor Amendment Regarding Water Service REQUEST: The Applicant proposes to amend the prior approvals to allow the Applicants to install a well on each lot, pursuant to a well permit approved by the State Division of Water Resources. APPLICANTS: River Rock Corporation, Luzern Corporation and Basel Corporation REPRESENTATIVES: Glenn Horn and Bart Johnson LOCATION: The property is located on East Highway 82 between the highway and the Roaring Fork River, and is described as Lots 1 -3, Block 4, Knollwood Subdivision. The Salvation Ditch traverses the property and the East Aspen Trail is located on the north side of the lots between the highway and the ditch. ZONING: The lots are zoned R -15 and are within the Urban Growth Boundary. BACKGROUND: The County approved Block 4 of the Knollwood Subdivision in 1963 (Plat Book 1, Page 286). Subsequent approvals were granted pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 47 -2006, BOCC Resolution Nos. 140 -2006, 016 -2009 and 007 -2014, and Administrative Decision No. 22 -2011 The development approvals for Lots 1 -3 provide that the drilling of wells for water service on the lots will be permitted only if water service is not available from the City of Aspen. This condition was included in the original 1041 hazard review approvals, pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 140 -2006 (Lot 1) and Hearing Officer Determination No. 47 -2006 (Lots 2 and 3). The condition was reiterated in Administrative Decision No, 22-2011, whereby the Applicant was permitted to develop the driveway and install utilities prior to pursuing a water service agreement with the City of Aspen. The installation of the driveway and utilities to the lots was completed in the fall of 2012. The condition reads: Prior to submission of any building permit application, the Applicant shall: Obtain approval of a water service agreement from the City of Aspen. If the City denies a request for a water service agreement, the Applicant may install a well on each lot, pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources. The Applicant shall adhere to any limitations imposed by the well permit on outside water usage. 000001 0-f� ISSUE: The Applicant has attempted to secure City water service, as described in detail in the application. In summary, the Applicant installed a single utility corridor under the culvert for the Salvation Ditch as required by the Salvation Ditch Company. Three water service lines for the three lots were installed within the corridor and capped for future use. City of Aspen water service is available to the lots, but the City of Aspen Utilities Department has determined that the infrastructure "by which all three service lines pass under the Salvation Ditch in a single bundled location does not meet our current standards." The current standards require the installation of three separate service lines extending directly from the water main in Highway 82 into each lot (letter from City Utilities is attached). While it is possible to connect to City water, the Applicant asserts that doing so would involve significant environmental impacts. The Applicant would have to cut two new trenches through the East Aspen Trail, through a new landscaping berm and retaining walls adjacent to the trail, down a steep slope ( >45 %), and through and under the Salvation Ditch (replacing the culvert in its entirety). This work would re- disturb the site and the trail, and would contradict the design requirements of the Salvation Ditch Company. Therefore, the Applicants have concluded that using individual wells to provide water service to the lots is the only viable alternative, and request that the BOCC: 1. Amend the condition to allow the Applicants to install a well on each lot if either (a) the City denies a request for water service, or (b) the City imposes conditions on the provision of water service that are infeasible and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts. 2. Determine that the Applicants may install a well on each lot, pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources because the conditions imposed by the City for the provision of water service are infeasible and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts. Sec. 7- 50- 20(c)(2) of the Code states: If the property line of a development is located within a one -half mile (2,6,10 feet) radius of a public water system's service area, the County may require information for analysis of the environmental impacts of connecting to the public system versus use of an individual well(s) or other water source. Based upon the results of such analysis, the County may require that development connect to a public system if service is available, or that water be provided from a source other than the public system. Staff supports the Applicant's request, based on the finding that the environmental impacts on the public trail, steep slopes and the Salvation Ditch from cutting two new trenches for water service lines are unacceptable. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the BOCC approve the River Rock Corporation, Luzern Corporation and Basel Corporation Minor Amendment regarding water service, subject to the attached Resolution. 2 0Ju002 Attachments A. 4118114 Davis Horn letter with attachments B. 4122114 City of Aspen Utilities letter U�i UO3 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO APPROVING THE RIVER ROCK CORP., LUZERN CORP. AND BASEL CORP. MINOR AMENDMENT REGARDING WATER SERVICE Resolution No. -2014 RECITALS 1. River Rock Corp., Luzern Corp. and Basel Corp. (together, "Applicant ") have applied to the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado ( "BOCC ") to amend the prior approvals to allow the Applicants to install a well on each lot, pursuant to a well permit approved by the State Division of Water Resources. 