The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About940486.tiff AR239.16 '3 RESOLUTION RE: ACTION OF BOARD CONCERNING CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A (AGRICULTURAL) TO E (ESTATE) - TOM AND MARGARET RUSSELL 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, a public hearing was held on the 11th day of May, 1994, at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of hearing the application of Tom and Margaret Russell, 1710 Lashley Street, Longmont, Colorado 80501, requesting a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) for a parcel of land located on the following described real estate, to-wit: Part of the Ei of Section 5, Township 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado WHEREAS, at said hearing on May 11, 1994, the Board deemed it advisable to continue said matter to May 18, 1994, to allow all Board members to be present, and WHEREAS, at said hearing on May 18, 1994, the Board deemed it advisable to again continue said matter to May 25, 1994, to allow all Board members to be present, and WHEREAS, at said hearing on May 25, 1994, the applicants, Tom and Margaret Russell, were present and represented by Geraldine Russell, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners heard all the testimony and statements of those present and reviewed the request of the applicant and, having been fully informed, finds that this request from Tom and Margaret Russell for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) shall be denied for the following reasons: 1. The streets providing access to the development are not adequate in size to meet the requirements of the proposed district. 2. The uses which would be allowed are not compatible to the surrounding agricultural land uses. 3. Sewer service by means of septic systems is not adequate or appropriate due to high water tables. 4. It is the opinion of the Board of County Commissioners that the applicants have not shown compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Policies. This proposal is not consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Policies. This proposal is located in the A (Agricultural) Zone District and is evaluated under the Residential, Agricultural, Open Space, Economic, Urban Growth Boundary, and Environmental Quality Goals and Policies. PL0950 See e 1-2G // 940486 Also 941586 B 1445 RFC 02391628 06/03/94 12 : 03 $0 . 00 1/004 (� O�� ';F 0U5 MARY ANN FRUERSTEIN CLERK & RECORDER Whi,l) Co, CO L CHANGE OF ZONE - RUSSELL PAGE 2 5. According to Section 21.5.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, the zoning of the property is faulty, or changing conditions in the area warrant a Change of Zone. The applicant indicated the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This particular application is not adjacent to a municipality, constitutes leap-frog development, and is located on prime farmland. The Residential, Agricultural, Urban Growth Boundary, Open Space, Economic and Environmental Quality Goals and Policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan demonstrate this Change of Zone should be denied. Several sections of the Comprehensive Plan do not support the applicants' proposal. The Residential Development Sections which do not support this application include Residential Goals 3 and Residential Policies 1, 3, and 4. Agricultural Goals 1, 2, 4, and 6 and Agricultural Policies 1, 3, and 10 indicate this application should be denied. Urban Growth Boundary Goals 1 and 3 and Urban Growth Boundary Policies 1 and 2.C do not support this application. Other Comprehensive Plan Sections which should be evaluated and do not support the proposed land use include Open Space Policy 1, Economic Goal 2, and Environmental Quality and Natural Resources Goal 1. 6. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan discusses existing land use by stating on page 14, that "The way land is presently used is one of the most important considerations in land-use planning. Most existing development will remain in the future and will have a strong influence on the future pattern of development and land use in the County. . . With the land area of the County remaining constant, increases in the land area of urban-type uses brings about decreases in the land area of farmland. The percentage of urban- type land use is probably not as significant as the pattern of use." The soils on this property are classified as prime, in other words, the best. This soil is also classified as having fair to poor soils potential for urban development, in other words, practically the worst. 7. AGRICULTURAL. The problem of competition and conflict between urban and rural land use interests exists. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan recognizes this and states, "As urban areas continue to expand, these [agricultural] resource lands are either directly converted to urban uses or are adversely impacted due to inherent conflicts between rural and urban activities." Also, on page 23, the Weld County Comprehensive Plan states, "Other burdens to the farmer have occurred from restrictions on normal farming practices in areas encroached upon by residential, commercial, and industrial uses." Unlike other industries that are free to relocate, agriculture is rooted to the soil in a specific time and place. 940486 8 :L445 HEC 02391628 06/03/94 12 : 03 $0 . 00 2 /004 r' 0056 MARY ANN FEVER TEiN c'iKRx & RECORDER WELD CO, CO CHANGE OF ZONE - RUSSELL PAGE 3 The Agricultural Zone District is intended to preserve prime agricultural land and to provide areas for agricultural activities and uses dependent upon agriculture without the interference of incompatible residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The soil at this location has been identified as prime agricultural land by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Allowing residential uses in this location will remove this prime resource from production. Agricultural Goal 4 seeks to "encourage residential. . . development to locate adjacent to existing incorporated municipalities". The proposed Change of Zone is approximately two miles away from the nearest municipality and, therefore, not adjacent to any existing incorporated municipality and constitutes leap-frog development. 8. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY. The Urban Development Goals and Policies are designed to plan for anticipated growth by directing urban uses and development to existing cities which can provide the necessary urban services. The Urban Development Section of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan addresses the preservation of prime agricultural land by considering its relationship to the entire system of land use and development within the County and the region. These goals and policies reflect a basic commitment to conserving natural and managed resources while directing growth. The first Urban Growth Boundary Goal is to, "Concentrate urban development in or adjacent to existing municipalities". This proposal is two miles from any municipality. 9. ECONOMIC. The Comprehensive Plan indicates, "The County shall provide land-use goals and policies which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture". One way of providing for the continuance of agriculture is to incorporate all elements of the Comprehensive Plan in any decisions which are made regarding a change in land-use. By denying this application, agricultural production can continue in this location. 10. The Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage residential uses to locate in existing municipalities or in areas where municipalities have planned for orderly expansion through annexation. Weld County should encourage a compact form of urban development adjacent to towns and cities by directing residential growth to those areas where urban services are already available before committing alternate areas to residential use. Furthermore, the Goals and Policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan specifically discourage residential uses to locate on prime agricultural land. This land should be utilized for agricultural production. B 1445 REC 02391628 06/03/94 12 : 03 $0 . 00 3/004 940486 r 0057 MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN CLERK. & RECORDER WELD CO; CO CHANGE OF ZONE - RUSSELL PAGE 4 Finally, the Weld County Comprehensive Plan has the burden of recognizing and appropriately dealing with the inherent conflict between agricultural and urban uses not only on elected officials, but the applicants themselves by stating on page 24, "It is important that Weld County representatives and officials recognize their role in reducing the conflicts between agricultural uses and residential, commercial and industrial uses. Individuals who find themselves with land designated and zoned in a manner that does not accommodate their intended use should consider seeking other more suitable lands; such a transition will be to the long-term benefit of both the individual and the public." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the application of Tom and Margaret Russell requesting a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) on the above referenced parcel of land be, and hereby is, denied. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 25th day of May, A.D. , 1994. //�� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: , 1 /f r,. /GG„ WELD COUNT y/„ C LORL O� �py� Weld County Clerk- he, Board f/&/f f titettr �,' L. H. Webster, C 'airmen' I BY: De le to.She B4- ,rd Dal . Hal , P o—Tem ' APP ADD AS' f0 FORM: ' �- � ✓1 fr�'-_' //Gevg E. Baxter `tk� 7 Count/ �t eye--/C!oot Constance L. Harbert . Barb/ .1. Kirkm yerer 940486 B 1445 REC 02391628 06/03/94 12 : 03 $0 . 00 4/004 F 0058 MARY ANN FEUERS'PEJN CLERK 24 RECORDER WELD CO, CO HEARING CERTIFICATION DOCKET NO. 94-37 RE: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM A (AGRICULTURAL) TO E (ESTATE) - TOM AND MARGARET RUSSELL A public hearing was conducted on May 25, 1994, at 10:00 a.m. , with the following present: Commissioner W. H. Webster, Chairman Commissioner Dale K. Hall, Pro-Tem Commissioner George E. Baxter Commissioner Constance L. Harbert Commissioner Barbara J. Kirkmeyer Also present: Acting Clerk to the Board, Shelly Miller Assistant County Attorney, Lee Morrison Planning Department representative, Keith Schuett The following business was transacted: I hereby certify that pursuant to a notice dated April 20, 1994, and duly published April 21, 1994, in the Windsor Beacon, a public hearing was conducted on May 11, 1994, to consider the request of Tom and Margaret Russell for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) ; and pursuant to a notice of continuance, dated April 25, 1994, and duly published April 28, 1994, in the Windsor Beacon, a continuance hearing was conducted on May 18, 1994, at which time said matter was again continued to May 25, 1994. A notice of second continuance, dated May 4, 1994, was also published May 5, 1994, in the Windsor Beacon concerning said hearing on May 25, 1994. Lee Morrison, Assistant County Attorney, made this a matter of record. Keith Schuett, Planning Department representative, entered the unfavorable recommendation of the Planning Commission into the record as written and answered a question from Commissioner Hall concerning the information from the Soil Conservation Service. The applicants, Tom and Margaret Russell, were present and represented by Geraldine Russell, their daughter-in-law. Geraldine Russell summarized the applicants' report, submitted on April 25, 1994, and marked as Exhibit F for the record, which explained how the proposal satisfies the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and addressed the concerns of the opposing neighbors. Geraldine Russell stated she held a meeting for the residents on March 3, 1994; however, only 16 of the 92 people that signed the petition attended. She indicated individual concerns, such as the zone change, the access roads, dust abatement, and the layout of the lots, were addressed. She also explained the dust abatement problem could be resolved with the Engineering Department, and Left Hand Water District indicated no history of low water pressure in the area. She stated fire hydrants would be installed according to Mountain View Fire Protection District's recommendation, and there is no knowledge of underground water problems. Geraldine Russell further stated there were no problems with the geological survey and the zoning requirements would be met concerning setbacks from Fir Avenue, as well as establishment of covenants and a home owners' association. Mr. Morrison indicated that State statute may require a home owners' association, depending on the number of parcels and requirements concerning jointly-owned properties. Geraldine Russell said the houses would be factory-built manufactured homes, with brick faces, and delivered in components. She said the houses would be situated on 2.5-acre lots not to obstruct views of the neighbors, and there would be only 15 home sites which will create a buffer to retain the rural atmosphere and be compatible with Carmacar Ranchettes. Geraldine Russell indicated the Erie School in the St. Vrain Valley is accepting transfers; therefore, room is available, and impact fees will be imposed on construction to go toward new schools. She explained the emergency access 940486 l�LC' 5 ' C'L`` /O/- RE: HEARING CERTIFICATION - RUSSELL PAGE 2 easement would probably not be required because the turn-around area would be large. Addressing the concerns of Parkland Estates residents, Geraldine Russell indicated the new structures would be no higher than the existing ones. In response to a question from Commissioner Kitkmeyer, Geraldine Russell stated 130 invitations were sent for the neighborhood meeting and 23 people attended. She indicated the meeting was only informational and there was not much satisfaction. Answering further questions from the Board, Geraldine Russell stated there are 74 residences in Carmacar, and they are willing to negotiate the proposed access. The 37.5 acres to the north of the site are owned by Mr. Crutchley, and the property to the south was recently purchased by the Russells, with Spruce Drive, a public road maintained by the County, currently being used as the farm access. Access easements were discussed, and Mr. Schuett indicated if the proposed access is changed the matter would need to be reheard by the Planning Commission. Mr. Schuett confirmed there was no response from the school district and requested clarification concerning the manufactured homes. Geraldine Russell referred to photographs of homes which were presented at the Planning Commission hearing and reiterated they are factory-built frame homes. She stated they are built according to the Uniform Building Code and indicated the average home would be 2000 square feet and sell for around $150, 000 in Longmont. Bill Cook, Donald Crutchley, Jim Willer, Jim Hollis, Gary Bean, Carolyn Mahoney, Kenneth Vaughters, William Sherman, and Phil Young, surrounding property owners in Carmacar Ranchettes and Parkland Estates, answered questions from the Board and voiced various concerns including water pressure, dust abatement, maintenance of roads, types of houses, compatibility with surrounding livestock and farming operations, increased traffic, establishment of a bedroom community, compatibility with and location of the proposed subdivision in relation to Parkland Estates' Airport, height of structures, overcrowding in the school systems, fire and police protection, underground water problems and percolation tests for septic systems, location of accesses, and maintenance of a rural atmosphere and agriculture. Ms. Mahoney submitted two additional pages to the opponents' petition, which was marked as Exhibit U; eight letters of opposition from Ann Chipman, Steve Chipman, Ellen Frohsinn, Duane and Charlotte Kramer (one letter to Dale Hall) , John McCamey (two separate letters to Dale Hall and Barbara Kirkmeyer) , Joseph and Stephanie Weatherly, and Duane and Charlotte Kramer (one letter to Barbara Kirkmeyer) which were marked as Exhibits V through CC, respectively; and "St. Vrain Valley School District Capital Facilities Needs Assessment," which was marked as Exhibit DD. Mr. Russell indicated they have owned the land for over 20 years and submitted a map, Exhibit EE, illustrating the location and size of Left Hand Water District's water lines in the area. Addressing the concerns of the flyers in Parkland, he stated he was once a pilot and an emergency landing would not occur in the proposed site. He also stated he had concerns about the high line along Weld County Road 12. Mr. Russell explained the water on the property is excess spring runoff, and he owns several shares of water. He said his ground and the property to the north are farmed by the same person. Mr. Russell further explained his land is planted in dryland wheat to keep the weeds from growing, the farm to the north has no water, and the owners of the 75- and 80-acre parcels to the west sold their water to Lafayette. In response to a question from Commissioner Hall, Mr. Russell indicated he was not aware of any seep problems. Commissioner Kirkmeyer explained the Board's decision must be based on specific criteria and questioned the compatibility with the agricultural operations to the north, northwest, and west. Mr. Russell indicated there is currently no dairy to the west; 80 acres were recently bought from the bank, from which a house on 5 acres was split; and 15 homes are not going to make a difference. Commissioner Kirkmeyer also requested evidence from Left Hand Water District indicating adequate water would be available, and she referred to a letter from the District dated January 3, 1994, stating the Left Hand Board would need to take action. Mr. Russell explained they are proposing to obtain water from the 6-inch line which runs along Fir 940486 RE: HEARING CERTIFICATION - RUSSELL PAGE 3 Avenue and indicated said letter approved 15 water taps. Commissioner Kirkmeyer clarified the 15 taps were subject to conditions and action being taken by the water board. Mr. Russell further explained they were required to pay $12,000 and buy 5 taps per year. He then submitted a letter, Exhibit FF for the record, from the Left Hand Water District, dated May 5, 1994, extending the time for full payment until October 3, 1994, and confirming general pressure over 90psi, which is more than adequate, in the main line to Carmacar. Commissioner Kirkmeyer questioned whether the streets were adequate in size to meet requirements and stated the referral from Don Carroll, Public Works Department, was not clear. (Changed to Tape #94-25. ) Mr. Schuett indicated his understanding of Mr. Carroll's referral was there would be impacts to the roads and upgrades would be required to provide an access. He further explained the present streets are not adequate; however, they could be upgraded to become adequate. Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated she is unsure the streets could be upgraded. Geraldine Russell clarified that only one map exists with a maximum of 15 homesites. Her husband would be the primary builder of the homes, and the building would be controlled. She reiterated the matter concerning the irrigation and spring runoff water and stated there is a letter in the file from the farmer. Geraldine Russell indicated Erie and Dacono are planning for growth in the area and stated she understood the north/south runway of Parkland Estates' Airport was for emergency purposes only. She stated the fact that Carmacar Ranchettes was developed prior to Parkland Estates and suggested the underground water problems be researched. She also clarified that the Russells bought their land from the original developer of Carmacar Ranchettes, and they are now pursuing their options. Geraldine Russell also suggested driving slower would help with dust abatement in Carmacar. Linda Cook, Carmacar Ranchettes, indicated she intends to research the water problems and stated concerns about the access road being located in front of her house and the increased traffic. Ms. Cook made further comments and answered questions from the Board. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Schuett indicated the Health Department and Soil Conservation Service referrals indicated no concerns regarding the septic systems; however, the level of the water table has not been reviewed in great detail and could be discussed at a later filing. Mr. Morrison indicated the State Geologist had no reservations as long as geotechnical engineered evaluations were completed for the septic systems. Commissioner Harbert indicated her greatest concern is the streets being too narrow and, if the Change of Zone is granted, the Russells would need to make arrangements for improvements to or change the access. She stated the proposal is compatible with the subdivision to the east; however, she questions compatibility with the other surrounding properties, and the letter from Left Hand indicates adequate water is available. Commissioner Hall stated the proposal would not be compatible in the area and development should be directed adjacent to municipalities. He stated this proposal would be leap-frog development and expressed concern regarding increased traffic and septic systems creating potential groundwater pollution. Commissioner Hall stated approval of this Change of Zone would continue conflict and increase the potential for problems. Discussion ensued concerning potential annexation by Erie. Commissioner Hall moved to deny the request of Tom and Margaret Russell for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) , based on the factors presented today and the Planning Commission's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kirkmeyer. Commissioner Baxter stated he is inclined to allow people to do what they want to do on their own property; however, he agrees with Commissioner Hall that the proposal would not be compatible. He, too, encouraged development closer to a municipality to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and stated Carmacar was developed a long time ago, and this addition would only make things worse. Commissioner Kirkmeyer agreed the proposal would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and not compatible with all of the surrounding area. She stated she still has reservations concerning the adequacy of the water, sewer, and streets. 940486 RE: HEARING CERTIFICATION - RUSSELL PAGE 4 Commissioner Kirkmeyer said she understands the present residents in the area want to maintain their quality of life and their concerns have been addressed; however, the area will be developed sooner or later and the residents need to find a way to lessen the impacts. Chairman Webster agreed with the other Commissioners' comments and suggested people who live in the country not close the door to others who want to move to the country. He stated others should be allowed the same opportunities; however, the Comprehensive Plan needs to be addressed today. On a roll-call vote, the motion carried unanimously. This Certification was approved on the 1st day of June, 1994. / ��/p/,}�,, APPROVED: ATTEST: D/�W444(I,( BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AC y, yjJ/ WELD COUNTY, C LORADO Weld County Clerk to the Board ki 4� 1; / By:4.tlQ, Jr� 1-1 !tC H. Webster, C air an ((((( Depu''ty__((C eI rk to the Boa=dc Dale . Ha , P o-T m TAPE #94-24 and #94-25 George-E. Baxter DOCKET #94-37 G' / onstance L. Ha/r/be/r/tt PL0950 /I /A-ty&L. /Barbara J. Kirkme er f 940486 ATTENDANCE RECORD HEARINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS ON THIS 25TH DAY OF MAY 1994: DOCKET # 94-37 - CHANGE OF ZONE FOR TOM AND MARGARET RUSSELL DOCKET 4 DOCKET (i DOCKET # PLEASE write or print your name legibly, your address and the DOCKET # (as listed above) or the name of the applicant of the hearing you are attending. NAME ADDRESS HEARING ATTENDING (ARV BEAN 1760 C/tucE Q,a, 6,416 -osi6 . 94- 37 Li // d /,wr/,g ( 1.1 /2/,.: 'o sc 4 9e/ --7 7 ,PPOW{/r' U/ / 7V 6380 Fii2 Pu/C f t/E eon/ qv-3 / 11Rf{FPRF'T -'lla( 3 544 rip ,Qvp- leip . Co • 83ci6 9v -37 l to hick_LOH -5-5-04, rile isivt, eel fe Co ce03/Lc W 37 I(4`f1(3LLJS 1172°1 EVE PLACE R1E, cc Y�OS'(, 901-.37 IM lt'L'1 I/C^ t( 7( `( r ' venl� Lk., [,c)r )OS/C 9`f-37 "'Az X.)v1,� 172/ 4r7Ne 9Ace It; e- RE g-�37 gEk4-r-774 C t/1t IL l7TE;es SSMC FIR ,9U,&eIc ro PA /L 79 - 37 co k.-0,: Ay4 0 <f141n 1?(0(c'i' ► . _ al cf3-1(,,, )-(-37 1h air& (/a n iu,J&Q&, 5176- F/l� � 60 XO5/6 ?e.1 -37 vt(RFt S A o* tRls 4r. I✓tw :Si £eiF Co Bas-IL- '?(-37 (c, - J, mar in /9W rr7in. P',e4/ $ LC-le 6 8x516 9137 940486 NOTICE OF SECOND CONTINUANCE Pursuant to the zoning laws of the State of Colorado and the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, a public hearing will be held in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, First Floor, Greeley, Colorado, at the time specified. All persons in any manner interested in the following proposed Change of Zone are requested to attend and may be heard. Should the applicant or any interested party desire the presence of a court reporter to make a record of the proceedings, in addition to the taped record which will be kept during the hearing, the Clerk to the Board shall be advised in writing of such action at least five days prior to the hearing. The cost of engaging a court reporter shall be borne by the requesting party. BE IT ALSO KNOWN that the text and maps so certified by the Weld County Planning Commission may be examined in the office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado. APPLICANT DOCKET NO. 94-37 Tom and Margaret Russell 1710 Lashley Street Longmont, Colorado 80501 ORIGINAL DATE: May 11, 1994 FIRST CONTINUANCE DATE: May 18, 1994 (Matter continued because only three Commissioners will be present on May 11, 1994) SECOND CONTINUANCE DATE: May 25, 1994 (Matter continued because only four Commissioners will be present on May 18, 1994) TIME: 10:00 a.m. REQUEST: Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E? of Section 5, Township 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado LOCATION: Approximately 1500 feet north of Weld County Road 12; west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes and approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: DONALD D. WARDEN WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE BOARD BY: SHELLY K. MILLER DEPUTY CLERK TO THE BOARD DATED: May 4, 1994 PUBLISHED: May 5, 1994, in the Windsor Beacon ` 940486 f AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ' STATE OF COLORADO as COUNTY OF WELD I, ROGER A. UPICIER of said County of Weld, being duly In any manor aawa4Na in Colorado. sworn,say that l am publisher of the fallowing propsMd Change of Zone are APPucANT WINDSOR BEACON requested to attend and may DOCKET NO.94-97 Tom be heard. and Margaret Russell 1710 Lashley Street _ a weekly newspaper having a general circulation in said Should the applicant or any Longmont,Colorado 80501 County and State, published in the town of WINDSOR, in I Interested party desire the 1 presence f record co roeporter r e O1RIGINAL DATE: May Ii,[ said County and State; and that the notice, of which the proceedings.in addition to Mt annexed is a true copy, has been published in said weekly the taped record which will FIRST CONTINUANCE for / successive weeks, that the notice was be kept during the hearing, DATE: May 18,1994( published in the regular and entire issue of every number of the Clerk to the Board shall continued because on be advised h wring*of such three Commissioners wN the paper during the period and time of publication, and in -action at least live days pdo present on May I1.19w) the newspaper proper and not in a supplement, and that ICTICE OF SECOND to the hearing. The cost of CONTIL film engaging a court reporter SECOND CONTINUANCE the first publication of said notice was in said paper bearing shall be borne by the DATE: May 25, 5904 the date of the '/? Pursuant to the zoning laws requesting party. (Matter continued becelas S day of , AD., 19 !O and the Cie M the State of Colorado and only four Commissionen the Weld County Zoning BE IT ALSO KNOWN that be present an May 18,1901) last publication bearing the date of the Ordinance,a public hearing the text and maps so _day of A.D., 19_ and that will be held'n the Chambers certified by the Weld County TIME: 10:00 a.m. 1 of the Board of County Planning Commission may the said WINDSOR BEACON has been published Commissioners of Weld be examined in the office of REQUEST:Change of Zane County, Colorado, Weld the Clerk to the Board of from A(Agricultural).to E continuously and uninterruptedly for the period of 5 County Centennial Center. County Commissionsrs, (SSW consecutive weeks, in said County and State, prior to the 915 10th Street.First Floor, located in Ste Weld Cony Greeley,Colorado.at the Centemal Can,115 10tr. LISA&DESSIIPT1ON.Pan date of first publication of said notice, and the same is a time specified. All persons Street.Third paw.Watley, et the E1/2 et Setts 5. newspaper within the meaning of an Act to regulate printing TeelO SS,Reny s dA P.M.wine W West,c$ of legal notices and advertisements, approved May 18, Owwdy,Colorado 1931,and all prior acts so far as in force. 15 fee thoof Weldie lJ', 15O0 feet north of Wald ` County Road 12;west of es adjacent to Canner — Ranahwtes and }18 SHER approximately 1500 feat ✓ �h /west of Weld County Rind 5 Subscribed and sworn to bef t. me this eJ/ day of BOARD OF COUNTY N„ ' 19c`� COMMISSIONERS ,, WELD COUNTY, �Q �7 . COLORADO ... /) P/ 11-ti o� BY:DONALD D.WARDEN NOTARY PUBLIC WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE BOARD My commission expires 9zc.L J a�f q 9 to BV:SHELLY K.MILLER DEPUTY CLERK TO THE �/ BOARD DATED:May 4,1994 Published in the Windsor • Beacon on May 5.1994. • • 340486 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Second Continuance, Docket #94-37, was placed in the United States mail, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following property owners. ( /( �' ��/' t DATED this 7 day of �J� J , 1994. VICTOR AND FLORENCE KEAR RICHARD AND CARMEN CHAVEZ 5517 ASPEN AVENUE 5346 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 SHARREN LYNN ESTER JAMES AND GEORGINA DAVIS 5487 ASPEN AVENUE 1843 PIKES PEAK ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 KATHRYN AYDT AND RONALD SCOTT AND TROY GLENN JONES LINDA HIDALGO 5457 ASPEN AVENUE 1813 PIKES PEAK STREET ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 ELDEN AND BARBARA MOORE RICHARD AND WILMA KETELBOETER 5427 ASPEN AVENUE 5306 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 DEAN AND SHEILA KOENIG DUANE AND CHARLOTTE KRAMER 5397 ASPEN AVENUE 1781 SPRUCE DRIVE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 MICHAEL AND CAROLYN MAHONEY LAVERNE AND DIXIE KRUEGER 5506 FIR AVENUE 1841 SPRUCE DRIVE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 BARBARA VAN ZUIDEN AND GARY AND SONJA BEAN WILLIAM SHERMAN 1760 SPRUCE DRIVE 5476 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 DOUGLAS AND DEBORAH LENZ CHESTER AND MARGARET HAUN 1780 SPRUCE DRIVE 5446 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 MARVIN AND SUSAN THOMPSON WILLIAM AND LINDA COOK 1820 SPRUCE DRIVE 5416 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 ERIE, CO 80516 CLARENCE AND CAROLINE FOSTER FRANCIS AND DONNA WALSH 13610 HURON 5386 FIR AVENUE BROOMFIELD, CO 80020 ERIE, CO 80516 940486 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING - RUSSELL PAGE 2 JOSEPH AND WENDY LOMELI 1677 WELD COUNTY ROAD 12 ERIE, CO 80516 ANTHONY AND LUCILLE GARDELLA 1675 WELD COUNTY ROAD 12 ERIE, CO 80516 DAVID AND JUDITH SOMSKY 1673 WELD COUNTY ROAD 12 ERIE, CO 80516 DONALD AND JEANNE CRUTCHLEY 5579 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 MARK AND MARILEE BELLA 5557 ASPEN DRIVE ERIE, CO 80516 KENNETH AND VANDA VAUGHTERS 5566 FIR AVENUE ERIE, CO 80516 FARM CREDIT BANK OF WICHITA 127 22ND STREET GREELEY, CO 80631 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY 3620 WAZEE STREET DENVER, CO 80216-3642 TOM AND MARGARET RUSSELL 1710 LASHLEY STREET LONGMONT, CO 80501 PETER SWIFT SWIFT AND ASSOCIATES 709 3RD AVENUE LONGMONT, CO 80501 iL2z LDeputy Clerk c the Board 940486 0((illicf MEMORAnDUM Board of County Commissioners May 18, 1994 Illik To Date Greg Thompson, Current Planner C ,/ COLORADO From Z-487, Tom and Margaret Russell Subject: The applicants have requested a continuance of this case until May 25, 1994, at 10:00 a.m. , because only four County Commissioners are scheduled to be in attendance at todays hearing. LY i_c Lc*7 M, 940486 Windsor Beacon i 425 Main Street ______ Windsor, Colorado 80550 O V Receipt ;(J Received Amount # & 6 0 c&-.—, ri_44— j Display Ad Subscription , t Classified Ad_ " Other Date " CU (7 ct By 1a,) 1J O2r o u) 0 4No G 34e4i3u I I n; I I s a Ek if I e /i i ' E r Is.c 5 Dyvc , a i" R .- W I° `. ice¢ J e c3nIrIa I I- 4 ; Is Ilie 8 I - w I I oo�. F B N �� VI I . gg' N I ; I• g O �i 9i�s g c 18 -; . c, �� I •I R B I I I n I Wm oa„_ .._.._ 00:„ I ill Iis x m e III el i is1 Gott. n� s III� 6 RN , iii le hm E ili . -,MEW--- 940486 / 1 --/ ! \ PROJECT' CV PROJECT, \ aTaaa �. RUSSELL PROPERTY t�m-mu eo nog Fa igvn THE SIGN SHALL BE POSTED ADJACENT TO AND VISIBLE FROM A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION IS NOT ADJACENT TO A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE APPLICANT SHALL POST ONE SIGN IN THE MOST PROMINENT PLACE ON THE PROPERTY AND POST A SECOND SIGN AT THE POINT AT WHICH THE DRIVEWAY (ACCESS DRIVE) INTERSECTS A PUBLICLY MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SIGN POSTING CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY THAT THE SIGN PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY AT L, r LEAST 10DAYS BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HEARING FOR CASE # z 7 0 THE SIGN WAS POSTED BY: ,� / CT l -6?liw NAME OF PERSON POSTING SIGN SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT STATE OF COLORADO ) jeu/dtr- ) ss. COUNTY OF isirsiaD ) %IL SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO ME THIS /6 DAY OF , 19 ? y . SEAL d. , Ago k%. NOTAR 'UBLI C MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 4r ----7.9. "97 LAST DAY TO POST SIGN IS: /- I(4? 9L//y , 19 / / s . PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO THE /DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES' OFFICE ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF THE HEARING. 940486 :A•••ri, • ill LEFT HAND WATER DISTRICT mmwm May 5, 1994 Tom and Margaret Russell 1710 Lashley Longmont, CO 80501 Re: Tap request #1441 Dear Tom and Margaret: This letter is in reply to your letter dated April 25, 1994 requesting an extension on the above referenced tap request. We will extend the time for the full payment of the tap fee until October 3 , 1994 . The amount due at that time will be the then current tap fee. Also, please be advised that we have no history of low pressure complaints in Carmacar. Main line pressures in this subdivision are generally over 90psi, which is more than adequate. Please phone if you have any questions. Qincerely, I ,rn--&.. ,7? - 1 ames M. Dickey eneral Manager JMD/kml R EXHIBIT I r P.O. Box 210 • Niwot CO • 80544 • (303) 530-4200 • Fax (303) 530-5252 9404% ___ 8 . _ - `,. RD: 20 j I14 r_____. // III .. 1/4 2 ' 2 24 j z 19 /2O 21 4,. 