Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glenwood Springs approves water-line extension agreement for 49893 Highway 6 & 24 over annexation questions
Summary
Council approved a cost‑share water service agreement to extend about 4,500 feet of city water line to serve a proposed mini‑storage and to provide hydrants; vote passed 5‑1 after questions about annexation and long‑term costs.
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Glenwood Springs City Council approved a water-service agreement to extend the city’s water line roughly 4,500 linear feet to serve property at 49893 Highway 6 & 24 and to provide fire hydrants along that stretch.
Staff said the city would help pay for the first 1,250 feet of the extension because that portion provides a broader utility benefit — a loop toward Mitchell Creek and additional hydrants — and that the proposal fits within existing budget planning. Matt (public works staff) said the project is on the city’s five‑year plan and that the developer, Mark Gould, requested three equivalent residential units (EQRs) of water supply; Gould has arranged county approvals for his portion and asked the city to authorize the mayor to sign a line‑extension agreement.
Councilors asked whether annexation would be required, whether the city’s out‑of‑town water rates apply and whether extending water to the property creates a precedent for cost‑sharing outside city limits. Staff said annexation is complicated and generally requires owner consent, and that water rates for out‑of‑town users are the same as in‑town rates. Council debate also covered the operational need to keep the line flushed (staff proposed an approximate 750 gallons per day flow to maintain water quality) and the possibility of future adjacent developments taking service from the new main.
Mayor Pro Tem Zelensky moved to approve the water service agreement and Councilor Schachter seconded. The roll-call vote was recorded as: Townsley yes; Mayor Pro Tem Zelensky yes; Mayor Dame yes; Schmoll no; Smith yes; Schachter yes. The motion passed 5‑1.
Council directed staff to return documentation and the final agreement and to proceed with the project under the cost‑share terms presented. The city noted that annexation is an owner‑driven process and that the council is not forced to extend water lines if it chooses not to.