2. The property is located on East Highway 82 between the highway and the Roaring Fork River, and is described as Lots 1 -3, Block 4, Knollwood Subdivision. The Salvation Ditch traverses the property and the East Aspen Trail is located on the north side of the lots between the highway and the ditch. 3. The lots are zoned R -15 and are within the Urban Growth Boundary. 4. The County approved Block 4 of the Knollwood Subdivision in 1963 (Plat Book 1, Page 286). Subsequent approvals were granted pursuant to Hearing Officer Determination No. 47 -2006, BOCC Resolution Nos. 140 -2006, 016 -2009 and 007 -2014, and Administrative Decision No. 22 -2011. 5. The development approvals for Lots 1 -3 provide that the drilling of wells for water service on the lots will be permitted only if the City of Aspen denies water service for the lots. 6. When the driveway to the lots was installed and the Salvation Ditch was culverted in 2012, the Applicant installed a single utility corridor under the culvert for the Salvation Ditch as required by the Salvation Ditch Company. Three water service lines for the three lots were installed within the corridor and capped for future use. 7. The City of Aspen Utilities Department has determined that the infrastructure "by which all three service lines pass under the Salvation Ditch in a single bundled location does not meet our current standards." The City would only provide water service if three separate service lines are extended directly from the water main in Highway 82 into each lot. 8. While it is possible to connect to City water, the Applicant is requesting to install a well on each lot, based on their assertion that the conditions imposed by the City on the provision of water service are infeasible and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts. 9. The BOCC considered this application at regular meeting on May 14, 2014, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to the application. 10. The BOCC finds that the Applicant has undertaken reasonable efforts to pursue water service from the City of Aspen. 11. The BOCC further finds that the Applicant installed a single utility corridor under the culvert for the Salvation Ditch as required by the Salvation Ditch Company and in order to minimize environmental u z .�U3U4 , Resolution No. -2014 Page 2 impacts and impacts on the East Aspen Trail. 12. The BOCC further finds that the City of Aspen's requirement to install separate service lines extending directly from the water main in Highway 82 into each lot would create additional environmental impacts by re- disturbing the site to cut two new trenches through the East Aspen Trail, through a new landscaping berm and retaining walls adjacent to the trail, down a steep slope ( >45 %), and through and under the Salvation Ditch (replacing the culvert in its entirety), and to reconstruct the new driveway 13. The BOCC further finds that compliance with the City's requirement would unreasonably burden the proposed project, and that the benefit of public water service is outweighed by the adverse impacts associated with the installation of the required infrastructure, and, therefore, that is appropriate for the Applicant to install a well on each lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the BOCC that it does hereby approve the River Rock Corp., Luzern Corp. and Basel Corp. Minor Amendment regarding water service, subject to the conditions set forth herein, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest. 1. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made in public meetings and in the application. 2. The conditions of BOCC Resolution Nos. 140 -2006, 016 -2009 and 007 -2014 and Hearing Officer Determination No. 47 -2006 shall remain in full force and effect, except as modified herein. 3. Prior to submission of any building permit application, the Applicant shall obtain approval of a water service agreement from the City of Aspen. If the City either (a) denies a request for water service, or (b) imposes conditions on the provision of water service that are infeasible and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts, the Applicant may install a well on each lot, pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources. The Applicant shall adhere to any limitations imposed by the well permit on outside water usage. APPROVED this 10 day of May, 2014. ATTEST: Jeanette Jones, Clerk to the BOCC APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 4, u\ C lk C ndy Houben Community Development Director P040- 14:P1D #273718401003/0041007 UITU005 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Robert A. Ittner, Jr., Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely County Attorney Davis Horn- PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING April 18, 2014 Board of County Commissioners c/o Suzanne Wolff, AICP Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Water Service for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4, Knollwood Subdivision (Parcel M Nos. 2737 - 184 -01- 003/004/007) Dear Board of County Commissioners: I am writing on behalf the owners of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 4, Knollwood Subdivision (the "Lots "), with regard to the source