The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutTBP 1996-09-13 . . TOWN OF FRASER "Icebox of the Nation" P.O. Box 120/153 Fraser Avenue Fraser, Colorado 80442 (970) 726-5491 FAX Line: (970) 726-5518 Manager's Briefing: September 13, 1996 Please note that we're meeting at 5:30 on Wednesday so that we can try a new fonnat that allows the Board to workshop prior to the regular meeting. No fonnal actions can be taken during a workshop, Supper will be served -- Subway??? The Workshop Agenda Maryvale will present a new PDD plan, It is their hope to "flush-out" the substantive issues associated with the new plan prior to submitting it fonnally to the Town. Catherine and J will be meeting with them on Monday to go over their proposal and to discuss other business issues. Ron Cousineau from the Colorado Forest Service is also on the agenda -- he and Catherine will be discussing proposed environmental changes to Fraser's code, specifically the "wood burning stove" (air quality) ordinance, The Regular Agenda Several people will receive awards for improvements they have made to their homes and/or businesses. A complete list of winners, who receive gift certificates and cash, is included, Jim Hoy's back in town (!) and will be present to discuss the Visitors' Center. As background: the Board budgeted around $27,000 this year to work with Midas Consulting Group on a fund- raising project for the Visitors' Center -- money that J pulled from this project to cover the Fraser River Trail construction. Michael Blimes from Midas has retooled the scope of Midas' project (see the enclosed proposal) for 1996 as the stock market's success has made this an especially good year to approach Foundations for grants, During StalfChoice we would like to . clarifY the Board's intent on the paving requirement in the business zone regulations . discuss leasing parking spaces on the Mustang site for a new business . follow-up on St. Bernard's communication vis-a-vis Maryvale . request a support letter for the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Project Board Choice will include a discussion on a regional planning commission. . , Finally, I have some good news to share in executive session relative to a property acquisition and will be putting together a package for your consideration between now and Wednesday! ýÿ . . TOWN BOAl~D SEPT. 4, 1996 The regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Johnston. Hoard present were Swatzell, Sanders and Wirsing. Also present were Reid, Skelton and Winter. Iv.1inutes of the 8/21/96 meeting were approved as WriUen. OPEN FORUM Memb~rs fi'cUll the cOlmmmity asked the Town to install a street light somewhere close to the SdlOOI pi'operty. It is too dark on that street to be sale l()f the f.:hildren, especially in the winter months. The town will look lor the best location and will look into the cost .md schedule this as soon as possible. VISION STATElVIENT DISCUSSrON l'vlariannc Khmckc, Town appointed membcr of the task force, n:vk:wed ,he vision statement and the process that the group took to get the statement. Klancke suggested that a great deal of 'he statement .;ould be indmlcd into 'he policy issues within the amended Cump. Plan that the Town is working on. Other tools to implement the vision was discussed. The Town Board considered a Resolution to adopt 'he vision slatcmcl1t but tabled tilis Resolution to have timl,; to work 011 the statement to more clearly detine the statement to the Town of Fraser, and discuss the vision with the Town of Winter Park. ORDINANCE 225 Ordinance 225 \,vas presented f(>r review. This Ordinance codifies the mixed use allowed within P A 28, ~ilaryval\J Subdiv~ion, as wtill as addressing several development issues subject to this prop~rty . Board had lengthily discussion with representatives fi'om the Cemetery with regards to fadlitating the needs of the Cemetery. Wirsing made a motion to appww Ordinance 225 with 'he change to Section I to read: 'and 8 f~~t of D4IIural wgetatioD and trees adjilcent to the fence; or is n~asomlble possibly.> Motion 2nd by Swatzell, canied. . . SIJ8l>IVISION EXEMl)TJON PLAT P A 28 Requirements necessary ior approval arc: Ordinance 225, detining the allowed mixtld use for the pmpl..:rty. Written wnJinlliltiou Ii'om the owners that a Jr.;vclopmcut will accuuullodatr.; "lcw wrridors, 1ll0V\i the entrance to the subdivisiou north, create a butter Jell' the cemetery, atllllh~ dCl,)ding of Tract A haw been addressed to the satisfaction of the Town, as well as they can be addrcssl.:d prior to an actual subdivision plat being processed. Technical changes need to be made to the plat. Swatzell made a motion to approw the; Subdivision Exemption Plat of P A 28 and to allow signatures when staff is satisfied the technical conections are made, and add a plat 110te with regards to Ordinance 225, also stalllo record the deed 101' Tract A, and Ordinance 225, motion 2nd Wirsing, carried. STAFF REPORTS (., Skcllon advised the Board th.lt a review of the FPDP has been don~. Skelton hamled a written Imurix of requirements and commenls to completeness of submittal. Unless Board has Jdditional cOllUllcnts, Skelton will advise Mal)'vale of the outstanding requin:ments that must be submitted for a complete tiling. BOARD CHOICE Wirsing mad~ a mOLion tu appoint Swatzell to the CIviL Policy committt:e, 2nd Sanders, can'ied. Saint Bernard Church is requesting assistance with the; acquisition of ~hurch land from Maryvale. BoaI'd set the Sept. 18th meeting to stad at 6:00 p.m.. Wirsing made a molion lo i'ppoinl hulla Shtaidan to the Bmlrd of Adjustment for a three year tenn, 2nd Swatzell, carried. \Virsing made a motion to appoint Rantz, Boudreaux and Knutson to three year lenus, these citizt:ns are presently serving on the Board, 2nd Swatzell, carried. Board approved Swatzell and Sanders attendance at the CIviL workshop on the 28th. Wirsing moved 10 go inlo an ~xecutive scssioH 011 a persOlUld issue, 2nd Swatzell, carried. Wirsing made a motion to come out of executive session at II :00 p.m., 2nd Swatzell, carried. No further business, meeting aJjoumed alII :00 p.m. . . 1996 IMPROVEMENT AWARDS BUSINESS: $50.00 Gift Certificate at Cold Springs Greenhouse Most Attractive Business: Crooked Creek Saloon Most Improved Business: Wally Alves (Old Lightning Liquor property) RESIDENTIAL: $50.00 Gift Certificate at Cold Springs Greenhouse Most Attractive Residence: Steve Baker and Laura Most Improved Residence: Divide Condos Best l"andscapiDl!: C,B. Jensen HONORABLE MENTION $15.00 Gift Certificate at Cold Springs Greenhouse BUSINESSES: Byers Peak Veterinary Clinic - Shauna Omlie Mountain Printer - Alex Graham Fraser Valley Ace Hardware Fraser Brazier - Kirk Main Mic's-ellaneous Quick Stop - Andy & Kim Hanna Byers Peak Restaurant Mountain Recovery Fraser Frame Shoppe & Laundromat - Ed Norby Community First Bank RESIDENCES: Harold and Helen Smith 811 Mink Lane Bob and Lucille Morrow Pink House on Ermine Hal O'Leary 801 Ferret Lane Bill and Lisa Faraklas Everett and June Nelson On the Meadows Condos Sun River Townhomes Powderhaus Ed & Sue Jackson Chuck and Elsie Clayton Edna Tucker Ed & Rusty Boudreaux Marianne Roberts Quail Property Owners on north side for open space maintanence (plant a tree) ýÿ . . \ The MIDAS Consulting Group, lnc. 1'0 Box 4798 Fund Haising Englewood, Colorado 80155 Marketing Fax / 303 . 