22 E I { 3' t" 8 2 �' / ;� 8 I aD. 18 6 _ ) l CRS --- ID T E CC av ._ /4, cl 8 RD. OP2 29 1 28 ::'/ 27 — 25 CO r— - . ,- — — L, F Si—N---*' IWOT R.q� C'! -� I,_ � IS co — +— DIZcN P.- - R D. 16 i r 11 • I may. 1 36 to"I / 31 ' I r, I 32 g� 33 i P 6„ it i 2. 3 4 I, d o st,• G co°NTY_ . A I \ , ' I" ,' - \ D. 14 1'/2 \0Pq p'„ I �� p• R0. 14 T 2.N !�' ,Z e r T. I N. 2 ',1 LJ�II i-I t/4 RANG THE y....% 1 o I, 71L LTER I, .44 4 e, 3 9 d -�, /� o ia_ ir`.:- -- —:.. 2y' 8:. \ 6.. RD 12 CROSS .11 ' ��3b 1 -12 ( D. 4 :ca±? a1 e, 0 i I ,r \ RD 10 J I" D. 10 13 AY IH• ' (7 1 I ^ 5 J itMRIE i ccii / J , ' •// i I k:, � �� I e, MPNF50N TANK /� W I I i �✓ /� o _ _ O • . u _ ..,,,. W W 2 8 4 pi .. p 1 .....„.___,c� (o \ 30 29 �8 j.- 2$ L I4.1 II 0 -1 -I I w / EXHIBIT I IKES C I I%2 I i. m l 1 _ __j -_._.- 2• -�D-a -=t i i - 1 F _ 9404% E qy3] r,�rnis As meter ru St. Vrain Valley School District Capital Facilities Needs Assessment per <.e c ' r Y" p ( *$ 4t B.VSLA kc inrOs .+�yronvwu c' �-uoJ� as yr .. i n{Cr✓w%f�H4 . March 2, 1994 z EXHIBIT I '/G March 2. 1994 1 Sr. Vram Valley School Durnrt 940486 capFral Farsiiner Needs Assessment Long Range Facilities Planning Committee Membership Jo Allen Dennis Berton Martin Block Hal Burdick Alice Burnett Jerome Cross Pete Ross Tom Garcia Froda Greenberg Cynthia Hedges Roger Jurgens Nat Kinlund Many Beth Laughery Gene Leach Darrel Lemon Carolyn Mahoney Renee McDermid Constance Pechora Mark Sullivan (Chair) Consultant: Shannon L. Bingham Western Sky Services 1750 30th St. #424 Boulder, CO 80301 303-938-1055 SVVSD Board of Education Martin Block Milton Etter Kathy Hall Sandra Manly James Martinsen Dale McCall Michael Shaw Superintendent of Schools Fred Pierce Sr. Vrain Valley School D slriet 2 March 2. 1994 940486 Captlai Fd,:au'c.�r .1 .-1 nsr.csmc.0 i Table of Contents Section 1 : Capital Facilities Needs Assessment Executive Summary 5 Economic and Demographic Background 7 Erie Jr. / Sr. High Feeder System Description 14 Frederick Jr. / Sr. High Feeder System Description 16 Longmont High Feeder System Description 27 Lyons Jr. / Sr. High Feeder System Description 29 Niwot High School Feeder System Description 31 Skyline High Feeder System Description 38 Enrollment vs. Capacity 44 Summary 46 I Section 2: Year Round Schools Report 49 Section 3: LRFPC Recommendation 66 Section 4: Facility Alternatives Staff Report 68 Appendix A - Abandoned Alternatives 85 Section 5: Appendix B - School Capacity 86 March 2.1994 3 St.Vrain Valley School District 940486 Executive Summary This document represents the continuing efforts of the St. Vrain Valley School District to update its five-year Capital Improvements Plan. The district has maintained an on-going, effective planning process as evidenced by the September, 1989 document "Building for Excellence". The district conducts on -going planning in or- der to anticipate growth and meet student facility needs as they occur. The "Building for Excellence" document was effectively a CIP for the district and St. Vrain used the document to structure its last bond election. The St. Vrain Valley School District will continue to experience significant growth in student enrollment during this decade. This growth will be a result of natural increase, economic growth and large-scale new housing construction. This report establishes the need for additional school facilities or some other mechanism for providing additional space in schools. The report addresses eco- nomic growth in Boulder and Weld Counties as compared to the Denver Metropolitan Area (DMA) and observes how the economy has performed over time. Rapidly growing subareas of the district are discussed and the resulting effect on long-term enrollment is noted. The report projects enrollment for individual schools dur- ing the coming eight years based on this information. New hous- ing construction is addressed using information for all communi- ties gathered from municipal planning offices and developers. The housing market for the St. Vrain Valley School District is ex- pected to be strong during the next eight years. The general state of economic growth combined with low interest rates has resulted in the creation of large-scale land developments which will pro- March 2, 1994 5 Sr. Vrain Valley School District 940496 duce significant volumes of new single family homes and multi- family dwellings. Accordingly. this report focuses on develop- ment as a primary predictor of additional enrollment in addition to I historical growth. The scope of an improvement schedule and the timing of those improvements depends upon the degree to which the housing market remains strong. I The district is also examining year-round schooling, busing and other means to address crowding. Obviously this report focuses on new construction solutions to the problem and can be used to illustrate the magnitude of enrollment growth that would have to be addressed by other means of providing additional capacity. This capital improvements plan proposes the construction of two new elementary schools, one middle school and additional high school facilities to accommodate growth. Combined solutions of new construction and non-construction solutions are also possible. r it' ! ` F b. '� 'tto a r 4+ 4..'>44..'>4M L a a I, ft-7,? tmya147 �' roa •.. [ .\,\.". i 14 \,lea,,,'A' N,', .- - ` • .Sr• a'E,.`&r „,ay.c; ;:a, .,�... a.'. +. ,:csrez Sales Office - Lyons Valley Estates Sr. Vram Valley School Distract 6 March 2 1994 940486 ( tPJ ! I .n:(i!ir A [d Acsra me nl Economic and Demographic Background The following paragraphs provide historical information and help I to establish the economic and demographic growth of Boulder and Weld Counties and the Denver Metropolitan Area (DMA) with an emphasis on the implications for school district capital facilities. Certain factors including employment, population, and pertinent economic and demographic indicators, provide an explanation for the rapid increase in demand for public education services in the district. Employment The primary determinant of economic and demographic change within a region is variation of employment opportunities, particu- larly basic industry employment. Basic industries are those that export products or services out of the region and thus create other opportunities for service-related jobs. From 1980 through 1991, DMA employment increased 17 percent to about 988,000 workers. In comparison, Boulder County employment was up over 38,000 jobs, or 39 percent, a considerably faster rate of growth: (1) March 2, 1994 7 St Vrain Valley-School Drone, 940486 �,,?iL:i F.::Riau. An.. inr tvrta. Boulder County vs DMA Employment (in thousands) with Percent Change Larimer County and Weld County Employment Boulder County Boulder Boulder as a I aritner Jst Year DMA* County DMA County % of DMA county county 1980 842.9 98.2 NA NA 11.7% 75.9 57.3 1981 870.6 101.4 3.3% 3.3% 11.6 75.5 57.3 1982 882.5 102.8 1.4 1.4 11.6 74.9 57.1 1983 949.3 119.7 7.6 164 12.6 79.2 59.1 1984 992.8 129.6 4.6 8.3 13.1 82.7 60.4 1985 994.6 124.9 0.2 (3.6) 12.6 83.4 60.6 1986 959.2 121.4 (3.6) (2.8) 12.7 83.5 58.7 1987 939.1 120.5 (2.1) (0.7) 12.8 86.5 60.8 1988 955.0 126.9 1.7 5.3 13.3 89.6 63.8 1989 951.0 127.9 (0.4) 0.8 13.4 92.0 63.0 1990 989.2 134.2 4.0 4.9 13.6 98.2 65.5 122 988.0 136.4 10.1) L¢ 13.8 NA NA +145.1 +38.2 *Denver Boulder CMSA - Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson counties) Although Boulder County employees represent a little more than one of every eight DMA workers, the County accounted for more than one of every four new workers added to the employment ranks between 1980 and 1991. The Boulder County unemploy- ment rate has generally been at or below the DMA rate: (2) Sr Vran Volley School District 8 March 2, 1994 940486 (Spit:d 1.r.,!u,r. Acrif:_t 2 ccccrnro! Boulder, Larimer & Weld County vs. DMA Unemployment Rates 1980 - 1991 Year DMA t Boulder Larimer Weld 1980 5.217( 5.817( 5.6 6.9 1981 4.9 4.9 5.6 6.1 1982 6.6 6.6 7.0 7.4 1983 5.5 4.8 5.9 6.6 1984 4.7 4.2 5.2 6.0 1985 5.0 5.1 5.5 6.7 1986 6.6 6.0 6.5 8.4 1987 7.0 5.7 6.6 8.2 1988 5.8 4.8 5.8 6.8 1989 5.3 4.5 5.1 6.1 1990 4.5 3.7 4.4 5.0 1991. II 3.5 m Na *Denver Boulder CMSA - Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, 1 Denver, Douglas, Jefferson counties) Since the Boulder County-wide unemployment peak of 6.6% in 1982, the unemployment rate for Boulder County has improved, with a very low rate of 3.5 percent posted in 1991. Unemploy- ment rates in Larimer and Weld Counties have also improved sig- nificantly after being relatively high in 1986 and 1987. Unem- ployment rates for all three counties are below the national aver- age. Population Substantial population growth has been exhibited in both Boulder County and the Denver Metro Area. DMA population increased about 230,000 persons, or 14 percent, between 1980 and 1990, while Boulder County's population grew by 35,700 persons, or 19 percent: (3) March 1. 1994 9 Sr Vran Valley School District 940486 t Population Change: 19811 to 19911 19811 1994) Population nr BoolJr; I(lh '6.68` 81,10 6.6-'7 8.n'; Bits anllcl,l 29,?Iii _'4,618 1.908 18.') I1uono _ 1'I 2.228 -91 49 Eric 1_254 1.258 4 0.3 j Firestone I.2f 14 1)58 154 I'_8 l:redcr ch 855 988 133 15.0 Lafayette 8,985 14.548 5,563 619 Longmont 42.942 51,555 8,613 20.1 Louisville 5,593 12.361 6.768 121.0 Lyons 1,137 1,227 90 7.9 Mead 356 456 1(X) 28.1 Superior 208 255 47 22.6 Boulder County 189,625 225,339 35,714 18.8 Weld County 123,438 131,821 8,383 6.8 DMA* 1,618.461 1,848,319 229,858 14.2 * Six-county region including Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas and Jefferson Counties. The majority of population growth has been in the Eastern portion of Boulder County, primarily in the Longmont, Louisville, Lafayette and Broomfield areas. Even so, considerable population i expansion has occurred in the City of Boulder as well. Demographics Components of the population change in recent years demonstrate the county's major source of resident growth: (4) 1980 to 1990 Components of Boulder Larimer Weld Population Change DMA County County County Natural increase 181,420 20,266 18,789 15,479 Net migration 48,438 15,448 23,326 -3,443 Total 229,858 35,714 42,115 12,036 Natural increase (births minus deaths) contributed more than three- fourths of DMA population growth with the balance attributable to migration, i.e. people moving into the region from other parts of the state or nation. In comparison, natural increase accounted for only 57 percent of Boulder County's population change. While r St. Vrain Valley School District 10 March 2. 1994 1. 940486 - - C apuu!Fa 'ii:ie Arrd, 1 crcvnc',i accounting for less than half the population growth, the relative importance of net migration is about double that of the DMA as a whole, thus indicating the health of the local economy. During the 1980's, Weld County actually exhibited net loss overall. However the communities of Weld County which are in the St. Vrain Valley School District actually grew. Economic Indicators Retail sales and assessed valuation provide insights about develop- ment within an area as well as the financial health of applicable local governments. DMA retail sales increased about 51 percent between 1982 and 1991 , while Boulder County retail sales grew 75 percent: (6) Retail Sales (millions) Boulder Cnty Boulder as a % Larimer Weld Year DMA County of DMA County County 1982 $ 19,222.1 $ 1,777.7 9.2% 1169.0 995.2 1983 20,454.3 1,959.5 9.6 1287.5 1022.9 1984 22,764.3 2,211.2 9.7 1434.0 1111.1 1985 24,016.8 2,355.0 9.8 1564.5 1118.3 1986 23,558.9 2,258.0 9.6 1617.3 1044.2 1987 22,679.3 2,394.5 10.6 1642.5 1095.7 1988 23,911.6 2,677.7 11.2 1750.1 1206.4 1989 24,842.2 2,917.2 11.7 1913.3 1271.8 1990 26,587.3 2,907.1 10.9 1998.9 1352.7 1991 29,097.5 3,118.2 10.7 NA NA March 2. 1994 11 Sr. vamp valley School Dinner 940486 86 The following table shows the retail sales experience of selected cities within Boulder County over the same period. The City of Boulder accounts for a large share of area retail sales, although its share of sales has decreased since 1982. Although Longmont's • share of the market has remained constant, retail sales volume has • almost doubled since 1982. Retail Sales of Selected Boulder County Jurisdictions Year Boulder Broomfield J afavrtte J ongmoui 1.ouisville Nederland AreaTota) SALES (MILLIONS): 1982 $1,024.6 $91.1 $32.7 234.5 $66.0 $7.1 $1456.0 1983 1,139.6 104.0 34.4 283.6 78.2 5.1 1644.3 1984 1,265.9 114.8 37.9 NA 86.8 5.6 NA 1985 1,256.2 106.9 57.4 NA 84.6 6.3 NA 1986 1,249.6 104.0 87.5 3269 83.9 8.9 1860.8 1987 1,273.0 117.6 64.8 332.7 120.2 10.8 1919.1 1988 1,4(X1.0 139.6 79.4 354 97.4 12.1 2082.5 1989 1,649.6 131.1 77.2 364.8 109.9 12.3 2344.9 1990 1,595.3 137.4 81.0 373.1 113.8 11.6 2312.2 1991 1,737.4 147.5 104.4 390.5 134.2 12.4 2526.4 1992 420.1 Source: State of Colorado, Department of Revenue, ".Sales Tax Statistics for Counties and Selected Cities". Unpub- lished Data, Calendar Years Shown. I Economic and Demographic Summary St. Vrain Valley School District and general Boulder County eco- nomic and demographic growth have been considerable in recent years. The county's economic base has improved, accounting for nearly 13 percent of the DMA's 1980 to 1991 employment growth and over 15 percent of 1980 to 1990 population growth. Allthough a "boom period" cannot last forever, most local business leaders are optimistic that the overall good condition of the Boul- der and Weld County economies is expected to continue well into 1 the future. The resulting migration and natural population growth as seen in construction of additional housing will continue to in- crease school enrollments and require the expansion of school dis- trict facilities. St. Vrain Valfer School District 12 March 2. 1994 940486 Capurd Fnrdalf %etdc is ecc,n'm Feeder System Descriptions The following sections detail growth issues in the various high school feeder systems of the school district. March 2, 1994 13 Sr. Vraln Valley School Dinner 940486 Erie Middle / Sr. High School Feeder System Erie The Town of Erie has agressively pursued annexation and is plan- ning for significant growth. Land speculation in the community began in roughly 1971 when the "Erie 8" land was annexed. However, development constraints, primarily the lack of water and the lack of a major road or highway through town, have held Erie's population to 1400 persons. In recent years, however, those con- straints have been removed. Although the community is equidis- tant from I-25, Colorado Highway 52 and U. S. Highway 287, de- velopment pressure is now bringing growth to the community. The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District pipeline reach- ing from Carter Lake to Broomfield will bring adequate water to the community to support significant residential development. The completion date of this pipeline has been projected by Erie Town officials to be 1995. Because of the availability of water, Erie can now annex toward U. S. 287 and become more visible and convenient. Erie has adequate water treatment and sewage treat- ment capability - its only problem has been raw water. The growth outlook for Erie during the late 1990's is strong. Erie - Residential Development Inventory The Airpark Development - This is currently the focus of new home construction in I Erie. Located South of original Erie on County Line Road, the development sur- rounds the airport and includes 90 lots. One-half of the lots are built upon. Si Vann Valle‘School District 14 March 2. 1994 p^Ow86 J'3 Y Capital Tcv l tits Sre, R A .ersment Erie 8 - This property has been annexed to the Town of Erie since 1971, hut has not developed. Located Southwest of the original Town, approximately 800 acres are in the development. With a residential density of 3 or 4 units per acre, a large number of units could result from the development. A figure of 1200 has been discus.sed in preliminary conversations. The property is currently owned by J. B. Tilene and is on the market. !last Development Corporation has expressed interest and is apparently i moving forward with a purchase offer and rapid development proposal. • Meadow Sweet Farm (The Young Annexation) - This 720-acre parcel, which is cur- rently located in the Boulder Valley School District, was annexed in August of 1993. 550 acres of the land would be residential zoning which would produce 1400 homes. The project is located predominantly South of Isabelle Road between North 112th Street and North 119th Street. Starting dates for the development have been proposed as early as Spring of 1994 and absorption schedules of 100 units per year have been discussed over a 14-year build-out. The Town of Erie and the owner of this property have proposed that it be de-annexed from the Boulder Valley School District and annexed to SVVSD. Other developments have been proposed in Erie including the following: *A 200-home development East of Erie 8, and West of County Line Road *A 200-home development North of town and West of County Line Road *A 150-home upscale development Northeast of town Contact: Scott Hahn, Town Manager, Town of Erie - 828-3843. Mayor: Mike Woodruf p March 2. 1994 15 St. Vrain Valley School Di.min 940486 Frederick Mid/Sr. High h of Feeder System Sco (The Tri Town Area) Frederick The Town of Frederick includes approximately 1000 people and is experiencing a resurgence in growth. The town has boomed in the past as a result of the coal industry which propelled growth in the ! 50's and 60's and the development of the Wattenburg oil and gas field East of town during the 70's. Today, the town is positioning itself to take advantage of the economic growth occuring in the I- 25 corridor. The town has annexed several large parcels of land along I-25 and has several major housing developments underway. The town has attracted several new industries that employ over 200 people, and several service businesses have chosen to locate in Frederick. The town is expanding its electrical infrastructure to serve additional development and has committed $150,000 to ex- panding water and sewer lines along I-25. The town board along with private investors are planning for the development of an 18- hole golf course and housing development at County Road 18 and I-25. Active subdivisions in Frederick include the following: Subdivision Total Lots Year Platted lots Developed Permits YTD 7/1/93 Remaining Parkview Estates No. 1 135 1978 63 3 66 Parkview Estates No. 2 14 No 0 0 14 Maplewood Estates No. 1 61 1993 0 10 51 Morningside Estates No. 1 16 1993 0 0 16 Pinnacle at Frederick 14 No 0 0 14 St. Vram Valley Schonl Distract 16 March 2. 1994 940486 Fue:au.,Ace di .1% nine of The Maplewood and Parkview subdivisions produce most of the new housing growth in Frederick according to Junior Ci; ota - Building Inspector and Fire Chief ,Maplewood - Maplewood, owned by the Grant Brothers, had 3 models and 18 lots • • which are presold as of November. 21 budding permits had been purchased for phase one of the .subdivision 's first filing as of November 4, /993. The price range of these homes is between $95,000 and $109,000. Other phases o f the subdivision are ex- pected to follow. Parkview - Parkview is also an active subdivision which has produced 7 houses so far this year. Development in Parkview is expected to continue with additional lot devel- • opment awaiting the resolution of drainage issues. • Morningside - Morningside is a 71-acre property owned by Wyatt which will produce 16 single family units. The development is located West of 1-25 and North of County Road 18. Development will commence once a water and sewer line extension is completed which will extend service South along 1-25 front Weld County Road 22 to Colorado Highway 52 and East along Colorado Highway 52 to serve the Tri Town Area. This extension would be complete by May of 1994. • The Pinnacle at Frederick - The Pinnacle at Frederick includes 14 one-half-acre • home sites and also awaits the completion of the same water and sewer extension. This development is located near the intersection of Weld County Roads 11 and 18 and is owned by the Grant Brothers. The Town of Frederick had issued 30 building permits as of No- vember 4, 1993 and expects to end the year with roughly that num- ber. The expected pace for the next five years could range from 40 to 60. The Building Inspector feels that 40 per year would be a realistic estimate given the current market and availability of va- cant land and developable lots in the area. Contact: Junior Chioda, Building Inspector, Fire Chief Town of Frederick, 833- 2742. Mayor: Ed Tagliente, 833-2354. fly • March 2, 1994 17 Sr. Vrain Valley School District 940486 Firestone The Town of Firestone is a community of approximately 1450 resi- dents. Firestone does not have an agressive annexation policy. hut is open to new annexations and has adequate water and sewer ea- pacity to handle additional development. Globe Subdivision - Filing #2 - Currently, the most active subdivision in town is the Globe Subdivision, Filing Number 2, which has about 35 lots left. Homes in this subdivision are priced between $65,000 and $150,000. The less expensive homes are Colorado Rural Housing Authority Self-help homes. Two separate parties are interested in annexing additional ground which might add 20 lots, but no formal proposal has been offered. Coldwell Banker has expressed some interest in developing a large scale subdivision, but again, no formal proposal has been offered. 10 to 12 vacant lots remain in developed subdivisions throughout town. .The town administration has budgeted for 10 new homes to be constructed in 1994, although conditions for the absorption of most of the remaining Globe Subdivision lots by the end of 1994 are good. The administration believes that 10 new homes per year is a good conservative estimate for the next five years given the current market. The following table illustrates historic absorption trends in Firestone: 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 7 2 15* 4 6 11 10 0 0 1 0 0 6 10" • Includes 2 Foate Novemes ber ** Year-to-date 4, 1993 1 ` � Contact: Trudi Peterson, Town Clerk, 833-3291. jJ Mayor: Rick Patterson Sr. Vram Valle School District 18 March 1, 1994 94048€ l d('.:I /J(:ia:et\er ! lsses Otle6! Dacono The town of Dacono ( Population 2,250 ) is currently not propos- ing residential annexation of any magnitude. However, the town is pursuing non-residential annexation, specifically a Factory Out- ; let Mall located at I-25 and the Erie Exit (Northeast Corner). Con- struction begins in April 1994 and the project should be operational by November 1994. Dacono is working to take advantage of its strategic position in the I-25 corridor and the economic advantages that accrue as a result of its proximity to the new Denver Interna- tional Airport. Currently, two-thirds of the community consists of mobile homes, and the remaining one-third is conventional housing. Three devel- opers have expressed interest in developing additional residential housing, but no formal proposals have been submitted. Most of this interest has revolved around several acres of vacant land near city hall and additional vacant land near the water tower. Munici- pal officials expect growth to be generated by the Factory Outlet Mall once it is operational. Three phases of the Factory Outlet Mall have been proposed which will be similar to the Factory Outlet at Castle Rock and I-25. Only the first phase is currently proposed. Given recent water and sewer extensions, the Town has adequate excess water and sewer capacity to serve additional growth. Dacono is a participant in a major water and sewer line extension which will bring those ser- vices to its municipal boundaries. Contact: Linda Stepien, Mayor, 833-2317. March 2. 1994 19 St. Vrain Valle)School Disinct 9404RR • City of Longmont The City of Longmont has experienced significant residential growth during recent years. Annual building permit activity has been volatile, but strong, as illustrated in the following graph. Graph 2 - City of Longmont - Single Family Building Permits Issued 400 - 350 - 300 - j 250 - 200 - 150 - 150 - ■ 50 - 0 I I 1 i I t f • 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 The Southwest portion of the City of Longmont including the Up- per Clover Basin neighborhood and the Pike neighborhood to- gether with the East Side and Spring Valley will soon become the most rapidly growing portion of the City of Longmont. Currently the McIntosh, Garden Acres and Longmont Estates neighborhoods in the Northwest area of town are producing the majority of new growth. This condition is changing as lot inventories in developed subdivisions in the Northwest decline and new developments are built in the Southwest part of town. Si. Vram Valley School District 20 March 2. 1994 940486 .. . . .. . ',.• i• 1‘irmilyn/ The outlook for tuturc residential construction activity is difficult to predict. The City ot- 1..o o m i oat has produced the olluwin2 pro- jectiOns Which illustrate an approximate development pace. I Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 • Permits 418 427 435 333 338 229 . -.7. ..,4 . .--• .°'.. • s ," £ • // :.. rJ""""' • GIs Cr I.fW/N .,...C„. ."rY/ :, ,J ..i// -;.5,,,000,,,,,- ,:..,.,,:.:-.7.77 --- -�......, A•'Y: • ,�,�� ...k ' • .. • •:;4.41 isj r '.≥` ...Y ij bn',,' !•,: .,,,,,,..';' ,;.... r a, K r•eso ▪ .eR f!;;�w,�Urr i+s'." . '4.:%;'' "'"f':4 /y�.' '7,....••• .•,..,..,„......t..,.. , ...1 ,4: a .h x wair▪ s:\s Y 'r' �.°• %3::,: y.,,?r t�Y' .i ra.f ' • •::x�u;•%,"",..mr ao-sas•t: LAS < d;. 1:;: L. "� .„•r • a :,...•_,„„„yi.„.,, . <rm.. ...,J,ro,. '' ri.n ..fai-Y{•.: k ...i, i%7:c:,. ',R;....... , '�i/.;,/,;,✓;n.a,......—•^ r .;': '-• °�� .. :i:F::' .:/.• ....r.%n,�iil�i3::yy;,, 2, a/,°,'"`i.A`: �sr;7; y>s: ..............,.........„,„..,......,..,...,....,./,4:,!,,,,e,. .y, t''''' , ::., S4v.,:e;.-:,,,,',,,,,,A,, ..::v'.r• ns �r y '^','/r /Y! .ii;'vi !..A.;,.:t / v6r!-SA% 'rSa + ..�w a..• ,�.�'" Y 1' .7 . �:' .. „b ' .'r r'�'SA.f' • o-v !>:K<C-:yk:• 'SC•iJ;♦'r" New home under construction in Northwest Longmont y!yr ?Ar.F.PV,,"M' l:Zr?,,.,..,:tVt'tS..aa�'.,�<Y}.. y:rx �:.,:.;:.�:o->:,-:. S.t) \ ...yid .y. c' .dl:.:.'iyc: ..:s.. ..*4?.c. aK 5%%�.,•.3%db%<tirs•,i��,si`. '>Y. y". :;L�' a J:::.. •I' S -y s' 'd gw.'> >J<•:w x�s141. o-'h;A' :::-';:;• '. > `\ P, o-r* � r. • : ..hJ.t•- �t'.R�...�y yr.,c w;�{�;Yr::�.�'<r. f • S' '�r ri a♦.edr s'C '',;d �S S. � .'�• �-��-.e• a.as .:/. ri'•: •• �g}� �.y�,0- � .eJ L� t� ��fi}.:r?}'•S'�'/:.. •p! '. •:G'.+{.Y.:./r .:0 ;•i• ,ir.:.. ..;>yR<;•`.:'t`�.i.;<`!] n'Y.; ,r,:[.:2;..gV.Y:.:,:,4• -.i$ -.. .<�iA,, .:.,... ,.> A.•:3::.:...::::, ' ,:�.:... .. ��''.,... rrir T',,,,,:—-'A:+`k+'3,,,,,. ,.vt c. � .,.. :{� 13' :-<:mty:b et3u2.•.,:. £,✓0.2' � sj�., �''� �;i >.r. • r,.;-,.k. ry� .�.. ( '< 4-,T�y rya d ' v;•. a,M>�''':..4,.Y:. �l-' to,.✓ • ': $�. • •Sc -,n t o- / V o , -�' -+ :. "'Z.t4.4.•.. Y 4. '.'riw•$ lf[�2w+ „'1 9 i� Ls ` '�J'-' >N> �.�:.4/�.c. 6;.. r •x r o b•A/',rbr�d".t hX.'!' • .\ �.* a.=4.6'..:.- a \ a 2 yy'�♦ ' . :-A✓d>Y,G `>'<' A fM rC`•r' A0• d : Y' w�,. '9y ' - y ,2 •9 s ,R+- y.._ .!W. v.,' • 1'S `&`,YA'' yxr d Sr .• 7 • • . .fft' ♦, is o, R ♦ .:. r. .....s d ,` 7^' •, .rte S ,,,. :< Ln ,.E rq✓ err fir, Y,J� �p. . Ft,,.. ''`.*,:`;•�1,:' ': \Na..Sd•'}t`" \�'' '�,mat w°„ .,y,�:"J.wr♦ •,\ `' a^ co«t�ey. N > \ '� la.raw .. •.° .,r' �• ci "" ..1 :,r: �a. �., .r�. \V� ♦�L `O^�� r'i fry .':b..'. ,5..�• \ RJ `'f ...,:vxiQ$. n ,•Y:dC, ''! k Street infrastructure under construction in Northwest Longmont I March 2, 1994 21 S7 Vram Valley School Disrrwi 940486 Upper Clover Basin Neighborhood Significant annexations have occured in this area during the last year. Schlagel, Meadow View and Clover Creek have annexed or are in final stages. Several additional annexations are pending. Pike Neighborhood iI New land developments in the Pike neighborhood will produce many additional school-aged children which must be served by existing and future schools. The following table illustrates the pro- f posed number of units from each development in the Pike neigh- ! borhood. Field observation as of the date of this report was used to determine the status of lots in each development. Lots are clas- sified as occupied, under construction or vacant. Although the Wallace LPA Amendment development is currently on hold, it is I considered here. Once the details are resolved, it will likely be developed at a density comparable to the current proposal of 283 units. St Vrain Valley School District 22 March 2. 1994 940481 (3PL'W i-drdm.r, \}�J<:1\l(urnrnl Pike Neighborhood Lot Status by Development - June 4, 1993 Development Filing Total Lots Occupied Under Const Vacant Rainbow Ridge 1st Filing 52 35 7 10 2nd Filing 24 0 0 24 3rd Filing 16 0 0 16 I 4th Filing 50 0 0 50 Subtotal 142 35 7 100 Creekside 1 1st Filing 14 10 1 3 2nd Filing 11 9 1 1 3rd Filing 42 3 8 31 4th Filing 42 0 0 42 5th Filing 43 0 0 43 Subtotal 152 22 10 120 "Tree Farm" 280 0 0 280 Creekside 2 Trad. SF 192 0 0 192 Patio Homes 263 0 0 263 Subtotal 455 0 0 455 Total 1029 57 17 955 The following table converts the number of unoccupied units in each development into a potential student impact. It is assumed that students produced by existing units are already housed in Burlington or Indian Peaks Elementary. Pike Neighborhood Potential Development Impact Development Units Elem Mid High Total Rainbow Ridge 142 less 35 Occupied 107 37 15 18 70 Creekside 152 less 22 Occupied 130 46 18 22 86 Wallace LPA Amendment 283 98 39 48 185 Creekside 2 New Revised Figures 455 159 64 77 300 Tot Units/Students • 972 340 136 165 641 Yield = .35 Elem, .14 Middle School, .17 High School March 2. 1990 23 St. Vain Valley School District 940486 Longmont - Southwest Quadrant - Residential Development Inventor Rainbow Ridge - l iii tieselopmenr is located South of Pike Road and West of U.S. • 2,,C on the West .side or the tree (arm. Owned by Bruns Construction, Rainbow Ridge Cili�t,��s 1. 2 and $ include 92 lots, 50 of which are built upon. A fourth filmy which would include 50 additional lots has not been developed. This property is currently I owned by Dean Prescorn and includes 40 acres - 20 of which are developable. Dale Bruns has experienced an approximate absorption rate of one and one-half units per 1 month and expects this pace to continue. Lot prices range from $58,500 to $85,000 with home prices ranging from $225,000 to $310,000. Contact: Dale Bruns 651- ' 3486. Creekside 1 - This development, located West of Rainbow Ridge and East of Sunset St. extended, is owned by the Grant Brothers. The property includes multiple filings and builders are currently working with 18 lots which remain in filing number three. Fil- 1 ings 4, 5 and 6 remain to be platted and 83 lots remain overall. The current absorp- tion rate is approximately two per month which the marketing staff at the subdivision expects to continue. The developer expects a 2 to 3-year build-out and hopes his monthly pace will accelerate. Lots in the 3rd Filing are large at approximately one- third acre and sell in the $60,000 to $90,000 range. Contact Chad Smith - Sales I Manager - Griffin Marketing - 776-9771, Wallace Grant - Owner - 776-9900. Creekside 2 (The Farm at Creekside) - This development, originally part of the Grant Brothers Farm Northeast of Hover and Plateau, has begun construction of an initial phase (Filing 1) of 63 lots. David Boschert, of Bosch Land Company, expects to develop 192 lots with a 3 to 5-year build-out. The annual expected absorption pace is 35 - 60 per year depending upon the market. The developer is planning to begin construction of 10 homes this Fall, but few will be complete by the end of the year. During 1994, the developer hopes to sell 40 units in anticipated good market condi- tions. The final price of a lot and home is expected to be between $175,000 and $240,000. The developer is positioning the housing product just above the price range of McStain's Meadow View product and just below the Creekside product. I Bosch Land Company had opened a sales center as of October 15th and client traffic j indicates a significant amount of potential "move-up" buyers from Longmont. The developer is using a limited builder program which includes five builders with four floorplans. Lot prices range from $40,000 to 45,000. The builders which have been invited to construct homes include: Artistry Homes, Elite Homes, Markel Homes, Wonderland Custom Builders and T.L. Stauffer. Contact: David Boschert - Bosch Land Company - 442-1277. St Vrain Valley School District 24 March 2. 1994 940481 i�tli� /,n:lairs tak I%two('ni Miscellaneous Creekside 2 Parcel - 27-acre medium density residential (patio home) barrel .Aorth of Pintail Drive - The Grant Brothers are current negotiating the sale at this parcel which tt;, v expect to generate a varienv of ntecliunt density product rapes. Contact: Wallace Grant - Owner - 776-9900. Miscellaneous Creekside 2 Parcel - 5-6-acre PUD-R parcel in the corner of Hover and Plateau. Contact: Wallace Grant - Owner - 776-9900. "Tree Farm"- This property located at the Southwest corner of U. S. 287 and Pike Road includes approximately 80 acres winch is developable as low-density residential. Westbrook Village - This property is currently under review for annexation and in- cludes 60 single family units. Located East of Airport Road and North of Quail Road, the applicant is FM Partnership. Contact: John Marlin, FM Partnership or Peter I Swift, Swift and Accociates 772-7052. Meadow View - This development is annexed and developing South of Nelson Road on both the East and West sides of Airport Road. McStain Development owns the prop- erty and 435 units are proposed in phased development to occur during the next 4-6 years. Home construction began in September and a 6 units per month pace would optimistically result in 24 homes by the end of 1993. The expected absorption pace for 1994 is 6 to 8 units per month and an 8 unit per month pace is expected thereafter. I Contact: Stephen R. Hanson, VP Planning and Development, McStain - 494-5900. Clover Creek - This development is owned by California Homes and was just annexed to the City of Longmont. The property includes 430 single family homes. The devel- oper, Chris Adrian, proposes a lot absorption pace of 20 during 1994 and 60 per year thereafter. Mr. Adrian expects to have homes under construction by June of 1994. Musselman - This annexation is in progress. The property is owned by Black Fox Development and would be combined with the Schlagel Annexation to form one devel- opment. This is an 80-acre parcel, 40 of which would be developed as single family residential with approximately 160 units resulting. Lot absorption estimates for Schlagel include units planned to be constructed on the Musselman property. Con- tact:: Sam Hepp, Black Fox Development - 651-3339. Schlagel - The development includes housing with a range of densities and an total of 2406 units. The property includes an elementary school site and a middle school site. The property has been sold to Black Fox Development which expects to begin con • - structing homes in 1995. Contact: Sam Hepp, Black Fox Development - 651-3339. March 2.1994 25 St. Vrain Volley School District 940486 'ap.'a'/ard,nr s \,rag accrsvnr at Willow Creek Crossing - This development includes 35 large-lot single family homes and 165 small-lot homes. The propopertv is annexed and zoned and the developer is in the process of filing a preliminary plat. Parcel A includes approximately 60 lots which would support homes in the 5275.000 - $350,000 range. Parcel B includes the remainder of the lots which will be priced in the $130 ,000 - $160,000 range. The developer expects to begin constructing infrastructure in Spring of 1994 and begin constructing houses in August or September of 1994. The developer does not expect significant construction in 1994, possibly 10 homes will be constructed on the North side and 3 or 4 on the South side. The remaining lots would be absorbed during 1995 and 1996, if the market conditions remain as they currently are. The South side of the development will be called Ferncrest Estates. The North side will be called Nelson Park. The Legacy - This apartment complex, located at St. Vrain Center just West of ShopKo, will include 504 units at build-out. 252 units are planned for construction beginning in the Summer of 1994. The 252-unit phase one includes, 70 one-bedroom units, 142 2-bedroom units and 40 3-bedroom units. Phase one should be complete by Spring of 1995 with the possibility of a few buildings leasing in 1994. The,remain- der of the units would be constructed at a later time. This property is annexed and zoned, but not platted. Contact: Don Macy, Macy Development Company, 321- 8888. Si'. Vain Valley School District 26 March 2. 