HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0 Letter of ApprovalBAILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mat,24-2006
R. Kent Kuster, Environmental Protection Specialist
Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment
4300 Cherr-l,Creek Dr. S.
Denver. Colorado 80246-1-530
Re: Rapids on the Colorado
Dear Mr. Kuster:
As noted in the previous letter. the Board of Countl, Commissioners reviewed and rccommended
approval of the site application for the proposed sewage treatment works on June 16- 2OA4. The
recommendation of approval w'as based upon a review of the Garfield Countl' Comprehensit e
Plan of 2000 and a Memorandum of Understanding between the developer and the Tor,vn of New
Castle regarding compliance rvith their Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation of approval
was not based upon anv engineering criteria related to floodplain location or capacit.v to serve. It
is our understanding that the CDPHE u,ill make those determinations.
Also. as noted in the previous lettcr, the recommendation of approval b1,the Board of Countl,
Commissioners included a notation in the staff report that the recommendation of the Site
Application in no wa.u- obligated the Countl' to approve anlr proposed PUD or other development
on the proper['in question. Mr. Hilton has submitted an application for Planned Unit
Development approval for 121 dwelling units. The proposcd PUD will have to be revierved bv
the Planning Commission and the Board based on the criteria used for such a request.
Please understand. that the Countl' does not make recommendations to the State regardir-rg site
applications based on the zoning. It is our obligation per the Site Application process to review
the application based on general conformance u,ith the Comprehensive Plan. not zoning. So. to
answer vour question. you cannot be assured that the Countl' u,ill be making such a finding" if an
applicant clrooses to submit a site application to us for revierv. in advance of a rezoning
application.
Building & Planning Department
cc: Don DeFord, Garheld Countl,Attornev
Gene Hilton - 2102 West Arapahoe Drive. Littleton. CO 80120-300g
Jill McConargry,, 0515 County Road 167. Glenrnood Spring. CO 81601
Lee Leavenworth. PO Drarver 2030. Glenwood Springs. CO 81602
108 8th Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
(970) 94s-8212 (970) 255-7972 Fat (970) 384-3470
Gaffield Coanty
aBill Owens, Governor
Dennis E, Ellis, Executive Direclor
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of colorado4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S.. Laboratory Services DivisionDenver, Cotorado 80246_1530 81OO [o;;y;t;;:"Phone (303) 692-2000 O"nrer, CdrJrajo sozsO_OszaTDD Line (303) 691_7700 (3os) 692_ao9o--'Located in Glendale, Colorado
http://www.cdphe.state.co. us
May 17,2006
Mr.I4ark Bean, planning Director
Garfield Countv
109 8'h Street. #2OO
Glenwood Springs, CO gl60l
Re: Rapids on the Colorado
Dear lv{r. Bcan:
Colorado Departmerrt
of PublicAealth
andEnvironment
#w
Thank you for letter dated March 22,2006 providing clarification to the Garfield Board of county commissioners reviewof the site application for the Rapids'on the'coloradi p.jr;;. "w.
have one .";;;i;g issue that continues to cause us tohave reservations about the review "f;i; project. oui confusion stems from the fact that the property is currently zonedfor 33 units on septic systems which *"rra ai..rr*g"i" gr"rra*",",
Ih.".site apprication requests approvar of awastewater treatment system with a capacity to serie rzirrlt, trrut.wourd discharge to surface water, so neither thecapacity nor the type of treatment is consistent with the cu,ent zoning. As we h*? dir"ursed, the common practice with
ffi1ffi:l'i:'rl3:rou",::
for the applicant to applv for and the countv io .e-zone a properry prior to subrnining a sire
we assume from your opening paragraph
,and
th.e ending paragraph that the county has approved of this project basedupon the relationship of the tr;aimeit works to the rocaicffiffi;il;i;, *lii.:rea as ir affects warlr quarity; rheproposed site location alternatives including the location *iirr'r"rp""t to the flood prain; and the capacity to serve theplanned purpose' Do your statements mean that the Board oicornry commissioners wiil not deny a re-zoning of theRapids on the colorado property uu."a o,-, ttr..upu"iryo. rif.-or*urr"*o..i.""i.",rt facility?
we are recommending to Mr' Hilton that he proceed with the re-zoning hearing for the Rapids on the colorado project toresolve the zoning issue for this properry. we anticip; ;ililrre site uppri"u'tior. in Garfierd county wi, onry berecommended if the zoning matctres the site use in the apptication. Thank you for assistance.
Sincerely,
h"le* t.x-
R. Kent Kuster
Environmental protection Specialist
cc: Ron Falco, WeCD
Mark Kadnuck, WeCD
Tom Schaffer, WeCD
Steve Brown' tr^Is.t:.* Attorney General, r550 Sherman Street, Denver, co g0203Gene Hilton, 210).^rNeste.uput o,n.ive, Littleton, CO g0I20_300gJill McConaugry,0*515 Cor.,ty noua iOZ, ClenwooJSp.iril, CO gf OOtLee Leavenworth, pO O.u*.iZO:0, Ct"r*ooO Springs, CO g1602
H