796 . 7640 Public Helations 303 . 770 . 9500 August 16, 1996 Mr. Chuck Reid Town Manager Town of Fraser P. O. Box 120/153 Fraser Avenue Fraser, CO 80442 Dear Chuck: The MIDAS Consulting Group, Inc. is pleased to submit, by this letter, MIrnS a proposal to the Town of Fraser for fund-raising counsel relevant to initial grantsmanship efforts on behalf of the Walk Through History Park. As the Town of Fraser does not have an established fund-raising history, with a donor base, we anticipated in our earlier, May, 1996 proposal for overall campaign counsel, that it would take at least two years to complete the originally proposed $1 million fund-raising initiative. You have since advised me that the financial circumstances in the Town of Fraser will delay our efforts for overall campaign counsel. As an interim strategy, The MIDAS Consulting Group proposes to begin researching possible funding sources toward the following funding objectives compiled by the Town of Fraser Board: 1. $100,000 to complete the funding necessary for the sculptures; 2. $150,000 to expand the current Visitors' Center; 3. $575,000 to purchase two adjoining properties and construct a second building; 4. $125,000 to develop high technology displays for the Park, including a World Wide Web (Internet) page, user-friendly computer displays, mini-theater, audio tours, etc. 5. $50,000 to create a traveling educational exhibit. (This estimated cost reflects the difference between the total of the four previous items and the $1 million campaign goal.) All of these costs are still estimates, as far as we know, and firmer costs will need to be determined by the Town of Fraser prior to submission of grant requests. In addition, it was anticipated that approximately $150,000 will be needed for annual operations and maintenance costs for buildings and property. . . . The MIDAS Consulting Group, Inc. , The scope and terms of our consulting services for initial grantsmanship services are detailed below with these costs and thoughts still in mind. StOPE OF PIIDFESSIONAL SERVWES While grantsmanship alone is not a substitute for overall campaign counsel, The MIDAS Consulting Group proposes fund-raising grantsmanship counsel to research possible sources of foundation and/or corporate grants on an hourly basis. The basis of this effort is to afford the Town of Fraser the opportunity to be positioned for consideration at a time when many foundations have more funds for distribution than in the past, and are coming off of a record year for overall grant support. Our fee would typically be $6,000, based on 40 hours at our standard hourly rate of $150.00 per hour, but we will contribute $1,000 as an in-kind contribution in honor of Jim and Carol Hoy. Therefore the direct cost to the Town of Fraser for this project will be $5,000, plus any out.:.of-pocket expenses as described herein. We, of course, would appreciate Jim and Carol being advised of t~is contribution in their honor. We require payment in advance of the $5,000, which represents a flat fee as a stand- alone project. This fee represents the aforementioned 40 hours to identify possible funding sources, review background information to be provided by the Town of Fraser, and prepare a fund-raising template proposal suitable for submission to viable funding sources, and being specific to the requirements of at least one such foundation or corporation. Additional submissions may occur depending upon the amount of time remaining available for modification to specific requirements. Any additional time spent over the project's 40 hours must be approved in writing by the appropriate representative of the Town of Fraser and be compensated in advance at $150 per hour. STAFt'ING & RESOI1Rf)ES Mr. Michael Blimes, Chairman of The MIDAS Consulting Group, will serve as the lead consultant to the Town of Fraser for this grantwriting project. Assistance or additional counsel may be provided by Ms. Roecker, President of The .MIDAS Consulting Group. The credentials of Mr. Blimes and Ms. Roecker have previously been provided. COUIIUNIUTION & APPIIDVALS The following communications procedures will be implemented by the Town of Fraser and The MIDAS Consulting Group during the contract period: 1. All communication, unless otherwise specified, will go through the Town Manager or an assigned designee as mutually agreed to by MIDAS, the Town of Fraser Board, and the Town Manager; 2 '. . . The MIDAS Consulting Group, loc. . 2. The appropriate authorities at the Town of Fraser will review and approve all materials developed by The MIDAS Consulting Group on its behalf prior to internal use or external distribution; 3. The Town of Fraser will not share or give such materials, including this proposal, with other individuals, organizations, or their representatives for their use without the written permission of the Chairman or President of The MIDAS Consulting Group; 4. The MIDAS Consulting Group will keep all Town of Fraser donor and financial information to which MIDAS has access in strictest confidence and will not divulge such information to other clients or organizations with whom we work. FEES & StHEDllLE OF PinlENT The fee for the grantsmanship project services proposed herein will be $5,000 and any travel time to and from Fraser is included at the equivalent hourly rate. Activities on behalf of the Town of Fraser will begin within five (5) days of receipt of both the signed contract and the specified advance payment. OllT.OF.POtKET EXPENSES The Town of Fraser is responsible for paying all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by The MIDAS Consulting Group associated with the grantsmanship project. Out-of- pocket expenses include mileage (30~/mile), business related meals, postage, faxing ($1.00/page), laser printing (15~/page), photocopying (10~/page), printing, long-distance phone charges, and any other incidental out-of-pocket expenses. The MIDAS Consulting Group will make every reasonable effort to minimize expenses without compromising quality. Naturally, these costs may be offset through in-kind contributions by local businesses (e.g., hotel/motel expenses :;hould overnight stays be '" required). Major expenses, such as hotel, photography, and printing expenses - should they be required - will be paid directly by the Town of Fraser. In no case will The MIDAS Consulting Group incur a major single item expense (more than $100) without the prior approval of the appropriate authorities at the Town of Fraser. Outstanding expenses will be detailed on monthly expense-only invoices, with payment due within 10 days of billing. 