1994 940486 i driiu. f.4 Longmont Highg School Feeder System Northwest Longmont - McIntosh, Garden Acres, Longmont Estates These neighborhoods are currently the development focus of the school district. Lot inventories in developed subdivisions, such as the Shores, are declining. With the Hygiene Elementary building becoming crowded,the continuing development of this area is a concern. Eventually, additional infill development may consume more of the existing vacant land which is within the Longmont Municipal Service Area, and more students may be produced. The district owns an elementary school site in this area. If this site were to be used, the boundaries for Hygiene, Sanborn and Longmont Estates elementaries would need to be redrawn. Longmont - Northwest Quadrant - Residential Development Inventory The Shores - The Shores !, a development located on the Northeast periphery of McIntosh Lake. The property is developed by Black Fox Development and includes a variety of densities including single family, patio homes and duplexes. Only 75 single family lots remain in this development in filings 6, 7 and 8. Sam Hepp, of Black Fox, predicts that these lots will be absorbed over an 18-month period at a 50 lots per year pace. 59 patio homes have just been approved in filing number 9 of the Shores. These homes will be built at a 25 homes per year pace with construction beginning in Spring of 1994. Contact: Sam Hepp - 651-3339. • The Orchards Apartments - The Orchards Apartments is currently expanding its development with the addition of 144 apartment units. The property is located in the March 2. 1994 27 Sr. Vraln Valley School District 940486 .5 UIIIhe a,1, ,lU"llc'Y of 11rtlt'r alld ,.'le Roads. The Ill (t, ere parntlllV constructed for an tslt'»,lt d pCYr,,t1 ,lldd ere rect7Y:1 r'UII tlticleC1. The apu/71)!t'iilV an' t !I rt'('It lll' being leased. Terry Lake - This lar,ce. proposed development is located North of Ute Rd extending almost to Yellowstone Road and between Count' Road 19 and U. S. 287. The devel- opment proposal has included as man} as 2031 acres and 3624 units. A smaller proposal was considered for annexation to the Town of Mead which included 600-700 units, but apparently this proposal is not viable due to water infrastructure problems. One recent land use concept included a golf course and several school sites. 4yy = 4 / //,....,..,S°,'�/i /{r/ciao/ 3l/✓rd... 17.XC2'xxri„xrs..:Ja � 4. The Orchards Apartment Complex in Northwest Longmont St. Vmin Vu!!n School District 28 March 2, 1994 940486 Lyons Middle/Sr . High School Feeder Systen Lyons Lyons has built a significant number of new residential subdivi- sions which will add many new students to the district during the coming years. Currently, Lyons Valley Estates is the largest devel- opment in town. According to Bob Freeman, Lyons Town Admin- istrator, costruction pace in Lyons has been strong with 25 building permits purchased during the first half of 1993. He expects a pace of 35 - 50 new homes per year during the next five years. Lyons - Residential Development Inventory Eagle Canyon - Eagle Canyon is a 50-unit residential development located north of Lyons on Colorado Highway 36. A five- to ten-year build-out is expected for this development with an average home price of approximately $250,000. The subdivi- sion has existed informally since 1985 and 3 lots have been developed. .44.vy r. F r... w` - 51!lDIY�SIDN r xx ax C t Eagle Canyon Sr. Vrain Valley School District 29 March 2. 1991 940486 Russel Subdivision -4Stet'( !chop - Sc( and Iluij - l!) - 5(i homes. Turner Reid Subdivision llns ,ulhh !yrv'n ry located in a planed )ehino of town with �0 - ,�U lf,t V remainUl c. Lyons l alley Park - Lyons l'ullev Park consists of 50 lots located near the Jr/Sr. High School. The first phase of the project which includes filings #1- #3 has 12 lots re- ntaining. 10 lots remain in filing #3 and 2 lots remain unsold in filing #2. The devel- oper has annexed additional land and is trying to replat it to support 100 or so addi- tional lots. The Town of Lyons town planner is currently reviewing the replat pro- posal for this second phase. The developer is experiencing a three unit per month pace having sold 35 homes in 14 months and hopes this pace will continue. Prices range from $131,250 to $178,950. Home buyers are coming from Longmont and Boulder mostly. The price range for the second filing will be higher. The Developer is working exclusively with one builder - James Roberts and Company. The develop- ment is administered by Wright Kingdom Realty and is owned by Keith Bell. Contact: Bruce Derefford in Boulder 541-1923. • j P •' ATI ar • Chandler Annexation - This annexation is located off Second Street and has 8 - 10 lots. March 2, 1944 30 Si. Vrain Valley School District 940486 (.ma.1 Fw iiar \rrul , rv,,nen1 Niwot High School Feeder System Niwot The Niwot area schools have experienced rapid and extensive growth during the past few years. This growth has resulted in school crowding, especially at Niwot Elementary. Additional housing units approved for construction in the Niwot Elementary School Attendance Area will push the school's enrollment well past the building's capacity and will also have a profound effect on sec- ondary facilities. Niwot - Historical and Future Growth School population growth and crowding is a direct result of large- scale residential construction in the Niwot area. The following chart illustrates annual building permit activity in the Niwot area during the past ten years. As the table indicates, 966 building per- mits have been issued in the Niwot Elementary attendance area between 1983 and 1992. School enrollment at NES in 1983 was 544 with a K-6 grade configuration. Today, enrollment at the school is 700 with a K-5 grade configuration - an increase of al- most 200 students compensating for the grade structure from K-6 to K-5. March I. 1994 31 Si. Vrain Valley School Dunnc( 940486 (_'hurt I - tlementurc :1ttendani e :trim - Building Permits Issued - Total Permits = 966 200 - S0 - /60 - 140 - 120 - 100 - 80 60 - 40 20 - 0 1 4 1 4 1 1 1 I 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 By 1995, Niwot Elementary enrollment will be at least 168 stu- dents over capacity with two double portable classroom already in place. The following table illustrates an estimate of the number of new houses which will be constructed within the Boulder County component of the Niwot Elementary attendance area. Student yield figures have been used to determine that 453 additional stu- dents will be generated by the proposed new units. / / ,L' . Niwot High School Si. Vrain Volley School Darnel 32 March 2, 1994 940486 - — Capna(1 anGnrr \reds:ISV, SIOrCI Estimated ,Viwot Elementary School Sub-area Housing Absorption (All Units are Single Family - As of November 4, 1993) i Niwot Subdivisions 11/4/93 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000+ Units Left Non-vested Subdivisons Hillcrest Heights 50 10 10 10 10 10 Lake Valley Estates 14 4 5 5 North Rim Filing #2 39 20 15 4 Johnson Farm 70 10 20 20 10 10 Peppertree Estates 8 5 3 Somerset Estates 48 10 10 10 10 8 The Cove 15 8 5 3 Waterford 22 10 7 5 Waterford Park (proposed) 30 5 15 10 Other Existing Subdivisions 183 15 15 15 15 10 10 103 New Subdivisions 30 5 5 5 5 5 5 Total Non-vested 509 102 110 87 50 43 15 103 ' Vested Subdivisons North Rim Filing #1 8 8 Johnson Farm Replat G 20 10 10 Brittany Place 6 6 Somerset 25 5 5 5 5 5 Sage Valley 2 2 t Springhill Replat B 5 3 2 Waterford Block 1 3 3 0 Miscellaneous Subdivisions 11 4 4 3 Total Vested Subdivisions 80 41 21 8 5 5 0 0 Grand Total 589 143 131 95 55 48 15 103 Expected Residential Absorption The table shows vested and non-vested subdivisions and indicates the eventual construction of 589 additional single family dwelling units. Vested subdivisions are those that were approved by the County prior to the inception of the district's impact fee system. Only non-vested subdivisions may be assessed an impact fee. March 2 1994 33 St. Vram Valtty School Dittricl 940486 Niwot Subarea - Student Yield In order to calculate the impact of growth in the Niwot subarea, student yield statistics must be developed. The following table illustrates student yield from study area streets which have houses built, on average, between 1987 and 1992. 276 houses were sur- veyed to determine student yield. The table indicates a student yield of 0.35 for elementary-aged students, 0.14 middle school students per house and 0. 17 high school-aged students per house. Total yield per house is 0.66 which is very close to the total Boul- der County yield figure of 0.635. Niwot Elementary Attendance Area - Student Yield Subdivision Street #Hs Av.Age Elem Mid High Tot Elem Mid High Tot # # # # Yield Yield Yield Yield Lake Valley Estates Birdie Ct 5 1987 4 1 5 0.80 0.20 0.00 1.00 Lake Valley Estates Niblick Dr/Ct 41 1987 16 2 7 25 0.39 0.05 0.17 0.61 Lake Valley Estates Putter Ct 7 1987 5 1 6 0.71 0.00 0.14 0.86 Somerset Sawtooth Ln. 18 1987 4 5 6 15 0.22 0.28 0.33 0.83 Gunbarrel Estates Ptarmigan Cir 16 1988 3 4 7 0.19 0.00 0.25 0.44 Johnson Farm/Overbrook Gold Nugget Dr. 17 1988 9 3 2 14 0.53 0.18 0.12 0.82 Lake Valley Estates Ace Ct 5 1988 3 1 4 0.60 0.20 0.00 0.80 Lake Valley Estates Greens PI 13 1988 2 2 3 7 0.15 0.15 0.23 0.54 Somerset Pawnee Way 29 1988 8 4 5 17 0.28 0.14 0.17 0.59 South of Old Town Country Creek 12 1988 9 3 0 12 0.75 0.25 0.00 1.00 South of Old Town Estate Cir. 41 1988 6 5 5 16 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.39 Hillside Estates Skyland Dr. 7 1989 7 2 4 13 1.00 0.29 0.57 1.86 Somerset Spring Hill Dr. 16 1989 5 3 4 12 0.31 0.19 0.25 0.75 Gunbarrel Estates Tabletop Ct 16 1990 2 2 4 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.25 Hillside Estates Cattail Dr. 3 1990 1 1 1 3 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 Lake Valley Estates Eagle Ct 9 1990 5 1 6 0.56 0.11 0.00 0.67 Somerset Willow Ln. 4 1990 3 1 0 4 0.75 0.25 0.00 1.00 South of Old Town Peppertree Ct./Dr./Ln. 8 1990 4 2 2 8 0.50 0.25 0.25 1.00 Hillside Estates Firethom Ct. 2 1991 0 0 1 1 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 Lake Valley Estates Driver Ct 2 1991 1 1 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 Lake Valley Estates Golf Club Dr 5 1992 1 1 2 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.40 Totals 276 97 39 46 182 035 0.14 0.17 0.66 St Vran Valley School District 34 March 2, 1994 910486 _ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. (Lvow Fa.!lint c Aerdr:%ssrn- nenr Niwot - Development-based Projections of Student Growth Given the elementary yield of 0.35 elementary-aged students per house, 207 additional elementary students would be generated by the proposed new housing. 83 middle school and 100 high school students would also be produced for a total of 389 additional stu- dents. The resulting impact on Niwot area schools is illustrated in the following table. Student Yield From Potential Housing Absorption Yield 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000+ • Elementary 0.35 50.05 45.85 33.25 19.25 16.8 5.25 36.05 I Cumulative Elementary 50.1 95.9 129 148 165 170 207 Middle School 0.14 20.02 18.34 13.3 7.7 6.72 2.1 14.42 Cumulative Middle School 20 38.4 51.7 59.4 66.1 68.2 82.6 High School 0.17 24.31 22.27 16.15 9.35 8.16 2.55 17.51 Cumulative High School 24.3 46.6 62.7 72.1 80.2 82.8 100 Total Yield 0.66 94.38 86.46 62.7 36.3 31.68 9.9 67.98 Cumulative Total 94.4 181 244 280 312 321 389 Development-based Enrollment Projections At Build-out School 1992 Enrollment Growth Build-out Enrollment +1- Capacity Niwot Elem 700 207 907 -259 March 2. 1994 35 Sr. Vrain Valley School District 940466 The growth impact on Niwot area schools does not justify an entire additional facility at each level. Accordingly. a comprehensive solution must be considered which links the need for additional facilities in Niwot to a solution for South and Southwest ! Longmont. Niwot - Residential Development Inventory • The following paragraphs summarize the significant residential land development projects underway in Niwot. Hillcrest Heights - Hillcrest Heights is a 50 unit subdivision lo- cated Northeast of the intersection of Niwot Road and 95th Street. The expected absorption pace is 10 units per year. The developer is currently building the street infrastructure and should begin con- struction of units in 1994. Contact: Marvin Davis, 478-0623. North Rim - North Rim is located just East of Lake Valley Estates and surrounding Lake Valley Golf Course. The development has a total of 86 lots, of which 75 are occupied, 5 are under constructon and 6 remain vacant. Contact: Chris Kirkpatrick, Venture Group Development, 443- 7447. The Ridge at North Rim - The Ridge at North Rim is located adja- cent to North Rim, East of Lake Valley Estates and South of Niwot Road. There are 74 lots in the development none of which are occupied. 35 single family homes are under construction and 39 • lots remain vacant. All lots are sold or under contract. Most purchasers are required to begin construction on or before April 1, Si Vrain Palley School District 36 March 2, 1994 940486 1994. Soi'ie' builders may pay a premium to postpone construction and conti to speculate on lots. The typical price range of fin- ished ho,i ., is $260,000 to $400,000. Some homes exceed 5400.000. The developers of the property have noticed a mixture of chi/ett'nt family compositions ranging from retired couples to families with young children. About half of the new residents are ji from Colorado. The remaining half are predominantly from Cali- fornia and New York. Contact: Chris Kirkpatrick, Venture Group Development, 443- 7447. Waterford - Waterford consists of 32 lots located North of Dry Creek near N. 83rd Street. The first homeowners in the develop- ment moved in the first week of November. Four additional units will be occupied before the end of November. Three additional units are a 'er construction. The developer expects to sell all lots by the Summer of 1995. The sales pace has been approximately one per month. Contact: Don Macy, Macy Development Company - 321-8888. Waterford Park - Waterford Park consists of an additional 30 lots adjacent to Waterford. The developer expects a three year build- out and a development pace of one per month. Contact: Don Macy, Macy Development Company - 321-8888. ire New homes under construction near Niwor March 2, 1994 37 St Vrain Valley School Duuici 940486 Skyline High School Feeder System , . k y � r' S ,,(�^p +'+2 / f/fu ^ k tNr7 hL�a r' o ,0 r� Y .H � cz a�r/F a •..: .A Skyline High School Northeast Longmont The potential impact of the Spring Hill Golf Course could impact this area significantly. Currently, the City of Longmont has hired a golf course architect and the development could produce between 900 and 1200 dwelling units although no formal proposal for resi- dential housing has been submitted. Longmont - Northeast Quadrant - Residential Development Inventory Rider Ridge - This property is developed by Centex Homes and incudes 132 lots, 35 of which are built or under construction. Homes are priced from $150,000 to $200,000 and range from 1900 to 2400 square feet. The first filing includes 60 lots and a sec- ond filing is forth-coming which includes the remaining lots. Centex is projecting a 5 March?. 1994 38 Si. Vrain Valley School District 904836 t.,1r,o,, .rr.r. linnenie nr - unit per month pace for Rider Ridge. Contact: Miles Grant, Centex Homes Denver, 79'- l(). Fox Hill Ridge - This development currently has 65 lots available in filing #2 with additional residential ground available to support an additional 65 units. Currently none are occupied. The developer expects to occupy 43 units during 1994 and 2' during /995. Have sold 12 units during the last 3 months. Price range is Mid $160'x. Contact: Jim Rowden, 678-1320. Fox Hill - High-end development with 25 lots left. The developer expects a 3-year build-out. Price range is $275,000 - $450,000. • The Highlands at Stoney Ridge - This development is divided into two phases. The first phase has 49 lots, of which all are sold and one-half are occupied. The second phase includes 75 lots, 6 of which are sold. The developer expects 30 to be absorbed during both 1994 and 1995, with the remaining lots (15) being absorbed in 1996 . The price range of the homes is $200,000 - $350,000 with an average value of $230,000. Contact Karen Shoemaker, The Prudential, 776-1312. HUD Property - A 37-acre property being sold by sealed bid this month. Annexed and zoned. Skyline Heights - This is a 29-acre subdivision just North of Skyline High School which includes 103 lots. The property is currently under development by Steele • • Eagle Development. The developer expects all 103 units to be occupied during 1994. Prince range is $160 - 180,000. U. S. Homes will be the builder. Contact • Jerry Steele. Spring Valley - This is the golf course development currently owned by G.T. Land located near Highway 66 and Pace. Centex Homes is currently negotiating the pur- chase of the land which would support as many as 1200 units. Centex predicts a 10- to 12-year build-out which suggests an annual pace of 100 to 120 homes per month. Contact: Miles Grant, Centex Homes Denver, 792-9810, Michael Byrne, G. T. Land, Ft. Collins, 223-3933. Southeast Longmont Southeast Longmont includes the Quail planned neighborhood. Development plans for this area are just now taking shape. Se Vram Valley School District 39 March 2. 199! C 940486 C,4pvul F u ilthec,Nerdy A,irt,nrenr Longmont - Southeast Quad - Residential Development Inventory Casa de la Esperanza - Casa de la Esperanca is a 32-unit migrant farnnrorker hous- ing development sponsored by Boulder County. The units are designed for fumilie.c with school-aged children and are mostly 3-bedroom with a total of approximatelv 100 bedrooms. The development was scheduled for October occupancy. Contact: Michael Reis, Housing Planner, Boulder County. • • ICI March 2, 1994 40 S'. Vrain Valley School District 940486 Mead Mead has a current population of 5(X) people with 170 homes. The tow n has annexed i large amounts of land and expects to eventually have 5000 people over a 20 - 25-year build-out. The town built 7 new homes in 1991, 17 in 1992 and expects to have significantly more in 1993. A pace of 20 - 40 new homes per year has been proposed by Town Manager Gary West. Mead sees itself as a community of large-lot subdivi- sions with most new homes having two-acre lots or more. Lake Hollow Estates - This 80-acre property is subdivided into 22 lots. There are three lakes on the property. The development is located North of original Mead on County Road 7 and broke ground in early Summer. CJK Annexation - This 140-acre property is located East of original Mead. The property is owned by Keith Aimes and no development plan has been submitted. Mulligan Lake Estates -A quarter section-sized subdivision Southeast of original Mead East of County Road 7. Platted for 80 lots. OKDoke Annexation - A Proposed 500-acre annexation near the intersection of Co. Rd. 3 and Co. Rd. 32 including approximately 1,000 homes, a golf course and an airfield. • .S ' yf�/c/{�.�firr y Af 5 . • S f <a.�ss �'�:a�y `i,e> --r.3 � n rs; L • ba 4. 1�1fH'E671 �r , >9. s_ AQ,fi a.un,: . ..s, kn.no ..,.wax...... .. .. ws • .,, -.• Mulligan Lake Estates St. Wain Valley School Distract 41 March 2. 1994 940486 Single Tree Estates - t quartersectirnn-vr-ed suhdi !ytox Soich a.s1 of nrii:inal .Ilead East o/ .Ilullic'an lake Estates flatted for 2tl lots Hunter's Ridge - A 20-lit subdivision located South o/ original Mead. It est o/ County Road 7. ,Ilost lots in this subdivision are built upon or sold. i Hunter's Cove - A 48-lot subdivision located Southeast of original Mead, East of County Road 7. Weingardt Annexation - 35 or 40 acres located Southeast of original Mead, East of County Road 7. Could be developed as 7 - 15 lots. Grand View Estates - 150 acres located Southeast of original Mead, East of 1-25 on Highway 66. Will develop as 2-acre lots and build-out with potentially 75 houses. One street in the development is platted and three homes have been built. Contact: Gary West, Town Manager, Circuit Rider, 532-4054. e p • Home under constructon in Mulligan Lake Estates • March 2. /994 42 Sr. Vran Volley School Morin 940486 Development Estimates by Community The following table illustrates the expected amount of single family construction for each of the district's communities. The estimates are based on municipal government estimates when possible. The estimate for the Town of Erie is generated by the au- thor of this report and reflects only those developments located within the SVVSD and excludes Meadowsweet Farm. For each community, the number of single family units for a given year is followed by the number of students which would be produced by new housing given student yield statistics collected in each community. Actual enrollment growth is the result of a combination of factors beyond new home construction. The resulting enrollment growth in given schools will vary from the housing growth indicator given the grade distribution and other demographics of a given community. 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Total Dacono Units 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Students.665 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Erie _ Units 0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 700 Students.665 0 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.5 465.5 Firestone Units 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 80 Students.74 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 59.2 Frederick Units 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 320 Students.54 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.6 172.8 Longmont Units 418 427 435 333 338 229 229 229 2638 Students.635 265.43 271.145 276.225 211.455 214.63 145.415 145.415 145.415 1675.13 Lyons Units 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 336 Students.73 30.66 30.66 30.66 30.66 30.66 30.66 30.66 30.66 245.28 Mead Units 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 240 Students.665 19.95 19.95 19.95 19.95 19.95 19.95 19.95 19.95 159.6 Niwot Units 100 143 131 95 55 48 15 15 602 Students.66 66 94.38 86.46 62.7 36.3 31.68 9.9 9.9 397.32 I Total Units 640 792 788 650 615 499 466 466 4916 Students 411.04 511.64 508.8 420.27 397.04 32311 301.43 301.43 3174.8 St Wain Volley School District 43 March 2, 1994 904136 Uipui En i,itrs,1r r./+A:crivne n! Enrollment vs. Capacity The following table illustrates the capacity of district buildings as I compared to the best enrollment projections given historical growth and expected housing growth. Seat availability is indi- cated for each school at three milestone years: 1995, 1996 and 2000. March 2.1994 Sr Vmin Valley School Dirnicr 9404E L:lpCai rt..;.i r. Are,], 1„f+onr nl C. _ x _ v C r, ri _ 5j, .. .r '- - Y r - it a C' s Y. r_r 0 C 0 Y - M. C. D r ^ N re c --, - r I r l C S.. v. - ^ r!. r 4 t r tC V. ea X N T Y rl v. Y ,G �. `S C. K �r. rt x ✓. K T Y O, N T C f- - r T �. - - - t"." S 'J' r^, •• ^ _ C I 0, ; a v. X C. v. OC Y ,C •C �C x 2 c - N C yr a C I. - = -, - ,C ,C r- C N .Qr, Co ,C ,G Oc a v. C v. rl N N 00 of n X .a., a K. `� - r- v Y r` C, r- K, cC N C - cC! cC 'l 7 N 'Pr % ‘C S -t v. K v. O S v. K. et T a T Cr- •.. r K. T K. —. — a a x a r .-, aa p C th O re IC a CP 7 C - -- N v. cCT kr. C t-- (-4 JCN a a OC ^r re tr,, a � C -t NI CGN N OC - et T N R CC C 00 O v, K. v: v, 00 v, K. O 7 00 - Cr. c r - r re, 0 K. -, - a a OC a r - . ^ re Y N ecie O OOC cC r et C. re r, C 00 7 O re 00 ^ en tan CC v r en V tee C re -. 00 CC O, en a Q N r a re on 0, WI cO N a NC T Q In at 2 a N f\ k1 C a Q re N >r N +. r� ,� N C a ry vr, C. in ., z,, ,rl a v, , • Q , N N a V; N V; ^1 OC "O P C "C NI rJ N a K. CC - " 00 - C. t N r- - N - K. OC a v, cL r- v, OC v, r, v. K. r r- en oc a C - r N OC ^ r v, r` T - - r` - "' K. cC ^ O IC C v, v. K. C eV - - C N GL\ r- N h ? v. N O re V, KJ T v. K. fir, v. O0 v. K. V} O a K. v. OC - r K. "Cr K. - - OC CC 00 CC r - ;1 t h = a . g a ve re a Q Q Q ,r, ri ON = cC a 00 r Q 4 h a CDC —, -, N co vn b pen Q CC +i V; h N ,r1 en en N OC +i V; en cC C en C N en h O tfl N V1 K. rC en a OKNa Cv, — OC en x - 7O r� K, rC CC Q` VD a — ,C ID _ — OC .... C — C N r _. a C C C C 00 r a r rD K. W N W r — C OC ^ en r 00 r r 7 re —O, -, ve 000 OOO OC OC r r , _, O kr.C. r O n v: cr O C K. O v. r N t1 v, X rx Q O N — 00 in a V. r — OC v. N r N N K, r r OC r v, K, r- r C CO v. v, v. 7 v. r re en •G r a C O — O C r e ,C N r e v. K, AO O -, C v, r4 C R a CC C O r^, r^, Z a — C O C C Z N O, eV O O v, 0 K. r- v, v, O v, K. O v, r-- v, K. tr. O r✓C ^^ en v, re re N O K. a -- N. r-- 00 OC en r-. r pr — 7Oe{ V'. ("4 C .'1 Cr. C" '1T BCC q" --+ r Cr, v. a " v, a a v, r0 r. re re Ill C aCCK, OC cent aK. N K. a Mr+: re a —. CNC v. re — re7 CN v. C r` N C Oon00,, rv. O v. K, It O r tr. KOO OC eev Cr. v, rD — r NO N a r- N a r r — >n T, te Of pp� g yO C�,r Op, m led 4ZI• _r U e ,Nr. vet Kv o� 7 v ,N r, rOr. V", vt ,D v' kr) ,Nr, Oro r-• a "0 co r N CCCr, T en —`• N N P CO t` i c au i v $ d pc cr2 E u u ic i u a3 u u 1 l ' t 8 c `�- u c n " G in � � c 5Et � {:: G e u °—E' '� E E c � v) ,__ % y u t ) c m c u cY eS• u 5 U:Ai E X 1a < 9 m_ 9 E D e iiUiia ., y u i hiiilhilili hw € € .:,xxxvt ,c3ot= ` isi St. Vran Valry School 36 District 45 * March 2. 1999 .;gin:.... . ..,., - Summary As illustrated in this report. district facilities will become severely crowded at all levels in several geographical areas. The district has multiple options available to u to address this need including new construction, boundary changes, transportation to F surplus facilities, the use of wide-spread portable classrooms and year-round school- ing. In the event that new construction is chosen as the alternative to address crowd- ing, two new elementary schools, one new middle school and additional high school capacity to serve 400 - 500 students will be required by new residential housing being built in the area over the next 8 years. If new facilities construction is chosen as the solution to crowding, the district should begin working to facilitate a bond election to address these needs. The following paragraphs summarize the extent of crowding: Niwot High Feeder System - The developments proposed for Upper Clover Basin will create the most intense need at Indian Peaks Elementary where 436 seats will be needed by 2000. Niwot Elementary, with a seat shortage of 219, will have profound need as well. Sunset Middle School will have 328 more students than its building can handle by 2000 and Niwot High will have 154 more than capacity. Longmont High Feeder System - Hygiene Elementary actually serves the housing developments immediately East of McIntosh Lake including the Shores. Additional development in this area will swell enrollment 134 students beyond the capacity of Hygiene Elementary by 2000. The same growth will push Westview Middle School enrollment 153 students past capacity and Longmont High 270 students past capacity by 2000. Longmont Estates Elementary also grows 37 students past capacity by 2000. Skyline High School Feeder System - Developments in the East Side Neighborhoods continue to produce new housing and additional students. Enrollment in East Side neighborhoods is declining, however, and most schools can accommodate additional growth. Spring Valley Golf Course, however, will produce a significant amount of growth which may not be easily housed in existing schools. The enrollment effect of this development is shown in Mead Elementary which swells to 143 student over capacity by 2000 if the Spring Valley development is successful. The middle school impact of the development is divided between Mead Middle School and Heritage Middle School. High school students can be adequately housed at Skyline High • School. Reassignment of portions of Spring Hill from Mead schools to Longmont March 2, 1994 46 Sr. Vrain Valley School District 940486 Capit&Fa4 unniaar;and.AuiuGnm schools may be a viable option. Lyons Jr. /Sr. High Feeder System - Both schools in this feeder system slightly exceed capacity by 2000. Minor Boundary adjustments can be used to accommodate enrollment during the next 8 years. Erie Jr. /Sr. High Feeder System - Large scale developments, if they are successful, will swell enrollment at Erie Elementary 94 students beyond capacity by 2000. 234 seats will be available at the secondary school in 2000. Frederick Jr. /Sr. High Feeder System - Enrollment in Frederick Elementary will be 2 students under capacity by 2000. Frederick Middle / Senior will have only 89 seats left by the same year. • St. Vrain Valley School District 47 March 1 1994 940486 Year-row i Schooling Krp r: REPORT OF THE YEAR-ROUND SCHOOLS STUDY COMMITTEE COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Rick Samson Alan Hein Jim Allen David Baker Rhonda Boettcher JoAnn Borys Brooke Bowman Ralph Bozella Frances Bracket Muriel Coulsen Bill Davis Jeannine Green Jim Harrison Rex Hartman Stephen King Mary Beth Laughery Darrel Lemon Barbara Levin Mark Lubbers Renee McDermid Mary Ann Rinnert Mary Sires Peggy Soderborg Bonnie Soman Paul Sueltenfuss Connie Syferd Ellen Winkleman DEPARTMENT OF INSTRUCTION ST. VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT (February, 1994) S1.Wain Valky School Durricr 49 March 2,/9949 4 0486 ! . riutil c )O.fll tit^..r. - YEAR-ROUND SCHOOLS Introduction II Committee Charge As a result of student enrollment projections that will exceed building capacities in several of our schools, the committee was charged with examining year-round schools as one option to address projected overcrowding in these schools. Specifically, the committee was to prepare a report for the Superintendent and Board of Education regarding year-round schools. Suggested components included facility use information, review of other Colorado and national school district experiences, budget impact, educational advantages, and impact on the school district and community as a whole. Background Information Building capacities and enrollment projections The districts' Long Range Facility Planning committee projections are attached as Appendix A. Basically, this information shows that by 1996,eight elementary school buildings and six secondary school buildings will be over their maximum student enrollment capacities. In fact, even if these particular buildings employed the year-round school concept, two would be over capacity in another four years. The year-round school concept Year-round schooling simply redistributes vacation days so that the traditionally long summer vacation is replaced by several shorter vacations throughout the year. For example, students may attend school for 45 weekdays followed by 15 weekdays of vacation (thus,a calendar called 45-15)or 60 days of school and 20 days of vacation (thus, 60-20). Students on a year-round schedule ordinarily attend school the same number of days during the school year as students on a traditional schedule. In St. Vrain's case that is 175 days. In addition, year-round schools implement the schedule in two forms: single-track and multi track. On a single-track schedule all students are on vacation at the same time. This format does not allow a school to accommodate more students at any one time and therefore, does not assist buildings which are over capacity. Schools implement the single-track, year-round schedule primarily because they believe learning will be more effective if it is not interrupted by a long summer break. A multi-track schedule allows a school to house more students than would be possible on a traditional schedule because a portion of the students are on vacation at any one time. The multi-track schedule is most often implemented to relieve overcrowding. However, it shares the educational purposes of the single-track schedule. Mach 2.19W 50 Si.Vrain Valley School Diaric Yew •vsn. S:n,v I,nZ R4vor In summary, a St. Vran Valley year-round school would be a facility that is open for approximately 240 days annually. Each individual student would attend for 175-days. With multiple tracks (usually four)the Building can accommodate one-fourth more students. Since a year-round school always has one group I of students on vacation, a school built for 600 can accommodate 800 when it converts to a year-round schedule. Realistically, a twenty percent increase in facility capacity is achievable. The Year-Round School Committee operated from the basic assumption that the number of school days St.Vrain students now attend school, 175,would remain approximately the same with a year-round school calendar. Also, since the district is studying year-round schooling due to overcrowding the multi-track schedule would be necessary over single-track. In the review of the literature the most common year- round school calendar options used are 45/15 and 60/20. This refers to students having 45 or 60 week days of school followed by 15 or 20 week days of vacation. These patterns continue throughout summer months. School facilities would be open approximately 45 more days each school year. Year-round school at the elementary, middle and senior high According to the National Association for Year-Round Education in a September, 1993 report there were 301 public school district and 29 private schools in 26 states utilizing year-round schooling during the 1992-93 school year. A combination of multi-track and single-track schedules were used. The majority of year-round school districts operated on a single-track, which, by keeping all students on the same schedule, saved neither space nor money. 