The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About910389.tiff RESOLUTION RE: APPROVAL OF SERVICE PLAN - LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 32-1-204, CRS, as amended, a Service Plan concerning the proposed Longs Peak Water District was filed with the Board of Weld County Commissioners, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 32-1-108, CRS, as amended, the Board of County Commissioners scheduled a public hearing on the Service Plan to be held at 10:00 a.m. , on May 1, 1991, and WHEREAS, notice of the date, time, location and purpose of said hearing was duly published in The New News, the County legal newspaper, on April 11, 18, and 25, 1991; said notice was also published in the Longmont Times Call, a newspaper of general circulation in the area; notice was provided to the Division of Local Affairs of the name and type of the proposed District; and to the Petitioners, to the governing body of each municipality and of each special district which had levied an ad valorem tax within the next preceding tax year and which had boundaries within a radius of three (3) miles of the proposed District, and to said Division, as required by Sections 32-1-202(1) and 32-1-204(1) , CRS, as amended, and to the Weld County Planning Commission as required by Section 32-1- 204, CRS, as amended, and WHEREAS, the Weld County Planning Commission studied and considered the Service Plan at its meeting on April 16, 1991, at which time said Commission adopted a Resolution recommending conditional approval of the Service Plan for various reasons as more specifically stated therein, which recommendation was subsequently presented to the Board of County Commissioners at its hearing on this matter by a representative of the Planning staff, as required by Section 32-1-204(2) , CRS, as amended, and WHEREAS, the Board did, on May 1, 1991, conduct a full public hearing on this matter, taking evidence establishing the jurisdiction of the Board to hear this matter and further taking evidence regarding the substantive issues set forth in Section 32-1-203, CRS, as amended, at which hearing all interested parties were afforded an opportunity to be heard, and 910389 Page 2 RE: SERVICE PLAN - LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Board fully considered the Service Plan and all testimony and other evidence presented to it in this matter relating to said Service Plan, including the favorable recommendation of the County Department of Planning Services, and WHEREAS, the Board, after consideration, finds that the Service Plan and the evidence and testimony presented to the Board meets the criteria contained within Section 32-1-203, CRS, as amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that: Section 1. The Board hereby determines that all of the jurisdictional and other requirements of Section 32-1-201, et seq. , CRS, as amended, have been fulfilled, including those relating to the filing and form of the Service Plan, the form and publications of the public notice of the hearing on the Service Plan and the type of public hearing held herein, and that, pursuant to Section 32-1-204(1.5) the petitioners did give proper and timely postcard notification of the hearing to the property owners within the district. Section 2. The Weld County Planning Commission has considered this matter as required by law and has recommended conditional approval of the Service Plan. Section 3. Prior to a decision on the Service Plan, the Board determined that no requests for exclusion of property, nor any petitions objecting to the creation of the District were submitted. Section 4. Based upon the information contained within the Service Plan and evidence presented to the Board at the hearing, the Board hereby finds and determines as follows: a. There appears to be sufficient existing and projected need for the organized water service in the proposed District's service area as demonstrated by the Association's existing members and customers. b. Although the existing service by the Association is adequate, the Association's structure is inadequate for the projected needs of the area because of the higher costs of operation as a non-profit corporation and the inability to protect its assets (water rights, tangible property, and customer service contracts) from encroachment by other entities. 910389 Page 3 RE: SERVICE PLAN - LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT c. The proposed District is functionally capable o£ providing economical and sufficient service to the proposed service area. d. The area to be included in the proposed District has the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. e. The formation of the District is in substantial compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. The District boundaries would be located in the 1-25 Mixed Use Development (1-25 M.U.D. ) area and Urban Growth Boundary (U.G.B. ) area as identified by the Comprehensive Plan. Ordinarily, a municipality is in a position to plan for expansion of existing facilities and services. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, alternative facilities and service systems may be used for urban type development within the I-25 M.U.D. and U.G.B. areas. f. The proposal appears to be in compliance with all County, Regional, and State water quality management plans. g. It appears the facility and service standards are in compliance with the standards of the City of Longmont, Town of Mead, and Town of Frederick. h. It appears the creation of the proposed Special District will be in the best interests of the area to be served. Section 5. The Service Plan of the proposed District, be and hereby is, approved. Section 6. The Clerk to the Board is hereby directed to advise the Petitioners, in writing, of this action and to attach a certified copy of this Resolution for the purpose of filing the same with the District Court of Weld County, and to send a copy of this Resolution to the Department of Local Affairs. Section 7. All Resolutions, or parts hereof, in conflict with the provisions hereof, are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict only. Section 8. This Resolution, immediately upon its passage, shall be authenticated by the signatures of the Board of County Commissioners and the County Clerk to the Board and sealed with the corporate seal of the County. 910389 Page 4 RE: SERVICE PLAN - LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 1st day of May, A.D. , 1991. pd. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERSATTEST: � WELD COUNTY, CO RADO Weld County Clerk to the Board Gordon ,J eC an t/"llA_ep-,?/-/Cizz,c,,e..-r,. —np (--<;---Clerk to the Boar eor a Kenned , Pro- em ---- . APPROVED AS TO FORM: tOnsjapta " — Constance L. Harbert �« . . C`t � County Attorney �� C. W.,. ' 16.63243 .632 W. H. Web 910389 NOTICE OF HEARING Docket No. 91-20 PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that there was filed with the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, a Service Plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The Service Plan is now on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, Third Floor, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, and is available for public inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, by Order of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, a public hearing on said Service Plan and related documents will be held at the County Commissioners Hearing Room on the First Floor, Centennial Building, Greeley, Colorado, at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, the 1st day of May, 1991. The purpose of the hearing shall be to consider the adequacy of the Service Plan of the proposed Longs Peak Water District and to form a basis for adopting a Resolution approving, conditionally approving or disapproving the Service Plan. The proposed Longs Peak Water District is located within Boulder and Weld Counties, Colorado. That portion located within Weld County is generally described as follows: Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6; and Township 3 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34 Pursuant to Section 32-1-202, CRS, the Service Plan may not be approved if a petition objecting to the Service Plan and signed by the owners of taxable real and personal property which equals more than fifty percent of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable real and personal property to be included in the District, is filed with the Board of County Commissioners no later than ten days prior to the hearing, unless such property has been excluded by the Board of County Commissioners under Section 32-1-203 (3.5) , CRS. Property owners seeking exclusion of their property may also file a petition for exclusion with the Commissioners no later than ten days prior to the hearing. If the Service Plan is approved by the Commissioners, the petitioners will petition the Court for an election on the issue of formation. Pursuant to Section 32-1-305(3) , CRS, the owner of real property within the proposed District may then file a petition with the District Court in and for Weld County, stating reasons why said property should not be included within the proposed District and requesting that such property be excluded 91 C2R3 therefrom. Such petition shall be duly verified and shall describe the property sought to be excluded. The District Court will hear said petition and all objections thereto at the time of the hearing on the petition for organization and shall determine whether, in the best public interest, said property should be excluded or included in the proposed District. Such petition may be filed any time after the petition for the organization of the District is filed with the District Court, but not later than ten days before the day fixed for the hearing on the organizational petition. Notice of that Court hearing will be published at a later date. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: DONALD D. WARDEN, CLERK TO THE BOARD BY: Carol A. Harding, Deputy DATED: April 8, 1991 PUBLISHED: April 11, 18, and 25, 1991 in The New News __ r NOTICE OF HEARINGDocket 91-20 6 s OESEBY . .