HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 MemorandumMEMORANDUM
TO: GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: FRED A. JARMAN, AICP
DIRECTOR, BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: "LOCATION & EXTENT" REVIEW;
RELOCATION OF CIry OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS
WASTEWATER TREATM ENT FAC I LITY
DATE: MARCH 17,2009
"'\
A-
\;I\
*..Y**
l. lntroduction
The City of Glenwood Springs is proposing to construct a new wastewater
treatment facility west of town on the south side of the Colorado River. After this
facilily is constructed, the City will abandon its existing treatment facility located.<^ at the confluence of the Roaring Fork and Coiorado Rivers. The
proposed treatment facility is located outside of the City limits in unincorporated
Garfield County.
ln order to satisfy state law, the Planning Commission is required to review the
proposed Glenwood Wastewater Treatment Facility (\AAI/TF) and take action
based on the project's concurrence with the County's Comprehensive Plan.
ll. Purpose of Memorandum
The Colorado Revised Statutes (530-28-1 10(1)(a)) requires that ...Whenever any
county planning commission...has adopted a master plan of the county...no
road, park, or other public way, ground, or space, no public building or structure,
or no public utility, whether publicly or privately owned, shall be constructed or
authorized in the unincorporated territory of the county until and unless the
proposed location and extent thereof has been submitted to and approved by
such county planning commission. More specifically, (CRS 530-28-110(1Xd))
requires that the acceptance, widening, removal, extension, relocation,
narrowing, vacation, abandonment, change of use, or sale or lease of or
acquisition of land for any road, park, or other public way, ground, place,
property, or structure shall be subject to similar submission and approval, and the
failure to approve may be similarly overruled.
This is generally known as the "location and extent" provision and requires the
Garfield County Planning Commission to take a position on proposed Glenwood
\ A//TF.
lll. Staff Comments
The City of Glenwood Springs is proposing to construct a new wastewater
treatment facility (W\A|I-F) approximately one-mile west of the Glenwood
Meadows Shopping Center on the south side of the Colorado River. After the
new facility is constructed, the existing treatment plant will be decommissioned
and replaced with a lift station that will pump wastewater to the new facility.
The access road to proposed \ A /TF will start from the RFTA facility located off
Midland Avenue, west of the Meadows Shopping Center. The access road will
traverse the hillside above the railroad tracks and will nkHo have cut and fill
slopes in access of 20 vertical feet.
2
Glenwood's other existing wastewater treatment facility is the smaller West
Glenwood \ A/VTF located on the north bank of the Colorado River, southeast of
the Glenwood Mall and across the river from the proposed facility. The West
Glenwood \ AI/TF will continue operating until it reaches its hydraulic capacity.
At such time, the West Glenwood \ A /TF will be decommissioned and the
wastewater will be pumped to the proposed facility on the south side of the river.
The project has been reviewed for its concurrence with County's Comprehensive
Plan - Section 7.0 'Water and Sewer Services' and Section 8.0 'Natural
Environment'. The following text in'italics'is verbatim from the Comprehensive
Plan. The text in'bold italics' is relevant to the review of the proposed WWTF.
Relevant Sections of Comprehensive PIan:
SECT'ON 7,0 - WATER AND SEWER SERY'CES
ISSUES:
/ssues identified during the Comprehensive Plan Process relafed to water
and sewer seryices are as follows:
The proliferation of lndividual Sewage Disposal Sysfems (/SDS) on
individual sifes should be carefully reviewed in terms of soil
constraints and drainage characfen'sfics of each site;
High-density development, defined as exceeding one (1) dwelling
unit per one (1) acre, should be locate in areas where central sewage
treatment facilities are either currently available, or feasible in the
future.
GOAL:
To ensure the provision of legal, adequate, dependable, cost-effective and
environmentally sound sewer and water services for new development.
OBJECTIYES,.
7.1 Development in areas without existing central water and sewer
seryices will be required to provide adequate and safe provisions for
these services before proiect approval.
7.2 Development located adjacent to municipalities or sanitation
districts with available capacity in their central waterlsewer
sysfems will be strongly encouraged to tie into these sysfems.
