The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20060330.tiff Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE MEMORANDUM SEP 3 0 2005 Le.N., TO: Michelle Martin, Planning Depart nt R EDATE: 2L )05 WIlD e FROM: Peter Schei, P.E., Civil ,Public Works Department COLORADO SUBJECT: 2005-XX Meadow Ridge PUD-Benson Farms LLC(MUD Revision) Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed this preliminary conceptual development (to revise the MUD). Comments made during this phase of the process may not be all-inclusive, as other concerns or issues may arise during the remaining application process. Comments ❑ Although finer points (land uses, zoning, and intensities) to the I-25 MUD Area Structural Plan revision are not paramount to Public Works' evaluation, the following observations cast light on the requirements essential for such a development within the County. ❑ Meadow Ridge PUD is provisionally planned for up to 2,400 residential units and flex zones. ❑ Weld County does not maintain roadway median areas. ❑ The Feasibility Geologic Investigation, CTL Thompson Inc., dated October 25, 2004 only provides general information regarding the geology and geomorphology of the subject land. CTL did not complete an on-site field investigation— only a literature search. o The applicant must submit a complete geotechnical investigation at the Change of Zone stage that addresses (at a minimum) the following: boring logs showing type and depth of on-site materials; gradation, swell potential, soil classification; site recommendations and discussion, and other tests as recommended by CTL for urban development of homes and roadways. ❑ The applicant must allow for future interconnectivity between adjacent parcels. Specifically along eastern boundary of the site that does not directly abut WCR 13. External Roadways: ❑ The proposed development property lies within the MUD, therefore roadway improvements shall meet Weld County MUD criteria. ❑ The applicant shall address the number and spacing of access points onto County roadways prior to any CHANGE OF ZONE application submittal. The road classification will dictate the access standards. Access points shall be coordinated with other adjacent developments such as CARMA directly to the south of this development. ❑ Road classifications shall be adhered to with respect to County access standards(number of access locations per mile). ❑ A detailed traffic impact analysis will be required at the Change of Zone submittal. ❑ This development may introduce approximately 23,000 additional vehicle trips per day to the off-site roadway system based on a proposed 2,400 residential homes. o The increased level of traffic on County roads creates maintenance problems, levels of service, and capacity concems. o Required offsite improvements will be determined when a detailed traffic impact analysis is received. o The applicant shall submit a proposed offsite improvements agreement with the CHANGE OF ZONE application. ❑ SH 66 has been annexed by the Town of Mead. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be verified, it will be dedicated on the final plat. o SH 66 is maintained by CDOT adjacent to this development. o The applicant shall coordinate with Mead and / or CDOT concerning respective roadway improvements meeting MUD criterion at the CHANGE OF ZONE application submittal. o Of special concern are any signalization requirements at intersections. EXHIBIT Page 1 of 3 / 2006-0330 1 ❑ CR 13 is classified by the County(Weld County Roadway Classification Plan, June 2002) as a strategic corridor-arterial road (adjacent to the east of this development) and requires a /40-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of- way and the documents creating the right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be verified, it will be dedicated on the final plat. o Public Works normally requires that access points to an arterial road be limited to half-mile intervals. The County will consider quarter-mile access points if safety issues, roadway capacity and the level of service (LOS) are not compromised. Public Works will finalize access points for the proposed development with the applicant at the change of zone as the final traffic impact study will be needed for evaluation of locations. o CR 13 is paved and under the jurisdiction of Weld County. The applicant shall coordinate with the County concerning respective roadway improvements meeting MUD criterion at the CHANGE OF ZONE application submittal. o Of special concern are any signalization requirements at intersections. ❑ CR 9 '/: is classified by the County(Weld County I-25 Parallel Arterial Study, September 2003)as a major arterial road(adjacent to the west of this development)and requires a /40-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the right-of-way shall be noted on the change of zone plat. If the right-of-way cannot be verified, it will be dedicated on the final plat. o Public Works normally requires that access points to an arterial road be limited to half-mile intervals. The County will consider quarter-mile access points if safety issues, roadway capacity and the level of service(LOS)for CR 9 'A (arterial) are not compromised. Public Works will finalize access points for the proposed development with the applicant at the change of zone as the final traffic impact study will be needed for evaluation of locations. o The County anticipates coordination efforts between the applicant and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for this project at the CHANGE OF ZONE application submittal. o Of special concern are any signalization requirements at intersections. ❑ WCR 11, 30.5 and 32 are not classified in the Weld County Road Classification Plan. At this time, Public Works does not disagree with the proposed collector road classification. However, this is based on development assumptions and not on a detailed traffic analysis. Internal Roadways: ❑ The County will not maintain any portions of the internal road rights-of-ways. It is recommended that the applicant consider formation of a metropolitan district to address road and landscape maintenance. ❑ Internal roads shall meet Weld County MUD criteria for a PUD. ❑ Public Works would like to discuss the roundabouts shown by the applicant on the sketch plan prior to any CHANGE OF ZONE application submittal. The current County MUD standards do not address design and construction of roundabouts,specifically on collector roads. ❑ The internal local road right-of-way shall be sixty(60) feet in width including cul-de-sacs with a sixty-five (65) foot radius, and dedicated to the public. The typical roadway section of