The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20080056.tiff Page 1 of 2 ge Po 12 I Brad Mueller • From: Rachel Kullman [rachel@clearwatercolorado.com] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:35 PM To: Brad Mueller; Steve Nguyen Cc: Bruce Barker Subject: RE:water consultants Hi Brad— Thanks for sending this along.Steve and I have both reviewed the letter. We think TZA has adeq uately addressed our questions or has at least provided a status update on their progress towards answering those questions. Let us know if we can be of more assistance. Rachel. Rachel Kullman Clear Water Solutions PO Box 3058 Montrose, CO 81402 • (p) 970-631-6070 (f) 866-242-9691 www.clearwatercolorado.com From: Brad Mueller [mailto:bmueller@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 2:39 PM To: Steve Nguyen; Rachel Kullman Cc: Bruce Barker Subject: FW: water consultants Steve & Rachel, I've just received comments from TZA in response to our meeting about Pioneer water. My layman's look at them is that they seem to adequately discuss what we had as questions, but of course we'll defer to your thoughts. We're hoping to get some consolidated comments to Pioneer mid-next week. I know that might be too soon for you to respond, but if not. we would certainly incorporate your thoughts at that point. As we discussed, please just provide an invoice for your hourly review. Thanks. Brad From: Joy McGee [mailto:joy@reutzelandassoc.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 2:12 PM To: Brad Mueller Subject: RE: water consultants Sort of 2008-0056 08/24/2007 ei%/ /\ ]2596 W.Hayaud Ave.•Ste 330 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Telephone. 303-971-0030 TZA Water Engineers,Inc. Facsimile 303-971-0077 August 17. 2007 Mr.Jack Hibbert, Y.E. Resource Colorado Metropolitan District 4643 South Ulster Street. Ste 1300 Denver,CO 80237 Re: Pioneer Communities Water Resources Report Dear.lack: I believe that our meeting this morning with staff members from Weld County and Clear Water Solutions, Inc. was beneficial. This letter has been prepared to provide answers to each bullet point listed in Chapter 6 of the Clear Water Solutions. Inc. Water Supply Plan Review, dated May 30,2007, as requested by Weld County Planning Staff • Below please find a list of bullet points followed by information / answers as discussed during our meeting this morning. • Provide basis for the water demand predicted for both potable and non-potable commercial uses. a Commercial use is made up primarily of irrigation of Parks and Schools. The estimated demand of 836 acre-feet per year, outlined in the Pioneer Communities Inc (PIONITR). Water Resources Report (REPORT), is based on assumptions developed from the sketch plan. We agree that these estimates arc preliminary and will remain so until such time that the zoning and the platting of each phase is finalized. Preliminary irrigation demands developed from the sketch plan are based on 196.1 irrigated acres in parks that will be developed throughout the community. 180.7 acres of irrigated lands associated with schools, and 6.R irrigated acres surrounding commercial developments. • Verify the agricultural efficiency of 90% or provide a more detailed description of the methods of delivery and distribution. o PIONEER's agricultural consultant prepared the estimated efficiency for the drip irrigation system that is proposed. In addition, PIONEER plans on installing a portion of the drip irrigation system to replace the center pivot • August 17, 2007 • Page 2 irrigation systems in 2008. Once installed, efficiencies for the drip system will be monitored to verify assumptions. • Describe the policies and procedures the developer will implement to manage demand during periods of drought or insure water supply is adequate during periods of drought. The only water supply mentioned to be used during drought is the Denver Basin groundwater,which the developer also states is unfeasible to develop at this time. a Lost Creek alluvial supplies are relatively drought resistant. The Lost Creek Groundwater Management District has never had to curtail pumping during periods of drought. Resource Colorado is the Water District that will supply water to PIONEER. PIONEER will implement, at a minimum, all drought management practices as required by Resource Colorado. PIONEER will also develop and implement a drought management plan to address both potable and non-potable water supply issues that may arise during periods of drought. Some of the management strategies that will be evaluated include but are not limited to the following: ✓ Development of educational programs within the community designed to conserve water (xeriscape gardens, installation of efficient irrigation • systems, promote installation of low water use fixtures, etc...); r Voluntary water conservation programs; ▪ Develop and implement a plan for outdoor water restrictions (watering days and times. etc...); ✓ Develop a tiered rate structure designed to reward residents and businesses for decreased consumption. o The REPORT shows that the proposed development has adequate water supplies to support the community at full build out using the alluvial wells identified in the Lost Creek basin. The Lost Creek wells are decreed for export and can be used and re-used to extinction (100% consumptive). Additional supplies including but not limited to Denver Basin Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer water, Box Elder alluvial supplies (with regulatory approvals),additional Lost Creek alluvial supplies, etc... may be used for drought conditions, construction water, etc... However, these supplies must be both technically feasible and legally approved before use will be allowed. • August 17. 2007 • Page 3 • Provide a finalized description and quantification of approved water supplies that will be used in the development. o At build out, the Lost Creek alluvial wells identified in the REPORT are planned for use. Each phase of construction will identify specific wells that will be used to support each separate development phase. • Indicate which approved water supplies will be used to meet which water demands in the development. The developer should indicate if the demand will be met with the first use of the water supply or with successive uses. c At build out. all potable demands will be met with water from Lost Creek alluvial sources and all non agricultural irrigation demands will be met with wastewater treatment plant return flows. At build out, Pioneer Communities will have a dual system to meet all water demands, one for potable uses (Lost Creek alluvial supplies) and one for irrigation uses (treated wastewater return flows). • Provide a description of the water supply operation (both potable and non-potable) • and the details of the physical transmission, storage, distribution, delivery, and treatment systems. c Details of the water system will be designed as each phase of build out is approved. While we have not developed a complete plan for the final water systems. the general outline for the water system at build out is as follows: At final build out, water will be pumped from the wells producing from the Lost Creek alluvium to a collection header or storage tank(s). Water will be treated and chlorinated as necessary at each wellhead or at some other approved location (collection header or storage tank) prior to entering one or more transmission lines (exiting the Lost Creek alluvial well field). Water will be pumped out of the Lost Creek alluvial well field and transported through one or more pipelines to PIONEER. Storage and booster pumps will he incorporated as needed along the transmission route to insure that Lost Creek water can be efficiently delivered to PIONEER. Preliminary plans are being evaluated which include installation of storage reservoirs) at a high point along the transmission route, possibly near the Town of Kcenesburg, so that the majority of PIONEER can be supplied by an efficient gravity feed system. However, additional storage and booster pump station will be developed as needed to maintain adequate pressure throughout the entire potable distribution system. Additional • August 17, 2007 • Page 4 chlorine injection will he provided as needed to maintain acceptable chlorine levels throughout the potable distribution system. Wastewater return flows will be captured at the outfall of the WWTP. Wastewater return flows will he treated and stored for irrigation purposes. The exact location for storage has not been determined. At this time reclaimed water storage is proposed in Sections 11 and 13 in areas zoned for agriculture. Additional engineering work will be required before finalizing a storage location. At full build out, the plan is to have developed a storage reservoir capable of storing approximately 1,000 to 1,200 acre-feet of water so that winter wastewater return flows can he stored to meet spring/summer irrigation demands. The storage facility will have a surface area of approximately 40 acres and an average depth of 25 to 30 feet (1,000 - 1,200 acre-feet). Booster pumps will deliver treated wastewater return flows to the irrigation system. The projected water budget at build out has been prepared by Resource Colorado and is attached to this letter report. • Verify the effluent percentage of the WWTP. o An acceptable industry standard fin percentage of effluent return flows from a mechanical wastewater treatment plant is 95%. • Provide water quality information on all sources of water supply and any blended water supply proposed to be used at Pioneer o While we do not have complete potable water quality analysis available for every well outlined in the water resources report, prior to any well going on line we understand that the well will need to be added to the list of approved supplies in the Systems Capacity Planning Manual, which has not yet been developed. Each source of supply well will be required to have complete analysis performed. In addition, if any treatment for any well is necessary. it will be completed before any such well is approved for the potable system, as required by the State of Colorado CDPHE. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this letter please contact me. Sincerely. - Thomas M. Dca, P.E. attachment sh3 3/6rdway/%-I i-07 • I • I 1 I III ii 1'I I ' _O R R'O't0 V'co'N'NI col co aIp M I !I I— N I NI M I M!L0 col N-IIN-.ItOIMII NIIN I II a m 'oi v ai rnir�'v[Ti o I 0i 03 o0i(NI I I _j— N Nn F- V I PIOI^ 0M Q I o,,vll v.N,,VIIR N J 'V O vlvlcolrnl^'OIN'N 0) Co! V 0 y c- T I_ M I of oll� SIN IN''cola)II�I010 a II I II IN a `y co 0100 0 0 010'010I0'1010 0 o J U NI NIN N N.NININININI NIN N I y I I I I ¢ N al mien'MINI coicOiIto' INIIct!0 Cc Lu U O 7%-imi i'OOj'O,I�IRI all O..MIt0 I II IICO o II I I w ' 0 E I I i ILi.,iMI. IM I I ¢ 0 0 O OIO OIOI� o II p N'INI1 co 01010 1 0 Cc co 1 I I w ^ D w m o w'GO' a I.-I CoIm "t N N'O .- O O O OIO .�- N1� In I 0 re u wNn 1 I I W—_I ¢ p I N colt Colt co coicc'IN''ND NA Iicc lIta Co !. el 000i NIN NINININ'NINININ ^ I N NINININININ'N NIN ININ N I 1 d I w I I I ILL N c I p'Q V \. p V'V OIC0 e O NI NItoI co VIC M p U. i_ NI NIth'M LOILO'N-IN-I CO'M NIN to _ __l.—._ . w. G O t FILL ~ O ≥ \I\I'J. o\° \ \ \ o I\ \',o I O ml z ¢ o C hI h'OInI OINlM n111NINIV]Ih c, l WI Q 'I a c N �.� III O VIRI Co'I�IO O NIcc W NI- N'IP P V 2 NI CD y aN•-C 0 m �cc v e.o o'I^I co IIN °o'eer) o�IIv c .o m ml c,—. C e a 'a w 1 �. mI 3 H ¢ w 0 I 8: c= i 0Ci I W ° m o ol1 o' co tO CO -11p 010 01 .2 "3- 0 CIE 0Z a o'.-'Nlti c'v '- N o1�CrlG 7'. m a y--. 0.o zI !. o a \ \ e!ele r- elo \'o to o o �I .. a., O o C O• O. ICI LO: to c0 N- N'O'O V o u a, `m O— z'. -o N 0• '010'01,0,0,0'0'0 0 010 Os h1 p�I 0 10 ' PIP'P'VIC V1 1') 1N1 V' 'T e N N CO c._ N'N1N'N'NIN NI NIN N NIN N a ._ 0, 0 N m "I O • o 1 p m I E ti c, ao0O olol\ ale! o',00 d �l � t o E in Nn hl Nn!hlh to 1.up Ln h'to h Co 0,col.< Q _'c, c;I II I Ij I I II I l iIII ! i I • , ' ii i i 11 I0 I ' I • - I --I--'- li o x I • � II '~ 1,75 %I i ? s VI • I • ' I I I I I D ■ EI I^ ! i j .• I i o • i :1- —:)1c-c)›. I• • YLi , `n I • ; I r — I a 0 Ec •-_ < I -. T I ! I I ! j co I I I .— `• � 1 rti I , I • 2 `! I [ • I I • • c : : I :. II'�I o00O OOO � ! � ; 1 • • 1 of N- co Q' c�^, N �� • • I !• • lea� aiOV . I I i i ! I ! I Pi I-2 !m i i O CD I0. al NI .Z - ^ a I❑ ■ — D — I > I 7 i 4� 0 i o Z a41„;: ' Z p I I I I . Q j a Ii . I 'I - a I I N I k I v) 0 ! . o a I i I I I O• I t a I , =� � I . I o 0 CC 2 Wi I 2 p I— I I I I co � Ico 1 I to ^- I I—co a M�wn- C �- — • , I 1 co „6.:;fiaAuJtJrJ O O O p O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 00 O O o O c O o -- - W I's CO In cr f N I N O CO O N aaj 0.10VT laaJ a.3`p' ' AT E F water rights • planning - engineering MEMORANDUM CWS File #07-160 To: Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department From: Rachel Kullman, Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Steve Nguyen, P.E., Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Date: July 31, 2007 Subject. TZA Water Engineers, Inc. —June 25, 2007 Memorandum We reviewed the Memorandum dated June 25, 2007 that was prepared by TZA Water Engineers, Inc. in response to our May 30, 2007 Water Supply Plan Review for Pioneer Communities. The purpose of this communication is to respond to TZA's June 25, 2007 Memorandum to provide the Weld County Planning Department additional guidance and perspective. In their memorandum, TZA provided a chapter-by-chapter response to our Water Supply Plan Review, which included concerns and specific points of clarification. We appreciate these • concerns and additional information and will consider them as we move forward with the project. The primary concern identified by TZA was our analysis of additional materials that were not proposed or intended for review as part of the self-contained TZA Water Resources Report (May. 2007). More specifically, we reviewed the water sources pending approval for use in the development. We reviewed these additional materials at the request of the Weld County Planning Department to provide an overview of all water-related activities (approved and pending) for the development. We understand that Pioneer Communities cannot include these additional water sources for use in the development until legally available for use. In their memorandum, TZA clarified some of the questions/concerns we indicated in the Water Supply Plan Review. However, there are remaining items in Chapter 6 we believe TZA has not addressed, namely the water supply operation, physical system, drought or dry-year demand management, and the intent of pending water sources. We are not requesting this information to unnecessarily delay this process, but at the County's request, we want this information to better understand how this development will operate and how supplies will be used to meet demands in both average and dry years. It seems this information would be readily available from the Applicant when it evaluated the long-term viability of this development. Although it appears total supply is sufficient to meet demands on an annual basis, we believe a more detailed analysis (potentially monthly) which considers both average and dry-year supplies and demands is needed to confirm water supplies are sufficient for the development. The agricultural lands can be managed easily, i.e. acreage reduced, depending on available supplies in a particular year; but residential and commercial irrigation is more difficult to manage in a dry year. We understand TZA's position that Lost Creek Basin water historically has been a • drought-resistant supply source and more water can simply be withdrawn as needed. However, it would be beneficial to see that the decreed supplies are sufficient to cover projected demands 8010 S.County Road 5 Ste.105 Windsor.CO 80528 I (T)970.223.3706 I (F)970.223.3763 I www.clearwatercoioraao.com • for the proposed development in dry years until proposed additional sources are decreed. Understanding how the water will be diverted, collected and stored, and reused will assist in this determination. We understand that TZA may not have addressed these items because they are still under development or are pending approval. If this is the case, a minimum of a status update on the progress made to date should be included. We believe a face-to-face meeting with TZA would be helpful to further discuss these items. • • 8010 S.County Road 3 Ste.105 I Windsor,CO80528 ( (T)970.223.3706 I (F)970.223.3763 I www.dearwatercoiorado.com /SZ /\ 125%W.Baraud Ave.•Ste 330 • Lakewood. Gtorado303-9 80228 1(/L1 Water Engineers, Inc. Telephone: 303-9"-1)037 g Facsimile: 303-971{1077 MEMORANDUM fo: Mr.Jack Hibbert, P.E. From: Thomas M. Dca, P.E. Date: June 25.2007 Re: Clear Water Solutions- May 30, 2007 Report Review This memorandum has been prepared to provide comments to the Water Supply Plan Review (REVIEW) for Pioneer Communities. Inc. (PIONEER) that was prepared by Clear Water Solutions. Inc. (CLEAR WATER) dated May 30, 2007. TZA Water Engineers. Inc. (TZA) has evaluated the REVIEW and compared it with the Water Resources Report (REPORT) prepared by TZA and delivered to you on May 1. 2007. After evaluating the REVIEW, we have the following comments and/or recommendations. As stated in our cover letter to the REPORT dated May I, 2007, "The Colorado State Engineer's • Office will not review referrals that do not qualify as a 'subdivision' as defined in Section 30-28- 101 (10) (a). CRS." We believe it was prudent for the Weld County Planning Department to contract with an outside source, CLEAR WATER, to review and comment on the water supply issues associated with Pioneer. We were pleased to see in the review recommendations that CLEAR WATER stated, "Presently, we have not identified any fatal flaws that we believe would prevent this project from moving forward." However, our primary concern is that CLEAR WATER has apparently based their review in part on information that was not contained in the REPORT that TZA prepared for PIONEER. While this letter may not address all points raised by the REVIEW point by point. our intent is to provide adequate information to address the comments on a broad approach and further the dialogue with the Weld County Planning Department and CLEAR WATER. Below. please find a list of items from the REVIEW followed by comments and/or answers prepared by TZA: Chapter I - Introduction Paragraph 4 states. "We have reviewed a voluminous amount of information related to the water supply plan, and as such, appreciate the need to insure an adequate review." The intent of the REPORT was that it would be a self-contained document that would hold all information that needed review for the PIONEER water supply plan. Our belief is that REVIEW has evaluated additional materials that are not part of the Pioneer Water • 6/25/2007 Page 2 of 4 • Resources Plan, and as such should not be a part of the REVIEW. Some of the information appears to be either dated or superseded. L -TZA to,*v.:#/4 PAA 1 Chapter 2 -- Definition of Terms CLEAR WATER has provided a list of terms and definitions of each term. We believe that, at a minimum, a definition of Designated Basin Groundwater should be added to the REVIEW. Chapter 2 — Table I —Water Demand Summary Spreadsheet Agricultural demands should be noted as projected only. Agricultural demands will vary on a year-to-year basis based on available supply. Agricultural demands are discussed further below and in Chapter 3 of the REVIEW. Chapter 3 —Commercial Use The REVIEW has not fully defined commercial use as intended by PIONEER. Commercial use is made up primarily of irrigation of Parks and Schools. The estimated demand of 836 acre-feet per year, outlined in the REPORT. is based on assumptions developed from the sketch plan. We agree that these estimates are preliminary and will remain so until such time • that the zoning and the platting of each phase is finalized. However, we thought it may be beneficial for REVIEW to address how these water demand numbers were developed. Preliminary irrigation demands developed from the sketch plan are based on 196.1 irrigated acres in parks that will be developed throughout the community. 180.7 acres of irrigated lands associated with schools, and 6.8 irrigated acres surrounding commercial developments. Chapter 3 —Agricultural Uses In Paragraph 1, REVIEW raised concerns that the projected 90% irrigation efficiency is relatively high. P1ONEER's agricultural consultant prepared the estimated efficiency for the drip irrigation system that is proposed. In addition. PIONEER plans on installing a portion of the drip irrigation system to replace the center pivot irrigation systems in 2008. Once installed, efficiencies for the drip system will be monitored to verify assumptions. Chapter 3 —Agricultural Uses In Paragraph 2, CLEAR WATER acknowledges that the agricultural demand will be variable based on water availability on a year-to-year basis. We concur that adjusting the number of acres irrigated on a year-to-year basis is a viable approach to managing the agricultural component and PIONEER believes that this will • 6/25/2007 Page 3 of 4 • allow the community to maintain an agricultural component for the planned development at project build out. Chapter 3 —Policies for Demand Management REVIEW suggests that there needs to he a plan for drought management. We agree that policies need to be developed to manage demand during periods of drought. However. as the REPORT indicates, all non-agricultural demands will be met by Lost Creek alluvial groundwater. To date, the Lost Creek Groundwater Management District has not ever restricted pumping during periods of drought, which indicates that Lost Creek alluvial groundwater is historically adroughht resistant source of supply. Chapter 4— Water Supply REVIEW has identified a "myriad- of water supply sources, many of which are not included in the REPORT. While we agree that at ultimate build out, some of the sources identified by CLEAR WATER may be feasible_ the REPORT clearly identifies only two sources of water. The 27 approved and decreed Lost Creek Designated Basin alluvial wells (all uses except agricultural), and the Hcnrylyn Irrigation District (agricultural use only). No Denver Basin Ground Water is included in the long-term plan, no water is planned from the • Town of Keenesburg_and no Box Elder alluvial groundwater is included in the long-term plan. Chapter 4—Lost Creek Designated Basin REVIEW raises several questions regarding use of Designated Basin alluvial groundwater. Lost Creek Designated Basin alluvial groundwater proposed for use at PIONEER has been issued a Decree in Case No. 98-CV-1727. The Decree allows groundwater to be "exported, used, reused. successive use. and disposition so long as dominion is maintained over the water.- No replacement plan is required to use the water rights proposed in the RE.POR I . L cove-4,1.44 Conclusions Water supplies not included as a source of supply in the REPORT, including Denver Basin groundwater and alluvial well supplies in Lost Creek that have not been identified, water that may be available in the future if an approved augmentation plans are obtained, water from the Town of Keenesburg, etc... should not be reviewed since these sources are not included in the REPORT. Water supplies that have not been decreed and available as sources have not been included in the REPORT. CW 6/25/2007 Page 4 of 4 • Currently. the water supplies defined in the REPORT prepared by TZA arc more than adequatq r to meet the needs of the proposed development, without additional sources of water. We believe that water supply plan needs to be dynamic and while we are not recommend ruling out changes in this plan in the future, reliable water supply plans can't rely on supplies that may not be technically and/or legally available. Hopefully. this memorandum provides adequate answers to questions and concerns that the REVIEW has identified. If CLEAR WATER and/or the Weld County Planning Department have concerns that they do not believe have been adequately addressed by this memorandum, we believe that a face-to-face meeting would be valuable to discuss any additional questions that may arise. • • r I I 4 r WELD COUNTY li PLANNING DEPARTMENT I 1 WATER SUPPLY PLAN REVIEW PIONEER COMMUNITIF INC 1 May 30, 2007 R Li! 1t I I 1 s+s 9 Y a='c 1 X113 I 1 _ ? R/ • 11 a_ y PIONEER -_ - ----'- F G : : i EIO CDViu1v.COLOPAD'J 9n• I Prepared by: cul-WATERsolutions water rights • planning • engineering 1 I Clear Water Solutions. Inc. I _ . Count/ Road 5 Suite !‘51,5.5 ' .•.,o. I I CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION 1• As mandated under legislation, counties in Colorado must require developers to provide evidence that water quality, quantity and dependability will adequately serve a proposed subdivision. This legislature also requires the State Engineer's Office (SEO) to review the water supply information provided by the developer, upon referral from the county, and issue an opinion regarding injury to other users as well as the overall adequacy of the water supply. Weld County Planning Department has contracted with Clear Water Solutions, Inc. to provide a third-party review of the water supply plan and related information for the Pioneer Communities development (Pioneer). Pioneer is proposed to be located near the Town of Keenesburg in southern Weld County, as shown in Figure 1. Before we discuss the details of the Pioneer water supply plan it should be noted that this particular water supply plan is particularly complex compared to most water supply plans —for both Weld County as well as for other jurisdictions in Colorado. The SEO has indicated the following reasons why this plan is rather unique compared to most plans they review and issue opinions on: • • When water supply plans are submitted, the developer is typically I further along in the process of project implementation. At present, the water supplies proposed are not fully developed or defined. • The scale of this development is extremely large. • Most water supply plans reviewed by the SEO do not include an agricultural element like that proposed for Pioneer Communities. For these reasons, Weld County Planning Department determined it was prudent to conduct a third-party review of the proposed water supply plan for this development. In our work for the County, we have reviewed a voluminous amount of information related to the water supply plan, and as such, appreciate the need to insure an adequate review. In this report, we briefly review and summarize some of the details regarding the plan. We also discuss some of the assumptions and information provided by the developer. However, the bulk of the information presented relates to the issues, concerns and additional unknowns we have identified regarding the water supply plan. The intent of this report is to provide Weld County Planning Department with direction as they continue to work with Pioneer through the development approval process. • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Cornmunities Water Supple Plan Review 1 1� l: • 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 23 22 II 20 27 26 25 30 29 28 2 25 30 29 28 27 Box •erCreek 26 T3N T3N T3N 33" 34 35 36 31 32 :#3 34 35 32 33 34 R65W R64W R63W 4 4 3 21 2 , 6 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 1 - 8 9 9II) _ 1 12 7 PIONEER i 10 11 12 7 q COMMUNITIES 16 >n4 n 16 15 14 13 17 16 15 T2N T2N T2N 21 22 23 "4 19 20 21 22 23 19 20 21 22 I Lo reek HVVY 76 28 27 26 25 30 -D 26 25 30 29 28 27 KNE$BURG LlY_ 4 �L 37 34 . 