Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationE IT 'aJ di'A. ' N BOX ft9B CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 January 25, 1977 Garfield County Planning & Zoning Commission Glenwood Springs, Colorado Gentlemen: Foster Petroleum Corporation as owner of record of the acreage to be known as Lake Spring Ranch hereby submits for your consideration and approval a sketch plan for developing said property into five acre home sites. Cost estimates prepared by Scarrow & Walker, Inc. indicate approximately $400,000. will be required for total development of the project. Of this amount approximately $270,000. will be required for development, storage and distribution of water and it is anticipated this amount will be financed through a water district. The balance of approximately $130,000. to be utilized for the construction of roads, electric, telephone, engineering, surveying and miscellaneous shall be paid in cash by the developer -owner. Although a closed sanitation system is not required under the circumstances it is our understanding that the County Planning and Zoning Board may wish to consider such a system in the future for the Spring Valley area. Foster Petroleum Corporation is open to consider such a program and recognizes there may be advantages to such a system for home owners on lots even as large as five acres. However, the timing of such a district would be critical to our decision making process if Lake Spring Ranch were to be included. Thank you for your attention to this request. I look forward to working with the County Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the County Commissioners on the Lake Spring Ranch P.U.D. for the residents of Garfield County. Duncan L. Sinnock DLS:ges Real Estate Investment Manager • 1 ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS FOR LAKE SPRINGS RANCH ROAD Upgrading existing road Construction of new road 10% for contingencies $ 19,600.00 38,500.00 $ 59,100.00 5,910.00 $ 65,010.00 WATER Collection System 2 -Wells $ 9,000.00 2 -Pumps 3,000.00 6" Line 24,480.00 Distribution System 8" Line 155,360.00 60,000 Gal. Tank 25,000.00 Chlorinator 2,000.00 Fire hydrants 24,000.00 $242,840.00 10% for contingencies 24,284.00 $267,124.00 65,010.00 Total for construction $332,134.00 Use $350,000.00 UTILITIES Electric $ 25,000.00 Telephone 20,000.00 Total for utilities $ 45,000.00 Surveying and Engineering 25,000.00 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST $420,000.00 ROBERT D. SCARROW L.S. PRES. ROBERT A. WAMSLEY L.S., VICE PRES. & MGR. LARRY GRAHAM, P.E. VICE PRESIDENT TOM WALKER L.S. CONSULTANT RAYMOND L. BALDWIN, C.E. FRANK W. HARRINGTON DENNIS O. BRADLEY, MGR. RIFLE I=Seat zow and 'Waast, Ina.' Reg. Engineers and Land Surveyors 204 8th Street - Office Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601 Extension Office 328 East Avenue • Rifle, Colo. 81650 May 3, 1977 Garfield County Planning Dept. Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Attn: Mr. Bob Witkowski Dear Bob: ELECTROTAPE CLARY COMPUTER WILD THEODOLITE ZIESS LEVEL INSTRUMENT RENTALS On behalf of Foster Petroleum Corp., we would request a review by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the sketch plan of Lake Springs Ranch. The reason for this request is that major changes have been made on the sketch plan and therefore feel that this review is necessary. If we can be of any further assistance concerning this project, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Raymond L. Baldwin, Agent RLB/cmm Glenwood Springs • Box 460 • Phone 945-5574 Rifle • Box 1478 • Phone 625-2740 lai- eazzow ants(' VYaf'ALtz, lne. ROBERT D. SCARROW L.S. PRES. ROBERT A. WAMSLEY L.S., VICE PRES. & MGR. LARRY GRAHAM, P.E. VICE PRESIDENT TOM WALKER L.S. CONSULTANT RAYMOND L. BALDWIN, C.E. FRANK W. HARRINGTON DENNIS O. BRADLEY, MGR. RIFLE Mr. Bob Witkowski Garfield County Planning Dept. Glenwood Springs, Colo.81601 Dear Bob: Reg. Engineers and Land Surveyors 204 8th Street - Office Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601 Extension Office 328 East Avenue • Rifle, Colo. 81650 April 7, 1977 On behalf of Foster Petroleum Corp., we would like to request an extension of time until May 1, 1977, of the review time on the sketch plan of Lake Springs Ranch. We would urge the County to be as expedient as possible in the scheduling of meetings to reach a decision on this project. If we can be of any further assistance concerning this project, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely /)t Ray B dwin, Agent cc: Duncan Sinnock RLB/cmm Glenwood Springs • Box 460 • Phone 945-5574 Rifle • Box 1478 • Phone 625-2740 ELECTROTAPE CLARY COMPUTER WILD THEODOLITE ZIESS LEVEL INSTRUMENT RENTALS ASPEN OFFICE P.O. BOX 8028 ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE P.O. BOX 1288 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.U. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 SANTO DOMINGO OFFICE WRIGHT-MENA WATER ENGINEERS KM 9% ANTIGUA CORRETERA DUARTE SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC RIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 12,180 ALCOTT DENVER. COLORADO 10E11 (303) 411.6101 September 9, 1977 Glenwood Springs Tel: 945-7755 Mr. Duncan Sinnock Foster Petroleum Corporation P. 0. Box 698 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 KENNETH R. WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAH RUSSELL E. DARR F ROBERT McGREGOR RALPH L. TOREN ROBERT D. TAFELSKI Re: Water Supply for the proposed Lake Springs Ranch Development Dear Mr. Sinnock: Wright Water Engineers has completed a preliminary analysis and evaluation of the water rights and water resources associated with the proposed development of the Lake Springs Ranch located in Spring Valley about 5 miles southeast of Glenwood Springs. Lake Springs Ranch intends to meet its water needs with two water systems. The first would be a central water supply system to serve up to 100 domestic units. The second water system will be the continued use of a portion of the Van Cleve irrigation ditch which has historically irrigated a portion of the Lake Springs Ranch. At this time it is expected that the water for the central water supply system will come from a spring or two wells drilled into the Spring Valley alluvium. These wells could produce about 100 gpm each and would be sufficient to supply in-house use, about 4000 square feet of irrigation per lot, plus some water for greenbelt and equestrian areas. It is our opinion that the proposed development has access to a reliable long term water supply. Besides having a continuously flowing spring of about 0.5 cfs, part of the development is located over a large groundwater reservoir which we believe contains more than 10,000 acre feet of water that is constantly being recharged. This is the aquifer from which Colorado Mountain College obtains its water. Lake Springs Ranch owns the following water rights: Name of Ditch Van Cleve No. 1 Van Cleve No. 2 Van Cleve No. 2 Amount 1.4 cfs .9 2.0 Approp. Date 9-05-1882 9-15-1882 5-15-1884 These rights have irrigated about 70 acres of historic consumptive use much greater than what is proposed development. Adjud. Date 5-11-1889 5-11-1889 4-18-1880 land and have had a anticipated for the • Mr. Duncan Sinnock, September 9, 1977 Page 2 These rights have historically obtained their water from the spring located on the ranch. There are only three water rights in the Spring Valley area senior to the Van Cleve rights and those rights are on Landis Creek and cannot "call out" any of the Van Cleve rights. In addition to the Van Cleve rights we believe Lake Springs Ranch can develop a new groundwater appropriation from the Spring Valley aquifer to meet most of its proposed water needs. We believe that the available physical and "legal" water supply can be developed to adequately meet the domestic needs of the proposed Lake Springs Ranch development, even in the dryest years. The developers intend to go to water court in the near future to obtain a change in use of a portion of the Van Cleve rights to adequately cover the "legal" domestic needs of the development. In addition to domestic needs, a