Staff Comment: Depending on the proposed service area and capacity, the
proposed sewage treatment facility may be able to serve future developments
outside the City limits. Therefore, the new treatment facility supports the
intentions of the Comprehensive Plan.
7.3 Project proposing the use of /SDS will be required fo assess fhe
sife's capacity to accommodate fhese sysfems prior to proiect
approval.
7.4 Development will be required to mitigate the impact of the proposed
project on existing water and sewer sysfems.
7.5 Gafiield County will strongly discourage the proliferation of
private water and sewersysfems,
7.6 High-density development, defined as exceeding one (1)
dwelling unit per one (1) acre, will be required fo assess fhe
potential of connecting into existing central water and sewer
facilities.
POLICIES:
7.1 All development proposals in rural areas without existing central
water and/or sewer sysfems will be required to show that legal,
adequate, dependable and environmentally sound water and sewage
disposa/ facilities can be provided before proiect approval.
7.2 Where logical, legal and economic extension of seruices lrnes
from existing water and/or sewer sevvag/e system can occur, the
County will require development adiacent to or within a
reasonable distance, to enter into appropriate agreements to
receive service. The burden of proof regarding logical, legal and
economic constraints will be on the developer.
4
7.3 The County will require developers proposing /SDS to provide data
that demonstrates to the county that the proposed sffe can
accommodate these sysfems prior to project approval.
7.4 Where /SDS is not feasible, Garfield County will require a sewage
disposa/ system approved by the Sfafe of Colorado.
7.5 High density developmentis consrdered urban in nature and requires
appropriate services. Through the Zoning Resolution, Garfield
County will strongly encourage high-density development to locate in
areas where fhese servrces are available.
SECTION 8.0 - NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
ISSUES;
/ssues related to the natural environment identified during the
Contprehensive Plan process are as follows:
Tourism is an integral component of Gaffield County. Therefore, it is
essenfia/ that the planning process respect the natural environment
that brings residents and visitors to the County;
The existing Management district Map, designated to address areas
of minor, moderate and sever environmental constraints, does not
allow for specific hazards to be identified and mitigated;
Protection of air and water quality should be an essenfia/ component
of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent amendments to the
Zoning Resolution and Subdivision Regulations;
Development should respect the natural contours and drainage
patterns on each individual project site;
lmportant visual corridors should be identified and companion design
guidelines regarding signage sefbacks, buffer areas and landscaping
should be formally adopted and enforced by the County.
GOALS;
Garfield County will encourage a land use pattern that recognizes the
environmental sensitivity of the land, does not overburden the physical
capacity of the land, and is in the best interesf of the health, safety and
welfare of Gaiield County.
Enhancement of the river corridor
The reclamation of land after extraction processes
Protection of watersheds and flood plains
Control of drainage that impacts communities
OBJECTIVES;
8.1 The County of Gaffield reserues fhe right to deny a project based on
sever environmental constraints that endanger public health, safety,
or welfare.
8.2 Proposed project will be required to recognize the physical features
of the land and design projects in a matter that is compatible with the
environment.
8.3 Garfield County will ensure that natural drainage features are
protected from a lte ration.
8.4 River-fronts and riparian areas are fragile components of the
ecosystem and these areas require careful review in the planning
process.
8.5 Development proposals will be required to address sofl
constraints unique to the proposed site.
8.6 GartieH county will ensure that natural, scenic and ecological
resources and critical wildlife habitats are protected.
8.7 Development will be encouraged in areas with the least
e nvi ro n me ntal constrai nts.
POLICIES
8.1 Gafield County shall discourage and reserve the right to deny
development in areas identified as having constrainfs such as
active landslides, debris flows, unstable slopes, bedrock slides,
major mudflows, radioactive tailings, slopes over 25%o, riparian
areas and wetlands and projects proposed within the 100 year
floodplain.
Staff comments:
(1) Debris FIow Hazard at \AAI/TF Site: Debris flows have not been reported on
the property's debris fans, but qany debris flows have occurred on similar
fans in the Glenwood area inclurlqil,the historic 1977 debris flow episode.