interior roadway shall be shown as two 12-foot paved lanes with 8-foot paved parking lanes on the CHANGE OF ZONE plat(the final traffic impact study shall also be reviewed for interior roadway cross-sections). The cul-de-sac edge of pavement radius shall be fifty (50) feet. The MUD criteria require curb, gutter and sidewalk. o The roadway cross-section shown for the residential roads should show a pavement with of 40-ft and ROW width of 60-ft. ❑ Any internal collector road right-of-way shall be eighty (80) feet in width and dedicated to the public. The typical collector roadway section shall be shown as two 12-foot paved lanes with 6-foot paved bike lanes and a 14-foot paved median on the CHANGE OF ZONE plat(the final traffic impact study shall also be reviewed for interior roadway cross-sections). The MUD criteria require curb,gutter and sidewalk. ❑ Easements shall be shown on the final plat in accordance with County standards (Sec.24-7-60) and / or Utility Board recommendations. ❑ Intersection sight distance triangles at the development entrance will be required. All landscaping within the triangles must be less than 3'/2 feet in height at maturity,and noted on the final roadway plans. ❑ The applicant shall submit to Public Works stamped, signed and dated final plat drawings and roadway/construction&grading plan drawings for review with the final plan(phase)application and approval. Construction details must be included. o Street signing — including stop signs and street name signs will be required at all intersections and shown as a signing plan on final roadway plans. The current edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)shall govern the signing plan. ❑ The applicant shall submit Improvements Agreements According to Policy Regarding Collateral for Improvements with the CHANGE OF ZONE application. These agreements must be reviewed by Public Works and shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners(BOCC)prior to recording any final plat(phase). Page 2 of 3 Drainage: ❑ Weld County will not maintain drainage related areas or items within or outside of the right-of-way. ❑ A final drainage report stamped, signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado shall be submitted with the CHANGE OF ZONE application. o Typical residential land use: The 5-year storm and 100-year storm drainage studies shall take into consideration off- site flows both entering and leaving the development. Increased runoff due to development will require detention of the 100-year storm developed condition while releasing the 5-year storm existing condition. The applicant shall address all historic drainage patterns across the site and account for both offsite historic and developed condition flows. o Appropriate design storm periods shall be utilized for the proposed land use,such as commercial. o The final drainage report shall include a flood hazard review documenting any FEMA defined floodplains or floodways. The engineer shall reference the specific map panel number, including date. The development site shall be located on the copy of the FEMA map. o The engineer must take into consideration stormwater capture / quality and provide accordingly for best management practices. o Stormwater runoff shall not adversely impact downstream storm drainage facilities; especially on the St. Vrain River. Provide evidence that storm drainage facilities downstream are not overloaded by the additional runoff ❑ The applicant shall prepare a construction detail for typical lot grading with respect to drainage for the CHANGE OF ZONE application. Front, rear and side slopes around building envelopes must be addressed. In addition, drainage for rear and side lot line swales shall be considered. Building envelopes must be planned to avoid storm water flows, while taking into account adjacent drainage mitigation. ❑ Final drainage construction and erosion control plans (conforming to the drainage report) stamped, signed and dated by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado shall be submitted with each final plan (phase) application. These plans (stormwater management plans)shall be based upon Urban Drainage methodology. Recommendation ❑ The Public Works Department finds no objection to this MUD revision. The applicant shall address the comments listed above at the specific step of the review process stated. The review process will continue only when all appropriate elements have been submitted. Issues of concern must be resolved with the Public Works Department prior to recording the change of zone and final plats: PC: 2005-XX Meadow Ridge PUD- Benson Farms LLC(MUD Revision) Email&Original: Planner Page 3 of 3 _ STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY COLORADO Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street,Room 715 Denver,CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-2611 Fax: (303)866-2461 December 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL Ms Michelle Martin Weld County Planning Department_ RESOURCES GftEELEY OFFICE Weld County Planning ,24 T3N R68W Bill Owens 10th918St DEC X 2005 Governor Greeley, CO 80631 RECEIVED Russell George Executive Director Re: Meadow Ridge PUP,MUD CGS Review No.WE-05-0025 Vincent Matthews Division Director and State Geologist Dear Ms Martin: We received the information on the petition to amend the MUD for Benson Farms/Meadow Ridge as PUD residential with some exceptions for commercial development. We do not have an objection to this change. However,the main concerns of the property, which I raised in my first letter(December 9, 2004)and which I copy below, must be addressed by the applicant in the next stage of development: Drainage. The northwest part of the property drains to Lake Thomas in the form of discrete drainages and swales. The drainage area should be delineated and shown as an easement. Structures should not be built in this area because of the potential for wetness and flooding. A drainage report has not been prepared at this stage of the project but would be prepared at the change in zone. This report should discuss the volume of flows that would be generated on site, the number of detention ponds that would be required to detain these flows,the locations of the ponds, and the discharge point for the ponds. A discussion on erosion control should be part of the drainage report or could be a separate report. The project should be phased to limit the amount of bare ground exposed at one time. Best management practices for erosion control should be implemented and should include the installation of temporary sedimentation ponds. Wetlands. The drainage area in the northwest part of the site should