Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5.0 PC 9.26.07 Staff Report
09/26/07 Exhibits for Lexie Meadows Estates Public Hearing Exhibit Letter (A to Z) Exhibit A Mail Receipts B Proof of Publication C Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended D Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended E Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000 F Staff Report G Application for Preliminary Plan H Letter from Colorado Geologic Survey, dated June 9' , 2007 I Letter from Mountain Cross Engineering, dated June 6th, 2007 J Letter From Colorado Division of Water Resources, dated May 25',2007 K Email from Colorado Department of Transportation, dated May 5' , 2007 L Email from Gar Co Environmental Health Department, dated May 30', 2007 M Memo from Gar Co Road and Bridge, dated June 16", 2007 N Email from CDPHE -WWQD, dated May 8"', 2007 O Traffic Analysis conducted by Felsburg Holt and Ullevi , dated June 25,h, 2007 P Memo From Zancanella & Associates, Inc. dated June 22"', 2007 Q Letter from Davis Farrar, Western Slope Consulting, dated Jul 3", 2007 R Lexie Meadows Wells A and B permits S Revised opinion letter from Colorado Division of Water Resources, dated August 17''', 2007 T Additional Information provided by Davis Farrar, dated September 18", 2007 U Revised Preliminary Plan, received September 19"', 2007 �►�.. I Fr,, AfG. F,"-t /",- vrc .�.... u, E r t ,�.,,�. s4F(• J 67AV P-f `Jr',, -to P4, a ..r %. U f / a rr, /', J. Oc' Cif •'� LsJ r r 00)n►n) rz)nr,; W-,\ REQUEST APPLICANT / OWNER REPRESENTIATIVE LOCATION SITE DATA WATER SEWER ACCESS EXISTING ZONING ADJACENT ZONING PC 07/11/2007 CR Lexie Meadows Estates Preliminary Plan Preliminary Plan Approval Jim Bob Ventures, LLC Davis Farrar, Western Slope Consulting LLC West of the Town of Silt on County Road 227 (Miller lane) 76.19 acres Central Water System ISDS County Road 227 (Miller Lane) Agricultural 1 Residential / Rural Density Agricultural 1 Residential / Rural Density STAFF RECOMMENDATION Denial PC 07/11/2007 CR I GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION The Applicant is proposing to subdivide a 76.19 acre parcel into thirty -seven (37) single - family lots. The Applicant has chose to pursue the "Cluster Option" identified in the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended §4:11. The gross project density is 2.14 acres per unit. Building envelopes will have been identified and are situated to define setbacks and optimize views and privacy. In order to qualify for the "Cluster Option" the Applicant is required to preserve twenty -five percent of otherwise developable land as open space. The proposed subdivision includes a 22.85 acre parcel with a building envelope and a 5.07 acre open space parcel to be owned and maintained by the Home Owners Association. II REFERRALS City of Rifle: Exhibit Town of Silt: No Comments Received Burning Mountain Fire District: RE -2 School District: No Comments Received Colorado Department of Transportation: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment: Colorado Division of Water Resources: Exhibit Colorado Geological cal Survey Exhibit Garfield County Road and Bridge Department: Exhibit Garfield County Vegetation Manager: Exhibit Garfield County Environmental Health: Exhibit Mountain Cross Engineering: Exhibit Garfield County Sheriff Department: III GENERAL RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENISIVE PLAN The subject property is located within Study Area 2 of the County's Comprehensive Plan and is designated as "Outlying Residential" on the proposed land use designation map. This designation indicates residential development is appropriate for this property at a density of one (1) unit per two (2) acres. This designation is consistent with the underlying Agricultural 1 Residential/ Rural Density Zone District (ARRD) and gross density the Applicants proposal. IV APPLICABLE ZONING REGULATIONS The following is an analysis of the proposed subdivision with the required zoning regulations of the ARRD Zone District: 1. Proposed Uses The Applicant is proposing to subdivide the subject property into thirty -seven (37) single- family residential lots which is contemplated as a "use by right" in the A/R/RD zone district and is therefore consistent with the underlying zone district. For other uses, the Applicant should consult Section 3.02 of the Zoning Resolution. -2- PC 07/11/2007 CR 2. Common Dimensional Requirements ➢ Lot Size / Slope: The Applicant has proposed a "Cluster Option" allowing a minimum lot size of one (1) acre. ➢ Maximum Lot Coverage: Fifteen percent (15 %) ➢ Minimum Setback: o Front yard: (a) arterial streets: seventy -five (75) feet from street centerline or fifty (50) feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; (b) local streets: fifty (50) feet from street centerline or twenty -five (25) feet from front lot line, whichever is greater; o Rear yard: Twenty -five (25) feet from rear lot line; o Side yard: Ten (10) feet from side lot line, or one -half (11 /2) the height of the principal building, whichever is greater. o Live Stream: (Section 5.05.02 of the Zoning Resolution) A setback of 30 feet measured horizontally from and perpendicular to the high water mark on each side of any live stream shall be protected as greenbelt. ➢ Maximum Height of Buildings: Twenty-five 25 feet V APPLICABLE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS A. Domestic & Irrigation Water Potable and fire protection water will be provided by a central water system. It is represented by Davis Farrar, Western Slope Consulting that the system will utilize one (1) on -site well, storing water in an aboveground storage tank (Application P. 23). Thomas Zancanella of Zancanella & Associates finds that an additional well and storage tank is required in order to provide adequate physical water to the proposed subdivision (Attachment G P. 6). Where as, it represented on Sheet No. DET -P the design includes two (2) wells and one (1) 200,000 gallon storage tank. The proposed central water system will require approval from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Control Division (CDPHE- WQCD). Mark A. Kadnuck, P.E., of the CDPHE -WQCD addresses his concerns regarding ISDS leach fields and there potential impacts to the ground water quality. These concerns will be addressed by the State and Garfield County Environmental Health Department during the system's approval process. Regarding Physical water, a pump test conducted (Lexie Well A) on -site demonstrated an adequate physical water supply if the proposed Lexie Well B demonstrates a similar capacity. It is the opinion of Thomas Zancanella, of Zancanella & Associates, Inc. that the proposed subdivision has an adequate physical supply to meet the water demands of the thirty -seven (37) proposed lots. The Applicant has proposed to provide untreated irrigation water from the Silt Canal. Irrigation water will be stored on -site in a pond. A secondary delivery system will be -3- PC 07/11/2007 CR required, no details have been provided for review. An opinion letter from Craig M. Lis, P.E., Division of Water Resources dated May 25th, 2007 unless the applicant obtains a court- approved augmentation plan material injury will occur to decreed water rights. The Applicant submitted a West Divide Water Conservancy Contract on ,tune 26th, 2007. However, a written opinion for the Division of Water Resources is required in order to make a determination on the adequacy of the legal supply for the proposed thirty -seven (37) residential lots. Staff Issues and Concerns • The Applicant has not demonstrated the nature of the legal entity which will own and operate the proposed water system (Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended §4 :9x 1)); c;,N • The Applicant has not demonstrated the method of financing the proposed water system (Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended §4:91(B) (2)); • The proposedtater system is described inconsistently within the application; • Irrigation pumping system detail has not been provided. • An opinion letter from the Division of Water Resources demonstrating that potable water can be provided to the proposed lots without causing material injury to decreed water rights is required; B. Wastewater The Applicant proposes that each lot will install Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) to manage wastewater for each residence. D size of the proposed lots, Staff has if concerned wit requested by Garfield County Environmental Health Applicant demonstrate two (2) locations sufficient in be restricted to ISDS replacement. By requiring re: adequate area for relocation should a system fail. ue to soil conditions present and the h the possibility of ISDS failure. As Depart, Staff recommends that the size to install an ISDS leach field to verve areas Garfield County insures The ISDS plan represents bed type leach fields. Garfield County Environmental Health Departments recommends that the Applicant require a more suitable design such as shallow- trench configuration or drip irrigation system which would be more suitable for the low permeability characteristic of the soils identified in the soils report. Staff Issues and Concerns The ISDS Management Plan is not included in the Declarations Covenants and Restrictions; Due to soils poor soils the Staff suggests each lot be required to identify two areas adequate in size for the installation of an ISDS leach field. The identified areas should be PC 07/11/2007 CR restricted from all other development; The ISDS Management Plan should require appropriate designs compatible with the soils identified on -site; The ISDS Management Plan does not adequately address the management of the systems to assure long -term operation; C. Roads /Access Public access to the property will be provided by County Road 227 (Miller Lane). The Applicant proposes a road system consisting of an internal loop and two cul -de -sacs. Each lot will have fee - simple lot frontage. The trips generated from this subdivision will be 354 average daily trips (ADT) using the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Twenty -eight trips are expected to occur during the morning and thirty -seven during the evening peak hours. Dan Roussin, Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) in an email dated May Stn 2007 requested a traffic study providing an analysis in order to determine if a State Highway Access permit is required. Staff received a Traffic Analysis conducted by Felsburg Holt & Ullevig on June 27th, 2007. The provided Traffic Analysis does not include an opinion regarding a State Highway Access Permit. The CDOT's twenty percent threshold is not addressed. Staff forwarded the analysis to Dan Roussin on June 28tH 2007. Staff has not received a response. Garfield County Road and Bridge requested a Traffic Analysis be conducted to determine the proposed subdivisions impacts on County Road 227. The provided Traffic Analysis utilizes traffic counts conducted in 2007 for the Sun Meadows Estates Traffic Analysis. An estimated growth rate of four percent (4 %) was used to update the field counts conducted in 2005. Staff Issues and Concerns The provided Traffic Analysis is not adequate to determine the impacts the proposed subdivision will have on the County and State infrastructure; A decision from CDOT regarding a State Highway Access permit is needed;> D. Fire Protection The Applicant has represented seven (7) Fire Hydrants located within the proposed subdivision. A Fire Protection Plan is required in order to determine adequacy of spacing and water pressure to provide adequate service in the event of a fire. E. Drainage 1 Floodplain Issues Drainage will be managed by on -site detention ponds. The proposed ponds will be constructed by the Applicant. As a condition of approval, Staff recommends that the Board require construction of the ponds prior to approving the Final Plat. cr ;r-, LI- j ' ' " S�4� F. Wetlands -5- PC 07/11/2007 CR There does not appear to be any Section 404 permitting Issues for this project. G. Wildlife The Colorado Division of Wildlife reviewed the ap cati n and suggested moving the building envelopes ay from E Elk Creek t ize human impact on the sensitive and habitat rich rips is r of East EI here also may be bear 1 human conflict in this area. The App 'c adjusted the proposed building envelopes as requested by the Depart of Wildlife. H. Soils 1 Geology / Radiation In general, the property is located in an area where the soils are generally classified as "Arvada — Torrifluvents — Heldt" which characterizes the soils as deep, well drained to somewhat poorly drained, nearly level to gently sloping soils on benches, terraces, alluvial fans, and flood plains. The soils in the area of the property primarily include the following three specific types: 13 - Chilton channery loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes: Community development is limited by the large stones. T 30 - Heldt clay loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes: Community development and recreation is limited by slope, slow permeability, high clay content, and shrink -swell potential. Dwelling s and roads can be designed to compensate for low strength and shrink -swell potential. Septic tank absorption fields are severely limited by slow permeability. Community sewage disposal systems will be needed in density increases. 