35,. 31 32 33 34 '35 36 31 32 33 34 3. R65W R64W R63 VV ll . CT R63W 3 2 • W 1 5 5 4 3 2 ' I 6 5� 4 3 I HUDSON ;s HY r • 9 0 IA 12 7 6 9 ice. 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 I Lost Cree I t5 14 ti 1 17 16 15 14 13 16 7 1615 B.x Elde Creek T1N T1N TIN 21 J3 @, 23 24 19 20 21 22 -23 24 1V 19 20 21 22 Legend 28 27 26 25 . 29 28 27 2fi • 25 C / Rivers& Creeks Pioneer Communities 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 352 ,.. 36 ,,� Highways R65W R64W _ .— - Lakes& Reservoirs 4 4 3 2 1 6 _ 3 a 1 I Municipalities t tl 1 2 Miles 1\ Figure 1. Vicinity Map I1�\ 'V WELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT _ (��+iro A PIONEER COMMUNITIES, INC. WATER !- a 1n WATER SUPPLY PLAN REVIEW , ita,<,•.4^ = plan nl nq COLORADO 1 I CHAPTER 2 - DEFINITION OF TERMS 1 Acre-foot (at): The amount of water it would take to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot; approximately 325,851 gallons. 1 Alluvial Groundwater Considered tributary groundwater, directly connected to the surface stream system (i.e. South Platte River). Its withdrawal is considered a surface diversion and is governed by Colorado's water rights priority system. Augmentation: One-for-one replacement of water to the stream system for groundwater that is consumptively used. Well pumping from shallow wells requires augmentation. CG WC: Colorado Ground Water Commission Effluent Percentage: The percentage of water delivered through the WTP that eventually shows up at the wastewater treatment plant. • ERU: Equivalent Residential Unit Non-tributary Groundwater. Water that is not hydraulically connected to the river system. Use of this water does not require augmentation and can be used to 98% extinction. Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe, and Laramie-Fox Hills aquifers supply non-tributary groundwater. Not Non-Tributary Groundwater: Deep groundwater that is hydraulically connected to the river system. Use of this water creates depletions that extend hundreds of years into the future, which require augmentation. For this reason, this is typically not a good water supply alternative. SEO: State Engineer's Office WVV P: Wastewater Treatment Plant • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review CHAPTER 3 - REVIEW OF WATER DEMANDS There are three primary uses for water in the proposed development: o Residential and commercial potable uses o Residential and commercial non-potable uses (i.e. landscape irrigation) o Agricultural irrigation In Pioneer's water supply plan and supporting material, the developer has quantified these water demands and identified assumptions used to project these demands. In this section of our report, we briefly review these assumptions and identify particular concerns. Table 1 provides a summary of the various water demand categories in the development, pertinent assumptions used to estimate demand, and the total annual water demand anticipated. Indoor Residential Uses Pioneer Communities anticipates build-out of 10,070 equivalent residential units (ERU) and assumes 0.265 af of indoor water use per ERU. We believe this estimate for indoor water use is consistent with regional uses in high-efficiency • developments. Outdoor Residential Uses Pioneer indicates irrigated landscape will be limited to an average of 3,000 sf per ERU. They estimate that 0.15 af of water will be required to meet those irrigation needs for each ERU. Our independent calculations indicate that this water demand estimate is consistent with regional requirements for bluegrass. We believe this estimate is adequate, provided irrigated areas are limited to the amount indicated by the developer. We also believe it is conservative to assume all landscape will be high-water use bluegrass. Regional water conservation trends have made low-water use landscapes (i.e. Xeriscape) more desirable in many developments. Commercial Uses The developer currently estimates both indoor and outdoor commercial water use as a percentage of total residential use. The developer provides no engineering basis for this estimate. We assume their estimate is preliminary since development zoning is not finalized. We suggest the developer more accurately quantify commercial water uses once zoning is finalized and use engineering • standards such as water use per customer served and per irrigated area to determine commercial water use. Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Reeietc • Table 1. Pioneer Communities Water Demand Summary Spreadsheet Water Demand Category Pioneer Assumptions Pioneer Calculated Demand Water Use Categories in Pioneer Assumptions made by Pioneer The total annual demand estimated by Communities Communities to estimate demand Pioneer Communities 10,070 ERU 2,669 af Residential Potable ( Annual use =0.265 af/ERU 3,000 sf/ERU (avg) 1,511 of Residential Irrigation Annual use =0.15 af/ERU 20%x(25%x total residential use) 209 af Commercial Potable I • 80%x(25%x total residential use) 836 af Commercial Irrigation Penman-Monteith equation 1,958-2,036 af Agricultural Demand Irrigation efficiency=90% Three probable cropping scenarios or practices proposed 1,280 acres assumed for scenarios, fallowed acres necessary if supply not adequate Notes: ERU-equivalent residential unit af-acre-feet sf-square-feet e�(:nlWATER;o nfr:Ir. • water rights planning .engineer r„ a 0 Agricultural Uses The developer estimates that water demand for the agricultural areas in the 0 development (1,280 acres) will depend on the specific crop mixes selected. The crop mixes proposed are diverse - ranging from more traditional regional crops like corn silage and wheat to more specialty crops like cucumbers, peppers, and melons. The developer calculated water use demand with the Penman-Monteith equation, which is an industry-accepted method. The developer indicates that high efficiency (90%) irrigation methods will be used to irrigate crops. This efficiency is relatively high. The method of irrigation should be verified before this efficiency level is used for water supply planning purposes. The developer also indicates that water supply for the agricultural fields is highly variable year to year and as such, they plan to adjust the number of acres irrigated to meet the available supply as needed. We believe this is a viable approach to managing supply and demand for the agricultural elements in the development. Policies for Demand Management The non-potable water uses (i.e. landscape and agricultural irrigation) proposed by the developer are based on average water use conditions. During periods of drought, water demands will increase and supply may simultaneously decrease. Other than indicating that agricultural acres will not be planted under water short conditions and that Denver Basin non-tributary groundwater may be used as a drought supply, the developer has not indicated specifically how high water demand periods or low water supply periods will be managed for the landscape areas in the development (e.g. watering restrictions). The developer should develop and institute policies to manage demand during periods of drought. a a a a a a 3 Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review 6 0 isa CHAPTER 4 - REVIEW OF WATER SUPPLY 3 Pioneer has proposed a myriad of water supply sources to meet the demands in the development. The primary water supply sources include the following: o Denver Basin groundwater • Laramie Fox-Hills Aquifer • Arapahoe Aquifer wia • Lost Creek Designated Basin o Box Elder alluvial groundwater • 10 existing wells • 5 proposed wells o Lost Creek Designated Basin groundwater • 27 approved wells • 12 pending wells • 9 wells owned by Keenesburg The location of these sources is shown in Figures 2 and 3. Aside from the small amount of Henrylyn Irrigation District water used on the agricultural fields, all the proposed water supplies for the development originate from groundwater. orn Although these groundwater sources are similar in the sense that wells will be used to pump the supply from aquifers, they are very different in terms of how each source is regulated and administered. The State of Colorado considers each of these a unique groundwater source and governs their use under discrete `a sets of rules and regulations. I r{r The legal, regulatory and engineering elements of these various water sources l are complex. In order to fully understand the water supply adequacy in the development, we believe it is necessary to provide a general overview of these various sources. With this context, it will be easier for Weld County to understand which proposed water supplies are or are not adequate at the present time. Table 2 summarizes the primary differences between the three groundwater sources. i Pioneer has begun the process of obtaining approval to use all three groundwater sources in the development, but not all sources have been approved for use at the present time. Table 3 provides a summary of the proposed water sources in the development, pertinent information about each source, and the status of approval for use. Table 3 also includes information 04, gaps that should be clarified by the developer. In this section of our report, we provide background and overview of each groundwater source and discuss the status of approval for use in the Pioneer Communities development. 4 a Clear Water Solutions, Inc. ' I Pioneer Communities Water Suppis Plan Review • OD 0 1 Shr Box .er Creek IE FOX LARAH LLS T3N T3N AQUIFER T3N :Ti Re R65W R64W R63W_ J PI• EER a - CO UNITIES 1r ARAPAHOE a AQUIFER - i' 2N T2N T2N Lo reek 4 HWY 76 , -i KEENESBURG -r1----• R65W / r �� R64W R63W 40 , R63W 4 �uosoN HWY 2 s rsT. ,4 `F� Lost Creek - �� 1N T1N ' Brx Elde Creek TIN Legend 0 - - - ' Rivers & Creeks IN. _ Pioneer Communities �' - _ — Highways _ to �— % _ ! Lakes & Reservoirs lb R65W , R64W Municipalities r Arapahoe Aquifer , Laramie Fox-Hills Aquifer r 0 I 0 1 2 Miles • I / I \ I 1�I AWELD Figure 2. Denver Basin Aquifers a / j/� \ 'V COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Z ; 1� 1 0 PIONEER COMMUNITIES, INC L(cnrWATERsr' it,nn, �� WATER SUPPLY PLAN REVIEW ^°°_ COLORADO ID 8 a a a aBox .er Cr,�ek , 4 ',_ T3N T3N T3N ;�° R65W R64W R63W 4 / __ ' / PIONEER • COMMUNITIES Ma-1 f 1 BOX ELDER 2N\ T2N T2N l a ALLUVIAL Lo reek AQUIFER r a HWY 76 LOST CREEK a K=-ENE BURQ ",� i ALLUVIAL p AQUIFER a R65W / . C R64W R63W - R63W UDSON HWY 5 � L- „,/ . Lost Cree 0 Box Elde &leek ill 4, J - T1 N V \---T1 N 1TLKI . ,,/ )T---, Legend Rivers&Creeks 1 i ME Pioneer Communities I ) -2 Highways l� — - Lakes& Reservoirs 0 R65W R64W 1 Municipalities '' i �_ _I Alluvial Aquifers 0 \\. t 0 1 2 Miles • I I ^I Figure 3. Alluvial Aquifers �• ( j (1 \) I V WELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 41) illiDe PIONEER COMMUNITIES, INC. ,=,trWATER-l)/iiori% WATER SUPPLY PLAN REVIEW COLORADO 0 9 Table 2. Summary of Groundwater Sources 41) Denver Basin Groundwater Box Elder Alluvial Lost Creek Designated Groundwater Groundwater 0 CRS 37-90-137(9)(a)and CRS 37-90-107, 108, 109 and Rules Governing Use (9)(b), CRS 37-80-102(1)(g) CRS 37-92 111 4 Colorado Ground Water Administrating Agency State Engineer's Office State Engineer's Office Commission and local groundwater management districts Application for Use State Engineer's Office Water Court District Court 4 Non-tributary Denver on-tributary and Not Non- Type of Groudwater tributary Alluvial/Tributary Basin (Non-tributary, Not Non- tributary) 411 p Availabilty for alluvial; Basis for Allocation Overlying land Availability Overlying land for Denver Basin 4 No for non-tributary except for Yes,for alluvial if south of T2N Augmentation or 2% replacement; Yes, for not Yes &T3N line; same as Denver Replacement Required? non-tributary Basin rules for Denver Basin groundwater Yes,for consumptive use OID Reuse and Sucessive Yes No portion of alluvial; same as Reuse Allowed Denver Basn rules for Denver Basin groundwater 411 wnlerr WATER;nf rl t in,l g ate.rights • plann+ng nglnee4,ng e 10 LIM e PRIV jai 4 4ii, $ c o, E o w 'o E till m E ° 0 3 E _ $g �QQ iiE :5 0. m o E Y o ° mTa ≥ _ U- m '` � _°m o as m w aCC i ••• �mon olDmm o g m r W: b E Q, J S N . m a �• w ° N c J D ° m g a. � .�y4' 4wm w= C� mu m� E m �: YR::C. Q C �i > U1 U Ly Pi.h C � ' m � - Q z - 8 a ° E m °a m 7 a R o m m E r g Z ,v r m '.,i U �D ;.,t1t a OD 111 Um I m a m v a 'a- ID co Q 4 w �._.C O c .__ry c • c ��._T T i. C T a n- c o 0 D m mIn Ill 0 mmU N J J J 3 0 U R m1-41P 4 n N cj m a 0.1 r m o ,, m T _-_• C C u c • ok 4 a I Da ,,.• .. • I:§ E ut m0 C 1 °c T mi. °° % c° C .i. o "- z chi o`_ `o_ o .:Y-.r;n ryry I mm° i rn U U U� U a u en IN SS �S * ii T C O O O C '^ a • o ¢ `g o w CD• d 5 A E N F o _ UU ill R ..^'C Q . O YN N U m D 0. c _ c w to o f m N • m u, m $ o 0 to - Q `—n N I I M- - ifl C m > > I I _O DIIID E __ 0 0 o1 'T o oI ° 76 $ m J T • y 2 iI O j Q V V j Z O pp 7p F O D D D N • i w N 3 >d m ao a, m L a 3 in 3 E • 3 n Q v m cn C ' a C N Q n o A E Np Q:t w w m = 6 O` N e w `' 2 O a 3 F E m c 1° 3 3 o a mp Qp 1 m V s�:'H, m co C Of D Y 7 E C H 0 3 t ? C y • N O 6 a, U .7( w a C m 0 OC .''• ° o m r.,• I to m O Ili O 0_ t C� 0. CI i rn n aI V n •� y ei 1 mle . 0 V N M > 1n co % A ra 63 a• Of t g c a f ..•.•.. EI J 0 j fA 2 2 Tu U S a. Denver Basin Groundwater i Background and Overview. Denver Basin groundwater is water within specific aquifers that are located generally from Greeley to Colorado Springs and from the Front rir Range foothills to Limon. The aquifers include the Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe, and Laramie-Fox Hills. The State Engineer has adopted specific rules and regulations for the Denver Basin aquifers, which are different from the rules and regulations for Box Elder and Lost Creek groundwater sources discussed below. '1 The State Engineer administers the use of Denver Basin groundwater and determines 4 the right to use this water for beneficial purposes. This water source is allocated on the 04. basis of overlying land ownership and may be withdrawn based upon a 100-yr aquifer life. Computer models, defined under Senate Bill 5, were developed to determine the 4 allocation at each location within the Denver Basin. Groundwater in the Denver Basin is classified as either nontributary (NT) or not- nontributary (NNT). NT groundwater is defined by statute as water that when withdrawn, has a minimal impact on the water flow in a neighboring surface stream system. This water can be used and reused up to 98% extinction. NT groundwater may also be "banked" in the sense that the annual allowable rate of withdrawal need not be used annually. However, at no time can the total volume pumped exceed the annual appropriation times the number of years since the appropriation was issued. 41 NNT groundwater has a more significant impact on the neighboring surface stream system when withdrawn than does NT groundwater. For this reason, the State 4 Engineer requires an augmentation plan to offset or replace the use of this groundwater. Use of this water creates depletions that extend hundreds of years into the future. It is difficult to secure an augmentation plan for this type of groundwater and as such is not often accomplished. Status of Denver Basin Water for Pioneer Communities. Denver Basin groundwater, both from the Laramie-Fox Hills and Arapahoe aquifers, has been approved for use in the development to meet residential and commercial potable and non-potable uses. Pioneer indicates that development of these water sources is not 40 financially feasible at this time, but specifies these sources may be used in the future under drought conditions. Del fie This approved Denver Basin groundwater is also included to be used as a source of augmentation in a pending augmentation application (Case No. 06CW256). This application proposes to pump groundwater from the Box Elder alluvium and use Denver Basin groundwater, among other sources, to augment depletions. It is not clear to what extent this water will be used for augmentation purposes versus actual water uses in the 41 development. The developer needs to provide information to insure this water source will not be over-committed. Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review 4 S a 0forFrom information obtained from Pioneer, we also believe there is a pending application Denver Basin groundwater located in the Lost Creek Designated Basin for lands owned by PV Water and Sanitation Metro District. The developer should clarify this Vie proposed water source and its intended use in the development, even if the application is still pending. jai Box Elder Alluvial Groundwater Overview and Background. Box Elder groundwater is considered an alluvial or tributary groundwater source. Tributary groundwater is directly connected to a surface stream system and thus governed under Colorado's priority system. Box Elder Creek and the alluvial aquifer that supplies it is tributary to the South Platte River (see Figure 3). 4S Use of water from an alluvial aquifer is administered by the SEG and is regulated and quantified under a system of water courts. The right to beneficially use this water source is based on water availability. Since the South Platte is over-appropriated (no 140 undeveloped water available) and since wells are junior to senior surface water rights, 4 replacement or augmentation water is required to offset use of that groundwater. Use of alluvial groundwater from the South Platte River and its tributaries requires a court- . approved augmentation plan. Status of Box Elder Water for Pioneer Communities. Water from the Box Elder alluvium is proposed for a myriad of uses in the development including domestic, irrigation, commercial, municipal, industrial, stock watering, recreation, fish and wildlife purposes, augmentation, residential, and fire protection. At the present time, this water source has only been approved for irrigation purposes on the agricultural fields in the development. This irrigation use was approved in an augmentation plan entered by Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Groundwater Management Subdistrict (Central GMS) in Case No. 02CW335. The remaining proposed uses are still pending in Case No. 06CW256. There are presently ten Box Elder groundwater wells located at Pioneer Communities. These wells were used historically to irrigate agricultural fields and are augmented under the Central GMS augmentation plan. Under this augmentation plan, these wells are allowed to pump on an annual basis under a quota system. The quota is set annually by Central GMS and is a function of the amount of water supply available to offset groundwater uses. Operation of this augmentation plan in recent years has shown that the quota is highly variable year to year. As such, it is difficult to quantify how much water will be available from these wells in future years. To deal with this variability, the developer indicates they will adjust their agricultural practices in a manner (likely reduce acreage) that will match the amount of supply available. 40 The developer also proposes to use water from these ten wells up to their decreed . capacity to meet additional demands not approved under the Central GMS plan. These wells are currently not being pumped to their full capacity. Augmentation of this 41 Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review I 40 4 r increased pumping is proposed in the pending Case No. 06CW256. Also in Case No. 06CW256, the developer proposes to drill up to five additional wells in Box Elder alluvium and store this water in as many as nine ponds. r The pending request to use additional supply from the ten existing wells and five new wells is anticipated to meet the myriad of uses indicated previously, not just agricultural uses. From the information provided by Pioneer, it is not clear to what extent Box Elder water will be used to meet the additional water demands in the development. The developer should clarify the intended uses of this supply and insure this source is not over-committed. a Lost Creek Designated Basin Overview and Background. There are eight "designated" groundwater basins in Colorado, most of which are located on the eastern plains of the State. One of those basins is Lost Creek (see Figure 3), which also is located within the boundary of the Denver Basin. The significance of a designated basin is that it is not regulated or 4 administered under the Colorado water rights priority system. Designated basin groundwater is a separate and unique resource, which is administered outside of the prior appropriation system. 4 Use of designated basin groundwater is administered by the Colorado Ground Water 4 Commission (CGWC) and by local management districts, not the SEO. Designated basin groundwater is also different from other groundwater sources in that applications for use are made to district courts, not water courts. There are two types of groundwater recognized in the Lost Creek Designated Basin — alluvial and Denver Basin. Alluvial groundwater is allocated on water availability, no unreasonable impairment, and no unreasonable waste. In areas of the Lost Creek Basin where the CGWC has determined it to be over-appropriated, a replacement plan is required to insure the water pumped from the aquifer is fully replaced. The CGWC currently considers the Lost Creek Basin to be over-appropriated south of the line between Township 2N and Township 3N. Denver Basin groundwater within a designated groundwater basin is allocated based on the amount of overlying land and a 100-yr aquifer life, similar to Denver Basin waters not within the designated basin jurisdiction. 411 Status of Lost Creek Water for Pioneer Communities. According to the water supply plan, Lost Creek alluvial groundwater is the primary source of water supply proposed for I® Pioneer presently. This supply is anticipated to serve potable residential and commercial uses and non-potable landscape irrigation uses via a secondary supply system that makes use of reusable effluent. Excess reusable effluent not used to meet landscape irrigation is also proposed to meet irrigation requirements at the agricultural fields. Iry Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review la 0 Information provided by Pioneer indicates Lost Creek alluvial groundwater supply is adequate for the following reasons: • The wells proposed to meet Pioneer's needs are located in the over-appropriated area of the Lost Creek Basin. As such, no new large capacity wells can be drilled in this area without replacement and as such will not impact Pioneer's a supply. Pioneer's wells were historically used for irrigated agriculture in Lost Creek and are exempt from the requirement to have a replacement plan. • The wells proposed to meet Pioneer's needs are senior and have never been curtailed by the CGWC. • Aquifer water levels in Lost Creek basin have been monitored by the SEO since the 1950's. Our review of the SEO's annual report on the basin indicates that water levels are generally stable or increasing. Given what we currently know about water levels in Lost Creek Basin, which was confirmed through discussions with the SEO, we believe this groundwater supply is sustainable. However, it is important to note that this currently is the sole approved source of water supply proposed for Pioneer at this time. In the event that water in the basin becomes unavailable or limited, there are no other sources currently approved 4 that are available to fulfill the entire demand in the development. An initial water rights application associated with Lost Creek water has been decreed in Adams County District Court (Case No. 98CV1727 and 99CV0097). These decrees set forth a change of use from irrigation to other development related uses as well as a change of location for use outside the Lost Creek Basin. From additional information we have received from Weld County and Pioneer, we also believe there is a pending 4 application to obtain more water from Lost Creek Basin, some from the acquisition of 12 additional wells and some through special arrangements with the Town of Keenesburg. Pioneer should provide clarification on these additional sources, even if they are still 40 pending approval. y Lost Creek Basin water is also proposed as an augmentation source via wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and lawn irrigation return flows to offset the use of Box Elder alluvial groundwater in Case No. 06CW256. In the augmentation application, it is not clear to what extent Lost Creek water will be used for augmentation purposes versus • actual water uses in the development. The developer should clarify the intended uses of each source and insure the source is not being over-committed. Pioneer is currently using a 95% effluent percentage to estimate the amount of wastewater that will be available for reuse in the development. This effluent percentage • is relatively high, but not unreasonable for a WWTP. The developer should confirm this estimate after the WWTP is constructed.• - Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review S Sh; - CURRENT WATER SUPPLY PLAN CHAPTER 5 ASSESSMENT OF As indicated above, some of, but not all of the water supply sources proposed by Pioneer have currently been approved for use in Pioneer Communities. The sources that have been approved for use have also been included in a pending request for a plan of augmentation that proposes to use these same water sources as an augmentation supply for wells drilled into the Box Elder alluvium. In addition, this pending augmentation plan indicates that Box Elder groundwater will also be used to meet some of the residential, commercial and agricultural uses in the development, which according to the water supply plan will be met 4 with primarily Lost Creek Basin groundwater. Although it may appear at first review that the developer may be over committing water sources by claiming it as a source of supply and as a source of 4 augmentation water, this is not likely the case. We anticipate the developer has likely submitted their augmentation application with overlapping water supply and demand to firm their water portfolio and provide for additional operational flexibility in the development over the long-term. If the pending augmentation plan is approved, as proposed, it will provide for a diverse and flexible water y� supply system for the development. Proposed Water Supply Plan The water supply plan proposed by Pioneer does not describe the pending y� augmentation plan in detail and does not clearly define what water will be used for what uses if the pending plan is approved. This detail is not likely included 4 because Pioneer claims the currently approved water supply (i.e. Lost Creek water) is adequate whether or not the augmentation plan is approved. In the water supply plan, Pioneer shows that on an average annual basis there is enough approved water supply to meet the residential and commercial potable and non-potable water demands. We appreciate Pioneer's desire to move forward with their development plan by S requesting Weld County and the SEO review the plan in light of not having the augmentation plan decreed. Part of the reason for this request may be related to the fact that the pending augmentation plan is not likely to be decreed for several 41 years. There is currently a backlog of pending cases in water court and the complexity of this case is likely to draw many objectors and require intensive negotiation and/or litigation. Although we appreciate Pioneer's request, we have several concerns related to Pioneer's desire for a review of the plan under the gle present circumstances. 