• - R GI�1'ENC that wee [Bed with • the Clerk to the Board of owl Commissioners of We W Comb Colorado, a Service Yea (Water District. The e Service Plan 1s now STATE OF COLORADO ) on f le in the OR ce of the Clerk to the Boars of Comt' )s.s. iMhrr Str�ceri c�ecleCalora�dpoe:e d COUNTY OF WELD ) betwen gbpp fa°,m!'lenA 600 p�m� Monde'through Frida .R GIVEN NOT�CE IS Board of David B. Reynolds, being duly sworn , anal, by order Coml' Commissimen of wets says that he is publisher of County, a public nearing on card Service and at t d The New News a weekly newspaper aocumens wu be vela ale News, YComt3' Cornuuasioners Hcrdng published in Keenesburg in said County Boom on We First Greele3'; and State; that said newspaper has a ��o ��nooie,l �,B�aulap;nptp, o� Wednesda3', lne„Y�st S;aia1'• general circulation in said County 1991. of�tlre nearing anaB and has been eontinously and bye tocacr the adequacy o[ue uninterruptedly Service Plan of the ,proposed p y published therein, ILongs Peak Weler Drsirrcl and to form a Dams for adspling a during a period of at least :Rosotution approving,corrdiuonaBy fifty-two COI7seCLLtiVe Weeks prior t0 ap4rovug or dsa44rov rig the the first publication of the annexed znc rN oposed Longs,Pcak Wa er District rs located Coioredo.a'1hi notice; that said newspaper is a and Weld Goumtas, ruon , located within. Weld newspaper within the meaning of theoml• s generally descnbea as act of the General Assembly of the Toansh 2Nar h, ReMfe sa west State of Colorado,, entitled "An Act ��l:b a s,and s; aria to regulate the q g Township 3 North, Range 6g g printing of legal west of We 3W P.M. u Sections 6,7,17, 1g, 19, M 21, 22, notices and advertisements, and 27,7s,n,3o,al,re,a3 and3�� persmnt re Seelfon 3$-1.202. amendments thereto; that the notice he Service Plan, ma not be a rroved,B ape hum o�rjecCurg to of which the annexed is a printed t service Plan and argued by the owners of seeable real end copy taken from said newspaper, was more than wMch equals more tnan,[dolt percent of the published in said newspaper, and in total valuation or assessment of pall taxable real, and peraonai the regular and entire issue of property to be included in the District,is filed with the Board of every number thereof , Cowl Commissionersno later than ten days prim to the hearing, unless such pprot,erty has been e03 unid,b)• lDe Board of,Comr)i once a week for � Cmunrssronen under Secum 3'1.1- 203 (3.5), CRS. Pro erl• owners successive weeks; that Shcd notice seeking exclusion of�hcir,prgerll' ma' also file a Petition for was so published in said newspaper exclusion x'iW the Commrasiom s no Iater Wan ten days prior to tree proper and not in any supplement hearingg. IE the Serv,;c'e Flan is approved lip thereof , and that the first the Conmrssioners, We uelumen will petition the Court �or ,an publication of said notice dS electron on the ream of[ornratron. Pursamt Loa Sean^ 37.1.305 (3), aforesaid, was on the CRS, the owner of real properly wiWm the proposed Distract may then,[Bc a petition with the ((�� G pithin Court N and for Weld day of I`� 0/1..1 ', 19 , Compety statinngg reeaons wtu' said pxrct,e^rt3 oulFosacd Drstnciaand exel dettiedr� Brat such property bo and the last on the aS day of excluded inerefrom.,Such Lett ion shall,be duly verified ma shall describe the property sought to be 6\e‘1W"'" � d. The District Court will hear seta exclude and all oDiiecuons thereto al li shoe of the hearing on the paterm for nether, in and shell determine whether, in the best y 4 , �/\ public interest said, properly should be excluded or vrc oiled m the propmed District. Such petition ma3' he,(Bed any time after . the yehnon for the Subscribed and swor t before oraenuauon,o the D'sUiet sEBed wiur the Dratr3ct Court, but not later than ten de33's before We da3' Eixad,for the bearing on the me this day of �u r orgamsauonal ioa. Nolfcc of (,I{- °mat Court r�aearing will be published at aB(s1ARD�e COUNTY COMNIS IOONNEERS 19_L. BY:DCONALD D.WARDEN (x Dri...�.a �!'�.<-..�.�,at„� Carol A TO THE BOARD BY: Carol 8, Harding, DATED: April g,1991 PUB LISHED: 1s,is I 11, 13,and 7_ in 1991 the New New_s_ — __-- .mil s M,y C�tmmission Pxni-P;�.�L".Orrh tr,t402 �''] AFFIDAVIT COUNTY OF BOULDER ) ) ss STATE OF COLORADO ) I, Joanna L. Macy, first being duly sworn under oath, depose and state the fallowing: 1 . I am employed by the law firm of Grant, Bernard, Lyons & Gaddis, P.C. , and in that capacity I obtained a computer printout from the Weld and Boulder County Assessors which listed all of the property owners within the boundaries of the proposed Longs Peak Water District. 2. I personally caused to be mailed to each property owner (at the addresses of record with the respective assessor's offices) a postcard informing the property owner of the date, time, place and purpose of the hearings before the Board of County Commissioners for each county. 3. That pursuant to the requirements of Section 32-1-204, C.R.S. , the postcard notifications were mailed no more than thirty days in advance of the respective hearing dates and not less than twenty days prior to said hearing dates. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. �y J anna L. Macy Subscribed and sworn to before me this first day of May, 1991 . Witness my hand and official seal . My commission expires /579.92. an Notary Pu lic r EX lei 1a 47-ea r M1. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing on the issue of organization of the LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT and to consider the adequacy of the Service Plan will be held before the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County on Wednesday, May 1, 1991, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 101, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colo- rado. If approved by the Commissioners and by the electorate, the Longs Peak Water District would be a Title 32 water dis- trict. Title 32 districts have no maximum mill levy limita- tions. However, the Service Plan indicates that it will operate utilizing revenues from water sales and not from pro- perty taxes. Information regarding this hearing, the exact boundaries of the District and the Service Plan is available at the office of the Department of Planning Services, Room 342, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, telephone 356-4000, Ext. 4400. A copy of the Plan is also available for inspection at Longs Peak Water Association's office. 91.0389 AFFIDAVIT �t EXHIBIT COUNTY OF BOULDER ) .—�--- ss. 9/, 2U STATE OF COLORADO ) I, KEN ROLLIN, first being duly sworn under oath, depose and state the following: 1. I am a registered professional engineer and a shareholder in the firm of Rocky Mountain Consultants, Inc. , which serves as consulting engineer to the Longs Peak Water Association. I have served as Longs Peak's engineer for a period of 14 years and I am very familiar with its plant, system, operations and customers. Furthermore, I am a resident of the area adjacent to the proposed District and therefore I am familiar with the service area. 2. Regarding the issue of need for organized service in the area, the Association currently has 708 customers (residences, commercial buildings, and agricultural users) . These customers will be transferred to the newly formed District. Therefore, there is a definite need for organized service in the area as demonstrated by these 708 customers. Furthermore, there are approximately 20 residences in the proposed service area which are on individual wells or haul water for cisterns. I feel that most of these will be required to hook onto public water supplies in the next few years in the interest of public health due to ground water pollution. 3. Regarding the issue of inadequate existing service for present and protected needs, the Association is facing a long-range problem of continuing to provide adequate service to its members for many reasons. From an operational standpoint, it is becoming difficult to obtain easements from landowners. The Association does not have condemnation powers and therefore when a landowner refuses to grant an easement for water lines to service his neighbors, the Association faces long delays while it conducts lengthy negotiations. As a district, the lines could be placed into the public rights of way as a statutory right. Also, the District will have the power of eminent domain. Furthermore, the Association almost lost its tax exempt status several years ago. This would have created a tremendous financial burden on the members. Also, the Company has unlimited liability exposure in the event of backflow pollution (cross connections) whereas a district would be protected by the Governmental Immunity Act which caps the limits of liability. A district can take certain measures to protect its raw water supply from certain activities which may cause pollution or contamination or the take-over by other public entities. The Association lacks such powers because it is not a public entity. Simply put, from an operational standpoint, the Association is facing many difficult issues which it lacks the legal ability to address. This may create a real situation whereby it may be questionable whether it can continue to provide adequate service in the future. 4. Regarding the issue of the ability of other entities to provide water service to the proposed area on a comparable basis and within a reasonable time, the City of Longmont is certainly nearby and its concerns have been addressed in the agreement between the two parties. However, from an engineering standpoint, the City cannot readily and economically provide water service in the service area without a massive construction project. It would not be feasible for the City 910,131 to service all of the Association's current customers because of the lack of density. The line extension costs would be prohibitive. Therefore, it is my professional opinion that the City of Longmont can not provide water service to the proposed service area of the District on a comparable basis and within a reasonable time. 5. Regarding the issue of compatible service standards, it is my professional opinion that the District' s proposed standards are compatible with those of the City, with minor differences due to the nature of the respective entities. The City' s line size requirements, for instance, are geared for high density development and use, whereas the proposed District standards are for less density and therefore call for smaller sized lines. However, this issue has been addressed in the Agreement between the two entities. 6. In 1981 the Paul Kugel Water Treatment Plant became operational and was placed into use. The major factor in planning the size and capacity of the plant was the comprehensive plan of Boulder County and its counterpart in Weld County. In other words, the plant was not designed or sized for high level urban density in the next twenty years, but rather was designed for the type of rural residential development which is allowed by both counties under current zoning and land use regulations. Using projections of rural growth, a new plant (or major plant expansion) should not be needed for the next 15-18 years. Therefore, the District should be able to continue to provide efficient and economical service to its customers at reasonable rates without the additional burden of heavy debt service in the foreseeable future. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Ken Rollin, P.E. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2/sr-day of i}�,ei/ , 1991 . Witness my hand and official seal . My commission expires: J—/7— X_� .. Y Public �. . .�: �'/ 2 �%'• , nT ' *' �� w r tRl.\O lS if ola\nii lYnv.W 2 9.1,C389 EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT COUNTY OF BOULDER ) 61/—20 ) ss STATE OF COLORADO ) I, VERNON PEPPLER, first being sworn under oath, depose and state the following: 1. I am a life-time resident of the area served by Longs Peak Water Associa- tion and have been a member of the Association since 1960. I have served on the Association's Board of Directors since 1961 and I have served as Chairman of the Board of Directors and President of the Association since 1981 . I also serve on the Board of Directors of the St. Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District. I am the Association 's representative on the Joint Water Users ' Task Force. Because of these affiliations, and because of my agricultural background, I am very familiar with the current water issues of northern Colorado and the Front Range. 2. Regarding the reasons for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District, the Association lacks parity with other governmental entities. Historically, each municipality and populated area has had an independent water treatment and delivery system. However, with the federally mandated water quality issues and the regional issues of raw water availability, we are seeing these municipalities and other water providers coming together to address issues of mutual concern. For instance, the City of Longmont, Left Hand Water District, and the Association have formed a water users task force to periodically discuss issues of mutual concern. Because the Two Forks project has been shelved, and because a lot of the smaller communities in northern Colorado use ground water which is becoming polluted, there is renewed competition for good water supplies: both raw water rights and treatment facilities. As a private association, the Longs Peak Water Association is at a disadvantage because it is not a governmental entity. It can not enter into intergovernmental agreements and can not join water authorities to solve regional problems. Also, because its members ultimately control major issues through the annual meeting process, some major decisions can be influenced by outsiders. 3. Regarding the issue of need for governmental attributes, the biggest issue is to protect our water rights and water plant from being "raided" by other water providers through condemnation or through "corporate takeover bids" such as was attempted by PSC and the Union REA several years ago. Also, in this modern era, people are more familiar with the secret ballot than with the corporate proxy vote. 4. For these and numerous other reasons, it is clear that the Association must now evolve into a public utility rather than remain as a private association. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. � / —c�✓G� �Vernoneppr S+Ksi ibex pc! sworn to before me this ,-ac/ day of April , 1991 . fitness my.haTO- and official seal . - ply commissiontxpires: Pu tc _ AFFIDAVIT COUNTY OF BOULDER ) ) ss. STATE OF COLORADO ) I, DEBRA BOENNIGHAUSEN, first being duly sworn under oath, depose and state the following: 1 . I am a Certified Public Accountant licensed to practice within the State of Colorado. I am an associate with the accounting firm of Lambert & Associates, 717 5th Avenue, Longmont, Colorado 80501 . Our firm has served as auditors for the Longs Peak Water Association for five years. 2. I am well familiar with the financial books and records of the Longs Peak Water Association. 3. In conjunction with the submission of the service plan for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District I prepared certain financial projections which are included in the service plan as Exhibit A, pages 23-28. 4. These forecasted statements of income and retained earnings, cash flow, and balance sheets for the years 1991 , 1992, and 1993 demonstrate that the District, as successor in interest to the Longs Peak Water Association, would be capable of providing economical service to the area within its boundaries and would have the financial ability to discharge the existing indebtedness of the Association. 5. It is my professional opinion that the proposed District would be capable of providing economical service to the area within its boundaries and would have the financial ability to discharge the small existing indebtedness of the Association. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. ,/ K ad& /C4.44.4:1�(/ Cell" Debra Boennighausen, C.P.A. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 22,-cl day of April , 1991 . Witness my hand and official seal . My commission expires: 31 /2- 9S q. ' -` 0t• Puy lc i w i B - 1 T 2,7 2O 91,0389 1 , GRANT, BERNARD v 1991 I LYONS & GADDIS r`. d1Nff,L F.BERNARD - A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION RICHARD N.LYONS,❑ ATTORNEYS AT L A W CI,op hfiV $370"]4,1-i5° JEFFREY 1.KAHN '1 ➢f R:w X.o, g H.WILLIAM SIMS,JR. . JOHN W GADDIS I . ..'. 515 K@1B4RK STREET DENVER OFFICE THOMAS 1.OVE?RION POST OFFICE BOX 478 1801 YORK STREET SUZAN a FRI'ICHEL LONGMONT, COLORADO 80502-0478 DENVER,COLORADO 80206 STEVEN L.SNYDER 303-776-9900 METRO 571-5506 FAX 772-6105 303-399-1122 April 24, 1991 Mr. Rod Allison Department of Planning Services 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Longs Peak Water District Dear Mr. Allison: I have reviewed the comments of the Town of Mead as expressed by Mr. Gary West in his letter to you dated April 17, 1991. I would like to respond in inverse order to his three concerns. First, the pending legislation regarding special districts is designed to curb the abuses which have occurred from developers forming taxing districts in non-developed areas and issuing junk bonds to pay for the utility infrastructures. The developers (and the junk bond holders) are then totally dependent upon land sales and development to repay the debt. If, as happened in Colorado in the last decade, the real estate market declines, the bonds are unable to be paid. Pending legislation is addressing this issue. However, the Longs Peak Water District would not be a developer district. It would replace the Longs Peak Water Association which has been in existence for over thirty years. It already has 708 customers whose monthly payments are sufficient to pay the very small remaining debt. Please refer to the service plan for a financial analysis. Simply put, the Association is not dependent upon growth and development to pay its bills. As the successor in interest to the District, it too will not be dependent upon speculative land sales to be successful . Second, I found it interesting that the Town is "philosophically opposed" to special districts. The Town has signed a water agreement with the Little Thompson Water District which supplies the Town with potable water, a copy of which is enclosed. If it were not for that water district, the Town would not have a dependable source of quality drinking water. Finally, the Association/District is not opposed to entering into an agreement with the Town. However, the Association objects to Mr. West's request that the process be delayed pending negotiation and execution of such an agreement. The Town currently has an agreement with Little Tom and when the Town annexes property to be developed, that agreement addresses the provision of water service. Please check your map and you will notice that the Town is completely surrounded by Little Tom, not Longs Peak. 9.1.03S1 GRANT, BERNARD LYONS Bic GADDIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW Mr. Rod Allison April 24, 1991 Page 2 What Mr. West is objecting to is that the Town has been approached by developers who are unwilling to pay for the installation of water lines to service their proposed development. They therefore have now approached the Town regarding a flag pole annexation. The Association (and the District if formed) stands ready, willing and able to service the proposed development if the developer will pay for the cost of line extension and upgrade. The Association is not attempting to thwart the Town's flag pole annexations. If new flag pole annexations can be better serviced by Little Tom, I am confident that an intergovernmental agreement can be negotiated. However, I do not see this as a reason for delaying the formation process. I might add that the Association does not have "boundaries" per se and that the District will have boundaries. If you recall , one of the concerns of the Weld County Planning Commission was that the boundaries would not cause any "no man's land. " By making Longs Peak's boundaries adjacent to Little Tom's, there would be no unservicable territory. The only issue becomes one of money to pay for the line extensions. In conclusion, Longs Peak Water District, if formed, would not be opposed to the negotiation of a signed agreement with the Town or with Little Tom. Very truly yours, GRAN NARD, LYONS & GADDIS, P ionaj r ation Richard N. Lyons, II Enclosure cc: Longs Peak Water Association Town of Mead _- , 9 ead P.O. Box 626 Mead, Colorado 80542 { Mead.'A Little Tnwn (3O3) 535-4477 1 I �_ — With a Big Future llApril 17, 1991 Department of Planning Services Weld County,Colorado 915 10th Street Greeley,CO 80631 RE: Longs Peak Service Plan. Gentlemen: The Town apologizes for the delay in responding to the request to review this proposed special district. The Board did not have a meeting scheduled in which to review the proposal until their April Board meeting. The Town is in the process of updating its comprehensive plan to include the areas adjacent to its present boundaries and the I-25 corridor into its future growth area. Several area land owners have approached the town for annexation in the past 3-4 years,primarily because of the unavailability of water from the Association. At our May 1991 meeting,we expect to receive another petition for annexation of land in the Association's proposed service area,again, primarily because water is not available from the Association at a reasonable cost. It is for this reason that Mead requests that an appropriate annexation and service agreement with the Town be developed prior to approval of the district boundaries as proposed. Our second objection is philosophical in nature. As a municipality,we are concerned with the proliferation of Title 32 Special Districts. While a Title 32 District may serve a useful short-term purpose in providing urban services to non-urban areas,it is very difficult to dissolve a special district as a municipality adsorbs the areas through annexation. Our third objection is that major legislation affecting Title 32 Districts is currently being considered in the State Legislature. We do not feel it appropriate for the Longs Peak District to be created until after the effective date of this legislation. We request that our objections be noted in the official record and that we be advised of your hearing schedule. THE TO OF WAD,. LORADO y __ J • e Gary !' i ' , MC, Cir ider City Manager '' A geld Ch vinwirirq nii SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION April 16, 1991 Page 2 The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Richard Kimmel - yes; Ann Garrison - yes; Don Feldhaus - yes; Shirley Camenisch - yes; Jean Hoffman - yes; Judy Yamaguchi - yes; Bud Clemons - yes; Jerry Kiefer - yes. Motion carried unanimously. APPLICANT: Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Dick Lyons REQUEST: To process a service plan pursuant to the provisions of the Special District Control Act, Section 32.1.201 C.R.S. for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District. Dick Lyons, Attorney, representative for Longs Peak Water Association, explained that this request is for approval of the proposed service plan, for submittal to the voters of the area, to form the Longs Peak Water District. What they are attempting is simply to convert a private water domestic company into a public utility. Jerry Kiefer asked if the district will be formed geographically covering the present users and then as these users go on a different system will they be taken out of the district. Will geographical boundaries change as those entities leave so that if there would be a need in the future for any type of taxation, that taxation would only affect those that are users? Dick Lyons said that this was one of the concerns of the City of Longmont, that property owners who were subject to taxation were receiving no inducement to come into the city because they would be doubling tax for the same service. This will be an entity that is capable of property-taxation but will not be utilitizing taxation. It operates solely on revenues._-To-assure the City and Longs Peak customers of that fact it has been written into the service plan that they=are _tied-to revenue_as.. -9=-_ opposed to property tax- . If this .changes it_will:require_a__complete-rehearing process to implement. - Ann Garrison said that she understood there were several major water providers in the south part of Weld County. She wanted to know if Longs Peak would be working with the other providers in the future to co-ordinate provisions of water. Is there currently any type of agreement between the water providers. Dick Lyons said that there was currently no agreement.