65 — Torrifluvents, nearly level: Community development is very limited by flooding, the seasonable high water table, and variable texture. Onsite investigation is necessary. I. Mineral Estate The property's mineral estate has been severed and is owned or leased to another party. As a result, the Applicant shall include a plat note on the final plat stating the following: "The mineral rights associated with this property have been partially or wholly severed and are not fully intact or transferred with the surface estate therefore allowing the potential for natural resource extraction on the property by the mineral estate owner(s) or lessee(s)." J. Ease nts The propert will be encumbered b e following easements: two irrigation ditches, private easeme along Elk Cr or the benefit of Lot owners and the Town of New Castle, internal roa acc easement. The Applicant shall be required to delineate, legally describe, nvey all easements shown on the plat to a Homeowners Association. is dedicati needs to be in a form acceptable to the County Attorney's Office e provided at the a of final plat review. As mentioned above, the internal acc s easements shall be requir to be dedicated to the public. This shall be dedicated M PC 07/11/2007 CR on the face of the final plat. K. Assessment/ Fees The property is located in Traffic Study Area 4 which requires a fee per average daily trip (ADT) fee be paid to the County. This fee will be figured at the time of final plat. The Applicant could expect to pay an approximate fee of $4,976.40 of which '/2 shall be paid at final plat and included as a component of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA). The remaining half shall be divided among the lots to be paid at the time building permits are submitted to the County for individual lot development. The development is also located in the RE -2 School District which requires a $200 per lot School Site Acquisition Fee for a total of $ 1,000.00 to be paid at final plat and included as a component of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA). VI PL NNING OMMISSION RECOMENDATION Garfiel Co ty Planning Commission reviewed the Whispering Creek Preliminary Plan applicatio on May 14t�', 2007. The Planning Commission moved to make a recomm n tion of approval with conditions to the Board. Below you will find a complete list of nditio s followed by the Applicants response: VII SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1.) That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners; 2.) That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete and that all interested parties were heard at that meeting; 3.) The Application is in conformance with the Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, of 1984, as amended; 4.) That for the above stated and other reason, the proposed Preliminary Plan is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County; V STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Preliminary Plan for Whispering Creek Subdivision with the following conditions: 1) That all representation made by the Applicant in the application. and as testimony in the public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners; 2) The Applicant shall include the following plat notes on the final plat: -7- PC 07/11/2007 CR a) One (1) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required to be confined within the owner's properly boundaries. b) No open hearth solid -fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision. One (1) new solid -fuel burning stove as defied by C.R.S. 25 -7- 401, et. sew., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit, All dwelling units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and appliances. c) All exterior lighting will be the minimum amount necessary and all exterior lighting will be directed inward and downward, towards the interior of the subdivision, except that provisions may be made to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the property boundaries. d) No further divisions of land within the Subdivision will be allowed. e) Colorado is a "Right -to- Farm" State pursuant to C.R.S. 35 -3 -101, et seq. Landowners, residents and visitors must be prepared to accept the activities, sights, sounds and smells of Garfield County's agricultural operations as a normal and necessary aspect of living in a County with a strong rural character and a healthy ranching sector. All must be prepared to encounter noises, odor, lights, mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads, livestock on public roads, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or otherwise of chemical fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one or more of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non - negligent agricultural operations. f) All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State law and County regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation ditches, controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property in accordance with zoning, and other aspects of using and maintaining property. Residents and landowners are encouraged to learn about these rights and responsibilities and act as good neighbors and citizens of the County. A good introductory source for such information is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small Scale Agriculture" put out by the Colorado State University Extension Office in Garfield County. g) Based on the analysis of the sub -soils on the property, Individual Sewage Treatment Systems and foundation designs are required to be conducted by a registered professional engineer licensed to practice within the State of Colorado. These studies and plans shall be submitted with individual building permit application for each lot. The cost of these studies shall be borne by the individual property owner. h) All streets are dedicated to the public but all streets will be constructed to standards consistent with Section 9:35 of the Subdivision regulation of 1984, as PC 07/11/2007 CR amended and repair and maintenance shall be the responsibility of the incorporated Homeowners Association of the subdivision. i) The mineral rights associated with this property have been partially severed and are not fully intact or transferred with the surface estate therefore allowing the potential for natural resource extraction on the property by the mineral estate owner(s) or lessee(s). j) Development with the flood plain is subject to Garfield County Administrative Permitting. 3) The protective covenants shall include a mosquito management plan for on -site detention ponds; 4) The Applicant shall provide a map or information that quantifies the area in terms of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and utility disturbances at the time of Final Plat; 5) The Applicant shall provide a revegetation security in an amount to be determined by Garfield County Vegetation Department at the time of Final Plat; 6) The Applicant shall cut and treat the inventoried Russian - Olives prior to Final Plat documentation of the treatment shall be provided to Garfield County Vegetation Department; 7) The Applicant shall be responsible for Garfield County Traffic Impact Fees prior to recordation of the Final Plat; 8) The Applicant shall be responsible for paying i/2 of the required RE -2 School District fee prior to recordation of the Final Plat; STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY— serving the people of Colorado COLORADO Department of Natural Resources EXHIBIT or�t, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 715 io t4'1 ' po" Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303) 866 -2611 Fax: (303) 866 -2461 June 29, 2007 Legal: SE' ✓,�, NE'14, S6, T6S, R92W DEPAIUMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Mr. Craig Richardson Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 Eighth Street Grove nor Jr. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Harris D. Sherman Executive Director Re: Lexie Meadows Estates CGS Review No. GA -07 -00012 Vincent Matthews DMsion Director and State Geologist Dear Craig: In response to your request, and in accordance with Senate Bill 35 (1972), 1 visited the site and reviewed the site plan on May 23, 2007. The site consists of approximately seventy -six acres to be developed as thirty -seven residential lots. Included in the review package was a Preliminary Plan Application, prepared by Western Slope Consulting LLC (2121107), which included a Geologic Evaluation and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by CTL Thompson, Inc. (1013106). The site is located east of the town of Silt, at the intersection of Antonelli Lane and Miller Lane. The geology of the area consists of surficial alluvial deposits underlain by the Wasatch Fort-nation. The site is characterized by gentle slopes and grasses. At the time of our site visit, the site was vacant. The primary geologic condition likely to affect the development plan for this property is swelling / consolidating soils. Regional conditions such as radon, seismicity, and water availability may also affect development plans. The CGS is in general agreement with the conclusions drawn in the CTL Thompson report. The CGS observed no geological hazards on the property that would prevent development of the proposed subdivision. Provided that the recommendations stated in the CTL Thompson report are included in the site design, the CGS has no objections to the proposed site plan. If you have further questions about this site, please do not hesitate to contact me at 303- 866 -3350. Sincerely, f' Y, Sean P. Gaffney Engineering Geologist Cc: file EXHIBIT 1 :5 June 06, 2007 Mr. Craig Richardson Garfield County Planning 108 8t` Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Review of Preliminary Plan Submittal for Lexie Meadow Estates Dear Craig: This office has perfonned a review of the documents provided for the Preliminary Plan submittal of Lexie Meadow Estates. The submittal was found to be thorough and well organized. The following comments, questions, or concerns were generated: Geotechncal Investigation 1. The geotechnical report recommends that site specific investigations are performed for each building. This should be included as a note on the Final Plat. 2. Site Grading Specifications and Pavement Construction Recommendations should be included in the construction drawings of the Final Plans. Water Supply 3. The well failed the coliform test and should be disinfected with negative (absent) results prior to final plat. 4. This water system will meet the requirements of a community system and will need to be permitted and approved by the Water Quality Control Division of the State of Colorado prior to Final Plat. Traffic Generation S. The Traffic Generation does not discuss the impacts that the traffic will have to the surrounding roads. This will need to be addressed. Plan Sheets 6. Driveways will need to cross the proposed roadside ditches. A typical crossing should be designed for future lot owners that incorporates culvert type, size, and slope adequate for the anticipated drainage. 7. MU -1: The location for the proposed Well B is not included. Also the 2" line size should be verified as adequate with the pumping scenarios possible from two wells. 8. MU -1: Hydrant spacing should be verified by the Fire District. 9. ISDS -1: The proposed Well B is not shown. 10. DET -T: Verify availability of Class 50 ductile iron pipe. 11. DET -P: Pressure is proposed to be supplied by the booster pumps in the pump station. A secondary power supply will be necessary to provide pressure for fire flow. 12. DET -P: The pressure head for the pumping systems within the notes has been left blank. 13. DET -P: There is no detail for the irrigation pumping system and how it will fit within the pump house. Lexie Meadow Estates Page 2 of 2 June 6, 2007 14. DET -P: The floor drain line should be designed to daylight to verify constructability. 