41 Pending Augmentation Plan. We do not believe it is prudent to assess the adequacy of the water supply plan under the uncertain circumstances surrounding the pending augmentation plan. The pending augmentation plan Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review 16 leaves many questions unanswered and many parts of the water supply plan undeveloped. For example, if an augmentation plan is not approved then Pioneer proposes to use Lost Creek WWTP return flows from the development directly for landscape irrigation in 04. a secondary supply system. A secondary supply system will require storage facilities to retain reusable effluent for delivery during periods of demand. Pioneer has not provided adequate detail on these proposed storage facilities. 4 Alternatively, if an augmentation plan is approved, we anticipate that Box Elder wells may be used to meet landscape irrigation demands instead and that this use might be augmented with Lost Creek WWTP effluent. This approach would likely reduce or eliminate the need for storage facilities and be more financially and operationally 4 feasible for the developer. These two approaches are significantly different in concept and may necessitate an entirely discrete physical system and operational plan. It would 4 be inaccurate to issue an assessment on the proposed water supply plan under either circumstance until such time as the pending augmentation plan is approved. 4 In our conversations with the SEO, we understand they will not give a final opinion on this water supply plan until the pending augmentation plan (Case No. 06CW256) is 4 decreed since the sources identified in this plan are currently committed by the developer for uses in the development. The SEO indicated to us that Case. No. 4 06CW256 is rather complex and not likely to be finalized for years. One alternative Pioneer may consider is the SEO will sometimes approve water supply y� plans per phase of development build-out if sufficient water supplies are secured to meet the demand for that portion of the development. 4 Clarification of Supply, Quality, and System Concepts. We believe it is important to more completely review the water supply plan once the plan is more clearly defined. This is necessary to understand the water supply availability (both in terms of quantity and timing), the quality of the water supply as well as the adequacy of the infrastructure used to distribute, store and deliver the water supply. 4 Under the current proposal, the developer has quantified water demands as well as water supply on an annual basis. We believe a comparison of water demand and supply on an annual basis does not fully address the adequacy of the proposed water supply for the intended uses. The developer should quantify the timing of water demands relative to water supply availability and any storage requirements and 4 incidental losses that incur during storage, operation and delivery of the water to the point of demand. The information provided by the developer to date does not provide _ 4 sufficient detail for us to make a complete assessment. 4111 The developer has provided some information on the water quality of the approved 41 sources, but not for all of the proposed or pending sources. We believe it is inaccurate to assess the water quality on the basis of tests for only a few of the supply sources. A Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water SuppIs Plan Rcvics 17 complete range of tests should be conducted to determine what the blended water quality will be. If the water supplies will be treated prior to delivery for potable uses, a detailed description of the treatment approach should be provided. to We believe the developer should submit, at a minimum, the conceptual plan for the distribution, delivery and storage of the water supply system for the potable, non- potable and agricultural uses. This information is needed to better understand how the supply system will operate and which sources will be used to meet which demands. 4 4 iftik 4i All AI Al AI 041 Clear Water Solutions. Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review IS CHAPTER 6 — RECOMMENDATIONS In this water supply plan review, we were asked to determine if there were any immediate fatal flaws associated with the water supply plan proposed by Pioneer Communities. Presently, we have not identified any fatal flaws that we believe would prevent this project from moving forward. The developer appears to be making progress in their quest to secure an adequate and .10 diverse water supply for Pioneer Communities. f is However, since the water supplies are not finalized at this time, we cannot provide conclusive findings until additional information is provided. We recommend Weld County insure that Pioneer continues to clarify and provide a the following as they progress with their plan: • Provide basis for the water demand predicted for both potable and w • non-potable commercial uses. • Verify the agricultural efficiency of 90% or provide a more detailed description of the methods of delivery and distribution. a • Describe the policies and procedures the developer will implement to manage demand during periods of drought or insure water supply is adequate during periods of drought. The only water supply mentioned to be used during drought is the Denver Basin groundwater, which the developer also states is unfeasible to develop at this time. sm • Provide a finalized description and quantification of approved water lir supplies that will be used in the development. • Indicate which approved water supplies will be used to meet which 4 water demands in the development. The developer should indicate if the demand will be met with the first use of the water supply or with successive uses. (' • Provide a description of the water supply operation (both potable and 4I' non-potable) and the details of the physical transmission, storage, distribution, delivery, and treatment systems. 4 • Verify the effluent percentage of the WWTP. • Provide water quality information on all sources of water supply and any blended water supply proposed to be used at Pioneer. 4 iler Illi { 0.l Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Pioneer Communities Water Supply Plan Review 19 160 I. wR+k yawm t ..g t g *; r tt isa eg: ran a 'zn }y�i t, s 9p �`� F wM1 F 'h � lk } t , 9 ( � � 3 L§ �"� F fi WATER rights, planning and .ngul��rI I MEMORANDUM CWS File#07-160 To: Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department From: Rachel Kullman, Clear Water Solutions CC: Steve Nguyen, Clear Water Solutions Date: April 18, 2007 Subject: Pioneer Communities, Inc. Hi Brad - I have reviewed the documents and information you provided to us on the water supply plan for Pioneer Communities. While reviewing, I identified a few additional items that we will need. Please let me know if you can obtain these items for us, or if I should coordinate directly with others. • Items needed: • In the TZA Water Resources Report (cover memo from Newell Wright dated August 17, 2006), an appendix is mentioned, but is not enclosed. We will need to obtain a copy of the Appendices. The TZA Water Resources Report also indicates it is a draft; if there is a final report, we would like a copy of the most recent version. • Information/original data from the water quality tests performed for the Lost Creek Designated Basin— these data were referred to in the TZA Water Resources Report mentioned above. • In the Sketch Plan Addendum (Jan, 2007), the developer's consultant mentions that 400 acre-feet of additional Lost Creek water to be filed on in the first quarter of 2007. Have you received any indication that this additional water supply will be included for the development? • Appendix F-1 of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan Amendment (includes agricultural crop analysis for the development). • Copy of Final Determination of Facts for Laramie-Fox Hills (issued August 1, 2006). If you do not have this, we might be able to obtain from the State Engineer directly. Steve and I would also I ike to meet with you soon for a progress update on the project. We will be in the Greeley area on May 2nd, so that date is preferable for us. Let me know if this day will work for you. Thanks, Rachel. • I$22,,5HLLCW CANYON 7 kAL HROONRICLO.CO 80020 (TI 303.92`3.0-758 ( 1'303.464.8607 WV.'W.GLCARWATG i.:OLORA00_CON Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE APR v' 2007 • RESOLUTION RECEIVED RE: APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PIONEER COMMUNITIES WATER PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - CLEAR WATER SOLUTIONS, INC. WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS,the Board has been presented with a Professional Services Agreement for the Pioneer Water Project between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,on behalf of the Department of Planning Services,and Clear Water Solutions, Inc., commencing April 2, 2007, and ending May 31, 2007, with further terms and conditions being as stated in said agreement, and WHEREAS,after review,the Board deems it advisable to approve said agreement,a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,Colorado,that the Professional Services Agreement for the Pioneer Water Project between the County of Weld,State of Colorado,by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,on behalf of the Department of Planning Services,and ClearWater Solutions,Inc.,be,and • hereby is, approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be, and hereby is, authorized to sign said agreement. The above and foregoing Resolution was,on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 4th day of April, A.D., 2007, nunc pro tunc April 2, 2007. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 WEOUNTY, CO RADO ::: ty Clerk to the B It9 , .,j.^ rj� Wika iro-Tem BY: ` Deputy Clerk to the Board C am F. Garcia APP D AS • A6, Robert D. Masden ounty Attorney y/��/�7 Dougl s R emac er • Date of signature: 2007-0941 PL0073 ('/' eL Cie,.c5 � ou- /q-D7 • Memorandum TO: Clerk to the Board DATE: April 3, 2007 FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: Pioneer Water Review CC: Monica Daniels-Mika Please schedule this as a consent item on the next available Board meeting agenda. The request is for the Chair to sign a Professional Services Agreement(2 copies)with Clear Water Solutions, Inc., for review of the water proposal submitted in conjunction with the Pioneer Communities, Inc., sketch plan application. The proposed cost of work is $13,651. The contract has been reviewed by Don Warden and Planning Services and is recommended for approval. • • 2007-0941 1 • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 This Agreement is entered between: Weld County Planning Department 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 (hereinafter referred to as "Client"), and Clear Water Solutions, Inc., a Colorado Corporation 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant") for Pioneer Communities Water Project Review RECITALS, 1. Client recognizes that it needs assistance in the review of the proposed water supply at the proposed Pioneer Communities Development. • 2. Client desires Consultant to assist Client with this review to identify project fatal flaws, assumptions used for demand projections and provide recommendations on findings. 3. Consultant is willing to assist Client pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, and other good and valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the following: Period of Engagement The Client shall retain the services of the Consultant through 2007, although the project will be completed by May 31, 2007. Standard of Care The Consultant represents that its services will be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with the standards expected of a consulting engineering profession. Consultant shall provide sufficient organization, personnel and management to carry out the requirements of this Agreement in an expeditious and Clear Water Solutions,Inc. Professional Services Agreement • Weld County Planning— Pioneer Communities Review 1 • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 economical manner consistent with the objectives of the engagement and specified interests of the Client. Scope of Services Per letter dated March 27, 2007. Project Modification In the event the Client requires changes to the scope, character or complexity of the services and where said changes result in an increase in the project costs, completion date, and/or value received by the Client, an equitable adjustment shall be made. Client and Consultant together shall determine an appropriate means to account for such adjustment, which may include scope, schedule and fee. Accordingly, this Agreement will be modified by a Supplemental Agreement to clarify and document the nature of any additional services contemplated by such change. Compensation Per letter dated March 27, 2007. Payment • Consultant shall invoice Client on a monthly basis. Payments will be remitted within 30 days from date of receipt, unless there is a dispute on the bill. Client shall notify Consultant within ten (10) days of the billing date with any discrepancy or to dispute the invoice. If this is not done within this time period, the invoice will be deemed correct and must be paid in full. Delinquent Accounts Undisputed accounts unpaid after 30 days shall be deemed delinquent and will incur a late payment charge, computed at the monthly rate of 1.25% on overdue balances(15% annually). Undisputed accounts unpaid after 60 days will be subject to stoppage of work and initiation of collections through a collection agency, attorney, small claims court, or other legal means deemed appropriate. Time incurred by the Consultant, as well as reasonable attorney's fees, will be added to the defaulted account. Ownership of Documents All documents produced in connection with the project covered by this Agreement shall remain the property of the Consultant, but will be made available to Client upon request. Clear Water Solutions,Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review • 2 • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 Suitable electronic media shall be transmitted as specifically requested by Client. Additionally, Consultant grants Client an exclusive license to use and reproduce copies of work product generated with the understanding that such documents are intended for the Client's in-house use and application in connection with this project. Work products developed under this Agreement shall not be used for or applied to other projects or shared with third parties without the prior written approval of Consultant. Documents shall not be unreasonably withheld. Client shall be responsible for all costs associated with reproduction and transmittal of hard copies and electronic media. Confidentiality Both parties to this Agreement hereby agree to maintain in confidence any information related to the project, unless release of such information is authorized in writing by the originating party or required by law. Limitation of Liability In recognition of the relative risks and benefits of the project to both Client and Consultant, the risks have been allocated such that the Client agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to limit the liability of the Consultant and its sub-consultants for any and all claims, losses, costs, damages of any nature whatsoever or claims expenses from any cause or causes, so that the total aggregate liability of the • Consultant and its sub-consultants to all those named shall not exceed the limits of Consultant's insurance coverage. Such claims and causes include, but are not limited to negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict liability, breach of contract or warranty. Contacts For the purposes of this Agreement the following parties are designated as the contacts for the project. As a matter of protocol, all coordination and daily communication and contacts between the parties shall be routed through these individuals. For the Client: Mr. Brad Mueller For the Consultant: Mr. Steve Nguyen, P.E. Notices All notices, requests, demands and other communication given, or required to be given, under this Agreement, shall be in writing and duly addressed to the parties as follows: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement • Weld County Planning- Pioneer Communities Review 3 • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 If to Client: Weld County Planning Department Attn: Brad Mueller 918 10"' Street Greeley, CO 80631 If to Consultant: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Attn: Steve Nguyen, P.E. 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 Any notice properly addressed and personally delivered shall be deemed to have been duly given and received upon such personal delivery, and notices properly addressed and sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, shall be deemed to have been duly given and received seventy-two hours after they are deposited in the mail, postage prepaid. Any party may change its address for purposes of this Agreement by giving notice to the other party as provided herein. Dispute Resolution In the event a dispute arises relating to the execution of services under the Agreement, both Client and Consultant shall convene to resolve the dispute in a way that is mutually • agreed to by both parties. If such a dispute is not resolved, the Client and Consultant agree to proceed in good faith to submit the matter for Mediation. The Client and Consultant shall jointly appoint an acceptable mediator and will share equally in the cost of such Mediation. In the event it becomes necessary for either party to enforce any provision(s) of this Agreement through litigation, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to collect, as part of any judgment entered, its reasonable expert witness, consultant, attorney fees and cost in connection with the litigation, arbitration, mediation, and/or administrative proceedings. Attorney's fees and expenses shall, for the purpose of the Agreement, include all paralegal, electronic research, legal specialists and all other costs in connection with the performance of the prevailing party's attorneys. Termination of Services This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than thirty days(30) written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the spirit of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. In the event of termination, the Client shall pay the Consultant for all services rendered through the date of termination, together with reimbursable expenses then due and other reasonable termination expenses. Clear Water Solutions,Inc. Professional Services Agreement • Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 4 • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Cup �\ By Steve Nguyen, President Weld County Planning Department By Dave Long, Chair— Board o Co ty Commissioners 04/04/2007 ATTEST: iAtedit WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE AR Oa ,Y • BY: Cc/ 4�-0'4) ; DEPUTY L I-tic TO THE BOAT ` ATTESTING TO BOARD OF COUNTY ''`C/C,' 4 .t r"COMMISSIONER SIGNATURES ONLY `C�-.:` �; Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement • Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 5 :ACC 2-C%4// PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT April 2, 2007 Neld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE (I [, 206; This Agreement is entered between: RECEIVED Weld County Planning Department 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 (hereinafter referred to as "Client"), and Clear Water Solutions, Inc., a Colorado Corporation 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant") for Pioneer Communities Water Project Review RECITALS, 1. Client recognizes that it needs assistance in the review of the proposed water supply at the proposed Pioneer Communities Development. • 2. Client desires Consultant to assist Client with this review to identify project fatal flaws, assumptions used for demand projections and provide recommendations on findings. 3. Consultant is willing to assist Client pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, and other good and valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree to the following: Period of Engagement The Client shall retain the services of the Consultant through 2007, although the project will be completed by May 31, 2007. Standard of Care The Consultant represents that its services will be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with the standards expected of a consulting engineering profession. Consultant shall provide sufficient organization, personnel and management to carry out the requirements of this Agreement in an expeditious and • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning —Pioneer Communities Review 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • April 2, 2007 economical manner consistent with the objectives of the engagement and specified interests of the Client. Scope of Services Per letter dated March 27, 2007. Project Modification In the event the Client requires changes to the scope, character or complexity of the services and where said changes result in an increase in the project costs, completion date, and/or value received by the Client, an equitable adjustment shall be made. Client and Consultant together shall determine an appropriate means to account for such adjustment, which may include scope, schedule and fee. Accordingly, this Agreement will be modified by a Supplemental Agreement to clarify and document the nature of any additional services contemplated by such change. Compensation Per letter dated March 27, 2007. • Payment Consultant shall invoice Client on a monthly basis. Payments will be remitted within 30 days from date of receipt, unless there is a dispute on the bill. Client shall notify Consultant within ten (10) days of the billing date with any discrepancy or to dispute the invoice. If this is not done within this time period, the invoice will be deemed correct and must be paid in full. Delinquent Accounts Undisputed accounts unpaid after 30 days shall be deemed delinquent and will incur a late payment charge, computed at the monthly rate of 1.25% on overdue balances (15% annually). Undisputed accounts unpaid after 60 days will be subject to stoppage of work and initiation of collections through a collection agency, attorney, small claims court, or other legal means deemed appropriate. Time incurred by the Consultant, as well as reasonable attorney's fees, will be added to the defaulted account. Ownership of Documents All documents produced in connection with the project covered by this Agreement shall remain the property of the Consultant, but will be made available to Client upon request. • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • April 2, 2007 Suitable electronic media shall be transmitted as specifically requested by Client. Additionally, Consultant grants Client an exclusive license to use and reproduce copies of work product generated with the understanding that such documents are intended for the Client's in-house use and application in connection with this project. Work products developed under this Agreement shall not be used for or applied to other projects or shared with third parties without the prior written approval of Consultant. Documents shall not be unreasonably withheld. Client shall be responsible for all costs associated with reproduction and transmittal of hard copies and electronic media. Confidentiality Both parties to this Agreement hereby agree to maintain in confidence any information related to the project, unless release of such information is authorized in writing by the originating party or required by law. Limitation of Liability In recognition of the relative risks and benefits of the project to both Client and Consultant, the risks have been allocated such that the Client agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to limit the liability of the Consultant and its sub-consultants for any and all claims, losses, costs, damages of any nature whatsoever or claims • expenses from any cause or causes, so that the total aggregate liability of the Consultant and its sub-consultants to all those named shall not exceed the limits of Consultant's insurance coverage. Such claims and causes include, but are not limited to negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict liability, breach of contract or warranty. Contacts For the purposes of this Agreement the following parties are designated as the contacts for the project. As a matter of protocol, all coordination and daily communication and contacts between the parties shall be routed through these individuals. For the Client: Mr. Brad Mueller For the Consultant: Mr. Steve Nguyen, P.E. Notices All notices, requests, demands and other communication given, or required to be given, under this Agreement, shall be in writing and duly addressed to the parties as follows: • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 3 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • April 2, 2007 If to Client: Weld County Planning Department Attn: Brad Mueller 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 If to Consultant: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Attn: Steve Nguyen, P.E. 