be investigated for the presence of wetlands ecosystems by persons qualified in this field. The designation of jurisdictional wetlands would need to be made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wildlife. There is a raptor nest in a cottonwood tree located in the drainage area of the northwest part of the site. The applicant should consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to determine procedures for dealing with raptors if the nest becomes occupied in the spring. A wildlife survey should be performed for the site, with emphasis on the drainage area. Oil and gas. The site narrative states that there are 10 areas of the site that contain oil and/or gas well operations. CTL/Thompson states that there are 10 producing wells on site based on the on-line mapping Meadow Ridge,rezoning,p.1 service provided by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. When I queried this service I received information on 12 producing wells on the site. During my site visit,I noted two wells that did not appear to be on the sketch plan,the Kerr-McGee Reynolds 3-24 and Kerr-McGee Reynolds 8-24. I may be in error but I would appreciate clarification on this subject. The applicant should consult with Kerr-McGee and Petroleum Development regarding future well drilling on the property, and how this might be accomplished once the area is developed. Plat notes should state that the operators would have the use of subdivision roads for servicing wells (and for drilling wells,if that is planned.) An agreement must be reached with the oil and gas operators, as the price of oil, in addition to a ruling expected from the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, would most probably mean that additional drilling would take place at the site. Please call me if there are any questions. Y s truly, Ci ue e Greehitati { �� Geologist 303-866-2811 celia.greenman@state.co.us Meadow Ridge,rezoning,p.2 r0 Th Weld „Weld County Referral nty Planning De"ilk GREELEy OFFICEPartment August 30, 2005 OCT ,RE 3 2005 COLORADO CEI VED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29, 2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22 (Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Comments: Signature =, - Date /o ‘�8— Agency l,JscO a ono rY ,f+%.lt..,C} en-Ate e,,.• +Weld County Planning Dept. .918 10th Street,Greeley,CO.80631 4(970)353-6100 ext.3540 4(970)304-6498 fax Weld County Sheriffs Office M e mo To: Michelle Martin From: Ken Poncelow Date: October 28,2005 Re: 2005-XX The Sheriffs Office recommends the following improvements for this housing sub-division: 1. The Sheriffs Office requests that builders and developers designate an area by the entrance of the sub-division in which to place a shelter for school children awaiting the school bus. This area should also include a pull off for the school bus which enables it to safely load and unload children out of the roadway. 2. Either mail distribution within the sub-division or a central drop off location within the sub-division should be developed so that residents do not have to cross a county road to obtain their mail. 3. A permanent sign should be placed at the entrance to the subdivision detailing the name of the sub-division, address, and a graphical presentation of the roadways within the subdivision. There should be a plan developed to maintain this sign. 4. If the roadways within this sub-division are not maintained or adopted by the county, individuals purchasing property in this sub-division should be notified that the Sheriffs Office will have limited traffic enforcement powers. 5. A plan should be developed to maintain roadways within the sub-division especially during inclement weather conditions for emergency vehicles. 6. The Sheriffs Office is very supportive of homeowner funded homeowner's associations. These associations provide a contact for the Sheriffs Office and a means of maintaining common areas. 7. If there are oil or gas production facilities within this sub-division,they need to be fenced off in order to mitigate the potential for tampering. These facilities are known to create an attractive nuisance for young people. Tampering not only creates a significant danger to safety but also of environmental damage with extensive mitigation and clean-up costs. 8. The names of all streets within the sub-division should be presented to the Sheriffs Office for approval. This will eliminate duplication of street names within the county. 9. The Sheriffs Office encourages Law Enforcement Authorities to provide additional funding for law enforcement requirements in the future. The Sheriffs Office lacks the ability to absorb any additional service demand without the resources recommended in the multi-year plan provided to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners or as 1 indicated by growth not considered at the time the plan was developed. I have no other comments on this proposal. • Page 2 Weld County Referral Weld County Planning Department IGREELEY OFFICE November 17, 2005 NOV 28Z005 COLORADO RE CEIVED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: PLEASE RETURN REFERRAL SHEET BY DECEMBER 9, 2005. Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29, 2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22 (Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66; east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if December 20, 2005 applicable) O We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Comments: Signature Date it/0(/ 2// 2 Ca,5-- Agency /vc c O GavAd ry srle,e #',' S or/•J•c is +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley, CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax Weld County Sheriff's Office M e mo To: Michelle Martin From: Ken Poncelow Date: November 24,2005 Re: 2005-XX The Sheriff's Office recommends the following improvements for this housing sub-division: 1. The Sheriffs Office requests that builders and developers designate an area by the entrance of the sub-division in which to place a shelter for school children awaiting the school bus. This area should also include a pull off for the school bus which enables it to safely load and unload children out of the roadway. 2. Either mail distribution within the sub-division or a central drop off location within the sub-division should be developed so that residents do not have to cross a county road to obtain their mail. 3. A permanent sign should be placed at the entrance to the subdivision detailing the name of the sub-division,address,and a graphical presentation of the roadways within the subdivision. There should be a plan developed to maintain this sign. 4. If the roadways within this sub-division are not maintained or adopted by the county, individuals purchasing property in this sub-division should be notified that the Sheriffs Office will have limited traffic enforcement powers. 