15. DET -1: The, intake detail does not seem congruent with the piping schematic shown on MU -1 or DET -P. Feel free to call if any of the above needs clarification or if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Chris Hale, PE C: Mr. Deric Walter, Boundaries Unlimited, #970.384.2833 MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826'/2 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Division of water Resources Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone (303) 866 -3581 FAX (303) 866 -3589 Nip;,yvww waler. stale. cc us STATE OF CO May 25, 2007 Fred Jarman Garfield County Building and Planning Department 108 8'h Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Fred: �r D NIAY 3 1 2007 IlUiLbIi\;(a & PLANI`iING Re: Lexie Meadow Estates Preliminary Plan Section 6, T6S, R92W, 6t' PM W. Division 5, W. District 39 EXHIBIT A Bill Ritter. Jr. Governor Harris D. Sherman Executive Director Hal D. Simpson, P E Slate Engineer We have reviewed the above - referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of approximately 76.19 acres into 37 residential lots with one single - family dwelling on each lot. The domestic water supply is to be provided through a new central system consisting of wells and a storage tank. Domestic demand will include 500 square feet of irrigation on each lot and stockwatering up to a total of four head. Non - potable irrigation water for 42.7 acres of open space is to be provided through 120 shares in the Silt Canal. Irrigation water is to be stored on the property in a pond with a surface area of 1.75 acres. Sewage disposal is to be provided through individual systems. The new central system will be supplied by one or more wells, one of which has already been constructed as a test well (Lexie Well A). Permit Nos. 268585 and 268586 were issued for the Lexie Wells A and C, respectively, on April 25, 2006, and limit the use of each well to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. A well test completed by the Samuelson Pump Company indicates that the Lexie Well A produced 25 gpm over a 22 -hour period on July 12 -13, 2006, that the drawdown was 1.6 feet and that the 99.6% recovery occurred within 45 minutes. The February 21, 2007 report by Zancanella and Associates, Inc. states that the Lexie Well C was a dry hole and was plugged according to the State Engineer's regulations. The report also recommends an additional well (Lexie Well B) and a 200,000 gallon storage tank be constructed for the development to meet the estimated peak demand of 50 gpm. If the additional well has a similar production rate, and with sufficient storage capacity, the water supply should be physically adequate. Well permits issued pursuant to CRS 37 -90- 137(2) and an approved plan for augmentation must be obtained prior to the construction and/or operation of the subject wells pursuant to the plan. Based on the above, it is our opinion, pursuant to CRS 30- 28- 136(1)(h)(1), that the proposed water supply is physically adequate, however, material injury will occur to decreed water rights unless the applicant obtains a water court- approved augmentation plan. The use of the irrigation water rights must not result in an expansion of use beyond the historical consumptive use, and a change of water rights application will be necessary to store any direct flow rights. If Garfield County Planning Department Lexie Meadow Estates Preliminary Plan May 25, 2007 you or the applicant has any questions concerning this matter, please contact Cynthia Love of this office for assistance. Sincerel Craig M. Lis, . E. Water Resources Engineer CMLICJLILexie Meadow Estates ii.doc cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer James Lemon, Water Commissioner, District 39 Lexie Meadows Estates Craig Richardson From: Roussin, Daniel [Daniel.Roussin @DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 3:21 PM To: Craig Richardson Cc: Znamenacek, Zane Subject: Lexie Meadows Estates EXHIBIT i� --]< I have review the subdivision proposal (37 single family units), the Lexie Meadows Estates will be accessing the state highway system at Miller Lane (CR 227). CDOT does have an access permit (4#306153) for 118 design hour volume at CR 227 from Sun Meadows Estates for highway improvements on SH 6. At this time, no improvements have been made to CR 227. In the review package, I did not see a traffic study discussing if the development will increase traffic by more than 20% at the intersection. Please provide a traffic study to provide this analysis. If the site does increase the traffic by more than 20 %, than an access permit is required for this development for the county road. If you have any question, please contact me. Dan Roussin Colorado Department of Transportation Region 3 Permit Unit Manager 222 South 6th, Suite 100 Grand Junction, Co 81501 970- 248 -7230 970 - 246 -7294 FAX 5/7/2007 EXHIBIT __L__ Craig Richardson From: Jim Rada Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 10:20 AM To: Craig Richardson Subject; Lexie Meadows Estates Attachments: Jim Rada.vcf Craig, Here are comments on this subdivision proposal. ISDS I. The soils report indicates that soils in this subdivision are generally very limited for ISDS due to low permeability. For the types of soils, the bed type leach fields shown in the preliminary ISDS plan would be a poor choice. I realize that this depiction was to show that ISDS would fit. However, a much more suitable design would be in shallow- trench configuration or drip irrigation systems which would likely take up much more area of the lots. It may also require that leach fields be allowed to be placed outside of the building envelopes. I recommend a plat note or some other allowance for construction of leach fields outside of building envelopes in accordance with Garfield County ISDS Regulations. 2. Poor soils will ultimately lead to leach field failures due to poor construction practices, hydraulic overloading and other circumstances. I would recommend that reserve leach field areas be required to allow for replacement and/or upgrade of systems. 3. Poor potable water quality will undoubtedly result in the use of water softeners, R -O water treatment and other similar types of devices. Some of these devices discharge clear water in large amounts depending on the design. I strongly encourage that clear water discharges to the leach field be discouraged, if not prohibited to reduce the risk of premature hydraulic overloading. 4. If reserve areas are required I recommend that no construction be allowed in the reserve leach field area to avoid damage to soil structure and permeability. This requirement should also include appropriate measures (i.e. fencing, etc.) to protect the leach field area during construction from compaction by equipment, materials staging etc. 5. The ISDS Management plan does not adequately address the actual management of the systems to assure long -term operation. The minimal design requirements are OK but should really require compliance with Garfield County ISDS Regulations and encourage landowners (and engineers) to design and install only ISDS that the best suited for site - specific conditions (not necessarily what's cheapest. Submittal of as -built drawings and record keeping by the HOA will only be effective if the HOA takes an active role in oversight, inspection and maintenance of the systems. Most HOAs do not carry out this function well. I find it difficult to believe that this plan will be any more than lip service within a few years of development. Perhaps the ISDS Management plan might be a bit more effective if the HOA specified that new homeowners be trained on the operation and maintenance requirement for their system. As many people moving to the area have never lived on an ISDS before at least such required training might help them understand the system. 0. Paragraph A.1.a of the ISDS management plan requires TSS and BOD analysis of effluent every two years. This is an unnecessary test for conventional ISDS as it will not provide any information of value to the ongoing operation of the system. This presents an unnecessary financial burden to homeowners. TSS and BOD analysis can be useful for some secondary treatment systems only if the manufacturer states a maximum TSS and BOD level for proper operation of their system. Even then one sample every two years will not be useful if the system fails to operate properly right after a sample is taken. 7. In addition to enforcing their own ISDS Performance standards with regard to system repairs or failures, I believe there should also be a requirement in the HOA ISDS management plan to report any ISDS problems or failures to the County immediately upon discovery. I would hate to think that repairs that require a permit from the County may not be reported. 8. Paragraph A.4 of the ISDS Management plan implies the County needs to wait for the HOA to enforce its ISDS Plan Provisions before the County can act to enforce the laws of the State of Colorado or the Garfield County ISDS Regulations. 7/5/2007 Page 2 of 2 Potable water 1. No mention is made of a CDPHE approval for this water supply system. Of course such an approval is required before construction of the treatment and distribution system can begin. 2. The Radionuclide analysis indicates that Gross alpha contamination is right at the Maximum Contaminant Level. This issue will be raised during my review of the water system plans for CIDPHE= approval. • Stormwater 1. It is likely thatjust road construction will disturb more than one acre of land. A CDPHE stormwater permit will be required. Jim Rada, REHS Environmental Health Manager Garfield County Public Health 195 W 14th Street Rifle, CO 81650 Phone 970 - 625 -5200 x8113 Cell 970 -319 -1579 Fax 970 - 625 -8304 Email jrada @garfield- coun_ty.com Web www.garfield- county.com ?/5/2007 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form V9 —A — Date Sent: June 16, 2006 Comments Due: July 5, 2006 Name of application: Lexie Meadow Estates Sent to: Garfield County Road & Bridge Dept. Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the Planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e- mailed, or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff contact: Richard Wheeler 109 8a' Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970 -384 -3470 Phone: 970- 945 -8212 General Continents: Garfield County Road & Bridge Department requests that a full traffic sl!& be done on Cr. 227. We would also re uest that the possibilfty of aligqing the entrance with Antonelli lane be considered. All entrances to Cr. 227 shall have stop si s installed. The stop sigLis and installation shall be as required in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). All entrances to Cr. 227 shall be permitted -by Garfield Coun Road & Bride Department. The drivewa access permit s will have conditions s ecific to the location of the entrances. All equipment and material used in the construction of the project shall abide by Garfield County_Road & Bridge Dg4gment's oversize /overweight regulations._ Name of review agency: Garfield CogW Road and Bridge Deft By: Jake B. Mall Date June 22, 2006 Revised 3/30/00 GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department Review Agency Form Date Sent: May 3, 2007 Comments Due: Name of application: Lexie Meadows Sent to: Garfield County Road & Bridge Dept. Garfield County, requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the Planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form may be used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary. Written comments may be mailed, c- mailed, or faxed to: Garfield County Building & Planning Staff contact: Craig Richardson 109 8th Street, Suite 301 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Fax: 970 - 384 -3470 Phone: 970 -945 -8212 General Comments: Garfield County Road & Bridge Department requested an updated traffic study in our previous comments. The traffic study submitted only addresses the traffic from the sub - division. The traffic study requested was for Cr. 22_7 with the sub- division projected traffic included. We would also request intersection sign placed on both sides of the new entrances on Cr. 227. The intersection signs and installation shall be as required in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Please add the previous comments on Lexie Meadows to this new comment form. Name of review agency: Garfield County Road and Bridge Dept By: Jake B Date May 7, 2007 Revised 3 /30 /00 Craia Richardson From Mark Kadnuck [ makadnuc @smtpgate.dphe.state.co.usI Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4 :51 PM To: Craig Richardson Subject: Lexie Meadow Estates —V--- The proposed subdivision will have a common water system that will be considerered a public water system. The plans for the water system must be approved by the state. Initial concerns with the water system based on the information provided include: 1) The well is surrounded by ISDS leach fields which have potential to impact the groundwater quality. 