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 Any notice properly addressed and personally delivered shall be deemed to have been duly given and received upon such personal delivery, and notices properly addressed and sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, shall be deemed to have been duly given and received seventy-two hours after they are deposited in the mail, postage prepaid. Any party may change its address for purposes of this Agreement by giving notice to the other party as provided herein. Dispute Resolution In the event a dispute arises relating to the execution of services under the Agreement, both Client and Consultant shall convene to resolve the dispute in a way that is mutually • agreed to by both parties. If such a dispute is not resolved, the Client and Consultant agree to proceed in good faith to submit the matter for Mediation. The Client and Consultant shall jointly appoint an acceptable mediator and will share equally in the cost of such Mediation. In the event it becomes necessary for either party to enforce any provision(s) of this Agreement through litigation, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to collect, as part of any judgment entered, its reasonable expert witness, consultant, attorney fees and cost in connection with the litigation, arbitration, mediation, and/or administrative proceedings. Attorney's fees and expenses shall, for the purpose of the Agreement, include all paralegal, electronic research, legal specialists and all other costs in connection with the performance of the prevailing party's attorneys. Termination of Services This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than thirty days (30) written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the spirit of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. In the event of termination, the Client shall pay the Consultant for all services rendered through the date of termination, together with reimbursable expenses then due and other reasonable termination expenses. • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 4 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • April 2, 2007 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. Clear Water Solutions, Inc. By Steve Nguyen, President Weld County Planning Department By Dave Long, Chair— Board o ounty Commissioners 04/04/2 7 � � ATTEST: • WELD COUNTY CLERK TOTH lip r' BY: kfA DEPUTY CLERK TO THE B ` ATTESTING TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER SIGNATURES ONLY • Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Professional Services Agreement Weld County Planning—Pioneer Communities Review 5 aoo2-o9-V/ 3 E 6 S I t � E� I E�x i t4 a* k 3 "� '3 liettPit .h t g,"` t s a ,lam tp a �;" e 4" i , r C r s''t o tt ,q„ tta r t a a{ ltt. lei # x 3`n rri- Tri' smla- i x. L7, t . a K- ` igt � ''4 .. ,f r rf Auw Nt ss I '0i7i " i.,, • WATER water rwhis, planning and gineer .g March 27, 2007 Mr. Brad Mueller Weld County Planning Department 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Proposal for Water Project Review- Pioneer Communities, Inc. Dear Brad: It was a pleasure meeting with you, Pam and Trevor on March 19, 2007 to discuss the water supply plan submitted to Weld County Planning by Pioneer Communities, Inc. Clear Water Solutions is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the County with the review of the proposed water supply plan, as requested. • Project Background We understand that Pioneer Communities is a proposed 10,070 residential dwelling unit development in southern Weld County near Hudson and Keenesburg. More specifically, the development will be located north of Interstate 76 generally near the intersections of WCR 22 and WCR 49. Pioneer Communities will consist of six metropolitan districts, known collectively as the Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District. These metropolitan districts will contract with Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation District to provide for domestic water supplies in Pioneer Communities. Resource Colorado will provide the water and construct treatment and transmission facilities to the development to serve indoor and outdoor residential uses, schools, neighborhood commercial centers, and irrigation for parks and agricultural fields. The various water supplies identified for the development include: Lost Creek alluvial groundwater Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer water Arapahoe aquifer water Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) reusable effluent Central Colorado Water Conservancy District Henrylyn Irrigation District Irrigation lawn grass return flows <'Clear tit ater Solutions. Inc. Proposal to Weld County Planning Department—Pioneer Communities.Inc. • We understand the Weld County Planning Department has already approved the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan for Pioneer Communities and is currently in the process of reviewing the development Sketch Plan. Before Weld County moves forward with the development rezoning and final plat processes, you would like to insure the proposed water supply plan submitted by Pioneer Communities is adequate. Scope of Services You have asked us to review and perform a fatal-flaw analysis for the water supply plan submitted by Pioneer Communities to verify the accuracy and soundness of the information, data and analysis presented. Key to our review will be to identify any shortcoming in the proposal and to determine compliance with Weld County regulations regarding water supply, including both adequacy of water quality and quantity. More specifically, we propose to provide the following services: 1. Review all information. We will review and research elements related to the Pioneer Communities water provision plan. This will include information you have already given to us as well as additional project elements like the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD) Decree and Case No. 06CW256. As we review this information, we will identify additional information and materials needed to complete the review. We will also contact the State • Engineer's Office about their review of the water supply plan, as needed, as well as Bruce Barker regarding Weld County Code. Many of the proposed uses from the above list of water supplies will require a change of use in Water Court. Our review of these court cases will verify that the appropriate changes have been made by the applicant. 2. Verify assumptions used for projecting water demands. We will review the assumptions and calculations used by Pioneer Communities to project water demands for the development. Water demands include indoor and outdoor residential uses, commercial uses, and irrigation for parks and open space (agricultural) areas. We will run consumptive-use calculations, using the Modified Blaney-Criddle Method, for the irrigated areas to confirm adequate water is dedicated for this use. 3. Examine sufficiency and dependability of water supplies proposed per Weld County Code. We will examine the sufficiency and dependability of all water supplies identified by Pioneer Communities relative to the Public Water Supply provision in the Weld County Code. We will identify any fatal-flaws associated with the determination of firm yield and summarize elements of uncertainty and variability for each source. We will coordinate directly with Bruce Barker to verify interpretation of the Weld County Code relative to the proposed water supplies. • Clear Water Solutions.Inc. Proposal to Meld County Planning Uepar ineni-- Pioneer Communities. Inc. 2 • One notable area of concern is the proposal to provide 3,600 ac-ft from wells augmented by CCWCD. With the scrutiny CCWCD is receiving in Water Court and the typically less that 100% quota established for pumping of its member wells, sufficiency of this supply must be addressed. In addition, we will examine the proposed use of the reusable effluent from the WWTP to irrigate the agricultural areas. We must verify that the water claimed is in fact reusable and that delivery of said water, by direct diversion or exchange, is feasible considering the flows in Box Elder Creek and the Colorado water rights system. 4. Research water quality conditions for water supplies. While reviewing water supply information for Pioneer Communities, we will also note issues related to water quality and request additional information if necessary. Because this water supply will need to meet drinking water standards, the County will rely on the State's analysis of the water quality. 5. Examine viability of proposed distribution system. We will review the proposed water/wastewater treatment and distribution system proposal for adequacy. Weld County's Responsibilities • Because there is some urgency associated with the completion of this project, there are certain requirements of Weld County staff for a successful project: • Attend all meetings required to discuss issues uncovered. • Provide additional information as requested. Deliverables We will summarize our review of the water supply plan and associated documents in a comprehensive report. This report will summarize our analysis, findings and recommendations. As we approach this phase of the project, we will consult with you directly about the format of the report deliverable. We understand that documents of this nature are public record and that the applicant may have up to three opportunities to respond to any concerns or questions raised. We proposed to provide five (5) copies of the final report. Professional Fees • The total cost for the project is $13,651. We will invoice Weld County on a monthly basis. This fee includes all professional fees and reimbursable expenses for this scope of services. cci near ater Solutions. Inc. Proposal to Ntield Counts Planning Ueparuneni—Pioneer Connnunilies. Inc. 3 • • If additional services are added that are outside the scope of this proposal, we will provide you with a fee estimate for the additional services and receive authorization from you prior to proceeding. If you are agreeable to the above scope of services and fee, we will complete a Professional Services Agreement between Clear Water Solutions, Inc. and Weld County Planning Department for signature prior to commencing work. Timeline We anticipate completing the review of the Pioneer Communities water supply plan no later than May 31, 2007. Although this schedule is aggressive, we understand the County's need to expedite a review for the proposed development. This schedule is contingent upon us receiving the signed contract by April 6, 2007. Thank you for your consideration to hire us. I have personally served all Weld County's water needs for the last ten years. I have a very good relationship with Bruce Barker and Don Warden and believe our firm has served the County well. We trust we can do the same for you. Project management and quality control will be included in our process to ensure the best results are presented for you. In addition, administrative services will be provided to prepare correspondence when required. • If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to call me at (303) 929-0758. Please direct all correspondence to: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. Attn: Steve Nguyen, P.E. 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 Cordially, Clear Water Solutions, Inc. —i Steve Nguyen, P.E. President Encs. cc: CWS File #P07-170 Clear Water Solutions. Inc. Proposal to Weld Count:Planning 6eparlmcnt— Pioneer Communities.Inc. 4 • Memorandum TO: Clerk to the Board DATE: April 3, 2007 C� FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: Pioneer Water Review CC: Monica Daniels-Mika Please schedule this as a consent item on the need available Board meeting agenda. The request is for the Chair to sign a Professional Services Agreement(2 copies)with Clear Water Solutions, Inc., for review of the water proposal submitted in conjunction with the Pioneer Communities, Inc., sketch plan application. The proposed cost of work is $13,651. The contract has been reviewed by Don Warden and Planning Services and is recommended for approval. • • •• r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES �l 918 10`" Street GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 W I I WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us pc E-MAIL 0)b 3@ EXT c 572 PHONE (970) 353-6100, 72 FAX (9O) 304-6498 COLORADO March 12, 2007 Steve Nguyen Clearwater Solutions 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail Broomfield, CO 80020 RE: Review of Water Proposal, Pioneer Communities Inc. • Dear Steve: Weld County would like to contract with you to review a water provision plan submitted by Pioneer Communities Inc. in conjunction with their Sketch Plan review land use application (Planning File No. PK-1125). Attached is the applicant's water provision plan submittal, referral review comments provided by the Office of the State Engineer, and the applicant's responses to the State's referral. Also attached is information about a recent water decree and general information about the proposed development. The County seeks a commitment to provide up to three reviews of these and any other materials submitted by Pioneer Communities, Inc., as well as any subsequent supporting materials and review comments from any outside referrals or districts. We would request that you also be available for up to three hearings or public meetings, as well as meetings with staff as needed. As part of an independent review of the water proposal, you are requested to verify the accuracy and soundness of proposed data and analysis; to identify any shortcomings in the proposal; to determine compliance with Weld County regulations regarding water supply; and to request and review additional information as needed to meet these • requirements. • Page 2 Steve Nguyen March 12, 2007 Review should include answering the following questions and addressing similar ones: o How viable (fiscally and practically) is the proposed distribution system? o What demand assumptions would be reasonable to expect of future residents in this area? o What is the source of the proposed Central Colorado District water, and can it be considered reliable? o Is it acceptable to "double count" return flows in the manner proposed, and are those flows reasonably considered reliable? o Is the assertion that water adjudicated in Weld County alone (versus Weld and Adam Counties) can provide for adequate supply a supportable claim? o Is an alternative, permanent supply proposed for that portion of demand accounted for by Denver Basin supplies? If so, is it adequate? In general, subdivisions in Weld County must demonstrate "adequate water supply," including having a 300-year supply and, where Denver Basin aquifer water is proposed, • alternative renewable water sources as part of a permanent supply plan. (Sections 27- 2-170 & 27-2-210 of the Weld County Code) Thank you for your assistance; we look forward to meeting with you. Please feel free to contact me at the number above. Sincerely, Brad Mueller, Long Range Planner Weld County Planning Services cc: File PK-1125 Monica Daniels-Mika Bruce Barker Trevor Jiricek Kim Ogle • -.est e f,C A Ue (,Da S ?Gen Pert. - • e At-it Q L - • Page 1 of 1 Brad Mueller 411 From: David Bauer Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:05 PM To: Brad Mueller Cc: Drew Scheltinga Subject: Steve Nguyen Our water rights consultant is Steve Nguyen of Clearwater Solutions. His mailing address is 13228 Shadow Canyon Trail, Broomfield, CO 80020, his telephone is (303) 929 — 0758. His Fax number is (303) 464— 8697, and his e-mail is steve@ clearwatercolorado.com . I think he should set up the Pioneer review under a separate invoice number so as to not confuse our gravel pit budgets etc. Thanks, David Bauer Weld County Public Works • 03/05/2007 • Memorandum TO: Monica Mika-Daniels ' DATE: February 26, 2007 • FROM: Brad Mueller COLORADO Department of Planning Services RE: PioneerWater CC: Bruce Barker We have finally received another opinion from the State Engineers Office about the adequacy of water for Pioneer. Their most recent comments indicate that they still have not received enough information for render an opinion regarding the potential for causing material injury to decreed water rights, or the adequacy of the proposed water supply. We will follow up with the applicants and the State to see what next steps are required to resolve these outstanding issues (assuming that they can be resolved). • At this point, the issues concerning water quality are met, since the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment will be reviewing and permitting the water facilities throughout their development. (See the attached comments dated January 24, 2007, from the Weld Department of Public Health and Environment.) However, in the same comment letter, our Weld Health Department is recommending that we contract with a third-party expert to review the overall water situation. Bruce Barker and I also still recommend this, since it offers relatively inexpensive "insurance" for an issue that is of critical importance for the development. We are encouraging this third-party review because of the possible scenario where all State questions are addressed, but that issues outside of their review concern remain. Such issues might be the viability of the distribution system, or how the application is going to "acquire and incorporate into a permanent supply plan, alternative renewable water sources to ensure water supplies for the future." (Section 27-2-170) This last Code requirement is not necessarily something that the State will consider in its review, for example. The biggest concern in wanting third-party review is that, in the complex world of water, we as County staff may not know all the relevant questions to ask. Please let me know if you would like to discuss this more. • 1 STA I E OF COLORADO FFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER *vision of Water Resources io oZ Department of Natural Resources /Q`'(c, 7d, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 i.C4<;F PhoB]6, FAX(303)3 86 -3589 February 13, 2007 Weld County Planning Department FAX 866-3589 GREELEY OFFICE Bill Ritter.Jr. http.Uwww water.state.co.us Governor Brad Mueller FEB 2 L 200? Hams D.Sherman Weld County Planning Department Executive Director 918 10th Street RECEIVED Hal 0 Simpson,P E. Greeley, CO 80631 state Engineer RE: Pioneer Communities — PK-1125 Sections 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 17 and 18, T2N, R64W; Section 32, T3N, R64W and Sections 2, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, T2N, R65W, 6th P.M. Water Division 1, Water District 1 Dear Mr. Mueller: We have reviewed your January 2, 2007 submittal concerning the above referenced proposal to subdivide 5,686 acres ("Subject Land") into 10,070 residential dwelling units (6,110 single family residential lots and18 multi-family lots), 1 commercial lot, 7 school sites/campuses, 8 parks and various utility, agricultural and open space parcels. • Water Supply Demand According to the submittal, the estimated water requirements total 7,260 acre-feet annually. This amount breaks down as shown in the following table: Feature Number Demand/Unit Demand Total Acre-feet/Unit Acre-feet/yr Indoor residential 10,070 ERU 0.265 2,669 • Residential Irrigation 10,070 ERU 0.15 1,510 Non-Residential Potable Use 209 Irrigation of Open Space. Parks Schools 836 and other uses • __________ Agricultural Demand 1.280 acres 2,036 Total Demand I 7,260 According to the water supply plan the 0.265 acre-feet demand per equivalent residential unit ("ERU") is consistent with the demand used by South Adams County Water and Sanitation District ("SACWSD"). According to the applicant SACWSD is in the same proximity as Pioneer Communities and would be an excellent comparison. In addition, the amount is based on a demand of 90 gpcd for 2.63 people per ERU. Based on the justification provided by the applicant the State Engineer's Office does not object to the applicant's assumed demand of 0.265 acre-feet for in-house use. However, if the county requires or prefers that the applicant use a higher number for planning purposes, that information must be provided . prior to further evaluation of the water supply plan. Brad Mueller Page 2 February 13, 2007 According to the water supply plan the amount of water required to satisfy the • agricultural demand is 2,036 acre-feet per year for use on 1,280 acres. It is noted that the map originally provided indicates 1,411 acres of agricultural land. The applicant must clarify if a portion of this land will be fallowed. According to the water supply plan the average allowed irrigated area will be limited to 3,000 square-feet per ERU. The 3,000 square-feet irrigation limitation per lot is based on a weighted average of all irrigation requirements for each of the various residential categories. The 3,000 square-feet is an upper limitation that will not be exceeded on a weighted average calculation. The drawing entitled "South East Weld Mixed Use Development Area" indicates 10 school sites and a neighborhood center, which conflicts with the county's summary on the referral, please reconcile. Source of Water Supply The proposed water source is the Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District ("District"). The District has provided a report which specifies the water resources that will be dedicated to this proposed development. Those water resources are as follows: 1. Alluvial groundwater from Lost Creek in the amount of 3.636.3 acre-feet According to the records available in the State Engineer's Office, with the exception of well 31594-F, the wells referenced in the water supply plan can be used on the Subject Land, for all of the proposed uses, in the amounts specified in the report. • Our records do not show that well permit 31594-F has been approved for use on the Subject Land. The water supply plan claims the well can pump up to 163.9 acre-feet of water annually on the Subject Land, for all of the proposed uses. The water from well 31594-F cannot be claimed as part of the water supply plan until such time as the use of the well has been changed to the proposed uses within the subdivision and the place of use have been changed to the Subject Land. 2. Laramie-Fox Hills ground water that is the subject of Division 1 Water Court case no. 2006CW61 The allowed average annual amount of withdrawal decreed in case no. 2006CW61 from the nontributary Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer is 1,281.9 acre-feet. The proposed uses are allowed by the decree. The Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer is a bedrock aquifer in the Denver Basin. The State Engineer's Office does not have evidence regarding the length of time for which this source will be a physically and economically viable source of water. According to 37- 90-137(4)(b)(I), C.R.S.. "Permits issued pursuant to this subsection (4) shall allow withdrawals on the basis of an aquifer life of one hundred years." Based on this allocation approach, the annual amounts of water decreed in 2006CW61 are equal to one percent of the total amount, as determined by rules 8.A and 8.B of the Statewide Nontributary Ground Water Rules, 2 CCR 402-7. Therefore, the water may be withdrawn in those annual amounts for a maximum of 100 years. • In the Charter and Code of the County of Weld, Colorado, 2001, Sec. 27-2-170. Public water provisions States: Brad Mueller Page 3 February 13, 2007 "PUDs must be capable of meeting state drinking water regulations (Colorado • Primary Drinking Water Regulations) and have adequate provisions for a three- hundred-year supply of water." The State Engineer's Office does not have evidence regarding the length of time for which this source will provide a water supply. However, treating Weld County' s requirement as an allocation approach based on three hundred years, the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal of 1,281.9 acre-feet/year would be reduced to one third of that amount, or 427.3 acre-feet/year. As a result, the water may be withdrawn in that annual amount for a maximum of 300 years. 3. Wastewater treatment Plant return flows The water supply plan states that 95% of the water used indoors will be returned through the Wastewater Treatment plant and will be used for irrigation purposes within the subdivision. According to the applicant a total of 2,535 acre-feet of wastewater return flows will be available to satisfy irrigation demands within the subdivision. According to the referral information the applicant's present plan is to construct a 40 acre storage facility. The applicant estimates that evaporation from the 40 acre facility would be 100 acre-feet. This evaporation loss appears low, therefore, prior to further evaluation of the water supply plan the applicant must clarify how the evaporation loss was calculated. In addition, the applicants estimated return flows of 2,535 acre-feet does not appear to include the return flows from "Non-Residential Potable Use". The applicant must clarify why the return flows from that use are no longer included in the estimate. • 4. Augmentation water used to offset depletions from pumping of the agricultural irrigation wells This water will be provided pursuant to the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District's ("Central") augmentation plan decreed in Division 1 Water Court case no. 2002CW335. For purposes of the water supply plan the applicant assumed that the amount of water available in future years will be the same amount as was covered in 2006 (853 acre-feet). The amount of water available for augmentation under Central's augmentation plan is dependent on the six year projection required under Central's court decree. Since the amount of augmentation water available and depletions from Central's member wells varies annually our office cannot comment on the likelihood that the 853 acre-feet of augmentation water will be available each year. 5. Water provided by the Henrylyn Irrigation District The water supply plan assumes that 120 acre-feet of water will be available annually under the Henrylyn Irrigation District for agricultural irrigation purposes. In response to our previous comment that the applicant must demonstrate that the water supply estimate of 120 acre-feet from the Henrylyn Irrigation District is based on a dry year scenario the applicant responded that the Lost Creek decree permits banking of water supplies from that well field which will permit the supplementation of any shortage from Henrylyn by pumping additional water from the Lost Creek supplies. This comment needs to be clarified since it is unclear from the provided information what the "Lost Creek decree" is and whether water has already been banked under that decree or the applicant plans to bank water in the future. In addition, the applicant must provide the dry-year yield for their Henrylyn Irrigation District supplies. • Prior to using the Henrylyn Irrigation District water for augmentation purposes, to offset depletions from alluvial well pumping, a change of use and augmentation place must be approved by the water court. Any water that is estimated to be pumped in Brad Mueller Page 4 February 13, 2007 accordance with such an augmentation plan cannot be included in this plan until • such time as the augmentation plan has been approved by the water court. 6. Irrigation lawn grass return flows The water supply plan states that 352 acre-feet of water will be available annually from lawn irrigation return flows. The lawn irrigation return flows cannot be claimed as a source in this water supply plan until such time as the return flows have been quantified under a water court decree and the applicant has the legal ability to withdraw the return flows. The Applicant has filed an application with the water court under case no. 2006CW256 to use most of the sources listed above, in addition to other sources, either for direct use in this proposed development or as augmentation sources. In addition the court application includes the request for storage rights in 9 proposed unlined ponds which will be used as part of the Applicant's unified system. From the court application it is clear that the water requirements for the development will be supplied by various sources, some of which require augmentation or changes of water rights. Until such time as a decree is entered by the water court in case no. 2006CW256 the terms and conditions under which the Applicant's water system will be operated are unknown. Therefore, the State Engineer's Office will not be able to determine if the unified system will be adequate to serve the proposed uses within the subdivision until such time as the decree is approved by the water court. State Engineer's Office Opinion Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(I), C.R.S., the State Engineer's Office has not • received enough information to render an opinion regarding the potential for causing material injury to decreed water rights, or the adequacy of the proposed water supply. Should you have any questions, please contact Joanna Williams of this office. Sincerely, Kevin G. Rein, P.E. Chief of Water Supply KGR/JMW cc: Jim Hall, Division 1 Office Water Commissioner Water Supply Branch Subdivision File • • Memorandum Aim TO: Brad Mueller, W.C. Planning DATE: January 24, 2007 C FROM: Pam Smith, W.C. Department of Public COLORADO Health and Enironment CASE NO.: PK-1125 NAME: Pioneer Communities Addendum Submittal The Department has reviewed the additional information submitted for the Sketch Plan phase of this development. The applicant has adequately addressed our comments that were presented in a memorandum dated October 20, 2006. I have provided our original comment and our response below. 