5. A plan should be developed to maintain roadways within the sub-division especially during inclement weather conditions for emergency vehicles. 6. The Sheriffs Office is very supportive of homeowner funded homeowner's associations. These associations provide a contact for the Sheriffs Office and a means of maintaining common areas. 7. If there are oil or gas production facilities within this sub-division,they need to be fenced off in order to mitigate the potential for tampering. These facilities are known to create an attractive nuisance for young people. Tampering not only creates a significant danger to safety but also of environmental damage with extensive mitigation and clean-up costs. 8. The names of all streets within the sub-division should be presented to the Sheriffs Office for approval. This will eliminate duplication of street names within the county. 9. The Sheriffs Office encourages Law Enforcement Authorities to provide additional funding for law enforcement requirements in the future. The Sheriffs Office lacks the ability to absorb any additional service demand without the resources recommended in the multi-year plan provided to the Weld County Board of County Commissioners or as 1 • indicated by growth not considered at the time the plan was developed. I have no other comments on this proposal. •Page 2 09/30/2005 16: 09 303-485-1968 ST VRAIN SANITATID PAGE 01101 • • • • Weld County Referral 111kSEP p 6?U COLORADO 05 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005_XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprrehensive Plan)and Chapter 26(Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N,R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of end adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new Information maybe added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information,please call the Department of Planning Services. • Weld County Planning Commission Hearing(if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that It does,/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan Er We have reviewed the request and find no conflicfsl with our Interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comment • •Learn 4 4 44! sr e Pe le-Act / O-K Ale.,,d e- & `,r,.w " t a.. As Signature /W • Date ?/10/ Or Agency 5140 +Weld rwmty Planning Dept. 4918 1d^Street,Greeley,CO.80631 6(970)353-6100 ext3540 +(970)304-6498 fax ANT OF c% q C DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY e/' IFS CORPS OF ENGINEERS,OMAHA DISTRICT 4 ` 2 DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE,9307 SOUTH WADSWORTH BOULEVARD n LITTLETON,COLORADO 80128-6901 September 13, 2005 Weld County Planning Department Ms. Michelle Martin GREELEY OFFICE Weld County Referral SEP 1 5 2005 Weld County Planning Dept. 918 10th Street RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Benson Farms LLC,Case No. 2005-XX Corps File No. 200580593 Dear Ms. Martin: Reference is made to the above-mentioned project located in the SW ''A of Section 24, T3N, R68W, Weld County, Colorado. If any work associated with this project requires the placement of dredged or fill material, and any excavation associated with a dredged or fill project, either temporary or permanent, in waters of the United States at this site, this office should be notified by a proponent of the project for Department of the Army permits or changes in permit requirements pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the U.S. includes ephemeral, intermittent and perennial streams, their surface connected wetlands and adjacent wetlands and certain lakes,ponds, drainage ditches and irrigation ditches that have a nexus to interstate commerce. Work in waters of the U.S. should be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, Range and County of the work and the dimensions of work in each area of waters of the U.S. If there are any questions call Mr.Terry McKee at 303-979-4120 and reference Corps File No. 200580593. Sincerely, // Timo T. :rey Chief, c ve Reg . atory office tm Benson Page 1 of 1 Michelle Martin From: Nice-Idler, Gloria [Gloria.Hice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:29 PM To: Michelle Martin Subject: Benson Michelle, I have no issues with the MUD amendment proposal. As plans proceed for the development, I'll be looking forward to future referrals. Gloria Hice-Idler Access Manager CDOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 (970) 350-2148 11/30/2005 . Wel d / co fr ..... „Bravo faid County Referral S � RF p 4 , 7ih e August 30, 2005 wiipe . : 2°.(25. Rter n.__, COLORADO (' z ', �norP.2 .L5 :ca a%a.:.,; Sec„ba The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29, 2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26(Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. a/ r 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information maybe added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: ,, ( IVo g Conn mg_ - rllayct n air-not-0 nw Atif proposal +O -tvg_ t -UcD . Pro icy}ed POuJ wiAfh I00' ca1-h,✓ aide. of -I--ha kLO9 etiniey__Il_Az . KIIn( RLY-1--kt✓ Signature ?itirt_A-s.- 14(.02 - I. a Date 1/)S/DSO Agency War Pscr_OSS +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax discasSic-As rtcjo%Al 0.cc..ess . LG rros„,\ Weld County Referral I eld County Planning Department August 30, 2005 GREELEY OFFICE C. SEP 19 79 r ` 2005 ` q ZE COLORADO RECEIVED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26(Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information,please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the re nest and find no conflicts with our interests. re See attached fetter. Ql Comen ,: / 0 ll'6 CLia W OPL0 mee e-te C curs, ✓ ate, - anlCc s ya O �L r �� r/ Signature r *at Date •- Q Agency r YteN1 4n eeit,v T&t n k1:sclt +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10"'Street,Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax (sit I64;sszt Weld County Referral 111kAugust 30, 2005 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional Information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Comments: ( ` t Signature �i a �^ \) f n� Date `+ l _0- Agency rnd .kn. , 1.