2) It is unclear where water treatment will be provided, if it takes place at the pump house, horizontal separation requirements (101) must be met for the raw water line and treated water line. Wastewater will be addressed using ISDSs, was the consolidation option considered /evaluated (connecting to Silt)? Mark A. Kadnuck, P.E. CDPHE -WQCD 222 S. 6th Street, Rm 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501 ph: 970-- 248 -7144 fax: 970 -248 -7198 email: mark.kadnuck @state.co.us 1 FELSBURG MA (4HOLT & ULLEVIG ertgineering pates to transpo7•tation solutions June 25, 2007 Mr. Deric Walter, P.E. Boundaries Unlimited, Inc. 823 Blake Avenue, Suite 102 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: Level Two Traffic Assessment Lexie Meadow Estates FHU Project #07 -154 Dear Mr. Walter: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) has completed a field visit and the analyses necessary to prepare a Level Two Traffic Assessment as described by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Region 3 for the proposed Lexie Meadow Estates development The proposed development is located west of Silt and north of State Highway (SH) 6 (see Figure 1). SH 6 is the major east -west arterial that serves the Silt area, and Lexie Meadow Estates will generate traffic that will use a Garfield County road that has an intersection with SH 6. CDOT has adopted the State Highway Access Code that provides guidance for traffic analyses that must be completed in order to determine the impacts of new traffic that will be generated by a proposed development. In 2005, FHU prepared a similar traffic assessment for a nearby residential development (Sun Meadows Estates), and the Lexie Meadow study has been prepared in coordination with the traffic data, analyses, and recommendations of the previous study PROJECT LOCATION Lexie Meadow Estates is located on the west side of Miller Lane (County Road 227). The primary regional access to the property is from US 6 via Miller Lane. Figure 1 provides a vicinity map and shows the significant roads that will provide access to the development. There are a few private driveways along SH 6 in the vicinity of the intersection with Miller Lane, but no other intersections with public roads are nearby. As previously described, SH 6 is the major east -west arterial on the north side of 1 -70 that provides regional continuity. There is an interchange with 1 -70 in the middle of Silt. This interchange is used by traffic oriented to and from the east. Rifle lies approximately five miles west and also has an interchange with 1 -70 which provides access to activities in the Parachute and Grand Junction areas. SH 6 is a two -lane highway that has approximately 28 feet of pavement. The speed limit on SH 6 is 55 mph. SH 6 has an R -A category according the Access Code criteria. The pavement width of Miller Lane is approximately 21 feet just to the north of SH 6. There is only a minimal shoulder. The pavement is in good condition, and the road is wide enough that a double yellow centerline stripe is provided. 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 tel 303.721.1440 Fitx 303.721.0832 ttxtxv. flit] in�;.coIII info @flztteng.c0trt June 25, 2007 Mr. Deric Walter, P.E. Page 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lexie Meadow is proposed to include 37 single family residences, and a plan for the development is shown in Figure 2. Trip generation rates can be found in the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trig Generation, 7th Edition, 2003. The trip generation analysis for the project is provided in Table 1. This table shows that the project will generate approximately 354 trips per day, with 28 trips per hour during the morning peak hour and 37 during the evening peak. Since the project generates less than 100 vehicles per hour during both peak hours, only a Level Two Assessment is required by CDOT. Table 1 Trip Generation Analysis BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES The Sun Meadows Estates traffic study included peak hour turning movement volumes at the intersection of SH 6 and Miller Lane. These volumes were based on extensive field counts. This previous information has been updated using a growth rate of 4% per year (growth factor = 1.08) to account for growth between 2005 and 2007. The 4% annual increase is the recent rate of growth that was derived for other traffic studies in the Silt area based on demographic studies of population growth and observed increases in traffic. Figure 3 shows the current (2007) average morning and evening peak hour volumes at the study intersection. Figure 3 also shows forecasts of near -term (2007) volumes that would result if the Sun Meadows Estates traffic volumes are added to current volumes. An assessment of future traffic volumes at the study intersections is also an important element of the analysis. A 20 -year growth factor of 1.47 is provided on CDOT's website (Year 2006 State Highway Traffic Statistics - Route 006C — 312212007) for this segment of SH 6. Figure 4 shows the resulting 2027 background turning movement volumes for the study intersections. The Sun Meadows Estates development is currently under construction. Figure 4 also includes a forecast of 2027 background traffic which includes the traffic from this nearby development that will also use Miller Lane at build out. DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION Glenwood Springs and the Roaring Fork Valley are strong attractions for trips because of the jobs, shopping, and other economic activities. Eagle County, the Vail area, and Denver are also east on 1 -70. To the west, Rifle is a growing regional center for the energy industry in western Garfield County. Further to the west lies Grand Junction which is the hub for the entire West Slope. The direction distribution of traffic was determined based on current traffic patterns at the US 6/Miller Lane intersection and past studies in the Silt area. As shown in Figure 5, it is estimated that 60% of the traffic will be oriented to and from the west on SH 6 and the remaining 40% will travel to /from the east. Daily AM AM PM PM Use Rate at e Rat Inbound Outbound PM Rate Inbound Outbound Single Family 9,57 0.75 25% 75% 1.01 63% 37% #210 Use Units Daily AM AM AM PM Total PM PM Volumes Total Inbound Outbound Volume Inbound Outbound Single Family 37 354 28 7 21 37 23 14 #210 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES The Sun Meadows Estates traffic study included peak hour turning movement volumes at the intersection of SH 6 and Miller Lane. These volumes were based on extensive field counts. This previous information has been updated using a growth rate of 4% per year (growth factor = 1.08) to account for growth between 2005 and 2007. The 4% annual increase is the recent rate of growth that was derived for other traffic studies in the Silt area based on demographic studies of population growth and observed increases in traffic. Figure 3 shows the current (2007) average morning and evening peak hour volumes at the study intersection. Figure 3 also shows forecasts of near -term (2007) volumes that would result if the Sun Meadows Estates traffic volumes are added to current volumes. An assessment of future traffic volumes at the study intersections is also an important element of the analysis. A 20 -year growth factor of 1.47 is provided on CDOT's website (Year 2006 State Highway Traffic Statistics - Route 006C — 312212007) for this segment of SH 6. Figure 4 shows the resulting 2027 background turning movement volumes for the study intersections. The Sun Meadows Estates development is currently under construction. Figure 4 also includes a forecast of 2027 background traffic which includes the traffic from this nearby development that will also use Miller Lane at build out. DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION Glenwood Springs and the Roaring Fork Valley are strong attractions for trips because of the jobs, shopping, and other economic activities. Eagle County, the Vail area, and Denver are also east on 1 -70. To the west, Rifle is a growing regional center for the energy industry in western Garfield County. Further to the west lies Grand Junction which is the hub for the entire West Slope. The direction distribution of traffic was determined based on current traffic patterns at the US 6/Miller Lane intersection and past studies in the Silt area. As shown in Figure 5, it is estimated that 60% of the traffic will be oriented to and from the west on SH 6 and the remaining 40% will travel to /from the east. June 25, 2007 Mr. Deric Walter, P. E. Page 3 In assigning site - generated traffic to the roadway system, it is estimated that all traffic will use Miller Lane. Figure 6 shows the near -term volumes that would result if the project generated traffic is added to existing traffic volumes. Figure 6 also shows the near -term volumes that would result if the project generated traffic is added to background traffic volume forecasts that include Sun Meadows Estates traffic volumes. Figure 7 shows 2027 total traffic volumes resulting from adding project traffic to long- term forecasts of background traffic volumes, both with and without the Sun Meadows Estates development. AUXILIARY LANE REQUIREMENTS The Access Code provides volume criteria for auxiliary turn lanes that depend on the category of the state highway. As mentioned previously, SH 6 has an R -A category, and the speed limit in the project vicinity is 55 mph. The Access Code sets the follow thresholds for R -A category highways with speeds more than 40 mph: Left turn deceleration lanes - more than 10 vehicles per hour (vph) Right turn deceleration lane - more than 25 vph Right turn acceleration lane - more than 50 vph The analysis of auxiliary requirements can be summarized as follows: SH 6 and Miller Lane Comparing existing turning movement volumes at SH 6 and Miller Lane (Figure 3) with auxiliary lanes requirements of the Access Code reveals the following: • Eastbound left turn deceleration lane — This lane is currently required since the morning volume (16 vph) and the evening volume (39 vph) both exceed the 10 vph criterion. • Westbound right turn deceleration lane — This lane is currently required. Although the morning (11 vph) volume is less than the criterion, the evening (26 vph) volume exceeds the 25 vph criterion. • Westbound right turn acceleration lane — This lane is not currently required since both the morning (46 vph) and evening (33 vph) volume are less than the 50 vph criteria. Figure 6 provides forecasts near -term volumes that result if only Lexie Meadow Estates were to develop and no homes are occupied in Sun Meadows Estates. A comparison of this traffic with the Access Code Criteria reveals the following changes to auxiliary lane requirements: Westbound right turn acceleration lane — This lane would be required since the morning (57 vph) volume exceeds the 50 vph criteria. The comparison of 2027 long -term volumes assuming that both developments are completed (see Figure 7) with the Access Code criteria reveals that the three auxiliary lanes are required due to both morning and evening volumes exceeding the minimums. June 25, 2007 Mr. Deric Walter, P.E. Page 4 } The developer and engineer for the Sun Meadows Estates development have been coordinating } closely with CDOT to prepare construction documents for the necessary auxiliary lane improvements at the US 6/Miller Lane intersection. The design of these auxiliary lanes has been complicated due to the } challenging topography and narrow right -of -way (ROW) available along SH 6. The Union Pacific } Railroad mainline tracks are immediately south of SH 6. There is a buried fiber optic cable on the north side of US 6 that would be very expensive to relocate. Designs for the eastbound left turn and westbound right turn deceleration lanes are currently in process. The westbound acceleration lane is not currently being required. Based on this history of prior coordination with CDOT regarding the US 6/Miller Lane intersection, Lexie Meadow Estates would need to provide an eastbound left turn deceleration land and a westbound right turn deceleration lane if the Sun Meadows Estates development does not fulfill their requirement to build these improvements. The dimensions of these two lanes would not change from current requirements. When Sun Meadows is completed as planned, Lexie Meadow Estates will be directly responsible for the additional storage length for the auxiliary lanes that its increased traffic volumes necessitate. In this case, the additional 14 vehicles per hour turning left from eastbound US 6 will require that the storage for this lane be lengthen by 25 feet, from 50 feet to 75 feet. Since right - turning vehicles rarely stop in the deceleration lane to complete their maneuver, there is no storage length requirement, and thus, no lengthening of this lane will be required, Please call if you have questions or need additional information. Sincerely, FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG kii, 4� David E. Hattan, P.E., PTOE Associate % !' oo 00 6/z 5/a 7 . FELSBURG �i HOLT & ULLEVIG North m r C) no N) Nt l L.n Lezie Meadow Estates 07 -154 6/18107 SITE C) �7 ti N C9 233 Sun Meadows ! Estates 1 r as cn CR 216 Antonelli Lane LS fi m r sy m SILT Figure 1 Vicinity Map 0 FELSBURG (OLT ULLEVIG North r IL ------ I L-- - - - - -J / ft V 1 Y; j 11 r� it i �J Lexfe Meadow Estates 07 -154 6110/07 II l 1I l f I I I I I I �L___J r- - -1 11• � `� >�.. � ! I I L__J --1 II !: f I'I I J: l—__-J t___J Antonelli Lane (CR 216) IN N U_ as c ro m .