PUB00004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. 32 . The land and Water Fund of the Rockies @ Moving Blue Mesa's Marketable Yield: A Myth 2. County Regulation of Facilities With a Statewide Impact Another consideration regarding trans-mountain diversion is the 1974 "H.B. 1 041 Act. ""3 H.B. 1041 encourages local governments to take the lead in permitting and regulating matters that are of concern beyond the local level and/or matters that have statewide impacts.'" In 1990 Gunnison County adopted regulations under the authority of the Act that subject all newly proposed "special development projects," such as large-scale water projects, to a permitting requirement.'" These regulations seek to "promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Gunnison County," and to "protect the beauty of the landscape and the rural character of the county [and] enhance recreational opportunilies for residents and visitors."'"' Significantly, these regulations govern "municipal or industrial water projects" and would thus apply to any newly proposed trans-mountain diversion.'" The Gunnison Regulations require water project applicants to satisfy a number of requirements designed to prevent adverse effects on environmental and socioeconomic conditions. Before any permits can be issued for special development projects by the Board of Counly Commissioners of Gunnison County, applicants must comply with an application process that requires submitting detailed project plans and costs, an outline of "project alternatives," payment of fees, a "comprehensive analysis" of all environmen- tal and socioeconomic impacls, and, most importantly, an explanation of "the need for the proposed project in the County.""" This information "must be submitted not only for the proposed project, but also for a no-action alternative and for. . . other reasonable alternatives," including "alternative locations outside the county."'" The regulations provide six pages of conditions under which applications may be reviewed."" A sampling of grounds upon which trans-mountain diversions could be denied includes: projects that will have a significantly adverse net effect on water rights, or on the capacities or functioning of streams, lakes, reservoirs, floodplains, wetlands, and/or riparian areas "within the impact area" (which is defined to include Gunnison County and, under certain circumstances, adjoining counties).'" H. Conclusion Exporting Gunnison water to the Front Range faces enormous challenges. As a result, the Front Range should look elsewhere for water. Fortunately, it will find that there are alternatives that are less costly and less controversial. Indeed, as Chapter 3 shows, part of the solution to the problem lies no farther, literally, than the Front Range's backyards.