•,-. t Siz- i N +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10'"Street,Greeley,CO.80631 O(970)353-6100 ext.3540 0(970)304-6498 fax *oUNTq/,y MOUNTAIN VIEW FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Administrative Office: 9119 County Line Road• Longmont, CO 80501 E �+ e (303) 772-0710• FAX (303) 651-7702 view September 19, 2005 Ms. Michelle Martin Weld County Planning Department 918 10h Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Ms. Martin: I have reviewed the submitted material pertaining to the petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County for the Benson Farms LLC (Case Number: 2005-XX). The Fire District does not object to the amendment but does have the following comment regarding the submittal: • In the Proposal to Amend the Mixed Use Development Area Map Section II — Fire Protection, the Mountain View Fire Protection does serve this area but not from a fire station located at Weld County Road 13 and 24. That station closed in August 2004. • As development proceeds, all applicable codes as they pertain to water supply, fire hydrant locations. fire department arress, and street designs must be met. We appreciate being involved in the planning process. Should you have any questions, please contact me at(303) 772-0710. Sincerely, LuAnn Penfold Fire Marshal LMP/lp cc: project file Ip09.12.05 Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Station 6 Station 7 9119 Cnty Line Rd. 14308 Mead St..Unit B P.O.Box 575 P.O.Box 11 10911 Dobbin Run 50 Bonanza Or. P.O.Box 40 Longmont,CO Longmont,CO 299 Palmer Ave. 8500 Niwot Road Lafayette,CO Erie,CO 100 So.Forest St. 80501 80504 Mead,CO 80542 Niwot,CO 80544 80026 80516 Dacono,CO 80514 0 SEP 0 '' 2005 Weld County Referral W d co Weld piannin E� g Depart OFFICE ment August 30, 2005 XI 2005 ECE�VED COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66; east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information,please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. l See attached letter. Comments: 61-0 e5`o f (He_ pco/o^-s red rG ( rry r s z Signature r 7 — Date // .3 o o S Agency St.. Vrp 2 Vi, !/c -•1j +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax • St.ivaEey School District September 28. 2005 Michelle Martin Weld County Planning Department 918 10th St. Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Meadow Ridge Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County (Situate in the E% of Section 23 and the SW% of Section 24, T3N, R68W} Dear Michelle Thank you for referring Meadow Ridge Land Use Amendement to the School District. The District has reviewed the development proposal in terms of (1) available school capacity, (2) required land dedications and/or cash-in- lieu fees and (3) transportation considerations. After reviewing the above proposal, the School District has noted comments below. Generally, the District finds that adequate available school capacity does not exist for this area. The principal findings of this review are as follows: • Mead Elementary and Mead Middle schools are projected to exceed the 125% capacity benchmark within the next 5-year period with the addition of students from this project. • Capacity calculations for this feeder include High School 5 approved under the 2002 Bond, which has not yet been constructed. Until this facility is built, there may be short-term crowding at Skyline High School. Capacity to serve this development at the elementary and middle school levels will have to come from a future school bond, with the potential of some capacity being provided from voluntary mitigation funds from this and other developments. • The School District has discussed the possibility of the applicant mitigating this proposal's impacts on this feeder system, but has not yet reached any formal agreement. Should this development be approved, the options for managing short-term overcrowding while the new schools are under construction may include adding modular classrooms and implementing split or staggered schedules as needed. Other options may include but not be limited to implementing year-round schools or asking voters to approve new bonds for additional school facilities or a mill levy for additional operating funds. It should be noted that a lack of operating funds may be a factor in delaying construction and occupancy of new school facilities in this area. Detailed information on the specific capacity issues, the cash-in-lieu/land dedication requirements and transportation impacts for this proposal follow in Attachment A. The recommendation of the District noted above applies to the attendance boundaries current as of the date of this letter. These attendance boundaries may change in the future as the new facilities are constructed and opened. If you have any further questions or concerns regarding this referral, please feel free to contact me via e-mail at seorue olen@stvrain.k12.co.us or at the number below. Sincerely, y.Glen Segrue, AI-ZP Planning Specialist Enc: Exhibit A - Specific Project Analysis Cash-in-lieu Chart ST.VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 395 SOUTH PRATT PARKWAY, LONGMp3p17 CO 80501. SCOTT TOILLION, DIRECTOR, PHONE 303-682-7229. FAX 303-682-7344. . { ATTACHMENT A—Specific Project Analysis PROJECT: Meadow Ridge Land Use Amendment (1) SCHOOL CAPACITY The Board of Education has established a District-wide policy of reviewing new development projects in terms of the impact on existing and approved school facilities within the applicable feeder system. Any residential project within the applicable feeder that causes the 125% school benchmark capacity to be exceeded within 5 years would not be supported. This determination includes both existing facilities and planned facilities from a voter-approved bond. The building capacity, including existing and new facilities, along with the impact of this proposal and all other approved development projects for this feeder is noted in the chart below. CAPACITY INFORMATION CAPACITY BENCHMARK (includes projected students,plus development's student impact) School Building Stdts. Stdt. 2005.2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 Level Capacity Oct-04 Impact Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. stdts cap. Elementary 504 451 840 459 91% 1350 268% 1372 272% 1398 277% 1422 282% Middle 360 531 336 360 100% 677 188% 686 191% 724 201% 746 207% High School* 2073 1446 408 1469 71% 1962 95% 2022 98% 2094 101% 2156 104% Total 4272 1584 2288 3989 4080 4216 14324 'combines capacities of existing schools and those approved in the 2002 bond that will alleviate this feeder Specific comments concerning this proposal regarding School Capacity are as follows: • Specific Impact - This application could add 2400 new single-family dwelling units with a potential impact of 1584 additional student in the Mead Elementary, Mead Middle,and Skyline High School Feeder. • Benchmark Determination - The School District anticipates that Mead