� Figure 2 Site Plan MFELSBURG ro HOLT & ULLEVIG SITE II r\ N cc U c m Iz 16(39)-A 199(109), N 116 SITE II m EQ 0o co co z- t-1 1 (26) LO CM 112(251) 16(39)-A 199(109), N 116 SITE II m EQ 0o co co z- X14(34) LO CM 112(251) 18(47)—f 199(109) -; Antonelli Lane (CR 216) Current Traffic Volumes Antonelli Lane (CR 216) Near Term (2007) Background Traffic Volumes (with Sun Meadows Estates) LEGEND � Figure 3 Q XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Dour Traffic Volumes North Lexie Meadow Estates 07 -154 5118107 MPLLSBURG �i HOLT & N ULLEVIG — SITE i Antonelli Lane (CR 216) f !� J d7 N ;6'85' N L16(38) J -- 165(370) 6 24(57) —f 290(160) 2027 Background Traffic Volumes N N - - -�rz SITE J Antonelli Lane (CR 216) I I Ifi tr ti Ln r �. t-i 9 (46) Co 165(370) 26(65)-J 290(160) 2027 Background Traffic Volumes (includes Sun Meadows Estates) LEGEND Figure 4 XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes North Lexie Meadow Estates 07 -154 6118107 . FELSBURO �i HOLT & ULLEVIG K SITE �c ro J r —__ 60 40'0 m� 0 X3(9) 4(14) -` LEGEND XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Antonelli Lane (CR 216) Figure 5 Trip Distribution and Site Generated Traffic North Lexie Meadow Estales 07 -154 6116/07 MFELSBURG ro HULT & ULLEVIG LEGEND n N SITE I� I:2i �r f- 14(35) Lo F-- 115(250) 20(53) 200(110)- N _ OC U SITE i I l� OF L1 <- 1115(25(2 50) 22(61) 200(110) —y Antonelli lane (CR 216) Near Term (2007) Traffic Volumes (with Lexie Meadow Estates Only) Antonelli Lane (CR 216) Near Term (2007) Traffic Volumes (with Lexie Meadow Estates and Sun Meadows Estates) Figure 6 XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes IJnrIh Lexie Meadow Estates 07-164 6118107 . FELSBURG �i H O L T & ULLEVCG � -7 North LEGEND N -- - -�Cz U I SITE 7 f I� F-:� to r 0 1 00 In , 165(3 5(370) 28(71) 290(160), N N SITE I f I� g am Cp N t22 (55) 165(370) 30(79)—1 290(160) Antonelli Lane (CR 216) 2027 Traffic Volumes (with Lexie Meadow Estates Only) Antonelli Lane (CR 216) 2027 Traffic Volumes (with Lexie Meadow Estates and Sun Meadows Estates) XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Lexie Meadow Estates 07-154 6118107 Figure 7 EXHIBIT Zancanella & Associates, Inc. Memorandum To: Jim Cagle, Bob Adisano Cc: Deric Walter, Lee Leavenworth, Davis Farrar i From: Tom Zancanella, Collin Robinson Date: June 22, 2007 Subject: Lexie Meadow Water Supply Issues We have reviewed a letter from Craig Lis of the Colorado Division of Water Resources to Fred Jarman of the Garfield County Building and Planning Department regarding the planned water supply for Lexie Meadow Estates. The letter states that so long as construction of Lexie Well B results in a well with capacity similar to that of Lexie Well A, the water supply should be physically adequate, given the recommended storage. The letter also states that several legal considerations need to be made in order to confirm the supply. First, well permits need to be obtained. Lexie Well A was drilled under a monitoring well permit. Lexie Well B has not yet been drilled. Permit applications to convert Lexie Well A from a monitoring well to a fee well and drill Lexie Well B as a fee well were submitted on June 12, 2007. Since anticipated depletions associated with the wells are covered under a now active West Divide Water Conservancy District (WDWCD) contract, the well permits should be issued within a month or two pursuant to the Temporary Substitute Supply Plan, although the processing time may vary with the Division of Water Resources' work load. A copy of each well permit application and the WDWCD contract is attached. Next, the letter states that material injury to decreed water rights will occur unless the wells are operated under a water court approved plan for augmentation, The WDWCD contract was obtained to obviate the need for a site specific aug plan by providing water to replace all depletions associated with the new demands under the TSSP and by allowing for inclusion in the West Divide district (Area A) under one of its batch adjudications, later. The State and County have always accepted this approach for subdivision approval. Since the contract has been approved and activated, we do not believe that an augmentation plan should be required by the state or county at this time. The letter also states that use of the raw irrigation water rights must not result in an expansion of use beyond the historical consumptive use associated with those rights. The development's water usage plan was developed with this in mind, so anticipated future raw water irrigation will in fact not result in any additional consumptive use and the limit of historically irrigated acres will be the same or less once the subdivision is built. ,Ik,: Zancanella & Associates, Inc. JUN 2 01 1011 Grand Avenue, Glenwo OOprings, Co 81601 GAR :7r,j.i)e,OUNf Y Z:)26000\26406 Cagle, Jim (Murr properly)1June071.lslVlemci.doc GUILDING & PLANNING Last of the issues broached by the letter, the proposed pond will need to be filled under a storage right. Lexie Meadows' raw water rights are direct flow rights, so a change of water rights would need to be filed to allow their use to fill the pond. As this would require a lengthy legal process, we recommend that the pond be filled the first time during high water under an unadjudicated junior priority from local precipitation and snow melt. The pond would then be kept full using potable well water to offset evaporation under the WDWCD contract, and would not need to store any direct flow raw water. This should eliminate the need for a decreed storage right. The West Divide District has agreed to augment the evaporation from the pond under the existing TSSP. Lexie Meadows or the West Divide District can carry the augmentation plan forward to permanently decree the augmentation plan. The above should have clarified and resolved each of the issues mentioned in Craig's letter. We hope you find it useful. If you have any remaining questions on the topic, please call our office at (970) 945 -5700. Attachments Zancanella & Associates, Inc. 1011 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945 -5700 2:126000126406 Cagle, Jim (Murr properly)1June07LisMemo.doc t,v�wois -sir4e Wdv UJ- UVJ-,lmrri 6�'��ta•9I.Da ��a r.=j 'iE 7 J Silt RPAAN J 1, p it �18, DE—i1] V E , C;0 80203 phone — Info: (303) 868 -3587 slain: (303) So3 -u5a i fax: (333) 856 -3589 h LLr3.��'/YtISi4V.�! /c[t �r- u'S=If�,. F'Q.tlj Water Vc-111 Per alt Application P.eview instructions on reverse site pricorto coir€pleting tort?,. The form rnLl.st be Completed in black or blue W, ortypad. Alma of appli�?nt Jinabob Vergiares I1, LLC, c/o Jin3 Cagle Nailing addfz,s P.O. Box 2300 Zip code Grand Junction II CO 81502 (970) 245 -3174 11 2. 'type Of Application (check applicable boxes) ❑ Construct new well ® Use existing well ❑ Replace existing well ❑ Change or Increase use ❑ Change source (aquifer) ❑ Reapplication (expired permit) ❑ Other: 3. Refer To (i€ applicable) Well permit # Water Court case # 268585 WDWCD # 070517LM(a) Designated Basin Determination # Well name or # Lexie Meadows Well A 4, Location Of Proposed Well County — Garfield NE 114 of the SE 114 Section Township N or S Range E - 0 r W Pri ncipal Meridian 6 6 1:10 92 ❑ ® 6th Distance of well from section lines (section lines are typkally not property lines) 1980 Ft. from ❑ N ® S 660 Ft. rrom ® E ❑ W For replacement wells only- distance and dlrectien from old well to new well feet direction Well location address (include City, State, Zip) L.J Check if well address is same as In Item 1 Optional: GPS well location information in UTM format You must check GPS unit for required settings as follows: Format must be UTM� ❑ Zone 12 or Q Zone 13 Eesting Units must be Meters Datum must be NAD83 Northing Unit must be set to true north Was GPS unit checked for above? ❑ YES Remember to set Datum to NAD83 5. Parcel On Which Well Will Be Located (PLEASE ATTACH A CURRENT DEED FOR THE SUBJECT PARCEL) A. Legal Description (may be provided as an attachment),. Lexie Meadows Estates, see section 5E. Also see attached descriptions. B. # of acres in parce€ C. owner 76 Jimbob Ventures II, LLC D. Will this be the only w0l on this parcel? []YES ® NO (if no -list other wells) Lexie Meadows Well B (pending) E. State Parcel JD# (optional): A portion of Parcel # 217906400425 Ofiica Use Only °- Form GINS -$5 ({Xo120CK, ) 6. Use Of Well (check applicable boxed) Attach a detailed description of uses applied for. ❑ Industrial Q Other (describe): DonPstic and Fire Prot°cfion ❑ Municipal Dernands 0 Irrigation ❑ Commercial 7. Well Data (proposed) Maximum pumping rate Annual amount to be withdrawn 40 9pm 1 22.53 Curnulative acre-feet 75 feet I Colorado River 8. Land On Which Ground Water Will Be Used Legal Description (may be provided as an attachment): Same as section 5A, (If used for crop irrigation, attach a scaled map that shows irrigated area.) A. # Acres I B. Owner ,42 acre lawns J Jimbob Ventures II, LLC C. List any other wells or water rights used on this land: Lexie Meadows Well B (pending), Silt Project 9. Proposed Well Driller License #(optio_nal):N /A _ 10. Signature Of Applicant(s) Or Authorized Agent The making of false statements herein constitutes perjury in the second degree, which Is punishable as a class 1 misdemeanor pursuant to C.R.S. 24 -4 -104 (13)(a). 1 have read the statements herein, know the contents thereof and state that they are true to my knowledge, Sign here (Must be original signature) I Date Z-/fat 2, Office Use Only USGS map name DWR map no. area WE WR CWCB TOPO MYLAR SB5 DIV __ WD SA MD Fffr 0 1, HP'T URN- PP�BOURCT-z 1313 821ERPftAH ST, RN] 8D18, DFH)Jr--rz co oon'os GENERAL PURPOSE WxierWell Permit AppliCallong Review instructions on reverse si&- prior to cornplesting fortn. The form imust be completed in black or blive IWA, or typsd. Inform I. A P C! ation 6. Use Veil (Check applicable boxe tlarrr of a ' pplican[ Attach -, detailed r1eSCdPdDi`I Of LIS&S appli5d for. Jhrfibob Ventures IT, LLC, c/o Jim Cagle EJ- Industn"al Ox Otlar Doml`stic and L i iip, Darnands El h/I 11 r- Tl P.0. Dox 2300 ❑ Irrigation Z ip Co Grand Junction ia L6 ode CO 81502 ❑ Commercial 7. Well D, , (proposed) ah - i_.4_... --- - - Nlaxfmum purnping rate Annual amc=4 to be vAthdrawn (970) 245 -3174 40 gpm 22.53 Cumulative acre-feet 2. Type Of Application (check applicable boxes) 0 Construct now well ❑ Use existing well I E] Replace existing well El Change or increase use 100 feet �- Colorado River 8• Land On Which Ground Water Will Be Used ❑ Change source (aquifer) ❑ Reapplication (expired permit) ❑ Other: Legal Description (maybe provided as an allachmenl): Same as section 5A. 3. Refer To (if applicable) Well —permit # water Court case # WDWCD # 070517LM(a) Designated Basin Determination 4 Well name or # Lexie Meadows Well B (If used for crop irrigation, attach a stated map that shows irrigated area.)_.__ Q. Location Of Proposed Well Ccunly Garfield NE 114 or the SE 1/4 - ®rS A, # Acres .42 acre lawns -- B. Owner Jimbob Ventures 11, LLC Section I! N Range E or principal Meridian C. List any other wells or water rights used an this land: 6 � 6 ❑ 0 92 EED31 2 6th Lexie Meadows Well A (pending), Silt Project Distance of well from section lines (section lines are typically not property lines) 2000 Ft. from E] N 0 S 660 Ft. from M E ❑ W 9. Prop _9sed Well Driller License #(optional):N/A For replacement wells only- distance and directionf(OM Did well to now woll 10. Signature Of Applicant(s) Or Authorized Agent feet direction The making of false statements herein constitutes perjury in the Second degree, which is punishable as a class 1 misdemeanor pursuant to C.R.S. -- 0 -- Well location address (include City, State, Zip) Check if wets address Is same as In Item 1. 24-4-104 (13)(a). I have read the statements herein, know the contents thereof and state that they are true tom knowledge. 