-- - - - • - Bud Clemons wanted to know necessary requirements-_to=.annex nto _the .district. - - If there were a need for services -outside-_of__the_district;- how=difficult—would_ -- it be for a private owner to - include his _land within:,the confines of.:,the __- district. Dick Lyons: explained :that _becauser-n£ithe configuration rof `the _- boundaries of the existing--districts,--Longs-Peak would: he:.filling=the gap_andr.: will completely fill in-Weld County. Everyone-is-'covered. x=chard Kimmel- moved: that-.-Longsm-Peaks Waterer ssociation-v_s o ickAlyons - -- process a service plan pursuant to the provisions :of the .Special-District Control=: - Act,_Section 32-1-201 C-.R.S. ;-_for the formation of the_Longs Peak-Water District - - be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with_the Planning Commissions.' recommendation for approval. Motion seconded by Jean Hoffman. 911.33,812 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION April 16, 1991 Page 3 The Chairman asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Richard Kimmel - yes; Ann Garrison - yes; Don Feldhaus - yes; Shirley Camenisch - yes; Jean Hoffman - yes; Judy Yamaguchi - yes; Bud Clemons - yes; Jerry Kiefer - yes. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NUMBER: Z-459 APPLICANT: Eastman Kodak, Inc. , c/o Nicholas Yobbagy REQUEST: A Change of Zone from A (Agricultural) and R-5 (Mobile Home Residential) to I-1 (Industrial) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A parcel of land located in part of Sections 26, 35, and 36, all in T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Approximately 1/8 mile southeast of the Town of Windsor, south of and adjacent to Weld County Road 66, and west of and adjacent to Weld County Road 23. Larry Lee, representative for Eastman Kodak, Inc. opened the floor for questions from the Planning Commission members. Jerry Kiefer asked if this change of zone proposal would affect the Poudre River trail tie in between Greeley and Fort Collins. Larry replied that he was unaware of any plans for the Poudre River Trail. Jerry Kiefer asked Rod Allison if this was more than a hope of the people of the area. . Rod, Allison stated, to his knowledge, the City of Greeley had no specific request on file for a trail _. easement. He explained that the easements on _both banks _of_the river would remain agricultural. Ann Garrison asked if the County was involved at all with plans for the trail. Rod Allison explained that' the County has been-involved ' '- -' since the re-development of the Comprehensive Plan in 1987, where policies are stated to look at projects when they do come in as it relates to the trail but it will be in co-ordination with the City of Greeley and any other towns around the Poudre River that may be designatingspecific trail easements.- --- The Chairman asked if there was-anyone-in the audience who would like to speak for or against the application. Jean Hoffman moved Case Numbers-.459._for. a-Changezof Zone from A (Agricultural)- _....• _ - and R-5 (Mobile Home Residential) :to=I--1-.{Industrial}_be forwarded-to-the Board ' of County Commissioners with the: Planning_Commissions'fcrecommendation__for --_-_ approval. Motion seconded by Bud [Clemons — _•__- —• __ --- ,. The Chairman asked the".secretary. .to_poll. the members of the Planning;Commission = -: for_.their decision._. Richard Kimmel,- .yes; Ann-Garrison- yes.,.- Don-TFeldhaus-- - VAS �- _ abstain; Shirley-Camenisch .--yes;: ,Jean Hoffman..:-: yes; Judy Yamaguchi - yes;: Bud - Clemons -. yes; Jerry Kiefer yes:—Motion carried 91.0;3 S��) RESOLUTION OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING 'COMMISSION' . - RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNEL- hMISSI0NERS Moved by Richard Kimmel that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it therefore Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Dick Lyons NAME: Mr. Dick Lyons, Esq. ADDRESS: Grant, Bernard, Lyons, and Gaddis P.O. Box 978 Longmont, CO 80502-0978 REQUEST: To process a service plan pursuant to the provisions of the "Special District Control Act" , Section 32-1-201, C.R.S. , for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that part of Section 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons: 1. The Department of Planning Services' staff recommends the request for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District be approved based upon the application meeting the review criteria of Section 32-1-203, C.R.S. There appears to be sufficient existing and projected need for the organized water service in the proposed District' s service area as demonstrated by the Association' s existing members and customers. Although the existing service by the Association is adequate, the Association's structure is inadequate for the projected needs of the area because of the higher costs of operation as a non-profit corporation and the inability to protect its assets (water rights, tangible property, and customer service contracts) from encroachment by other entities. The proposed District is functionally capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the proposed service area. 07 An T f„il RESOLUTION, LONGS PEAK WATER ASSOCIATION Page 2 The area to be included in the proposed District has the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. The formation of the District is in substantial compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. The District boundaries would be located in the I-25 Mixed Used Development (I-25 M.U.D) area and Urban Growth Boundary (U.G.B. ) area as identified by the comprehensive Plan. Ordinarily, a municipality is in a position to plan for expansion of existing facilities and services. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, alternative facilities and service systems may be used for urban type development within the I-25 M.U.D. and U.G.B. areas. The proposal appears to be in compliance with all county, regional, and state water quality management plans. It appears the facility and service standards are in compliance with the standards of the City of Longmont, Town of Mead, and Town of Frederick. It appears the creation of the proposed Special District will be in the best interests of the area to be served. This recommendation is based in part, upon a review of the submitted application materials, other relevant information regarding the request, and the responses of referral entities. The Planning Commission's recommendation for approval is conditional upon representatives of the City of Longmont and the Long Peak Water Association signing the "Agreement Regarding the Formation of the Water District" . This agreement shall be signed prior to filing a petition with District Court for the organization of the special district. A copy of the signed agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services' staff and District Court representatives. CA-A �L'itti RESOLUTION, LONGS PEAK WATER ASSOCIATION Page 3 Motion seconded by Jean Hoffman. VOTE: For Passage Against Passage Richard Kimmel Ann Garrison Shirley Camenisch Jean Hoffman Don Feldhaus Judy Yamaguchi Bud Clemons Jerry Kiefer The Chairman declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the proposed amendments to the Board of County Commissioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Sharyn Ruff, Recording Secretary of 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 April 17, 1991. Dated the 17 of April, 1991 C� 1 S aryn F. Ruff Secretary / - Z INVENTORY OF ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION Case Number i?.012.f ®eLK SCrt/r cE /141,.., Submitted or Prepared —42 COn,p— (r4, r c_'h Prior to Hearing at Hearing 1. Application Pages 10)- 2. Applicant plat(s) page(s) 3 3. DPS Referral Summary Sheet 4. DPS Recommendation v 5. DPS Surrounding Property Owner's Mailing List• ✓ 6. DPS Mineral Owner' s Mailing List ✓ 7. DPS Maps Prepared by Planning Technician 8. DPS Notice of Hearing 9. DPS Case File Summary Sheet ✓ 10. DPS Field Check ✓ 11. memo - Con /Ivy tN— �"M-- fir.1 f; /If/ - 12.men,0 - Heit/711- r fir / r, 1491 ter- . 13. Memo - /ylea1 lefirkr I�rifi- - / 27 /551- 705.4- v 14.14-1rr - Lsiviown+_ ‘; /fg/ 2/`7-0. ✓ 15.p7mo - N,G,W;G, 7, - /ill (P- • 17./ner~•v - f^A1��k" -F, Ce ' "lard , 'Yu / ' l� ✓ 18.AO"' - - rrwr/ Lc- lggl- l� ✓ 19./npro V/'airu& t • 20. v 21. 1rlrn 4 ; atwl y-Corr-u,viudibta - 44 /5 /591 ' //e — I hereby certify that the 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 . /176.17/a ` Current Planner. STATE OF COLORADO ) • COUNTY OF WELD ) 0.94k1 elz84‘AYII�.GNBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS I() day of c_s J { (/ ) 19(t . _ ' tstAL" • '' `+ p �Ci � t ' • _ 0 �) 6 rrmmicCirr7 P ;3. .mr �' x.,r..• n 199 5 ....ri �:,y Z - Z INVENTORY OF ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION Case Number ,2en,f / g /� Submitted or Prepared be c , Prior to Nearing at Nearing 1. Application Pages 2. Applicant plat(s) page(s) 3. DPS Referral Summary Sheet 4. DPS Recommendation 5. DPS Surrounding Property Owner's Mailing List • • 6. DPS Mineral Owner's Mailing List 7. DPS Maps Prepared by Planning Technician 8. DPS Notice of Hearing 9. DPS Case File Summary Sheet 10. DPS Field Check 22, _kr• /j)emd (du y Enrr�e �/ ra - i� '_ #741-4.4_ 2.4, m41 Z� w•Tor+l-ov.J Fire Clef ` /r, ) f(/45� ✓ 2 c y4.Leti- fig ®r I Y, 159 f - 2 nto Pt 2C - Mt� A'pt, / 17 — �/�_ oaf,-t �An:4 itr 17. 61:11. ✓ 5 /0/ .11 y ' 1 19. 1'z'- � p u� ��JCh / - ' 20. 21. I hereby certify that the 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 . /1/4-/ Curre it Planner STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF WELD ) SMilig)� AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS re441 day of r ArC J[ 1/�_ 19g( . 04 S ALE•46 °i 'tct % t ,` • Yl 7� My commissios? es?sres Oct 45. 