Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears renewal and expansion request for Valley Canyon water tanks, allows commercial water sales in proposal
Summary
Staff presented CUP25-52, a renewal and proposed expansion of an existing water-tank facility (renewal of CP07061) at Highgrove Road near Valley; the applicant seeks a new 500,000-gallon tank, standpipes and commercial water-hauling operations. Commissioners asked about access and operations; staff noted a deep well on site and that access is from
(Note: schema requires a full article; body continues)
The Planning and Zoning Commission received a presentation Sept. 24 on CUP25-52, a request to renew and expand a permitted water-tank facility on a 3.6‑acre portion of a 40.88‑acre parcel on Highgrove Road near Valley. Staff identified the owner as the Collins family and the applicant as Rob Baldowski.
Staff said the current permit (CP07061) originally authorized a roughly 500,000‑gallon tank and that the permit lapsed in 2017. The current request would re-authorize a 500,000‑gallon potable tank, add an additional tank and standpipes for potable water truck fills and expand on-site water-distribution infrastructure to allow commercial water sales and parking for water-hauling trucks. Staff characterized the facility as a utility that serves businesses and supports commercial water‑hauling operations in the area.
Commissioners asked whether access would be from Highway 64 or from Peter Road; staff said access is from Highgrove Road, which connects to Highway 64. Staff noted the site includes a deep well and argued the tanks would capture runoff and provide potable and non-potable uses, including emergency and wildlife uses identified in the application.
The applicant's narrative and site plan show circulation for water trucks and a non-potable standpipe for livestock and emergency use. Staff said the Planning and Zoning Commission will consider findings required for a CUP at the hearing next month; on Sept. 24 they solicited questions and said no formal hearing was held that evening. There were no recorded objections in the materials presented at the study session.
If the CUP is approved it would reestablish the permitted water‑treatment and commercial distribution operations on the parcel; any commercial water sales would be subject to county permitting and state water-rights and public‑health requirements.