of water service for the three Lots. Specifically, I am requesting a determination on behalf of Pitkin County that each of the Lots will be permitted to provide potable water service by the drilling of a water well pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources. Background The County development approvals for the Lots provide that the drilling of wells for water service on the Lots will be permitted only if water service is not available from the City of Aspen. The most recent iteration of this requirement is found in Administrative Decision No. 22 -2011, which was recorded in the County's real estate records on April 12, 2011. The specific language of this Administrative Decision reads as follows: Prior to submission of any building permit application, the Applicant shall - ...Obtain approval of a water service agreement from the City of Aspen. If the City denies a request for water service agreement, the Applicant may install a well on each lot, pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources. The Applicant shall adhere to any limitations imposed by the well permit on outside water ALICE DAVIS AICP 1 GLENN HORN AICP HUNG 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. • SUITE 104 a ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 + 970/925 -6587 - FAX: 970/925 -5180 U adavis @rof.net ghorn®rof.net ,^J I. _ Board of County Commissioners April 18, 2014 Page 2 usage. Based on conversations with your staff, we understand that the genesis for this requirement is section 7- 50- 20(c)(2) of the Land Use Code, which provides in relevant part as follows: If the property line of a development is located within a one -half mile (2,640 feet) radius of a public water system's service area, the County may require information for analysis of the environmental impacts of connecting to the public system versus use of an individual well(s) or other water source. Based upon the results of such analysis, the County may require that development connect to a public system if service is available, or that water be provided from a source other than the public system. (emphasis added) Current Status The owners of the Lots have worked hard to obtain a water service commitment from the City of Aspen, but have run into an obstacle that cannot be overcome without significantly reconstructing the infrastructure for the site and causing severe environmental impacts (not to mention being extremely expensive to the point of being impractical). This site has had many challenges. One of the biggest challenges was the requirement to put the Salvation Ditch in a new underground culvert. This work had to be coordinated with all of the utility extensions and the construction of the relocated East of Aspen Trail, which runs through the Lots along the frontage of Highway 82. The Salvation Ditch required that all utilities be installed under the new ditch culvert in a single utility corridor on Lot 1. The Salvation Ditch did not want multiple locations for utilities under the ditch culvert because it would make future repairs all the more difficult to manage. Thus, all three water service lines for the Lots were installed in the single corridor under the new ditch culvert on Lot 1. These three water service lines are stubbed near the Highway 82 right -of -way line in front of Lot 1. A depiction of the utility corridor installed under the new Salvation Ditch culvert is included on Attachment A to this letter. I am enclosing as Attachment B a letter from the applicants' project manager and consultant Tom Newland of Newland Project Resources. This letter from Mr. Newland explains the process he has gone through with the City's water department to obtain a water service commitment from the City. As explained in Tom's letter, the City now has a policy that would require the water service lines installed for the Lots to be relocated such that each service line would extend from the water main in Highway 82 directly in front of each Lot and through the front lot line of each Lot. The City will not permit the water lines to extend through the single utility corridor that was installed on Lot 1, even u� 0 ©7 '%, -- Board of County Commissioners April 1 S, 2014 Page 3 though they were already installed in this location in a manner that was consistent with prior City policy and engineering standards. As explained in Tom's letter, complying with this new requirement would require trenching new water lines from Highway 82 down into each Lot in at least two new locations. These trenches would have to cut through the new East of Aspen Trail, through a new landscaping berm adjacent to the trail, down a steep slope, through and under the new Salvation Ditch culvert and would, in general, create a significant environmental impact on the site. In addition, at least one retaining wall would have to trenched through and then reconstructed. Such an undertaking would re- disturb the site all over again and would also contradict the design requirements of the Salvation Ditch. There would be no way for the owners to satisfy both the City and the Salvation Ditch as to the location of the water service lines'. The approximate location of the new trenching that would be required is depicted on Attachment A. In light of the foregoing, the owners have concluded that using individual wells for providing water service to the Lots is the only viable alternative. For all practicable purposes, City water service is not available to these Lots. Requests Accordingly, we are asking the Board to take the