significant amount of irriga- tion water will be available to irrigate lawns and greenbelt areas in the development. If you have any questions on the above, please don't hesitate to call. WLL:gh 741-22 cc: Scott Balcomb Scarrow & Walker-KKBNA Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. •Al '� -/ r,! By t'liti—(- -3 ASPEN OFFICE P O BOX 8028 ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE P 0 BOX 1286 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 STEAMBOAT OFFICE P.O. BOX 5220 STEAMBOAT VILLAGE, COLORADO 80499 SANTO DOMINGO OFFICE WRIGHT-MENA WATER ENGINEERS KM 9% ANTIGUA CORRETERA DUARTE SANTO DOMINGO, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC DIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2420 ALCOTT STREET DENVER. COLORADO 80211 13031 458.6201 March 14, 1977 Glenwood Springs TEL: 945-7755 Mssrs. Lyle and Hal Beattie Mr. Duncan Sinnock Mr. Don Hicks (CMC) Mr. Gene Meckling (Los Amigos) Spring Valley Landowners 207 10th Street Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Gentlemen: • Re: Spring Valley Basin Water Resource Managment KENNETH R WRIGHT WILLIAM L. LORAH RUSSELL E. DARR F. ROBERT McGREGOR RALPH L. TOREN ROBERT D. TAFELSKI At the request of various landowners in Spring Valley, we are submitting the following proposal to define and, to a limited extent, to evaluate the water rights and water resources in the Spring Valley basin. Our study would provide basic data on the physical water supply available to this area, including both surface and groundwater potential supply sources. Wright Water Engineers, Inc., has been and is retained by Beattie Enterprises for similar work on their properties (the Hopkins and Cabrinha Ranches) in Spring Valley. We would not undertake the proposed work for any of the other Spring Valley landowners without the approval of Beattie Enterprises. We do not intend to duplicate previous efforts, but would incorporate, where relevent, portions of our past work for Beattie Enterprises. We would also use data provided by drillers, landowners, and others. Wright Water Engineers, Inc. would work where practical on this study with the Garfield County Planning Department. The topographic area of Spring Valley is estimated to be roughly 15 to 20 square miles. A preliminary survey identified the following major landowners in Spring Valley: Colorado Mountain College, Beattie Enterprises (Hopkins and Cabrinha Ranches), Foster Petroleum (Quigley Ranch), John Powers, Ould, Cox, Nieslanik, Kindall, and Los Amigos. Attached is a map outlining the approximate area that would be included in the study. March 14, 1977 . • PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES Page 2 Scope of Work 1. Define the groundwater potential in Spring Valley based on existing geologic mapping, limited field inspection, well logs, and interviews with drillers. Define known springs and other water sources tributary to the Spring Valley aquifer. 2. Tabulate the decreed water rights in the Spring Valley area and, where practical, comment on the historic use of the ditches. The scope of this study would not be sufficient to make recommendations concerning the transfer of water rights from irrigation to domestic and municipal use. 3. Roughly estimate the amount of water in Spring Valley available for consumptive use by various types of land use such as residential development, agricultural irrigation, etc. 4. Prepare general comments on the water resources situation in the Spring Valley area including a general discussion of management plans for the groundwater aquifer, and its consequences. 5. Prepare a report based on the above items to be presented in a general meeting to the Spring Valley Landowners for their questions, comments and review. Remuneration It is proposed that the total cost of the above described consulting services for the entire Spring Valley would be an estimated maximum of $4,500. The base work already completed by Wright Water Engineers for Beattie Enterprises would constitute $1,500 of the $4,500, leaving an additional cost of $3,000 for completion of the above work for the Spring Valley basic water resources report. We would suggest that all the Spring Valley Landowners contribute to the $4,500 cost of these engineering services in shares as agreed among those willing to participate. Wright Water Engineers wouldbill the project to Beattie Enterprises. Time Required Work would begin immediately upon acceptance of the above proposal. • • March 14, 1977 Page 3 It would take approximately one month to complete the above listed work items after approval date. If you approve the above proposal, you may indicate acceptance by signing on the line provided below and returning a signed copy to our office. WLL/ml Accepted By: Very truly yours, WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS, INC. ByW( C 7li1/1; William L. Lorah Percent Partici- pation up to $4,500 Project Date Date q Date Date Date Date Date Date Date ATTORNEY AT LAW • WEBB WALKER, III P.O. BOX 1233 (ARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 March 7, 1977 Mr. Robert Witkowski County Planner 2014 Blake Garfield County Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Lake Springs Dear Bob: (303) 963-3181 OFF) 0.77,71Z77r----N a ; 1i � E', • MAR 1-1 IS GARFIELiD CO. In the meeting concerning Lake Springs on February 23, 1977, it is my understanding some concern was manifested regarding fences, the pasturing of horses, and dogs running at large. Though the covenants for Lake Springs have not been formally drafted and adopted, the covenants, when adopted, will cover these areas roughly in the language and with the intent set forth below. ANIMALS No animal will be raised or bred on any lot for com- mercial reasons. A. (1) Household pets will be allowed. However, no more than two (2) of any kind of animal will be allowed with- out approval of the Environmental Control Committee or its assigns. A. (2) All dogs shall be restrained from running at large without accompaniment of a human being capable of controlling the actions of the dog and having actual control of the dog. B. (1) Horses will be allowed on an individual owner's lot(s) for recreational purposes. B. (2) Horses shall not be permitted to graze or pasture on a lot for grass or weed control, and in no event may horses damage the natural grass and vegetation. B. (3) Horses shall not be permitted to be kept on a lot for any period exceeding 24 hours. B. (4) Horses shall be stabled in an area designated by the Environmental Control Committee or its assigns. But in no event may horses be stabled on an individual's lot. i • Mr. Robert Witkowski March 7, 1977 page two FENCING All fences shall be a maximum of forty-two (42) inches high. Posts must be spaced a maximum of one rod. Fences may be con- structed of wood or stone and woven, barbless, or barbed wire may be used to complete the fence but in no event may more than two (2) strands of wire be used to complete the upper portions of the fence, subject to the approval of the committee. No electrical fences along lot boundaries will be permitted. Fences may not obstruct bridal paths or other easements. The Environmental Control Committee will be selected by the Association from time to time and it will be its responsi- bility to enforce the covenants through procedures granted them in these covenants. If you have any questions concerning the portions set forth in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Webb Walker III WW:js Phase I Report LAKE SPRINGS RANCH For Foster Petroleum Company TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Numbers Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions 1 - 3 Phase I Report Market Data 1 - 6 County Attitudes 7 - 11 Sewage and Sanitation Commercial Activity Road Systems Recommended Zoning Summary and Conclusion Recreational Development- 12 - 15 Aspen/Snowmass Area The Ranch at Roaring Fork Conclusion Colorado Mountain College- 16 - 19 Student Housing Needs Staff Housing Water and Sanitation General Comment Market Demands- 20 - 24 Realtor Opinions Conclusion General Comment Mining Activity 25 - 27 Utilities Availability 28 - 29 Telephone Electricity Natural Gas Water and Sanitation Planning and Engineering 30 - 31 Amenities 32 Notes to Financial Projections 33 - 34 Financial Projections 35 - 40 Westbank Subdivision, Protective Covenants 41 - 50 1 • Counselors in Real Estate 600 South Cherry St. Denver, Colorado 80222 303-320-5600 Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions A summary of the salient facts and conclusions contained in the body of the following report are: 1. The land should be developed for moderate cost, single family homes ($42,000 maximum price) and multi -family homes ($38,000 maximum). In the latter category, well designed dujiex and four-plex units, attached side by side, not stacked, wculd probably have the greatest market acceptance. In addition, we feel there will be market for larger (5 acre or more) estate -type lots designed to capture the more outstanding views and remote feeling of the area. To accomodate these diverse uses, we suggest a Planned Unit Development consisting of 450 dwelling units, single and multi family, an amenity package described herein and 20 acres of commercial land. Some common amenities, at modest cost, will enhance the marketability of the project. 