Elementary and Mead Middle schools will exceed the 125%benchmark capacity within the next 5 years with the addition of this development. • Additional Capacity Impacts—A new high school has been approved in the 2002 Bond and is expected to be open within the next 5 years. However, the exact date of completion for this facility remains to be determined and will depend on the rate of residential growth in this feeder and the availability of operating funds. • Mitigation— The School District has developed a mitigation policy, under which the District will not oppose the plat stages of a development, even if it is projected to be over the 125% Capacity Benchmark. The District and the developer have been working on an agreement to provide voluntary mitigation funds under this policy, but have not yet reached any formal agreement. • Phasing-The District would appreciate a phasing plan from the developer to better determine enrollment and capacity impacts on the affected schools. A phasing plan will allow the District to more accurately reflect this development's impact on school capacity over the next 5 years. (2) LAND DEDICATIONS AND CASH IN-LIEU FEES School District policy requires that the applicant either dedicate land directly to the School District along with provision of the adjacent infrastructure and/or pay cash-in-lieu (CIL) fees based on the student yield of the development. CIL fees only provide funds for land acquisition, which is only a small component of providing additional school capacity for a feeder. Specific comments regarding land dedications and CIL fees for this referral are as follows: • Dedication and/or Cash-in-lieu Requirements-The District has had discussions with the applicants about providing an elementary and middle school on the property (total of 35 acres). However, since this proposal will have a land dedication requirement that is larger than 35 acres, this development will likely be required to provide some additional CIL fees according to the attached chart. • Number of Units covered by dedication/cash-in-lieu —Approximately 1900 single-family units would be exempt from paying CIL fees with a 35 acre land dedication. All units over that will be subject to CIL fees. • Dedication/Cash-in-lieu Procedures—Land dedications transactions are conducted through the District Planning office and involve a dedication agreement, which outlines the terms and responsibilities of each party. Cash-in-lieu payments are to be made to the St. Vrain Valley School District Business Office—395 S. Pratt Parkway, Longmont, CO. 3) TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS Transportation considerations for a project deal with busing and pedestrian access to and from the subdivision. Pedestrian access, in particular, is an important goal of the School District in order to facilitate community connection to schools and to minimize transportation costs. Specific comments for this application are as follows: • Provision of Transportation- Busing, under current boundaries, would likely be provided. • Pedestrian and Access Issues — The School District looks forward to reviewing detailed plans of sidewalks and pedestrian pathway with future submittals. ST.VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 395 SOUTH PRATT PARKWAY, LONGMONT, CO 80501, SCOTT TOILLION, DIRECTOR. PHONE 303-682-7229. FAX 303-682-7344. \ \ \ \ I ' ! II � \ / c -0 . . : . � ' � u ad ci, \ \ \ . 2 o \ . •\ e ; 3 \ , - as czi ~ // u3 { \ / \ II ) 6-1 \ "5 ■Go 0 0 a 0 ' 0 \ - - - © R % R 5 R ! E Go b , \ era G , 4 G _ bo % G k 1.1� § c4 % � ) \ ) \ \ \ � II -O. S . Q . ' Q ® / - _ . _ ] fa ` ] w & * K \ 2 2 \ / R tt Cud \ - § / § a A & 0 & u % . % » / ® . a ) ! ) } \ ) � I ' ! o " Lh . a / . 4 f / k4 ` ` ^ ` ) a � - \ ) § ® \ \ en � � a ) •@ ® ■ A C C § H / H ( t ~ ` \ / j } � \ � \ \ � � / ; 2 a 2 G m \ •.!. d bill / R ) VI f � : a - § e ® E o % r : 3 f / / ± -a ia$ a § \ } \ .it / 0 a . 0 \ \ ad \ : , \ \, . � / , \ 3 � : ' � J , : /II , I/ i � /; . \ St. Valley School&strta�ty De De 11.77ELEY OFFICEPa►tment September 28, 2005 OCT x 5 2005 Michelle Martin rrw Weld I _ED C County Planning Department ��.� V 918 10th St. Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Meadow Ridge Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County (Situate in the E1 of Section 23 and the SW% of Section 24, T3N, R68W) Dear Michelle Thank you for referring Meadow Ridge Land Use Amendement to the School District. The District has reviewed the development proposal in terms of (1) available school capacity, (2) required land dedications and/or cash-in- lieu fees and (3) transportation considerations. After reviewing the above proposal, the School District has noted comments below. Generally, the District finds that adequate available school capacity does not exist for this area. The principal findings of this review are as follows: • Mead Elementary and Mead Middle schools are projected to exceed the 125% capacity benchmark within the next 5-year period with the addition of students from this project. • Capacity calculations for this feeder include High School 5 approved under the 2002 Bond, which has not yet been constructed. Until this facility is built, there may be short-term crowding at Skyline High School. Capacity to serve this development at the elementary and middle school levels will have to come from a future school bond, with the potential of some capacity being provided from voluntary mitigation funds from this and other developments. • The School District has discussed the possibility of the applicant mitigating this proposal's impacts on this feeder system, but has not yet reached any formal agreement. Should this development be approved, the options for managing short-term overcrowding while the new schools are under construction may include adding modular classrooms and implementing split or staggered schedules as needed. Other options may include but not be limited to implementing year-round schools or asking voters to approve new bonds for additional school facilities or a mill levy for additional operating funds. It should be noted that a lack of operating funds may be a factor in delaying construction and occupancy of new school facilities in this area. Detailed information on the specific capacity issues, the cash-in-lieu/land dedication requirements and transportation impacts for this proposal follow in Attachment A. The recommendation of the District noted above applies to the attendance boundaries current as of the date of this letter. These attendance boundaries may change in the future as the new facilities are constructed and opened. If you have any further questions or concerns