following action: (a) First, amend the existing water service condition for the Lots to provide that the applicants may install a well on each of the Lot if either (i) the City denies a request for water service agreement; or (ii) the City imposes conditions on the providing of water service that are infeasible and that would result in unacceptable environmental impacts. (b) Second, determine that the applicants may install a well on each lot pursuant to an approved well permit from the State Division of Water Resources because the conditions imposed by the City for providing water service are infeasible and would result in unacceptable environmental impacts. Thank you very much for your assistance with this matter. Sincerely, AVIS HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP =0003 cz) C<, FA—g—'Is Rix LZ P —4 All, 4' t 111 KNOLLWOOD SUBDIVISION LOTS 1.2. & 3; BLOCK 4 TBABERLME ENO 4' NTLnmC HORDAMCOA"" .a + I' p 3� �, —� I �,= s ws�� Pnxm COUNTY. COLORADO 111, F;P! ATTAO MENT A - F/IMT I r 0 0 Y m A O 0 b x N A W N nnnnnm T le Sn --I wwwu+w ccccc- 7 -j �'m�X - H H' i . C7 ?�6O O M faM� m�N R "O in pe c n r C D Z 0) 7 Z 0 r r a O 0 �.J rr� VJ 0 z �� L/J l C y _ rfrxir. WOOD 5UBDN[SION r LOTS 1.2. & 3; BLOCK 4 �. TMERUM ENS •" .,�''. �y r� PnXIN COUNTY. COLORADO w.µ�NrsLVD- CARSOMDALLCO.5162A errv,aw.a ana m�u.e.l�;Aevwter.n. PI rTAL [A 0ll0J -F fA - ?ART 2— I C tl L Y t M I I I I I J f r illuil a �E R,dp RIX KI 8 r � 6 a 0 b x N A W N nnnnnm T le Sn --I wwwu+w ccccc- 7 -j �'m�X - H H' i . C7 ?�6O O M faM� m�N R "O in pe c n r C D Z 0) 7 Z 0 r r a O 0 �.J rr� VJ 0 z �� L/J l C y _ rfrxir. WOOD 5UBDN[SION r LOTS 1.2. & 3; BLOCK 4 �. TMERUM ENS •" .,�''. �y r� PnXIN COUNTY. COLORADO w.µ�NrsLVD- CARSOMDALLCO.5162A errv,aw.a ana m�u.e.l�;Aevwter.n. PI rTAL [A 0ll0J -F fA - ?ART 2— P.O. Box 4825 417 original Road, Basalt, CO 81622 Phone: (970) 927-4645 Fax :(970)927 -ol96 torn@npri.co April 9, 2014 Suzanne Wolff Pitkin County Community Development Department 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 RE: CITY WATER SERVICE FOR KNOLL WOOD SUBDIVISION, BLOCK 4, LOTS 1 -3 Dear Suzanne: This letter is to recount for you the actions we have taken to attempt to secure city water service for the above referenced parcels. As you are aware, the approvals in place from Pitkin County for these lots provide in essence that the owners must try to get water service from the City and that individual wells for the lots will be permitted only if water service from the City cannot be secured. We have been in discussions with the City Water Department regarding the provision of water service for the past few months. Below is a description of these discussions: • When the infrastructure and site work for the lots was done the owners placed improvements for two water supply scenarios: 2" water service lines for each lot that run up to the City water main in Highway 82 and can be tapped into the water main if the City agrees to provide water. The Utility Plan for the lots placed the water lines in the best possible configuration given the rather severe and very challenging environmental constraints existing on the property. Extreme care was taken in the design to avoid impact to the Salvation Ditch, steep slopes ( +45 %), public trail, and native vegetation between the building envelopes on the lots and the City water main, located in Highway 82. Our engineer also consulted the City water standards then in effect when designing the system. 2. Potential well sites on the lots and a "dry" fire hydrant that is connected to a 20,000 gallon water tank were also placed in anticipation of needing a private water supply if the city water connection was not approved. The tank and hydrant were approved by the Aspen Fire District. Initial discussions began with the city began in December of 2013 and revolved around the need for a Water Service Agreement as opposed to just a permit for a water tap. I had several phone discussions with Andy Rossello, the Utilities Engineer, regarding this issue, and it was ultimately determined that a water main extension to the lots wasn't needed and therefore a formal Water Service Agreement with the City could be waived in lieu of a permit for a water tap. Land Use Planning -Re imit Expedition - Project Management. Owner's Representative • Information Management Q00011 ATTAO-EM E Nr 3 I then submitted the as -built plans for the utilities on the properties to Andy in early January and discussed those plans with him. We then had some discussions regarding the 20,000- gallon water tank, which required some consultation with Brian Nichols at the Aspen Fire District. Those discussions did not relate directly to the question at hand, but we did agree that each of the houses would be fitted with a fire protection sprinkler system. • 1 had a few more conversations with Andy Rossello regarding the configuration of the 2- inch water lines that were placed anticipating possible connection to the water main to provide City water service to the lots. Andy had concerns about the configuration of the lines, as they did not conform to the current City Water Service Standards. Andy felt that the best way to address these concerns would be to have a meeting with himself, Neal Goldsborough, the Water Distribution Supervisor, and Mike McDill, the Deputy Director of Utilities. • This meeting took place on March 3rd at the Water Department office. City staff went over their concerns which were as follows: - The water standards require that water service lines are to be