1. Pioneer Communities intends to protect and promote the rural and agricultural aspects of the area. With this in mind, will livestock be allowed on the low density lots around the perimeter of the development? RESPONSE: Pg 50 of the Addendum Submittal states that there will be no livestock on these low density lots. This item has been addressed. • 2. A review of the Open Space Plan notes the neighborhood parks in Planning Areas PA-1 and PA-3 have no direct trail connectivity except through the sidewalks. From the detail provided on this Plan it appears that the neighborhood park in Planning Area PA-79 does not have access to the trail. RESPONSE: The lot configurations for PA-1 and PA-3 areas have been redesigned to allow trail connectivity through the open space (previously designated as neighborhood parks that have been converted to open space). PA-79 has not been redesigned; this neighborhood park has been converted to open space. This item has been addressed. 3. At the Change of Zone phase, when a more detailed plan is submitted, the Department will evaluate the proposed development for additional aspects such as public restroom availability at public gathering areas, smart growth principles and progress on the water and sewer approvals. RESPONSE: This comment is still accurate. However, the Addendum provided a copy of the December 12, 2006 Water Court Ruling. As such we reviewed all available information concerning water provisions for the development. These include: • Pioneer Sketch Plan and Addendum • September 29, 2006 Letter from the Colorado Division of Water Resources • December 2, 2005, letterfrom Timothy Buchanan, P.C., to Brad Simons concerning Lost Creek designated groundwater. • • August 17, 2006, draft Pioneer Communities Subdivision Water Resources Report There appears to be one outstanding issue that was raised by the Division of Water Resources concerning well 31594F. However. all of these documents appear to represent that there is an adequate quantity of water available for the development. Given the • complexity of the issue and the fact that the availability of water is a vital factor in the success of the development we recommend that the County contract with a third-party to review the water supply plan for adequacy (in accordance with Section 27-2-170 of the Weld County Code). Due to the large number of people that will reside in the development, the drinking water system that serves the development will be considered a "community water system' per the Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulations and regulated as such. As with any "community water system" issues concerning water quality, treatment, and the distribution system will be addressed through the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division. As a final comment the Department would like to support the applicants' request for a deviation from the standards for local residential streets. They are requesting narrower streets than allowed by County standard. Based upon a myriad of journal articles it has been found that narrower streets calm and slow traffic making the streets safer for pedestrians, bikers, etc. thus improving the opportunities for physical activity. O:\PAM\PLANNING\SKETCH\PK1125 PIONEER ADDENDUM C0MMENTS2.RTF • • Page 1 of 1 Brad Mueller • From: Monica Mika Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 5:20 PM To: Brad Mueller Cc: Bruce Barker Subject: Pioneer Water issue I just finished reading through all of these papers. I have a few follow up questions I was wondering if you could help me with. 1. The consultants spend quite some time on the issue of water quality. What did our Health Dept have to say about this? Water quality is an issue that they routinely comment on. What did the State Health Dept have to say about this issue? 2. Was the indoor demand calculation taken care of? 3. Did the applicants resolve the Ag demand calculations? 4. Has the decree 2006CW61 been signed? 5. Have the wastewater treatment flow issues been resolved Until these have been answered and accepted by the State "as adequate" I do not know what the consultants will be looking at specifically. It appears to me that the State needs more information before they proceed with accepting this application... I think this needs to happen. Lets chat about this, and thanks for putting this all together. Once you get these answer together than we can see where we are. I would also like to see the list of additional questions you are desiring the consultants to tackle. Thanks. • • 01/02/2007 • • DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 1, STATE OF COLORADO Weld County Courthouse 901 9th Avenue P.O. Box 2038 Greeley, Colorado 80632 CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR A COURT USE ONLY A UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS OF RESOURCE Case Number: 06CW061 COLORADO WATER AND SANITATION METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado, acting in an enterprise capacity pursuant to the RESOURCE COLORADO WATER AND SANITATION METROPOLITAN DISTRICT WATER ACTIVITY ).' ENTERPRISE IN WELD COUNTY. Attorneys for Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District: • Timothy R. Buchanan, #12185 Kara Godbehere Goodwin,#36742 TIMOTHY R. BUCHANAN, P.C. 7703 Ralston Road Arvada, Colorado 80002 Telephone: (303)431-9141 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,RULING OF THE REFEREE AND DECREE OF THE WATER COURT The application in this case was filed on February 28,2006(hereinafter"Application"),with the Clerk of the Water Court, Water Division 1. and the Court having reviewed the pleadings and having received evidence regarding the Application, does hereby enter the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Ruling of the Referee and Decree of the Water Court: FINDINGS OF FACT I. The name, address, and telephone number of the Applicant are as follows: Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado,acting in an enterprise • • capacity pursuant to the Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District Water Activity Enterprise 9145 E. Kenyon Avenue, Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80237 Tele: 303-843-9742 Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District(hereinafter"Applicant")has entered into or will enter into an Option Agreement with HP Farms LLC and Pioneer Communities Inc. to purchase the water rights determined pursuant to this Decree. HP Farms LLC is the owner of the property described on Exhibit A to this Decree. Pioneer Communities Inc. is the owner of the property described on Exhibit B to this Decree. 2. The Application was published in the resume for Water Division No. 1 and in the appropriate newspaper in Weld County in conformance with the requirements of Section 37-92-302(3), C.R.S. All notices required by law for the filing of this Application have been fulfilled and the Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Application. 3. The time for filing Statements of Opposition or Entries of Appearance has expired. The following parties filed Statements of Opposition: a. City of Englewood, dated April 19, 2006. • 4. Applicant requested that the Court enter a Decree approving the Application for determination of rights to the ground water in the not nontributary Arapahoe Aquifer underlying approximately six hundred and fifty(650) acres, and the nontributary Laramie- Fox Hills Aquifer underlying approximately five thousand, six hundred and sixty-eight and two-tenths (5,668.02) acres, where the six hundred and fitly (650) acres overlying the Arapahoe Aquifer is encompassed within the five thousand,six hundred and sixty-eight and two-tenths (5,668.02) acres overlying the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer, and such acreage is located as follows: a. Parcel A: A parcel of land being in the Southwest Quarter of Section 4,the East Half of Section 5, all of Sections 7 and 8, portions of Section 9, 17 and 18, Township 2 North, Range 64 West of the 6th P.M. and all of Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the 6`h P.M., as more particularly described on Exhibit A. h. Parcel B: A parcel of land being a portion of the North Half of Section 13, Township 2 North, Range 65 West of the 6"' P.M., as more particularly described on Exhibit A. c. Parcel C: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14 and the Northeast Quarter of Section 15,Township 2 North,Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., as more particularly described on Exhibit A. • • 06CW61 Page 3 d. Parcel D: A parcel of land being a portion of Section 1, all of Section 2, a portion of the east half of Section 11, and a portion of Section 12, Township 2 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., as more particularly described on Exhibit A. e. Parcel E: A parcel of land being a portion of Sections 5, 7 and 8, Township 2 North,Range 64 West of the 6th P.M.,as more particularly described on Exhibit B. f A legal description of Parcels A-D is attached as Exhibit A, and a legal description of Parcel E is attached as Exhibit B. A map of all parcels is attached as Exhibit C. 5. Applicant seeks a determination of its rights to the ground water in the not nontributary Arapahoe and the nontributary Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers underlying the property, being legally described on the attached Exhibits A and B. 6. There are additional claimants of water from the nontributary Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer underlying the boundaries of the property, described as follows: a. Well Permit No. 85467, located in the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 32, Township 3N, • Range 64W of the 6th P.M.,permitted for withdrawal of one(1) af/year of water for domestic and livestock use. b. Well Permit No. 68889, located in the NW 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 9, Township 2N, Range 64W of the 6th P.M., permitted for withdrawal of one and one-half (1.5) of/year of water for livestock use. c. Well Permit No. 229984, located in the SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 9, Township 2N, Range 64W of the 6`h P.M.,permitted for withdrawal of four(4)af/year of water for domestic and livestock use. d. Well Permit No. 71982, located in the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 8, Township 2N, Range 64W of the 6th P.M.,permitted for withdrawal of one(1) afiyear of water for domestic and livestock use. e. Well Permit No. 241545, located in the SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Section I I, Township 2N, Range 65W of the 6th P.M., permitted for one(1)afiyear of water for domestic use. f Well Permit No. 159506, located in the SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 12, Township 2N, Range 65W of the 6th P.M., permitted for one(1) af/year of water for domestic use. 7. The ground water in the Arapahoe Aquifer underlying the boundaries of the property is not nontributary ground water as defined by Section 37-90-103(10.7), C.R.S.,and as defined by s • 06CW61 Page 4 2 CCR 402-6, Rule 5. The ground water in the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer underlying the boundaries of the property is nontributary ground water as defined by Section 37-90- 103(10.5), C.R.S., and as defined by 2 CCR 402-6, Rule 5. 8. The water in the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer is nontributary and therefore the appropriation date of such water rights is not applicable. The appropriation date for not nontributary groundwater from the Arapahoe Aquifer will be February 28, 2006. 9. Withdrawal of water from the not nontributary Arapahoe Aquifer will within 100 years deplete the flow of a natural stream at an annual rate greater than one tenth of one percent of the annual rate of withdrawal. Pursuant to C.R.S. 37-90-137(9)(e), a judicially approved plan for augmentation shall be required prior to use of groundwater from the not nontributary Arapahoe Aquifer underlying the property. Such augmentation plan shall provide for the replacement of actual stream depletions to the extent necessary to prevent any injurious effect based on actual aquifer conditions in existence at the time of the decree. 10. The average specific yield of the Arapahoe Aquifer is seventeen percent (17.0%). The average specific yield of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer is fifteen percent (15.0%). 11. The State Engineer has estimated the average number of feet of saturated aquifer materials in • the Arapahoe Aquifer to be twenty (20) feet, and the average number of feet of saturated aquifer materials in the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer to be one hundred and forty-eight(148) feet. At this time, there is insufficient data regarding the saturated sand thickness of the Arapahoe and Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers to finally determine the quantity of water that may be withdrawn by the Applicant. 12. The State Engineer estimates that there are approximately five hundred and seventy-five (575) acre-feet of not nontributary Arapahoe Aquifer ground water and approximately one hundred twenty-nine thousand, one hundred thirty-four(129,134) acre-feet of nontributary Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer ground water underlying the boundaries of the property. At this time, there is insufficient data regarding the Arapahoe and Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers to finally determine the quantity of water that may be withdrawn by the Applicant. 13. Based on the area of the overlying land and a 100-year aquifer life, the State Engineer has estimated the average annual withdrawal of water that is available from each aquifer as follows: a. Arapahoe Aquifer: 5.7 acre-feet b. Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer: 1,281.9 acre-feet 14. The water will be used for all beneficial purposes.including,but not limited to, commercial, municipal. irrigation and livestock watering,including reuse and successive uses until such water has been entirely consumed. The water may be used through immediate application to • • 06CW61 Page 5 beneficial uses, for storage and subsequent application to beneficial uses, for exchange purposes, for replacement of depletions and for augmentation purposes. 15. Applicant is entitled to locate wells at any point within the boundaries of the property, without the necessity of filing an amendment to the Application, or republishing or petitioning the Court for the reopening of this Decree. See 2 CCR 402-7, Rule 11. 16. Wells completed into the Arapahoe Aquifer will be completed to the bottom of the Aquifer, which the Applicant has estimated to be fifty(50) feet. Wells completed into the Laramie- Fox Hills Aquifer will be completed to the bottom of the Aquifer, which the Applicant has estimated to be seven hundred and fifty(750) feet. The specified depth is approximate and will be determined at the time of drilling the wells according to the actual topographic location of the wells and the depth to the bottom of the aquifer, and in compliance with 2 CCR 402-7, Rule 9. 17. Subject to the following terms and conditions, this Application is approved: a. Arapahoe Aquifer:The allowed average annual amount of withdrawal for each well constructed by Applicant shall be equivalent to one percent(1%)of the product of the specific yield of the aquifer, the actual saturated sand thickness, in feet, at the • location of the parcel, and the land area,in acres, allocated to the well. The specific yield of the Arapahoe Aquifer is seventeen percent (17.0%). The actual saturated sand thickness of the Arapahoe Aquifer shall be determined at the time the Arapahoe Aquifer wells are constructed. The total land area overlying the Arapahoe Aquifer is approximately two thousand, six hundred and sixty-six (2,666) acres. The State Engineer's Office determined the allowed average annual amount of water available for withdrawal to be 5.7 acre-feet. For the purposes of this Decree, the determined amount is 5.7 acre-feet. However, if it is found at the time of construction of the well that the saturated thickness of the soil is higher than anticipated and estimated, Applicant reserves the right to withdraw one hundred(100)acre-feet annually. Each well constructed to withdraw water from the Arapahoe Aquifer shall be a part of a well field with each other well withdrawing ground water from the Arapahoe Aquifer. Applicant shall have the right to withdraw the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal from the Arapahoe Aquifer through any combination of wells drilled into the Arapahoe Aquifer. Applicant shall also have the right to construct such additional wells as may be required to maintain the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal. b. Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer: The allowed average annual amount of withdrawal for each well constructed by Applicant shall be equivalent to one percent (1%) of the product of the specific yield of the aquifer, the actual saturated sand thickness, in feet, at the location of the parcel, and the land area, in acres, allocated to the well. The specific yield of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer is fifteen percent(15.0%). The • • 06CW61 Page 6 actual saturated sand thickness of the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer shall be determined at the time the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer wells are constructed. The total land area overlying the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer is approximately five thousand, six hundred and sixty-eight and two-tenths (5,668.02) acres. The State Engineer's Office determined the allowed average annual amount of water available for withdrawal to be 1,281.9 acre-feet. For the purposes of this Decree, the determined amount is 1,281.9 acre-feet. Each well constructed to withdraw water from the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer shall be a part of a well field with each other well withdrawing ground water from the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer. Applicant shall have the right to withdraw the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal from the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer through any combination of wells drilled into the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifer. Applicant shall also have the right to construct such additional wells as may be required to maintain the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal. c. The allowed annual amount of withdrawal may exceed the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal as long as the total volume of water withdrawn from each aquifer does not exceed the product of the number of years since the date of entry of this Decree, times the allowed average annual amount of withdrawal. 2 CCR 402-7, Rule 8A. • d. The groundwater will be withdrawn at a pumping rate consistent with sound engineering principles and practices.Construction and equipping of the wells will be pursuant to the following conditions: 1. Ground water production from each well will be limited to the aquifer into which the well is drilled. Plain, non-perforated casing will be installed and properly grouted so as to prevent withdrawal of water from more than one aquifer. 2. A totalizing flow meter will be installed on the pump discharge prior to diversion of water beneficial uses.2 CCR 402-7,Rule 15.Annual records of all diversions will be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. 3. Each well will be equipped so that the water level may be measured and monitored. 4. The bore hole of each well below the surface casing will be geophysically logged prior to installation of final casing in conformance with the Statewide Nontributary Ground Water Rules. 2 CCR 402-7, Rule 9. • • 06CW61 Page 7 e. Well permit applications will be filed with the Colorado Division of Water Resources ("State Engineer") at such time as the Applicant is ready to drill wells on the property. The State Engineer shall issue well permits in accordance with the Decree entered herein. Should Applicant fail to construct any well prior to the expiration of the corresponding well permit,Applicant may reapply to the State Engineer for a new well permit and the State Engineer shall issue a new permit identical to the expired well permit. f. The water rights that are the subject of this Application are not "conditional water rights", as that term is defined by Section 37-92-103(6),C.R.S., but are water rights determined by Section 37-90-137, C.R.S. Therefore, Applicant shall not be required to file applications for quadrennial findings of reasonable diligence for the water rights that are the subject of this Application. g. Withdrawal of ground water from the Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers will be subject to the relinquishment of 2%of the amount of water withdrawn as required by Section 37-90-137(9)(b), C.R.S., and by 2 CCR 402-6, Rule 8. 18. No material injury to vested water rights will occur if this Application is granted, subject to • the terms and conditions described herein. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 19. To the extent that any of the Findings of Fact constitute Conclusions of Law,the Findings of Fact are incorporated herein. 20. The Court has jurisdiction over this Application and over all parties. 21. This Application is in accordance with law and should he granted, subject to the terms and conditions contained within this Decree. RULING OF THE REFEREE AND DECREE OF THE COURT 22. The foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are incorporated herein by this reference. 23. The Application for determination of rights to ground water in the not nontributary Arapahoe and the nontributary Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers is granted. subject to the terms and conditions described in this Decree. 17. In accordance with Section 37-92-305(1), C.R.S., the Court retains jurisdiction of this Application to provide for any necessary adjustment, either increase or decrease, of the • allowed average annual amount of withdrawal to conform to actual local aquifer • 06CW61 Page 8 i:.i ii.Rlt Doctment- i}istricl. ( characteristics as determined from analyses o f the saturate rvic less of the aqui fer ob ai.nc ed If Pt Yil t Ua7 , JE:•; t(4 .0 ai 1'i t' iL + as described above. Within sixty days after the completion kweld(.$)ion ctest h4ie s(s);,he Applicant shall file with the State Engineer copies of the ii6111I8gsl frorri3such well(s)or test hole(s). Any person, including the State Engineer, may invoke the Court's retained jurisdiction to make a Final Determination of Water Right. The State Engineer, upon notification of invocation of retained jurisdiction,shall utilize data available to him and make a final Determination of Water Rights Finding within four months and submit the same to the Water Court. 18. Transfer of Water Rights The ground water rights decreed herein are vested property rights decreed to the applicant. The ground water rights decreed herein shall be owned by the applicant or the applicant's successors until such time as the applicant or the applicant's successors expressly convey all or a portion of the water to another entity through a deed that identifies this case number. the specific aquifer, and the annual volume (based on a 100-year aquifer life)or total volume of ground water that is being conveyed. ___\ Entered this day of -,\,c l2006. • BY THE COURT: I I L1;, Raymdnd S. Liesman' Water Referee Water Division No. 1 No protest was filed in this matter. The foregoing is confirmed and approved, and is made the Judgment and Decree of the Court. fi :7105 Entered this day of 2006. BY THE COURT: Roger.A. Klein Water Judge Water Division No. 1 State of Colorado • 11111 1111 11111 111111111 11111 III 11111 111i Ill! 3280274 04/25/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 4 of 31 R,156.00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk&Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION -- PARCEL A SHEET 1 OF 4 PARCEL A A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 5, ALL OF SECTION 7 AND 8, PORTIONS OF SECTION 9, 17 AND 18, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. AND ALL OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 7, AND CONSIDERING THE NORTH LINE OF' THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. TO SEAR NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2450.04 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OE THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH 88'33'53" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2624.23 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH 88'55'59" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST OUARTER OF SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 2637.26 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE NORTH 00'36'02" WEST, ALONG THE [.EST UNE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 2623.67 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE NORTH 00'36'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE "OF 2617.72 FEET TO 'THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE SOUTH 89'00'37" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF THE SOUTHWEST WARIER OF SECTION • 32. A DISTANCE OF 2638.29 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE NORTH 00'24'55" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32. A DISTANCE OF 2629.68 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE NORTH 00'25'26" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 2629.31 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32: THENCE NORTH 88'47'51" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 2635.28 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32. THENCE NORTH 88'48'10" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 2634.89 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE SOUTH 00'29'52" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 2638 79 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE SOUTH 00'29'48- EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 32, A DISTANCE OF 2638.56 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 5: THENCE SOUTH OO14'13" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 2616.95 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE NORTH 89'09'35" EA57, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, A DISTANCE OF 2624.68 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 00'04'11" EAST. ALONG THE EAST LINE CF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER CF SAID SECTION 4, A DISTANCE OF 2624.85 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH 89'13'14" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE or THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4, A DISTANCE OF 2616.60 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 4, THENCE SOUTH 00'12'53" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 9, A DISTANCE OF 150.01 FEET; /7` Carroll& Lange P,otessionsl[opined,&Land SUNeyars 65 Sown Colo do 60243 t 5 Sown unto bi 40128 P.W�E:1303�948-0200 ww(. )94LL-L. MrWW.CMReL L-UNGE.00u P'\3325',E1fNl&TS\PARCEL s,B.C.O.DWG.SHEET I Oi 4,PREP4RED 4/t9/OS.REV • 11111111111111113280274 tine111111ii� XWeld 1County,1111 • 1iii 1111 5 of 31 R 156.00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk& Recorder • LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL A SHEET 2 OF 4 THENCE NORTH 89'13'14" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 5235.