2. The influence of Colorado Mountain College is of great importance to the success of the development. The staff, faculty and students are all finding great difficulty in locating housing they can afford to purchase or rent. The need of accommodations for 350 additional students is immediate. 3. Based on the current market and conservative estimates of the expected growth in Glenwood Springs and environs, we ( -2-- project a period of seven years from commencement of sales (1977) to sell out (1983). In the event mining activities increase more rapidly than currently anticipated, an acceleration of demand among retirerees is experienced, the college grows faster than projected, and the local efforts to expand Glenwood Springs as a year-round destination resort become a reality at a fast€r pace than is currently foreseen, then this sell out period could be greatly reduced. The seven year time frame is forecast against a moderate rate of population growth and economic activity. We have totally discounted any impact from oil shale development down valley, due to the generally accepted skepticism over the future of that industry. Strong probability exists that all of the factors mentioned above will grow in excess of current rates, but it is not certain enough to use as a valid planning factor. 4. There will be a definite need for limited commercial development to support existing and projected demands of the population of the College, as well as the demands created by the Lake Springs development itself. No credit has been given to other probable development in the area in these projections concerning the commercial support facilities'. 5. Our study indicates the need for the following action: a. Verification of growth rates for the period between 1973 and 1976. b. Additional investigation of sources of low cost housing (systems and manufacturers). • -3- 410 c. Attempt to capture the current student housing market (approximately 350 students). 6. Recommendation: Phase II should consist of the foll- owing activities: a. Proceed with 5(a) and 5(b) above (included as a part of the activities projected in the cash flow summary) . b. Proceed with planning through the preliminary plan stage (cost estimated in the cash flow su_ .mary at approximately $80,000). c. Investigate availability of financing for the retail market to be suppled by this development with a view to achieving as close to 100% financing as is possible. d. Upon approval of preliminary plan, decide whether to market the entire package "as is" or to continue development. • Counsaiors in Real Estate 600 South Cherry St. DIrnver. Colorado 80222 303-320-5600 Phase I Report LAKE SPRINGS RANCH For Foster Petroleum Company Market Data Appended to this report are various exhibits, including a :nap which identifies various areas of activity in the Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, El Jebel and Basalt areas. These are considered to be the primary market areas for the Lake Springs Ranch development. Secondary markets will certainly develop from the Aspen/Snowmass area as these have already had an influence on the drastically short housing supply in the Roaring Fork Valley. Additionally, should the oil shale industry, including the Paraho projects, increase in scope in the coming months and years, their influence will be felt in the entire region. We have, however, discounted any develop- ment of oil shale at this time in our consideration of the feasibility of developing the Lake Springs Ranch. We have located on the map areas within Glenwood Springs itself where single and multi -family developments are taking place. In addition, we have identified areas where lot sales programs and spec single home building are taking place in the Glenwood Springs environs. -2- Number 1 on the map is a 13 unit development on the west side of Glenwood Springs across the river from Colorado Moun- tain College's Administrative Offices. The units are of frame construction, two-story units attached side by side with stagg- ered studs on common plates, dividing each unit and utilizing rock wool batts woven between the studs in an effort to attenuate sound between the units. Accessibility to the area is -:ot very good. No garages are provided nor is there any paved parking off-street. We are told that only on--street parking will be available. Each unit contains a living room, combination kitchen/dining area, utility room aid half bath on the main floor, two bedrooms and one bath upstairs and a full unfinished basement. The price was $31,600 until recently, when they were raised to $32,600. We interviewed one of the administra- tive employees of Colorado Mountain College, who had purchased one of the units, indicating that he had his basement finished, including one bedroom and three-quarter bath with a fireplace upstairs. His price, including these extras, came to $37,100. There are approximately 1,000 square feet of space on the upper two floors with an additional 500 gross square feet of space in the basement. The land costs per unit was just under $3,000 in this development. The complex consists of two four-plexes, one three-plex and one duplex, with the possible addition of one more duplex if sufficient landis available under zoning allowances. The developer did not provide financing, • -3- and each person is responsible to find his own. The employee of CMC obtained the following financing through World Savings and Loan: 90% of the purchase price at 9 1/4% plus 1/4% for mortgage insurance; with a 2 point fee, the loan term was 30 years. The builder of the units is a gentleman named Bud Kents, who has previously been building in Snowmass (phone number: 923-2161). He is currently planning a 34 unit project in the south end of town identified as area Number 2, in connection with Bell Realty. These units, which will be slightly larger, will sell for somewhat higher price in view of a land cost of approximately $5,000 per unit. He is estimating an initial price of not less than $36,000, nor more than $38,000. Number 3 on the map identifies the Westbank Ranch in the southeast area of Glenwood Springs. This is a land subdivision that is owned by a syndicate of people from Glenwood Springs and Denver. Had it not been for the fact that the Bank of Glenwood, a subsidiary of the Colorado National Bank, held the underlying note on the property agreed to extend the terms of that note, it might have gone into foreclosure early in 1975. The principals, however, were able to hold on and we are ad- vised that the market has come back very strongly in the closing months of 1975, to the extent that there are currently four spec houses under construction in the area. The lots have been sold to end users and to builders who put up spec houses. The prices ranged from roughly $9,000 to $12,750 in early 1975. • -4- Activity 4 Activity has increased so greatly now that they just recently raised the prices approximately $2,000 per lot across the board. At