stubbed off the main line in a perpendicular fashion at the center of the lots; Each service line needs to be buried at least 7 -feet underground; Each service line must be located entirely within the lot it is servicing, preferably along the shortest route from the water main to the house. Everyone at the meeting acknowledged that the existing service lines do not conform to the current City standards. We explained that because of the severe environmental constraints on these lots, connecting to the water main in the way the current standards required was not possible without a great deal of expense and a significant amount of environmental damage. The Salvation Ditch was placed in a culvert and buried through the lots when the infrastructure improvements were placed. The Salvation Ditch Company required all of our utilities to be buried within one 10 -foot wide location along the ditch. This meant that the water service lines could not be located entirely within the lots that they serviced. In addition, the water lines cross under the ditch about 2.5 -feet below the culvert. Placing the service lines as required by the City's standards would severely impact a steep ( +45 %) slope and city trail /retaining wall located between the building envelopes and the water main. Finally, the requirement to place the service taps in the middle of each lot would also necessitate removal of several aspen and spruce trees located within a small berm between the city trail and the water main. Despite hearing the difficulties involved with placing the service lines according to the current City standards, even with the environmental constraints we described, City staff was unwilling to vary from the water standards to provide service to the lots. City staff said they would draft and send a letter to us regarding their position that if we wanted to obtain City water, we would need to comply with the City's water standards regarding the service lines. After discussing the outcome of this meeting with the owners of the properties, we decided to make one more attempt to compel the City to provide water service to the lots. A trip to the site was scheduled on March 7th with Neal Goldsborough. We thought that if the City saw the environmental conditions in the field they might be willing to vary Letter to Suzanne Wolff, City Water to Knollwood Lots 0 0 12. Page 2 4 dr from the service line standards. Although Neal agreed that the site was challenging, he said the City would still require that the standards be met. We discussed the letter the City would provide so that the owners could have some definitive answer regarding provision of City water, and Neal said he would draft the letter and send it to us. We have followed up on the status of this letter several times, but have not received it yet. We have been told they will send it at some point but that Mike McDill (the signatory) is very busy right now. To conclude, although it is theoretically possible to connect to City water, doing so would involve significant environmental impacts and would cost several hundred thousand dollars in addition to what was already spent on the existing system. Approvals would need to be obtained from the County for developing on slopes greater than 45 %; the City trail would need to be closed and cut in two places for the 7 -foot deep trenches that would have to be dug down the hillside; significant portions of the retaining wall for the trail would have to be demolished and re- built; the culvert for the Salvation ditch would also need to be taken out in its entirety and then replaced to allow for the new alignments of the service lines (this assumes that the Salvation Ditch Company would even allow this, which we doubt); and a large portion of the driveway would have to be removed and replaced to get to the ditch culvert. In addition, several native trees would have to be taken out between the trail and the highway, permanently changing the trail experience in this area. This concludes my explanation of the contacts we have mead with the City Water Department regarding the lots. Please contact me at any time if you have any questions or require further information. Sincerely, ,l l- Tom Newland Letter to Suzanne Wolff, City Water to Knollwood Lots Ulri��i� n Page 3 April 22, 2014 fll I Tom Newland Newland Project Resources, Inc. PO Box 4815 Basalt, CO 81621 RE: WATER SERVICE TO LOTS 1 -3, BLOCK 4, KNOLLWOOD SUBDIVISION OF 'X are Un W rTs Dear Tom: This is to follow up on our conversations and site visit regarding the provision of city water to the residential parcels cited above. She properties have adequate City of Aspen water service available for residential development. However /the existing infrastructure by which all three service lines pass under the Salvation Ditch in a single bundled location does not meet our current standards. The service connections to the water main In Highway 82 will need to comply with current City of Aspen water standards before service can be provided. This would require the Installation of new service lines extending directly from the water main in Highway 82 through the frontage of each lot directly Into the lot, in addition to compliance with all other current standards. If you have any further questions, please contact Neal Goldsborotigh at (970) 920 -5114. T _ Sincerely, ` Mike McDill Deputy Director of Utilities, City of Aspen Cc: Neal GoldsborougN Aspen Water Distribution Supervisor Development 20141Knollwood Lots 1-3\201140422 Water Services Expcctations UUUU14