3 . . . The MIDAS Consulting Group, loc. . CONTRAtT APPlIDf At If the terms contained herein are agreeable to the Town of Fraser, a signed copy of this proposal should be returned to The MIDAS Consulting Group, along with the advance payment of $5,000. Upon receipt, this will constitute a contract for service. Any extension of counselor additional expenses beyond the terms noted herein must be approved in writing by the Town Manager or Board President of the Town of Fraser and the Chairman of The MIDAS Consulting Group. The MIDAS Consulting Group fully endorses and complies with the spirit and letter of the Code of Ethics of the National Society of Fund Raising Executives (NSFRE), of which we are active, dues-paying members. The MIDAS Consulting Group is the only fund-raising firm in the Rocky Mountain Region that is a member of Colorado's 2% Club, which is comprised of businesses which contribute cash or in-kind services totaling at least 2% of their gross revenues. The MIDAS Consulting Group appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal to the Town of Fraser and looks forward to working with you to advance the fund-raising goals of this exciting and challenging endeavor. If you have questions or need additional information prior to formalizing this agreement, feel free to contact me. In the meantime, please accept my wish for your success. Sincerely, a~~ Michael E. Blimes Chairman Accepted: - Date: For the Town of Fraser 4 ýÿ . . St. Bernard's Church Post Office Box 3151 Winter Park, Colorado 80482 303-726-4588 29' August 1996 Town of Fraser Board of Trustees . P.O. Box 120 Fraser, Colorado 80442 SUbject: 5-acre plot for St. Bernard's Church at Maryvale The purposes of this letter are as follows: 1 . To make a matter of record our current dissatisfaction with the 5-acre plot for St. Bernard's church shown as 10E on the ~evised Planned Development Plan dated 5/30/96 by Maryvale LLC. 2. To inform you of negotiations underway to resolve our differences. 3 . To apprise you of our desires as to the exact 5-acre plot we would wish for the church. A copy of the plat and a legal description are enclosed herewith. BACKGROUND ---------- 1- In a conveyance agreement between Regis-Maryvale, Inc. and the Archdiocese of Denver dated in November of 1987, Regis conveyed to the Archdiocese at Maryvale " . . . the Church Site including the existing lodge, two cinder block buildings, the U-shaped building and other structures in the Church Site, and the cemetary ( sic ) ground adjacent to it, all consisting of approximately 5 . 0 acres... " 2 . It should be noted that there is not now nor was there at the time a U-shaped building near the Church Site that anyone can remember. It should also be noted that within any reasonable 5-acre plot surrounding the church site it is impossible to include the cemetery. 3. The conveyance stipulated that the gift from Regis would occur at such time as the location of Village Drive and the location of the exact boundaries of the linear park shown on the plan were determined BUT !!_~l~~_~!~!~~_!~~! if ~~~~-~~~-~~!_~~~~-~~~~-~!!~!~-~!!_Z~~~~_~!_!~~_~!~~!~i ~! !~~-~~~~~~~~!_:!~~~-~~~~!!!~~!_!~~l!_~~_~~~~~~_!~!!~~_~~~ ~~~!!_!~~!!_~~~!~Z_!~~_~~~~~~_~i!~_!~_!~~_~~~~~!~~~~~~: 4. The six years were up on 20 November 1993. Yet we still do not have either a legal description of the plot nor a d.l'!ed to it. r..CTIONS TAKEN ------------- 1 . In January 1996, St. Bernard's, at the urging of the Archdiocese of Denver, had a survey done of the most logical 5-acre plot considering existing access roads, existing . . St. Bernard's Church Post Office Box 3151 Winter Park, Colorado 80482 303-726-4588 parking sites around the church and especially the future need for enlarging the church to accommodate new developments in the valley. 2. Copies of the plat and its le1al description were provided informally at a February meeting of the Trustees to Mr. Chuck Reid and to Mr. Rich Nippert. 3. At a meeting on 28 August 1996, Mr. DiCola, counsel for the ~rchdiocese, and the undersigned again made known to Mr. Nippert our desires as to the 5 acres and gave him another copy of the January plat. He promised early consideration of our desires. PROBLEMS WITH PLOT 10E ---------------------- There are two problems with plot 10E now proposed in the latest POP for the church site: 1. Village Drive is planned to curve in such a way as to pass within what looks to be 10 to 30 feet of the rear of the church. 2. The only possible way to enlarge the church is to extend it toward the rear, i.e. tow~rd the already-too-near planned road. If we are able to come to a satisfactory resolution of this issue with Maryvale LLC, we will inform you promptly. Since the statute of limitations may expire on 20 November, we feel it necessary to press for a very early resolution and the receipt of a deed. ~ (U ~-ir:~ Chair, Finance Committee ----------------------- Copies to: Mr. Chuck Reid Mr. Rich Nippert Mr. A.J. DiCola Father Francis Gerber \ . . .. 1 <- TOWN OF FRASER "Icebox of the Nation;' P.O. Box 120/153 Fraser Avenue Fraser, Colorado 80442 (970) 726-5491 FAX Line: (970) 726-5518 TO: Mayor Johnston & Town Board Members FROM: Catherine E. Skelton ~ '(f---) DATE: Friday the 13th )-,' ~, RE: Development Permits in the Business Zone Staff has been working with John Humpreys to finalize the "Architectural Character" section of the existing business zone regulations. Staff is also reviewing the existing regulations and will be proposing some amendments to them in the near future. Recently, Melanie Zwick from New York Life asked the Planning Commission for permission to install a concrete apron in the driveway of her business extending approximately 15' from Eastom Avenue, and to cover the remaining driveway with class C gravel. Melanie's original development permit required her to pave, and the Planning Commission required her to adhere to the original permit and pave the parking lot. This brings to mind the whole paving requirement. Staff has reviewed all development permits that have been approved since the business regulations were adopted. It does appear that some businesses were required to pave and others weren't. We have put together the following information so that we can have a discussion about the paving requirement at Wednesday's meeting. Development Permit name and number: Paving required: 002 Jim's Sleigh Rides Paving not required 003 Melanie Zwick, NY Life Paving required, not completed 004 Taco Ball N/ A; already paved 005 Sportman Quickstop N/A; already paved 006 Ron Anderson-Trailer Paving not required 007 Lorenzo's Restaurant Paving not required 008 My Garage Paving not required 009 Mt. Madness Paving not required 010 Fraser Arctic Cat N/ A; already paved 01 J Bond Electric Paving required 012 Power Play Sports- FVC N/ A; already paved ýÿ . . , ~ Development Permit name and number: Paving required: 013 NOT APPROVED 014 G.c. Maintenance & Rentals N/A; already paved 015 Safeway Plant Shelter N/ A; already paved 016 Michael's Audio/Video Paving not required 017 K. C. Lukow Paving not required 018 Elk Creek Mercantile Paving not required, but partially complete 019 Hilly's