the beginning of 1975, the lots in Filing Number 2 (30 lots) averaged $13,459. Filing Number 3 (32 lots) averaged $13,808. The recent price increase would make the average in Filing Number 2 approximately $15,500 per lot and in Filing Number 3, nearly $16,000 per lot. The Westbank subdivision does include as its major amenity a nine hole golf course, which is considered to be a very good course. Protective covenants for the sub- division were filed on January 20, 1971, and are appended hereto. Filing Number 2 has 30 lots on 36 acres or a gross density of approximately one site per every 1.2 acres, while Filing 3 has 32 lots on 36 acres or approximately one lot for every 1.13 acres. Number 4 on the map is the Aspen Mesa Estates, which is located on the ridge above El Jebel on the way up to Missouri Heights. These sites averaged slightly under 2 acres, and were selling from $8,500 to $13,750 per lot. One larger lot of 4.93 acres sold for $14,750. The avera-e, therefore, was somewhere around $12,000 per site or $6,00:' per acre. These lots were platted before current state laws imposed requirements upon water and sewer. Number 5 on the map is the Oak Meadows Subdivision, which lies on the raod between Glenwood Springs and the Sunlight ski area. The first filing of this subdivision consisted of 29 lots averaging approximately 2 acres, quite heavily timbered and sold out very quickly in the range of $8,000 to $8,500 per lot. We are told now that there are very few lots that are platted -5•- remaining to be sold, though there are additional filings that would be platted and sold in the future. Activity became very slow during the last couple of years on prices that had been raised to approximately $15,000. In addition to the lot cost, the tap fees for water run approximately $1,000 and individual septic systems are also an extra cost to the buyer. We have heard, but have not verified, that the Mid -Continent Coal Company purchased the entire unsold portion of this subdivision. Number 6 on the map is a subdivision in Carbondale, known as Crystal Village. This subdivision is in the final stages of planning and has not yet been approved for final platting or sale. There are to be approximately 140 single family sites in that subdivision that are expected to sell in the range of $15,000 on the river and $6,000 to $8,000 for interior lots. We estimate that these lots will average approximately 3/4 of an acre in size. They were somewhat smaller earlier but with a greater number of lots. They have, however, been prevailed upon to increase the size of the lots slightly and decrease the number. Multi -family sites are selling for approx- imately $2,500 per unit, with a projected total of 419 multi- family units in the subdivision. The owner and developer of the subdivision is Mutual Savings and Loan Association of Grand Junction, Colorado through their Carbondale office. The manager of the office is Dennis Edson. El Dorado Engineering in Glenwood Springs, through it's principal Ron Liston, is doing the planning for the subdivision. Number 7 on the map is a development called Sopris Village and is just outside of the little town of El Jebel. This is being developed by people from Aspen with the principal being the Aspen One Company, whose partners are Don Piper and Dick Fitzgerald. The houses that are being put up there appear to be very flimsy, as a matter of fact, they look like modulars without too much treatment on the outide. Their prices are between $31,000 and $42,500 on lots of 1/4 acre and less, in- cluding water and sewer. They have been successful in selling everything that they have put up so far. We understand that 100% financing is being offered, so that the buyer can get in with no money do -:gin. In discussing the current situation in Glenwood Springs with Bill Sisson, the President of the Bank of Glenwood, he felt that the marked increase in activity in sales at the Westbank project, enabling them to raise their price so dra- matically, was occasioned by an upturn in buyer confidence coupled with the fact that there is virtually no other subdiv- ision in the area offering the same kind of land available for immediate building. He concluded, therefore, that it was purely a case of being in the right place at the right -time, even - though a year ago things didn't look quite so good. In Phase II of this study, it would be our intention to go into greater depth and detail, studying each of the sub- divisions mentioned above and determining exactly what the sizes of lots are, the prices of lots and homes and complete financing detail. -7 • • County Attitudes According to the County Planner, Bob Witkowski, the Lake Springs Ranch lies in an area of the County that is con- sidered favorable for higher density development. Most of the County is zoned for agricultural purposes which allow, in addition to agriculture, one unit on every two acres of land. Much of the County is not currently available for residential development for one of several reasons. A large part of the County is in public ownership, significant portions of the County have terrain and geological conditions which would severely inhibit residential growth, considerable acreage is currently held by private owners for mining and/or agricul- tural use and, with respect to the remaining land in the County, there are growing concerns as to the impact of greatly increased population. Lake Springs is currently zoned A/R (Agricultural/Residential) which does allow one unit for every two acres. From our dis- cussions with Mr. Witkowski, we tentatively conclude that a density greater than 1 per 2 acres would be- allowed. Under the current zoning ordinance, there is a further provision under the A/R zoning that provides for a cateogry known as A/R/C (Agricultural/Residential/Cluster). Under that category, zoning would provide for approximately 900 units or two units for every acre. Further, under the current PUD zoning, as many as 4 units per acre could be allowed for a total of 1,300 units. ( • -8- . We discussed higher densities, both PUD and A/R/C with Mr. Witkowski at great length. He reacted visibly against the high densities of 900 or 1,300 units on the 450 acre Lake Springs parcel. Witkowski did, however, react favorably to the PUD concept so long as it was relatively low in density, about 450 units for the property. Further, Witkowski seemed to be current and knowledg':able with respect to recent PUD planning approaches. It was our opinion, after concluding the meeting with Witkowski, that a density of approximately one unit per acre or a t^tal of 450 units could be achieved. Hence, the pro- jections which are appended to this report are based on that density. The County Commissioners have indicated that they would approve a moratorium on the review of any subdivision or development activity for approximately five months from February 1st. This moratorium has been asked for by the County Planner to enable him and his staff to take stock of plans currently under review and to place themselves in a better position to review future applications. During this planned moratorium, they will also finalize the review required of them by House Bill 1041, which requires all Counties to com- plete certain studies as follows: 1. Flood Plain Study - does not seem applicable to the Lake Springs Ranch. • -9- • 2. Wild Fire Study - also appears not to apply. 3. Geologic Hazards - The firm of Lincoln-DeVore are conducting these studies now and have indicated that they probably will be completed in the early part of March. From preliminary examination, it does not look like there will be any particular difficulty with the geologic aspect of the property. What minor problems there might be, can easily be corrected with con- struction procedures. 