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 01'13'26" EAST, ALONG THE EAST UNE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9, A DISTANCE OF 2493.41 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 01'13'28" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9, A DISTANCE OF 1818.33 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 1636, PAGE 232 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN BOOK 1536, PAGE 232 THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES; 1) SOUTH 89'40'42" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1005.00 FEET; 2) SOUTH 01'13'28" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 825.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 89'40'42" WEST, ALONG HE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9, A DISTANCE OF 1658.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 89'40'42" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9, A DISTANCE OF 2663.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 88'54'40" WEST. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 1325.42 FEET TO THE EAST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; • THENCE SOUTH 88'55'39" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 800.86 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THAT RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-17-2-RE2827 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-17-2-RE2827 THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; 1) SOUTH 43'30'34" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 760.92 FEET; 2) SOUTH 28'31'48" WEST. A DISTANCE OF 391.52 FEET; 3) SOUTH 12'08'48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 451.95 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88'57'32" EAST. A DISTANCE CF 31.74 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 05'44'56" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 527,78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 27'52'19" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 537.25 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 01'17'57" EAST, ALONG THE EAST UNE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 317.94 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER LOT B OF THAT RECORDED EXEMPTION 1305-17-3 RE-3467 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS: THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT B RECORDED EXEMPTION 1305-17-3 RE-3467 THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; 1) SOUTH 01'19'55" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 2147.26 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT A OF SAID RECORDED EXEMPTION; 2) SOUTH 89'07'59" WEST, AND ALONG SAID LOT A, A DISTANCE OF 466.59 FEET; 3) SOUTH 01'19'55" EAST, AND ALONG SAID LOT A, A DISTANCE OF 466.69 FEET THENCE NORTH 89'07'59" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 46'5.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17: ft\ Carroll sL Lange P,olesroml 6rrnKs6 LaIRISurveyos 166 FAUN LNIm BM.Stele 156 Labwoa ColDrala 60229 PHONE;(MO 990-0ma FNC(202)980-0917 WW I..CMAQL4AJME.CaM F.\3325\EXX9iTS\PARCEL A.0 C,D0WG. SHEET 2 CF 4,PREPARED 4/19/05,8(0 • • 111111111111IIIII1111111111111111111111II!11(1111111111 3280274 04/25/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 6 of 31 R 156,00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk& Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL A SHEET 3 OF 4 THENCE SOUTH 01'19'55" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17. A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 89'0759" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 1325.58 FEET TO THE WEST SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 17; THENCE SOUTH 89'07'27" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 1295.52 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO, 51: THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51, AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 17, THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES; 1) NORTH 01'19'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2640.25 FEET; 2) NORTH 01'19'32" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1319.95 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT A, RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-17-2-RE2827 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY GE SAID LOT A, RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-17-2-RE2827 THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; 1) NORTH 88'5B'47" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 530.00 FEET; 2) NORTH 0118'51" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 330.00 FEET; 3) SOUTH 88'58'47" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 630.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51; • THENCE NORTH 0118'51" WEST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 17, A DISTANCE OF 990.08 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 88'54'43" WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 88'46'35" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51; THENCE SOUTH 01'18'51" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51 AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 1319.40 FEET TO THE NORTH SIXTEENTH CORNER OF SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH O7'i9'32" EAST, ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51 AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18. A DISTANCE OF 720.15 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT A,RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-18-1 RE-3731 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT A, RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1305-1A-1 RE-3731, THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; I) SOUTH 58'56'49" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 362.81 FEET; 2) SOUTH 01'19'32" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 600.32 FEET; 3) NORTH 88'56'49" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 362,81 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RICHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51; THENCE SOUTH 0"19'00" EAST, ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 51 AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST UNE CF THE SCUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 2639.92 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89'07'45" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 2605.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; fix Carroll a Lange I P,nlfss,o,r Symms&Lana Suv ,,ey, &5 SoutUn,on L'4o0 utl Se'56 LaiwvaLL C0Wn008033E PHWIF(b9)PoO-0IIA I, Fu 1303) OIS-LAJ VJJIW CA ROLLiµGECOM e\3335\EXHIBITS\PARCEL ASI.C.0101t.SHEET 3 Oe 4 PREPARE° ♦/19/03,REV. • • • I I IMII I I111I 1111111111111111 I III 111 1 111 I I 11111111111111 3280274 04/25/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 7 of 31 R 156.00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk& Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION -- PARCEL A SHEET 4 OF 4 THENCE NORTH 01'02'20" WEST, ALONG THE WEST UNE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 2631.61 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18: THENCE SOUTH 8B'56'51" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16, A DISTANCE OF 2401.45 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 49; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE or WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 49, THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: 1) NORTH 00'33'56" WEST AND PARALLEL WTH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 2625.90 FEET; 2) NORTH 00'30'34" WEST AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2613.01 FEET; 3) NORTH 00'30'29" WEST AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7. A DISTANCE OF 2612.77 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 3707.29 ACRES OF LAND. MORE OR LESS. • Carroll &Lange Proleeslenal Engineers 6 Lend Survryon 165 Leval Union BMW.Craw 156 Sholo leaevoo0.Colorado 6022226 PM0RE: 303)060y2Ap FAX(301980.091) W VIW.CARR0i1-lwrK.E,C0b 9\3325\Ex#lpr'S\PARCEL A.B,C.0.OvA7,SXEET 4 0a 4,PREPARED 4/19/05.REV. • • 1111111 1114 1111111111111111111 I I 1111111111111111111 III 328029 of 31 R 156.00 D 9550.00 Steve d Moreno Clerk&Recorder • LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL B SHEET 1 OF 1 PARCEL B A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 65 WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., COUNTY OF WELD. SLATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, AND CONSIDERING THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7. TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. TO BEAR NORTH 88"34'38` EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO THENCE NORTH 00'08'26" WEST, ALONG 7HE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2619.05 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NC. 22; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: 1) SOUTH 89'35'47"EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2595.70 FEET; 2) SOUTH 8936'40" EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 1297.47 FEET; 3) SOUTH 89'37'04' EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 1267.82 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY • RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 49: THENCE SOUTH 0033'56" EAST, ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2595.92 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 89'49'20" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2573.51 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 89'5519" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2606.57 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 309.35 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. eFSCarroll & Lange= Pglezt'ay{EpinrH L.Lane SUMyou 165 Sown Union a a 156 WawOo(6 Colaads 00221 FAAXX L 20 990-0011 CA 0LL4 dGEcou P;\]323\Evu913\PARCEL A,B,C.0,OwG, SHEET 1 OF 1. PREPARED 4/18/05.REV. • 1111111111111111111111111Th 111111111111111111111111111 • 3280274 04/26/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 9 of 31 R 156.00 D 050.00 Steve Moreno Clerk&Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL C SHEET T OF f PARCEL C A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15. TOWNSI-TIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 65 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF WELD. STATE OF COLORADO. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15. AND CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15 TO BEAR NORTH 00'31'05" WEST, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE NORTH 00'31'05" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15, A DISTANCE OF 2625.15 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22; THENCE NORTH 89'38'18" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, A DISTANCE OF 1906.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE BOUNDARY OF LOT A RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1307-15-1-RE-2900 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT A RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1307-15-I-RE-2900 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES; 1) SOUTH 55'02'18" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 693.65 FEET; 2) NORTH 00'14'46" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 72.06 FEET; 3) NORTH 89'38'18" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF PARCEL A RECORDED AT 800K 995, RECEPTION NO..1925403 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0014'46" EAST, ALONG .THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15 AND ALONG SAID PARCEL A, A DISTANCE OF 342.40 FEET; . THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF PARCEL RECORDED AT BOOK 995, RECEPTION NO. 1926403 THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES; 1) NORTH 89'45'12" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 147.00 FEET; 2) NORTH 00'14'46" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 221.13 FEET; 3) NORTH 44'56'06" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 633.47 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22 THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES, I) SOUTH 89'53'06" EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE WES1 HALF OF THE NORTHwE5T QUARTER OF SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 734.65 FEET; 2) SOUTH 89'52'34" EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 554.16 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY QF PARCEL B RECORDED AT BOOK 995. RECEPTION NO. 1926403 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL B, THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES. 1) SOUTH 55'42'52" EAST. A DISTANCE OF 427.41 FEET; 2) SOUTH 0020'11" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET; 3) SOUTH 45'02'37" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 604.58 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14: THENCE SOUTH 00'20'03" EAST. ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 599.27 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14; THENCE NORTH 89'54'02" WEST. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, A DISTANCE OF 2664.25 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15; THENCE SOUTH 00'14'46" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, A DISTANCE OF 1326.20 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 'THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE SOUTH 89'35'05" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, A DISTANCE OF 2660.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 225.47 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. 1'\ Carroll & Lange P,oeassroW Enpinevrs 4 land Surrryaa `1' 705 sown union 0-0 .S t IM t raa«ood.Colorado do =0331°4=42W X(2 3)90 990.0200 WW f3031 IOLL-AN VTMlt.CARROLL-MNGE.CAN Pr\3325\Ex eiTS\PARCEL AB.C,00w0.SHUT t or 1,9RERAREO s/ta/Da RCv. • • 111111111111111111111111111111101111111111111 3280274 04/25/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 10 of 31 R 156.00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk& Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION -- PARCEL D SHEET 1 OF 2 PARCEL D A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 1, ALL OF SECTION 2, A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 11, AND A PORTION OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 65 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF' SECTION 2, AND CONSIDERING THE NORTH UNE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. TO BEAR NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO THENCE SOUTH 89'03'34" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 2537.82 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 89'49'07" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH UNE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 2610.24 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 02'07'44" EAST, ALONG THE EAST UNE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 2446.69 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2; THENCE SOUTH 02'07'56" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2 A DISTANCE OF 2616.64 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 2; • THENCE SOUTH 88'23'24" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER 'OF SECTION 12,, A DISTANCE OF 2212.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74'29'42" EAST, ALONG A COURSE IN THE SOUTH HALF OF' SAID SECTION 1, A DISTANCE OF 391.46 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89'39'42" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 228.39 FEET; • THENCE SOUTH 00'21'03" EAST. A DISTANCE OF 123.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 12; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH OO'21'03" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1453.13 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 30'32'58- EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1320.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87'00'20" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1636.76 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 49; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 49 THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES; 1) SOUTH CO'30'29" EAST AND PARALLEL WTH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 1.06 FEET; 2) SOUTH 00'30'34" EAST AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2583.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Or WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22 THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES. 1) NORTH 89'37'04" WEST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH UNE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 1267.25 FEET; 2) NORTH 89.36'40" WEST AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, A DISTANCE OF 1297.79 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 12; 3) NORTH 89'36'47" WEST AND PARALLEL WTH THE NORTH UNE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2234.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 892, RECEPTION NO. 1814338 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; erIN Carroll& Lange V PH 745,1Oey Engineers b Land fi,rvayps `� 155 South e6,,5040 6O 8 2e 156 PHONE 19051 900.02000 1:NC/309)91-09s7 MM'W.CNIH0LL•W V 0F.C OM P\2225' O'1JB11S\PMC£L A.B.C,bOWG.SHEE?1 a 2.PRCPAOID 4/19/05.01V • 1111111 IIIII 11111 111111 11111 FIB 111111111 II! III! 3280274 04/25/2005 01:43P Weld County, CO 11 of 31 R 156.00 0 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk& Reeordel LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL D SHEET 2 OF 2 THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; 1) NORTH 00'23'13" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 360.00 FEET; 2) NORTH 89'36'47' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 360.00 FEET; 3 SOUTH 00'23'13" WEST. A DISTANCE OF 360.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NC. 22: THENCE NORTH 89'36'47" WEST. ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE. A DISTANCE OF 0.94 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, SAID POINT ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT A, RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1307-It-4-AMRE-586 OF THE WELD COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF LOT A, RECORDED EXEMPTION NO. 1307-I1-4-AMRE-586. THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES; I) NORTH 00'03'07" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 260.00 FEET; 2) NORTH 89'52'39' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET; 3) SOUTH 00'03'07" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 260.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Cr SAID WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22: THENCE NORTH 89'52'39" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11, AND ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 22. A DISTANCE OF 2362.46 FEET TO A POINT-ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11; • THENCE NORTH 00'07'19" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 2629.89 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11: THENCE NORTH 00'07'10" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 11, A DISTANCE OF 2660.27 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11; THENCE SOUTH 89'48'19" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF-SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 2677.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 00'02'04" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2. A-DISTANCE•OF 2647.61 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 00'25'50" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 2480.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 1425.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. • • • TOTAL NET AREA OF PARCELS A, B, C. & D '5 5667.70 ACRES, MORE OR LESS �� Carroll & Lange w1/4 alma,Fnpm,pt 5 1 1 Survemu 65 Umm�eb 04c b, 156 L20s,woo0 E.Cc Wapp 0022628 PROVE 1361)960.0 0 FA;tpD 9900w 7 WWW. IiNL^2 C04 P.\]325\COOPS pARRCEL A,O,GD.Dw6.5 CEt 2 Or 2,PREPARED 4/19/05,REV. • • 111111111111(114111111111111(1111! 1iIIi111111111111111 • 3280274 0412612906 950.. Wd 12 of 31 R 166.00 D 950.00 Steve Moreno Clerk&Recorder LEGAL DESCRIPTION - 880AC SHEET 1 OF 1 EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF SECTIONS 5, 7 & 8, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 64 WEST OF THE SIXTH P.M., COUNTY OF WELD, STATE OF COLORADO. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, AND CONSIDERING THE NORTH UNE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7 TO BEAR NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO; THENCE NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO, 49 BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 88'34'38" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7. A DISTANCE OF 2450.04 FEET TO THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH 88'33'53" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2624.23 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH 88'55'59" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 2637.26 FEET TO THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE NORTH 00'36'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 2623.67 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE NORTH 00'36'02" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER Of SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 1700.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88'59'25" EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 2632.99 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE SOUTH 0014'13" EAST. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A All DISTANCE OF 1699.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5: THENCE SOUTH 00'14'43" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 5, A DISTANCE OF 2621.96 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 00'12'53" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 2622.17 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 88'54'32" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 2627.98 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8. THENCE SOUTH 88'56'54" WEST. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8, A DISTANCE OF 2643.93 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH 88'40'30" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST OUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, A OtSTANCE OF 2617.05 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, THENCE SOUTH 88'40'30" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST OUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 2414.97 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WELD COUNTY ROAD NO. 49. THENCE NORTH 00'30'29" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER Of SECTION 7 AND ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 2612..77 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING A CALCULATED AREA OF 880.00 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. /FM Carroll&Lange PrWeulaual Endowthe d Lena Sur.e)ora 1S3 South CoIen thud.State 136 Lake .1 3) 000960228 PHO 1019 -a91V D FAIL-.CARR00.0977 wW W.CMROll1iV`'OEC:OM P:\3325\cxnitr TS\PARCEL A,9,C,O.OWO,SHEET 1 CP I,PREPANE13 4/18/05.RLV. • -- 1 • ,I • - .- - - I ;I ? / ({i �r .I T ' q , kl �fE / o �� • x . � I W = p :. pk : tJf • , 4i 91:") On��... S t:: O `,•1> , U 5 _. qqf6� o ` l 4:-. C^ - ,< -� mac (j()o_ ��,� ��.0 _- . it ij 1 O 1. fb, ,'*. Z U CO N m o.. ---- • �V WATER water rights • planning • engineering MEMORANDUM CWS File#07-160 To: Brad Mueller.Weld County Planning Department From: Steve Nguyen, P.E. Date: 9-19-07 Subject: Invoice#1277 for Pioneer Communities Review—September 2007 Please find enclosed our invoice for professional consulting services rendered from 6-21-07 to 9-18-07. The total due is $447.50. Below is a summary of your project account. Phase { Current Invoice Project Budget Remaining Budget A—General i $0.00 $13,651.00 $0.00 B—On-Going Services $447.50 - - Total $447.50 I $13,651.00 i $0.00 A detail of the value provided by Clear Water Solutions, Inc. for this billing period is as follows. Phase B—On-Going Services • Reviewed response from TZA • Made final evaluation • Drafted final communication to Brad Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions regarding your invoice or project. We appreciate your business. • ..__...._.__._.................... ........ 8010 S.County Road 5,Ste. 105 I Windsor,CO 80528 i (T)970.223.3706 I (F)970.223.3763 I www.clearwatercolorado.com P� • -WATER ' water rights • planning • engineering INVOICE -#1277 September 19, 2007 Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department CWS Job# 07-160 918 10th Street Project: Weld County Pioneer Communities Greeley, CO 80631 Billing Period: 6-21-07 through 9-18-07 Professional Fees Phase A— Engineering Report Hours Earned Project Manager II 1.5 $202.50 Senior Water Resources Eng III 2.0 $200.00 Administrative 1.0 $45.00 Professional Fees Total $447.50 Reimbursable Expenses • Reimbursable Expenses Total $0.00 Total this Billing Period $447.50 Past Amount Due $0.00 INVOICE TOTAL $447.50 7) U�' Arnie Baughman, Office Administrator Please Remit Payment to: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. 