regarding this referral, please feel free to contact me via e-mail at searue den@stvrain.k12.co.us or at the number below. Sincerely, Glen Segrue, AI P Planning Specialist Enc: Exhibit A - Specific Project Analysis Cash-in-lieu Chart ST.VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT.395 SOUTH PRATT PARKWAY,LONGMONT,CO 80501. SCOTT TOILLION,DIRECTOR.PHONE 303-682-7229. FAX 303-682-7344. ATTACHMENT A-Specific Project Analysis PROJECT: Meadow Ridge Land Use Amendment (1) SCHOOL CAPACITY The Board of Education has established a District-wide policy of reviewing new development projects in terms of the impact on existing and approved school facilities within the applicable feeder system. Any residential project within the applicable feeder that causes the 125% school benchmark capacity to be exceeded within 5 years would not be supported. This determination includes both existing facilities and planned facilities from a voter-approved bond. The building capacity, including existing and new facilities, along with the impact of this proposal and all other approved development projects for this feeder is noted in the chart below. CAPACITY INFORMATION CAPACITY BENCHMARK (includes projected students,plus development's student impact) School Building Stdts. Stdt. 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 Level Capacity Oct-04 Impact Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. Stdts Cap. stdts cap. Elementary 504 451 840 459 91% 1350 268% 1372 272% 1398 277% 1422 282% Middle 360 531 336 360 100% 677 188% 686 191% 724 201% 746 207% High School' 2073 1446 408 1469 71% 1962 95% 2022 98% 2094 101% 2156 104% Total 4272 1584 2288 3989 4080 4216 4324 *combines capacities of existing schools and those approved in the 2002 bond that will alleviate this feeder Specific comments concerning this proposal regarding School Capacity are as follows: • Specific Impact - This application could add 2400 new single-family dwelling units with a potential impact of 1584 additional student in the Mead Elementary, Mead Middle,and Skyline High School Feeder. • Benchmark Determination - The School District anticipates that Mead Elementary and Mead Middle schools will exceed the 125%benchmark capacity within the next 5 years with the addition of this development. • Additional Capacity Impacts— A new high school has been approved in the 2002 Bond and is expected to be open within the next 5 years. However, the exact date of completion for this facility remains to be determined and will depend on the rate of residential growth in this feeder and the availability of operating funds. • Mitigation — The School District has developed a mitigation policy, under which the District will not oppose the plat stages of a development, even if it is projected to be over the 125% Capacity Benchmark. The District and the developer have been working on an agreement to provide voluntary mitigation funds under this policy, but have not yet reached any formal agreement. • Phasing-The District would appreciate a phasing plan from the developer to better determine enrollment and capacity impacts on the affected schools. A phasing plan will allow the District to more accurately reflect this development's impact on school capacity over the next 5 years. (2) LAND DEDICATIONS AND CASH IN-LIEU FEES School District policy requires that the applicant either dedicate land directly to the School District along with provision of the adjacent infrastructure and/or pay cash-in-lieu (CIL) fees based on the student yield of the development. CIL fees only provide funds for land acquisition, which is only a small component of providing additional school capacity for a feeder. Specific comments regarding land dedications and CIL fees for this referral are as follows: • Dedication and/or Cash-in-lieu Requirements-The District has had discussions with the applicants about providing an elementary and middle school on the property (total of 35 acres). However, since this proposal will have a land dedication requirement that is larger than 35 acres, this development will likely be required to provide some additional CIL fees according to the attached chart. • Number of Units covered by dedication/cash-in-lieu —Approximately 1900 single-family units would be exempt from paying CIL fees with a 35 acre land dedication.All units over that will be subject to CIL fees. • Dedication/Cash-in-lieu Procedures—Land dedications transactions are conducted through the District Planning office and involve a dedication agreement, which outlines the terms and responsibilities of each party. Cash-in-lieu payments are to be made to the St. Vrain Valley School District Business Office—395 S. Pratt Parkway, Longmont, CO. 3)TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS Transportation considerations for a project deal with busing and pedestrian access to and from the subdivision. Pedestrian access, in particular, is an important goal of the School District in order to facilitate community connection to schools and to minimize transportation costs. Specific comments for this application are as follows: • Provision of Transportation-Busing, under current boundaries,would likely be provided. • Pedestrian and Access Issues — The School District looks forward to reviewing detailed plans of sidewalks and pedestrian pathway with future submittals. ST.VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT.395 SOUTH PRATT PARKWAY, LONGMONT,CO 80501. SCOTT TOILLION,DIRECTOR.PHONE 303-682-7229. FAX 303-682-7344. _ t CC ra a. `I' l / 2f § obo kd \ o Io o ill = 0- 11111111111 III3 $ III2 k ■ &it J 4-M CS I \ § ..-uin In � � L. '‘K a } - � S ; I/ I S \ f 173 \ 8 \ III� � > m & � mm ) in. \ - � a ! a .04-94 Q, _ f \ _ cts � � 0ea } | \ j \ \ kJ 2 - . 