Hooker Paving not required 020 Jane Hudon Paving not required 021 Mic's-ellaneous Paving not required 022 Ice Box Lemonade- FVC N/A; already paved 023 NOT APPROVED 024 Ace Hardware Paving required 025 Jimmy's Pizza- FVC N/ A; already paved 026 Metro Brokers- FVC N/ A; already paved . . August 26, 1996 Mr. Chuck Reid, Fraser Town Manager Fraser, Colorado 80442 Dear Mr. Reid: In the Fall of 1992, my wife, daughter, son-in-law and I purchased a condominium in the town of Fraser. Since our daughter and family live in Louisville, Colorado, the condo would become a week end retreat for them throughout the Spring, Summer and Fall months. For us, as retired folks, it would become our Summer home, to escape the heat and humidity of southern Illinois. Our youngest daughter spent her honeymoon at the condo, we have celebrated two birthdays of our first grandchild in Fraser, and my , wife and I have spent several wedding anniversaries overlooking Byers Peak from our living room. Unfortunately, we are not wealthy people and reluctantly rent our space to the skiers during the Winter ski season. This added income helps us to afford the annual maintenance expenses and the cost of improvements to the property that we have already done and will continue to do each year. We plan to remove the property from the rental program as soon as financially possible. We do not come to Fraser to shop for clothes, T-shirts and souvenirs. We come there to 'live', to hike and bike and view the scenery, but for a short time each year. And, we read our MANIFEST subscription, with interest, to learn that the proposed Maryvale development may add 4,055 residential units, 2210 hotel/lodge units and 525,000 sq. ft. of commercial space to the serene meadow separating Fraser from Winter Park. Thus, likely destroying those reasons that we come to visit each Summer. We realize that growth is essential to a community as a source of jobs and tax revenue, but overgrowth can certainly be detrimental. This Summer, we drove 1-70 west to Utah and were appalled at the massive growth of Frisco, Silverthorne, Vail, Beaver Creek, etc. I realize that these towns are in the 1-70 corridor. making them easily accessible, but please, we don't need that kind of expansion in the Fraser Valleyl We located in Fraser to sit on our deck and view the mountains, the meadow and the wildlife; not roof tops, people and traffic congestion I pollution. We did not buy our condo to make money, nor to lose money. We just wanted a quiet place in the clean air of the Colorado mountains for us and our family to visit and call our 'second home'. And., that is what we have ---- right now. We sincerely request the Fraser Town Council to seriously look at the development proposals of the Maryvale developers and reduce the size of the proposal to allow steady, but planned growth --- not over growth. Let's keep the meadow as a natural, physical barrier between Fraser and Winter Park. Let's continue to allow our visitors a chance to stop on the Fraser Trail a'nd feed the horses, photograph Byers Peak and ýÿ . . enjoy the serenity, the peace and quiet, that comes with unspoiled nature. We donlt need Outlet Malls, massive vehicular traffic problems and neon lights. We want to maintain the reason that we, and others like us, come to the Fraser Valley --- and Fraser in particular. The opportunity to enjoy peace, quiet, clean air, beautiful sunsets and rainbows, modest traffic, a walk to the park, a ride on the trail, etc. Please reduce the size of the Maryvale development to maintain the integrity of the Valley as we know itl We urge your consideration of this request and wish you well in your future negotiations with the developers. Very truly yours, ~CVux./ /J~~ 0 ....loLA- . C (- Sharon and Larry Meyer 1606 West Lake Road Murphysboro. Illinois 62966 618/684-4156 ýÿ . . Leigh Wilson 7131 East Walsh Place Denver, Colorado 80224 August 12, 1996 Chuck Reid, City Manager . Town of Fraser PO Box 120 Fraser, Colorado 80442 Dear Chuck, I am writing this letter as follow up on the letter and short discussion that we had earlier this summer concerning the drainage on Quail Avenue in Fraser. You indicated that the city was not responsible for any problems that we may have with Wapiti Meadows in diverting their drainage onto our lots. You also indicated that the city is concerned that the holding pond behind Wapiti Meados may have a leak. You also indicated that the major problem is finding out if and where the leak might be. I am writing you requesting that you look into possible leakage of the holding pond above Wapiti Meadows before the issue of spring runoff comes about again next year. Although I am not a water expert, I'm sure that there are resources from other mountain towns on how they might trace leakage problems. This issue I'm sure is not unique to Fraser. I appreciate your help in this matter before the issue of excessive drainage comes up next spring for the third year in a row. Sincerely, (, . j \d~ lL- /tl.t-tv,-, Leigh Wilson . . . ROSS LIBENSON P. C. A TIORNEY AT LAW 2737 MAPLETON A VENUE, SUITE 103 BOULDER, COLORADO 80304 (303) 449-0700 September 9, 1996 BY HAND RE: Maryvale Planning Area 28 Ms. Catherine E. Skelton, Community Development Director Town of Fraser 153 Fraser Avenue P. O. Box 120 Fraser, Colorado 80442 Dear Catherine: This shall confIrm our conversation of today's date. First, since the town agreed to protect the cemetery through the platting process, it may be necessary for the cemetery board and concerned individuals to attend planning commission and trustee hearings. Please advise myself and our secretary, Alta Gessellman, at least one week in advance of all item being heard so we may be afforded the option to not only attend, but also prepare. Second, the subdivision exemption plat for P.A. 28 was approved even though it was not correct and required changes by the developer. Apparently, it was given to attorney Kevin Ehlers to make substantive changes to the notes in the dedication before it is recorded and to add language about ordinance #225. ýÿ . . Mr. Catherine Skelton. September 9, 1996 page 2 Since there is no ordinance for this unusual procedure, we want the opportunity to review it before filing. We assume that neither the mayor nor the clerk have signed the subdivision exemption plat. Will the corrected plat, to be signed and recorded, be presented to the town trustees at a regular meeting of the town board? Very truly yours, Ross Libenson P.C. Ross L. Libenson cc: Town of Fraser, Board of Trustees .. 1.0 PROJECT PROPOSAL .{MARY SHEET: . .' PROJECT TITLE NAME Fraser Ri\'er Basin Nonpoint Source Pollution Project Phase I . NAME AND ADDRESS OF LEAD PROJECT SPONSOR East Grand Water Quality Board clo Grand County Water and Sanitation District No.1 P.O. Box 3077 Winter Park, Colorado 80482 ST ATE CONTACT PERSON Greg Parsons TITLE Program Administrator PHONE (303) 692-3585 FAX (303) 782-0390 STATE Colorado WATERSHED Fraser River. a tributary of Colorado River PROJECT TYPES: _ BASE --X..