1 Sign here (Must be criginalsignature) Date Optional: GPS well location information in UTIVI format You must check GPS unit for required settings as follows: —T[N wAfllnlh� Format must be UTM 0 Zone Q or 0 Zone 13 Easting pro, name &I title Units must be Meters Office Use Only Datum must be NAD83 Northing USGS map name DWR map no. Surface elev. Unit must be set to true north Was GPS unit checked for above? YES El Remember to set Datum to NAD83 S. Parcel On Which Well WHI Be Located Receipt area only (PLEASE ATTACH A CURRENT DEED FOR THE SUBJECT PARCEL) A. Legal Description (maybe provided as an attachment): Lexie Meadows Estates, see section SE. Also see attached descriptions. WE B. #at acres in parcel C. owner 76 Jirnbob Ventures H, LLC WR CWCB D. Will this be the only well on this parcel? ❑YES ZNO (if no- list other wells) Lexie Meadows Well A TOPO MYLAR E. State Parcel ID# (opfiona* A portion of Parcel # 217906400425 S85 DIV WD- BA- MD Contra as 0705 -1 7L M1, Map --fi 559 v, b Y,,?PL7- CA TIT ON TO LEASE -/ AT E. R Ff t0l,A Date Activatud 5/17/07 O/E-ST LIIViDJA-1� VfA1j-ZT!- CONSERCVANCY DISTRIC-T 0�1 ')Vest Fotu fc'a Sts- t-1 F. (D. P-ox 1475, Ri FDIC; do 8 -'CS(-' T0!qhon.---: (970) 625-5461 C &' z 5 me: Jimbdb fir 7—T—C, C/o Jim C-.Ri- 5. LOCAT IOC' Of' UI RUC` URE Maihgaddresz- P.O.B r121-00 NE SP CO $1532 Co nth Quarelqusrtsr Qt:,er Telephone: (970)245-31'74 6 6 Sou fr, 92 Was' Authoi`tzcd zigcra: Thomas A. ZLr,c-r-nclk% P.E. SeQtion Tovnishuip R. COURT CASE t -`s: D= ee Case .No. Ali gmen toz3o-n Plan Case N o- 3. USE OF WATER • RESIDENTIAL (check applicable boxes) • Ordinary household use Numbe-roldweltings; 37 a SubdivWon: No. constructed units: 0 No, vacant lots 37 [a Home gardenl1mvn irfiga(lon of 500 Der lot - _ sq. ft. Method of irrigation-.0 flood 21 WI E3 drip Oother Non-commercial animal watering of 4 AU animals total, nolperlot Fire Protection pp Evaporation: Maxiintim water surface to be exposed: 1.75 acres Description of any use, other than evaporation, and method of diversion, rate of diversion, and annual amount of diversion of any water withdrawn from the pond-. Ff"ell Sharing Agreement for multiple owner wells must be submitted. If greater than two ojonaps, application must he made under a homeowners association, Upon approval ofaubdirvision, HOA Y411 be formed, 0 COMMERCIAL (check applicable boxes) Number ofunits: &q. ft, oFcorrimercial units-. Description of use: D INDUSTRIAL Description of use: Evaporation- Maximum water wrface to be exposed: Description of any use, other than evaporation, and method of'diversion, rate of diversion, and annual amount of diversion of any water withdrawn from the pond: ❑ MUNICIPAL Description of use: El DIRECT PUMPING Tributary: Location. 4. SOURCE OF WATER Structure: Wells StructurcName. Lexie Wells A and.B Source, flSurface ❑Storage []Ground water Current Permit # test wells to be repermitted (attach copy) Dist-sncc of well from section lines: 1,980 a from soutil section lime I A 1 -60 ft _fora east section line 6 60 Elevation; 5,480 Well location address; County Road 4 227 (Miller Lane) Across (west) from Antonelli Lane, see —attached in: (Attach additional pagesfor multiple structures) 6. LAND ON WWCH WAUR WILL BE USED (Legal description may be provided as on attachment.) Garfield County Assessor's Parcel No. 2179 064 00 425 w attached map Number of acres In tract 76.2 Inchision Into the District, at,4pplicont's arpense, may he required 7. TYPE OF SEWAGE SYSTEM 0 Septic tank/absorpilon [each field Mcntralsystem ❑ 0ther DI-ttrictname: 8, VOLUME OF LEASED WATER NEEDED IN ACRE FEET: 10,5, see attached table (minimum of I acre foot except augmentation from Alsbury Reservoir where a lesser amount is allowed) Provide engineering data to support volume of water requested. Cononerdal, municipal, and industrial users must provide diversion and consumptive data on a monthly basis. A 0oralizingfiow ingler with remote readout is required to be installed and usage repayfed to West Divide Applicant expressly acknowledges it has had the opportunity to revinv the District's form WaterAllotmeut Contract and agraiff this application is made pursuant and subject to the terms and conditions contained therein. (\ % . A Applicant Signature Applicant Signature Applicafim Date- I - 12--6:z ISSUED AS AREA B CONTRACT YES X 1x10 The printed portions of this fbnY4 except differentiated additions ordeletions, have been approved and adopted by the West Divide Water Conservancy District. Form # WDWCD 050901 APP OL i4 F _ } of USG taw �VR 11:K !AG I.WGUuons.awy , [��-. Et 1� I. D a -J s (r ESL - �_ , f, -}"?; r , J =�F ;fl �y'S1� r•i Elid fry J.[ Eir ° & i_il €� EF C.1 laE 1 5,1 Cii ': IE c P_4)722 jacr �tR�i Sr0 G�r�.- - .��:�.�E'1 � _ ^viiC���: °v c4NFiELL, CO+_NIV cc �11t A List •5L T- 1E15CRTP77,?i;r c1 CtfI - c- :2EP�, i me �E-1 'NE. _A 2nd 7Tl €hr 7.48 1451�1/4, S. cotion 6 Tow ls;ip 6 SoL.t'sj, 2 ',' of :: 6tii P.M., Cr, iTjv of Cartivl!I, SigtQ of Cal orado, lying Viesterl y C.-F the f'asiei'i f f;or;]'ft c}f vrr_y fem= a a Cow nty Roa d a a-)d Ill plac�; 5114 PITcc] oflemd bbi�g ;.iar•� patdcularly d c iced ss fal.laws; 1?cgi 7 irk of <: Ei7'it?t 3rf id fence,h ,cc Pnc S� lta�, .Ni ca�;c; oi' said "e -tirso G a 3" ? lurrri"Eitrm C,ip'Fr and in placr bca; a South E -ost 1417.13 fort: Tlwn e worth O!J °4323" �Vcst ScG,tl! feet to fire hlortl;ea9t �n:7iCi oPilte said SF114 vl l /;, n 3" Ahm-1iuu ±t Caip F'atthd in plane; 1 it n;c 5ovt1i 0'26'17" West 1320.00 f c. , along fife noz:ihcrly line of aaid S1,71MIN131 /4 is the Norihwcst Con, cr ofthe said SE114NEI /4 a 05 rcbw with a redpla tic cap L.S, 4'13501 found in pine nl$0 b[ji g a poittt in a fence line; Thence along said ze;tcc South 00 °4 P28" Bast 12,8,14 jfrwt to a t5 rebar, el ilh a rcd plastic cap L,S, 4+13501 found in placc; Thence Not -th 88 °46102" )rose 56.55 feet along said fenm, Tltence South 0Q° [3'32" Wes[ 1386.77 feet ulong said fence; Thence SOLtth 00'42'08'-' 'West 46.7 ] feet along said fence to 0 #5 rcbar with a red plastic cols L,S.4413501 :found inplacc; Tbrricc North 88 95755" isasi 250.36 feet along; a fence fine; Thence North 01 °11'23" Wcst 114.89 feet; Thence Nortll OVI3'22" East 11.64 fret; Thence North 670716" East 36.75'fcct to a point on a fence line; Thence along said fence line North 88 °5753" Last 474.63 foot to the point of"bcginning. PURSUANT TO C:.k.8" 38- 35- 106,5, the name and address of the person who created the new legal doscripfion is as follows; Jeff Tuttic, P,L.S. 33636 7u tle Surveying Sorvices 226 Flcntht:r Lane Gtenwuod Springs, CO 81601 County of0arfletd Statc of Colorado SAID patrol hoirng a portion of u parcel of land historically described as follows; A PARCLL OF LAND SITUATED IN T E W112SW114 AND SWl /4NWl /4 OF SECTION 5 AND IN THE E 1 /2SEIA, SF 114NE114 AND LOT 1 OF SECTION 6, ALL IN TOWNSHM G .SOUTH, RANCTE 42 WEST OF THE SIXTH PiUNCil'Ai.Ivll:l`UDIAN, LYT00 WESTERLY OF THE WESTERLY RJGHT OF WAY FENCE, OF A COUNTY ROAD AS CONSTRUCTED AND IN PLACE, NORTHERLY. EASTERLY AND SOUTIi,URT Y 01" A (:_•`illl "'��'j-_[Iir �, Le„k: P .�'. .iE LIDS '.it L >.i ?i3 `PS A - nF G�U FLi1'.:LAS 00ti,}ir <' 2Dr ? ?7.� iN P A r. "r_' i'0P.t 1,�.:1: Slit 'f:f _' C,.. lsai, CE -NiER L 1 N E OF 1 €:lis 1-01 l3 k CA C T[.1.3%!!,t€ T, P�. 3`_D![C Hl{t S C'ON_'S1?; iC iz..i'_ ' €. li'; F f14Y '1&1 lj Fit,C!M_`J1 1-AN, D .I T, DES R.l BF_D fi�y i�. (,n , :BEf=INNIN A,T:'.1"C?iNT I�TG:',JilFEN-,T- WF.3'?`vETH CJA Fi4VF- .`'.'liM, 3�1.s 1Cf[i E%1i":It S16`4 0'E 13-01.54f u ; 71.16NCE Cl; Y42'Wl991.4G, FEET SAfl) FE C!i; TH E-,,7r, E NOVI "32 "E 62 .09 3^'!'__ I l'.i_O11G aA[ �i:NC I ; '] "3- l;*NCs N�9 °49'I�1 "t slI,CJT�C Sr�ti i Fl`i�CE, [2Y,9.,;�J I�Ti'�1 "t'C? t' T'D1N i Ci;v SltIU a:iG?;l 1' O'r V4 Y FY,INCF. TF1E�1Ci $O�`fj9' > + "li 2625.771 �C'[ r' LQIi;�SAiDT:(C'T OF V.'AY FZNCZ; '! 1-LENC i?. ALONG SAID ;; ;0[ (i 0:= !%Wt<Y FENCT., ),U A9 FE-al' 't'o A PDT`-(T ON UJT; ti FNTE'RLINE OF SAID 1 T i C; sPlcuCrltl.OVGSy,FT.lCE�TT:RLN 3:: °OC•'1` °Si +7h.62)EE1; THEN'C% S36°3741 "W 117,46 FF.F T ; T H1.itICE 854 °13'56 "W 42.62 5ERT. TMFNCF MU43'35 "W 59.5t FEET; iRMgCE LEAVING SAT-) CI NTERT.11N1� SOT °171 I "W 521,44 1•=RF'(' ALONG A FENCE; IHENCE,889`7,7'50 "NV ALONG SA1la SOUTi[EP.LY FENCE, 1052.23 Fi.E7'. MOTS 0}? 1.E,5s'I'n 7I-16 POINT OF I3E:GINNING, FXC�,PTING PROM ALL OFT 11B ABO yF, DFSCRISVI) PROPERTY, T1i(; I`'01..(.CJWINC; PARCELS OF LAND: A PARCEL O3 - LAND SITUATED IN T DE W 1/2SW AOF SEC'T'ION 5 AND IN TI-111 EIl2Sf.114 Of° SECTION G, ALT, IN TOWNSH[F 6 SOUTH. RANGE 92 WEST OF Tf[j: - SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, LYING WRSTEKLY Of"CFHC WL•STERLY RIGHT OF WAY I E CF OF A COUNTY ROAD AS CONSTRUCTED AND IN PLACL, NORTJJPASTERLY OF T1-Il; CCNTFRl.1Nr OF TF P LOWER CACTUS VALLEY DITCTI AND SOUTHRRLY OF A FriNCE AS CONSTRIICI'ET) AND IN PLACE, SAID PARCEL OF LAND IS DF.SCP MEU AS FOLLOWS: 13E jWNINCT AT A POINT IN THE W [ STERLY RIGHT OF' WAY FFN.CF: OF SAM COUNTY ROAD, WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID VX- T[ON 6, BEARS! S0O °25'46 "L 1417, ISFFET; THENCE SOP09'51'w 107.13 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY PENCE: THENCE ,500''03'14' W ALONG SAM RIGHT OF WAY FFNCF, 234.49 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTE'KT.1NE OF SAID DITCH`, THENCE ALONG SAID CENT RL1Nl;. S30"0019 "W 79.02I:CET; THENCE324 °32'21 "W 87„93 FFP.T; THENCE S36°37'41 "W 07.40 FF,T; T€ P,NCF S54 61;1'54 "W 42.68 FEET; THENCE N66643'35'W 59.51 FEET; THENCE, N50 °08'57 "W 79,00 FF P,T; "C[-113NCE N07 °27'16 "W 61.56 !'"- -T; THENCEN23'58'03 "W 91,51 F15F.T; THENCE N47 05947 "W 19.06 FEET; THENCE S81 °42'33 "W 39.15 FEHT; THENCE S32 °23'34 "W 120.37 FEET; THI;NC%N8713'08 "W 79,30 FEET; THENCE S80 °33'37 "W 122.70 FEET; THF,NCF S68'21'Z6''W 143.88 FEET; THENCE N83 °02'31 "W 68.16 FRET; THENCr N61 012'53 1-W 121,46FEE7'; TIIENCE NO2 °13'47 "lit 98.83 FP,13'I'; TiMNCI N09,03'10 "W 134.)OF'E.E7 t_S I� 1�11i hti €`'1 -sIL !i1iii Js st 7' �� - ss :J SF '1 I.r iii L � Is, ft -r it i �:a'J i.aiI fr -' 7A�P= .e' = ?� itbP! l'21'V%--' 191.s,E FEE PT [I•I I�!'�CF �FviJ�-J3.22 "S5 11.IF^ (•'��1� ? ` E V1i'ii !;AID T i1T:1tiL,;., l „�: C;B: TE��LIi �'s ,✓.- T11rIIi:. N ?;8'57'55`E f.C'- CVG SAM i 1 :' , 4;I.G9 F :ET, MO.RZ, OR LESS' 1Y) A _3'C)INIT IN ! liii: s!'ES "i ECcL i' R1Crs? i L> WAY F yNC:� C�1 S. ;:TD CGUr'1 T 1ZO.,i? T n: POI?vi i} 3Gi i i 3.3• ALSO FU 0F 51~CTl.Ori G, Tfl1�:7•ISa;�iF' rz $�iJ1. f; CtJ+.idC�Y 92 'vVEs T �jb Tri c [, i i? F"s�f3 CIT'riL 1;TN °,11�J1'�i ;, 13F•.i „�G 1dC7RT F�aT fi LiLPinT'i Di ?£CPIrF.n gs rot_1,()T1,3: E3'✓Ci1T1t�1� dG A! A l't)li i.l 3' ='H'r,1�1t:r'[`r[d SOII'P'IE,1ST C'- Ol,td =€ (.r Sr_IU S1:C' €'lU1r' G [3F:fti<S 876 °47'19 "R 1551,51 FF;,Ti 7[-MNC: N89'27'50 "E 1052.21 F =1:T; 7')I;�i4C iVUI "I t'1 IT. 32.15 FRET; THBN'C?,SW''l2'�1"V/ 1652.67 FEET; 1'(- [h[JCL' SGO'�L (iG "JJ 27.$3 FEr i I',7 'i; -II~ I�Cili;`i' Gi L; 1�01i`fi�iltlG, Ml -80 FUF T i 3r:.R E tiCAPTING APARCEI OF LAND SIT-1-FA-1 P© R i PR WEST 112 of SECTION 5, TOiniNS1-11F 0 50UT 11, P.ANGF; 92 WEST OF THE 61.1.1 PRINCIPAL 1' EPID.—WN BEING MC F-:; PARTlCULALLY DBSC.RIDED AS FM DDS: 13C-.01NNiNG AT A POJNT ON THE WEST LINE O?' SAID SEMON 5 Wlir.NQ.r °r Ur, S0L1TIiRII?S T, CO RATER OF SAID SECTION 5 BEARS 500'43'23 "E 1072.13 1°: rT; Tfll. NCI`, ALONG SAID SECE ION LINE N00'43'23 "W2863.43TTET; THBNCF DFPART1NCr SAM SECT IOM LINE N89'40'14 "1:',+36.2(, PUP-T; TH1sNCI' Sot009`5I "W 2625,77 FRET; TURNCE SOV03'14 "W 234.+39 7UT; 3 MENC T. S36006 9" 5•v 4.04 FEET TO T UL POINT 01113LGINMN- (j, COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO tiJ al&- t C.__ n- i;f; iga Co L, G p as S 0 f- :. -_ ": wpter �n l krPL'1 NcSf �1r� /. l,l �Jlou bs L House ii L'e= -3dr L•�L 9t5 3! (1,f�i;,1 Pond Evap. Total = e-, in, o_L -_.c'u L1- ^-gCc.- s!r_1 ._ 1J ( /. -•J P o:?ulz 5'1fL LC 1 ' (G -i ?[ '.i:)T $ L:F'e Lot J00 (jr Gi %� _ C'M'Ac iii ai =1' T '�.ln 1,33 Cci_'P_) E°Sca fl,n i r.I t: (C Jf?i6--_) TiPTi '. tor. 0.27 f 11.05 D�i1y Usas;, pc- V=-Id i % (sr l) PerC_ni ('l Pond Sjgnarp Pse2 1.7i (acY�„f tiJ al&- t C.__ n- i;f; iga Co L, G p as S 0 f- :. -_ ": wpter �n l krPL'1 NcSf �1r� /. l,l �Jlou bs L House Lawn Potable Watef Di-versions LivestoOk Pond Evap. Total Average In-House Potable Water Cousun Lawn Livestock Pond November 1.19 0.00 0.00 0.27 146 11.05 0.18 0.00 0.00 0. December 1.23 0.00 0.00 0.20 1,44 10.50 0.18 0.00 0.00 01 January 1.23 0.00 0.00 4.20 1.44 10.50 0.18 0.00 0.00 0. February 1.11 0.00 0.00 0.23 1.35 10.92 0.17 0.00 0.00 0. March 1.23 0.00 0.00 0.37 1.61 11.72 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.. April 1.19 0.07 0.00 0.60 1.87 14.11 0.18 0.06 0.00 0. May 1.23 0.24 0.00 0.81 2.28 16.62 0.18 0.19 0.00 0. June 1.19 0.25 0.00 0.97 2.42 18.23 0.18 0.20 0.00 0.