'Elementary School: According to the report referenced above the year-round school concept is used mostly at the elementary level. Nationwide, seventy-nine percent of students in year-round schools are elementary students. Middle school: Also, according to the report, year-round school is a workable option for middle schools. However, only nine percent of students in year-round schools are at the middle level. High School: And, surprisingly year-round school at the high school level was implemented at a slightly higher rate than at the middle level with ten and a half percent of the students in year-round education being at the high school level. As with the middle school it is difficult to provide a complete curriculum offering to all students in each track at the high school level. Single course offerings such as advanced placement classes in the areas of Physics, Calculus, and specials like music, art, English as a Second Language and Special Education services, are difficult to provide in a multiple track, year-round school setting. Colorado School Districts' Experience6 Jefferson County In the summer of 1974, Jefferson County Public Schools implemented a year-round calendar, having 168 days of school per academic year. Begun initially as a two- year pilot in highly impacted attendance areas, it was expanded into more schools and attedance areas until 1977. At that time, approximately one third of Jefferson County's 115 • schools were on some form of year-round calendar. St.Vrain Valley School DWrici 51 March 2, 199/ 940486 Ye.4T rola!Schooling Reron Jefferson County provided the following information ab0u their experience with year-round schools 1. Economic Benefits a. Gain in use of facilities b. No surplus schools in declining neighborhoods c. Savings in bonded indebtedness of the District d. Opportunity to pay some teachers more salary for teaching an additional term at no increased cost to the district for employee health insurance. e. Save the cost of cross-district busing 2. Educational Benefits a. Greater involvement of teachers in planning and developing activities through the use of bonus learning time (voluntary by students, self-supporting') b. More innovative climate in year-round school facilities c. More extensive enrichment activities (which were self supporting') in elementary schools. Fifth term option was excellent at the high school d. More initiative from principals and staff for school based planning e. Maintenance of stable school environments in rapidly growing neighborhoods f. Elimination of the need for double sessions in rapid growth areas g. Decreased dropout rate at the secondary level h. Reduced teacher and pupil burnout, especially at the elementary level i. Creation of more intense learning environment K-12 'Self-supporting, fees charged to students to pay for salaries and other costs 3. Other Effects a. Jefferson County's year-round calendar resulted in a redistribution of vacation days throughout the school year b. Preserved the neighborhood school concept Jefferson County offered the following reasons for terminating year-round schools' 1. Changes in Community Conditions a. Decline in rate of growth in pupil enrollments b. Improvement in District capability to pass bond elections for the construction of new schools c. Stable enrollments in some schools did not permit track changes • 2. Changes in Staff Attitude a. Loss of enthusiasm by school administrators b. Changes in administrative staff of year-round program at secondary level c. Desire of some high school teachers to have all students present at one time 3. New Priorities • a. Changing teachers on a quarterly basis at the high school level was perceived as lacking instructional continuity b. Decline in test scores of one high school (sic) march 2,1994 S2 Si.Vrain Valley School Diariu 9404RE Yrm Rep,r. c. Failure to address high school concerns over communication problems with students and teachers d. Recent concern over the length of the school year and desire for increasing instruc- tional time e. Changes in priorities of community leadership Douglas County Schools Year-round schools were implemented in Douglas County schools in response to rapid growth in student enrollments and inability of the school district to provide sufficient classroom space. During the current school year, they have twelve of their nineteen elementary schools on year-round calendars. Next year, Douglas County plans to add two additional elementary schools and two of the district's four middle schools to year-round. Douglas County School employees reported support for year-round schools from parents, com- munity and staff. The primary reason for their support comes from the educational benefits that they feel are being attained. Even though Douglas County passed capital construction bonds, their new schools will open with year-round calendars. Douglas County did provide facilities on school grounds for day-care services and allowed students to ride district buses. Cherry Creek School District Mission Viejo Elementary School initiated a multiple-track, year- , round calendar twenty-one years ago in response to increased student enrollment. It has re- mained on a year-round calendar since that time because of strong administrative support. Currently, a year-round calendar is being used at the K-5 level in at least three other elementary schools. They have established a district-wide task force to explore extending year-round into their middle schools. Cherry Creek reported that the most important factor to be considered is the cost per pupil. They have reported savings in their operational costs and bonded indebtedness as a result of year-round schools. Cherry Creek School District found that year-round schools were cost effective with student enrollments of 725 students and up. The inter-session activities and programs (self-supporting) are seen as a positive means of providing enrichment activities and remediation opportunities for students. Nationwide There is some degree of uncertainty regarding the current trend for year-round schools. USA Today reported in December 1993, that the number of students in year-round schools is on the decline. Si. Vran Valley School Manor 53 March 2,1994 - .. 86 The National Association for Year-Round Education reported in September 1993 that the number of states and schools adopting year-round calendars is on the increase. The National Association for Year-Round Education reports that 1 .4 million students in 366 school districts dispersed through 32 states are cn year-round school calendars. Educational Advantages,/Disadvantageq possible Advantages Reported Nationally The literature was inconclusive as to the educational benefits of year-round schools. We were unable to find definitive research supporting educational benefits of year-round schools. Likewise, there was no indication that year-round calendars were detrimental to students' achievement. School districts have reported that the fifteen day breaks in a year-round calendar result in less re- gression in learning on the part of students. Students having special needs appear to benefit from a year-round calendar. This is based on a reduction in the number of special students needing an extended school year in year-round schools. Research indicated the following specific advantages: dIncreased attendance rates for teachers and students SIntersession activities provide opportunities for enrichment (self-supporting) IIntersession activities provide opportunities for remediation (self-supporting) IStudents at the secondary level who have failed classes would be able to take these more frequently. Possible Disadvantages Reported Nationally Research indicated the following specific disadvantages: dRegression occurs after each 15 day vacation break tHigh schools experienced difficulty in providing complete course offerings every track tSingle section classes (AP Calculus, French IV, Band & Chorus), courses requiring semester sequencing (Physics 1 & 2, Algebra, Geometry) for completion were difficult to schedule tSpecial needs students (ESL, Educationally Handicapped) are grouped in tracks in order to provide services • Mach 2,1994 54 St.Vrain Valk School Distract 940486 Year rowel St-hording Report dlf schools are not operating at "ideal" capacities, the likelihood of combination classes is increased Summary of Impacts: Financial and Nonfinancial P Building Capabilities Air Conditioning Elementary: Burlington, Erie, Indian Peaks, Niwot, , Rocky Mountain and Sanborn Elementary Schools Middle Schools: Heritage, Longs Peak Middle, Sunset, and Westview Middle Schools High Schools: Lyons, Niwot and Skyline High Schools Partially Air Conditioned Frederick, Mead, Columbine, and Lyons Elementary Schools and Erie Middle/Senior High School Not Air Conditioned Elementary: Central, Hygiene, Loma Linda, Longmont Estates, Mountain View, Northridge, Spangler, Main Street Middle Schools: Mead Middle High Schools: Longmont Financial Costs to Implement Year-Round Schools dThe cost of adding air conditioning to an elementary school building is approximately $200,000 per school. Monthly costs for electricity -approximately $3,200 per month. dCost for staff development IThe cost for pre-implementation planning costs by staff dCommunity awareness meetings and information Si. v,oin valley School District 55 Won h 2,1994 40486 Y,',✓-rour:c Scii.n:M,^Re;✓r: District Impact-Instruction Curriculum (Year-round school calendars require teachers to "share" classrooms when their students are on vacation. (The district's hands-on curriculum requires manipulatives and substantial teacher materials that would need to be moved and stored. (A substantial proportion of teachers supplement the district curriculum with materials owned by the individual teacher creating additional moving and storage problems. (Teaming and integrated instructional units would be more difficult to coordinate. (Special course offerings-single section classes, would be difficult to schedule. (There would be no adverse impact on core conceptual objectives or application level assess- ments. I (CTBS Testing would require greater coordination. (Summer school would need to be restructured for students in year-round schools. �l. (Summer band would need to be addressed for students in year-round schools. (Coordination of school improvement activities would become more difficult with constantly rotating staff. (Lesson planning would need to be restructured to accommodate the change in calendar. (Curriculum delivery would need to be re-examined. Special Needs/ Programs St. Vrain Valley Schools provide many special programs and support services to a variety of students throughout the district. Obvious "specials" like Art, Music and PE come immediately to mind. These "specials", with Special Education services, are provided to all students within the district. In addition, there are specialized program offerings to specific groups of students such as: (Chapter 1 to qualifying elementary school students in grades K-3 (Bilingual Education to identified students in four elementary buildings (English As a Second Language to qualifying students in any of the 31 school buildings March 2J 994 56 Si.Vraln Valley School Dunks 9410486 Year rorwl Sikbuny Rep. rr *HILT (High Intensity Language Training) to secondary students for whom English is their second language in three secondary schools dACE (Accelerated Curriculum for Excellence) at all elementary facilities dindian Education to students with tribal membership dMigrant Education to eligible students in all grades dAdvanced Placement course opportunities at the high school level dSingle course offerings at the secondary level 'Counseling services at all levels As one can see,these services are provided by specialists in their field and not provided to every student. It already takes additional funding to support these programs which includes annual grant writing meeting federal and state requirements. These grant projects would need to be"accepted"within the year-round school concept. Also, specialists are limited in number and services are already thinly spread throughout a traditional school day and calendar. They could not be spread over a multi-track system without adding more specialists or offering a longer contract with appropriate compensation for the additional time. On the other side, there is often an expectation of higher achievement for some students with the implementation of a continuous instructional schedule. The National Association for Year-Round Education in a January 1993 report noted that educationally-disadvantaged students lose three to four months of a year's academic growth during summer vacation compared to less loss by their non- disadvantaged counterparts. They also reported that students in compensatory education programs had achievement losses overthe summer. They felt these findings suggested that a year-round schedule may be a strategy for sustained achievement gains in programs for disadvantaged students because there is no long summer break. This is also much of the rationale for federally mandated Extended School Year ESY) for students with disabilities who regress at such a rate over the traditional summer that too much time is lost in the fall recovering what was lost in order to move on to learning new skills. Therefore, ESY is mandated. The need for ESY could be lessened or possibly eliminated with the advent of year-round schooling. Personnel Staffing Considerations dAdditional clerical and secretarial help would be needed for record keeping, etc. School would be opening/closing for one or more groups of students multiple times a year. dAdditional custodians, food service personnel, would be needed. dArt, music and physical education teachers need to be available during all tracks. dChapter I, Bilingual, HILT, ACE, Indian Education, Migrant Education Advanced placement, and counseling need to be available offerings teachers (Physics, Calculus), single course g ( Y during all tracks. Q�{ p St.Vrain Valley School District 57 March 1,1994 94 0486 ,oun.1 j,n...,.nx Pepurr tDIN1C personnel, health clerks, media tech, teacher aides, building administrators, would need to be increased. (Support personnel, Teacher On Special Assignment in the various subject areas, and central office, would all need to be available on a year-round schedule for those schools in session. (All employee groups would need to be informed and involved from the beginning and through out the planning and implementation process. Personnel considerations (Negotiated agreements with all employee groups would need to be re-examined. (Teacher burn-out might be reduced. (Teacher attendance might be improved. tissues related to change would need to be addressed. (Re-certification and staff development would need to be coordinated around the year-round calendar. (Difficulties would exist for staff seeking graduate level, on-campus, course work. (Staff members with summer employment could be affected. (Substitute teaching, extended contracts opportunities might become available during intersessions. (Greater coordination with colleges and universities for student teaching assignments would need to occur. (Additional training and planning time would have to be provided. (Considerable staff development would need to be done to prepare all staff members for the year-round calendar. (Communication and decision-making of all types would require additional planning/preparation. (The district may need to address schools not on year-round requesting to establish a single- track, year-round calendar. (Feeder school coordination would need to be considered. March 2,1994 S8 St.Wain Valley School Diana 940486 Yew' row,.:Schooling Reno.: Transportation dYear-round schools could be implemented on either a limited or full-scale basis. lit may be possible to retain drivers by offering year-round employment. IThere will be an additional expense of approximately 25% due to the extended school year. Building Cleaning/Custodial Services dYear-round schools could be implemented on either a limited or full-scale basis. IThere would be increased difficulty with cleaning buildings that are in use full time. IThere will be an additional expense of approximately 10% for custodians due to the extended school year. Custodians are already year-round employees. Athletics. Extra-Curricular and Co-curricular Activities It appears that athletics would not be adversely affected by a year-round calendar. However, choirs, bands, orchestra, forensics, yearbook, theater, Homecomings and Proms could be adversely affected. These activities might need special considerations or provisions for selection of tracks. Impact on Families Financial It may be more difficult to obtain day care for three or four weeks at a time instead of three months at a time. It is difficult to assess what if any increased cost may be involved. Families with children in different tracks may have additional costs for day care. There is a question as to the availability of jobs for teenagers and what the financial impact may • be on some families who count on their teenager's income from a full-time summer job. Local merchants would have to alter their back to school sales to accommodate different beginning dates. St.Vraln Valley School Vivid 59 March 2.1991 n40486 ..tr round S.h..ol.ng Rep,-'r! Non-finamai Families could be impacted if their children were in different tracks. • Traditional summer schedules would be dramatically changed with year-round schools and family life styles would be changed as well. Day Care Year-round schools redistribute vacation days. It is important to point out that the district is not responsible for students on the fifteen school days when the children are out of school during those fifteen vacation days. Parents would be responsible for day care during those fifteen days. It is possible that the schedules of the private day care providers will be affected. i Vacations/Family Travel Children will probably be pulled out of school to vacation with their parents, if parents and chil- dren do not have the same vacation schedules. impact on Community Day Care' There is a concern that the number of latch-key children might increase with year-round schools. Services of day care providers would be market driven and new schedules created to accommo- date families on all tracks. Recreational Programs' Recreational program schedules within the communities served by the school district would have to be modified to accommodate year round schooling (swimming, tennis, golf, baseball and softball). Recreational programs that extend beyond district boundaries could be affected because other districts are not on year-round schedules. Fewer students would be able to participate in, or staff, summer activities. March 2,1994 60 Si Vran Valley School District 9404E Year roana Sc Summer Camps Summer camps are conducted out of the school district and are geared to traditional summer vacation schedules. This will make scheduling difficult for families and some may elect to pull their children out of school to attend camps. Agricultural Labor/ County Fair Activities Children of agricultural families might not be available to help with summer hay cutting and wheat harvest. Children involved in county and state fair activities may miss several days of school. 'Implementation of year-round schools in selected buildings, while maintaining a traditional calendar in the remaining schools, compounds problems in these areas. Other Considerations Implementation Timeline Experience indicates that school districts should provide a minimum of 18 months for making the decision, planning, and preparing to implement year-round schools. Twenty-four months would be ideal. Less than twelve months would be problematic in all areas. Community Information Experience suggests that frequent meetings be held with the school communities to be impacted. Economies of Scale For multi-track, year-round schools to be cost effective, there should be a minimum student enrollment of 700 children. Other Students on vacation breaks coming back onto school grounds could create increased prob- lems. Local businesses could also experience increased problems as a result of students being on vacation breaks throughout the year. Sr.%rain Valley School Diaries 61 March 2,1994 486 C ipnal F2,4:i irs wunan and Sulunonr Preliminary Recommendation Long Range Facilities Planning Committee I In the event that new construction is chosen as the alternative to address crowding, the LRFPC recommends that two new elementary schools, one new middle school and additional high school capacity to serve 400 - 500 students be constructed using bond funding. Additional additions and renovations to address facility deficiencies and small-scale capacity shortfalls are assumed. March 2, .1994 66 St. Vran Valley School District 940486 Cantal Failities Summon and Solwmns SVVSD Staff Report on Facility Alternatives Prepared by Shannon Bingham Tom Garcia March 2, 1994 • March 2. 1994 6$ Sr. Wain Valley School Diaries 940486 ( appal Fu;::;T I 1mrrmnw and 5n[unon: Alternative Solutions to School Crowding The following sections detail various scenarios for implementing solutions to school crowding. The scenarios illustrate new construction alternatives, reactivation of existing facilities, boundary change alternatives and year-round school alternatives. The proposed solutions are independent of each other and independent of grade level appropriateness. For example, a proposed solution at the elementary level may re- quire a certain action to be taken at the middle school level. Hypothetical combina- tions of various solutions follow the alternatives to illustrate comprehensive solution packages. The combinations illustrate a continum between new construction and year-round schooling. Alternative #1 - Addresses elementary crowding at Niwot Elementary (requires new construction) This alternative requires the assignment of those portions of the Niwot Elementary attendance area West of the Diagonal Highway to a new Clover Basin Elementary School. NES - West of Diagonal Highway Niwot Elem Residual Zone Niwot Enrollment Zone Niwot Enrollment 52 27 80 2 53 110 81 55 56 43 82 15 58 13 83 52 59 13 84 20 70 7 85 52 71 18 86 24 72 12 87 109 Total 243 88 92 91 3 Growth 94 4 West Side 61 Total 428 Total 589 Percentage 10.36% Growth East 528 Grwth 2000 167 Total 589 89.64% Adjusted 260 West Side Grwth 2000 167 Enrollment St Vrain Valley School Dimly 69 March 2. 1994 940486 C.apaal ra.::,He iunurwn and uiul:ry I Adjusted 578 Clover Basin 474 1 West Side and PikeEnrollment Total 734 Niwot Elem. Capacity 624 Additional Features - * Potentially reassign Hillcrest Heights and other "North Niwot Fringe" neighborhoods to an el- ementary school in the Pike or Indian Peaks Elementary attendance area to further reduce Niwot Elementary Enrollment. ** Total Pike and Clover Basin growth is forcast at 474 additional elementary students by 2000. Alternative #2 - Addresses elementary crowding at Niwot Elementary (requires new construction) Assign all of Niwot Elementary attendance area West of the Diagonal Highway to a new Elementary School located near Lake Valley Estates. Transport Clover Basin students to this school to fill it or construct a smaller school. NES - West of Diagonal Highway Niwot Elementary Residual Zone Niwot Enrollment Zone Niwot Enrollment 52 27 80 2 53 110 81 55 56 43 82 15 ' 58 13 83 52 59 13 84 20 70 7 85 52 71 18 86 24 72 12 87 109 Total 243 88 92 91 3 Growth 94 4 West Side 61 Total 428 Total 589 Percentage 10.36% Growth East Side 528 Grwth 2000 167 Total 589 Percentage 89.64% Adjusted 260 ' West Side Grwth 2000 167 Enrollment Adjusted 578 Clover Basin 474 West Side ' and Pike ** Enrollment March 2, 1994 70 St Vrain Valley School District 940486 Total 714 Ni cot Elem. Capacit) 624 ' * Potentially reassign Hillcrest Heights and other "North Niwot Fringe" neighbor- hoods to an elementary school in the Pike or Indian Peaks Elementary attendance area ' to further reduce Niwot Elementary Enrollment. ** Total Pike and Clover Basin growth is forcast at 474 additional elementary students by 2000. Only a portion of the total Clover Basin growth increment would be as- signed to the Lake Valley Estates School. Pike neighborhood students would be assigned to another site. Alternative #2A - Build a Small School In Lake Valley Estates or North Rim. Sug- gestions from residents of the subdivisions located West of the Diagonal Highway have led to the creation of this scenario. This school would be constructed to serve the eventual enrollment of 260 students coming from subdivisions located in the target area only. The subdivisions contained within the target area include Lake Valley Estates, North Rim, Brigadoon Glen, Oriole Estates, Range View, Boulder Hills, Saddle Club Acres, Crest View Estates and Lake of the Pines. Alternative #1 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Results in an enrollment at Niwot Elementary School which is within capacity. * A school located in Clover Basin would directly serve enrollment produced by one of Longmont's most rapidly-growing areas. * Niwot Elementary School students East of the Diagonal continue to walk to a neigh borhood school. * Cons * Niwot Elementary School students West of the Diagonal must participate in a boundary change and relocation to new school. Alternative #2 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Lake Valley Estates/North Rim students would no longer be transported, and would instead, walk to a neighborhood school. * Cons * At or near build-out, Clover Basin will produce more students who could easily walk to school than the Lake Valley Estates /North Rim area could produce and there- fore a more efficient walk-in school would exist. St Vraln Valley School Anna 71 March 2. 1994 940486 �ar.;a; (.i,r.:Jt ianinwn and io:uar ne . Alternati%ew #2A - Pros and Cons * Pros * Lake Valley Estates/North Rim students would no longer be transported, and would instead. walk to a neighborhood school. * Small school alternative would allow Clover Basin students to attend a school in that neighborhood assuming an additional school would be constructed. * Cons * Small Schools are more costly to staff and operate. Alternative #3 - Addresses crowding at Hygiene Elementary . Assign all of Niwot Elementary attendance area West of the Diagonal Highway to Hygiene Elementary School. Build a new School Northeast of McIntosh Lake to House Hygiene Students Within City Limits. Assign Longmont Estates Elementary neighborhood#225 to the new McIntosh Lake Elem. in order to increase enrollment at the new McIntosh Lake Elementary and reduce enrollment at Longmont Estates El- ementary. West of Diagonal Highway McIntosh City Limits Enrollments Zone Niwot Enrollment Zone Hygiene Enroll 52 27 200 69 53 110 206 46 56 43 212 29 58 13 220 83 59 13 221 0 70 7 222 90 71 18 223 0 72 12 Total 317 Total 243 Longmont Estates Reassignment Hygiene Residual Enrollment 225 130 Zone Hygiene Enroll 50 22 Expected Growth McIntosh Lake 60 0 125 61 2 Total McIntosh Lake Enrollment 62 4 572 63 29 64 38 65 39 66 20 Total 154 March 2, 1994 72 St Vrain Volley School Dinric, 940486 Capunl F..e.i Wire Swnniaan and Solunone Expected Growth West Niaot Area West Side 61 Total 5?;9 Grwth 201X) 167 Students 17 II Total 414 Alternative #4 - Addresses crowding at Hygiene Elementary Assign South portion of McIntosh Lake City Limits area to Longmont Estates El- ementary leaving the primary growth area around McIntosh Lake in Hygiene Elem. Attendance Area. Assign South portion of Longmont Estates Elementary to new °I Clover Basin school. House West Niwot students in a clover basin elementary school. McIntosh City Limits Reassignment Longmont Estates Reassignment Zone Hygiene Enrollment Zone LM Estates Enroll 206 46 236 0 220 83 238 45 Total 129 244 19 245 25 Hygiene Elem 2000 Enroll 246 42 630 250 45 F 255 7 Minus McIntosh Lake #206 and#220 260 16 To 501 293 1 Clover 200 Basin Hygiene Elementary Capacity 480 Longmont Estates Elem. 2000 Enroll 580 Plus McIntosh Lake #206 and #220 709 Minus Long Estates Reassignment 509 Longmont Estates Elementary Capacity 528 Alternative #3 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Addresses crowding at Hygiene Elementary School by relocating Longmont growth impact. * Places Longmont students in a walk-in, neighborhood school - within municipal St. Vrain Valley School District 73 March 2, /994 940486 limits. * Cons * Remaining residential growth potential in the Macintosh Lake area is limited and Northwest Longmont schools may decline in enrollment ten or fifteen years into the future. * Hygiene is actually farther away from the Lake Valley Estates / North Rim area than either Niwot or Clover Basin. * Requires a large portion of the Longmont Estates Elementary attendance area to be transported accross 17th St. to new McIntosh Lake School in order to fill it. * Safety implecations associated with students crossing or being transported across 17th Street. Alternative #4 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Allows Hygiene Elementary enrollment to remain within capacity. * Addresses Niwot Elementary School crowding situation. * Cons * Lake Valley Estates area students would be transported a greater distance to Hygiene than they would be to Niwot or Clover Basin. - * South Longmont Estates Elementary students removed from their community to solve Hygiene Elementary School crowding problem. * Transportation costs and student travel times are increased. Alternative #4.5 Construct a new elementary school in the Pike Neighborhood. Under this alternative, a new elementary school would be built on the Pike Neighbor- hood site and the approximately 340 students (at build-out) who will be generated by that neighborhood would walk to that school. The 260 Niwot Elementary students (by 2000) who would be generated by the portion of the attendance area West of the Diagonal Highway would be transported to this new school. Alternative #4.5 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Addresses Niwot Elementary School crowding situation. * Locates school in efficient walk-in neighborhood where site exists. * Cons * Lake Valley Estates area students would be transported. * Transportation costs and student travel times are increased. Alternative 5a - Activate Main Street School as a traditional elementary school March 2. 1994 74 St. Vrain Volley School District 940486 Capuu!I acrluit laminar and Sofia Jam with its own attendance area. Alternative 5b - Activate Main Street School as a magnet school with a district- wide attendance area. Alternatis e 5c - Overflow to Main Street Elementary Scenario ' This alternative illustrates the enrollment effect of transferring 4th Grade students which exceed the capacity of West & Southwest schools to Main Street Elementary. 1995 Excess 1996 2000 Capacity Hygiene 98 111 134 480 Indian Peaks 113 190 436 480 Lngmnt Est. 40 43 37 528 Niwot 139 169 219 624 Total 390 513 826 Alternative 5a - Pros and Cons * Pros * Utilize facility already owned by the district. *Cons * May displace exising programs located at Main Street. * Extensive boundary changes would be required at many schools in order to create an attendance area for Main Street. * School building deficiencies such as playground equipment. Alternative #5b - Pros and Cons * Pros * Utilizes a facility already owned by the district. * Opportunity to experiment with a creative, alternative-style program. * Cons * Difficult to insure relief for schools that need it. * School building deficiencies such as playground equipment. Alternative #5c - Pros and Cons * Pros * Utilizes a facility already owned by the district. * Utilizes a mechanism previously used by the district to address crowding. Sr. Vrain Valley School Damn 75 March Z 1991 940486 * Could allow a creative, alternative-style program. * Cons " Removes 4th grade students from their neighborhood schools. Results in increased student ride times and transportion costs. Alternative 6 - Add Portables This alternative illustrates the effect of adding portable classrooms to Hygiene, Indian Peaks and Longmont Estates Elementary to absorb additional growth. Hygiene 1995 1996 2000 #Over Capacity -98 -11I -134 Add Two Doubles +96 +96 +96 Residual Shortage -2 -15 -38 Indian Ms 1995 1996 2000 #Over Capacity -113 -190 -436 Add Two Doubles +96 +96 +96 Residual Shortage -17 -96 -340 Long Est. 1995 1996 20O0 #Over Capacity -40 -43 -37 Add OneDoublc +48 +48 +48 Residual Surplus +8 +5 +I I Niwot 1995 1996 2000 #Over Capacity -139 -169 -219 Add Two Doubles +96 +96 +96 Residual Shortage -43 -73 -123 Alternative #6 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Allows students to remain in their neighborhood schools. * Portables may be purchased without bond funding. * Cons * Core area crowding often results where portable classrooms are extensively used. * Perpetuates "temporary" solution. * Cost of portables is a drain on capital reserve funding. * Site constraints and encroachment on play areas. * Staff challenge to insure access to core facility resources (computer lab, library, gymnasium, restrooms) for students in portables. March 2. J994 76 St. Strain Valley School Morin 940486 lap::;rl ;MA :e Sunman ant 'tut Jon Alternative #6.5 - New Clover Basin Middle School The school could open in Fall of 1997 with 254 students if both Sunset and Westview Middle Schools remained at capacity. Ideally, the new school would open with more students and the enrollments at Sunset and Westview would be reduced to lower levels ' ; and growth areas distributed among the three schools. By 20(X), this school would have an enrollment of 553 if both Sunset and Westview remain at capacity. Alternative #6.5 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Addresses middle school crowding at Westview and Sunset. * Places a new middle school in the rapidly growing Clover Basin area. * Cons * Requires initial boundary changes. Alternative #7 - High School Additions to Longmont High School and Niwot High Schools. Under this alternative, both schools could operate through 2000 with 250-student additions. The long-term solution to high school crowding would be a new school constructed on the Clover Basin site. Enrollment growth is not significant enough to justify this school until after 2000. Alternative #7 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Addresses high school crowding through 2000 without constructing a new facility. * Cons * Site limitations at both schools suggest that additional enrollment would congest both site and facility at both locations. * District regulations establish desired high school size at 1200. Alternative #7A - Shift Boundaries to Distribute High School Crowding. This alternative has some viability given the availability of space in Skyline High School, but is not a total solution. Seats Avail 95 Seats Avail 96 Seats Avail 2000 Longmont High -54 -147 -209 Niwot High 37 -28 -182 Skyline High 320 295 185 Alternative #7B - Construct the Core of a New High School in Clover Basin and Add Only Enough Classrooms to Accomodate High School Need through 2000. Sr. Vran Valley School Droner 77 March 2' 1994 940486 lap.:a. I 0.::;r[ec N,unmar_ oul This alternative would be in conjaction with the construction of a new middle school. Alternative #7C - Construct a New High School Facility in Clover Basin and Operate it as a Grade 6-12 Joint Middle School/High School Facility. This alternative is in lieu of constructing a new middle school or other middle school solution. Alternative #7A - Pros and Cons * Pros * Uses existing facility. * Cons * Results in increased bussing and private car use. * Only addresses half of high school space needs by 2000 - additional space needed. Alternative #7B - Pros and Cons * Pros * Addresses high school facility needs without increasing program size at Longmont High and Niwot High. * Less funding required than constructing entire facility. * Cons * Lower cost-effectiveness for building a high school in two phases. Alternative #7C - Pros and Cons * Pros * Solves middle school crowding issue. *Addresses both middle and high school needs assuming the building may be divided into a 750-student middle school component and a 500-student high school compo- nent. * Reduces potential size of LHS and Niwot High programs which would result from existing building expansion. * Places additional high school facilities in area where most growth will be produced. * Cons * Potentially more expensive than new middle school and high school additions. * Requires later conversion when additional funding for middle school becomes avail- able. * Potential educational and social challenges of combining middle and senior high students into student body as large as 1250. * Special design cnsiderations may be required. Alternative #8 - Distribute Spring Valley (East Longmont) Growth Among Sr. Wain ValleDinner March 2. 