- WATERSHED _ GROUNDWATER -X... I&E W A TERBODY TYPES NPS CATEGORY (pHASE I) _ Groundwater _ Agriculture _ LakeslResenroirs -X.. Urban Runoff -X. Rivers _ Silviculture -X.. Streams _ Construction -X.. Wetlands _ Resource Extraction _ Other _ Stowage and Land Disposal -X.. Hydrologic Modification _ Other PROJECT LA TITUDE~MIN. 51' LONGITUDE 1050 MIN. 45' SUMMARIZATION OF PHASE I MAJOR GOALS (1) Control/eliminate sedimentation impacts to the Fraser River in order to minimize bedload shifting and improve aquatic habitat for invertebrates and trout fishef)'; (2) Control/eliminate sedimentation impacts to the Fraser River in order to improve drinking water quality and reduce treatment and maintenance costs associated with turbidity. . PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Through the implementation of a variety of slope stabilization. erosion control and sedimentation basin BMPs throughout the Fraser River basin. the continued degradation of the Fraser River caused by Urban Runoff and Hydrologic Modifications will be reversed/offset. The focus oft.he Projects is to reduce sediment. since the Fraser River has been designated as "Partially Supporting" classified uses as a result of sediment. Project participants hope that completion of the entire Project will return the Upper Fraser River to a viable trout fishef)' while enhancing the high quality trout fishery in the Lower Fraser River. Phase I of the Fraser River Basin NPS Project will focus on sediment loading in the Upper Fraser River Basin. defined by the Project participants as extending from the summit of Berthoud Pass to the USGS gage at theldlewild Campground. The first project identified by the participants as a priority BMP is the construction of a sedimentation basin and access road immediatel)' upstream of the Denver Water Board's Fraser River Diversion Dam on the mainstem Fraser Rh'er. The sedimentation basin will be designed to capture and contain excessive bedload sediments transported in the Fraser River during spring runoff and summer storm events. FY 1997319 funds requested $ 114.000.00 Match $ 76.000.00 Other Federal Funds $ 0.00 Total project cost $ 190.000.00 , . . < " FRASER RIVER BASIN NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION PROJECT PHASE I DRAFT PROJECT Il\fPLEl\1ENT A TION PLAN September 17, 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT PROPOSAL SUMMARY SHEET ................ Cover Sheet 2.0 STATEMENT OF NEED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.0 COORDINATION PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.0 EV ALUA TION AND MONITORING PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.0 BUDGET .............................................. 8 EXHIBIT A - 4/6/96 MEMORANDUM (DAVID GLOSS, USFS) EXHIBIT B - PROJECT LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT C - PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS PHOTOGRAPHS EXHIBIT D - PROJECT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN EXHIBIT E - PROJECT MILESTONE TABLE EXHIBIT F - PROJECT BUDGET APPENDIX 1 - PROJECT HISTORY G:\COUNSEL\DOCUMENT\319GRANT.APP MJR-082096-4 ýÿ 2.0 STATEMENTOFA . , 2.1 The Fraser River (a major tributary of the Colorado River) is a critical natural and economic resource in the Grand County communities of Winter Park, Fraser, Tabemash and Granby. The Lower Fraser River, extending north from Tabemash through the Fraser Canyon to its confluence with the Colorado River near Granby, is a gold medal trout fishery that may be in jeopardy due to a variety of point source, nonpoint source and hydrologic modification impacts along the length of the entire river. Several of these impacts were identified in the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control Division's November, 1989 Colorado Nonpoint Assessment Report. The Fraser River and its tributaries have been classified as "Partially Supporting" classified uses as a result of sediment, and "Water Quality Limited" as a result of un-ionized ammonia (Colorado Department of Health and Environment, 1994). While much of the Upper Fraser River, especially the headwaters of the Fraser River, is currently incapable of supporting a viable, naturally reproducing trout fishery, primarily as a result of nonpoint source impacts, it is believed that the implementation of various BMPs in the Fraser River basin could significantly improve water quality and, consequently, aquatic habitat throughout the entire length of the Fraser River. Over the last several years, a variety of BMPs have been implemented in the Upper Fraser River basin, especially erosion control work on Berthoud Pass. The purpose of the subject project is to implement a new BMP in the Upper Fraser River basin, the retrofitting of an existing hydrologic modification owned and operated by the Denver Water Department ("Denver Water"), in order to minimize accelerated sedimentation loading below that structure (the Project"). It is hoped that construction and operation of the Project will remove deposited sediment sizes which are most detrimental to aquatic life - generally fine gravel and sands in a size range of 1/4 inch (6.3 mm) and smaller. Measurements of the Fraser River stream bed material in the vicinity of the Project, indicate that in some areas over 50% of the surface particles are of this small, detrimental size. The majority of bedload sediment introduced from U.S. Highway 40 operations and collected behind Denver Water's diversion structure at the Project site is believed to be in this size range. In his April 6, 1996 memorandum (Exhibit A), United States Forest Service ("USFS") Hydrologist David Gloss calculated the amount of introduced sediment in the Upper Fraser River basin and the recommended size of the Project's sedimentation pond in order to achieve the Project's goal of removing a portion of the Upper basin's introduced bedload sediments at the Project site. Members of the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Task Force believe that the combination of projects undertaken to date, together with the addition of the Project, will significantly improve water quality in the Fraser River by reducing the amount of introduced bedload sediments which are degrading aquatic habitat and increasing maintenance costs for downstream municipal water providers. It is anticipated that reduced sediment . loading in the Upper Fraser River will assist in the re-establishment of a viable trout fishery in that river segment, and should reduce the above-average water treatment and maintenance costs currently experienced by the Winter Park Water & Sanitation District as a result of accelerated bedload sediment loading clogging water intakes in the Fraser River. The Winter Park Water & Sanitation District and the Town of Granby are currently the only municipal water providers in the Fraser River basin who divert directly from the Fraser River. These two districts provide treated water service to some 4,200 residents and approximately 190,000 square feet of commercial businesses. The Project is not intended or designed to remove suspended sediment/turbidity, but rather is intended to reduce introduced bedload sediments which are clogging municipal water intakes. Limited reductions in suspended sediments and turbidity may occur, but are incidental to the Project. 