` July 1.23 024 0.00 1.01 2.48 18.10 0.18 0.19 0.00 1.1 Au,°ust 1.23 0.21 0.00 0.91 2.35 17.16 0.18 0.17 0.00 0.1 September 1.19 0.18 0.00 0.67 2.04 15.41 0.18 0.14 0.00 0.1 October 1.23 0.09 0.00 0.47 1.79 13.09 0.18 0.07 0.00 0.1 Annual 14.51 1.26 0.05 6.71 22.53 13.95 2.18 1.01 0.05 6.. (1) Months in water year order. (2) Equals Number of Lots times Daily 1n -house Usage per Lot tunes Days in Month divided by 325,851. (3) Equals Total Potable Water Lawn (and Garden) Area times Lawn CIR I (Lawn (and Garden) lrrigaiian Application Efficiency)_ (4) Equals Head of Livestock times Daily Usage per Head times Days ul Month divided by 325,85 t - (5) Equals Pond Surface Area times Evaporation (6) Equals the sum of Colunns (2 thm 5). (7) Equals Column (6) times 325,851 divided by minutes in month. (8) Equals Column (2) tirrm Percent of In-house Usage Consumed. (9) Equals Column (3) times Lawn (and Garden) Irrigation Application Efficiency. Months Days in Mouth Monthly [Water Usage Parameters Irrigation Water Requirements CIR) Lawn Pasture rJ Evaporation tJ Lagging Factors PA November 30 0.000 0.000 0.153 4.61 December 31 0.000 0.000 0.115 3.86 January 31 0.000 0.000 0.115 3.87 February 28 0.000 ODOO 0.134 4.45 March 31 0.000 0.000 0.211 5.51 April 30 0.132 0.041 0.345 8.63 May 31 0.444 0.248 0.460 11.68 June 30 0.465 0.418 0.556 13.83 July 31 0.447 0.515 0575 13.70 August 31 0.391 0.448 0.518 12.48 September 30 0.332 0.248 0383 10.17 October 31 0.166 0.043 0.268 7.21 Annual 365 2.378 1.960 3.833 100.0 ?ancanela and AS5ociatea. Inc, z-v?M000W6 Cagle. Jim (Mur propertyy11WawUsage3 Mi2007 fS =3 P :� «in 1,. parcel pf3=Sd i iiate+�i AD th5 1 .�` °�1 /4S�^Jl /4 ��.tsC� 5; J.Dma511i,. � 6 ��i l�, �?��� 92 V& $ 4:`ll„ Gtr!P.ML, Coi n'- yofGzxiield; stz�r I u <,i i 3r cal of amd- b6jaumora ? :_iic l_ilydy:cribed �: `Ol1eYJS: Psgvnx bag at the West 114 Co--me;- of said Section 5, also ht i-!g the soighweS, cotter ens a p?rc €1 of land deucribed in l3ool_ 1215 m pagc 237, thence along the southerly line of P-.ia parcel N 89 °43'40" F- 25.73 fiat to a point on the Vvestexly eight of wad fence line of i�Iei Lalke (CoLr?ty Road 227), therice alon;!�-- said wc; m-dy right of,,,ay fence line S 00'010'5.1 "W 1206.49 feet, thence departing said fence line S 88'5-1'55-" W7-26 feet to a point on, the westerly line of said Section 5, thence along said w:,sterly lin: N 00 °43'23" W 1205.71 feet to the point of ginning, containing an area of0.46 acres, more or less. PURSUANT TO C.R.S. 38 -35- 106.5, the name and address of the pmo'n who created the new legal d.esr iption is as follows: Jeff Tuttle, P.L.S. 33638 Tuttle Surveying Services 226 I leather Lane Glenwood Springs, CO 81501 -2- p ii ,. [. -� ti n id4. A Fs A. r-,— -} ! .:m-a M9i' 11a; �3 ;3l �j E I 4 l' 1 d h l f�°i r?, 902 Ie,th c' y!. j,�,5 rGrra{�+,_ f�1r1_s �� .i.- ��, C. d ° f 1/4 1,"I , �.,iq i , .7�o': wC� i__, � =*1C= r� i�9..� C- it 4��1 ['•1�•L�'w.l,l JS'1� —� 41r : s.� 1 �_ �I .Z�i °jPti,l '7 Tj —�" Yi y d—s l �_ ld, �__ eo"Co1 mdo. sa._.p� L.erice Segkl mg at the Northvvzst Cosner of tho said SW114i I /a, S6cori 5, a " r1unn.i m cap.fQuild im Ph, -Qc; atRa b img c palbfit in a f tr,-- - lies th�ncf alo nz sad-. flerno #!de. N 89'41 i53" F'. 46.2; feet to a point on the sieste_rly right of vvay fence IL-ac of 1`1 Mer lane (Comaty Road 227), thence along said fen,- c; line 5 00 °09'51" W 65 &.G6 feet to a point on, -Lb e northerly Mae of a parcel efbid described i-I Book 1215 at Page 237, thence along said northerly 1i -ae S 89 °42'47" W 36,01 feet to a point oi.Y the westerly line of said Section 5, thence along said %vesterly lime N 00 °43'23" W 656.65 &et to the point ofbegimni_lg, containing an area of 0.62 acres, more or toss. PURSUANT TO C.R.S. 38- 35- 105.5, the name and address of the persax! Nvho created the new legal description is as follows-. Jeff Tuttle, P.L.S. 33638 Tuttle Surve3ing Services 226 Heather Lane Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 -2- t_- OfltrEc t .0 ?vJlI ,I'A(=) 'WEST DIVIDE �AVATER CONSERVANCY DISTR -TC T TWA T F-R ALLOTIMEN T COtr'TR- C 1 hlame of Applicant: Lexic i -,e-. loays HOA c/o.Iir�ibob Vey-�ttires ll, LL C Orianti�� of t`iater in Acre Ecet: 10.5 AF Applicant, hereby applies to the Nest Divide Water Conservancy District, a political subdivision of the State of Colorado, organized pursuant to and existing by virtue ofC.R.S. 1973, §37 -45 -101, et sue., (hereinafter referred to as the "District ") for an allotment contract to beneficially and perpetually use water or water rights owned, leased, or hereafter acquired by the District. By execution of this Contract and the attached Application, Applicant hereby agrees to the following terms and conditions: Water Riahts: Applicant shall own water rights at the point of diversion herein lawfully entitling Applicant to divert water, which will be supplemented and augmented by water leased herein. If Applicant intends to divert through a vvell, it must be understood by Applicant that no right to divert exists until a valid well permit is obtained from the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Quantity: Water applied for by the Applicant in the amount set forth above shall be diverted at Applicant's point of diversion from the District's direct flow water rights, and when water is unavailable for diversion pursuant to administration by the Colorado State Engineer during periods when said direct flow water right is not in priority, the District shall release for the use of Applicant up to said quantity in acre feet per year of storage water owned or controlled by the District. It is understood that any quantity allotted from direct flow, storage or otherwise, to the Applicant by the District will be limited by the priority of the District's decrees and by the physical and legal availability of water from District's sources. Any quantity allotted will only be provided so long as water is available and the Applicant fully complies with all of thetenns and conditions of this Contract. The District and the Applicant recognize that some of the District's decrees may be in the name of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, and the ability of the District to allot direct flow right to the Applicant may be dependent on the consent of the Colorado River Water Conservation District. If at any time the Applicant determines it requires less water than the amount herein provided, Applicant may so notify the District in writing, and the amount of water allotted under this Contract shall be reduced permanently in accordance with such notice. Rates shall be adjusted accordingly in following water years only. Beneficial Use and Location of Beneficial Use: Any and all water a] lotted Applicant by the District shall be used for the following beneficial use or uses: industrial, municipal, domestic and related uses, or commercial (except for commercial use from Alsbury Reservoir and except to the extent that Ruedi Reservoir water may not be available for commercial as that term is defined on Page 5 of Contract No. 2-07-70 - W0547 between the United States and the West Divide Water Conservancy District). Applicant's beneficial use of any and all water allotted shall be within or through facilities or upon land owned, leased, operated, or under Applicant's control. 4. Decrees and Delivery: Exchange releases made by the District out of storage from Ruedi Reservoir, Green Mountain Reservoir, Alsbury Reservoir, or other works or facilities of the District, or from other sources available to the District, shall be delivered to the Applicant at the outlet works of said storage facilities or at the decreed point of diversion for said other sources, and release or delivery of water at such outlet or points shall constitute performance of the District's total obligation. Delivery of water by the District from Ruedi Reservoir or Green Mountain Reservoir shall be subject to the District's lease contracts with the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Releases from other facilities available to District shall be subject to the contracts, laws, rules, and regulations governing releases therefrom. Furthermore, the District hereby -.lj' It" , to stor.' watt-, ar. tG r;i' -.e E;=C" reic�5e5 LO i? Et3'L?CiLP�521af In -�'bF bl ?]li Ol' G'Orlia011Ed Gy' i l�jSLtCt i7 ii3P f�� ?ee, so long as the hater service to the Applicant parspa-it to this 991 ccmeni, is no% irnp< -.irec by said croon. Any quantity of t ie Appiica~i ?s alloc2floil not celiva_Ed to or u s E d by App1_icamI by tht; end of ea. c=a wztcr year (October I ). shAI reve n to the water Supp]ies Of the D1str,ct, Such rev rsl0n shall not eljtItle Fl1»llcentto miy'+' fund ofpa`„Rent made fo< SuCli LVate ?. -later 5 rv1c8 provldEd by the Dis -cict shad] be hm]ted i0 the ariount of water available ]n priority at theo- igm-20 poin, of diwrsion ofthe District's applicable water right, acrd neither tha District, nor those entilied to utili2c the District's decrees, may call on any greater amount at new or alternate poLgts ordiversion. The Dist; ict shall request tno Colorado Division of Water k6sourees to estimate any conveyRnce losses bebveen fhf, orighi 1 ;coi t and any alternate point, and such e.s',irnate shall be deducted l on this amount in each case. -Water service provided by tine District for properties located within the Bluestone and Silt Water Conservancy Districts is provided pursuant to Agreements with said Distriets. The Intergovernmental Agreement between the District and the Silt Water Conservancy District, dated January 25, 2001, is recorded as Reception No. 575691, Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office. The Intergovernmental Memorandurn of Understanding between the District and the Bluestone Water Conservancy District, dated April 26, 2001, is recorded as Reception No. 584840, Garfield County Clerk and Recorder's Office. Alternate Point of Diversion and Plan of Auementation: Decrees for alternate points of diversion oftheDistrict's water rights or storage water may be required in order for Applicant to use the water service contemplated hereunder. Obtaining such decree is the exclusive responsibility of Applicant. The District reserves the right to review and approve any conditions which maybe attached to judicial approval of said alternate point of diversion as contemplated or necessary to serve Applicant's facilities or lands. Applicant acknowledges and agrees that it shall be solely responsible for the procedures and legal engineering costs necessary for any changes in water rights contemplated herein, and further agrees to indemnify the District from any costs or losses related thereto. Applicant is solely responsible for providing works and facilities necessaryto obtain/divert the waters at said alternate point of diversion and deliver them to Applicant's intended beneficial use. Irrespective of the amount of water actually transferred to the Applicant's point of diversion, the Applicant shall make annual payments to the District based upon the amount of water allotted under this Contract. In the event the Applicant intends to apply for an alternate point of diversion and to develop an augmentation plan and institute legal proceedings for the approval of such augmentation plan to allow the Applicant to utilize the water allotted to Applicant hereunder, the Applicant shall give the District written notice of such intent. In the event the Applicant develops and adjudicates its own augmentation plan to utilize the water allotted hereunder, Applicant shall not be obligated to pay any amount under Paragraph 19 below. In any event, the District shall have the right to approve or disapprove the Applicants augmentation plan and the Applicant shall provide the District copies of such plan and of all pleadings and other papers filed with the water court in the adjudication thereof. Contract Payment, Non - refundable, one time administrative charge, in the amount determined by theBoard ofDirectors of the District from time to time, shall be submitted with the application for consideration by the District. Annual payment for the water service described herein shall be determined by the Board ofDirectors of the District. The initial annual payment shall be made in full, within thirty (30) days after the date of notice to the App] icant that the initial payment is due. Said notice wits advise the Applicant, among other things, of the water delivery year to which the initial payment shal l apply and the price which is applicable to that Year. al y c r-a yew - thereai�er shall Le dud 2nd p2:yr�1 by th Applaca_?i � c, ' ` nV, .tan ua,,, 1 • u f:]in1.�. pa i,�i;t IOe ea...i e O'a_ '' b• °�v:c e' ,i �,� c_ L -F�t t�_`�7' ctI payment is nut made by the doe date a fiat SJf late TCe will be asses. d. j`i- O Viritten nc�,Icc prior to cs_mcelh. ?ior, watt be sent cerdfie_] mail, r• to a'ccpipt requested, to the Appka i at such address as may 1 -a designated by tale Applicant in tis'Iith -a- or, set iai ih in this Coni, £t o' ApphGatioa . Water use for any part of a. water year shall require pkvment for the entire V ater year. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to prevent t'o Disti ict hom adjusting the annual rate in its sole discretion for future "eats only. if payment is not :wade within fifteen (15) days after the data of said written notice, Appli cant shall at District's sole option h=oc no further right, title or interest under this Contract without fur-ther notice, end delivery m ay be im__madiattly curtailed. 