1994 78 r School Diana 940486 C apart'Fa,.1a s S onrmir, and Solunnnl Spangler, Loma Linda, Columbine and Rocky Mountain Elementaries Seats Avail 95 Seats Avail 96 Seats Avail 2000 Mead Elementary -28 -51 -143 Spangler 88 95 109 Loma Linda 34 46 51 ' Columbine/Rocky Mtn 275 297 323 Alternative #8 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Effective use existing elementary schools. * Cons * Transportation costs. Alternative #9 - Build a New Elementary School to Accomodate Spring Valley Alternative #9 - Pros and Cons * Pros * Lower transportation costs. * Cons * Not enough students produced in Spring Valley by 2000 to justify a new school. Alternatives #10a, 10b and 10c - Year Round Schooling Alternative #10a - Only the following growth-impacted schools move to year- round calendar. School Capacity 125% of Cap 2000 Enroll Ovr/Undr Erie Elem 408 510 526 -16 Hygiene Elem 480 600 614 -14 Indian Peaks Elem 480 600 916 -316 Longmont Estates 528 660 565 95 Niwot Elem 624 780 867 -87 Sunset Middle 744 930 1072 -142 Westview Middle 768 960 921 +39 Alternative #10b - Growth-impacted listed in Alternative #10a and Longmont schools West of Main Street move to year-round calendar. School Capacity 125% of Cap 2000 Enroll Ovr/Undr Sr. Vram Valley School District 79 March Z 19W 940486 Capi[u l a`ad ,s ':u>nnaf. and.Vsluncn.c Burlington Elem 432 540 405 135 Central Elem 528 660 492 168 Mountain View 504 630 487 143 Sanborn Elem 528 660 461 199 Longs Peak Middle 720 900 760 140 Alternative #10c - All SVVSD Elementary and middle schools move to year- round calendar. Alternatives #10a, 10b and 10c - Pros and Cons (More detailed pros and cons including educational impledcations appear in the Year-round Schooling Report.) * Pros * Increased use of existing facilities. * Cons * Cost to retrofit/air condition. * Transition to new academic calendar. * Would require boundary shifts and transportation to redistribute enrollment. • • Mardi 2. 1994 80 St. Vrdn Valley School District 9110486 rr.,,r: ? ,.Wtt.,,. . mJ�rhUunr Conclusion The previously described alternatives focus on isolated crowding solutions. Most solution: focus on a specific level - elementary, middle school or high school. The solutions must be combined in order to determine a comprehensive solution. For example. an all new construction solution might focus on constructing two new el- ementary schools using Niwot Elementary scenario#1 and constructing a grade 6-12 secondary school in Clover Basin (Alternative #7c). Combinations of new construc- tion solutions and year-round schooling alternatives are also possible. For example, the district may choose to implement year-round schooling in its most impacted el- ementary schools and construct one new elementary school in Clover Basin which would also open as a year-round school. This solution might be in conjunction with various new construction solutions for the secondary level. Additional combinations may be created and "costed-out" for school Board consideration. The following paragraphs illustrate possible combinations which are described for illustration pur- poses only and are not in priority order. Sample Combination #1 - This combination uses new construction to address crowd- ing by combining elementary alternatives #1 and #4.5 and secondary alternativew #7c. Under this combination, a new elementary school would be built on the Pike Neigh- borhood site and approximately 340 students (at build-out) who will be generated by that neighborhood would walk to that school. The 260 Niwot Elementary students (by 2000) who would be generated by the portion of the attendance area West of the Diagonal Highway would be transported to this new school. A new elementary school would also be constructed in Clover Basin to address growth produced by the clover basin developments including Schlagel, Meadow View and the others. Some portions of the McIntosh Lake developments which would have attended Hygiene Elementary would be assigned to this school and transported there. At the secondary level, a high school would be built on the designated site located Southeast of the intersection of Nelson Road and 75th St. This school would be operated as a 6-12 secondary school potentially starting out as a grade 6-7 school during its initial year and adding a grade each year retaining the high school students as they are accumulated. For example the second year would include grades 6-8, the third 6-9 and so forth. After the third year the programs would be segregated into relatively isolated halves of the building. A timeline for the deployment of this com- bination would be as shown in the following table. Sr. Vran Volley School Darner 81 March 2. Mg 940486 'ap:4i Tsr;nr, .1w!mo-Jr. Ina „hu o-nc Combination #1 - Timeline November 1994 August 1995 August 1996 August 1997 Pass Bond Election 11/94) Revise Elementary Ed Specs (1/95) Revise Secondary Ed Specs (2/95) Complete Design - Pike Elem. (10/95) Begin Construction - Pike Elem. (12/95) Complete Design - Secondary Sch. (12/95) Begin Construction - Secondary Sch. (2/96) Begin Design - Clover Basin Elem. (12/95) Open - Pike Elem. (12/96) Complete Design-Clover Elem. (6/96) Begin Construction-Clover Elem. (8/96) Open - Secondary (8/97) Open - C.B. Elem.(8/97) *Fast - track construction methods may be appropriate Preliminary Steps - The following timeline includes other timeline items which must be accomplished prior to any bond election or construction activity. Initial Board of Education Presentation March 2 Board of Education Direction by March 30 Campaign Planning Begins Mar 30-Sept 26 Staff Develops Project Scope and Presents to Board of Education June 1 Final Facility Needs Plan Approved by Board of Education July 13 Campaign Begins - Approximately Sept 26 Election Day Nov 8 Sample Combination #2 - This combination features a combination of year-round schooling and new construction. Under this combination, a new elementary school would be built in Clover Basin. This new school would open as a year-round school with the level one elementary schools (Erie, Hygiene, Indian Peaks, Longmont Es- tates, Niwot) also converting to the year-round schedule. At the secondary level, schools would remain on the traditional calendar with the solution illustrated in Combination #1 implemented. A timeline for the deployment of this combination would be as shown in the following table. March 1, 1994 82 Si. Vran Valley School Diann 940486 C.ap.brl lacallow iiwmun and Solutions Combination #2 - Timeline November 1994 August 1995 August 1996 August 1997 Pass Bond Election (11/94) Revise Elementary Ed Specs 11/95) Revise Secondary Ed Specs (.2/95) Complete Design - Clover Basin Elem.(10/95) Begin Construction - Clover Basin Elem.(12/95) Convert Level 1 Elementary Schools to Year-round Calendar Complete Design - Secondary Sch.(12/95) Begin Construction - Secondary Sch.(2/96) Open - Clover Basin Elem.(12/96) Open - Secondary(8/97) Sample Combination #3 - This combination features the use of year-round schooling to address crowding at the elementary and middle school levels. The lowest cost, new construction alternative to boost high school capacity would be employed at the high school level in the form of additions at Longmont High and Niwot High. The year-round schooling solutions would extend beyond level 1 to level 2 which inlcudes school students. Level 1 schools inlude the following: both elementary and middle g Erie Elementary, Hygiene Elementary, Indian Peaks Elementary, Longmont Estates Elementary, Niwot Elementary, Sunset Middle and Westview Middle. Level 2 schools add the following schools: Burlington Elementary, Central Elementary, Mountain View Elementary, Sanborn Elementary and Longs Peak Middle School. Combination #3 - Timeline November 1994 August 1995 August 1996 August 1997 Pass Bond Election(11/94) Convert Level 1 Schools to Year-round Calendar Complete Design - High Sch. Additions(10/95) Begin Construction - High Sch. Additions(12/95) Open - Secondary Convert Level 2 Schools to Year- round calendar ' Sr. Vain Valley School District 83 March 2.1990 940486 �apaai F.anhties Swnman and Sldmmm Sample Combination #4 - This combination reflects not using bond funding to ad- dress crowding issues. Year-round schooling would be used to address crowding at the elementary and middle school levels. Portable classrooms and boundary changes would be used to boost high school capacity at least until 2000. Combination #4 - Timeline November 1994 August 1995 August 1996 August 1997 Convert Level I Schools to Year-round Calendar Convert Level 2 Schools to Year- round Calendar Begin Adding Portable Buildings to High Schools Shift Portions of LHS to SHS March 2. 199 84 a Wain Valley School Duirin 940486 f.k.iine' Swnmun and A'nlunnrt, Appendix A - Abandoned Alternatives Alternative #6.5A - Shift Boundaries to Distribute Middle School Crowding This alternative has limited viability given the lack of space in middle level schools adjacent to Westview and Sunset as illustrated in the following table: Seats Avail 95 Seats Avail 96 Seats Avail 2000 Sunset Middle -130 -147 -352 Westview Middle -81 -107 -201 Lyons Mid./Sr. 23 4 • -12 Longs Peak Middle -41 -38 -40 Heritage Middle -81 -87 -1 Alternative #6.5A - Pros and Cons * Pros * Uses existing facilities. * Cons * Compromises feeder system concept. * Not adequate surplus capacity at any adjacent middle school facility to address crowding even in initial year. * Transports students out of their attendance areas. • St. Vraln Valley School District 85 March 2,1994 940486 Appendix B - School Building Capacities and Methodology The following section illustrate the capacities of SVVSD buildings. These capacities have been developed in conjunction with building principals and other instructional staff and represent the maximum recommended enrollments for individual buildings. Elementary school capacities have been determined by multiplying the number of regular education classrooms at each school by the district staffing ratio of 24 students per classroom. Kindergarten classrooms are counted twice considering their typical use for two sessions of kindergarten (morning and afternoon) per day. Parent class- rooms were counted as regular classrooms where a room of conventional size was used for that purpose. Head Start classrooms were also counted as part of building capacity when a full size classroom was used for that purpose. Classrooms which were not integrated into capacity included music rooms, art rooms, gymnasiums and computer laboratories which are used on a rotating basis and special use classrooms which are used on a resource basis. Special use classrooms include special education resource, special education self-contained, Chapter 1, ESL, HILT and other special programs. Rooms used for sanctioned preschool programs were also not counted as part of regular education capacity. This approach to calculating elementary school capacity is consistent with methods used in other school districts. Secondary capacities were calculated by multiplying the number of schedulable class- rooms by the secondary school staffing ratio which is also 24 per classroom. For small program-size schools, the lower staffing ratio of 20.5 per classroom was used. Scheduled classrooms include full-size, regular classrooms in all disciplines, art rooms, music rooms, main gymnasiums, auxiliary gymnasiums, floor exercise rooms, wrestling rooms, weight rooms (when full-sized) PRD labs, technology labs and com- puter labs. Computer labs used as writing or resource labs at the high school level were not counted. Most districts use a similar methodology to calculate secondary capacities, but use scheduling efficiency ratios to reduce overall capacity. For example total middle school capacity would be multiplied by .85 to reflect the fact that each room may only be scheduled six out of every seven periods. High school capacities used by other districts may be scheduled as low as 82.5% efficiency. SVVSD capacities shown in this report all reflect 100% efficiency. District staff has worked with building princi- pals to develop capacities and the maximums indicated are attainable. March 2, 1994 86 St. Vrain Valley School District 940486 Capital Id !uirs Smnnrun and Vr Ipuva% rn a rn . S, . O O m a o ,.° >' _n c ra a. m C _ ..J - P T. t+i CO V ? e z m e u� n e u. ‘. e .�� u., I 42114 AL E .4 V1 N O .. O N N n r- O N .. O N N 0 4 M Q N N N N ! N N N N N N n N N N N M N. I' -, N L E. 2 .. J .. y Ll L O O N ti ^ 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 .'. N �"I 0 d D. '• M a" y 0. y .y O .. .. N 0 .. 0 0 0 0 .y O O N O .+ - a 41 .A r.1 PI d U j ... G CO 4. U) U •. coo .. MO C:1 O E d 4/. O U ..rn 4 "40 o y y y' O .-. . O ^ O c O o O G o 0 0 .. O ^ 8 HE f. I-. q a N o 0 COn 6 U K 0 .N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a 0 c 0 0 LOE ett N N C IS ef 4. y IY .-. ... .,. .y N ... ey e1 .y N .4 d E a O M-IN . d a y i z .. ., .. .. .. .. .... .. W M E 0 N O .11 Y '0 ..1 0 .n r n a r .c `a .e m N .n .. cc, r w C W U K .. N n n N . . . . . . . N .. P .. .. M V NE O E 44 0 O K U X N N or. n N N N N .. N N n n n N N r EL MU y y .CC. .. 0 .. .r 0 +0y�{� 0 .. '. 0 .. n0ry�, .. 0 0 tO O C N6 i ~ '0 S G d J M d �6Cyyd! rn � gEq �TC A '>" gnp 1. ((30��' 8 qpE' I Sr. Virgin Valley School District 87 March 2, 1994 940486 Grp :ri r .dw Ss n rrmn and Sui,iz n.c I Middle School Capacity Comp/ Class PRD Art Music Gym Tech TotalCapacity Heritage 23 1 1 2 2 1 30 720 Longs Pk 24 1 1 2 2 1 30 720 Mead 12 1 1 1 1 1 17 349 Sunset 24 1 1 2 2 1 31 744 Westview 25 1 1 2 2 1 32 768 Main St 30 0 1 2 1 0 34 816 High School Capacity Comp/ CR PRD Art Music Gym Tech Total Capacit Erie 21 2 1 2 4 2 33 677 Frederick 21 1 1 1 2 3 28 618 Lyons 10 1 1 1 2 1 16 328 Longmont 41 2 3 2 4 3 55 1348 Niwot 36 1 1 2 4 3 47 1152 Skyline 42 1 2 2 4 3 54 1323 1 March 2, 1994 88 Sr. Vram Valley School Dufrin 940486 Description of Individual Elementary Schools Burlington Elementary School • Burlington has 17 classrooms that either are presently being used as regular class- rooms or could he used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both of those rooms are classroom size and are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a preschool classroom, a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Burlington has three District programs for students in Special Edu- cation. Central Elementary School Central has 20 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are class- room size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both of those rooms are classroom size and are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a preschool classroom, a computer lab, an IMC, a parent room (which is included in the 20 listed above), a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Central presently has a double classroom portable on site that is not presently being used by students and is not included in the total above. Columbine Elementary School Columbine has 19 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. The art room is not classroom size, the vocal music room was originally designed as a classroom. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium, a parent room, a Chapter I reading program, and a lunchroom. Colum- bine presently has a two classrooms that are not presently being used by students. Head Start has an agreement with the District to utilize three classrooms for their program. The two classrooms not presently used by students, the parent room and the three rooms used by Head Start are all included in the 19 classrooms listed above. Erie Elementary School Erie has 17 classrooms that either are presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are class- room size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both of those rooms are classroom size and are used regularly for the entire school day. Erie has two classrooms (included in the 17 listed above) that are not presently being used for regular education purposes (workroom and speech and language instruction). This Si. Vrain Valley School Dwarf 89 March 2, 1954 940486 school also has a preschool classroom, a computer lab, an IMC. a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Erie presently serves students through sixth grade. Frederick Elementary School Frederick has 34 classrooms that either are presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are three rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and as music rooms (2). All three of these rooms are classroom size and are used regularly for the entire school day. Frederick has four rooms that are not classroom sized but are being used for small group instructional purposes. This school also has a preschool classroom, a computer lab, a Chapter I reading program, an IMC, two gymnasiums and a lunch- room. Frederick presently serves students through sixth grade. Hygiene Elementary School Hygiene has 18 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. Hygiene has a room designed for preschool students that is presently being used as a classroom due to overcrowding. Only a small number of students are assigned to that second grade class due to space limitations. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunch- - room. Indian Peaks Elementary School Indian Peaks has 18 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school presently houses a Chapter I reading program and a District program for students with physical handi- caps. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Loma Linda Elementary School Loma Linda has 19 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. There are also two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school presently houses a Chapter I reading program and a District program for students with special educa- tional needs. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunch- room. Loma Linda has one classroom (included in the 19 listed above) that is pres- ently being used for small group instructional activities. March 2. 1991 90 St Vrmn Valley School District 940486 t hmtu: i.::,;,rc�;mrrn.ic rind lbhnrrnr Longmont Estates Elementary School Longmont Estates has 20 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. There are also two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a computer lab. an IMC, a gymnasium, a preschool and a lunchroom. Lyons Elementary School Lyons has 13 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. There are also three rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and as music rooms (2). Two of the three rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. The third room is used for instrumental music instruction for sixth grade students. This school also has a com- puter lab, an IMC, a gymnasium, a preschool and a lunchroom. Lyons presently serves students through sixth grade. Mead Elementary School Mead has 17 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are also two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both • rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a computer a, lab, an IMC, a gymnasium, a preschool and a lunchroom. Mountain View Elementary School Mountain View has 19 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school presently houses a Chapter I reading program, a District program for students with hearing impairments and a District program for students with significant special educational needs. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Niwot Elementary School Niwot has 24 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are also two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. A teacher at Niwot Elementary teaches both art and kindergarten and uses the room for both purposes, half a day each. All three of the rooms are classroom size and are used Sr. Vrain Valley School District 91 March Z I994 940486 Caput: .r.ev lan nan and 1,>iur:cns regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a preschool classroom, a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Niwot presently has a two double classroom portables on site with three of the four classrooms being used for I regular instruction and are not counted in the number above since they are not a part of the permanent school building. Niwot is currently utilizing an Extended Day schedule where intermediate students report to school early and leave early and pri- mary students report to school later and leave later. Northridge Elementary School Northridge has 22 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school presently has one vacant classroom that is included in the total above. This school also has a computer lab, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Rocky Mountain Elementary School Rocky Mountain has 16 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are also two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. Rocky Mountain also houses a Chapter I reading program, a parent room and a preschool for students with special educational needs. There are also two vacant rooms that are included in the total listed above. This school also has a computer lab, a preschool, an IMC, a gym- nasium, and a lunchroom. Rocky Mountain serves students from preschool through second grade. Sanborn Elementary School Sanborn has 20 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school presently has one vacant classroom that is included in the total above. This school also has six small computer labs, an IMC, a gymnasium and a lunchroom. Spangler Elementary School Spangler has 20 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are two rooms that are classroom size that are presently utilized as an art room and a music room. Both 1 rooms are used regularly for the entire school day. This school also has a computer March 2. 1994 92 St. Vrain Valley School District 940486 lab. an l\IC. a Chapter I reading program. a gymnasium and a lunchrom. Secondary Schools Erie Middle/Senior High School Erie has 21 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms of elective courses. There are two classrooms used by the Personal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music class- rooms, two gymnasiums and one IMC. The school has two computer resource labs and one tech lab. This school also has an auditorium for student and community use. Erie serves students in grades seven through twelve. Frederick Middle/Senior High School Frederick has 21 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms of elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, one art classroom, one music classroom, two gymnasiums and one IMC. The school also has two computer resource labs and one tech lab. Frederick serves students in grades seven through twelve. Heritage Middle School Heritage has 23 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music classrooms, two gymnasium stations and one IMC. The school also has two computer labs and one tech lab. Heritage also houses a District English as a Second Language program in two classrooms and a District wide self contained Special Education program in one classroom. This school also has an auditeria for student use at lunch time. Heri- tage serves students in grades six through eight. Longmont High School Longmont High has 44 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There are two classrooms used by the Personal Resource Development department, three art classrooms, two music classrooms, two gymnasiums and one IMC. The school has three computer resource labs and one tech lab. This school also has an auditorium for student and community use. Longmont High serves students in grades nine through twelve. St. Vrarn Valley School Diana 93 March 2. 1994 940486 Capi6u'I..14 It C SW11114217.nM Solunoru Longs Peak Middle School II Longs Peak has 24 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular class- ; rooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms of elective courses. There are two classrooms used by the Personal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music classroom, two gymnasiums and one IMC. The school also has two computer re- source labs and one tech lab. This school also has an auditeria for student use at lunch time. This school also will be receiving several multi-handicapped students for the 1994-95 school year and the PRD lab will be remodeled in order to accommodate these needy students. Longs Peak serves students in grades six through eight. Lyons Middle/Senior School Lyons has 10 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classrooms used by the Personal Resource Development department, one art classroom, one music classroom, one gymnasium and one P.E. classroom and one IMC. The school has one computer resource lab and one tech lab. This school also has a telecommunication classroom that is connected to Skyline High School and can service up to 10 students at Lyons. Lyons serves students in grades seven through twelve. Mead Middle School Mead has 12 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, one art classroom, one music classroom, one gymnasium, one IMC, and one computer lab and one tech lab. Mead serves stu- dents in grades six through eight. Niwot High School Niwot has 36 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music classrooms, two gymnasiums with four teaching stations and one IMC. The school also has three computer resource labs and one tech lab. This school also has an auditorium for stu- dent and community use. Niwot serves students in grades nine through twelve. March 1. 1994 94 Sr. Vram Valley School Diann 940486 Capital Fns u;r.t ,Jennlu, dnd Solunnm Skyline High School Skyline has 42 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, two art classrooms, two music classrooms, two gymnasiums with four teaching stations and one IMC. The school also has two computer resource labs and one tech lab. This school also has Vance Brand Civic auditorium for student and community use. Skyline serves students in grades nine through twelve. Sunset Middle School Sunset has 25 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There is one classroom used by the Per- sonal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music classrooms, one gymnasium with two teaching stations, one IMC, one tech lab and three small computer labs. This school also has an auditeria for student use at lunch time. Sunset serves students in grades six through eight. Westview Middle School Westview has 24 classrooms that are either presently being used as regular classrooms or could be used as regular classrooms. In addition, there are several other rooms that are used as classrooms for elective courses. There are two classrooms used by the Personal Resource Development department, one art classroom, two music class- rooms, two gymnasiums, one IMC, one tech lab and three small non scheduled com- puter labs. This school also has a student center for student use at lunch time. Westview serves students in grades six through eight. St. Wain Valley School Dinner 95 March Z 1991 940486 DUANE E. AND ChRLOTTE K. KRAMER EXHIBIT ,-I 1781 Spruce Drive E Erie, CO 80516 C/cr 3 J 19 May 1994 Ms. Barbara Kirkmeyer Weld County Commissioner 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Proposed Rezoning near Carmacar Ranchettes Docket No. 94-37 E/2 Section 5, T1N, R68W, Weld County, CO Dear Ms. Kirkmeyer: We have lived in Carmacar Ranchettes for fifteen years and have enjoyed living here. However, it never ceases to amaze us that "progress" always has to happen in the south- west corner of Weld County. We had to fight very hard to keep Rocky Mountain Energy from creating a "Strip Mine" on Road 5 near us. We learned then that Carmacar Ranchettes should never have been built over the minerals owned by Union Pacific. We wondered why the subdivision was approved in the first place. Now, another subdivision is proposed and we hear rumors of yet another near Road 5 and Road 12. We had to fight to get the county to maintain our roads. We have a dump to the south of us with its ever-threatening expansion. We have the threat of a prison to the east of us. We had the threat of a prison nearer than that. (Road 5) Hopefully, we can learn from past mistakes and look very carefully at this proposed zon- ing. Please consider : ROAD MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SAFETY POLICE PROTECTION FIRE PROTECTION WATER AVAILABILITY AND WATER PRESSURE SEWAGE SCHOOLS COVENANTS QUALITY BUILDING LANDSCAPING Thank you. Sincerely, Duane and Charlotte Kramer 940486 i3f BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO IN REFERENCE TO DOCKET NO. 94-37, CHANGE OF ZONE HEARING , FOR PROPERTY NEXT TO MY HOME IN CARMACAR RANCHE 1 1 ES BY TOM AND MARGRET RUSSELL. BE IT KNOWN BY ALL WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT I AND MY WIFE ARE 100%AGAINST THE ATTACHMENT OF THIS PROPERTY TO OUR SUB DIVISION. WE DO NOT WANT TO BE THE DOORMAT FOR THESE PEOPLE TO TROD OVER US. I DO "NOT" WANT THE EXTRA BURDEN OF TRAFFIC AND THE GENERAL DISRUPTANCE OF MY LIFESTYLE WHICH PROMPTED ME TO CHOOSE TO LIVE IN CARMACAR RANCHE 11_ES IN THE FIRST PLACE. AGAIN, I REINTERATE, I DO NOT WANT ANOTHER SUB-DIDISION ATTACHED TO CARMACAR RANCHETTES? JOSEPH& STEPHANIE WEATHERLY YerCAri‘ ;f110/4-441 %f d 940486 JOHN H. McCAMEY / Ex 1921 Spruce Drive H/e/r Erie, Colorado 805169721 Phone/Fax: (303) 665-0218 /lam 18 May 1994 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street, Third Floor Greeley, CO 80631-1123 RE: Docket No. 94-37 Change of Zone from A (Agriculture) to E (Estate) Part of the E/2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. Ladies and Gentlemen: It has come to my attention that a hearing will be held on 25 May 1994 relative to the above-referenced property. I understand that this hearing is for a change in zoning for said property. Apparently, a meeting was held a couple of weeks ago at the Rinn Methodist Church at which a number of the residents of CARMACAR RANCHETTES objected to the plans of the property owners. I , too, feel that there are a number of problems that need to be addressed before any real development is done in this southwest corner of Weld County. 1. We are presently dependent on individual septic sys- tems. With the projected growth in this part of the county for the next twenty-five years, a Master Plan for a Sewage Treatment Plan needs to be created before large tracts (5 or more houses) are allowed to be developed. I would highly recommend that a small sewage treatment plant, that would handle the houses in ques- tion, be installed which at a later date could become a pumping or staging for a sewage treatment plant that will be required for the development of the southwest part of Weld County. 2. The St. Vrain School District must develop a plan to absorb the increased number of children that will occur with the above-mentioned home development. 940486 3. The developer of the property should to certify that- Left Hand Water can handle the increased number of homes without reducing an already low water pressure in the area. This should be done including a physical survey of the present pressures by Left Hand Water not just radical information. I am very interested in the development of the south- western portion of the Weld County and would appreciate being notified when any meetings are to be held which included the restructuring of the zoning ordinances for said area. 4. I understand that the developer has stated that he will treat the roads in Carmacar during construction but after that time it is up to us to do something to keep the dust down. Please note that I contacted the High- way Department over two years ago complaining about the way our barrow ditches are being filled with dirt from the grading of the roads during the winter when they are torn up by the small amount of traffic we have. My worries are predicated on a hundred-year rain and the possible flooding conditions that could develop in the area if the barrow ditches are allowed to fill. 5. My concern here, also, is relative to the number of vehicles that will be moving on our streets where there are small children and no park areas. I believe that the developer should be required to have green open space within this area which might be a five-acre park, or some such thing, in which children could play, rather than playing in the streets. In talking to many of my neighbors, I find that they are very vocal in their objections to the new development. As it is planned, it does not consider the area or the neighborhood. It is more of a "city-type" development. Very truly yqurs, J � ' E 1 (cii-0 r.5Tbhn H. McCamey nd Mrs. Lucia W. MGCay JHM;ck CRMCR0518C.TXT 940486 EXHIBIT JOHN H. McCAMEY 1.921 Spruce Drive ' '- 3" Erie, Colorado 80516-9721 Phone/Fax: ( 103) 665-0218 18 May 1.994 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street, Third Floor Greeley, CO 80631--1123 RE: Docket No. 94-37 Change of Zone from A (Agriculture) to i; (Estate) Part of the E/2 of Section 5, T1N,J 6 ,W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. • Ladies and Gentlemen: 1 t has come to my attention that a hearing will be held on 25 May 1994 relative to the above-referenced property. 1 understand that: this hearing is for a change in zoning for said property. Apparently, a meeting was held a couple of weeks ago at the Rinn Methodist Church at which a number of the rFt:;i.dents of CARMACAR RANC1WTTES objected to the plans of the prop�rrty owners. 1 , too, feel that there are a number of problems that need to be addressed before any real development is don..: in this southwest corner of Weld County. 1 . We are presently dependent; on individual septic sys- tems. With the projectea growth in this part of the county for the next twenty-five years, a Master Plan for a Sewage Treatment Plan needs to be created before large tracts (5 or more houses) are allowed to be developed. I would highly recommend that a small. sewage treatment plant, that would handle the houses in ques- tion, be installed which at a later date could become a pumping or staging for a sewage treatment plant that will be required for the development of the southwest part of Weld County. 