1 G:\CQUNSEL\DOCUMENT\319GRANT .APP MJR~2096-4 The Task Force has alAeoo that once the Project is comPleA group will meet to identify priority , projects in the Middle Fraser River basin and proceed to plan the implementation of those projects as Phase II of the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Project. 2.2 The Project will be located on the mainstem of the Fraser River immediately upstream of Denver Water's Fraser River Diversion Dam in the vicinity of the entrance to the Mary Jane ski area. The Fraser River is a major tributary of the upper Colorado River basin. The Fraser River is classified as an Aquatic Life Cold Water Class 1, Recreation Class 2, Water Supply and Agriculture waterbody. The Fraser River is a 3rd order stream with mean daily stream flows ranging from 3 cfs to 200 cfs as measured at the Idlewild Campground USGS flow gaging station. The Upper Fraser River's geomorphic stream class is B3 upper reach and C3 lower reach based on the Rosgen classification system. 2.3 Attached as Exhibit B is a USGS map indicating the location and size of the Upper Fraser River watershed and the location of the proposed Project. The Project will be located on lands administered by the USFS. A portion of the lands upon which the Project will be constructed is under Special Use Permit from the USFS to Denver Water. U.S. Highway 40 runs generally parallel to the Fraser River in the vicinity of the Project site. U.S. Highway 40 is the responsibility of CDOT. 2.4 The Fraser River originates near the summit of Berthoud Pass at an elevation of 11,315 feet. The Project site is located in a narrow valley at an elevation of approximately 9,350 feet. The Upper Fraser River watershed consists of steep, forested mountain terrain. Average annual precipitation in the area of the Project isapproximately 18.4 inches, distributed seasonally as follows: 10.4 inches during the summer season (May through November) and 8.4 inches during the winter season (December through April). 2.5 Water quality data has been collected by the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Task Force at selected sites in the Upper Fraser River basin during the period 1990 to 1994. A March 6, 1995 letter from Robert Ray to Michael Repucci includes an analysis of that water quality data. Mr. Ray's analysis ultimately led the Task Force to isolate the Upper basin's sediment loading problem (as well as the extensive bedload shifting caused by that loading) as the primary limiting condition on fish and insect reproduction throughout the length of the Upper Fraser River. A series of photographs demonstrating the effects of sediment loading to the ~raser River is attached as Exhibit C. Force members believe that the bedload shifting is most active during spring runoff and during summertime stonn events, while during low flow periods sediments are not carried through the watershed and tend to lodge in stream bank undercuts, pools and spawning substrates. David Gloss' April 6, 1996 memorandum (Exhibit A) indicates that the annual introduced bedload yield in the Upper Fraser River is several times background conditions (approximately 1,390 tons, or 2,780,000 lbs., each year). While reports prepared by Denver Water indicate that the sediment transport capacity of the stream is much larger than the sediment supply, visual inspection of the stream bed both upstream and downstream of the Project site seems to belie this assertion. Although no specific studies address the impact of sediment loading in the Upper Fraser River basin on fish and insect populations, a Colorado Division of Wildlife report dated June, 1991 concerning the effects of similar impacts on Straight Creek in Summit County, documents serious degradation of trout habitat and the size and diversity of macro invertebrates in Straight Creek, due to sand and sediment from 1-70. Carrying capacity of the Fraser River, like Straight Creek, has been severely limited by numerous 2 G:\COUNSEL\DOCUMENT\319GRANT .APP MJR~810964 i I years of U. S. HighWay' operations coupled with erosion (bo.atUralIY occurring and accelerated), whereby sediments have filled in stream bank undercuts, beaver ponds and natural pools in the stream. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION I 3.1 The Project consists of the construction of a diversion structure within the stream bed immediately upstream of where the Fraser River enters a large, existing settling pond behind the Fraser River Diversion Dam; a water conveyance system whereby water diverted from the mainstem Fraser River using the new diversion structure will be transported around the settling pond and then either released into Denver Water's canal for diversion back to the mainstem Fraser River downstream of Denver Water's Fraser River Diversion Dam, or released back to the main stem Fraser immediately downstream of the settling pond at the sluice gate located at the base of Denver Water's Fraser River Diversion Dam; a new road in a yet-to-be-determined location that will provide access to the edge of the settling pond; and excavation of the existing settling pond to a depth, width and length necessary to capture, on an as-needed basis, the calculated amount of introduced bedload sediment to the Fraser River caused by erosion of cut and fill banks and wintertime sanding operations along U.S. Highway 40. S= Project Conceptual Design attached as Exhibit D. The Task Force anticipates that once constructed, the Project will be operated so that during low flow conditions each fall, Project participants will conduct a visual survey of the settling pond to determine the need for maintenance. If the visual survey indicates the need for maintenance, the Fraser River can be diverted from the settling pond utilizing the diversion structure and water conveyance system, and then heavy machinery will be able to excavate and remove captured material from the constructed pond area. CDOT and Denver Water have committed to cooperate in the Project's needed maintenance work under a formal intergovernmental agreement. It is currently anticipated that CDOT will provide the majority of labor and equipment for needed Project maintenance. Finally, Denver Water has agreed to alter its current dam operations plan by postponing opening the sluice gate located at the base of the Fraser River Diversion Dam until qfter the settling pond has been dredged. The goals of the Project are two-fold. The first Project goal is to improve the water quality in the Fraser River in order to improve trout habitat and increase the size and diversity of the river's macro invertebrate population, while simultaneously reducing or eliminating the incremental costs of water treatment associated with bedload sediment loading in the Upper Fraser River. The second Project goal is to test a new BMP (the retrofitting of an existing water diversion structure coupled with a revision of the structure's operations plan) that may have applicability to other sites with similar sedimentation loading issues and existing hydrologic modifications. 