2 'O ; ® # \in eA � [ On fp ) ato l C .O ) \ • 04 \ & % \ \ § ) �• � � 2 Li 4c g \ \ \ � \ � \ kIII k � � o \ \ � \ \ 0I t � � - 2i jai � 2t ! . ! � % ; 4 ( 4 % q \ 03 I . f \ § \ \ \ \ ) \ ) \ fe 12 k % ka. k , ; \ \ \ 7 Ian nr & $ e # » tg ± NI a � e - E o e a ° ; � t - k k # ! g 1111110 111111111R1-3 \ / r _ IRI ' I\ u. re Li- 4 § « { - on ■ U 2 5 e « § STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER cow Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources ye 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 �') Denver,Colorado 80203 �t806 j Phone(303)866-3581 September 13, 2005 FAX(303)866-3589 Bill Owens www.watecstate.co.us Weld County Planning Department Governor Michelle Martin Russell George Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE Executive Director 918 10th Street Hal D.Simpson,P.E. Greeley Co 80631 SEP 1 6 2005 State Engineer Re: Meadow Ridge PUD-Sketch Plan RECEIVED Sec. 23 and 24,T3N, R68W, 6th P.M Water Division 1,Water District 5 Dear Ms. Martin: We have reviewed the above referenced proposal to subdivide a 463.73-acre parcel into a mixed- use community. Information from the referral material indicates that this is an amendment to the previously submitted Meadow Ridge PUD that was reviewed by this office by our letter dated November 24, 2004. The purpose of this amendment is to modify the land area that was previously dedicated to this development. This proposal will reduce the developed area from 801 acres to 463.73 acres. Of the 463.73 acres, 135.89 acres will be dedicated for commercial or residential use and 327.84 acres will be designated as residential use. Applicant proposes a maximum of 2,400 residential units on the property, assuming that the property is developed entirely residential. If some of the property is developed for commercial uses, the number of residential units will be reduced. A Water Supply Information Summary Form was not included in the referral material. The proposed water source for this development is still identified as the Little Thompson Water District ("District"). A letter of commitment for service from the District was also provided. Based on the information from the above-mentioned letter the District is committed to serve up to 2,300 residential lots and 100 acres of commercial/nonresidential land use. The District will require the developer to purchase and transfer to the District 1.4 shares of the Colorado Big Thompson (CBT)water per lot prior to the tap activation. The submittal information indicates that the property is irrigated land. The Applicant anticipates continuing to use irrigation water from the existing lakes and irrigation ditch systems for the open space and outdoor watering needs within the development. This letter is not offering an opinion on the irrigation water for this development. Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), C.R.S., the State Engineer's office offers the opinion that with the District as the water supplier, the proposed water supply may be provided without causing material injury to existing water rights and the supply is expected to be adequate. We recommend that the County obtain a signed copy of the water service agreement from the District prior to final approval of the Development. As indicated above, the State Engineer's opinion is only in regard to the domestic water supplied by the District. The irrigation water adequacy and injury assessment was not reviewed. If you have any question in this matter please contact loana Comaniciu of this office. Sincerely, - Dick Wolfe, P.E. Assistant State Engineer cc: Jim Hall, Division Engineer Water Supply Branch Subdivision File DW/IC/Meadow Ridge PUD L----%.2)\\ Weld County Referral ' November 17, 2005 C. COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: PLEASE RETURN REFERRAL SHEET BY DECEMBER 9, 2005. • Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. ` Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan) and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1) land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66; east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new Information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if December 20, 2005 applicable) • ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan ( We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. O See attached letter. Comments: /7(.E# 1NG [0Pt L.ttyP j/U Y#t 7-76 ffve:it C7nvin/ce__. Fox. 7/He Nl VD S'Yt; V Signature Date ''-Net/ - ?rit-:5-- Agency La t/ = i f/aat75 vI,/ 7H4 5i///c7- ❖Weld County Planning Dept. 4918 10'^Street,Greeley,CO.80631 4'•(970)353-6100 ext.3640 4(970)304-6498 fax d eT2 :80 SD ea AON T • Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE a� t:, t 0 2005 4* CNED Memorandum TO: Michelle Martin, W.C. Planning Wilk DATE: December 9, 2005 FROM: Pam Smith, W.C. Department of Public; - t COLORADO Health and Environment l CASE NO.: 2005XX NAME: Benson Farms The Weld County Health Department has reviewed the petition to amend the MUD land use modification. The applicant is still planning to pursue the PUD application. The petition will re-allocate the residential and neighborhood commercial zoning areas of the property. The Department does not object provided that the development will be served by a community water district and a sanitary sewer district, as originally proposed. O:\PAM\PLANNING\SKETCH\MEADOW RIDGE MUD 2005XX.RTF I 0 Weld County Referral ' August 30, 2005 Ci COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29,2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22(Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26(Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new Information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information,please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if applicable) November 15,2005 C);, We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan JE4 We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: I.l (fin rail 66 rYu { c�Aa2e Gi t n e, c om erj nO VADAQiinrO I.uflrf, rvol-r4. Signature ( Date q _ a-o5 Agency ( 3Y� &Jy\4(D 1YCt +Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 +(970)304-6498 fax (/r,: ‘) Weld County Referral ' November 17, 2005 C. COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: PLEASE RETURN REFERRAL SHEET BY DECEMBER 9, 2005. Applicant Benson Farms LLC Case Number 2005-XX Please Reply By September 29, 2005 Planner Michelle Martin Project Petition to amend the Mixed Use Development Area of Unincorporated Weld County. Changes to Chapter 22 (Comprehensive Plan)and Chapter 26 (Mixed Use Development Plan Structural Land Use Map 2.1)land use designation modification. Legal Part E2 of Section 23 and the SW4 of Section 24 all in T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. Location North of and adjacent to State Hwy 66;east of and adjacent to CR 9.5. Parcel Number 1207 24 000009, 1207 24 000004, 1207 24 000003, 1207 23 000011, 1207 23 000033, and 1207 23 000032 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information maybe added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information,please call the Department of Planning Services. Weld County Planning Commission Hearing (if December 20, 2005 applicable) ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan RI, We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. • Comments: [ IUl i &(I COX iv n° f t.o(Vt.:v,l no ‘nol,n Signature 1\n,\ Date I I -Z7 15 Agency 7 C.m.i/ a :Weld County Planning Dept. +918 10th Street,Greeley, CO.80631 :(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax Hello