Gunnison County Times Articles - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!002 Hearing Tuesday in recreation water right application CWCB reviews RICD plan, welcoming public input Chris Dichey Even though construction of the project is currently stalled, plans to obtain a water right for the long-awaited Gunnison River Whitewater Park are progres,sing. In fact, the public has a rare op- portunity to voice its opinion to the statewide agency that reviews such applications next Tuesday. In early April, the Upper Gun- nison River Water Conservancy District applied for a water right that specifically would support the fledgling whitewater park, to be located just west of Gunnison, beginning at the Twin Bridges. This type of water right - called a Recreation In-Channel Diversion - is a new concept under Col- orado water law created recently by the state Legislature. A stipu- lation to this legislation dictates that before the case goes before water court, the Colorado Water Conservation Board must review the matter and make its recom- mendation known. Tliat's where the public comes in. The CWCB, a statewide water policy and review board, meets in Gunnison Tuesday for an all-day hearing on the Upper Gunnison's RICD proposal. The board will be taking public comment from 4:55 to 5:25 p.m. The meeting will be held in the Aspinall Wilson $uilding. Applying for the water right is basically an attempt by the UGR- WCD to help ensure the long- term viability of the whitewater park by making a legal claim to keeping a certain amount of water in the river far the express purpose of supporting this recre- ational amenity. Like any other water right, the RICD would have an appropriation date and be sub- ject to "calls" from senior users in times oF drought, like this year. Conversely, an RICD water right could protect the whitewa- ter park from being called out by potential future water right-hold- ers, including possible plans to re-direct Upper Gunnison River water for trans-basin diversion. This, according to UGRWCD Di- rector Kathleen Curry, is proba- bly the biggest objection the CWCB is likely to have. "They're primarily concerned about ... how this could affect the state's ability to develop Aspinal Unit water for out-of-basin use," she said. Curry insists that creating an- other layer of defense against possible trans-basin diversion schemes was not the district's ob- jective when filing for the RICD. Instead, she said, the board was responding to the recreational users it serves. "The board was focused on try- ing to do something positive for recreational water use," she said. "They responded to a request by the paddling community to ob- tain a right for the park." Such rights are rare. In fact, ac- cbrding to Cindy Covell, the spe- cial attorney the UGRWCD has hired to spearhead the RICD pro- posal, the city of Pueblo is the only other entity to apply for one. That , application recently Ye- ceived a mixed review from the CWCF• and now stands before water .:ourt. A number of individuals and entities have Eiled objections to the Upper Gunnison's applica- tion. Among those include the Colorado River Water Conser- vancy District, the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association and Front Range water developer Dave Miller. The Upper Gunni- son and the city of Gunnison and Spann Rariches have reached agreements, effectively ending the opposition from both of those groups. Still, Curry thinks the RICD faces an uphill road. "I'm not very optimistic that the CWCB will react favorably to any RICD 'application," she said. "Indications are that they have fundamental concerns regarding these types of water rights." Technically, the whitewater park can be constructed with or without a right. Nonetheless, proponents feel the additional se- curity can pay big dividends to the long-term sustainability of recreation on the Gunnison River. "(An RICD) may not make a big difference right now," com- mented Three River Resort owner Mark Schumacher, "but as the basin gets tighter it will in the fu- ture. It's a small amount of water compared to what normally flows through there. But there are times when it could be called out by fu- ture junior appropriators." (See related story below about the county's progress in getting con- struction of the whitewater parh baclt on trach.) Whitewater park construction may resume soon Private property issue possibly nearing canclusion Chris Dickey After momentum to build a long-awaited whitewater park on the Gunnison River jusC,west of town grew strong this spring, the project basically has been on hold since the first of May after a snafu was discovered. Dealings are ongoing con- cerning an unexpected piece of private property that rests in the riverbed where the kayaking and rafting play park is sup- posed to be built, according to Gunnison County Manager John DeVore. But DeVore said he thinks the end to t'his four- month delay is in sight. "It would be a beautiful thing if we could get this thing done in the next coupte of weeks," DeVore said Tuesday afternoon. The problem was discovered in late April after construction of the first of five proposed "drop" structures had begun. Project supervisors were conducting research in an effort to locate some utility lines that run underneath the riverbed in the vicinity when it was discov- ered that an Oklahoma family owns two triangular pieces of property there. One lies in the river channel, while the other sits on the soutli bank and is a possible single-family home building site. The county contacted the family to see if they'd be willing to sell, and upon receiving con- firmation that they were made steps to begin the negotiating process by having an appraisal done. The appraisal was only recently completed. DeVore wouldn't reveal the dollar figure the land appraised for, but indicated that he's begun discussions with the family through their local real estate agent, Dennis Steckel. One of the offers he's proposed is for the county to pay slightly more than the appraised value of the seem- ingly worthless land under the river if the family would be will- ing to separate it from the sale of the other, more valuable parcel. The county doesn't need the lanfl on the riverbank to contin- ue construction af the park, al- though it could conceivably sell it to a prospective home builder. DeVore explained that Eunds to purchase the land - whether it be one parcel or both - will come from the Federal Aviation Ad- ministration because oE its prox- imity to the airport runway. What the FAA won't cover will come from the county's sales tax fund. Once the real estate issue is resolved, local contractor J.A. Clarke Corp. can get back in the river with heavy equipment, constructing the rock siructures that form waves, eddies and play pools for paddling enthusiasts. The county's Army Corps of Engineers' permit to make these in-channel modifications expires at the end of the year. DeVore is hopeful work cati be completed by then, although an extension can be filed for if necessary.. One person who won't be back ' on the job site is Boulder-based project engineer Gary Lacy, who is generally considered the top whitewater park designer in the country. A rift initially devel- oped between Lacy and the county over whose responsibili- ty it should have been to discov- er the private property inholding, and the conflict was exacerbated by what DeVore called a "disagreement over costs." County staff is currently involved in discussions with possible replacement engineers. 0