2. The St. Vra.in School District must develop a plan to absorb the increased number of children that will occur with the above-mentioned home development. • 940486 3. The developer of the property should to certify that- Left Hand Water can handle the increased number of homes without reducing an already low water pressure in the area. This should be done including a physical survey of the present pressures by heft Hand Water not just radical information. [ am very interested in the development of the south- western portion of the Weld County and would appreciate being notified when any meetings are to be held which included the restructuring of the zoning ordinances for said area. 4. f. understand that the developer has stated that he will treat the roads in Carmacar during construction but after, that time it is up to us to do something to keep the dust down. Please note that I contacted the High- way Department over two years ago complaining about the way our barrow ditches are being filled with dirt from the grading of the roads during the winter when they are torn up by the small amount of traffic we have. My worries are predicated on a hundred --year rain and the possible flooding conditions that could develop in the area if the barrow ditches are allowed to fill . 5. My concern here, also, is relative to the number of vehicles that will be moving on our streets where there are small children and no park areas. I believe that the developer should be required to have green open space within this area which might be a five--acre park, or some such thing, in which children could play, rather than playing in the streets. In talking to many of my neighbors, I find that they are very vocal in their objections to the new development. As it is planned, it does not consider the area or the neighborhood. It is more of a "city-type" development. Veit-ye-truly ,y rs, • ✓f Mr John H. McCam . and • ' Mrs. Lucia W. MCCamey JHM:ck CRMCR851RC.TXT 940486 DUANE E. AND CuARLOTTE K. KRAMER 1781 Spruce Drive Erie, CO 80516 EXHIBIT 19 May 1994 Mr. Dale Hall Weld County Commissioner 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Proposed Rezoning near Carmacar Ranchettes Docket No. 94-37 E/2 Section 5, TIN, R68W, Weld County, CO Dear Mr. Hall: We have lived in Carmacar Ranchettes for fifteen years and have enjoyed living here. However, it never ceases to amaze us that "progress" always has to happen in the south- west corner of Weld County. We had to fight very hard to keep Rocky Mountain Energy from creating a "Strip Mine" on Road 5 near us. We learned then that Carmacar Ranchettes should never have been built over the minerals owned by Union Pacific. We wondered why the subdivision was approved in the first place. Now, another subdivision is proposed and we hear rumors of yet another near Road 5 and Road 12. We had to fight to get the county to maintain our roads. We have a dump to the south of us with its ever-threatening expansion. We have the threat of a prison to the east of us. We had the threat of a prison nearer than that. (Road 5) Hopefully, we can learn from past mistakes and look very carefully at this proposed zon- ing. Please consider : ROAD MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SAFETY POLICE PROTECTION FIRE PROTECTION WATER AVAILABILITY AND WATER PRESSURE SEWAGE SCHOOLS COVENANTS QUALITY BUILDING LANDSCAPING Thank you. Sincerely, U A/ �� -1 C. Sbb /// , � : _ LG r-- sLr� Duane and Charlotte Kramer h� 940486 EXHIBIT WC-Id Cooati 1; (c m n') i ssiok1P/`S L Del /e i-fa 11 Re ; Do c_ k€ f- X10 . 7y—37 — re 00N�` e vh wri 11/k yprQSS fry vier c� / c-oNcerit. over/ �/�f fro D rci 2-owe Change Toni A 7o Ef aNGI `k-e s(A.bse (•wu* c/ ue /c mm ilfr c* AJamenuts homes/ CM 45 sr /e , IYl2 Ave I ofrs Ant f h /o oI r a c./ear— feSpONS !a my ma or/O co/veer-Ns ,'/ � m I, f cces5 / he. r C7"ase c%eue- eNf IA) is A cth ai.s l �<v Seems ro A Ui2 I o ahi t%,t1 U; e it) .� /�/Atl.— a o/,i-f cad�u {� ci kc, 1 S �read S or /L Any Tre1 ~�c cc d- res Gi 1 mf s / r, ±o N earl y reside/tits; 2 , Pied lGGf%OAi of Gun./2l- /Jressare_ t oar hamES / whi'c�j ; /r ea�[y ;wade pate , 3. 06s /raclroru of views 4y S itt-tres cy 110 T7, l N kc ;0�i /, / Gcoo urr yUGt l-U�f oJ, "Mil SS �OroDo t sef 2-D4t/ i Gvel Ak //kit; / /�1 d /v-e ( frs y eir_c /l1A),- i o crom ni)/ )AV Luri±itif + /r e e io is 1G /teUie±e our cON cfrec, ask) JC yOlt. El/e,J i. c-cAsLv,U Oita Hoc O01€1 Vie Eire / CO Sos/C 1;1 9O486 Raid 1 . illlf ii ti � �: S 1 , con L iHLOCJ . i <�rtii w end ref 1.Ir Avenue _ lrorl :lr C� such . as„ �� _�.� i_ Lau_ � t soli ha: vm I Have witnessed threes u-ea.,iuns . And when H3 , O e?noug fi water F7 <,. _ 3L!1" 1.O oft ccl .i vely fight a 1III ,C . P. . . -.71 '.c± say that. thpi. cannot w.ir. htl a l ;u:L of C: i h.Ly unlikely that; t[,-, w is fa i?_. i , ; Hs, Het, w a .t al 1 ', I a to app lY e ()hi,: time .an not, be expected C accept YHi: i, i '�c :311; i .Ulldl iln h✓P,iiif ; 1 � kik, 10Ht 6,J, 11jppali 11 it EXHIBIT IV- 3? 940486 I,Ioty L .1.`i4F !Ammo ' t. omit/ Planning Lunn fission t J iii This is t_Ires second time I 've written , to addles,/ t,nbs tile- 1111211 atlllo sg)HIrC) _ !)�•,:,Wnlilly to Petri pI-I 1 65.1 - i) i ., it + I1,- i . neighbors are not being consider4.4.1 I <JI- .) .� x O, n0 i'i bJc . f z=nd O: o . , 'J.i; i �x S . e)ll Line �U :'I .. .::11 kh`ial r`=.F ail 'fTmi cJie amt _ , t4t nm t>_ i } ll'C, I )r tilts lost 3.0 yeato It_ . ill i. 4if wl t the ^,all we -,._ 14 i c i [., . 'ft . iI va 1.W 'oma l c:h loll I lob hi oU<)h th., dr2d WGUla it I ]4�Cl�lt Lo"1 i it Cl.}S f-1 ,,L LHnr , on, Lilo di ea . rho Po el.t I-aveoffered to apply all . And the county can not [iir. as . 'd • r.l.il1it '1k41 respP it i0.t.L col .. - 'i-: :. arid have .1..1-c h1 bi1 hundreds U1 Hui open ub othEi . f a. nos ,lar, ` 4I L., or .nu Ll I ldarlt. ,ny children io know [ALfll r f r;i.-r ll0is . i '11i`3 LnCtl 7 940486 P to 1F We , the undersigned , petition the Weld County Commissioners to EXHIBIT vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . 91/-37 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TiN, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adiacent to Carmacar Ranr_hettes . NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATE ,. I DATE NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Li rail- 4ietetAlr_ P 1 1144, I or?-P ? 7 SIGNATURE I DATE i‘f•-*A-b_-__ AA-Aar_ 5-2_3 -9 I NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I � r. a letzf `s I I S'4q s f‘ -,Col Pe? �o SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I I I SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I I i SIGNATURE I DATE NAME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE I DATE 940486 Page 16 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissi _ners to EXHIBIT vote AGAINST : r K A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . 1 ��-3 7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N . R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I . GNATURE ( DATE -4-- -�lu.Jc�.ii.-el. I $-23-`Pf 4 ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I PATS F` (`; DATE `--ark`-�J- SP.%-qii-/ l. NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER aseil+ C Lae Aril 44 lib C ImoaoZALvi v► -e(,) ST I $a't'<30 S ATUREt1 _ _ I DATE NAA ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Ellen) H. Fo L s i'ivisi < < 9 Y c tioiAjtzlini (/ et(i S/.' i 431.2. --O . �f.6 SIG- '7RE7/ ziZfi DATi e_11//? ./ NAME ; Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I I I . SIGNATURE I DATE I . 940486 E. Lo COU`�;TY' To: Weld County Commissioners Barbara Kirkmeyer I .� !,,„ Dale Hall 2f, 1i !!: CS 1400 N. 17th Ave. CLERK Greeley, Co 80632 TO THE r,„t, May 20, 1994 We are writing to you regarding the application to rezone the land west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes and north of Weld County Road 12 from 'agriculture' to 'estates'. We wish to make it clear that we are not opposed to the rezoning to 'estates', but to how the land may ultimately be developed. We have many concerns and questions regarding this change which have not been properly addressed nor answered. Our main concern is the increased traffic that may be directed through our neighborhood in Carmacar. The increased traffic would pose dangers to local children and equestrians. It would also increase dust which we, personally, would not want controlled by chemical methods or asphalt. Another issue is there seem to have been no covenants proposed or established for this new development. This leads to many more uncertainties. What will the quality and aesthetic value of the homes be? Will there be street lights, thereby adding to local light pollution? Erie and many parts of Weld County are rapidly changing. We have enjoyed the quiet, rural community of this area for almost nine years. If rezoning must occur in this community and others in Weld County, let it be rezoning to 'estates' rather than to smaller lots (as in 'urban residential' or 'urban commercial'). Weld County needs to maintain its rural communities and interests as much as possible. Do not let Weld County become another sprawling urban extension of Boulder, Lafayette, Louisville, and Longmont. Weld County must take a hard look at how this growth and expansion should take place. Forethought, not afterthought, must occur in the organization and planning of our community. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, 1 Kath n ydt Jones Troy Jones 5457 Aspen Ave. Erie, CO 80516 828-0416 940486 Ekh,Lauf T 00 . 1)L, Rat` • B Sherman B R VanZuiden Board of County Commissioners 547o Fir Erie, Colo 80516 Dept. of Planning Services Weld County Adminstrative Offices 1400 N. 17th AV Greeley, CO 80631 • Re: Docket No. 94-37 We would like to get on record with our objections regarding a pro- posed zoning change by Tom and Margaret Russell for the property across the street to the west of us , adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes subdivision. Legal description: Part of the E of Section 5 , Town- ship 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. We can foresee nothing but negative impacts on our subdivision if this zoning change and subsequent development is jammed down our throats . The traffic, noise, dust and other pollution will more than double, especially during the construction phase, not to men- tion the added danger to the young children living on these quiet streets. Our second concern is with water, specifically; water pressure. Those of us living along Fir have very poor water pressure at the present time - with another 15 or more homes tapped into our water main, we won ' t even have enough water pressure to run a sprinkler. Our third concern is for our wonderful view. Our homes have been in place for over 20 years and we have no recourse, from what I understand, to bind the Russells to any promises that they might make to us residents of Carmacar, once this zoning change has been approved. We just can ' t go along with this zoning change and the problems that it will bring and we intend to fight it all the way. I know that the Russells own other property in close proximity to this parcel of land, let them develop somewhere else. vo-015-TA4- MAY 2 0 1994 T 1 .c,ra a v Planningtikvt, L,�,m Cx�� 940486 mEMORAnDUM Clerk to the Board May 23, 1994 To Date Greg Thompson, Current Planner `� COLORADO From �J Z-487, Tom and Margaret Russell Subject: The enclosed letter was received. Please include in the abovementioned case file. Five copies are attached for the County Commissioners. L- 171 L'' (. w C. r" 0 .t . O a,. 940486 ( ) wIIi:.LD _CCU;:Pe SAlic-c j 5, ice,_ d S l /f/L L - G d'o,/7 , ,5--3J74 %,eiz.f 6 P, 94 n Y 2M AM 52 /ic e , XS,S—/� CLERK TO THE BOAFfl t. 9i6- 40w , -�.-�- 2 t, eg, 89603 ca. 7c424 , otec,,ce v re 7dy.- (-Lite_ macaw / ix-`- it-fzet xta. 9'-037 mom,,¢_ , eC z / ��, it',..„ in ems-,¢ , ,,�a „ - ,,,,,,,_. Lz -77, , Aid- /.�esee. f7p77,-e-w-l2. 4r- A_ > els 21,?___ 1,1-e-074_,i-e-i-t, te_e_-„c ..z:V_e_, 5,4c.--t--,.a..-e„,47 a leArtr ‘te-Cee_ fre.-/ L÷lenet÷ - . ‘40,-2,CC- ,A/a G� � 7 r W o - ,_e -��G,'�J%fit-v�seil G�' '�� /��✓�//+/ '//t< z1 6t Gi l ' ' pet- ` ,2 03 2 r t� G Xe-C c � �i 'g.c lice-e �4 i - d e- -n-2 /K/4 �e_• ��ce 7t�c �_� / Pte 77 '-cam, 2 /1,{20-u)—, `A-- z #feie2-e L /1 use /1 -a--- jv,,- yam- ' ,za%' G <`" S . c 940486 Diana Williams & Mark 4440845 P. 01 .D t- iT May 23, 1994 I x. 39 Mark Williams Parkland Estates CLER / 4732 Sylvia Lane Erie, CO 80516 Barbara Kirkmeyer 14O0 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80623 Dear Ms. Kirkmeyer: We are writing about our concern with the rezoning of the land just west of Carmacar from agricultural to estate. Of greatest concern to us is the impact this may have on the value of our home in Parkland Estates. It is most important that the planning be compatible with and have a balance of value between Carmacar and Parkland. A low value, high density subdivision would break the continuity of our neighborhood and is highly undesirable. Sincerely, ?44.k kJL( A;L-- Mark Williams 86 MAY 23 ' 94 12: 49 4440845 PA941, Cxhib, f Co . �l ; � ( .77 VV`�33 VV '.''=,_D CC :7Y „, 12? �L /9.9V , / 0,_ 7/i / 7a we - TO T� \Eo _,i Z__ Q_,,, Cb Erg „_.3 -D rum) id cvt z tk a 6L4 ) , vim, fie. ,ems Mid do-r&_„61 .e t _z rte,_ w ern _ _6 Atcri _ t to _ _ , __ mot 4 A,<ze.)_. - cr e _ -1u.t. _l � �( � �1� / - wt./ 1.v-a-u et e-_ -2,-1.e - 1 _ /2cnad4- c -‘41& cG __ 4c:riv-.21- � C114,--)7142-C-0.4-1 _._ e#01-tel ate unz .e,e 4 ,4ay i !t- . Cole_ ka-a! /mow _�� -l t - 2 (1 u `'6 yr w ute,62-€6-- Ctfre,_-l/ Ls G[�?/ 4 Q tt xL , &. . 940486 Ca.n dt- J GcyGo.e /7 c a- e -' U _ c,Lu — aP e _ C+tvv ./Lamed-, C ,,F `el-8, met i v ti�i I -Zce ke (7 bk. c G c' � ,i4) Cti-e _ a i _Inc . Yhr`ce sal r_ A2 k-'eh- Ce-e 14,-- a _ Cie u e v en, art, tr,2, 7?"w.e 1 v c.Q -e Jixuce - a ./1 .: ,C'+-r, :ilf ria : 11/4. haw_ 6 _awn -? 71Aty- 4(4,9_4„t_ _aL __: rte -end G _Lizare _ Ce-e.,L4 �t� tuk, "tar ao uude rift, a, _ '1b Qc Cdr„ - . _r . -n-tt .; _< -_wv x ti 01-c Lv-wt4 v o two- L 6-111- 3 _ 940486 44 r5 U ` fix t6, mEmoRAnDumr1 D CI - , FA II"! 2-3 Fly 3: Clerk to the Board May 23, 1994 �$vlikRA To pew CLLR Greg Thompson, Current Planner ( TO Tr{, B0L D COLORADO From Z-487, Tom and Margaret Russell Subject: The enclosed letters and petition were submitted to the Department of Planning Services today. Please include the information in the official case file. I have included five copies of the information so each Board of County Commissioner has the information available to them, if you would be so kind as to forward the information to each County Commissioner. rxhiht1-- ei , 9404% LipAgLogs-0-011 MAY 2 199 Play 23, 1994 °44an^.. 'TrV Pl:tI.atnp Weld County Commissioners 1400 N . 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80632 Dear County Commissioners, We would like to express our concerns on the pending rezoning of the property in Docket # 94-37 scheduled for May 25th . These concerns are as follows: 1 . We have yet to see the plat plan for the development of the property. The plat plan presented at the March 15 , 1994 , Planning Commission meeting was different than the plat plan that was given to the residents that live within 500 feet of the proposed subdivision . 2 . The type of homes described to the residents that live within 500 feet of the proposed subdivision was entirely different than the homes presented at the Planning Commission meeting. 3 . At this time , the proposed subdivision would only aggravate the problems of Carmacar such as road maintenance , water , police and fire protection . The proposed subdivision does nothing to improve the problems that currently exist in Carmacar. In fact , the proposed sub- division will only be a leach to the residents of Carmacar. We encourage you to review the Planning Commission meeting of March 15, 1994 , as to the number of discrepancies that were presented at that meeting. In previous conversations with You , you had asked if there could be any alternative proposals that would be acceptable . The number of discrepancies presented by the owners and the lack of information such as a plat plan . have Beverly jeopardized the integrity of the owners . We support the Weld County Comprehensive plan that exists at the present time . This proposed subdivision is in violation of the comprehensive plan and should not be granted an exemption . We wish to maintain a rural atmosphere and hope that any further development is carefully scrutinized . Thank you for your time . aincerly. / al41414*--) V1/(25A----U—A-4D Mike Mahoney Carolyn I1ahonev 5506 Fir Avenue RR#1 Erie , CO 80516 Enclosure 940486 March 14 , 1994 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N . 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE : CASE NUMBER Z-487 This letter is to inform you of our opposition in the change of zoning from Agricultural to Estate for part of the E2 of Section 5 , TiN, R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . We live within 500 feet of this development and oppose it for the following reasons : ----Inadequate roads . The roads in the Carmacar subdivision cannot handle any more traffic . Currently, Weld County has difficulty maintaining the roads due to the amount of the traffic that exists now. The corner of Mountain View and Fir, where we live , has continuously been worn down with the amount of traffic that it serves . Our corner fence in 1979 was approximately 10 feet from the road. Today, that corner fence post is approximately 3 feet from the road . With another 15 houses and approximately 30 more cars , we are concerned how much more our corner will be worn away. We would prefer that our roads remain dirt and not paved . The roads provide a raceway for some cars already. With paved roads, it our fear that the racing will become even faster and more frequent . With law enforcement located at Ft. Lupton, it is hard to control speeders and reckless driving. Also, as property owners , we do not want to be assessed for the paving of our roads as well as the continuing cost of maintenance required after they are paved . ----Limited Access . Off of the plat plan, it appears that there will be only one road leading into the subdivision from Fir Avenue . It seems dangerous to only have one road to serve as an access for a majority of the lots . This subdivision is being accessed solely through the Carmacar subdivision . It does not seem fair that the development of the lots depends solely on access from an existing subdivision . The amount of houses should have direct access to a major county road not through an existing subdivision . It is also disturbing that the road out of the proposed subdivision has to come directly towards a existing house on Fir Avenue . The existing streets in Carmacar run parallel to each other so that headlights from cars do not reflect directly into a house unless you are turning a corner . Again, it is an existing homeowner on Fir Avenue who will he impacted at the expense of a new subdivision . 9404% ----Police Protection . Our police protection must come from Ft. Lupton which is approximately 15 miles away. Because of this distance from us , it does not seem wise to approve additional houses for this area . ----Water Pressure . The water pressure is not satisfactory now in the summer months when everyone is watering. Only one sprinkler head from a hose can be used at a time . Sprinkler systems have to run late at night when people are sleeping so that they can have an ample supply of water. ----Spring . There is a spring that exists just south of the middle of the property. We are concerned as to where this water is going to be diverted when development takes place . Our water level is already high requiring us to keep a sump pump in our basement . Where the water is diverted could pose a problem for that landowner. In addition, we are concerned that the 15 additional septic systems could raise our existing water level . ----Schools. With all of the proposed building in the town limits of Erie , the elementary school is expected to be 94 seats short within 6 years . These projections do not include any children coming from subdivisions outside of the town limits . ----Wildlife . Foxes , coyotes , and owls have frequently been sited on the land of the proposed subdivision. Even bald eagles fly over this field in search of food . It would be sad to see all of these birds and animals leave when the people start building . Please call if you have any questions on the above statements . Our telephone number is ( 303 ) 666-0366 . Sincerely, (-2(e'(-41/41/ Michael J. Mahoney Carolyn Mahoney 5506 Fir Avenue RR#1 Erie , CO 80516 cc : Dale Hall Barbara Kirkmeyer 940486 Board of County Commissioners May 22, 1994 Weld County Centennial Center MAY 2 1494 915 10th Street,First Floor Greeley,Colorado 80631 "Aqa roniltV Planning RE: Docket Number 94-37 (Applicant -Tom and Margaret Russell) As homeowners living on Fir Avenue along the western edge of Carmacar and immediately across the street from the proposed development, we are still opposed to the planned rezoning from A(Agricultural) to E (Estate),even after our May 3 meeting with the Applicants. The concerns we have regarding the developmental plan as proposed to us are as follows: 1)It adds no value to our property. In fact, according to a recent appraisal used for our refinancing in 1993, our mountain view has not only an esthetic value,but also a monetary value which would be lost. Tony Perry of Longs Peak Appraisal Consultants recently estimated a$2000 - 5000 value on mountain view property. We have no guarantee that the quality of the new homes will sustain/increase our existing property values. Should this rezoning be approved, strict covenants acceptable by Carmacar residents must be adopted. 2)It will increase automobile traffic and associated dust. The one-time application of chemical dust retardant proposed by the developer does not address this problem. Will the current street construction accommodate this additional traffic? 3)It will create additional traffic congestion at the following locations: a)State Highway 52 and County Road 5 (already a dangerous intersection) b)The two entrances to Carmacar c) The proposed intersection on Fir Avenue Items b& c could be addressed by eliminating the access from Carmacar and reaccessing the subject property from the south(County Road 12). 4)It will change current water drainage patterns into and along Fir Avenue. 5)In general, it will lower the quality of life as we have known it for the past fourteen and one-half years. In the long term,we believe this development will be just the beginning of an overall push to rezone more agricultural land for residential use. Even the "convenient" southern termination of the project's proposed main street indicates the intention of near-term development to the south. We believe that the Department of Planning Services has an obligation to study the long range impact of not only the proposed rezoning, but also the ramifications of such rezoning on surrounding undeveloped acreage and existing infrastructure,i.e.,roads,drainage,utilities,fife/police protection,homes,etc. The proposed development has everything to gain and nothing to lose in attempting this rezoning. We feel that Carmacar has nothing to gain and much more to lose. Yours very truly, Chester C.Haun 5446 Fir Avenue Margaret J. Haun Erie,Colorado 80516 940486 P .1 We . the undersigned, petition the Weld ronnt.t% Ccmmissloner to j gm-- L-, vote AGAINST : •l \:A Change of zone from A ( Aaricltural ) to E ( e�:t,:�te ) . MAY 2 1994 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of "ction 5 , TIN . R6S1'1 <.f the W-R8ilflffl 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 : and crest of and adiacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER til IC- j -3. /►M o,c I .≤SU6 �i.< 4-vg FQic co FoS/6 I 30? ‘G‘ O-? SIGNATUP I DATE /� p4 r S- NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER rvl n ) hone I 5 t /kca . SIGN 1 E I DATE , a:Lat- ,It_ 1 --. I 67/thy NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I 1 )63 L, /,r►,,... O60�Z I 5-y/e, /�l x /L U-Q. r. 1 -SIGN TUREetoc _ DATE I • I s /y/9y NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER --� '--� - Ceirn_k_S 1_( V-, c- __N\g_ __-gcs t Lo- - )3�A<P _`1 at-] SI NA R I DATE bass,AME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER (nn ( GAR.e. T 7-1--+44u s9tic, PIP. aye- CQr E, co . i eat - 3cPy‘ SIGNATURE I DATE cx- -4. 1----to��u,_ I S"Q3"`ict NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I I I SIGNATURE I PATE 94486 F' e 2 We . the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Chance of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 . T1N . P68W of the 6th P . 11. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER - ene'e., bpc c rs I 5.YIS AvAL,A-ve, &--(Z.O .,_ ,_ )-7,_3 z,;u SIGNAT . I DATE NAME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER --41/i‘h ict e-D7Tet) ._I igk5-Z- /h.,6-/--) efit &//F 6--O I 82-67- .1-/6 SIGNATURE`-....` - I DATE / .7- 1-- - ‘ ys NAME ( Plea a Print) ' ADDRESS P ONE NUMBER Garbctraiap nivaclabs 1 q5/ /15,eti C f -/--/f) 6 18 ? S" - SIGNATURE I DATE... . /.45 -- - - 2141-'NAME ( Please rint ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER � C Jrre v 1//yrfv.A-k.- 5-f r2_ ,�� _C2y!�/ � _ 1_4`'_`G_ .. __ I -'ZY f? SIGN TURF I DATE .SS -- ... . .5:.t<_. _ ._ ___ _ ._ ! ��!� Y_ NAME (Please .P int) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER/1--.1-444-4-e--t. "- ,, „..../ S-s/l fr per, .4-L-g- I J'4 4,5 3 / S IGNATU .E 1 DATE - —'' I .-S --/6 -- y..____t'2 ---E__,ee -,-----,L_ -----`'NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE I DATE I -900486 P e 3 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 . T1N , RG811 of the 6th F. M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 4aC lie Gc,rde1 u-) I ffo 1 Lye LP co„ k_c I.. L-f)/L,0".1 I .2t- - 3 S NATUR I DATE .t.jas,_ ---<-1kile2).__) I ----i - ? 4 NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 114_u i 0 t QMsky' / 13 w cf), iz ' Y16-- 3 -3 :NATURE I DATE cwe._ - . 3 E Ri e Co Yo4rb- I ad -qt./ ME ( Please P nt ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I -Ti_cLA----1-\._NATURE I I DATE 0.�'- j8':± 2e., eLIC .,....1A144-7---' 4_. ME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I -- (,r']giUbc- L :096-z I /&77 e iP 12 - - I g :s_41(o -`>.---- SIGMA U , I DATE .142 NAME ( Please rint ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I JQ5e - - - -- --- ---- -- ° _/- _LAC - /-z I gas y6??_.. STGNATU I DATE I _ y �-zOq N tE ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I SIGNATURE I DATE I 940486 P e 4 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N , R6SW of t.h 6th F.M. . Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Fond 12; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 450hyx K Q eon 1 1-1‘2 0 spin ce. Dr Erik j la - 33 5 GNATURE I DATE I 5 - IC - NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER GqA( O, Potiv I )760 SPRI.cz L' 6) 0E --- i g-2_ - 33 -5- 1 SIGNAT D TES q"1 NAME ( Plea e Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I `)O ct. tei 5 el, Le✓ 2. I 17820 Srace Dry 7 v1't g'xs`- O22 SIGNATU DATE c4-(-' c,'- '//, ve' '. cps-/5y , AHE ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER p erofa h l\-t. Levy 111-8.0 _5' u« Pr e e i 3z oz z S r, A DATE 14- �Z� 1 ---/is 19 y NAME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I ..ja` - ern_ YI l / g i Y'u( r Eh,, I .6-1/s-/ 7/ j.N TURF I DATE . I NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Mara 14t._710.14",%-_.. . ' _4 420_ _ . ff)�v e _ .��. ire_ fr/ 1 8a8-379D2 SIGNATURE I DATE ffa)?,v-e,-,,, ,, r-A-- , �C i `8-, I ,5----/5-- u,kv4ss P 5 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) , LEGAL DESCRIPTION; Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TIN, R6SW of the Gth P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Located approximately 150O feet north of. Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER LF-ao'iq �� Isii 6 ._gLo F/ IgA 4.6.5---- 354/ SIGNATURE I DATE {-;�,w-.-, a I -� -/5--- ?')-- NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER , p6inili L , Wilit-M 6-386) F712 fil/E ketE I z, 6----,_-3:-.5- 77/ )_ -1 SIGNATURE4z.„,..x4,_ I DATEX": ',:=:).1144-1----- I l / c,( NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I 1 -FPcle. 1 re44,--4-4._ aro ,5-//--07 4,- ei-, c4, I gs-s--_ o Z.55- SIGNATU — 1 DATA . .. . I s:_a, - y NAME (Pleas Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER O � L , CAROI�IALC I / / SPRUCE DR ERIE c'o i g28 - 3790 SIGNATURE CJ - I DATE _ .. _ .. _ . I 5//6,/98 NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Xi: - j? ..S I / 9 y 5_ €c/ce ae, --- - -- -` 196 s3‘yr SIG ATi:RE ! DATE I _.. .. .C/A. //11 _ NAB ( ase Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER F ._,,,,_ , , , a RL„. _, ). __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ t?,/_. , .3f.e...y.ct _ .: _ I ii4 i-3C Kj.' SIGNATURE ! DATE - . - - - - - . ... • • - - - - - - � • • - y940486 P e 6 We , the undersigned , petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A ; Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 . TIN , R6SW of. the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Well Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER - I 0(itle V//--i-SIGNATURE `7-K ' - ~` )�'�,,7 * , -- I DATE / 7 l*/ NAME (Please Print) y ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I --_PCLI S. _ Om' ' 1 6 _13_6/_-s_ e / 7),A--.312-5-0 SIGNATURE - I DATE ,, pl �i _(,// )A _ ' i _. . ._ .. .. .. ._. - _ _ - - .. . _ _ _ - - NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 1 rr y!] ,11 1--1 1 lCIt�►2U 1) . �/ E:ol-A1V� +J! 1-7i e: ICI.r:� cIa '"3r (Ii'•S -• S & ) SIGNATUREr7) y i - DATE .) ----,•,-7A.. -. ( -E- , '_-, -41;1 ---\ 5///e/Y NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 1 \I MES Pi. HOWs I 14721 EblE PvCEE ME CO 805Ib 828- t(!Ig . - -- IGNATURE. E DATE "�° fim -C,' _ _ 5//71411...... - (ill (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER --� I , I Ai-1El /' 11 I 1-r c /1) v0 ` Z ,t.:.„z 111tH ?/' .' SIGNP PE I DATE frit / --", 4 /2/1z/2...0, 1 ..rit ! V (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER ./11. -•i�r:- e/. ! Ze %114.4 //G ei Fr • g. Si t- 40„31 SI^t1ATUF�' � I DAT P e 7 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N . RCSW of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER tJsicjU0. )4CA21Ltt 41s7i_ LbIc Pe-4cE �: (as S- 8006 IGNATURE ,� DATE //n0-t4, 1 ""lf- NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER ILG,A toeJ La 3a Sykv1k y-o8cS SIGNATU I DATE - - s 1(7-qy NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 063e,„, i /gt n,„„) I OE/ gnimi M . 4 C/GI� Ld gDs/Co � g235-21�" SIG"),1/ frZ� DATE NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER L Pe ee thA 4�= qy1y! -_40 En? rat c?t - SIGNATURE DATE(<4_a7420.->-- -, - �� - 0Y/-/ vim NAME ( lease Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER / I � eCter�-((JJ((_i_n?andel ! go \geye/14 . 24. t . . DATE/130 -679 v I GN UU � tir ,l 0.7024/ NAME (Ple s� e Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Ai&E e) 4( t�_ I. `/6 Zs �y L snag- � s ��s-- SIGNATU DATE / 940486 Page 8 We , the undersigned, petit.on the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ') . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TIN . P, 8W of the 6th P . M. , Weld Count , Colorado . LOCATION : Located approximately 150© feet north of Weld Country Roar 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 1 1/6.24 .Bs T.-7-y )L•st SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print , ADDRESS PHONE ldUMBER P. O j gizi 134 P1^caml�os5 �essmo f1 I g. rt co SOS) SIGNATURE Cga,.0,m,,___ DAT NAME ' Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I - -Rrl- CLl ^ i 4:72.6 8 62(___ c p c co 8'028-' Sl,_ G SIG .---. '"- D---- IDATE r �S ZZ NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Diw iNroN I 11%2 �e Y x. i/C co I YAY4lsaa SI ATURE ; DATE NAME '�se Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER TA340,41 Gt/ WMe i 47l,2 &ETA/ Th. '121E as I 'A- ? 3Y ?? SIGNATURE I DATE r ..s'--9-.2. ,,4 NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER lg./Ile-5 — e7e3 g 772 dei - ie. t'"-1l5 SIGNATURE , f DATE 51--,2 -2_-- 7r 940486 Page 9 tie , the undersigned, petit 6n the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Chance of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Ge+:tion 5 , TIN . RGSW of tho Gth P .tt. , Weld County. Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Pd 12; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER j r 71— 9(/c Sp-Pee 4PA'/v,� �,�' - o gc-C loxii75 • SIGN R DATE 5-/a/ NAME ( Please Pr ' t) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER AMAVHA 477/N Sit// I /9tic O.efi'E SIGNATURE I DATE dfu::1 ,_ .. NAME ( Plase Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER E � � S C/ SIGNATURE I DATE T ) . _ NAME ( Please Pint ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER t1411,,, CU4,4070 t\e SIGNATU DATE 1--( ._._.... . _ _ __. .. _. _. ... _. _ ._ .. _ .. _.. . o� �� NP.ME ( Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE DATE NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER .SIGNATURE ! flr.TL 94ff486 PPne 10 We . tho undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST: A Chance of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N , RGCW of the 6th P . M. . Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER .17 SIGfATUR / I DATE NAME ( Please P int ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER ,6471y 6A I MOCig Houtiufa/4 View Sf y s--OS46o SIQN TURF citDATE - -ef NAME ( Plea e Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Stt« M 0)W% 15 3g-7 Mo 3 kue i 8 3 4 3 S ATURB I DATE -- - - - - ---- - - -- - NAME ( Please Print ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE DATE NAME (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I � SIGNATURE ( DATE 940486 Pne 11 . Ur , the undersigned , petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Chance of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N , RCOi of th 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchett.es . • NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER kENNC - R. VAUriN d SS C FA 4 ►/ ! (703) g2?. 3�'�/a E4? 1EL C o roS/6 SIGNATURE4,-,, ,- f�7DATE /� /w NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER -3\Q--`)e-"C a'Cit,R i- 7.-06:1 i /5-da/ 9/ SIGNATURE - I DATE ------ s2B _3exy.--7 NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Al I _40_IQ__Ciiir-in0n_I __2.Q*_12LI-T_Ile..,, - 0-'3) 828 a')(* . SIG URE a-- ! DATE Y41/I a-AL--- I ,x --15 - __ ?c NA (Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER `` I I Rd/1Atc1 ,� ' moco,-4 c?) Ad ►'c c look 5 ? 1 K2 373 / SIGNATU . / I DATE I S- / 5_- qcI NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER O - \O1 q_'?rt� . _ _ v'QQ_Y.1 ' I VZ l _s- ectir51_ r) -66E 5- 30c/2" GNRTUR J DATE%-:----Hin/i ,4,477/1.1--- I 51- 1 S-----9 V NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER ',4re.1t Rj4uoar il -/S37LQn_S_Pc at: 51 Erne, I4,6s 3a' 9`._ SIGNATURE I DATE ..,40.4,,e4._ ._ _ &.4-„,..05-- i - /3- — 9Y 940486 P e 12 We , the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A ( Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E of Section 5 , T1N . P68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adiacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME tPlease Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER M4AE1 g-k \11., l j gc 7 Ltrn s PEAk ' i_51,21 -6 a ? 6 ` IGNA U E , I DATE C.t.,( C(1214 0_,,,,,,A4 i NAM- (P1easvPrint) ADDRESS PHONE NUMB R I I ��1!il) O A r L_ _ 11 y.4/� (I I 0,t).6/ 5 PMf� I L2 ?- ? 0 c__ - SI NATURE I DATE _ _ _46.A. i4M _;, t • NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER MANX 211.. 