7he a]loh-nent of vrkr, as hel'cL-i made, may be transferred; leased, or otherwise disposed of at the discretion of the Board of Directors of the Disr act. Upon cancellation of this water allotment Contract with the District, the Disiict shall notify the Division o, Water Resources offices in Denver and Glenwood Springs. The Division of Water Resources may then order cessation of all water use. Additional Fees and Costs. Applicant agrees to defray any expenses incurred by the District in connection with the allotment of water rights hereunder, including, but not limited to, reimbursement of legal and engineering costs incurred in connection with any water rights and adjudication ;accessary to allow Applicant's use of such allotted water rights. 8. Assignment: This Contract shall not inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors or assigns of Applicant, without the prior written consent of the District's Board of Directors. Any assignment of Applicant's rights under this Contract shall be subject to, and mast comply with, such requirements as the District may hereafter adopt regarding assignment of Contract rights and the assumption of Contract obligations by assignees and successors. Nothing herein shal l prevent successors to a portion ofApplicant's property from applying to the District for individual and separate allotment Contracts. No assignment shall be recognized by the District except upon completion and filing ofproper forms for assignment and change of ownership. In the event the water allotted pursuant to this Contract is to be used for the benefit of land which is now or will subsequently be subdivided or held in separate ownership, the Applicant may only assign the Applicant's rights hereunder to. l) No more than three separate owners all of whom shall be party to a well sharing agreement satisfactory to the District; or 2) A homeowners association, water district, water and sanitation district or other special district properly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado, and then, only if such parties, association or special district establishes to the satisfaction of the District that it has the ability and authority to perform the Applicant's obligations under this Contract. In no event shall the owner of a portion, but less than all, of the Applicant's property to be served under this Contract have any rights hereunder, except as such rights may exist pursuant to a well sharing agreement or through a homeowners association or special district as provided above. Upon the sale of the real property to which this Contract pertains, Applicant shall make buyer aware of this Contract and proper forms for assignment and change of ownership must be completed. Other Rules: Applicant shall be bound by the provisions of the Water Conservancy Act of Colorado; by the rules and regulations of the Board of Directors of the District; and all amendments thereof and supplements thereto and by all other applicable Iaw. 10. Operation and Maintenance Agreement: Applicant shall enter into an "Operation and Maintenance Agreement" with the District under terms and conditions determined bythe board of Directors of the District, if and when, the Board of said District determines in its sole discretion that such an agreement is required. Said agreement may contain, but shall not be limited to, provisions for additional annual monetary �ti un iJ • e::iv ..:Ora Or DS m-fi v: dt- i1 V:, 5 7 J1 v:,3 a_n L1 IU;' c'' iiICi! %l t4minis:rc^_'ion, Up C., a`1i3n, Fod nlalntc nancc coats: or L- ot±!Z;r cosu try the DistTiCt bV licli " "-flay e is:' tlft —gush s x-victs nla& cVaili'ble to 1111e LApplicc ^_r:. 1 1 . rn'�� -t �f1•_l �_ .t 17b D15iTICt Iesc1"VOS t'C1e eXC} 15iVe right to reVie'tY, 1'eapprovc or Cilsapprove a_i;y p o oseG of th? weC•' -r of ntted heru1na-t , Any u °t- ofhri th! --3 th= ±: sel fo h herein or any lease or s ^le o the water or eater rights horeu,Ider wlthoL't the prig. 1:; *' -Ue-_ ziptl:o':al Orti?- D'_s nC: to o: E: mateiia} breach of fhi> C4nit��Ci. 12. Use amd Ptaee o= Use: Applic -nt agrees to usu the water in the r_carmer and on the property described in the doculmnts submitted to the District al the tim. this Contract is executed, or in any opea-ation and r iahitenwIce agreement provided by Applicam. Any useothe_ tkann as set forth thereon or any lease a, sale of the water or water rights herein, other than as perruitted in paragraph ° above. shall be deemed to be a rnzterial breach of this agreement. 13. Tie: It is unders`iood and agreed that nothing herein shall be interpreted to give the Applic mt any equitable or legal fee title interest in or to any water or water rights referred to herein. 14. Conservation: Applicant shall use commonly accepted conservation practices with respect to the water and water rights herein, and hereby agrees to be bound by any conservation plan adopted hereafter by the District for use of District owned or controlled water or water rights. 15. Restrictions: Applicant shall restrict actual diversions to not exceed the contract amount, which provides water (on the formula of one acre foot per dwelling) for ordinary household purposes inside one single family dwelling, the watering of domestic livestock, fire protection, and the irrigation of lawn and garden as specified in the Application. Water Resources. Applicant shall also comply with all restrictions and limitations set forth in the well permit obtained from the Colorado Division of Watering of livestock shall be restricted to Applicant's domestic animals not to be used for commercial purposes unless Applicant obtains approval from the Colorado Division of Water Resources for commercial use/livestock watering, provided that in no event shall actual diversions exceed the amount of water provided by this Contract. Violation of this paragraph 15 shall be deemed to be amaterial breach of this Contract. 16. Well Permit: If Applicant intends to divert through a well, then Applicant must provide to District a copy of Applicant's valid well permit before District is obligated to deliver any water hereunder. 17 • Measuring Device or Meter: Applicant agrees to provide, at its own expense, a measuring device deemed acceptable by the District's Engineer after consultation, or a totalizing flow meter with remote readout to continuously and accurately measure at all times all water diverted pursuant to the terms of Applicant's water right and the terms of this Contract. Applicant agrees to provide accurate readings from such device or meter to District upon District's request. Applicant acknowledges that failure to comply with this paragraph could result in legal action to terminate Applicant's diversion of water by the State of Colorado Division of Water Resources. By signing this Contract, Applicant hereby specifically allows District, through its authorized agent, to enter upon Applicant's property during ordinary business hours for the purposes of determining Applicant's actual use of water. l v. RFpre OI?5. By e itoutli-i- this Contract, �?pplic:mt agi ccs that it is not relying on a' -ry 1 rat or e.ngi�icerin z4vi-= that Appl'+_carit may bclievc has beer, rz.ceived forn the District. Applicant fn her acknowledges that it ha; obtaineEl all necessary legal and engineering advice f-osi Applicant's ovrD sources oche-, thLo the Disiiict. Applice-int foTther ac?:nowled ;s that the District may es nn guaw tutees, W Tanties, or assurances whatsoever about the quantity or quality of water av iilable pursuant to this Contract. Should the District be unable to provide the water contracted for heroin, no dari?p.-es rnsy be assessed against the District, nor may Applicant obta'in a rebind from the District. 19. Costs of Water Coot Filing a_nd A-io-rrientmior Pl ?n; Should the District, in its ovdi-, discretio.E, choose to ir-icluc:e Applicant's Contract herein in a water court filing for &Itenaie point of diversion= or plan of aub cntation, th=,11 Applicant hereby;; gees to payto the District, when assessed, on additional fee representing the District's actual and reasonable costs a-id fees for Appli_cant's share ofthe proceedings. Applicant shall be assessed a pro -rma share of the total cost incurred by the District in preparing, filing and pursuing to decree the neater court case, The pro -rata share shall be calculated by dividing such total cost by the number of contractees included i,-i the filing. To the extent that the District is caused additional costs because of objection filed specifically due to the inclusion of Applicant's Contract in the filing, such additional costs nayhe charged specifically to Applicant and not shared on a pro -rata basis by 211 contractees. 20. Binding Agreement:. This agreement shall not be complete nor binding upon the District unless attached hereto is the form entitled "Application to Lease Water From West Divide Water Conservancy District" fully completed by Applicant and approved by the District's engineer. Said attachments shall by this reference thereto be incorporated into the terms ofthis agreement. All correspondence from the District to Applicant referring to or relating to this agreement is by this reference incorporated into this agreement as further terms and conditionsof this agreement. 21. Waminsz: IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN A VALID WELL PERMIT OR OTHER WATER RIGHT IN ORDER TO DIVERT WATER, INCLUDING THE WATER ACQUIRED UNDER TIBS CONTRACT, IT IS THE CONT141JING DUTY OF THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN THE VALIDITY OF THE WELL PERMIT OR WATER RIGHT INCLUDING FILING FOR EXTENSIONS OF PERMITS, FILING WELL COMPLETION REPORTS, FILING STATEMENTS OF BENEFICIAL USE, OR OTHERWISE LAWFULLY APPLYING THE WATER TO BENEFICIAL USE ON A REGULAR BASIS WITHOUT WASTE, 22, AREA B. CONTRACTS: IF APPLICANTS WELL OR OTHER WATER RIGHT THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS CONTRACT IS LOCATED OUTSIDE "AREA A" AS DESIGNATED BY THE DISTRICT. THEN THIS PARAGRAPH APPLIES: THE AUGMENTATION WATER PROVIDED BY THE DISTRICT UNDER THIS CONTRACT MAY ONLY PROTECT APPLICANTS WATER RIGHT FROM A CALL ON THE COLORADO RIVER AND MAY NOT PROTECT APPLICANT FROM A CALL FROM ANY OTHER SENIOR RIGHT. NO REPRESENTATION OTHERWISE IS MADE BY THE DISTRICT. IF THIS IS A CONCERN TO APPLICANT, THIS CONTRACT MAY BE RESCINDED UPON WRITTEN NOTICE DELIVERED TO THE DISTRICT BY THE APPLICANT WITHIN THE nXT 30 DAYS FOLLOWING THE AFFIXING OF SIGNATURES ON THIS CONTRACT IN WHICH EVENT ALL SUMS PAID BY APPLICANT FOR THUS CONTRACT SHALL BE %INEDIATELY REFUNDED TO APPLICANT. ir Applicant Applicant s -- I'te 'T��Uiiia iyln nm1:'!t wa �E lit i'i�cC��CA y ?O:c mli CQi t ii s� ' &iy of f p L by 4 G' )� G "]tnessrn h_,ds�d0_nrj� {sell 1 r ^�° l'aSG! 7 i�ll7L ry Public —i 6 3 a S TA, TE OF S °. aa° CO P i Y OF the fore�oi_ria instrument Was acknovilodaed, befoTe me, ou th7S day 0� _ � , 20 by Witness my hatid and official sea.}. My con -hr ission e-o cs: Notary Public ORDER After a hearing by the Board of Directors of the West Divide Water Conservancy District on the Application, it is hereby ORDERED that said Application be granted and this Contract shall be and is accepted by the District. WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSE CY DISTRICT By -. President 7 Date This Contract includes and is subject to the terms and conditions of the following documents which must accompany this Contract: 1. Map showing location of point of diversion (use map provided) 2. Application and Data form fully completed and signed The panted portions of this form, except differentiated additions or deletions, have been approved and adopted by the West Divide Water Conservancy District. Form #WDWCD 050901 CONTRACT. 6 EXHIBIT WESTERN SLOPE CONSULTING LLC D July 3, 2007 Mr. Craig Richardson. Senior planner Garfield County 108 8th St, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Submitted by E -Mail Dear Mr. Richardson: I am writing on behalf of Jim Bob Ventures LLC about the Lexie Meadows Subdivision Preliminary Plat application. The applicants respectfully request a continuation of the public hearing from the currently noticed July 11, 2007 date to the regular planning commission meeting on September 26, 2007. The consulting team is working on resolving the County planning staff concerns about the application. It is our goal to answer the questions in advance of the September 26, 2007 meeting. I will plan on attending the planning commission meeting next week to answer any questions about this request. Please contact me if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Davis Farrar Project Planner 0165 BASALT MT DR • CARBONDALE, COLORADO - 81623 PHONE: 970 - 963 -7172 • FAX: 970- 963 -7172