1921 � -'_` `. ?SI 46to MEMORAnDum vine To Da Board April 8, 1991 le COLORADO From Carol Harding, Deputy Clerk to the Board Hearing Date for Longs Peak Water District Subject The Service Plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District has been submitted to this office, along with the required fee of $500.00. It is recommended that the Board set the hearing date as May 1, 1991, at 10:00 a.m. i v frn/1'h O tity`i4). ti STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT Department of Local Affairs �.ov ootoq Harold A. Knott, Director a♦l�® q(j � ®1• i Ian* Roy Romer Governor Larry Kallenberger Executive Director NOTICE OF FILING OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICE PLAN Pursuant to CRS 32-1-202(1), the County Clerk and Recorder, on behalf of the County Board of Commissioners, shall notify the Division of Local Government within five days after the filing of a service plan of a proposed special district. Please provide the following information and return this form to the Division of Local Government. LONGSPEAK WATER DISTRICT APRIL 3, 1991 Name of Proposed District Filing Date WATER MAY 1, 1991 Type of District Proposed Date of Hearing 10:00 A.M. WELD COUNTY CENTENNIAL CENTER Time of Hearing Location of Hearing RICHARD N. LYONS, II BY JOANNA L. MACY (303) 776-9900 Contact Person Filing Service Plan Phone WELD County Receiving Service Plan ea-44 APRIL 8, 1991 Clerk to the 24-parDate Form DLG-60 Rev. 3/91 01).3389 131/3 Sherman Street, Room 521, Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-2156 FAX (303) 866-2251 iM/1 DRUG. �} 1" 2110. ��4 h -0 i-bh STATE OF COLORADO ) ) COUNTY OF WELD ) CERTIFICATE OF REPORTING IN RE THE ORGANIZATION OF )TO DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT LONGS PEAK WATER DISTRICT, ) WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ) I, DON D. WARDEN, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, Weld County, State of Colorado, do hereby certify that within five days of the filing of the Service Plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District, I reported, on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, to the Division of Local Government in the Department of Local Affairs, the name and type of the proposed special district for which the Service Plan had been filed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of the County this c) " day of April , 1//991 . �� Cler t� oar of County Commissioners BY: ! LZ , , 4.��9h,--' Z Deputy Clerk to the Board Er.tt,381 NOTICE OF HEARING Docket No. 91-20 PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that there was filed with the County Clerk and Recorder of Weld County, Colorado, a Service Plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The Service Plan is now on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, Third Floor, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado, and is available for public inspection between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. , Monday through Friday. A copy is also available for inspection in the office of Longs Peak Water Association, 9875 Vermillion Road, Longmont, Colorado 80501. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that by, Order of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, a public hearing on said Service Plan and related documents will be held at the County Commissioners Hearing Room on the First Floor, Centennial Building, Greeley, Colorado, at 10:00 o'clock A.M. on Wednesday, the 1st day of May, 1991 . The purpose of the hearing shall be to consider the adequacy of the Service Plan of the proposed Longs Peak Water District and to form a basis for adopting a Resolution approving, conditionally approving, or disapproving the Service Plan. The proposed Longs Peak Water District is located within Boulder and Weld Counties, Colorado. That portion located within Weld County is generally described as follows: Township 2 North. Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6; and Township 3 North. Range 68 West of the 6th P.M. Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34 Pursuant to Section 32-1-202, C.R.S. , the Service Plan may not be approved if a petition objecting to the Service Plan and signed by the owners of taxable real and personal property which equals more than fifty percent of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable real and personal property to be included in the District, is filed with the Board of County Commissioners no later than ten days prior to the hearing, unless such property has been excluded by the Board of County Commissioners under Section 32-1-203 (3.5) , C.R.S. Property owners seeking exclusion of their property may also file a petition for exclusion with the Commissioners no later than ten days prior to the hearing. If the service plan is approved by the Commissioners, the petitioners will petition the Court for an election on the issue of formation. Pursuant to Section 32-1-305(3) , C.R.S. , the owner of real property within the proposed District may then file a petition with the District Court in and for Weld County, stating reasons why said property should not be included within the proposed District and requesting that such property be excluded therefrom. Such petition shall be duly verified and shall describe the property sought to be excluded. 91 0389 The District Court will hear said petition and all objections thereto at the time of the hearing on the petition for organization and shall determine whether, in the best public interest, said property should be excluded or included in the proposed District. Such petition may be filed any time after the petition for the organization of the District is filed with the District Court, but not later than ten days before the day fixed for the hearing on the organizational petition. Notice of that Court hearing will be published at a later date. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY COLORADO BY: lL CLO' T BO RD DATED: April 8, 1991 BY: AA, 70.41, PUBLISHED: Deputy Clerk to the Board ,.K GRANT, BERNARD WALLACE H.GRANT LYONS & CADDIS DANIEL F.BERNARD A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION RICHARD N.LYONS R ATTORNEYS AT L A W JEFFREY A KAHN H.Will TAM SIMS,1R. 515 IGMBARK STREET DENVER OFFICE JOHN W.GADDIS POST OFFICE BOX 478 1801 YORK STREET THOMAS 1.OVERTON SU'I.AN D.FRTTCHEL LONGMONT,COLORADO 80502-0478 DENVER COLORADO 80206 STEVEN L.SNYDER 303-776-9900 METRO 571-5506 FAX 772-6105 303-393822 April 2, 1991 Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners County of Weld 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80632 Re: Longs Peak Water District Enclosed for filing is the service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. Also enclosed are the following: * A check in the amount of $500 as the processing fee. * A certificate of reporting the filing to the Division of Local Government. * A notice of the hearing to be held before the County Commissioners. This notice must be published three times in a newspaper of general circulation within the proposed district. This newspaper would be the Longmont Daily Times Call . The first publication must be no later than twenty days prior to the hearing which is scheduled for May 1, 1991. An affidavit of publication from the newspaper will be required. A copy of the service plan should be retained in your office and made available for inspection by the public. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, GRANT, BERNARD, LYONS & GADDIS aPrroofeesssional Corporation (�G� �i " . ��1�_,7'_ Ric ar N. Lyons, Il RNL:jIm (/ 910331 EP \SEP«E_E..00E 910253 GRANT, BERNARD LYONS & GADDIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOANNA L. MACY Legal Assistant 515 KGTBARK STREET POST OFFICE BOX 978 LONGMONT,COLORADO 80502-0978 303-7749900 METRO 571-5508 FAX 772-6105 pt Department of Local Affairs t • as Division o/Local Government 1313 Sherman St.,Room 521 Susanna Lienhard Denver,Colorado 8O2O3 Administrative Officer Telephone:(3O3)888-2156 Date: April 16, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Dick Lyons NAME: Mr. Dick Lyons, Esq. ADDRESS: Grant, Bernard, Lyons, and Gaddis P.O. Box 978 Longmont, CO 80502-0978 REQUEST: To process a service plan pursuant to the provisions of the "Special District Control Act", Section 32-1-201, C.R.S. , for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that part of Section 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado 1. The Department of Planning Services' staff recommends the request for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District be approved based upon the application meeting the review criteria of Section 32-1-203, C.R.S. There appears to be sufficient existing and projected need for the organized water service in the proposed District's service area as demonstrated by the Association's existing members and customers. Although the existing service by the Association is adequate, the Association's structure is inadequate for the projected needs of the area because of the higher costs of operation as a non-profit corporation and the inability to protect its assets (water rights, tangible property, and customer service contracts) from encroachment by other entities. The proposed District is functionally capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the proposed service area. The area to be included in the proposed District has the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. 911:113S1 RECOMMENDATION, LONGS PEAK WATER ASSOCIATION Page 2 The formation of the District is in substantial compliance with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. The District boundaries would be located in the 1- 25 Mixed Used Development (I-25 M.U.D) area and Urban Growth Boundary (U.G.B.) area as identified by the comprehensive Plan. Ordinarily, a municipality is in a position to plan for expansion of existing facilities and services. In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, alternative facilities and service systems may be used for urban type development within the I-25 M.U.D. and U.G.B. areas. The proposal appears to be in compliance with all county, regional, and state water quality management plans. It appears the facility and service standards are in compliance with the standards of the City of Longmont, Town of Mead, and Town of Frederick. It appears the creation of the proposed Special District will be in the best interests of the area to be served. This recommendation is based in part, upon a review of the submitted application materials, other relevant information regarding the request, and the responses of referral entities. The Department of Planning Services' staff recommendation for approval is conditional upon representatives of the City of Longmont and the Longs Peak Water Association signing the "Agreement Regarding the Formation of the Water District" . This agreement shall be signed prior to filing a petition with District Court for the organization of the special district. A copy of the signed agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services' staff and District Court representatives. 9103:31 -..� DREW SOP TINGA (� WELD COL : Y ENGINEERING DEFT /. If 4 fe, 93 N 11Tf1 AVLNUE GREELEY� CO 8�t6.