Planning Commission hears Nestlé proposal

If you're new to the site, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed, follow us on Twitter or sign up for our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

In a work session during which no time was allowed for public questions, the Chaffee County Planning Commission today heard details of the application by Nestlé Waters for their proposed water project. Plans by Nestlé Waters in Chaffee County include the development of two adjacent springs, the installation of a pipeline for delivery of spring water to a loading facility in Johnson Village and truck transport of the spring water to a bottling facility in Denver.

Jenny Davis, attorney for Chaffee County, and members of the Planning Commission acknowledged that the exclusion of public comment during the work session was “somewhat awkward” and asked for forbearance and understanding from the crowd of less than 20 people at the Salida Steam Plant. The public will have an opportunity to comment at public hearings in February before both the Planning Commission and the Board of Commissioners.

Don Reimer, Chaffee County development services director, introduced the work session, explaining that the role of the Planning Commission in this case is largely procedural. The Commission, he said, will make a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners on the basis of whether the application by Nestlé Waters meets the submittal requirements, whether the review criteria is satisfied and whether any proposed mitigation for adverse effects is adequate. He noted that the Nestlé project is complex, involving no less than six properties and 17 easements in four different zoning districts as the planned pipeline travels from the source springs north along the railroad to County Road 301 and under the Arkansas River to the proposed loading facility in Johnson Village.

Reimer went on to explain that Nestlé Waters is required to have a Special Land Use Permit because the proposed uses, which include commercial spring development, water supply pipelines and a spring water truck loading facility, are not specifically defined in the county zoning code. Nestlé must obtain a 1041 Permit from the county because the proposed project involves more than 30 acre feet annually and impacts an area designated by the Colorado Division of Wildlife as significant for wildlife. The 1041 regulations were originally authorized by the State Legislature as House Bill 1974-1041 in order to provide a means for counties to regulate areas of State interest such as transportation and water planning, viewshed protection and the promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of local citizens.

Bruce Lauerman, a hydrologist and natural resources manager for Nestlé Waters prefaced his presentation by noting that the company currently ships bottled water to Colorado from southern California, which involves considerable trucking miles, fuel consumption and cost. This project, he said, will help Nestlé to reduce its overall environmental footprint, reduce expenses and act more “regionally.”

Lauerman explained that four production wells at the springs will withdraw water from the aquifer located east of the Arkansas River at a rate of 125 gallons per minute (gpm). Water will be delivered via a buried pipeline five miles to the Johnson Village loading station where it will be transported to a bottling facility in Denver by a maximum of 25 trucks per day.

Lauerman emphasized that the rate of pumping would be minimal compared to the total combined output of the two springs, which according to Nestlé’s hydrology studies together produce, on average, 1460 1750 gallons per minute. He noted that 125 gpm equates to about 0.3 cubic feet per second (cfs), a small fraction of today’s estimated flow in the Arkansas River of 300 cfs. If approved, the application will permit Nestlé to pump 200 acre feet of water annually from the aquifer below the springs.

Because Nestlé is required to by law to augment the Arkansas River for the amount of water they would withdraw, the company is currently negotiating with the City of Aurora to obtain an equivalent amount of “transbasin” water which would be piped from the Western Slope and stored in Twin Lakes. One advantage of this scenario, according to Lauerman, is that the net amount of water in the valley remains the same. “We won’t be buying a ranch and drying it up,” he noted.

“It’s not intuitive that the best thing for a watershed is that a bottling company shows up, but Nestle is interested in protecting the resource and has demonstrated that this project is low impact and sustainable,” Lauerman asserted. He went on to detail projected benefits such as the inherent protection of the two springs and their associated surface water, the “naturalization” of the existing trout hatchery and neighboring riparian areas, the preservation of bighorn sheep habitat on Sugarloaf Mountain, a net positive tax revenue to Chaffee County, and construction wages estimated at $1.9 million which are expected to accrue in part to local contractors and workers.

Of the interest taken by local residents in the project, Lauerman said “I see that people in Chaffee County are concerned about their water, and I applaud that. I’m from Helena, Montana and we do it the same way.”

Following the presentation, Commission members engaged in a relatively cordial discussion with Lauerman, detailing their own questions about the application and anticipating issues which might be raised during upcoming public hearings. Among other comments, Commissioner Sig Jaastad asked whether Nestlé could build a bottling facility in Chaffee County and create local jobs rather than trucking the water to Denver to be bottled. Lauerman explained that “the raw material for bottled water, water, is here in Chaffee County, but all other materials would have to come from Denver,” and that such an arrangement would be impractical.

This was the first of several planned meetings. A second work session for the Planning Commission will be held at the Fairgrounds on February 5 to introduce the findings of consultants retained by the County as part of a more technical conversation about the proposed project. A public hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled at the Steam Plant on February 11. The County Board of Commissioners will meet for a work session on February 20 at the Buena Vista Community Center and again for a public hearing on February 26 at the Steam Plant. Public comment will be accepted at the public hearings, but not at work sessions.

For more on this issue, including external links, see our crib sheet.