3.2 Goal 1: Improve trout habitat and increase the size and diversity of the river's macro invertebrate population, while simultaneously reducing or eliminating the incremental costs of water treatment associated with bedload sediment loading in the Upper Fraser River. Objective 1: Construct the necessary components of the Project in order to capture introduced bedload sediments in a geographically practical location in the Upper Fraser River basin. Task 1: Complete design of the Project during the winter of 1996-97. Products: A complete design package suitable for preparing necessary bid packages and engaging contractors to perfonn the described work during the summer of 1997. .' 3 G:\COUNSEL\DOCUMEN1i319GRANT .APP MJR-0820964 Cost: . . $20,000.00 Task 2: Negotiate necessary USFS, Corps of Engineers and DWB licenses/permissions, permits and environmental analyses during the winter of 1996-97. Products: Receipt of necessary licenses and permits so that the Project can proceed during the summer of 1997. Cost: $1,000.00 Task 3: Purchase Project materials in the winter and spring of 1997. Products: Necessary Project materials and structures are suitably stored for commencement of Project construction in the summer of 1997. Cost: $15,000.00 Task 4: Implementation and completion of Project construction in the summer of 1997, and removal of accumulated bedload sediments behind the Denver Water diversion dam in the fall of 1997. Products: A completed diversion structure/sedimentation system in accordance with the fmal design plan and issued licenses and permits. Cost: $127,000.00 Objective 2: Implement a monitoring, reporting, and operation and maintenance follow-up program to document the success of the Project and operator compliance with contract commitments. Task 5: Survey the Project site both before and after initial Project construction, and then again in the summer of 1998 in order to caJculate the efficiency of the Project in removing introduced sediments from the Upper Fraser River basin. Products: Data which will objectively establish the success of the Project in removing the targeted percentage of introduced bedload sediments in the Upper Fraser River at the Fraser River Diversion Dam Project Site. An aggradation analysis and an analysis of sediment sizes removed from the Project site will also be conducted in order to confirm whether the suspected limiting condition in the health of the aquatic environment is, in fact, shifting stream bedload. Cost: $1,000.00 Task 6: Collect, assimilate and analyze water treatment and maintenance costs for the Winter Park Water & Sanitation District to detennine if the Project has reduced the water treatment and maintenance costs associated with sedimentation loading as expected. 4 G:\COUNSEL\DOCUMEN1i319GRANT.APP MJR.{)820964 product. Data which will identify whether th.is a positive correlation between the amount of sediments removed annually from the Project site, and those water treatment and maintenance costs for the Winter Park Water & Sanitation District directly related to bedload sedimentation loading in the Fraser River. Cost: $200.00 Task 7: Conduct trout and macro invertebrate population inventories upstream and downstream of the Project site before Project construction and again in the summer of 1998. Products: Data which will identify whether the Project has made a positive contribution to improving the health of the trout habitat and the size and diversity of the river's macro invertebrate population directly downstream of the Project site. Cost: $1,000.00 Task 8: Conduct trout habitat inventories upstream and downstream of the Project site before Project construction and again in the summer of 1998. Products: Data which will identify whether the Project has made a positive contribution to improving the diversity of trout habitat directly downstream of the Project site. Cost: $800.00 Goal 2: Test the viability of the new BMP demonstrated by the Project (the retrofitting of an existing water diversion structure coupled with a revision of the structure's operations plan) in order to determine if the Project's BMP may have applicability to other sites with similar sedimentation loading issues and existing hydrologic modifications. Objective 1: Implement an information and education program for entities located within other State watersheds that exhibit similar sedimentation loading issues as the Upper Fraser River and have existing hydrologic modifications that could be retrofitted and operated as a potential BMP to address those issues. Task 9: Consult with Denver Water, CDOT and the Colorado Department of Health Water Quality Control Division in order to identify other State watersheds that exhibit similar bedload sedimentation loading issues as the Upper Fraser River and have existing hydrologic modifications that could be retrofitted and operated as a potential BMP to address those issues. Products: A list of potential sites for possible application of the Project's tested BMP. Cost: $500.00 5 G:\CQUNSEL\DOCUMENT\319GRANT .APP MJR-082096-4 ýÿ . T . ,. . th p' .. d . . d . I Task 10: . ransmlt ormatIon concemmg e roJect to mtereste entIties an agencIes ocated . within the watersheds identified through completion of Task 9 above and offer to speak or provide other technical assistance to such entities and agencies if they wish to learn more about the potential applicability of the Project's BMP to their watershed. Products: Greater awareness of the potential applicability of the Project's tested BMP to other State watersheds. Cost: $1,000.00 3.3 See milestone table attached as Exhibit E. 3.4 A permit issued under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act will be necessary in order to construct and thereafter operate the Project. In past discussions with representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Project sponsor has been told that issuance of a permit should not be problematic since the discharges contemplated to occur during Project construction and subsequent maintenance activities would be I considered "beneficial." A license or other pennission from Denver Water to construct a portion of the Project within the limits of a Special Use Permit issued by the USFS to Denver Water for the Fraser River Diversion Dam may be required, but should be forthcoming since Denver Water is a member of the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Task Force and is a Project proponent. The USFS has determined that a Special Use Pennit for the portion of the Project to be constructed outside of the limits of Denver Water's Special Use Pennit will not be required as the USFS has agreed to act as the permittee for this portion of the Project. Disposal of sediments removed from the Project site will be on National Forest Service lands at one or more predetermined locations as discussed in the environmental analyses prepared by the USFS. The USFS and Winter Park Resort will work cooperatively to secure the necessary licenses/permissions and permits from the referenced agencies during the winter of 1996-97. 