4. Mineral Resources - That study seems to be somewhat in limbo right now but, according to the Planner, would not appear to be a problem for the Lake springs Ranch. Sewage and Sanitation: We discussed the type of sewage and sanitation systems that the County prefers. Witkowski seems to prefer spetic systems versus central systems, but recognizes that a central system may be the best way to handle sewage at the Lake Springs Ranch. He agreed that it might be advisable to form a Water and Sanitation District, bringing in other properties in the area that would plan to develop in the future. He acknowledged that it might be advisable for the Lake Springs Ranch to join with the Colorado Mountain College and tie into their sewage system at least. He indicated, also, that he could see no problem with individual septic systems, in conjunction with central water systems, so long as soil tests indicated the viability of such sewage system on every part of the Lake Springs Ranch. Note: See additional information and discussion • -10 410 of sewage in the Colorado Mountain College section of this report. Commercial Activity: Witkowski seemed reluctant to acknowledge the need for commercial activity on the Lake Springs property, but finally did agree that some kind of commercial facility would be needed. While he indicated that he would rather not approve any comm- ercial at the present time, he did recognize that if a PUD were approved, that the commercial area must be considered and set forth in the original PUD application. Road Systems: Witkowski seemed quite amenable to the possibility of integrating private one-way roads with public roads. He felt that such roads could be narrower than the normal County standard, recognizing that a system of one-way roads would use less land and allow better traffic control. He also accepted the fact that such roads could do less damage to the land. He expressed his concern that roads and radii be suff- icient to allow the free flow of fire equipment through the subdivision. He also indicated that all roads should meet County standards, at least insofar as surface is concerned, for as he said, "Even private roads ultimately somehow seem to become the responsibility of the County". Recommended Zoning: Witkowski indicated that a PUD category would be the proper zoning for the Lake Springs Ranch and not the A/R/C (Agricul- tural/Residential/Cluster). He obviously would not favor any- where near the kind of density allowed under the PUD (4 units • -11- • per acre), and was reluctant to commit to a definite number. While we felt that 375 would be the least number of units approved, and that 450 would be the most, as indicated above, we all felt strongly enough that 450 units would be approved that we used that in our projections. We did test him on 650 units, or a density of approximately 1 1/2 dwelling units per acre. He indicated that he felt this was too high in light of the demands of the area, including the College at the present time. He related that kind of density to a new town that has been planned near Grand Valley, west of Glenwood Springs on Interstate 70. That new town was plannec. in conjunction with oil shale development and the density was proposed to be 2.8 units per acre. He felt that the Lake Springs Ranch was not anywhere near the same situation as a new town, and therefore, the density should be much lower. Summary and Conclusion: While statements made by the Planner are not binding upon the County, the consensus of opinion was that his recommenda- tions would probably be approved. Witkowski is a refreshingly bright and knowledgeable kind of person who seems to react well to an intelligent approach to planning. While the process may be cumbersome, we all concluded that the PUD incorporating 450 units.and approximately 20 acres of commercial ground would be available to us on the Lake Springs Ranch. • -12- • Recreational Development Glenwood Springs has long been a haven for retired persons utilizing the facilities of the Glenwood Springs Vapor Caves in Glenwood fall (Jsne C. Wallin, General and Hot Springs Lodge and Pool. The high season Springs has always been from early summer to early through September). In an interview with Terry Manager of the Glenwood Springs/Hot Springs was indicated that the entire Glenwood Lc ige and Pool, it Springs area was putting forth a concerted effort to attract winter visitors to the Glenwood Springs area. The area has been successful in recent years in extending the season, both earlier in the spring and later in the fall. The Glenwood Resort Association was recently formed to promote resort activity and business in and around Glenwood Springs. Member- ship in this Association includes the Hot Springs Lodge and Pool, the Colorado Hotel, the Vapor Caves, the Sunlight ski area and two lodges at the Sunlight ski area. The Association is well funded and very active. For instance, their Denver- based promotion, early this fall, has more than justified the expense in increased resort business. Just recently, they have held their Ski Spree, a joint promotional effort to attract more winter visitors to Glenwood Springs. They feel that their efforts have been highly successful to date and that Glenwood Springs will be positioned as a destination resort increasingly -13- • in the months and years ahead. The Association is supporting and has seen a rapid recent increase in snowmobiling. They have received considerable encouragement from the Forest Service to go into areas in the National Forest where wild life is not affected in the wintertime; notably in areas above 10,000 feet. (The success of this kind of promption has been dramatically deomonstrated in West Yellowstone, Montana at the w=st entrance to the National Park. Winter business there was previously non-existent. However, during the last five years, snowmobiling has been allowed in certain areas in the Park and around West Yellowstone and the wintertime activity has grown dramatically). Having Glenwood Springs posit-_oned as a destination resort would, if successful, put an increasing demand on the need for housing, just as it has down valley in Aspen and Snowmass. At least, for the foreseeable future, prices would be far more compet- itive in the Glenwood Springs area in virtually every category as compared to the Aspen/Snowmass area. Aspen/Snowmass Area: The success of the Aspen/Snowmass area as a destination winter resort is renowned around the world. In spite of the activities of the Aspen Institute and the Music Associates of Aspen including the music school, summer business has never developed as highly as the area would like to see it develop. Increasing promotions to promote such business has met with considerable success in recent years and should grow appreciably • -14• - as Snowmass' summer business picks up even more. The town of Aspen is quite far ahead of Snowmass, but both are growing appreciably and extending their season well into the fall. For the last five years, the weather in the fall has been excellent, practically through the middle of November, with winter tapering on slowly. Efforts to attract visitors during this season have been very successful. In the town of Aspen itself, it has been noted over the last few years that there is virtually no off season in the fall. Snowmass, on the other hand, has been totally dead in the spring and the fall, with very slight business in the summer. Now that they are putting on a drive to obtain conventions in the summertime and have provided some limited facilities for them at Snowmass, this business has been growing. This kind of growth, in year-round business, puts an increasing strain on housing in the entire valley from Glenwood Springs to Aspen. The Ranch at Roaring Fork: The Ranch at Roaring Fork is a recreational development located approximately two miles east of the Carbondale turn- off on Highway 82. This development was started by a man named Jacobson from Phoenix and was designed to be a mini - destination resort aimed primarily at summer people. It is our understanding that approximately 20 of 60 condominiums built at the Ranch at Roaring Fork have been sold. The main thrust of the development is'aimed at fishing, golfing, horse- back riding and general relaxation. They obviously trade on • -15- • the recreational facilities available in the wintertime in both Glenwood Springs and Aspen. It has been a mystery to most real estate people how Jacobson has held on with as much unsold inventory as he has had for so