1 Lk I s55q A N AvE . I ey,2 S NATUR I DATE NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I ,y�SIGNATURE� �/ I DATE S---, eA..e" x.eli_d_u l_. �`4 .y I v ~ /s ~, S NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 1 ( �ce r),-s e '� 4.1p!,-.1.c,40.) j $? 5 _- -4(1 "Qw •( "-r I rs • 3 . SIGNATURE r- r I DATE NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER HA Ag: r '' L _I'- tNCI /9s /1/(r/t/ 14 12) 3% I Y,Zg - 334`K _ _ SIGNATURE e I DATE --'"-/-5---- k 0486 f 13 .'le , tho undersigned , petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 9 , TIN . RGSW of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER LOacT. !'lc 'rii i 19 ii5 M Ow #a irri Vi ea) S -t" 1 W-33"/S/ S A U ll I DATE /Cerny I 6--/S"' 9 NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 0%ki) b' hob%.v(Sarvi JQbS .Mo«,v1A; ,y L;F w Si- i ? Y 697 ``IGNATURE I DATE _pLail-0 ; .,...„.4-62j(t1A4.4Y- 1 5 NAME ( Please Print ) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER T' , 11 Q�l -b1�;� - t•-)1 Igro s ArnNu.NAa,,.► V, tk S i- p Y..3SI ,TUBE I DATE _ -- - ' y �. /s9 E (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER • I I I I SIGNATURE I DATE NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I 1 SIGNATURE I DATE I NAME (Please Print) ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I SIGNATURE DATE sums 2 May 1994 Board of County Commissioners ! f - -L f;'1 II: 29 Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th St. First Floor CLFI ; Greeley, Colorado 80632 TO ! Hr !T r',' " ' Re: Docket #94-37 Commissioners: On March 15th 1994 a hearing was held by the Weld Co. Planning Commission at which time the commission unanimously voted to deny a request for a zoning change made by applicants Tom and Margaret Russell. We support the decision of the planning commission and ask that the County Commissioners also deny this zoning change. We object to this zoning change for the following reasons: 1) This land is prime farm ground surrounded on three sides by work- ing farms. 2) This land is not close to any city and is not in the path of develop- ment. It would represent "flag pole" development - a trend that is unwise and extremely costly for the county. 3) Services the county would have to provide if 15 additional homes were built in the area would be far more expensive than the additional property taxes would pay for. (This information was provided by mem- bers of the planning commission. ) 4) THe county roads that would be accessed to reach this property are not sufficient to support additional traffic. Additional traffic would also negatively impact this very rural area. 5) The agricultural nature of this area and the quality of life we now enjoy would be negatively impacted. We will be present at the public hearing on May 18th, and would be happy to answer any questions regarding our objections. Once again, we would request that the Commissioners vote to deny this request for a zoning change. Thank you, j, t YYIh-t, I Mr. and Mrs. Donald J. Cr ey 5579 Fir Ave. Erie, CO 80516 828-3138 bX/ b� + j cc Pt )--{L; ec �<° is) 940486 rii ;t, le ;fir! Y ,.,,i _L t`� TO: 02 •/��■��/■�/��t/7 CLERK 1C) 'ii_ iu l;- _. Committed to Your Satisfaction April 30, 1994 Weld County Commissioners P O Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 RE: Proposed zone change (A) Agricultural to (E) Estate Tom and Margaret Russell Case #Z487 Dear Commissioners: I feel the proposal of Tom and Margaret Russell to change the zoning of their property is a very positive step towards providing quality housing in an area where it is truly needed. There is a large demand for small acreages in this area. The location of their property is ideal as there are already rural developments bordering this proerty. Also, I understand the Russells' son, Ben Russell, would be the primary builder if this project is approved. I have been the listing agent for Ben for the last two years. In this time, he has listed seven (7 ) new homes with me. We received full price offers on every home, and the homebuyers are completely satisfied. Ben is the type of builder who shows a "pride of workmanship" in every home he builds. I am in favor of this proposal and feel the fifteen ( 15) homes would be consistent with the growth that is anticipated for this area, and yet compatible with the existing land uses. Sincere y, iane Stow, CRS, G , CRP REMAX of Longont DKS:mtp Diane Stow, CRS, GRI, CRP Sales Associate 1wiv Office: (303) 772-3811,Ext. 146 of Longmont,Inc. Toll Free: 1 (800) 228-0995 2350 17th Ave., Longmont, CO 80503 Pager: (303) 938-7688 Independently owned and operated FAX: (303) 772-1768 _ PrmteJ o�Or«wdc�nuner ®•MLf �� Cx-I1LLi C?c' PL, Nt, F' e�c�. ,, 940 • r . . te TO: The Weld County Commissioners r9'! /C9 25 rI II: 08 FROM: Tom and Margaret Russell CLERK TO THE EO ,Y;) REGARDING: Case #2487 A zone change from (A) Agricultural to (E) Estate . Legal Description: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado Location : Approximately 1500 feet north of Weld County Road 12; west of and and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes; and approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5. Size of Parcel : 42 acres , more or less The Weld County Planning Staff and the Planning Commission has recommended denial for the proposed zone change based on the following Goals and Policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan: RESIDENTIAL GOALS 3 RESIDENTIAL POLICIES 1, 2, and 4 AGRICULTURAL GOALS 1, 2, 4, and 6 AGRICULTURAL POLICIES 1, 3, and 10 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY GOALS 1 and 3 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY POLICIES 1 and 2C ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND NATURAL RESOURCES GOAL1 OPEN SPACE POLICY 1 ECONOMIC GOAL 2 Having reviewed the Weld County Comprehensive Plan dated March 24, 1992 , we feel it is necessary to inform you that we disagree with the findings of the Planning Staff and the Planning Commission based on the above Goals and Policies . Attached are the reasons we feel the Planning Staff and Planning Commission were incorrect in their recommendation of denial . Respectfully, Tom Russell Margaret Russell CAI hi F 940456 RESIDENTIAL GOAL 3 Promote efficient and cost effective delivery of public facilities and services to residential development or districts. The facilities and services are already existing at the proposed site . There is supporting documentation in the file. Left Hand Water states "Fifteen taps , as requested, have been allowed. " The water line currently exists at Fir Ave. , which runs directly adjacent to the property on the east side. Electricity is already at the proposed site. The Weld County Health Dept . , as well as The State of Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey has no conflicts with septic systems . The Colorado Geologic Survey states , "this office has no reservations with the land use as planned. " The school services would be provided by Erie. I have an article from the Longmont Times-Call , April 14 edition that says Erie is accepting transfers from other St . Vrain Valley School District schools . If this is the case , it would appear the school could handle the increased enroll- ment. School capacity is now being debated by the St . Vrain School District and some are recommending school impact fees be assessed to each new building permit issued . When these impact fees are imposed they will apply to our development as well , and it will pay its fair share toward new schools as decided by the school board members . 940486 RESIDENTIAL POLICY 1 An application for residential development within a municipality's urban growth boundary area shall be reviewed in accordance with the urban growth boundary and residential goals and policies. According to the map on page 32 of the Weld County Comprehensive plan dated March 24, 1992 , the pro- posed site is within the Urban Growth Boundary. RESIDENTIAL POLICY 2 An application for residential development within or adjoining an unincorporated community shall be reviewed in accordance to the unincorporated community and residential goals and policies. The 42 acres is in the Tri-Area and Erie Comprehensive planning areas . Both planning commissions have reviewed the application and find it compatible and that it has no conflicts with their interests . We have provided a mineral resource statement from a certified geologist that is favorable. We have paid for a report from the Colorado Geological Survey with regard to foundation and individual septic systems and their engineering Geologist states "they have no reservations with the land use as planned" as long as proper evaluations are done and their recommendations followed. Weld County Health Department has reviewed the application and finds no conflicts . We have paid the Left Hand Water District ' s engineer ' s to review a water service request and their engineers have determined that water taps are available at this location and that they have sufficient pressure to serve the area with fire hydrants . We have contacted the Mountain View Fire Protection District and made arrangements to submit and pay for a plan inspection review. 940486 RESIDENTIAL POLICY 4 Weld County shall encourage a compact form of urban development by directing residential growth to urban growth boundary areas where urban services are already available before committing alternate areas to residential use. As previously stated, urban services are already existing at the proposed site . The land is surrounded by development. A minor sub on the North approved in 1976 . The 56 acres to the South has been divided in recent years and contains two 5 acre tracts , one 3 acre tract and the balance, 44 acres , is on the market with water to be retained by the Thornton owner. The land directly to the West was recently repossessed by Farm Credit Bank of Wichita because the crop yield was such that the farmer could no longer make the payments . It is now being divided into smaller parcels and sold to several different buyers . Carmacar is to the East with over 70 homes on mostly 1 1/3 acre tracts . Within 1000 feet to the South is another large subdivision, Parkland Estates , with its 4000 foot paved runway. Adjoining Carmacar to the North are several more homes on small 1 to 5 acre tracts . AGRICULTURAL GOALS 1 Institute policies that will encourage the preservation of the agricultural uses in Weld County. Complying with the compact form of urban development as this proposal does , preserves the outlying farmgrounds and agricultural uses that now exist . AGRICULTURAL GOALS 2 Promote the agricultural use of prime agricultural land. There is a letter on file from Lavern Kruger who currently farms the proposed site. It is questionable that this ground can be considered prime agricultural land. The land has no year around irrigation water, but only spring runoff . The applicant purchased the land from the original developer of Carmacar Ranchettes , who had planned for future development . At that time , much of the top soil was removed for fill in the low lying areas of Carmacar . 940486 AGRICULTURAL GOALS 4 Encourage residential, commercial, and industrial development to locate adjacent to existing incorporated municipalities and in accordance with the municipalities adopted comprehensive plan goals and policies. This is in accordance with. Erie and Tri-Area Plannings adopted comprehensive plan goals and policies as stated by letters from both planning commissions. AGRICULTURAL GOALS 6 Develop policies and regulations to permit low density residential development on non-prime agricultural land as recognized by the Soil Conservation Service. The proposed development calls for 15 homesites on approximately 42 acres, which qualifies for low-density residential development. When considering the previous data regarding the top soil removal , the lack of sufficient irrigation water, and poor crop production, I would deem this land as non-prime agricultural land. AGRICULTURAL POLICIES 1 Agricultural zone districts shall be established and maintained to protect and promote the County's agricultural industry. The agricultural zone district is intended to preserve prime agricultural land and to provide areas for agricultural activities and uses dependent upon agriculture without the interference of incompatible residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The interference of incompatible residential land use was created for this ground with the development of the Carmacar Ranchettes Subdivision . It has become almost impossible to irrigate with the annual spring run-off water without flooding some of the neighbors basements . Also, at some of the stages of farming, there are complaints of blowing dust , smells , etc . 940486 WHAT: A meeting to discuss questions and concerns regarding our proposed zone change on the land located in your neighborhood. WHEN: Tuesday , May 3 , 1994 7: 30 p.m. WHERE: Rinn United Methodist Church Fellowship Hall I25 Access & WCR 20 3783 WCR 20 Longmont, CO Your questions and comments are important to us. Please call 833-4687 to R.S.V.P. or if you have any questions. Thank you, t Geraldine Russell/ /011/-1.k fi C' r il , , ‘., ,,..} ki . ii) ? , Q. i /O, p ii _., ? a; ,_79 „ ,A,/y ir n GL 9404ss AGRICULTURAL POLICIES 3 Conversion of agricultural land to residential, commercial, and industrial development shall be discouraged when the subject site is located outside of a municipalities comprehensive plan area, or I-25 mixed use development area and activity centers. This policy is intended to promote conversion of agricultural land in an orderly manner that is in harmony with the phased growth plans of a municipality and the County. It is intended to minimize the incompatibilities that occur between uses in the agricultural district and districts that allow urban-type uses. In addition, this policy is intended to minimize the cost to Weld County taxpayers of providing additional public services in rural areas for uses that require services on an urban level. The subject site is located in the urban growth boundary. Conversion of agricultural land in Southwest Weld County is now a reality and is being promoted by the existing towns and the County with the Weld County Enterprise Zone and its tax credits . The site is 4 miles from the large electronic sign on I-25 at the Erie exit promoting growth and development by a Denver based developer . The site is within 5 miles of the I-25 mixed use development boundary. Erie has annexed several hundred acres to the South and East of its town center and is now considering a 187 acre development to the north to include a shopping village and 250 homes . Our 15 homes on 42 acres will have insignificant impact compared to the surrounding developments . In addition, there would be no cost for public services as they already exist at the site . 940486 AGRICULTURAL POLICIES 10 Public facilities and services such as sever, water, roads, schools, and fire and police protection must be provided and developed in a timely, orderly, and efficient manner to support the transition of agricultural land to urban development. The expansion of public facilities and services into predominantly rural agricultural areas, when the expansion conflicts with other existing goals and policies, will be discouraged. In evaluating a land-use application, Weld County representatives and the applicant will consider the public facilities and services goals and policies. Having already addressed the sewer, water, and schools , I will now address the roads and fire and police protection . The roads in Carmacar are currently gravel . We would like to access our proposed homesites through the existing roads of Spruce and Mountain View to Fir Ave in Carmacar. I believe there are 74 homesites in Carmacar and another resident on Fir Ave. These 75 homesites plus our 15 equals 90. If there is an average of 2 vehicles per homesite that would be an average use of 180 defining this as a local road . The applicant is willing to discuss and provide a reasonable dust abatement program for the . 8 of a mile of the loop of Spruce, Mountain View, and Fir Ave . if the access through Carmacar would be allowed. The land owner adjoining the site on the West has expressed a willingness to provide additional land for a 60 ' right- of-way access if necessary. Also, the Russells ; have a contract to purchase the 44 acres adjoining the site on the South, thus providing an ' alternate direct access from Road 12 if needed. Mountain View Fire Protection District has reviewed the application and has no conflicts so long as the applicant meets their requirements. One of their requirements addresses fire hydrants. The installation of additional fire hydrants would be beneficial to residents of Carmacar, especially those located directly across the road on Fir Ave. 940486 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY GOALS 1 Concentrate urban development in or adjacent to existing municipalities. This is why we are proposing Estate zoning and not R1 . However , the site is within the urban growth boundary. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY GOALS 3 Maintain urban growth boundary areas that provide an official definition between future urban and agricultural land uses. As established, the site is within the urban growth boundary. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY POLICIES 1 Land-use development proposals within an urban growth boundary shall be encouraged so long as they conform to the desires of the municipality as expressed in its comprehensive plan or by its land-use decision making body and if the municipality has agreed to provide services. There are responses from Tri-Area Planning and the Town of Erie stating they find no conflicts with their interests . URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY POLICIES 2C The proposed use is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan of the county. A municipality's adopted comprehensive plan goals and policies or the recommendation of the land-use decision making body will be considered when reviewing development proposals within an urban growth boundary area. I feel the statements and reports that have been previously discussed have demonstrated how the proposed zoning is consistent with the policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and will fit with the changing cond- itions in the area and also how the uses allowed by the proposed re-zoning will be compatible with surroundigit0486 land uses . ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND NATURAL RESOURCES GOAL 1 The location, type, and density of any development or use shall not exceed the physical capacity of the land and water to accommodate the use without adverse effects on water quality and quantity. We have addressed this issue with reports from the Weld County Health Department , a mineral resource statement from a certified geologist , a report from the Colorado Geological Survey and the Left Hand Water District ' s engineers . They find no reservations with the land use as planned as long as proper evaluations are done and their recommendations followed . OPEN SPACE POLICY 1 Promote agricultural use of prime agricultural land. I find it hard to define this site as prime agricultural land . The irrigation ditch at the back of the property never produced enough water for irrigation of crops as stated by the farmer. Many of the water shares for this ditch have been sold to the City of Lafayette. The land is not easily accessible for farming except through Carmacar. Fortunately, the current farmer resides in Carmacar and can easily access the property, but if he ever decides to quit farming the ground due to poor production, or any other reason, it would be difficult at best, to find another farmer who would want to access the property through the existing sub-division of Carmacar . When the Russells purchased this land in 1979, they believe the zoning allowed for development into 2 1/2 acre tracts . They purchased the land from a partner of the original developer of Carmacar Ranchettes , and this developer had intended to develop this land . 940486 ECONOMIC GOAL 2 The county shall provide land-use goals and policies which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture. It is my belief that our proposed homesites would do this . In the (E) Estate zoning one animal unit per acre is allowed. The rural way of life would be retained in this area with a proposal such as this . If forced to wait until a municipality annexes the land and requires paved roads, city sewer, and such improvements , the cost of development rises . In order to recover those costs , a developer is forced to put in more homesites on smaller lots . That is when the area will become congested and the rural atmosphere will be lost forever. With this proposal we will attract residents who truly desire a "country way of life" and will take pride in their surroundings . The impact on services and roads would be minimal with this proposal as compared to a municipal annexation with 120 homesites on 1/3 acre lots . I feel our proposal is the best for all concerned interests . The county will be generating a tax revenue while retaining an agricultural rural atmosphere, the land-owner will generate a profit while enabling the county to retain urban growth goals and policies , and last but not least, the residents of the existing sub-divisions would acquire a permanent buffer from encroaching towns and municipalities . 940486 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March 15, 1994 Page 3 Glen Droegemueller, Attorney, representative, Droegemueller Farm, explained this shop facility had originally existed as a nonconforming use and 80% was destroyed by fire. His brother, the applicant, has a wide range of uses for this shop including demolition work throughout the- County and maintenance of trucks and heavy equipment he utilizes. They would like to replace what originally existed and also incorporate a 30' x 60' wash facility and a patio that will someday connect the two existing patios. They proposed to build the 80' x 60' shop in a more secluded location on the property. Marie Koolstra was concerned the expansion of the business would use too much agricultural land. Bud Clemons was concerned about the outdoor storage on the property. Lee Morrison explained this amended application is consistent with the Use by Special Review approved in 1982 and is consistent with prior handling. The Vice-Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Art Peterson, surrounding property owner, explained they are all pleased to have this type of equipment available along the river. Mr. Droegemueller' s equipment has saved surrounding property owners from "wash-outs" in the past. He has no problems with this type of operation in the area. The Vice-Chairman asked if the applicant agreed with the Department of Planning Services' staff recommendation. Glen Droegemueller said yes, but they would like the term "used and secondhand lumber" included in Development Standard #14. Ron Sommer moved Case Number Amended USR-519, Droegemueller Farms, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a change to Development Standard #14 as recorded in the resolution. Shirley Camenisch seconded the motion. The Vice-Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Shirley Camenisch - yes; Marie Koolstra - yes; Bud Clemons - yes ; Ron Sommer - yes; Richard Kimmel- yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: Z-487 APPLICANT: Tom and Margaret Russell REQUEST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Approximately 1500 feet north of Weld County Road 12; west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes; and approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5. 940486 k / . 1D f SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March 15, 1994 Page 4 Peter Swift, Swift and Associates, representative, gave an overview of the application. He explained the proposed development was within the Urban Growth Boundary of the Town of Erie and will be near other developments such as Carmacar Ranchettes and Parkland Estates. They plan to build 15 - 16 residences on 2.5 more or less, acres. Public services, paved roads, and schools are already available. The property owner has stated the lack of water rights to the property make it difficult to farm. Ron Sommer asked if the applicant has had discussion with Carmacar Ranchettes Subdivision regarding road maintenance. Peter Swift said no transportation study has been done at this time. The Vice-Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. Geraldine Russell and David Conner, wanted to further state this property is difficult dryland farming close to an existing subdivision. They are both in favor of such an application. Carolyn Mahoney, Don Krutch, Wayne Cook, Jim Hollis, John McCamey, Jim Willer, Gene Ganino, Anne Shipman, Wendy Lomeli, John Piere. Broshue, all surrounding property owners, were concerned about the conditions of existing roads in the area, traffic and speeding problems that already exist, you water pressure, over population of schools in the area, the proximity of t existing air park and flight patterns in the area, wildlife, water table and drainage problems that exist. Shirley Camenisch asked about existing accesses onto the property at this time. Geraldine Russell showed access on the overhead projection. Ron Sommer wanted to clarify the type of dwellings proposed. Geraldine Russell said the homes would be valued in the $200,000 range. Bud Clemons asked about the water pressure issue. Geraldine Russell read a letter from the water district. Keith Schuett read the Department of Planning Services' staff recommendation into the record. Bud Clemons moved Case Number Z-487, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial based on the Department of Planning Service's recommendation and the applicant has not demonstrated acceptable access. Marie Koolstra seconded the motion. The Vice-Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Shirley Camenisch - yes; Marie Koolstra - yes; Bud Clemons - yes; Ron Sommer - yes; Richard Kimmel- yes. Motion for denial carried unanimously. 34048s BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Moved by Bud Clemons that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: Z-487 NAME: Tom and Margaret Russell ADDRESS: 1710 Lashley Street, Longmont, CO 80501 - REQUEST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Approximately 1500 feet north of Weld County Road 12; west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes and approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5. be recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners based upon the applicant's failure to demonstrate acceptable access and the Department of Planning Service' s recommendation as follows: This proposal is not consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Policies. This proposal is located in the A (Agricultural) zone district and is evaluated under the Residential, Agricultural, Open Space, Economic, Urban Growth Boundary, and Environmental Quality Goals and Policies. According to Section 21.5.1.1 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, or the zoning of the property is faulty, or changing conditions in the area warrant a change of zone. The applicant indicated the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This particular application is not adjacent to a municipality, constitutes leap-frog development, and is located on prime farmland. The Residential, Agricultural, Urban Growth Boundary, Open Space, Economic and Environmental Quality Goals and Policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan demonstrate this change of zone should be denied. Several sections of the Comprehensive Plan do not support the applicants' proposal. The Residential Development Sections which do not support this application include Residential Goals 3 and Residential Policies 1, 2, and 4. Agricultural Goals 1, 2, 4, and 6 and Agricultural Policies 1, 3, and 10 indicate this application should be denied. Urban Growth Boundary Goals 1 and 3 and Urban Growth Boundary Policies 1 and 2.C do not support this application. Other Comprehensive Plan Sections which should be evaluated and do not support the proposed land use include Open Space Policy 1, Economic Goal 2, and Environmental Quality and Natural Resources Goal 1. EX � b� C 940486 RESOLUTION, Z-487 Tom and Margaret Russell Page 2 The Weld County Comprehensive Plan discusses existing land use by stating on page 14, that "The way land is presently used is one of the most important considerations in land-use planning. Most existing development will remain in the future and will have a strong influence on the future pattern of development and land use in the County. . . With the land area of the County remaining constant, increases in the land area of urban-type uses brings about decreases in the land area of farmland. The percentage of urban-type land use is probably not as significant as the pattern of use. " The soils on this property are classified as prime, in other words, the best. This soil is also classified as having fair to poor soils potential for urban development, in other words, practically the worst. AGRICULTURAL The problem of competition and conflict between urban and rural land use interests exists. The Weld County Comprehensive Plan recognizes this and states, "As urban areas continue to expand, these [agricultural] resource lands are either directly converted to urban uses or are adversely impacted due to inherent conflicts between rural and urban activities. " And on page 23, the Weld County Comprehensive Plan states, "Other burdens to the farmer have occurred from restrictions on normal farming practices in areas encroached upon by residential, commercial, and industrial uses. " Unlike other industries that are free to relocate, agriculture is rooted to the soil in a specific time and place. The agricultural zone district is intended to preserve prime agricultural land and to provide areas for agricultural activities and uses dependent upon agriculture without the interference of incompatible residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The soil at this location has been identified as prime agricultural land by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Allowing residential uses in this location will remove this prime resource from production. Agricultural Goal 4 seeks to "encourage residential. . . development to locate adjacent to existing incorporated municipalities" . The proposed change of zone is approximately two miles away from the nearest municipality, and therefore, not adjacent to any existing incorporated municipality and constitutes leap-frog development. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY The urban development goals and policies are designed to plan for anticipated growth by directing urban uses and development to existing cities. . . which can provide the necessary urban services. The Urban Development Section of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan addresses the preservation of prime agricultural land by considering its relationship to the entire system of land use and development within the County and the region. These goals and policies reflect a basic 940486 I RESOLUTION, Z-487 Tom and Margaret Russell Page 3 commitment to conserving natural and managed resources while directing growth. The first urban growth boundary goal is to, "Concentrate urban development in or adjacent to existing municipalities" . This proposal is two miles from any municipality. ECONOMIC The Comprehensive Plan indicates, "The County shall provide land-use goals and policies which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture" . One way of providing for the continuance of agriculture is to incorporate all elements of the Comprehensive Plan in any decisions which are made regarding a change in land-use. By denying this application, agricultural production can continue in this location. CONCLUSIONS The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan encourage residential uses to locate in existing municipalities or in areas where municipalities have planned for orderly expansion through annexation. Weld County should encourage a compact form of urban development adjacent to towns and cities by directing residential growth to those areas where urban services are already available before committing alternate areas to residential use. Furthermore, the goals and policies of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan specifically discourage residential uses to locate on prime agricultural land. This land should be utilized for agricultural production. Finally, the Weld County Comprehensive Plan has the burden of recognizing and appropriately dealing with the inherent conflict between agricultural and urban uses not only on elected officials, but the applicants themselves by stating on page 24, "It is important that Weld County representatives and officials recognize their role in reducing the conflicts between agricultural uses and residential, commercial and industrial uses. Individuals who find themselves with land designated and zoned in a manner that does not accommodate their intended use should consider seeking other more suitable lands; such a transition will be to the long-term benefit of both the individual and the public. " Motion seconded by Marie Koolstra. VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Shirley Camenisch Bud Clemons Marie Koolstra Ron Sommer Richard Kimmel 940486 RESOLUTION, Z-487 Tom and Margaret Russell Page 4 The Vice-Chairman declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Sharyn Ruff, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado, adopted on March 15, 1994. Dated the 15th of Marc , 1994. I haryn F. Ruff Secretary 940486 INVENTORY OF ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION Applicant: Tom and Margaret Russell Case Number: Z-487 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 1. Application 24 pages X 2. 1 Application plat 1 page X 3. DPS referral summary sheet and letter X 4. DPS letter to applicant X 5. DPS Recommendation X 6. DPS Surrounding Property Owner/Mineral Owner X Mailing list, letter and certificate. 7. 