=, _. ARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)3564000,EXT.4400 91510th STREET /'__ GREELEYi En ,COLORA0060631 ri O r-rr ,.. r f,.. _ I i.ril 3t1 8 1991 COLORADO l March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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.x 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: \ le fer to the enclosed letter. �Signed: " ��.L�� \r Agency: enc•• '; K n QJ"�' i ti Date: ¢ t5 ( 91 .91.033 1 1 WES POI- EF'S/WC, t (� 1517 16"I H AVENUE COURT GREELEY, CO 8t;6'i ff a , IFIRM \ re DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 y: Ot COLORADO n `, � I i-°F 0 6 19S1 _ E: I . March 18, 1991 t - - l Ll `\�c Lp` CASE NUMBER: Longs-renaue-rv-rct-r3an TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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, ?0 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. refer to the enclosed letter. Signed: Vv ,, foi& Agency, L V V` I/lop-sr Date: S(At l._ f LAND-USE APPLICATION SUMMARY SHEET Date: April 9, 1991 NAME: Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Dick Lyons ADDRESS: Dick Lyons, Esq. Grant, Bernard, Lyons & Gaddis P.O. Box 978 Longmont, CO 80502-0978 REQUEST: To process a service plan pursuant to Section 32-1-201, C.R.S. , for the formation of the Longs Peak Water District. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: Refer to map in Service Plan application. PLANNING COMMISSION FUNCTION: To make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners in accordance with the service plan criteria of the "Special District Control Act" , Section 32-1-203, C.R.S. A copy of the criteria for review is attached to this summary sheet. 01.02)S1) § 32-1-202 SPECIAL DISTRICTS (3) Each service plan filed shall be accompanied by a processing fee set by the board of county commissioners not to exceed two hundred dollars, which shall be deposited into the county general fund. Such processing fee shall be sufficient to cover the costs related to the hearing prescribed by section 32-1-204, including the costs of notice, publication, and recording of testimo- ny. (4) In the case of a proposed hospital district, submission to the board of county commissioners by the petitioners of a certified copy of an approved certificate of public necessity issued by the health facilities review council of the department of health shall constitute compliance with subsection (2) of this section. (Repealed and reenacted Laws 1981, H.B.1320, § 1. Laws 1982, S.B.44,§ 1; Laws 1985, H.B.1020, §§ 1, 2, 3; Laws 1985, S.B.12, § 1; Laws 1986, H.B.1003, § 13.) Library References Municipal Corporations 4=12(2), (3). WESTLAW Topic No. 268. C.J.S. Municipal Corporations§§ 17, 20. Notes of Decisions Necessity for service plan 1 Upper Bear Creek Sanitation Dist. v. Board of County Com'rs of County of Bear Creek, 1986, _ 715 P.2d 799. I. Necessity for service plan _ -- Organizers of a proposed special district A water district may not provide domestic must submit a service plan to the relevant water to its inhabitants except pursuant to a board of county commissioners and any peti• service plan which has been approved by court- lion for organization must be supported by a ty board of commissioners and, with respect to resolution of that board approving the service an original service plan, by the district court. plan; those requirements apply also to any Millis v. Board of County Com'rs of Larimer type of modification requiring board approval. County, 1981, 626 P.2d 652. § 32-1-203. Action on service plan—criteria (1) The board of county commissioners of each county which has territory included within the proposed special district, other than a proposed special district which is contained entirely within the boundaries of a municipality, shall constitute the approving authority under this part 2 and shall review any service plan filed by the petitioners of any proposed special district. With reference to the review of any service plan, the board of county commission- ers has the following authority: (a) To approve without condition or modification the service plan sub- mitted; (b) To disapprove the service plan submitted; (c) To conditionally approve the service plan subject to the submission of additional information relating to or the modification of the proposed service plan. (2) The board of county commissioners shall disapprove the service plan unless evidence satisfactory to the board of each of the following is presented: (a) There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized service in the area to be serviced by the proposed special district; 20 8103 art, 1 1 i SPECIAL DISTRICT PROVISIONS § 32-1-203 (b) The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed special district is inadequate for present and projected needs; (c) The proposed special district is capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within its proposed boundaries; (d) The area to be included in the proposed special district has, or will have, the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. (2.5) The board of county commissioners may disapprove the service plan if evidence satisfactory to the board of any of the following, at the discretion of the board, is not presented: (a) Adequate service is not, or will not be, available to the area through the county, other existing municipal or quasi-municipal corporations, including existing special districts, within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis; (b) The facility and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facility and service standards of each county within which the proposed special district is to be located and each municipality which is an interested party under section 32-1-204(1); (c) The proposal is in substantial compliance with a master plan adopted pursuant to section 30-28-106, C.R.S.; (d) The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted county, regional, or state long-range water quality management plan for the area; (e) The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served. (3) The board of county commissioners may conditionally approve the service plan of a proposed special district upon satisfactory evidence that it does not comply with one or more of the criteria enumerated in subsection (2) of this section. Final approval shall be contingent upon modification of the service plan to include such changes or additional information as shall be specifically stated in the findings of the board of county commissioners. j (3.5) The board of county commissioners may exclude territory from a proposed special district prior to approval of the service plan submitted by the petitioners of a proposed special district. The petitioners shall have the burden of proving that the exclusion of such property is not in the best interest of the proposed special district. Any person owning property in the proposed special district who requests that his property be excluded from the special district prior to approval of the service plan shall submit such request f to the board of county commissioners no later than ten days prior to the hearing held under section 32-1-204, but the board of county commissioners shall not be limited in its action with respect to exclusion of territory based upon such request. Any request for exclusion shall be acted upon before final action of the county commissioners under section 32-1-205. (4) The findings of the board of county commissioners shall be based solely upon the service plan and evidence presented at the hearing by the petition- ers, planning commission, and any interested party. 21 i § 32-1-203 SPECIAL DISTRICTS (5) In the case of a proposed hospital district, submission to the board of county commissioners by the petitioners of a certified copy of an approved certificate of public necessity issued by the health facilities review council of the department of health shall constitute compliance with subsections (2) and (2.5) of this section. (Repealed and reenacted Laws 1981, H.B.1320, § 1. Laws 1985, H.B.1020, §§ 4, 5; Laws 1985, S.B.12, § 2.) Cross References Consolidated districts, powers, see § 32-1-607. Notes of Decisions Burden of proof 3 there was no proof that a substantial number Judicial review 4 would not do so and there was competent Modification necessitating service plat 2 evidence to support board's action although Necessity for service plan 1 practicability, feasibility, reasonableness and necessity of the modified plan had been vigor- ously contested. Millis v. Board of County I. Necessity for service plan Com'rs of Larimer County, 1981, 626 P.2d 652. A water district may not provide domestic water to its inhabitants except pursuant to a 3. Burden of proof service plan which has been approved by court- Burden is on those who object to a water ty board of commissioners and,with respect to district service plan to present satisfactory avi- an original service plan, by the district court. denee at the public hearing before the board of Millis v. Board of County Com'rs of Larimer county commissioners that at least one of the County, 1981, 626 P.2d 652. ___. _.. statutory criteria for disapproval has been met. Millis v. Board of County Com'rs of Larimer 2. Modification necessitating service plan County, 1981, 626 P.2d 652. See, also, Notes of Decisions under § 32-1-207. 4. Judicial review Assuming that change from seven to nine Neither district court nor reviewing court percent in interest rate on water district bonds may substitute its judgment for that of county to finance service plan constituted a "material board of commissioners approving modifica- modification" necessitating submission of the tion to a water district service plan; reviewing change to county board of commissioners for court's function is to determine whether there approval, board approval was not abuse of is any competent evidence to support the discretion where although there was testimony board's decision. Millis v. Board of County that some district owners would not tap in Com'rs of Larimer County, 1981, 626 P.2d 652. § 32-1-204. Public hearing on service plan—procedures—decision (1) The board of county commissioners shall provide written notice of the date, time, and location of the hearing to the petitioners and the governing body of any existing municipality or special district which has levied an ad valorem tax within the next preceding tax year and which has boundaries within a radius of three miles of the proposed special district boundaries, which governmental units shall be interested parties for the purposes of this part 2. The board of county commissioners shall make publication of the date, time, location, and purpose of such hearing, the first of which shall be at least twenty days prior to the hearing date. The board of county commission- ers shall include in such notice a general description of the land contained within the boundaries of the proposed special district and information outlin- ing methods and procedures pursuant to section 32-1-305(3) concerning the filing of a petition for exclusion of territory. Such publications shall consti- tute constructive notice to the residents and property owners within the proposed special district who shall also be interested parties at the hearing. 