long. It has been gen- erally agreed that the development was neither fish nor fowl and that you do need winter activities closer at hand to provide the basis for a successful destination reso--t. The prices in the condominiums start at the mid fifties, so they do not fill the greatest housing need in the Glenwood Springs/ Carbondale area, which is in the range of $40,000 to $45,000 as mentioned in the next section of this report. Whether the Ranch at Roaring F rk will be a success remains to be seen for the short erm. It is our opinion that, for the long haul, that it probably will be successful though its growth will be slow. Whether or not the present developer will be in control or someone else also remains to be seen. Conclusion: Efforts to position Glenwood Springs as a destination resort appear to be headed for long-term success. Adding this dimension to the area can only create a stronger demand for primary housing to fill the needs of the personnel necessary to support such activity. • -16- • Colorado Mountain College Student Housing Needs: There are currently 192 students being housed in new apart- ments that were built on five acres of land, sold to a private developer for $15,000 or $3,000 per acre. The apartments consist of one and two bedroom units that house two, three and four students. Another 200 units are being planned by an- other developer on the same basis as above. A meeting was to be held on January 26th of the Board of the College to determine whether or not this project would go through. The problem seems to be that the developer needs a 20 year guarantee from the College in order to secure his financing. The College is quite sure that they would not wish to extend such a guarantee to any developer, and rather that a one year guarantee would be the maximum they could consider. One alternative available to them might be for the College to sell revenue bonds and build their own units. Dr. Gann is not particularly interested in going into the housing business and would rather have them built and rented by private developers. Current rental rates are $85.00 per student in one bedroom apartments (two students to an apart- ment) and $67.50 per student in a two bedroom apartment (rate based on four students to an apartment). In the summertime, these units are rented on a daily basis, including maid service, linens and so forth to conferees in certain programs utilizing • -17- • College facilities. The College use of he units is for nine months of the year. It is the intentio of the College to house approximately 1/3 of their studen.. on campus, which leaves a rather large gap of housing ne:.cd for other students and faculty members. The current enrol ent of the College is 650 students and the only thing orev:sting them from taking in another 200 students is the lack of .using available. The ultimate enrollment by the year 2001 is projected to be 1,500 students. They do not have any d:sire to go any larger and as long as Elbie Gann is the Presid:nt of the University and the present Board is in control, th:y have no interest in ever becoming a four-year, degree gr.nting university. They fill a need that they feel exists now a d will always exist in the future for an institution to pro ide a beginning education for those students who would transfer t. other universities for their last two years of college, an for those who only wish to take two years of Junior Colleg training. Staff Housing: There are currently 60 people on t e faculty, earning an average of $14,000 to $14,500 per year, and 20 employees in administration and continuing education Many of the staff people have had difficulty finding hous ng in the area. When the college reaches its full enrollment of 1,500 students, the faculty would be approximately doub e and the staff would increase by approximately 15. We feel hat it is reasonable to assume that Lake Springs Ranch coul• capture at least 20% of the existing and the future market p ovided by these people. -18- i Water and Sanitation: The College has its own water system, including a 660,000 gallon storage tank and purification equipment. In addition, it has developed its own sewer system that has a capacity con- siderably in excess of the current needs of the College. We discussed the possibility of tying into those systems and it did not meet too much resistance. Dr. Gann did point out, how- ever, that he had tried to encourage all of the adjoining land owners (prior to Foster's involvement) to join in a water and sanitation district. None of them were interested in doing so at the time. Subsequent to that, some of the adjoining land owners have come in and tried to get on the system and h:_ve been refused. This caused at least two of them to attempt to have the College's Planned Unit Development turned down. At least in the early stages of development, it could be very advan- tageous to the Lake Springs Ranch to be connected to the College's central sewage system. In time, that system could be increased to handle all of the College's needs, all of Lake needs and conceivably some of the other adjoining It probably would not be feasible to tie into the Springs' land owners. College's water system and, since the Lake Springs Ranch has sufficient water rights and water available, they could probably do their own central system at no greater cost than trying to tie with the College. This must be considered more carefully, however, if a water and sanitation district or metropolitan district is planned. in General Comment: Without casting any inferences as to Dr. Gann's convictions or integrity, we must note that the history of state -supported colleges in the State of Colorado is to grow. Within the last 10 years, Mesa Collece in Grand Junction has moved from a two- year Junior College to a four-year, degree granting college; Colorado State College _as become the University of Northern Colorado and Southern Colorado University has gone from a two- year Junior College to a four-year, full University. Dr. Gann appears to be ap-Jroaching 60, although he is very vigorous, most intelligent and extraordinarily alert. The largest portion of the enrollment of CMC is in its adult education program which enrolls over 4,000. What the influence of this program and the vocational educational program might be will not College. in the future is hard to predict, but it certainly result in any fewer staff and faculty spaces at the -20• - 411 Market Demands Realtor Opinions: Bill Crutcher and Bob Moncrief, both representatives of the Pat Bell Agency in Glenwood Springs, offered the following opinions: A. Market Demands: 1. The strongest need, they said, was in three bedroom, one or two bath, unfurnished units with fill unfinished basements. Optimum size would be in the 1,000 to 1,100 square foot range and should be priced in the low $40,000's. They indicated that the houses then would be running between $28.50 to $30.00 per square foot for everything exclusive of land. Land costs, they said at this point, should be in the range of $10,000 to $11,000 per lot (this seemed a little high to us in that it would be 25% of the finished product). 2. They indicated that the price gap was in the range of $50,000 and down. 3. They indicated the demand in Carbondale is about the same as in Glenwood Springs;_based on current growth as Crutcher saw it, there would be a demand for 60 to 80 new housing units per year in each market. 