8010 South County Road. Suite 105 Windsor, CO 80528 We thank you for your business!! • Nc G ,rGrtmcnl 47lzrha- • oi WATER c if {; f . : R C E V L:Li water rights • planning • engineering MEMORANDUM CWS File#07-160 To: Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department From: Steve Nguyen, P.E. St= Date: 6-21-07 Subject: Invoice#1218 for Pioneer Communities Review—June 2007 Please find enclosed our invoice for professional consulting services rendered from 5-17-07 to 6-20-07. The total due is $2,160.63. Below is a summary of your project account. Phase Current Invoice Project Budget Remaining Budget A— General $2,160.63 $13,651.00 $0.00 Total $2,160.63 $13,651.00 $0.00 • A detail of the value provided by Clear Water Solutions, Inc. for this billing period is as follows. Phase A—Pioneer Communities Review • Complete final report to Weld County Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions regarding your invoice or project. We appreciate your business. • 8010 S.County Road 5,Ste.105 I Windsor, co 80528 I (T)970.223,3706 I (F)970.223.3763 I www.clearwatercolorado.com clearWATERsa!!Hyons ,water rights • planning • engineering INVOICE -#1218 June 21, 2007 Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department CWS Job# 07-160 918 10th Street Project: Weld County Pioneer Communities Greeley, CO 80631 Billing Period: 5-17-07 through 6-20-07 Professional Fees Phase A— Engineering Report Hours Earned Project Manager II 9.0 $1,215.00 Senior Water Resources Eng III 8.0 $800.00 Administrative 1.0 $45.00 Professional Fees Total $2,060.00 Reimbursable Expenses • Office Supplies/Reproduction $1 00.63 Reimbursable Expenses Total $100.63 Total this Billing Period $2,160.63 Past Amount Due $0.00 INVOICE TOTAL $2,160.63 Racole Nguyen, Office Administrator Please Remit Payment to: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. 8010 South County Road, Suite 105 Windsor, CO 80528 We thank you for your business!! • % f Weld County PI°-rv•— n._. • GREE! .. clearWATERsolut ons . MAY 2 zrrU7 water rights • planning • engineering REC MEMORANDUM CWS File#07-160 To: Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department From: Steve Nguyen, P.E. sN Date: 5-17-07 Subject: Invoice #1199 for Pioneer Communities Review— May 2007 Please find enclosed our invoice for professional consulting services rendered from 4-23-07 to 5-16-07. The total due is $4,719.53. Below is a summary of your project account. Phase Current Invoice Project Budget Remaining Budget I A—General $4,719.53 $13,651.00 $2,160.63 Total $4,719.53 $13,651.00 $2,160.63 • A detail of the value provided by Clear Water Solutions, Inc. for this billing period is as follows. Phase A—Pioneer Communities Review • Review of additional materials for project • Meeting with State Engineer's Office on 5-1-07 to compare findings, discuss project issues, etc. • Project update meeting with Brad Mueller 5-2-07 • Summarize all project findings - supplies, demands, sources • Begin drafting report Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions regarding your invoice or project. We appreciate your business. • 8010 S.County Road 5,Ste.105 I Windsor,CO 80528 I (T)970.223.3706 I (F) 970.223.3763 I www.clearwatercolorado.com • ( CC?rWATER°, „ . water rights • planning • engineering INVOICE -#1199 May 17, 2007 Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department CWS Job# 07-160 918 10th Street Project Weld County Pioneer Communities Greeley, CO 80631 Billing Period: 4-23-07 through 5-16-07 Professional Fees Phase A—Engineering Report Hours Earned Project Manager II 3.5 $472.50 Senior Water Resources Eng III 40.25 $4,025.00 Administrative 2.0 $90.00 Professional Fees Total $4,587.50 Reimbursable Expenses • Adams County Documents $7.98 Office Utilities $49.29 Mileage— 140 Miles $74.76 Reimbursable Expenses Total $132.03 Total this Billing Period $4,719.53 Past Amount Due $0.00 INVOICE TOTAL $4,719.53 Racole Nguyen, Office Administrator Please Remit Payment to: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. 8010 South County Road, Suite 105 Windsor, CO 80528 • We thank you for your business!! Weld LOnntYEEL PlanningOFFICE Department • GREY ate 1-WATER: water rights • planning • engineering RECEIVE MEMORANDUM CWS File#07-160 To: Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department From: Steve Nguyen, P.E. St Date: 4-23-07 Subject: Invoice#1181 for Pioneer Communities Review— April 2007 Please find enclosed our invoice for professional consulting services rendered from 3-27-07 to 4-22-07. The total due is $6,770.84. Below is a summary of your project account. Phase Current Invoice Project Budget I Remaining Budget A—General $6,770.84 , $13,651.00 $6,880.16 Total $6,770.84 $13,651.00 $6,880.16 • A detail of the value provided by Clear Water Solutions, Inc. for this billing period is as follows. Phase A—Pioneer Communities Review • Review materials from Weld County • Review Denver Basin groundwater rules • Commenced calculation verification • Coordinate with Weld County on additional information needed • List decrees needed Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions regarding your invoice or project. We appreciate your business. • 8010 S.County Road 5,Ste.105 I Windsor,CO 80528 (T)970.223.3706 I (F) 970.223.3763 I www.ciearwatercolorado.com • is _ rWATERs; =aS water rights • planning • engineering INVOICE -#1181 April 23, 2007 Brad Mueller, Weld County Planning Department CWS Job# 07-160 918 10th Street Project: Weld County Pioneer Communities Greeley, CO 80631 Billing Period: 3-27-07 through 4-22-07 Professional Fees Phase A— Engineering Report Hours Earned Project Manager II 2.5 $337.50 Senior Water Resources Eng III 63.0 $6,300.00 Administrative 2.0 $90.00 Professional Fees Total $6, 727.50 Reimbursable Expenses • Maps $13.20 Office Utilities $30.14 Reimbursable Expenses Total $43.34 Total this Billing Period $6,770.84 Past Amount Due $0.00 INVOICE TOTAL $6,770.84 Racole Nguyen, Office Administrator Please Remit Payment to: Clear Water Solutions, Inc. 8010 South County Road, Suite 105 Windsor, CO 80528 We thank you for your business!! • Pioneer Communities, Inc Resource Colorado Water & Sanitation Metro District Offsite Facility Plan with Production Zones " ,Inc. / ' r.. wce zo • Production Zone D KEENESBURG '-\\ 6 CJ Lord 1 ('� B , \ Reservoir t. Prospect Valley , •dl wCRl,. 1 Production Zone B & C N ' I r. W , F } cren 40-g 6 I I NH Deis wca 6 • �as,�a�;- , _„ 0 1 2 3 4 • L 5 ' Miles a o �C....,___, a ;mot _ 1 inch equals 2 miles ok ,- 1. v _ Weld County �"• �� O Proposed S. Platte Regional WWTP I * Proposed Pioneer WWTP Adams County - - - 2010 Production Zone A North "°'"AVE t A —•—•- 2012 Production Zone A South i i Production Zone D a,orIev L ,, 152nd i._. es. Primary Pioneer H2O Transmission Main ?LLLL II Production Zones Will AVE • t i _ Box Elder Creek • • Lost Creek "°'°°°` ''% South Platte River Production Zone A Highways IP lam AVE I' Li Cities 'I IT MiIton '4��y,. ) FicterKu PLATTEVILLE - •I5 e• ♦ t • r :or 3 ♦ _. I / t ♦ m( \ I t KIu9 t fleuervBreached t an MR le I Pioneer Corn 't t L �-A\ ...,,,e cij HF t ri __IL ? / • ,. __.,. c i t' - 1, _ ( — c. \+FORT LUPTON wunwa�ea a HUDSON; ri //I/ 1. t JI \ ? , \ g e f / (-1.------Q i -----,) �` LOCHBUIE °1 " [ t I . 3w` �\ U Hrve e; Rosery m c,`oc�l t Hacervm• e L rj• Ele ji rrf-... i tYBRIGHTON /(/ 4 f ��•1} �� f V I`\ ` -_ ) r 0,2‘'-' 4 ek( / N . COMMERCE CITY Page 1 of 2 Brad Mueller WASTEWATEC • From: Connie O'Neill [connie@nfrwgpa.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:42 AM To: Brad Mueller Subject: FW: Cash Flow tables for Resource Colorado-Wastewater Utility Plan Attachments: 05-01-2007 RCMD 10-Year Cash Flow Estimate.pdf Brad, Here is the summary table submitted by Resource Colorado to fulfill on of the conditions of their utility plan approval. As we discussed on the phone, I think this table will satisfy the committee but I am still waiting to hear from some of them. Connie From: Malesky, Carol [mailto:CMalesky@PIRNIE.COM] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:12 PM To: Connie O'Neill Cc: Nicole Adams; Aranda, Fernando Subject: RE: Cash Flow tables for Resource Colorado-Wastewater Utility Plan Connie, Please see the revised table which I believe gives you the information you requested. Please let me know if you need anything else or have any questions regarding this submittal. Regards, Carol • Carol Malesky RI`I)O1R t.OiNSCI.'1INC, 303-316-6542 From: Connie O'Neill [mailto:connie@nfrwqpa.org] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:14 AM To: Malesky, Carol Subject: RE: Cash Flow tables for Resource Colorado-Wastewater Utility Plan Carol, Thanks for sending the tables. These tables were included in the revised information that was submitted from Resource Colorado. It is great that they have been updated to reflect a 10 year planning period however, I think we are still looking for something that brings this all together. I think what the Committee wants to see is a consolidated table that shows all the revenue and all the expenses together that can demonstrate there is enough money to cover everything, where the money has to come from to cover everything, and that all appropriate expenses have been considered. I hope that helps. Let me know if you have other questions. Connie From: Malesky, Carol [mailto:CMalesky@PIRNIE.COM] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:37 PM To: connie@nfrwqpa.org Cc: Nicole Adams Subject: Cash Flow tables for Resource Colorado-Wastewater Utility Plan Connie and Nicole, I have attached a file with four cash flow tables included. These tables show all the sources of funds and uses of funds separately accounted for the following: 10/03/2007 Page 2 of 2 Wastewater utility(includes developer advances and user charges as sources of funds; uses includes maintaining a minimum fund balance equal to 60 days of O&M expenses) • Reuse utility (includes the same) Capital construction fund (includes wastewater and reuse tap fees and revenue bonds as sources of funds; uses of funds include debt service payments, capital project expenditures, and repayment of developer advances) Debt service fund (shows payments from the wastewater and reuse utilities for repayment of debt service) Please let me know if this fills your needs for a summary of revenues and expenses. If it does not, I would be happy to condense these and add any other information items you need. Regards, Carol Carol Malesky Principal Consultant R[L ' CONSULTING 100 Fillmore Street, Ste 200 Denver, CO 80206 Direct: 303-316-6542 • • 10/03/2007 3S pm y oo�gpipmo p°p Pri2_oo2 v a A. CC • N 2 1�t�l N g N 4 s N Si1 (ySry ES. y M tl O W N p N N W 8 2 n$ 0 0 l'1 D 0 I m N 1_ I '- 6R°°8 o o 8 h,--, N I^ I 8$ N N S N 8 aO I R h 12 ONO N NN N ID I �j N N N N YI N M ON Oy Q OOSn 0 I Q ' M Otl NOOG1 I r p,...., s4 O M O.Qp_.4A- G. o,.�n E 4E pay 8 8 Q. i 8_ - e! N N 46 O N el I Q N �W(1 N Sig CO. 3 ry N M I. 0 I� h N - . .-q N N N N N N 4- * ao ooNgG n a I $ Pmccg I n_ ',.- V o 8� N m Ip pNf O' O O , YI Q m I tl I �tp/ M y Od0 NmN N N I $ .4N Nf_ E W O O N 11 N y y M N dpP m� �� oo�ro m I n voom Sp.; Sim 8 $ O pp.. mWN at CO O ppr . O CO. ,4. N t`1 I Ol I ' ' I W en N N N I I .. EN r ss 88 N N 8 p N mN N m� 01 OOM1OO.��0 la, p ao I �<rPg2ORON I n o IV, 28 N N m 0$ I O N Y 4 8 0 N3 : R 14 N M M N m 1 ca Y N ^ I Q .'-..4' { f y H H mm N u (sN el r) O O V.s1O Oh'1 m i N PItl 80181g� 11 m N OOi� 8 Q� N O1 1!1 r.. O 8 �p8 M SO O. I N. N Ytlf off Cl Is. I S I g S Vl t O INi I s N . N N N IS N I M y kri N N N N • rp "vg '�R'm_Q v• .NOO. ' 0 m I . aim q O A p I N N L` N rsi N O� h a t7 pi• N OOON. I r I eS N N N N N M N 8• rF47. 8 8 8NO I g 8 1 $ NmOON I tl 1 N 82 O V f�l N '488" I 10 I Ti, N I N II q M M 0.1 m N N Op mN N o N N o 8• N 00 W O I N I 7. o O N I o p I a s.N N es. h- 60r.:0 I N O ' 8 WO t',f 8 8 1 8 a 18 .. N W YI N y p O M 00 O O O O R I g N N 2 0 8 0 0 I § N I N $g N I � ,. IAy § I1 mI �p �� W yN�� fm� � op M N N N O 2 M `m yc a a g r m ^ a m E 5 a `cc LL $ 4 a E o flflhj}IIII I 9 y.+ q ' z' m 'iii L N C Ep Ng 'L C ppy C� s• F 4 U ■ m LL tai Q j t LL { f V U� d O ymm r rr$ o �N ■ m$o a 'c�K�U (' Hw '^ c Page 1 oft Brad Mueller • From: Brad Mueller Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 3:33 PM To: Connie O'Neill Cc: Brad Mueller; Bruce Barker; Kim Ogle Subject: FW: follow up from Utility Plan meeting Attachments: App D -Tab 20 - Wastewater Service Agreement.pdf Connie, Thank you for passing along another copy of the proposed sewer service structure for Pioneer. My review of this didn't result in any surprises. Basically, it says that the financing district members (i.e., Pioneer Districts 1 —6, i.e., the residents) will be paying for the initial local infrastructure cost ("local tap fee component"), paying another set of tap fees to the service district (i.e., Pioneer Regional) and the wholesaler(i.e., Resource Colorado), and paying a service fee to the service district and the wholesaler. So there will be a 3-component tap fee to home developers and then —like the monthly phone bill —there will be a couple different fee components on the monthly service bill. • Structurally, the set-up is consistent with what was proposed with the Metropolitan District Service Plans. That is, the local financing districts bond the local improvements and pay the regional district for service. The regional district is responsible for the community-wide infrastructure, and contracts the service with the wholesaler, who owns the wastewater treatment facility and the larger area-wide infrastructure. However, while the governance of the districts and the logistics of the system are consistent, the unknown may • still be the fiscal viability. That is, now that we know more specifically the utility plans, there could be an analysis as to whether that physical plan can be adequately funded by the Metropolitan Service Plans presented last year. If there is a major disconnect between cost and funding, then the County would need to determine whether "adequate" sewer service is available. ("Adequate sewer service" is a re-zoning criterion.) As we briefly discussed, the County is deferring to the NFRWQA to their determination of the adequacy of the system for the time being. So you're aware, however, the County Attorney has agreed that if the Association finds it unnecessary for its processes to go to the level of fiscal analysis described above, then the County may need to undertake that task. (The Attorney's Office has traditionally acted in the role of determining adequate water and sewer service for new development.) This would be consistent with fiscal/logistical viability analyses that are being done for streets and water service. A bit longer response than you were probably anticipating, but I wanted to make you aware of some of the thinking ahead that we are doing, in anticipation of Pioneer's rezoning request. Let me know if you have any questions or thoughts. Brad Mueller Weld County Planning Services From: Connie O'Neill [mailto:connie@nfrwgpa.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 2:40 PM To: Brad Mueller Subject: FW: follow up from Utility Plan meeting Here is the e-mail with Tab 20. • Connie 04/24/2007 Page 1 of 1 Brad Mueller • From: Connie O'Neill [connie@nfrwgpa.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:53 PM To: Brad Mueller Subject: follow up from Utility Plan meeting Attachments: App D -Tab 20 -Wastewater Service Agreement.pdf Brad, Here is the memo—Tab 20—that I said I would e-mail to you this morning at the Utility Plan meeting. Let me know if you have questions. Connie O'Neill Manager North Front Range Water Quality Planning Association 500 East Third Loveland, Colorado 80537 phone: 970-962-2785 fax: 970-962-2913 • • 10/03/2007 • DRAFT McGEADY SISNEROS, P.C. 3/5/07 MEMORANDUM To: Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District Board of Directors Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District Board of Directors Pioneer Metropolitan District Nos. 1 —6 Boards of Directors From: McGeady Sisneros Date: March 5, 2007 Re: Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District, Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District, and Pioneer Metropolitan District Nos. 1 —6 Wastewater Service Agreements Proposed Term Sheet Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District(defined below) will be the regional provider of wastewater collection and treatment services for the Pioneer Community. The Pioneer Regional District(defined below) is anticipated to be the point of contact with end-users within the Pioneer Community for local service, payment of tap fees and • billing of wastewater service. The wastewater system to serve the Pioneer Community will have three tiers. The first tier consists of a localized wastewater collection system for households within each of the Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 (defined below). This localized collection system will connect to a Pioneer regional wastewater collection system central to the entire Pioneer Community. These first two tiers will be owned, operated and maintained by Pioneer Regional District. Finally, the Pioneer Community system will connect to the Resource District's interceptor sewer system that will transport wastewater for treatment at the Resource District's wastewater treatment plant. One or more intergovernmental agreements will provide for the comprehensive funding, construction, operation and maintenance of the Resource District Wastewater System and the Pioneer Sewer System. • {00091984.DOC v31 1 • 1. Definitions of Entities Providing and Receiving Services. (a) Pioneer Community. The Pioneer Community development located in Weld County, Colorado that is within the service areas of the Pioneer Regional District and Pioneer District Nos. 1 — 6. (b) Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. Pioneer Metropolitan District Nos. 1 —6, each a quasi municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado. (c) Pioneer Regional District. The Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado acting by and through its Pioneer Regional Metropolitan District Water District Activity Enterprise that is authorized pursuant to its service plan to and will provide wastewater services to the Pioneer Community. (d) Resource District. The Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District, a quasi municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado acting by and through its Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District Wastewater Activity Enterprise, that is authorized pursuant to its service plan and Rules and Regulations to provide wholesale wastewater collection and treatment service to Service Providers, including Pioneer Regional District. (e) Service Providers. Municipal or quasi-municipal entities in Weld and Adams Counties, such as Pioneer Regional District, that provide for the collection and • transportation of wastewater generated by individual users to Resource District for treatment and discharge. . 2. Definitions Relating to the Wastewater System. (a) Extensions. (i) Local Extensions. Wastewater interceptor sewers or wastewater or sewer service lines that are less than 12" in diameter and are specific to, in terms of both location and sizing, each of the Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. (ii) Regional Extensions. Wastewater interceptor sewers or wastewater or sewer service lines that are less than 24" in diameter located throughout the Pioneer Community to collect wastewater from one or more connection points with Local Extensions for transportation to one or more connection points to Resource Extensions. (iii) Resource Extensions. Wastewater interceptor sewers, sewer or wastewater main lines or wastewater service lines that are 24" in diameter or greater that are required in order for the Resource District to provide wastewater services to the Pioneer Regional District to one or more connection points with Regional Extensions. (b) Pioneer Local Collection System. All structures,facilities, Local Extensions, and equipment owned and used by the Pioneer Regional District for collecting, • {00O91984 DOC 8:3) 2 • pumping and transporting wastewater, specific to one or more of the Pioneer District Nos. I —6, to one or more wastewater service connection points of the Pioneer Sewer System. (c) Pioneer Sewer System. All structures, facilities, Regional Extensions, and equipment owned and used by the Pioneer Regional District for collecting, pumping and transporting wastewater within the Pioneer Regional District service area to one or more wastewater connection points of the Resource District Wastewater System. (d) Resource District Wastewater System. All components of the Resource District's wastewater collection system and Wastewater Treatment Plant, including but not by way of limitation (i) all structures,facilities, Resource Extensions, and equipment, owned and used by the Resource District for collecting, pumping and transporting wastewater from one or more wastewater connection points of the Pioneer Sewer System to the Resource District Wastewater System; and(ii) all structures,facilities and equipment for treating wastewater prior to discharge or disposal, including the Waste Water Treatment Plant. (e) Wastewater Treatment Plant. The wastewater treatment plant proposed to be owned and operated by Resource District to initially serve the Pioneer Community that may be expanded to serve other Service Providers within Resource District's service area. 3. Definitions Relating to Fees and Charges. Tap fees will be charged by Resource District and Pioneer Regional District for all capital • costs associated with providing the necessary wastewater facilities to serve the Pioneer Community. Individual users of the system will pay service charges to Resource District and Pioneer Regional District for the operation of the systems, including the Local Collection Systems. (a) Pioneer Regional District Tap Fees. All fees and charges levied by Pioneer Regional District, including all system development, capital, or plant investment fees necessary to provide funding for the costs associated with the construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement or enlargement of the Pioneer Sewer System and Local Collection Systems. The tap fee will also include a component to recover all capital costs and expenses associated with the Resource District Wastewater System necessary to serve the Pioneer Community, and fees and charges levied for connection to the Resource District Wastewater System. (b) Pioneer Regional District Service Charges. All fees and charges levied by Pioneer Regional District for the provision of service from the Pioneer Sewer System, including fees and charges necessary to operate and maintain the Pioneer Sewer System and Pioneer Local Collection Systems and a component to recover all service charges levied by the Resource District for regional service from the Resource District Wastewater System. (c) Resource District System Development Charges. All system development, capital, or plant investment fees necessary to provide funding for the costs associated with the construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement or enlargement of the Resource District Wastewater System levied by Resource District, as set forth in and defined in Sections 2.2.3 (a) and (b) of the Resource District Rules and Regulations. S (00091984.DOC v:3) 3 • (d) Resource District Connection Fees. All fees and charges levied by Resource District for connection to the Resource District Wastewater System, as defined in Section 2.2.3 (a) and (c) of the Resource District Rules and Regulations. (e) Resource District Service Charges. All fees and charges levied by Resource District for service from the Resource District Wastewater System, as defined in Section 2.2.3 (a)and (d) of the Resource District Rules and Regulations. Service charges will include those fees and charges necessary to operate and maintain the Resource District Wastewater System. 4. Resource District - Pioneer Regional District Intergovernmental Agreements. (a) Capital Construction, Operation and Maintenance. (i) Resource District will be responsible for construction, construction administration, reconstruction, repair, replacement or enlargement of the Resource District Wastewater System. Resource District will own, operate and maintain the Resource District Wastewater System. (ii) Pioneer Regional District will be responsible for construction, construction administration, reconstruction, repair, replacement or enlargement of the Pioneer Sewer System. The Pioneer Regional District will own, operate and maintain the Pioneer Sewer System. Pioneer Regional District will pay for the cost of operation and maintenance of the • Resource Extensions even though those extensions will be owned by Resource District and operated and maintained by Resource District. (b) Service. (i) Pioneer Regional District will enter into a connector agreement with Resource District whereby Pioneer Regional District is legally bound to accept and to pay for wastewater service by the Resource District. (ii) Pioneer Regional District will provide direct service to individual users within the boundaries of Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. (c) Funding. (i) Resource District will administer the levy and collection of the Resource District System Development Charges, the Resource District Connection Fees, and the Resource District Service Charges. (ii) Pioneer Regional District will administer the levy and collection of the Pioneer Regional District Tap Fees. In order for Pioneer Regional District to recover a portion of the capital fees and charges of the Resource District, Pioneer Regional District will agree to include within its Pioneer Regional District Tap Fees, a component to cover the Resource District System Development Charges and Resource District Connection Fees. • {00091984 DOC r3) 4 • (iii) Pioneer Regional District will administer the levy and collection of the Pioneer Regional District Service Charges for service to individual users within Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 and for the costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the Pioneer Sewer System and the Pioneer Local Collection Systems. The Pioneer Regional District will include a component of the Resource District Service Charges for the operation and maintenance of the Resource District Wastewater System in its Pioneer Regional District Service Charge. 