22 .OA r '7')(1/2 REFERRAL LIST NAME: Longs Peak Water Association c/o nick Lyons REFERRALS SENT: March 18, 1991 REFERRALS TO BE RECEIVED BY: April 5, 1991 COUNTY TOWNS and CITIES Attorney Ault X Health Department Brighton Extension Service Dacono X Emergency Management Office _Eaton Sheriff's Office Erie X Engineering Evans Housing Authority X Firestone _Airport Authority _Fort Lupton Building Inspection X Frederick _Garden City STATE Gilcrest Division of Water Resources _Greeley _Geological Survey _Grover Department of Health Hudson _Highway Department _Johnstown Historical Society Keenesburg _Water Conservation Board Kersey Oil and Gas Conservation Commission La Salle _Lochbuie FIRE DISTRICTS X Longmont Ault F-1 X Mead X Berthoud F-2 Milliken _Brighton F-3 New Raymer Eaton F-4 _Nunn _Fort Lupton F-5 _Platteville Galeton F-6 Severance Hudson F-7 _Windsor Johnstown F-8 La Salle F-9 COUNTIES X Longmont F-10 Adams Milliken F-11 Boulder Nunn F-12 _Larimer Pawnee Platteville F-13 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES _Platte Valley F-14 US Army Corps of Engineers Poudre Valley F-15 _USDA-APHIS Veterinary Service Raymer _Federal Aviation Administration _Southeast Weld F-16 Federal Communication Commission Windsor/Severance F-17 Wiggins F-18 Western Hills F-20 SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS Brighton OTHER Fort Collins X Central Colo. Water Conservancy Dist. Greeley Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. Longmont X Tri-Area Planning Commission _West Adams X_ Don Warden COMMISSION/BOARD MEMBER X Vern Hammers X Left Hand Water District X North Front Range Water Quality X Little Thompson Water District Association c/o Dave Dubois X Mead Sanitation District X Central Weld County Water District X Carbon Valley Recreation Dist. X Weld County Library District X Tri-Area Ambulance District X St. Vrain Sanitation Dist X St. Vrain & Left Hand WaterVII)1.t33T4 X Northern Colorado Water Conservation Conservancy District District X Thompson Valley School District X St. Vrain School District RE-1J ..... DREW SCI MBA ? ` tbaC:L.S Cris , Y F_'PlicXE:ERING DEPT arti �:_:_ nl t t T-a a nvE_ralJE _. ARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 WI lie c:� i „ At�) . W III` � 1tk rt r� ; p �9� i COLORADO �I�_ A-4 eirspi ^9, Pb9:lt4n LnrsDfla March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan ' TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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./ 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: . ` 'le: fer to the enclosed letter. Signed:, " Agency: E_nc- ; � P u 4---- ‘ F,__ Date: 4 i'�_ ( ci l 91.038:9 I \ 1 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)3563000,EXT.4400 ' 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 C. COLORADO 1 a ;C.r � , March 18, 1991 �r�� CASE NUMBER: Longs WakL§Lirvi'ce4P}an TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17 , 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. ?0 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. 1 se refer to the enclosed letter. ft Signed: Agency: e# Date: p \ / q r J Ir 1 91.O;17S9 (Q. kao DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 �'� ,. 91510th STREET � e 24t'-5:12%,1��J�� ti GREELEY,COLORADO 60631 C. APR 0 t: 1991 COLORADO is suss March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. j' 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. Signed: kcay t1 Cat-.gda Agency: Date: 1'._,z-9/ q as�� y 01.w..Ygg�738 D DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I VIII% PLANNING DIVISION Civic Center Complex / Longmont, CO 80501 60Z QR,�� (303) 651-8330 April 4, 1991 -� t, 3 1951 Mr. Rod Allison, Principal Planner Weld Cb. 1a�rt�K u�mPwraa�u�! Department of Planning Services Weld County 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan Dear Rod: Thank you for sending the Longs Peak Service Plan to the City of Longmont for our review and comment. The City and Longs Peak Water Association (LPWA) have negotiated an agreement to resolve issues of mutual concern. A copy of the agreement is included in the Service Plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. This agreement was the subject of a City Council study session on January 15, 1991. During its February 12, 1991, meeting, the City Council authorized the Mayor to sign the agreement. A prerequisite to the Mayor' s signature was that a statement be inserted in the service plan to the effect that should it become necessary for the Longs Peak Water District to issue general obligation bonds, such action would be a material change to the service plan. The District would then be required to comply with the statutory procedures applicable to service plan modifications. This statement appears on page 16 of the service plan. During the negotiations with LPWA, the City reviewed and commented upon a previous draft of the service plan. The service plan submitted to you responds to many of the City's comments. There is one point, however, on which the City would like to comment. While it is true that the City does not provide service to everyone in the McCall Lake and Hygiene areas, the City does provide a reliable source of water to its customers in both areas ( see page 18) . The City has made and continues to make improvements to this water service. d .. t ka�'ar • r .ak •. 1E".r�' by ., `1i _ �4` . �2'p'tr l254.. ir . , - _ _ Since the City provides water service to customers in these areas, it is an oversight that the service plan references that no other entity can provide adequate water service within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis to 2500 people instead of the approximately 1990 people the LPWA serves currently (see bottom of page 7) . The City' s existing customers should not be included in any calculations for the Longs Peak Water District. The City made a similar comment to LPWA during our review of the previous draft of the service plan. The City has reviewed the map of the proposed District' s boundary, but has not reviewed the legal descriptions and compared them with the map. If as a result of your review, the map is changed, please refer it back to the City for our review and comment. The City respectfully requests that a condition of any approval of the service plan be the execution of the agreement between the City and the LPWA. Once LPWA provides the City with the three attachments referenced in the agreement, the Mayor can sign it on behalf of the City of Longmont. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this referral. LPWA' s initiative to work out issues directly with the City prior to submitting the service plan benefits both the City and LPWA, and makes this letter an easy referral response. If you have any questions, please call either Froda Greenberg or me at 651-8330. Sincerely, g Brad Schol Planning Director xc: Phil DelVecchio, Community Development Director Steve Miller, Water/Wastewater Utilities Director Dale Rademacher, Distribution and Collection Engineering Manager Jim Cinea, Water Resources Director Clay Douglas, City Attorney Brad Bailey, Deputy City Attorney Dan Bernard, Grant, Bernard, Lyons, & Gaddis, P.C. Ken Rollin, Rocky Mountain Consultants, Inc. File: #2004-1d Ole SI DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES cittt: CSitu PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 1 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 111 C. COLORADO March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 2. We do not have a Comprehensive Plan, but we feel this request (is/is rot) compatible with the interests of our town for the following reasons: 3. 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. /� Signed �A AgencY: ��-;e}..Y�G��C DO G✓dT Date: �lAveh G 910389 r(fri 1pIIDEPARTMENT O�FcPC 'NG SERVICES‘,,,iCf::: I'4. 1 , .7., ,r, l fRHON 3 3)356-0000,EXT.4400 • t � nCt 2• 915 10th STREET \� GREELEY,COLO COLORADO 80631 Ask 0 � �V „ ., COLORADO lir ! `. March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. Y 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 �riefer to the enclosed letter. Signed: L�L�c /� Agency: / ��, i g y: ./i.4_,,, . fC.C� /4 r Date: .1-.=-2 6 - Cj / sions ► N WARDEN ; , INANCE DIRECTOR t .RENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1 PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 1P915 10th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 111 C. COLORADO March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service. Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. ✓ We have reviewed the Fpquest and fi,}d no co Tcts with spur interests. NO 6)261)1&YY1s lula/no,41 -rLgSi,bi/( 4. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to: . 5. Please fer to the enclosed letter Si ned: / i gQIC ��. Agency: 7/26 /� Date: 3��,i? :➢1®389 ,\ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE -� (303)356-4000,EXT.4400 915 10th STREET GREELEY,COLOROLORADO 80631 C � , COLORADO \ Ma March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT"MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. V We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our �ihrl intereststa✓J/.t/!, /, �3_nmJf/1y��ykig/5S�h,4776co 4470 4• A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to: 5• Please refer to the enclosed letter. / / �/7 Signed: -ps / J�/1 Agency: 47T/ 7,0„0 !n/�yG 225/7r'!G/� Date: ‘3 . „2 /. / 910309 RECE;' P;Ar� iffi ' 1991 ect DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)356-4000 EXT.4400 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 COLORADO � R�` 1 March 18, 1991 —;L->- CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM 1T MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. y 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. Signed: ? Date: ��5/V ti' S::;le C RECD'" '1AR 1 9 1991 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES I \r PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 ' 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 COLORADO V 2 � \99\ °° March 18, 1991 gyp,VOA* CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: • Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. X 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. • Signed �1e/�/ya�0 Agency: 7� �✓��2_o /is Date: 7:97,42 910359 lit `I;0„ ii-h, \ lin DEPA, MENT OF PLANNING SERVICES � PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 915 10th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 wiik COLORADO March 18, 1991 . CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: . Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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 . ► • 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. Pie sese refer to the enclosed letter. Signed: /!E',0,1 'N/YYL , -c,e Agency: ( 0/Y1lY1 “-ii /Ci // am a G ,$ Date: „3// 91 9/ 910363 to WELD LINTY OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT. 4250 OR353-4224 P.O. BOX 758 GREELEY,COLORADO.&0632 • COLORADO ,'L�) rs., TO Planning Services _ :" , e'1',i: xs '-arua..+ FROM Ed Herring A - -_ DATE: 032191 REF: Longs Peak Service Plan I have reviewed this request and find no conflicts with our interests. The only item thatI would address is that if/when the water treatment facility is open and operating I have found that there are sufficient chemicals used to require the filing of Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III forms. This is an awareness issue as this case does comply with our Comprehensive Plan. If you have any questions please contact me at 356-4000 extension 4250. 