4. Prices in Carbondale are getting up to the range of Glenwood Springs. B. Growth Generators: 1. Increased coal mining activity in the area. -21- 2. Recreation - Recreation amenities in the Glenwood Springs region costs less than similar -type recreation amenities in the Aspen/Snowmass area. As indicated above, skiing at Sunlight is somewhat cheaper, coupled with very inexpensive annual memberships in the Glenwood Springs Pool, low cost golf available at both the Westbank Course and the Glenwood Springs Municipal Course, fishing and so forth. If people wish to take advantage of the higher cost amenities nearby, they can drive to Vail in about ore hour and fifteen minutes, and to the Aspen/Snowmass area in forty-five minutes to one hour. 3. Retirement - A great number of people coming to the area are retirerees from industry, government service, and the armed forces. While this has been true for years in the Glenwood Springs region, the increasing crime in big cities, together with the by population growth in terms recreational involvement, has places as Glenwood Springs. Glenwood Springs is probably problems of the crunch created of traffic, shopping and focused attention on such Furthermore, the climate in even easier to live with than Denver. As yet, there are no smog problems in Glenwood Springs. C. Market Opinion: 1. Bill Crutcher felt that the kind of development we are projecting here is ahead of its time. He fears that attached units such as four-plexes and duplexes would not • -22- • have much market available to them in the Lake Springs area. He pointed to the Ranch at Roaring Fork but did not recognize the fact that their prices started in the mid fifties versus the low forties. 2. He pointed to the problems experienced in the last year in Oak Meadows and that their sales had slowed down dramatically recently. He did acknowledge, however, that they had very little inventory available to sell at the present time, which leads us to believe that his informa- tion on the market is not as current as perhaps it might be. 3. Both Crutcher and Moncrief felt that in the area of Lake Springs, acreage sites would be the best way to go. They did not feel that smaller sites would have a good market there. Upon questioning, they did modify this opin- ion slightly to say that they thought the sites should be from perhaps 1/2 acre up to 5 acres in size. They felt that the price range should be $6,500 to $9,000 per site. D. Conclusion: We concluded that Bell Realty was perhaps a bit pro- vincial and unsophisticated in their approach to the market. We find this often to be the case even in larger communities. While their comments should be carefully considered, we feel that it is necessary to check in greater depth in the market and not rely solely on their conclusions. -23 -- Real Estate Broker - Fender Realty - Carbondale, Colorado Ruth Fender, Broker: A. Ruth Fender is what one might refer to in the Real Estate industry as a "deal maker". working with ranch syndications, as ranches in the Garfield County area, Canondale. She has done a good job of well as selling many working particularly west of She has been involved to a much more limited degree n the sale of single family dwellings or single family dwelling sites. B. Ruth did feel that there is a definite need for lower cost housing in the Carbondale/Glenwood Springs area, in the range of the low to mid forties. C. She felt that lot prices should be in the neighborhood of $7,500 to $12,000 per site. She too, ventured the opinion that single family detached housing was the only kind of develop- ment to have on the Lake Springs Ranch. She indicated that same fear that multi -units with coronion walls would not sell too well. Her opinion was ventured without knowledge of the opinion given to us by Bell Realty. She went on to indicate that the sites should range in size between 1/4 and 1/2 acre. She too, pointed to the Ranch at Roaring Fork and sited it as the example of why she felt multi -family units would not sell. Again, Ruth did not recognize the difference in price and the type of market, i.e., that the Ranch at Roaring Fork is aimed at the second -home market. We would not recommend moderate to high priced second home sites for the bulk of the Lake Springs Ranch. • -24- General Comment: Many real estate people are only willing to accept what they know has been successful in their area in the past and, as a result, tend to follow the old market. Since their function, and therefore their viewpoint, is related to earning a ccmmiss- ion on whatever is being sold in the marketplace, there is generally no demand placed upon them to predict turns in the market. The condominium market in Aspen, and in other recrea- tional areas in Colorado were not built, in general, by the real estate people who were active in those areas. In general, outside developers analyzed a ne?d and built whatever was required to fill that need. A part of the provincialism mentioned above was the fact that these particular real estate people did not seem to relate to the impact of the College in that end of Garfield County. They did not seem to recognize that a strong sense of community can develop with the College at its core. • -25- Mining Activity • We met with Marvin Meyers, the director of personnel of the Mid -Continent Coal and Coke Company in Carbondale, Colorado. The bulk of Mid -Continent's output is sold to United States Steel at their Geneva works in Salt Lake City, and to Kaiser Steel Company. Meyers indicated that their growth was really very closely tied to the increase in activity in the steel industry. He indicated that if they could sell 1,500,000 tons of coal per year (4,109.58 tons per day), that their per- sonnel would increase from its current level of 400 people up to 600 people. In 1976, he indicated that they would probably increase about 20 people or 5% from their current level of employment. They currently are able to produce approximately 1,000 tons of coal per day; they are currently working 5 major mine facilities and are installing a new system in one of the mines, which is known as the Long Wall System. They work two shifts per day, five days per week. Their coal reserves are estimated at 70 years. They are operating at about 85% of current capacity. Their capacity will be increased substantially, however, if they go to the Long Wall System. This, too, would cause quite an increase in the number of personnel. Eventhough they would produce over three times as much coal per day with the Long Wall System as they do employing their current methods, their personnel would not increase more than 1 1/2 to 2 times. -26 - They are currently investigating a method to recover the Methane gas that is released during their coal mining operation. They feel there is enough Methane gas available to serve all of the needs of a community the size of Denver. Unfortunately, they are not able to collect the gas at present and it is just blown out into the atmosphere. If the gas is collected and stored to be sold comr:iercially, it could create a secondary industry in connection with Mid -Continent's mining operations. We asked hirr, about the Anschutz Ccal Company, whom he thought currently employed about 20 r.en. He felt at the rate they were currently cranking up, that they probably would not increase their personnel or get into full production for at least a year. We intend to have indepth discussions with the Anschutz people if Phase II is approved. Currently quite a few of their people live in trailers in El Jebel and other areas nearby. Mid -Continent built, owns and operates some townhouses in Carbondale that currently rent for $220 per month for two bedroom and $275 per month for three bedroom units. He ack- nowle.iged the shortage of housing and the need for additional housing in the area. At present, their lowest paid hourly worker, a common laborer, makes $7.17 per hour ($14,913.60/yr.) while their highest paid hourly worker makes approximately $8.83 per hour ($18,366.40/yr.). These rates do not include _ fringe benefits that are over and above the basic wage rate. • -27- We conclude then that the mining activity will not produce a significant number of prospects for housing made available at the Lake Springs Ranch in the near future, but that if the activity increases as the economy picks up, both at Mid -Continent and Anschutz mining operation, there may be very few alternatives available to their people except to come up to Lake Springs. We would look to the mining market more for overflow for the bulk of their people and as a primary source of housing for a smaller percentage of their group. -28 - Utilities Availability Telephone: Telephone will be supplied by Mountain Bell and will re- quire deposits put up in advance for the installation of lines. These deposits will be an asset thac will be recovered as sites are sold and