According to the geotechnical repb{the vast majority of the site is located
on land with moderate to high debris flow hazard. To mitigate the hazard,
the report recommends deflection berms (3ti1p feet high) upfritt of the facility.
ln places where the protection of the bernVis inadequate, buildings will be
flood-proofed and be reinforced to withstand debris flow impact.
6
(2) Rockfall Hazard at \AA//TF Site: t'(.,pffrttr have occurred historically in the
Glenwood Springs area at EitrQ yLitn similar geologic settings. The
geotechnical report recomment}d/ mitigating the rockfall hazards with
barriers (i.e. embankments, walls, or cable fences) and building
reinforcement.
(3) Geotechnical lssues Reqarding Access Drive. The geotechnical report did -
not consider the 3,000 foot long access drive from the RFTA facility to the
site. The City recognizes the need for a geotechnical study prior to final
design.
8.2 GartieH County shall discourage development proposals that
require excessive vegetation removal, cut and fill areas or other
physical modifications that will res-ult in visual degradation or
-. p u bli e eoncerns:' - -' - - - -'
Staff comment on visual deoradation: The construction of the access road, withI Ysvt !! rrr !
idth, could result in visual degradation as
the site is viewed from West Glenwood and l-70. Much of the access drive is
on BLM land and BLM has requested that the color of retaining walls match the
indigenous rocks.
With regard to the treatment facility, the treatment tanks will not be highly visible
from the l-70 direction since the tanks will be at ground level and behind the
railroad track embankment. The City Engineer reports that the City is concerned
about the appearance of the buildings and has hired a7^,a'rchitect as part of the
design team. Rockfall and debris flow mitigation meastlre,(walls, embankments,
and cable fences) could be visible from l-70 and screehfi'lg with landscaping is
recommended.
8.3 Natural drainage patterns will be preserued so the cumulative impact
of public and private lands activities wilt not cause storm drainage
and floodwater pattems to exceed the capacity of natural drainage
ways, or subject other areas to increased potentialfor damage due to
flooding, erosion or sedimentation or result in pollution to stream,
ivers, or other natural bodies of water.
8.4 The County will require development with river frontage to
address fhe r.ssue through physical design in such a way which
will protect fragile wetlands from protection and scenic
resources and protect floodplains from encroachment.
Staff comments: The \AA//TF and access drive are outside of the floodplain and
do not impact wetlands.
8.5 The county will discourage development in areas where severe
sofl constraints cannot be adequately mitigated.
Garfield County will protect critical wildlife habitat needed by state
and federally protected, threatened or endangered species.
Gartield County will require development on lands having
moderate or minor environmental constraints to mitigate
physical problems such as minor rock falls, 17- 24% slopes,
minor mudflows, potential subsidence, high water tables, slow
percolation, radioactive sorrs, andlor corrosive or expansive
soils.
Staff Conclusion and Recommendation
8.6
Undoubtedly Glenwood will soon need a new wastewater treatment facility to
serye the City's growing population. Locating a new facility is difficult in that it
should be downhill from the City in order to eliminate excessive pumping and far
enough away such that population centers will not be adversely impacted by
odors and noise. The proposed wastewater treatment facility on the north bank
of the Colorado River west of town satisfies these conditions.
The drawbacks of the site are its location at the base of steep hillside and the
resultant debris flow and rockfall hazards. The City and its engineers believe
that these hazards can be mitigated at the treatment facility site through the
construction of a combination-o-f b.enns; embaRkmdntS, walls, cable fenees, and
building reinforcement. A geotechnical evaluation has the access drive to the
site needs to be performed prior to final design.
ition to the geotechnical hazards, members of the public may be
concerned by the visual degradation caused by the construction of the access
drive and treatment facility. The County supports the efforts of the City to design
visually appealing buildings and hide rockfall and debrisO*dF behind
landscaping. d/ ,J s-\,',(nla
Based on the information provided and the recognized need for a new treatment
facility for Glenwood Springs, the Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission find the wastewater treatment facility project consistent with the
County's Comprehensive Plan.
8.7
tv.
8