3103 in f 6 \1: ‘ iii, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES \` t r '� , PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 l�t� 1.i. u � n 1 " ' l 915 10th STREET 4 C GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 r. z: �9�1 1 111 I O �t. � Off._ - , ,, COLORADO �µ,. ".. March 18, 1991 CASE NUMBER: Longs Peak Service Plan TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed is an application from the Longs Peak Water Association, c/o Mr. Dick Lyons for a service plan for the proposed Longs Peak Water District. The parcel of land is described as all that part of Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, T2N, R68W, Sections 6, 7, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34, T3N, R68W of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. 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 April 5, 1991, so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Please call Rod Allison, Principal 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 followingreasons. 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. xx We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests.We would like to note that this application is not within our (3) mile radius. 4. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to: 5. Plea e refer to the enclosed letter. 41-1+ Signed: W�+A/�� Agency: Tri-Area Planning Commission Secre ry Date: 4/3/91 910389 BERTHOUD FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT POLICY BSM 85/05-003 FIRE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS SECTION I PURPOSE 1 . 1 The purpose of this policy is to set a standard within the authority of the Berthoud Fire Protection District regarding water distribution lines , fire hydrant specifications/ location and required fire flow. SECTION II WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 2. 1 All areas served by municipal or district water distribution systems or located within one ( 1 ) mile of systems capable of supplying required fire flow shall meet the following water distribution line size: Tvge of Development Minimum Line Diameter Single family (rural ) 6" Single family & duplexes (urban) 6" Multifamily 8„ Commercial & industrial g" 2.2 Larger diameter water distribution lines may be required , per the above types of developments, based on the required fire flow gallonage per the adopted fire flow gallonage formula. 2. 3 One and two family units constructed in a subdivision more than one ( 1 ) mile from water lines capable of supplying required fire flow. see "Larimer County Water , Sewer and Fire Safety Standards and Procedures" . Section 3.3. 2. 4 Dead end water distribution lines shall be minimized by looping all main lines when possible. 2.5 Dead end water distribution lines. in residential and commercial / industrial areas , over 300 feet shall be an oversized water distribution line if used for fire protection as recommended Ov an engineer 's report . The engineer ' s report shall specify the following: ;310389 Policy BSM 85/05-003 - Page 2 1 ) water distribution line size 2 ) residual water pressure at pr000sed h•vd,-ant locations 3) available water (gpm) at proposed hydrant locations SECTION III FIRE HYDRANT SPECIFICATIONS/LOCATIONS 3. 1 All fire hydrants installed within the authority of the Berthoud Fire Protection District shall meet the following standards : a) All fire hydrants will be A24015 Mueller improved, A423 AWWA Mueller Centurion or- approved equal . b ) All hydrants will have a five and one-quarter (5 1 /4) inch or larger valve opening . two (2 ) two and one-half (2 1/2) inch hose nozzles, one ( 1 ) pumper nozzle and a six (b) inch or larger mechanical .joint inlet . c ) All nozzles shall have National Standard threads. d) The hydrant shall be of traffic hazard type with safety features which will prevent barrel breakage. e) Within Larimer County, including the Town of Berthoud, the contractor has the option of the following : 1 ) operating nut and stubs on cups shall be one ( 1 ) inch square or pentagon and open right. Within Larimer County, excluding_ the Town of Berthoud , the operating nut and stubs on cups shall be one ( 1 ) inch square and open right . Within Boulder and Weld Counties. the specifications for the operating nut and stubs on cups shall be in compliance with local codes. If no local code exists, specifications for the operating nut and stubs on cups shall comply with those specifications set forth for the Town of Berthoud . Hydrants shall open to the right . 3.2 Fire hydrants installed in a residential cul-de-sac with a dead end water distribution line of over 300 feet . shall be on an eioht (8) inch minimum water distribution line. . .910389 Policy 88M 85/05-003 - Page 3 ** 3.3 Single family and duplex residential developments shall have fire hydrants spaced so that no structure shall be more than 500 feet from the hydrant as measured via the street . Hydrants shall not be more than 1 .000 feet apart . ** 3.4 Multiple family (higher density than duplex ) developments shall have fire hydrants spaced so that no structure shall be more than 500 feet from a fire hydrant as measured via the street . Hydrants shall be not more than 1 .000 feet apart . ** 3 .5 Commercial and industrial developments shall have fire hydrants spaced so that no structure shall be more than 500 feet from a hydrant as measured via the street. Fire hydrants shall not be more than 1 ,000 feet apart. 3.6 When a multiple family dwelling, commercial or industrial building protected by a fire protection system and the fire department connection is in excess of 150 feet from a fire hydrant , there shall be required an on site fire hydrant and water distribution lines capable of supplying the required fire flow. 3 .7 Fire hydrants shall be connected to loop water distribution lines. whenever possible. 3.8 Fire hydrants shall be within 15 feet of the curb or designated roadway and with no obstruction within 3 feet . 3.9 Fire hydrants for commercial use installed on a dead end water distribution line. over 300 feet in length , shall be installed on an oversized water distribution line as recommended by an engineer ' s report. The engineer ' s report shall specify the following: 1 ) water distribution line size 2) residual water pressure at proposed hydrant location 3) available water (gpm) at proposed hydrant location 910389 ' Policy BSM 85/05-003 - Page 4 3. 10 When fire protection facilities ( i .e. . fire hydrant , water distribution lines, etc . ) are to be installed . such facilities, including all surface access roads. shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. 3. 11 When a building is to be constructed in an area where a fire hydrant is to be required and there are no fire hydrants in the area to flow test for available fire flow, an engineers report specifying the available fire flow will be required for review prior- to this aaency ' s authorization agent ' s signature to the building permit application. SECTION IV REQUIRED FIRE FLOW 4. 1 All areas served by municipal or district water distribution systems or located within one ( 1 ) mile of systems capable of supplying required fire flow shall meet the following minimum fire flow: Type of Development Fire Flow Gallonage/Min Single family (rural ) 500 Single family & duplexes (urban) 500 Multifamily 1 .000 Commercial & industrial 1 ,500 4.2 Additional fire flow gallonage may be required, for the above types of developments, based on the adopted fire flow gallonage formula. 4.3 In an area where a building is to be constructed and there are no fire hydrants to obtain available water (gpm) , the following will be required prior to this agency completing the plan review process : 1 ) An engineer 's report stating : a) if not installed , the water distribution line size required to meet fire flow calculations b ) residual water pressure at proposed fire hydrant location( s ) c ) available water ( gpm) at proposed fire hydrant location(s) d ) number of fire hydrants needed to provide required fire flow aii.o389 Policy HSM 85/05-003 - Pace 5 * SECTION V WATER SUPPLY IN AREAS WITHOUT MUNICIPAL OR DISTRICT WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS * 5. 1 In areas more than one mile from a municipal or District water distribution system capable of supplying the required fire flow, rural water supplies may be utilized. • 5 .2 Desion and construction of cisterns, reservoirs . etc . . shall be in accordance with NFPA 1231 . * 5.3 The owner/occupant shall provide and maintain fire department accessibility . Date District Board President /62 /9W F`W-C/ Date Fire Chief * Amended 7/15/86 ** Revised 2/ 16/90 910359 (fri DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE(303)356-4000,EXT.4400 91510th STREET GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 C� COLORADO March 15, 1991 Mr. Richard Lyons, Esq. Grant, Bernard, Lyons & Gaddis P.O. Box 978 Longmont, CO 80502-0978 Subject: Service Plan for the Proposed Longs Peak Water District. Dear Dick: Your service plan application for the proposed Longs Peak Water District is being processed pursuant to Section 32-1-203, C.R.S. A meeting with the Weld County Planning Commission will be scheduled for Tuesday, April 16, 1991 at 1:30 p.m. The meeting will take place in Room 101 of the Weld County Centennial Center located at 915 10th Street in Greeley, Colorado. It is recommended that you or a representative attend the meeting to answer any questions the Planning Commission members might have with respect to your application. Sincerely, g`h-I �� Rod Allison Principal Planner 910389 • Stephen Charles Berthoud F.P.D. P.O. Box 570 Berthoud, CO 80513 Carbon Valley Recreation District P.O. Box 119 Frederick, CO 80530 Tom Cech Central Colorado Water Conservancy District 3209 West 28th Street Greeley, CO 80631 John Zadel Central Weld County Water District 2235 2nd Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Left Hand Water Association P.O. Box 714 Longmoint, CO 80501 Little Thompson Water District 307 Welch Avenue Berthoud, CO 80513 William R. Emerson, Assistant Chief Longmont F.P.D. 700 Weaver Park Road, Unit D Longmont, CO 80501 Mead Sanitation District P.O. Box 399 Mead, CO 80542 Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District P.O. Box 679 Loveland, CO 80537 Les Williams St. Vrain & Left Hand Water Conservancy District 1960 Industrial Circle Longmont, CO 80501 St. Vrain Sanitation District 514 Kimbark Street Longmont, CO 80502 910389 " I he _ _pc e a� N>t4-0 `I/ 4� ,r Dr. Jack Hay St. Vrain Valley School District RE-1J 395 South Pratt Parkway Longmont, CO 80501 Don Saul Thompson School District R2-J 535 Douglas Avenue Loveland, CO 80537 Tri-Area Ambulance District P.O. Box 708 Frederick, CO 80530 Weld County Library District 2227 23rd Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 910389 Trudy Peterson Town of Firestone P.O. Box 100 Firestone, CO 80520 Mary Jane Hall Town of Frederick P.O. Bpx 238 Frederick, CO 80530 Brad Schol, Planning Director City of Longmont Civic Center Complex Longmont, CO 80501 Bertina Willden Town of Mead P.O. Box 626 Mead, CO 80542 910369. Hello