3 DPS Maps Prepared by Planning Technician X 8. DPS Notice of Hearing X 9. DPS Case File Summary Sheet X 10. DPS Field Check X 11. Facsimile Memorandum from Keith Schuett, X Current Planner II to Margaret Russell (staff recommendation) 12. Colorado Geological Survey referral response X dated March 4, 1994 13. Planning Commission Member Field Check, dated X February 21, 1994 14. Referral letter sent to referral agencies, dated X February 11, 1994 15. Letter dated February 17, 1994, from Greg X Thompson, Current Planner, to Jim Soule, Colorado Geological Survey 16. Tri-Area Planning Commission referral response X dated March 1, 1994 17. Weld County Health Department referral response X dated March 2, 1994 18. Mountain View Fire Protection District referral X response dated February 28, 1994 19. Weld County Engineering Department referral X response dated February 18, 1994 20. Town of Erie referral response dated February X 17, 1994 kt be f B 940486 INVENTORY OF ITEMS , Z-487 Tom and Margaret Russell Page 2 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 21. Affidavit of Publication dated February 18, 1994 X 22. Planning Commission Sign Posting Certificate X dated December 30, 1993 23. Letter dated March 4, 1994, from Greg Thompson X to applicants requesting required fee for Mountain View Fire Protection District 24. Letter received March 4, 1994, from William V. X Cook objecting to the change of zone 25. Letter dated February 27, 1994, from Mr. and X Mrs. Donald J. Crutchley objecting to the change of zone 26. Letter received March 3, 1994, from James L. and X Georgia L. Davis objecting to the change of zone 27. Letter dated February 15, 1994, from Greg X Thompson to applicants returning initial check to Colorado Geological Survey 28. Letter dated March 1, 1994, from Diane and Elden X Moore expressing concerns with the change of zone 29. Letter dated March 11, 1994, from Scott and X Linda Hidalgo expressing concerns with the change of zone 30. Letter dated March 10, 1994, from B.R. Van Zuiden X and William R. Sherman opposing the change of zone 31. Letter dated March 11, 1994, from Gary 0. and X Sonja K. Bean opposing the change of zone 32. Letter dated March 9, 1994, from Jean-Pierre X Bressieux expressing concerns with the change of zone 33. Letter dated March 8, 1994, from Francis S. and X Donna L. Walsh objecting to the change of zone 34. Exhibit A, letter dated March 14, 1994, from X LaVerne D. Krueger concerning the change of zone 35. Exhibit B, Petition against the change of zone X 36. Exhibit C, letter from Michael and Carolyn X Mahoney opposing the change of zone 37. Exhibit D, letter from Deborah M. and Douglas X M. Lenz expressing concern about the change of zone 9z10486 INVENTORY OF ITEMS, Z-487 Tom and Margaret Russell Page 3 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 38. Exhibit E, letter from Mr. Koenig opposing the X change of zone 39. Exhibit F, letter from Geraldine Russell with X information relating to the change of zone 40. Exhibit G, letter from David K. Morris concerning X the change of zone 41. Exhibit H, letter from Chester C. and Margaret X J. Haun opposing the change of zone 42. Exhibit I, letter from Gene and Diana Godinho X expressing concerns about the change of zone 43. Exhibit J, letter from Steve R. Chipman X objecting to the change of zone 44. Exhibit K, letter from Ann R. Chipman objecting X to the change of zone 45. Planning Commission resolution After Hearing I hereby certify that the 45 items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commission hearing. I further certify that these items were forwarded to the Clerk to the Board' s office on arch ��94. Greg Tho s n, C rrent Planner STATE OF COLORADO ) ) COUNTY OF WELD ) 00VB2�J�BED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS t o day of muck 19(4 .„,,,.c. t:fr,,,,. e tY • z o . tik, : .r %°)1 4 : NOT ABLIPC • „ @�mmission Expires 940486 1-XHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET Case CD2. e '18 ', /€LW-4 L.2, N. t /, ititidamt (PC. chnizi) Exhibit Submitted By Exhibit Description ' kali/4 3//8 B. Pi Jfli. hat /i ex d � jamultrae- A8 c. Pf 8.11 tul1/�. .2 a� /�,G�//deu Ica ti 1 /��Q Ce ht n�cda C ax1 D. P�Q l2 n c (nJa `�1/ �lC��n m fittetten ttrn ` o E./�a 4//; F. lett,O.2tit5 et 0Arno w 4p/L (//pa) 4/95G. ilbtiit lv M f)tVPi grit ntc 51 H. oet kJv , /1 // Aetend (.nd2..ntwin 5Ali. ear A- �5//3o/r�� 6/p.J. ,'I !!lio &Ylak(1JLtek 11, ,A &2 trig 0/0 1.c&m (6/2/q/4 ` /,, K. f Fly irit- H //iL. eu tit hi £nU1_6( Etao (/ (tril 6/Writ ; 5//eM. 1211L11 L1 A S, 1M mi Cam t-n ct-Im.frakat 5/13 N. (yL2_k 2 L) et iolyndzint ie '' ' 3 Q 4t.i Tleau9 (544,94..774,0 tetyto'Og B,J�0,0e . �!' lizah_oruy / ,,3 Y?Wtv�4+ Z (4jaMs, 0S//VMi j rJY.z_1 y.#6 el 9Cd1ex rr airtiA 7;30. Hiram n,.u[. w,Attu-calnatewne. Pi fet , b B/2 Aaita)C ( /3 PatitaH per,;wdz, eucni,i& p /.�DF. �`1?`I Anc. �j?,GtXUDd'zt A //fit-z 'of L?e2�ddc�2G 5/a3 Q 1a'''_ ' L) t g ,�i tt Dg C'�o-n ciiuu 549. R. Snit I? ; Villa' ',da t MI Canatu2 epp i — 5/atis. I/0;1 n-, ... ufA /YU Ay-P.4_, tt . 4it ' u. ii0✓Ur�, ./7-11 “v;, / 5 ''16 ,t'r IA 1:vi _ G f-rU�, ,, n a,,„' -k 1,c � v. i t 1 ��f 1r W. Lr 71 (14_141,n, (ill- X. 7 l>�.Jttiw‘ (( t. '` Y. kitiln c / CL-'l,L o Z. 71 C 7--r L} -N < ( (z� ) u 940486 il c C 1 O Sy ycxtt . ` i,,,,(.)) c s _ (.Lcr. t iv via, a,i , ,,,, ,itti 7(17.,4- ,-,-h4t Fr Adidttx L.,/,‘,.,itiAt yyti e ti3 batt,t £( L(t ( /'./ti$ 940486 17:„ \fr FICE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PHONE (303)3564000, EXT. 4200 "live FAX (303)3520242 P.O. BOX 758 GREELEY. COLORADO 80632 COLORADO March 23, 1994 Tom and Margaret Russell 1710 Lashley Street Longmont, Colorado 80501 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Russell: Your application for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) has been recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners by the Planning Commission. The legal description of the property involved is shown as part of the Ei of Section 5, Township 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. If you wish to be heard by the Board of County Commissioners, it will be necessary for you to indicate your request by signing the bottom of this letter and returning it to this office. Regular hearing procedures will then be followed. This includes publishing a Notice of Hearing in the legal newspaper, an expense to be paid by you. In order to proceed as quickly as possible, we must receive your reply by Monday, April 25, 1994. If we are not in receipt of your request by that date, the matter will be considered closed. Sincerely, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO W. H. Webster, Chairman WHW/lmd I/we, Nie'rrt., ad( ion 4 do hereby request the Board of County Commissioners to cond�i r the a ove mentioned application. Ex[Li -d- s o�ss osit‘t, MEMORAI DU Wi`,Pe Clerk to the Board April 15, 1994 To Date Greg Thompson, Current Planner O( COLORADO From Z-487 Subject: Please include the enclosed referral response with the abovementioned case file. 940486 f i) 4 'i 40t, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)353-3845, EXT. 3540 f ' WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 1400 N. 17TH AVENUE ligg� O .,'t"' 11.1�� GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 p x, COLORADO r?- b X994 Date: February 11, 1994 CASE NUMBER: Z-487 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from Tom and Margaret Russell for a Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) to E (Estate) . The parcel of land is described as part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. The location of the parcel of land for which this application has been submitted is approximately 1500 feet north of Weld County Road 12; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. This application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facilitate the processing of the application and will ensure prompt consideration of your recommendation. Please reply by February 25, 1994, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Greg Thompson, Current Planner, if you have any questions about the application. Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed above. 1. We have reviewed this request and find that it does/does not) comply with our Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons. 2. We do not have a Comprehensive Plan, but we feel this request (is/is not) compatible with the interests of our town for the following reasons: 3.2(, A We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. 4. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to: 5. Please refer to the enclosed letter. r : :::th /1j/a� i✓ �� Agency: Col-04'4OD /` t (743 Co5. Cott , �^^�� D \\ � i APR 1 5 1994 vpid County Planning 940486 Date : March 10 , 1994 To : Weld County Planning Commission Subject : Request of zone change-Case # Z-487 I am writing in _ response to a letter that was distributed on February 11 , 1994 to some residents of the Carmacar Ranchette sub-division . The said letter was to inform Carmacar residents of a request by a Tom and Margaret Russell for a change of zoning from A ( Agriculture ) to E ( Estate ) . I have been a resident of Carmacar since 1984 , and my property lies on the north west end of Fir Avenue . I strongly object to this zoneing change from Agriculture to Estate for a number of reasons. One such reason is that response from police and fire departments take at least twenty minutes if not more . I have witnessed this on three occasions . And when the fire department does arrive , they face the problem of not having enough water pressure to effectively fight a fire . I also have dealt with low water pressure for the last 10 years . This is all to say that this area cannot withstand a influx of new homes that will have to run off the same water lines as Carmacar residents . Another reason I oppose the request , is that the Erie Schools are over crowded now , and with all the school budget cuts , it is highly unlikely that there would be funds for new teachers or for new construction . I have two small children , and this matter concerns me very much . Also , the increase in traffic flow through the Carmacar area would greatly increase the chances of car/pedestrian and or car/ equestrian accidents . It is my understanding that there is a spring on the property in question and that the water from this spring would have to be diverted . Where and how this water is diverted is a concern of many residents . I have watched surrounding cities go through a growth boom , and have watched hundreds of acres of open space turned into sub••- divisions. I do not want this to happen in this portion of Weld county . I want my children to know what open plains are , and to see the beautiful sight of crops growing in fields . Do not let country living become extinct ! Very concerned Parent/Resident , (dx/(4-) 7C5/bef' /-4/( Q/A---/ EXHIBIT 1< 940486 f Date : March 10 , 1994 To : Weld County Planning Commission Subject : Request of zone change--Case # Z-487 I am writing in response to a letter that was distributed on February 11 , 1994 to some residents of the Carmacar Ranchette sub-division . The said letter was to inform Carmacar residents of a request by a Tom and Margaret Russell for a change of zoning from A ( Agriculture ) to E ( Estate ) . I have been a resident of Carmacar since 1984 , and my property lies on the north west end of Fir Avenue . I strongly object to this zoneing change from Agriculture to Estate for a number of reasons: One such reason is that response from police and fire departments take at least twenty minutes if not more . I have witnessed this on three occasions . And when the fire department does arrive , they face the problem of not having enough water pressure to effectively fight a fire . I also have dealt with low water pressure for the last 10 years . This is all to say that this area cannot withstand a influx of new homes that will have to run off the same water lines as Carmacar residents . Another reason I oppose the request , is that the Erie Schools are over crowded now , and with all the school budget cuts , it is highly unlikely that there would be funds for new teachers or for new construction . I have two small children , and this matter concerns me very much . Also , the increase in traffic flow through the Carmacar area would greatly increase the chances of car/pedestrian and or car/ equestrian accidents . It is my understanding that there is a spring on the property in question and that the water from this spring would have to be diverted . Where and how this water is diverted is a concern of many residents . I have watched surrounding cities go through a growth boom , and have watched hundreds of acres of open space turned into sub divisions . I do not want this to happen in this portion of Weld county . I want my children to know what open plains are , and to see the beautiful sight of crops growing in fields . Do not let country living become extinct ! Very concerned Parent/Re -ident , 1 EXHIBIT ''' -'5214.10)Ila l 1 r 24/57 940486 EXHIBIT ,- IlA c1n, IS, 19 Ste te&r' Coco IAnh\vt, Colnrnisslohi Luc. Lave- ��Ii1}--coincev-vv5 elleo (u� C�A(v�13.) hog, Png. 2oV)1Vn)c/ �� 1 -"V is 4rop€. 1 , khoujph cc5 I"4r4 ai^pa E.l scckioh E rt �1 W 0 +c5 c.,CmAv\5e. -Zov.ri413 Y \av e.v^eaAm'Q, eo etc ' uG�s GO Al O tLNr•q 1 ne1 �n tits e o o !Air- 5 fro e � W ` 1 S ik tt I e O xi S� eci t o v1 1eo; Scc$'f o r R, to 8 a� L4 Yv L �.o,C,r_o\ov,,cJlp . � 1 1 9 �^ `n� ) v OW 1 \n `e1ti 1c tis +c! o fnA & / 9l sl1OQ�' �O(� Cl Q\``U''� V el ' a h (nor lenr O pO<`�-�`\d, 1 W e- 1 14\a- t e n W OVtc L h cJ W > 1 �roa IJAlkeve 3 �.oe,Yvl t� O ((eaaiS Uh d.3e o h ula S /c3 pale. o wv V et-Fure Ca; C; G ompl 2 4l( keq H\ okooAzn t4 A»c ?o n' v-13 re 2 v l )^e:vhc n2k, II p 1o.a�Lr c ov\c��rLs c1Ave An2 kclat; 1Jo Y4.,.1,J.:..�- aesIwr ..- Qr'op¢4i *1 10 0Wr pu^o FIR r•- u.? (1 eUfreaA 2 con ouv- a Ri• N ee'brAd)'). tale care. u.1pv-v h �e(� �1 A¢o�\01� I rVivl� i� -esQ es+4+ S w � 1 6,e_ ur\ V1a.. rapl°� `cJ ' J Vier EpoT¢r\�i l (1c((l�a1nj ciders L cl-3/ II i hseci$) In cor3e u< \-Nic,'c. Ivy}- ;L ckj 1 In0.1 es . W� ge(.50 • 1 Ct e._ C. o in ceN Y, s u,10 a 1A loose.. Jogs A in c n , VQVr (oko !Yr\ 4 G +'1e b O 1- .. Oh v 3o ou\r proper�-^f� Pr if e. c‘tA.S.Q. pre) to \Q Y)S , p\hyln com m.is41i oners a �p fv`00-0— 41S �r, m �. cos. eQi b u j cv-s s\n 044101 biz a h ;Qia eIAe,s pros 4c) �eM Paraft.SQ 0-P 'Dropares Arc Pass ,\s bwnn1 \≥ ok. •Amnc cb triOAticQ. 15.4 �, h dl c:53 S cs v- C , ' eJl st G o rn n V q -�-� av,v- pWo pe DI J < Get G-o A$ m4n l `bh119 1,Jt o�xgv 00o-tt11A'(i.v,hhynnIA;\)h5 a C -eS Cct`` `n S Gents I✓ 1\44,4 God 1375 Wuh ti2o 1:3haeta ;elk Co Eta 20 940486 Department of Planning Services March 15, 1994 Weld County Administrative Offices 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley,Colorado 80631 RE: Case Number Z-487 As homeowners living on Fir Avenue along the western edge of Carmacar and immediately across the street from the proposed development, we are opposed to the planned rezoning from A(Agricultural)to E (Estate). The concerns we have regarding the developmental plan as proposed to us are as follows: 1)It adds no value to our property. In fact,according to a recent appraisal used for our refinancing in 1993, our mountain view has not only an esthetic value,but also a monetary value which would be lost. We have no guarantee that the quality of the new homes will sustain/increase our existing property values. Should this rezoning be approved, strict covenants acceptable by Carmacar residents must be adopted. 2)It will increase automobile traffic and associated dust. Will the current street construction accommodate this additional traffic? 3)It will create additional traffic congestion at the following locations: a)State Highway 52 and County Road 5 (already a dangerous intersection) b)The two entrances to Carmacar c) The proposed intersection on Fir Avenue Items b&c could be addressed by eliminating the access from Carmacar and reaccessing the subject property from the south(County Road 12). 4)It will change current water drainage patterns into and along Fir Avenue. 5)In general,it will lower the quality of life as we have known it for the past fourteen and one-half years. In the long term,we believe this development will be just the beginning of an overall push to rezone mom agricultural land for residential use. Even the"convenient" southern termination of the project's proposed main street indicates the intention of near-term development to the south. We believe that the Department of Planning Services has an obligation to study the long range impact of not only the proposed rezoning, but also the ramifications of such rezoning on surrounding undeveloped acreage and existing infrastructure, i.e.,roads,drainage,utilities,fire/police protection,homes,etc. The proposed development has everything to gain and nothing to lose in attempting this rezoning. We feel that Carmacar has nothing to gain and much more to lose. Yours very truly, Chester C. Haun = EXHIBIT Margaret J.Haun 5446 Fir Avenue Erie,Colorado 80516 940486 March i4 , .)94 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Weld County Administrative Offices 1400 N . 17th . Ave . treeeley , Co . 80631 Re : Case # Z-487 Dear Sirs : I agree with one exceptign for a change of zone from A ( Agricultural ) to E ( Estate ) for part of the E2 of Section 5 , TIN , R68W of the 6th P .M . , Weld County , Colorado . EXCEPTION;. THIS NEW SUBDIVISION MUST PROVIDE IT 'S OWN ENTRANCE SO THE TRAFFIC DOES NOT COME THROUGH CAMACAR . Rega ds David K . Morris 1844 Pikes Peak St . Erie , Co . 80516 EXHIBIT 940486 March 9, 1994 I am a representative of the developers for the proposed homesites near Carmacar. I have heard there are questions and concerns regarding our proposal . Please feel free to call me at 933-4687 with any questions or comments you may have . I am enclosing a map showing the proposed homesites. As you can see, there are 15 homesites on 42. 61 acres. Also enclosed are pictures of homes we have constructed in Longmont. The homes are in the Stoneyridge Subdivision at 17th and Lashley St. , and have sold in the $120,000-$155,000. 00 range. We currently have a home under contract , but not yet occupied , if you are interested in seeing our construction. You can call me at the above number to make an appointment. Thank you for your time, and again, if you have any questions please feel free to call . Respectfll , L Geraldine Russell z EXHIBIT te 940436 °ai a a a° Sy- At I / YI 4 >/ S rn s �a A CO R / I'/' 7 m,,. O 1 ( Y H -. I I_ l .I n (1 ! !x I I 'IIli RA 8 I j z I r x Y C 61 I v� I I 03.3. RN 8 R� el I 3. ia - ig R� 8 IS F� II j li I COM 0•1114 0,111Z l e.t.a X I I v� ig Fm 8 ?, i it 3I y� cows, a v $ z a B =a "I 1i R R '' a IIIa Rm e II 1 cow. ono.: (etc ars. OCh Sve!ft crud Anocos2 n PROJECT. bm�c/aiu eel eaws..aro . RUSSELL PROPERTY d M , .® \2 : . y § \ , 2 § } \~ \ \ \ i ' C I / } / \ I ? iAttiiii' Or ... \ \ . , / . > . \ \ . \ : at': \ ° \ : \ H . § { \ { • a' ® A . . \ > \ \ \ /M \ . 1 } 2, , / * / 2 , � . i, i n „4 il • hieliii \ . . � 4d?! ° . m. yx « .,. \ , ^ yr w".. m. 0:0� g . @ z '\ / s.: . . ( < 9.&\ : W 3' :O d? \/ ± g 2 � 2f\ : y IF«\ sit \ \ , vy. ainimar � \ ~ r 1 w §-\ \ . \ � \ \a \ ' y . . . , \ 1 ; \S» s3 ± «-44.4.4? . , ` ze 4s a.c. s h I r 1 C s r [� Y -� 45, e t y L -a ...ii.III j ,., If- }y ,w✓_ -11 , is , 4,4 r.: y l q5 f , * - !�9.V.4 Vie" .,,. ' 4 ) ate.. '';,,,,,,,,4-7 T1 } 'it4 i .4 # P 9, h � � 6 ,.. 94 6 EXHIBIT YA-41-f e& /51 /994 R `tDdd 6 y, 4kL Amp A.; 5 is/et c, �a t. 4 9rSe t_ t dew / 1a C.nx_ac.,e alt eA-, &tc ca4) th,e, , 2uie. Lae G e`ta,Lt.e 7/ Qac 2, CZt.�� /L00_4 7 ee-x_ c.n-�(, at alene C�� t/Lfit z 9,te bJ2u at 1-42 (2).Le )cal te,c,a _ tae_,e_, tJ efl4 d.e.C4 4,a) Z<c¢ G tted �� e a�ee�p Lr ck a y .cea.t.> • /de-- 7tJi aLa , ,124t_ -tots z(Jej ALt t"ILL g-97- et-576 940486 (am) Or aft Larch I4, 1994 KXHIBIT Weld County Zoning Commission G reeleu, CO & 2 `„Ls To Whom It Nay Concern: We are residents of Carmacar Rancnettes and are very concerned with the possibility cif rezoning an area west of Fir Ave. in our neighborhood. We reside at 1760 Spruce Dr. within 00 feet of the property in question. The concerns we name below are in no particular order as we feel all are priority issues for us and our neighbors. The zoning of our particular lots allows limited agriculture. As we understand it we can have a maximum of 4 large animals. Nancy of our neighbors have horses, cows, ostriches and many of us raise chickens, turkeys and.dogs_ As we understand the estate zoning. it will not allow the same number kinds of animals. This could create animosity between those of us already here and any newcomers. This is a big problem for those of us already here as we will not allow our zoning to be changed. There is also a concern for water (from Lefthand Canyon) and other services (from the county). Our water pressure is already consistently low, any additional usage on the current mains would only add to the problem. Our dirt ►oads are adequate for the traffic as it is now but would worsen with any more use. In the winter, we fear there could be real problems as the roads get plowed only after the snow has been on the ground for a week or better We just had septic problems and were informed that if we need to redo our drainfield in the future it could present a host of problems since the water table is rising steadily. I can't help but think that could be -a problem for new homes. The designs for the homes in the proposed development seem at first glance to be the type of cookie cutter style, change-the-elevation-front-and-call- it-different homes that are being mass produced in all the major developments throughout the Front Range. Yes, these are affordable beginning and move-up homes, but we feet that if you are considering moving to a rural setting such as ours, you deserve a more custom and personal home. This is in keeping with the feel of the neighborhood that already exists in this immediate area. With few exceptions; the houses throughout Carmacar Ranchettes, and nearby Parkland,. are totally custom 940486 omit. We feel the diacing a whole development of p. -assembled, miiss designed homes into this mix will set a price and tax base lowering precedent that will do neither the county nor the current homeowners any favors. Erie Elementary School is presently at capacity. As an executive member of Erie Elementary*s PTO, i (Debbie) don't forsee the School District having available money to solve any problems of overcrowding caused by new enrollments. We moved to the country to get away from large developments. More traffic on our roads (we live on one of the access roads to this lot) would put our children at the kind of danger we left behind in Lafayette. We enjoys the farm atmosphere, having wheat fields behind our house and around the corner. We enjoy watching the birds, especially the owls and bale eagles We listen to coyotes and have seen foxes and raccoons. Building more houses is certain to drive this wildlife away. In conclusion, we feel that the additional traffic, population, construction, water usage on marginal mains, inequitable zoning issues, qualitu of life considerations and esthetics are some of the pressing topics that concern ourselves and others in this neighborhood_ We hope that this is taken into strong consideration by yourselves and others when discussing the possibility of developing this and other parcels of current farm-land here and throughout the county. th Concern, Deborah M. Lenz Douglas 1t Lenz 1780 Spruce Drive Erie, CO i30.516 (.303) 828-0228 940486 March 14 . 1 ' 94 . EXHIBIT I 2yc7 Violri County Department of Planning Services 14001 N . 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE : CASE NUMBER 7-497 This letter is to inform you of our opposition in the change of zoning from Agricultural to Estate for part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . We live within 500 feet. of this development and oppose it for the following reasons ----Inadequate roads . The roads in the Carmacar subdivision cannot handle any more traffic . Currently, Weld County has difficulty maintaining the roads due to the amount of the traffic that exists now. The corner of Mountain View and Fir, where we live , has continuously been worn down with the amount of traffic that it serves . Our corner fence in 1979 was approximately 10 feet from the road. Today, that corner fence post is approximately 3 feet from the road . With another 15 houses and approximately 30 more cars , we are concerned how much more our corner will he worn away. We until d prefer that our roads remain dirt and not. paved . The roads provide a raceway for some cars already. With paved roads , it our fear that the racing will become even faster and more fr. eluent. . With law enforcement located at Ft . Lupton, it is hard to control speeders and reckless driving. Also, as property owners , we do not scant to be assessed for the paving of our roads as well as the continuing cost of maintenance required after they are paved. ----Limited Access . Off of the plat plan ; it appears that them will he only one road leading into the subdivision from Fir Avenue . it seems dangerous to only have one road to serve as an access for a majority of the lots. This subdivision is being accessed solely through the Carmacar sobrli vi sion . Tt doer not seem fair that the development: of the lots depends solely on access from an existing subdivision . The ;mount of houses should have di rect access to a major county road not through an existing subdivision. it is Also disturbing that the road out of the proposed subdivision has to come directly towards a existing house on Fir Avenue . The evi sti na streets in Carmacar run parallel to each other so that headlights from cars do not reflect directly into a house unless you are turning a corner . Again, it is. an Pxist.inc, homeowner on Fir Avenue who will he impacted at the e-,pense of new snhrl i ei si on . 940486 --- -Police Pt : teot..ion . Our police protection must come from Ft . Lupton which is Approximately 1.5 miles away. Because of this Ali stanoe from us . it does not, seem wise to approve additional houses for this area . -- --Water Pressure . The water pressure is not satisfactory now in the summer months when everyone is watering. Only one sprinkler head from a hose can be used .At a time . Sprinkler systems have to run late at night when people are sleeping so that they can have an Ample supply of water. ----Spring. There is a spring that exists just south of the middle of the property . We are concerned as to where this water is aninu to be diverted when development takes place . Our water level is lready high requiring us to keep a sump pump in our basement . Where- the water is diverted could pose a problem for that landowner . In addition , we are concerned that the 15 additional septic systems co•ild raise our existing water level . ----Schools . With all of the proposed building in the town limits of Erie . the elementary school is expected to he 94 seats short within r, years These projections do not include any children coming from subdivisions outside of the town limits. ----Wildlife . Foxes , coyotes , and owls have frequently been kited on the land of the proposed subdivision . Even bald eagles fly over this field in search of food . It would he sad to ;gee all r f these birds and animals leave when the people start building. Please call if you have any questions on the above statements . Our telephone number is ( 90? ) AA6-G1?F.6 . Sincerely, a2/{-4}± (I4: 6 A-?' )iichael J. ff,ahoney Carolyn uThoney 5506 Fir Avenue RR#1 Erie . C.C O516 pale Hall Barbara Kirkmeyer 940486 Page I We , the undersigned , petit n the Weld County Commiss_ lers to 1. EXHIBIT vote AGAINST : 6 A Change of Zone from A ( Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . 2lta 7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N , R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 : and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER 671,4)040k' I C I �111 I I / 15 -i7IOMA1 , siiIc Lo_&& b 1. 3-be_!-11at1_ &-,(ef "Co R)5/6I Z Sa me ?es/E I ,y c±e lc__1 4 -c-c-J3 /.5' 7 A„_,,, 1 e s,'r!_At &I C c 13 0 3 - 6 6 s - 3o 2 0,7, }44-1/1/1- _-`i) e7/b L.x c� &Le Fe- - 5C757kI fir)3 -- < 2-5 3017 n / � �v�� . j 3� 3 - �� -393 ► taI Il rn7 } 0rip tot 5 ' ed. c(os/� i , / r II �y L_ I J (2!L_Al_Lc Eii\e_�EcL Jik__J�i t? _ Cx2/ - ( � d 5S1c! f (tZ A 6rE� tie ) �l�l 3o3 8 Y 313 ( I Sio / 7 ig , Vii . No.1/04 303 FZ� 3/�� ,5t u- I 2:�,efid ��-L �eC ice, c�; � - �,x, ) I : �_?(-E�, lte —� z kaa_r Lf_ ,#- 1-'7-,c-- ( 0 eic_57( I ) 5 ‘'6.-" -) " / Z aitk ( 53_q1-Ala'" - ire Co Bas[ I X03 8a 3413 �3�I 7 , %tare v�,'.e (14-637c 1 -503 ni 3 Y v 3 I I 940486 Page We , the undersigned, petit ,n the Weld County Commiss_ .aers to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TIN, R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER l✓� GGu �.. , I S7/‘ ��: ,�(/� Fasi� I 12-1-L1727 Crie j O1 L‘I 3/4114kI 5.3 6_ 'in''e_ ó&S S S41/ . /J °i I I s irna �..`k c,ctuY'I 5`3Q6-. .a/22e_EaLecr_J11Y16 (92.2357cP A I I 11760 SiO(gcjr i 1e EME GO goS/6 I S'28'-332S )1 _ I I el I / 70 S r e_pc__ cieCo_$Qgk -33 0-'60814,4 1a- aS Qw S ant--° ! aS oa > � l 78/ 4,42...tcy__.- g-3753 c_ *tce KiLcu1/44 g72? - 0/2_ '11 \anoeswoC . 1-4"-• I 5446 Oda_ / Cr. 8os,� l 818 - 34"(' -62_^?parr -55 4/6_61>yivc r ei 516 >ISi6 I I 940486 Page 3 We , the undersigned, petit_ in the Weld County Commissners to vote AGAINST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N, R68W of the 6th P. M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I I 1 ! I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I 940486 Page 4 We , the undersigned, petit—on the Weld County Commissl.,ners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TiN, R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER JAMES A�..�HpO�W� S I 9729 ERIE PLACE I (303) S28- W19 Q. Id-tit I ERIE, CO ZOSI, I / ) 1 I y � a4 rA , s Ic�L.,z I , G I -I 52S - 4119 i. L�.-_ �_ � V �L'�i__`1114 CoC �t7 v f��y ./ 77/ emit, .-L I 41-6--�%'� •� br-- I t+:.w'1 CO/ xo5 / L I 2?- -:)'' ,-S" }i 4,..,,,_,do i I /4,yy,e'AeL ,..4..4_,-, I e , ,, ) I:14 Mg "deer dra4ge _(._ilt:._(/_-_ __9/124__G0 i(6G ga2.830 7? X1768 ('a i A I I in h i_ 4 e I ens4_Ca .96 / 4' .- 1 3,7- 8' - Li5 ii.2, 69 Al 1,i, INS f �o I b'ZS' o3z7 er' 7-1"1 frTt S �Q1aln I (0( y ge vct L F I �2(c Co a S1 I 44`t - V ) i��/he fle Vii!/erg I 4/74 v ea vc r/y Gw I `ga/�ga �� r,c cc, Roc//o I 4/71/- 9 FF0 Meoet ,17 A wi& I 97/47 yv yr Ante' I X28-3.5 -s . c• --- I ..fl-8 444-C'`- I ez_.......„...,_ I Lc \a_ Lo %LAS*l2F (t)-K-3S1-9 I I Athysirt:e , 6 a t e_ i, I6479 Eb,F/ , (R i c Co S7& I 60 - 00(0 Ja� y) S- I'd e(5 I / YL__at(I-etc.C c &C1r Ca 1C. ra)i 31/14 /l hrstsi/he C . WeisI CcYCO ffD.S/d ga8,38SC� �Jto>?� 1 ,'&v abris Cie.-. zr/e NJgtoon, i),O -- z - - - --- -- -- ---- -- --- -- 1 ii1� 7� Be v X I� �N �QT Cz C v g os�IL. .5"307079 9 Chery czixt'e( I I Fane 5 We, the undersigned, petition the Weld County Commissioners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TIN, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER z/ I 1 -57 / 1 Rd.ciati:e ti74cio ‘7 Y05-1 6 ‘iii7/14%2-.J4- Yei r ! I ! I 1 1 I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I 940486 Page 6 We, the undersigned , petit in the Weld County Commiss_ ,ners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N, R68W of the 6th P .M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . �/ /') NAME .,/� /j ADDRESS /�( ( PHONE �N/UM(BER / -k. '1-C i J-Z q_ le I -.._�S/Z (�1<te .„ C.L'�!-Q. ALL_L_ �G df J��I 167 rl - 75-5 l ?Z=L 1� �/- I L -- - `- �2 I /, ,4i A vi S7, dire co sDSIid y - 0 e, _ d- iBIoL� l)JccJ_) sr_- .A GI 702 Y3o 6( - _ads�� 119ifC1v._tifiU St Er_%_ecalose g�8- /� I /4/%5 Air 1K:eic Te4iiyi sels-/E yz_g 5/5 , ' nos ' ' \ V t a g)., 80 S l i " 8 ca f s )Q AtAlfy, I I cto ��^� Oie E.Sj- \e co et p, I (a ,R q I Flo l a- /'I'hCn2/' I /4/5 141ki• /Cud � fete, 0/6. I 5'd 8 33S/8' X557 A/7-pr\9 �<<� 4tE co -2 60 65 l3 47144(AlibecLAAL etbefittoy2a.L., logs Ltrir I act/ <& ttz, Co. , b€6--7.6 a a I I � 'J.46/1 iArtill 1%1.2 Lov. _s f( s _Evic 6 6—30Y I I 940466 We, the undersigned, peti on the Weld County Commis. ners to vote AGAINST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5, T1N, R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER'' 'r L t. e_ I /67?-5— vJ C1 I R_a2_---_3 3.2'(s u A 7) I - - 54 �"%mac I � I Af dhe _ ,ae., z--Ic.061 Petiglic.u.3_Erin) Co us1(s r :21" - 33>, i r I,49,-zreA: ..c4 7„43,4I-E. -743--/ ft--,..4(„1 , ... ;-,,i-- e . ,c,.5_,4...., ieeecircc A :1O.61-se- -1/6si 12(4-64/1)- -'t--(--Q--' ?:72F5:- .33/__ -717 4e>--v-c- -- efir/2,7 _5---?6, 7 4pi-e--n. --1:-.--- &-e- et4r- c34i. � I I _ Lecolz /9W ,4e.eice Die. 6-tic O.:48 -,304// - 3. LEw,s 1941 5 yc + R 92 8- 3.6v1-s940486 I I ____ ._ _____ ___ i I � I ! I I I I I I I I I I ! Page 8 We , the undersigned , petit.un the Weld County Commissi.,ners to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION : Part of the E2 of Section 5 , T1N , R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION: Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes. ` ` NAME Q y� ADDRESS/j� PHONE NUMBER y VIM °Q(�7Ow- J iSt ASp-eh. 4 . £m ,/ (1,06; i 1?Z 6 - 012 et ay Me I I a s( A s C .- 5-2,(:_t & I ZS Q cJ 3 9 1 t.v i) g ,S7. ? ' i7,6-7 �.P.A-! f c�,E, a sue'- U 332 ii R&H i_s_e_? S1r0J2 I / 61,S -_E_SF L -C - I=/ill C-4 I S/- c233t_-- , _ 5398 CiA acs & Co ed 3? a. __ ___ _ tr?"r - / .. . g atlypos, .4 &pi, a &,?-3 ,70\ i if I5729 t) c-L S EEiE__ Co I W s- </s y JaL,c1--/ ,, , I /?8`0 .Scitruce Dr_fc; CC) g2Y -022 $ lett_ 4.,:i ' I a / uz,_ or. J-i-tL 6'C.D 9 a O - 37'6 i WO *,.., €___ 064 . I..; 0; c 2 e_ 02_3_C . I /06)4Lc-c IL otu , Sa-A-Li ee x.72.1 -00?.95- 1071, \). ` , I /&.7y _wi�� Co , 4 ) 7_ cD, cdiSV - '417 I _ ,djxz 2c_r €4.24.-e I 460 fi n& /, .'/. ��i e 6 �'L's / `I',' 2/:'` y - 9n 0481 Page 9 We , the undersigned , petit n the Weld County Commiss_ hers to vote AGAINST : A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural ) to E ( estate ) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of the E2 of Section 5 , TiN , R68W of the 6th P . M. , Weld County, Colorado . LOCATION : Located approximately 1500 feet north of Weld Country Road 12 ; approximately 1500 feet west of Weld County Road 5 ; and west of and adjacent to Carmacar Ranchettes . NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER I S'6>≥16 I / .)6L,-x3` ►-,?G c-1 I 1(2-77 b(.3 EL.A C-= b 1D- es&-c ' 203 .,;K_Y(i., 7 r_I/n/-4/ p � _../?. /? 4-,)-7_,25 Pl.)C f �/�eI //2-/2, C276 �\/ - \I N6111 1 / - 4vgleI r * J,CJ-- -3(J-yR a,..4.€ T, ,S1...*--- I EQ,c CO �c�� °_ , D T S, �sKv I I L73 cti,� �0 C0 Ro t2 1303 srzk-3Js3 t:ee-CAF.., t c ..1;„..,17 P (G,I `,J � 1_t_=&-1 L--s e / 7s_ icicle ( , /;?u'- ,2- tfrs i �(;,y_S.7 A - s 1-„e= ' -;�,- -) irr1 - 2=-L-, j----?_-‘,Z E3-1..... ,_• ee, 13 c 6_,f..L __e•9`2;C t I I I f I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I ! 1 I f I I 940486 // J / / ,4L✓•t, / // /Ci y L/ 7.{..: it- 24 %/ / ' ` ' -.,"N et C`G- "L..,2-1-4-6'!"(1.- �---i- - ' ___e,,-27 ,,,,e_ Cam- ` c) C 2, CZG eL16, ,5- flh', R 6 5 k'el t 4,-,G /TM. 4G,_ C<( CL L 7 r L/�L ° G22/� iZ _ LCC' ^/ /x-� i ' n , Cr ,u.22 �G..lt"ft • (L' ,Ae...L2,L" cflC—it• C" .G/'Cc"rtit.- - .t�..2- . . tt.t.tare.L .-c I JJ I L/`ii ,/ 'e''.--7,-(e/ -di'1 Le e i` J 't li1i 4l6.c✓/rh C`�.,F•' et `zC ur A,,a. Gti',. '2Le'-'�.c. j e"---AL Lr-j � e `CL. 'v' (' `) r ,-2 7-e< �� /� ./� 4. L i,' (� p [/ -Eel CC:�'G=ECG-G ,:' i ,-7c' CC."�-.C[G.'1' ;�< ,/,.ti�9 i; -4—,...„_..z. G fix' ' c.% I L `` //�� tt//,.u` 1-L:),t 4/IL- - t,2 rt, .c, _./'''AL^- ter..,— zc-4w/- / l J ..i'2,--cac.,�t � ,L it it c • �:�. _.:,,,,z..„ aAA _ , 1( EL,=e,.- Z KGB / f �c, , � {- _, (2c �t� , r ,c, li : : �„ e-ste _ . -Z /{'- C L'�-E.,4-c-L ,,, r-Y" .e' J"C.z.CY,L `r/ . '" t.^i L? '_ �" C1fc .;�L L/'-L'c-CC�t ?cl' ,� c« C.<t i —c-±, (L'<. Itt-e,-ct-/7:4—jeitt ,_,..76; LC`c.L L.1Tc, 'Lt".L. C< _F Z L 1 if`"Cltic �_/ tI .-P,' _,' �4� `IC -d-el-7,7-1,7-/-h.- , a L IL cre. <"(,' LC , ''' 14 J ,/{ [tN / C LC,'C/- G2-icte 9(,',o.,` ,C %CA-'it "L C/1-1-1G /r`7 (i'' / ,C(..' A"'"' [,7/,/ L / -yam / /' //le CJC✓.1LS -L). / 244.7/t1„ _• EXHIBIT t 940486 C22/7(11C4 it 8, / c7 9V Se‘ei Y vim/4/ht ,m6 fie, 0,22, ge, 1O S/C0 gn MAR 1 1 1994 �1.�� p��' Veld Ane�+fiJ AIBIIBIIIA �C� e�eri cCO. 8© laJ/ _. yd adre:€ z . eZd7,2 , - 026C4z- e <sece_L t 52.7 1 - tee/ a- -fA../ :rot tea(' lad-e-lc_} /i J am, O%tee( dtle-pte 7ko � �' �' z w." a d es— 3 L �� Maur— leer- /cam-, s L `AGi &G.1/2- " ?icet. ,v4Get 4 ---1 l7-n-e2ctcx c/ AeztleE `� / c2/ 1/45 7 7 -8_ a,7aa 940486 Hello