Laserfiche WebLink
Moving Blue Mesa's Marketable Yield: A Myth <br />2. County Regulation of Facilities With a Statewide Impact <br />Another consideration regarding trans-mountain diversion is the 1974 "H.B. <br />1041 Act.""' H.B. 1041 encourages local governments to take the lead in permitting <br />and regulating matters that are of concern beyond the local level and/or matters that <br />have statewide impacts."' <br />In 1990 Gunnison County adopted regulations under the authority of the Act <br />that subject all newly proposed "special development projects," such as large-scale <br />water projects, to a permitting requirement.1' These regulations seek to "promote <br />the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Gunnison County," and to <br />"protect the beauty of the landscape and the rural character of the county [and] <br />enhance recreational opportunities for residents and visitors.""' Significantly, these <br />regulations govern "municipal or industrial water projects" and would thus apply to <br />any newly proposed trans-mountain diversion."' <br />The Gunnison Regulations require water project applicants to satisfy a number of <br />requirements designed to prevent adverse effects on environmental and socioeconomic <br />conditions. Before any permits can be issued for special development projects by the <br />Board of County Commissioners of Gunnison County, applicants must comply with an <br />application process that requires submitting detailed project plans and costs, an outline <br />of "project alternatives," payment of fees, a "comprehensive analysis" of all environmen- <br />tal and socioeconomic impacts, and, most importantly, an explanation of "the need for <br />the proposed project in the County.""' This information "must be submitted not only for <br />the proposed project, but also for a no-action alternative and for ... other reasonable <br />alternatives," including "alternative locations outside the county.""' <br />The regulations provide six pages of conditions under which applications may <br />be reviewed. 14' A sampling of grounds upon which trans-mountain diversions could <br />be denied includes: projects that will have a significantly adverse net effect on water <br />rights, or on the capacities or functioning of streams, lakes, reservoirs, floodplains, <br />wetlands, and/or riparian areas "within the impact area" (which is defined to include <br />Gunnison County and, under certain circumstances, adjoining counties)."' <br />H. Conclusion <br />Exporting Gunnison water to the Front Range faces enormous challenges. As a <br />result, the Front Range should look elsewhere for water. Fortunately, it will find that <br />there are alternatives that are less costly and less controversial. Indeed, as Chapter 3 <br />shows, part of the solution to the problem lies no farther, literally, than the Front <br />Range's backyards. <br />• 32 • The Land and Water Fund of the Rockies