3.5 The East Grand Water Quality Board ("EGWQB") is the appropriate lead Project sponsor for the implementation/coordination of the Project because the constituent members of the EGWQB include all of the governmental entities providing water and sanitary sewer services to the residents of the Fraser River basin. Support for the Project by the EGWQB and its constituent members is critical to the success of the Project by providing an efficient means of coordinating Project goals and objectives among diverse political interests. 4.0 COORDINATION PLAN 4.1 The lead Project sponsor will be the EGWQB. It is anticipated that major Project roles will be as follows: Group 1 - EGWQB: Lead Project sponsor. It is hoped that some or all of the constituent members of the EGWQB will also contribute toward the required 40% non-federal match. Group 2 - Winter Park Resort: Project administrator responsible for overall Project coordination and administration. Winter Park Resort is committed to providing a portion of the required 40% non-federal match and will work: cooperatively with the USFS to secure the necessary 6 O:\COUNSEL\DOCUMENT\3190RANT.APP MJR-082096-4 ýÿ , . . . licenses/permissions and permits for the Project. , Group 3 - CDOT: Project co-designer and co-provider with Denver Water of needed Project maintenance following initial construction. CDOT is committed to providing a portion of the required 40% non-federal match. Group 4 - Denver Water: Project co-designer, co-provider with CDOT of needed Project maintenance following initial construction, owner of the Fraser River Diversion Dam, holder of a USFS Special Use Permit for a portion of the lands upon which the Project will be located, and responsible for implementation of the new operations plan for the Fraser River Diversion Dam following initial Project construction. Denver Water is committed to providing a portion of the required 40% non-federal match. Group 5 - USFS: Project technical advisor concerning hydrologic and biological matters, administrator of lands upon which the Project will be constructed, and lead agency for preparation of Project environmental analyses. The USFS will also work cooperatively with Winter Park Resort to secure the necessary licenses/permissions and permits for the Project. Group 6 - NWCCOG: The Northwest Colorado Council of Governments ("NWCCOG") will provide further technical advice concerning hydrologic and biological matters related to the Project. Group 7 - CDOW: The Colorado Division of Wildlife ("CDOW") will assist in providing fishery inventory/monitoring studies both upstream and downstream of the Project site before Project construction and again in the summer of 1998. With the exception of the formal intergovernmental agreement between CDOT' and Denver Water described in Section 3.1 related to periodic Project maintenance, it is anticipated that each of the cooperating organizations will continue to interact pursuant to the parties' existing informal agreements. Other members of the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Task Force include the Towns of Winter Park and Granby, the Grand County Commissioners, the Winter Park Water & Sanitation District, Grand County No.1 Water & Sanitation District, the Middle Park Water Conservancy District, and the City of Northglenn. 4.2 There is a significant amount of local interest and support for any proposals in the basin directed at collecting, preventing and controlling sediment from entering the Fraser River. Recent growth surveys conducted in Grand County have identified water quality as one of the primary concerns of residents. The involvement of the EGWQB as lead Project sponsor underscores the breadth of local support for the Project. 4.3 Letters of Support for the Project have been delivered to the Colorado Department of Health Water 7 G:\COUNSELIDOCUMENT\319GRANT.APP MJR~82096-4 -.u Quality Control DiVisi"and are 00 file wilb lbat agency. . . . . 4.4 The Project will coordinate with the following other Section 319 and non-Section 319 water quality projects (either proposed or current) in the Fraser River basin: .1 201 Facilities Plan Update for Winter Park and Fraser Area; .2 201 Facilities Plan Addendum for Tabernash Area; and .3 Ground Water Study being developed by the Colorado Water Quality Control Division and Grand County . 4.5 The proposed Section 319 funding of the Project will not be used to replicate efforts or assume other agencies' responsibilities for activities being carried out in the Fraser River watershed. I 5.0 EVALUATION AND MONITORING PLAN I 5.1 The objective of the Project is to capture and remove approximately 50% of the introduced bedload sediment in the Upper Fraser River basin, rather than allowing such sediment to continue its current migration downstream from the Fraser River Diversion Dam once the Dam's sluice gate is opened. The sediments captured at the Project site will be removed as needed and taken to a proper disposal site. The project will be monitored and evaluated by the methods described in Section 3.2, Goal 1, Objective 2, Tasks 5 through 8. The information described in each of the listed Tasks will be ~ollected by CDOT, Winter Park Resort, the USFS, and CDOW, respectively, and summarized by Winter Park Resort in report form semi-annually and upon Project completion. 5.2 A comprehensive sampling and analysis program is being developed by the Fraser River Nonpoint Source Pollution Task Force. Discussions regarding the actual comprehensive Upper Fraser River sampling and analysis program (including parameters to be measured) have begun, but a conclusion has not yet been reached. However, certain elements of the monitoring program have been defmed as ~escribed in Section 5.1 above. These elements will be included as part of the overall monitoring program when it is fully established. 5.3 The current EPA-approved State Quality Assurance Project Plan will be used and will not require amendments in order to implement the Project. 5.4 The information collected through the adopted Project evaluation and monitoring plan will be summariz,ed in report form as described in Section 5.1. The resulting reports will be made available to the Colorado Department of Health and other interested entities located within State watersheds that exhibit similar sedimentation loading issues as the Upper Fraser River and have existing hydrologic modifications that could be retrofitted and operated as a potential BMP to address those issues. 5.5 No model has been used in developing the Project parameters since the type of BMP contemplated by the Project is entirely new. 6.0 BUDGET 6.1 The project budget is attached hereto as Exhibit F. 8 G:\COUNSEL\DOCUMENT\319GRANT.APP MJR.{)82096-4 -