5. Pioneer Regional District Relationship to Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. Generally, the responsibility for the construction of the Pioneer Local Collection Systems will be borne by each Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. These systems will be transferred or dedicated to the Pioneer Regional District for operation and maintenance. Pioneer Regional District will agree to provide the necessary wastewater collection and transport services to individual users within the Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 serving the Pioneer Community. (a) Capital Construction, Operation and Maintenance. (i) Construction of each of the Pioneer Local Collection Systems and the funding necessary therefore will be provided by Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. Pioneer Local Collection Systems will be constructed in accordance with standards adopted by Pioneer Regional District compatible with the Resource District Rules and Regulations. (ii) Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 will transfer or dedicate the Pioneer Local Collection Systems to Pioneer Regional District. Pioneer Regional District will own and • be responsible for operation and maintenance of the Pioneer Sewer System and each Pioneer Local Collection System. (b) Service. Pioneer Regional District will provide wastewater collection services to individual users within the boundaries of Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. (i) Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 will acknowledge that the districts are prohibited from entering into service agreements with Resource District directly. (ii) Pioneer Regional District will provide wastewater collection services to service users in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Resource District and will adopt rules and regulations for the provision of wastewater services to individual customers within Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 that are consistent with the Resource District Rules and Regulations. (c) Funding. (i) Pioneer Local Collection System Capital Costs. Each of the Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 will be responsible for funding the costs and expenses associated with the construction of its Pioneer Local Collection System. (ii) Resource District Wastewater System and Pioneer Sewer System Capital Costs. Funding for the construction of the Resource District Wastewater System and Pioneer Sewer System will be financed with revenue from the Pioneer Regional District Tap Fees paid by individual users within Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6. {00091984.DOC v:3) 5 (iii) Resource District Wastewater System Operation and Maintenance Costs. Individual service users within Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 will pay a Resource District Service Charge that includes a component for the operation and maintenance of the Resource District Wastewater System. (iv) Pioneer Sewer System and Pioneer Local Collection System(s) Operation and Maintenance Costs. Individual service users within Pioneer District Nos. 1 —6 will pay a Pioneer Regional District Service Charge for the operation and maintenance of the Pioneer Sewer System and each Pioneer Local Collection System. • • 00091984.DOC v:31 6 MINUTES • NFRWQPA April 26, 2007 Meeting 1. Role Call The meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by Chair, Ed Schemm at the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District offices. Roll was called and the following members were in attendance: Les Morgan—Dacono S.D. Cindy Titus—Lochbuie Jon Mays—Erie Larry Wyeno—Longmont ni Jim Duell—Estes Park S.D. Steve Adams—Loveland a Steve Comstock—Ft. Collins Larry Ketcham—Milliken Q— Jim Sidebottom—Ft. Lupton Sheryl Trent—Milliken Wendy Daughtry—Greeley Nicole Adams—Resource CO M.D. Dennis Schump—Greeley Jeff Hodge—Upper Thompson S.D. Dave Pusey—Kodak Brad Mueller—Weld County (11 Ed Schemm—Larimer County Dennis Wagner—Windsor 11.1 \ Karen Frarck—Lochbuie 1. Also present were Connie O'Neill, Manager for the Association, Matt Benak,Tom Satchell, Lauren G nn Benton, John Holdren, and Trisha Culp. t► 2. Minutes . 1 The minutes of the March 22, 2007 meeting were considered. Mr. Mays made a motion to approve the 4 minutes. Mr. Wyeno seconded the motion and it passed. 1 3. Financial Report �L Ms. O'Neill summarized the March financial report and pointed out a correction to the date on the fourth page of the attachment. Mr. Morgan made a motion to accept the financial report. Ms.Titus seconded the motion and it passed. 4. Decision Item: Utility Plan—Resource Colorado Water &Sanitation Metropolitan District Mr. Adams summarized the Utility Plan Committee's review of the plan. He indicated that the Committee is recommending approval of the utility plan with four conditions. • Approval is contingent on the submittal of additional financial information, necessary to meet the requirements of the utility plan. This includes updated revenue projections showing a 10 year • planning horizon and a summary spreadsheet showing total revenue(including tap fees and service fees)and total expenses(including capital, O&M, and debt service)that can demonstrate a positive cash balance over a 10 year period. • Approval is contingent on the submittal of additional information to delineate the responsibility of each district for the reuse system. • Approval is contingent on successful rezoning of the WWTP property and the surrounding planned service area from the Agricultural Zone District to zoning allowing suburban/urban density. • Once final approval of all documents has been given by the Utility Plan Committee, a final copy (both hard and electronic)of the complete utility plan, including appendices, will need to be submitted to the Association for our records. In addition, the Committee also recommended that the following comment accompany the plan. • The Association recognizes that Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District is a wholesale district. As such,tap fees included in the utility plan are those fees associated with the wholesale portion of the service only. Rate payers within the district service area will also be responsible for the fees associated with the Pioneer Regional District and the individual Metro Districts. The Regional District and the individual Metro Districts have not yet established what these rates will be and therefore, the rates were not included as part of the Utility Plan at the time of review and consideration. Ms. Adams indicated that the District accepted the conditions. She indicated that the financial information should be submitted the following week and the information needed on the reuse responsibilities would be submitted following a Board meeting on May 9, 2007. Mr. Duell complimented the District on the completeness of the plan. Mr. Benak thanked the Committee for their time during the review process. Mr. Mays then made a motion to approve the utility plan with the conditions and comment stated by Mr. Adams. Mr. Morgan seconded the motion and it was approved. 5. Decision Item: Site Application—Resource Colorado Water&Sanitation Metropolitan District— New Facility Ms. O'Neill reviewed the two conditions of approval on the site application from Weld County. • • Approval is contingent on successful rezoning of the property and the surrounding planned service area from the Agricultural Zone District to zoning allowing suburban/urban density. • Page 2 NFRWQPA Meeting April 26, 2007 • No building permits shall be issued and no construction shall take place on the site until either a Special Use Permit or a Site Plan Review, as specified by zoning, is submitted and approved by Weld County for the facility and related appurtenances. She also stated that the Utility Plan Review Committee recommended that the previously stated comment on the utility plan also be added to any recommendation for approval of the site application. Mr. Mueller indicated that the District is going through the zoning process now. Mr. Sidebottom then made a motion to recommend for approval of the site application with the two stated conditions from Weld County and the previous comment from the Utility Plan Review Committee. Mr. Mays seconded the motion and it was approved. • 6. Decision Item: New Member Request—Town of Severance Ms. O'Neill indicated that the Town of Severance had requested membership to the Association as a voting member. According to the Articles of Association, a majority vote is required to approve a new member. Since a majority of the membership was not present at the meeting a motion was made by Mr. Morgan to conduct a vote of the membership by e-mail. Mr. Wyeno seconded the motion at it was approved. (NOTE: In an e-mail vote which was conducted after the meeting, the Town of Severance was approved as a voting member of the Association.) 7. Other Business • A. Water Quality Control Commission: Ms. O'Neill summarized the Commission meeting held in April. Highlights included the setting of a hearing date for Regulation 62, Effluent Limitations, in January 2008. In addition, the Commission held an Administrative Action Hearing for Policy 96-1, Design Criteria for Consideration in the Review of Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The expiration date of this policy was extended to May 31,2008 and an Administrative Action Hearing was scheduled for April 2008. • B. Poudre Monitoring Committee: Ms. O'Neill indicated that the Committee is moving forward on developing the monitoring plan. They are also working on an agreement between the participants. Several of the participants also will be attending training on data management. Mr. Pusey stated that monitoring under the new plan has started. He also added that the Town of Windsor and South Ft. Collins Sanitation District have joined the group which includes Greeley, Ft. Collins, Kodak, and Boxelder Sanitation District. C. Other Items/Reports: Ms. Daughtry introduced a new Greeley representative, Mr. Schump. Mr. Ketcham also introduced the new Milliken Town Administrator, Sheryl Trent. 8. Adjourn There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 3:33 p.m. • RESOLUTION RE: ACTION OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WELD COUNTY,COLORADO, CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN- RESOURCE COLORADO WATER AND SANITATION METROPOLITAN DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS,the Board has received a Site Application from Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation, concerning the construction of septic tanks with grinder pumps, with discharge to infiltration beds, located on the following described parcel of land, to-wit: Section 32,Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado WHEREAS,the regulations for site applications require review of the site application by the Board of County Commissioners, and further, that various local and state agencies be given the opportunity to review and comment on said site application, and WHEREAS, the site application from Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation was • submitted to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County for review and comment,a copy of said application being attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and WHEREAS,after study and review,the Board finds that said site application is not in conflict with the Weld County Code, and that it is in the best interest of Weld County to recommend approval of said application. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado,that the site application submitted by Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation be, and hereby is, recommended favorably to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Site Application and Utility Plan is subject to successful re- zoning of the property and the surrounding planned service area from the Agricultural Zone District to zoning allowing suburban/urban density. 2. No building permits shall be issued and no construction shall take place on the site until either a Special Use Permit or a Site Plan Review, as specified by zoning, is submitted and approved by Weld County for the facility and related appurtenances. • 2007-0172 0 (7 - Pi- f-t_ -PPE_ PL0079 `-fs ea—s—) I Flo—O2 • SITE APPLICATION - RESOURCE COLORADO WATER AND SANITATION PAGE 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be,and hereby is, authorized to sign said site application. The above and foregoing Resolution was,on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 15th day of January, A.D., 2007. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WEfCD�COU TY, COLORADO ATTEST: �' `b�` °� `"A cc 1,+avid E. Long, Chair Weld County Clerk to the .,*f, _77 .‘-t k '* 'Ilia . e, ro-Tem BY: Deputy Clerk to the Board `' Willi F Garcia� A O DASTO • "4. V p-2 Robert D. Masden • oun A orn y /�.� ouglas ade acher Date of signature: • 2007-0172 PL0079 b Memorandum • TO: David E. Long, Chair ik Board of County Commissioners From: Trevor Jiricek, Department of Public Health & Environment and Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services COLORADO DATE: January 9, 2007 SUBJECT: Site Application Approval for Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District In accordance with CDPHE WQCC, Regulation No. 22,the Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District(RCWSMD) has submitted their Site Application and Utility Plan for Board of County Commissioner review and approval. BACKGROUND: The RCWSMD is charged with providing wastewater service to the Pioneer Community • Development being planned in southern Weld County near the intersection of County Roads 49 and 22. The wastewater treatment plant proposed in the application will be located in the NW ''/4, NW '/4, of Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 64 West. The plant will be constructed in three phases with the first phase (0.3 MGD)projected to receive flows by September 2008. The second phase is designed for 1.2 MGD, and the third phase for 3.6 MGD. RCWSMD plans to re-use its wastewater to augment water supply plans in the Box Elder Creek drainage basin and adjacent drainage basins, and irrigate landscaped areas at the plant site, on Pioneer common areas, and possibly on residential lots. The selected treatment technology is a membrane biorcactor. Both the Department of Planning and Health have reviewed the submitted materials and recommend your approval with the following conditions: 1) Approval of the Site Application and Utility Plan is subject to successful rezoning of the property and the surrounding planned service area from the Agricultural Zone District to zoning allowing suburban/urban density. 2) No building permits shall be issued and no construction shall take place on the site until either a Special Use Permit or a Site Plan Review, as specified by zoning, is submitted and approved by Weld County for the facility and related appurtenances. • 2007-0172 • November 16,2006 CQNSULTANTS: 1 CEtV D l�ov i r,: zoos Mr:Trevor Jincek. E1iVlSOIfAL IIE U1I IEAVII'F3 Weld County Department of Public Health&Environment 1555 North 17th Avenue• Greeley,Colorado' 80931 Re: Application for Site Location Approval for Construction of a New Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works—Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation District JHC Project No,690-01 Dear Mr.hricek: On behalf of Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District(RCWSMD),we are submitting a copy of the Site Application Partinge to you that includes'the application forms and Wastewater Utility Master Plan(which acts as the"engineering report")as described in the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPHE)Regulation No.22,Section 4. This site: application is being submitted in regards to a new,state-of-the-art wastewater treatment plant being planned for southwestern Weld County. As one of the reviewing agencies within Weld County,we are asking that the Weld County.Department of Public Health&Environment review thesite application based on your agency's plans,policies,rules and regulations. After performing this review,please forward any comments or your recommendation back to our office The CDPHE states that reviewing-agenciess have sixty(6Q)days Co review and comment on this Site application. After the sixty day period,if we have not received comment"or recommendation of'. approval from your agency,we are allowed to forward this site application to the COPHE. They will • they contact your agency and provide a period of seven(7)additional days for your agency to ptpt-rde comments or your recommendation. • Please do not hesitate to contact me at(303)X986-0733 f you have any further questions regarding this . site application or theattached Wastewater'Utility Master Plan. Sincerely, JACOl3SON HELOOTH CONSULTANTS:INC. Matthew J.Benak,P.E Project Manager`'. MID/mb Attaclimenta cc:. Ms.Nicole Adams,Gateway American Resources,LLC 12640 West Cede Dave,Suite A Iakewoc4 Colorado8022 -2D05 .Inc®Ihrinc cbm 705-98frW55 FAX707-486-O956 .wwwlhaocrofn, • COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Water Quality Control Division 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South • Denver,Colorado 80246-1530 (303)692-3574 APPLICATION FOR SITE LOCATION APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS (Section 22.4,of Regulation 22) APPLICANT: Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District PHONE: (303)987-0835 ADDRESS: 141 Union,Suite 150 CITY,STATE,ZIP: Lakewood,Colorado 80228 Email Address: nadams@jfcompanies.com Primary Contact(for project inquiries): Nicole Adams,P.E.(Project Manager—Gateway American Resources,LLC) Consulting Engineer: Jacobson Helgoth Consultants,Inc. Phone: (303)986-0733 Address: 12640 West Cedar Drive,Suite A City,State,Zip: Lakewood,Colorado 80228 Email Address: mbenak@jacobsonhelgoth.com [Matthew J.Benak,P.E.] • A. Summary of information retarding new site application: 1. Proposed Location(Legal Description): NW 1/4,NW 1/4,Section 32 Township: T3N Range: R64W County: Weld Lat. 40°ll'20" Long. 104°35'39" for Wastewater Treatment Works 2. Type and capacity of treatment facility proposed: Major Processes Used: Influent flow monitoring;influent screening and grit removal;membrane biological reactor system;ultraviolet disinfection;effluent discharge to the Box Elder Creek. Waste biosolids to be aerobically digested and wet-hauled off- site. Hydraulic: 0.39 MGD(maximum monthly average);0.30 MOD(annual average) Peak Flow: 1.34 MGD Organic: 976 lbs BOD,/day Present PE: 0 Design PE: 3,529 %Domestic.100% %Industrial:0% 3. Location of Facility: Attach a map of the area,which includes the following: (a)' 5-mile radius: all sewage treatment plants,lift stations,and domestic water supply intakes. (b)' I-mile radius: habitable buildings,location of public and private potable water wells,and an approximate indication of the topography. 'Note: See Figures 1 and 2(attached] • WQCD-3a(Revised 6/06) Page 1 of 3 6?‘29 C/7o( 4. Effluent disposal:Surface discharge to watercourse(name): Box Elder Creek,(PEL report incorrectly identified the discharge stream as stream segment COSPMS05a. It is actually COSPMS03a[tributaries to South Platte River,Big Dry Creek to Weld/Morgan county line]). Warm Water Aquatic Life Class 2,Class 2 Recreation,Agriculture. South Platte • River basin,Middle South Platte River Sub-basin, Stream Segment 03A. Subsurface disposal: N/A Land Application: N/A Evaporation: N/A Other(list): N/A 5. Preliminary Effluent Limitations received on: October 11,2006 6. Will a State or Federal grant/loan be sought to finance any portion of this project? NO 7. Present zoning of site area? Agriculture(this will be identified as Special Use: Wastewater Treatment Facility when Pioneer Communities submits their Zoning Application to Weld County) Zoning within a 1-mile radius of site? Agriculture(this will be identified as a mixture of Agriculture and Residential when Pioneer Communities submits their Zoning Application to Weld County) 8. What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest domestic water supply intake? Greater than 150 miles downstream in Nebraska. Public water supply wells drawing from the South Platte River alluvium located more than 75 miles downstream of the point where Box Elder Creek meets the South Platte River. Name of Supply: Address of Supply: What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest other point of diversion? Approximately 25 stream- miles,Irrigation Ditch Name of User: Herman Peterson • Address of User: 30584 WCR 380;Kersey,CO 80644 9. Estimated project cost: $6,674,000 Who is financially responsible for the construction and operation of the facility? Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District 10. Is the facility in a 100-year flood plain or other natural hazard area? NO,except the extreme northwest corner of the property. This is not considered a critical area and flooding of this area would not cause a plant back-up or upset conditions. If so,what precautions are being taken? Engineered flood management structures and mitigation measures taken during roadway and infrastructure development of the community will reduce the possibility of harm during a 100-year flood event at the W WTP. Has the flood plain been designated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board,Department of Natural Resources,or other agency? Federal Emergency Management Agency If so,what is that designation? Zone A 11. Please identify any additional factors that might help the Water Quality Control Division make an informed decision regarding your application for site approval. N/A (Attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary) 12. Public Notification procedures complied on: A Public Notification sign will be posted for a minimum of 15 days prior to the time the Site Application is sent to the CDPHE—WQCD. A photo of this sign will be included with the final Site Application. • WQCD-3a(Revised 6/06) Page 2 of 3 B. If the facility will be located on or adjacent to a site that is owned or managed by a federal or state agency,send the agency a copy of this application for the agency's review and recommendation. C. Recommendation of governmental authorities: The application shall be forwarded to the planning agency of the city,town,or county in whose jurisdiction(s)the treatment facility is to be located.The applicant shall obtain,from the appropriate planning agency(agencies),a statement(s)of consistency of the proposal with the local comprehensive plan(s)as they relate to water quality(subject to the provisions of 22.3(6). The application shall be forwarded to the water quality planning agency(agencies)for the area in which the facilities are to be constructed and for the area to be served by those facilities.The applicant shall obtain,from the appropriate planning agency(agencies),a statement(s)of consistency of the proposal with any adopted water quality management Plugs). If you have any further comments or questions,please call(303)692-3574. I certify that I am familiar with the requirements of the"Site Location and Design Approval Regulations for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works",and have posted the site in accordance with the regulations. An engineering report,as described by the regulations,has been repared and is enclosed. Date:November 16.2006 Nicole Adams.P.E. ture A licant• Typed Nam *The applicant must sign this form The Consulting Engineer cannot sign this form. Recommend Recommend Signature of Approval' Disapproval Comment R resen e • 1. 0/1/46 /� gement( er Agency: RCWSMD � 2 01/15/2007 Y ? ..„ Board of County Cotmttissimn rs David F. Long, 7 air 3. 42frit (L. fAu 1U LA (-P1/11 /66-Hgabc 4. i/OPCe7 Local Health Authority: Weld County Department of Public ATTN: Mr.Trevor Jericek 5. 208 Planning Agency-North Front Range Water Quality Planning Association ATTN: Ms.Connie O'Neill 6. ATTEST: late % 's \i WELD COUNTY CLERK • • 'YTI WQCD-3a(Revised 6/06) Page 3 of 3 BY:C l DEPUTY JERK TO TH ,4111.j�. d(17 '7,2 M 0/ t' r A , 4 I ` f c`i_s . } $:,' ` ��FFF{{{ • b ` • R(, �� r l` \j `�/� [,y "w \i , \.'\� d 'oho o N' ,� . �I ,IC�ir` `.ST_,\r ,e .Y°, �\si.C r pp' °' „ n l ,1 �, v °° % 1 V °6, v u��}y � �j��y- . 1 i „ , w� y I' . rl. i d ,21 4 ' l o , 01 '` IFS Im � r1 � ��,.o r O. Aj, 1 ^ pia U' \ ' ' • a , a" G ♦ ,-;:\),..i;` °7, X IJ�v I • e ,, 9Ri - v '*" •v ♦ f /fir 0( . 1 Lt---•—'---_-',,,-. ;. ✓��1. r s � '' `` 1 1 r. ) i s v t Y ,l \ JJ f° iC I , 1 .:%:9,& ,°rf Y , . \ _ A —mow / _. �" �� i\ DATE: 11/07/06 '1i SCALE: 1" = 3800' FIVE MILE RADIUS MAP Jacobson Helgoth PROD. NO.: 690-01 SITE APPLICATION CONSULTANTS DRAWN: DJH RESOURCE COLORADO WATER AND • CHECKED:MJB SANITATION METROPOLITAN DISTRICT FILE NO.: 69001SAFig1.DWG FIG 1 I �..-� 1.-.-� , .app ` f,1 ajl . 7. � I`.-.. - V moo) '1 \ • DOMESTIC WELL W r° 1� 'G =3.. �� . ■ IRRIGATION WELL 111 ` ...9\ r f ' (.,,our�� ♦ HOUSEHOLD WELL ,j-k\( � ) ) ; � � L--) U N 1N4 �7p At , C. \''' O7, t (OA J ( Vt. b �� l 1` �' o 0 f ■ ■ ■ S. I � .� � c'? --C3.1\1 �� 1-0OATI I r�. ,� / a s70 N, © 0 Nj 1, • -CJ( 36 ( ,.. � 31 n /.)- • Ff,\, 62 to .` v 1 33 ',6\Alit -t- \ -N.„, N �.,. O wro • ' yy� l r i ` �" u v: 0, -\ o� f1 o ) / 4 DOMESTIC WELLS ° - _ ----o-} °--- A o. \,:::::, NW NW SECTION 6 - 4 0 . T2N R64W . . ).F '4pJ --(Lit: a )\� l rilz °&`� 7 j /\ 4 r. � mooaiff' o I S • ( t: ? I xo MOO ME u DATE: 11 07/06 III SCALE: 1 = 2640' ONE MILE RADIUS MAP Jacobson Helgoth PROJ. NO.: 690-01 SITE APPLICATION CONSULTANTS DRAWN: DJH RESOURCE COLORADO WATER AND • CHECKED:MJB SANITATION METROPOLITAN DISTRICT FILE NO.: 69001SAFig2.DWG FIG 2 SITE APPLICATION COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST • New Domestic Wastewater Treatment Works (includes New Reuse Plant) Name of Project: Wastewater Treatment Facility Applicant Name and Address: Resource Colorado Water and Sanitation Metropolitan District(RCWSMD) 141 Union, Suite 150 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 c%Nicole Adams, P.E. @ Gateway American Resources, LLC Ph. (303) 472-8796(mobile) nadams@jfcompanies.com Consultant Name and Address: Jacobson Helgoth Consultants,Inc. 12640 West Cedar Drive, Suite A Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Ph. (303) 986-0733 Attn: Matthew Benak, P.E. mbenalc@jacobsonhelgoth.com Type of Project: New mechanical wastewater treatment facility designed to treat an annual average flow of 0.30 MGD. • Please indicate where (document and page#) Section Elements the submittal addresses the following Application submitted on proper form. Application,Pg. 1 thru 3 Recommendation of local authorities and planning agencies. Application,Pg. 3 22.4(1) Signed by responsible party of the proposed facility. Application,Pg.3 Two copies will be Two copies submitted to CDPHE. submitted Wastewater Utility Plan 22.4(1)(b) Engineering Report. (WWUP)enclosed with Site Application Service area definition. WWUP,Pg. 1-1,Pg. 3-1 Staging or phasing. WWUP,Pg. 3-1, 3-2 22.4(1)(b)(i) Flow/loading projections. WWUP,Pg.3-2, 3-3 Relationship to other water and wastewater treatment works. WWUP,Pg.2-1 Proposed site location. WWUP,Pg. 1-1, 3-8 22.4(1)(b)(ii) Evaluation of alternative sites. WWUP,Pg. 5-1, 5-2 Evaluation of treatment alternatives. WWUP,Pg. 5-1 thru 5-7 22.4(1)(b)(iii) Proposed effluent limitations. WWUP,Pg.4-3 Date of PELs. Application,Pg. 2 22.4(1)(b)(iv) Analysis of existing facilities within service area(s) WWUP,Pg.2-2, 2-3 22.4(1)(b)(v) Analysis of opportunities for consolidation WWUP,Pg. 2-1, 5-1,5-2 22.4(1)(b)(vi) Proposed site adversely affected by floodplain,etc. WWUP,Pg. 3-9 • • Will be included with Site • 22.4(1)(b)(vii) Soils Report stating that the site will support the facility. Application delivered to CDPHE 22.4(l)(b)(viii) Detailed description of selected alternative. WWUP,Pg.3-4 thru 3-7 22.4(1)(b)(ix) Legal control of the site for the project life. WWUP,Appendix B 22.4(1)(b)(x) Institutional arrangements. WWUP,Pg. 6-2 22.4(1)(b)(xi) Management capabilities. WWUP,Pg. 6-1 22.4(1)(b)(xii) Financial system. WWUP,Pg. 6-2 Implementation plans and schedule WWUP,Pg. 1-2,6-3 22.4(1)(b)(xiii) Estimated construction time. WWUP,Pg. 1-2,6-3 Estimated start-up date. WWUP,Pg. 1-2,6-3 22.4(1)(c) Notice of the intent to construct for private property. N/A 22.4(2)(a) Review comments by the management agency if necessary. 22.4(2)(b) Review comments by the county if necessary. 22.4(2)(c) Review comments by the city or town if necessary. 22.4(2)(d) Review comments by the local health authority. 22.4(2)(e) Review comments by the water quality planning agency. State or Federal review comments if necessary. Will be included with Site 22.4(3) A picture of the public notification sign. Application delivered to CDPHE • • Hello