subscribers sign up for the service. Electricity: Electric service will be supplied by the Holy Cross REA. We spent same time with John Spangler, who indicated that there would be ser -:ice available to the area. Virtually the entire amount of the cost of installing the electrical service, be it underground or overhead, would have to be born by the developer of the land to be repaid out of revenues, at a rate of up to 12% per year. If 12% were not available in any one year, it would not be cumulative and the refund policy would only extend for a period of 12 years. It is conceivable, therefore, that there might be some net cost of installing the electrical service into the subdivision if sales velocity were not sufficient to cover the phases as they were installed. Accordingly, we con- cluded that very careful phasing of the operation was essential, not only to reduce the possibility of exposure in the expense of installing the electrical service, but with the extension of water, sewer and telephone services as well. Natural Gas: Due to the uncertain future availability of natural gas, we have determined that the subdivision should be designed to • -29- • operate as all electric and not consider the installation of gas at all in the area. Water and Sanitation: As treated elsewhere in this report, we recommend, and have provided in our projections, for the formation of a water and sanitation district, the details of which will be explored to a far greater degree in Phase II of the study. -30- • Planning and Engineering Larry Graham, a design and engineering associate with Scarrow and Walker in Glenwood Springs, brought to light the following facts with respect to design and engineering which figLres have been used in the cash flow projection attached: Sketch Plan $ 1,000 Preliminary Plan: Boundary survey 8,000 based on split of 4 sections Set all corners on boundary 1,000 Topographical ft. survey - 2 interval 4,500 complete with control, etc. Base plan - design fee 7,500 based on $25/lot; $10/unit Vicinity :nap, soils map, vegetation map, wild life map 300 $21,300 Final Plat - Based on 20,000 linear feet of road maps: Street profile design @ 10/ft. Cross-section of roads @ .05/ft. Drainage study & plan Sewage plan design @ $10/lot & $10 a unit Drawing final plat $ 2,000 1,000 1,000 4,500 assume multi -use systems, pri- vate tanks and leech fields $ 8,500 4,50 $13,000 Staking $1.00 ft. on Sani- tary sewer 20,000 up front cost -_ Staking $1.00 ft. on roads 20,000 up front cost Lots - a crew of three $34.00/hr. - a crew of two $28.00/hr. Assume $40/lot x 235 -31- • $ 9,400 pro -rate 20/unit x 216 4,320 $89,020 Note: One of the principals in Scarrow and Walker acts as the County Surveyor. area, -32- Amenities Amenities will include tennis courts, a limited equestrian together with bridle paths marked but not surfaced in any way (leading _Erom the property to other connecting land wherever possible), cross county ski trails, again connecting with other properties wherever possible, marked athletic fields in the Green Belt area. Consideration should be given to the possibility of a club house, together with a swimming pool. Our Phase I plan only calls for $100,000 worth of amen- ities and considered to be a cost to the development. Additional amenities may be added if the Phase II study would justify them. It is felt, however, that if additional amenities are added, that the increased price of the lots would more than off -set the cost of those amenities. Accordingly, we project a net cost of $100,000 for amenities to the Lake Springs Ranch. • -33- 110 Notes to Financial Projection Appended to this report is a preliminary cash flow pro- jection from 1976 through 1983, when the project would be completed and phased out. Our preliminary projections show a gross income from land sales of $3,578,000 against expenses of $1,574,860 exclusive of the cost of land. Gross income before the cost of land is $2,003,140; deducting the cost of land marked up to $500,000 leaves a net to a developer of $1,503,140. If Foster Petroleum were the developer of the land, then of course, the difference between their cost and the $500,000 land cost shown in this projection would be addi- tional profit to them. We have set up the projection in this way in order to demonstrate to any developer what he might expect to make from the development if he were to pay $500,000 gross for the land. Lot prices have been projected at rates which we consider to be conservative since the sales of land would not begin until 1977. These projections have been based on what we con- sider to be the current market in Glenwood Springs. All projec- tions are made in constant dollars, as we feel that sales prices should increase at a rate equal to or exceeding the development - expenses. Planning and engineering fees have been detailed in a previous section of this report. Road costs are based on 26,000 feet of graveled roads in addition to 5,000 to 6,000 lineal feet of roads already traversing the property. We have . -34- . used an estimate of $22,500 per mile of road determined from conversations with John Hyrup, the road contractor from Basalt who did the road work on the homestead. Amenities have been previously explained. The developer's fee has been based on a projection of the time expected to be spent during the actual development phases. Marketing costs have been set at 7% to 3nable the develop- ment to pay full brokerage commissions to all cooperating brokers, eventhough they do not have exclusive listings on the property. The support figure of 7.2% to include the costs of advertising and marketing programs, .s well as all the necessary office support, throughout the life of the development. Financing: The amounts shown are designed to either cover the costs of conventionally financing development expenses in advance or, if the developer puts up all cash, to enable them to sell the paper carried back from purchasers at a discount and cash out of the project. Z a a C c a a . •4 .• :t %- tYti. r�- L f L t - - t� Dai.zzEt+ ^ (oE eie� ��t c i 1 Vy a . 1 v - T 0 L 4' 1/4 • V I 5 W r `0. — 0 I 0.p o 0 O ' 0 o 0 0 O o .0 O • • . 4•.. 0 —" - -. 0 W O.0 O 0 O 0 0 `_ 0 0 0 0 O 0 Cs O O.0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 p o o to 0 4 4 NJ a ' 0 S __ l.. O-- -- - 0 0 0 p o 0 0 O p `` 0 0 'O o O O o 0 O S 0 O O O 0 O 0 - i 3 ' 1 N. o V 4 O ---i'-.- L_.0 _.W _ — a O 0 p •o O 0 0 p 0 O- O `J O O O O v 0 40. 0. 0 (^ n 0 0 - o O 0 0 O O o 0 0 u C. p 3 0. V V 1 S. q e . V 0, ---0- 0-0 'S o O . o O 0 0 O O o i Vio 0 0 O O O O O O O, 0 0 0 v" — -- . `� — 0 5 O 0' --- 0 O 0 0 O Co 0 0 0 0 O O 0 V 0 3 -O • .0 4 0 L 1. �." o O o O O O V o 0 0 O V V 0 \e.n0 --J -`i O 0 - w 0. a O 0 O O 0 '0 w ` 34 0,4 O - - O . ^ Co co O O OC 0 C. O _ L- O o o O 0 O O 0 q O O p O p O 0 o 34 34 C O O 0 0 '0 0 p O p 0 7 o C o O o 0 o 0 ' 1 •1_—_—;--- 0 o O o 0 0 O -------0 'r -0 0 0 0. I O'. 0 o 'o C 0 J O 0 0 00 ' 0 to 0 J o H o c; -._1 - O_ .OSZ `__0 o. — o' O ` Y ` n O 0 -O ee y; 0 0 0 O O O i * i I • --• : 4 y i ! i I �• h t -1-- ---1 -;-i - ' i raa.i t �l e r t. s t,%* t.*v i Lt t's1 I. ., . :,- r s1 i 4 . —I - 0 I. ti O 0 0 0 j 0 p O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 o 0 o .0 - 0 0 0 0 -o C .Y _- p O o n O o O i•:_• o' O • 0 0 0 •p o 0 -pC • 0 1tit 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 O .. 6 p 0 0 .0 O 4` . O 0 O 0 Q 9 Y 2 .. 7 Z 1 1 [ _ - - 3 a 1 7 Y3. --.—._ 3—._ - .. IN t ' 5 k21 •:t4.-, --t-, _ - �. 7" . .. 21 et t -\: ',,, .,,,\.5% ,,,1 1,?___,,,,.. pp £ - t+ --- ----I — p --. J c _ j l i+ h i t • $- vr L 0 w i v A 7' tt' t .. • } • _ , o E O o I 1I±L o a o o 'o 'o Iw 1 o o ,0 O 0 o O 1 0 0 0 I . 1o/ -� ' _ _ — 0 t. oe� o o 0 a. p ._ .. .o • a .. O e c. .. . O O -- - I As c N. o 0 o 0 0 —— Ca ^o I} o p .0 o oOo C. O O 0 o p 0 O C c, C.— a y I. a `� o o- o _ O 0 O o S O -- G I• 1Y t. J c C 0 SS % 1 O o o a a o 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o to q1u 1 0 0•0 o... N. V o Io • - ____N.._ ..%-----11..--'----0 ------ O O ( O O I O 0 O c` O,• O -• v :ft O O O G O \ tr I _ e r -k V 't -- — ; O O ,'l 0 0 0 • C Co 'c O O 0, 0 O ,Oe v0 • 0000 ! �` 1 1 - ` 10 •�-I S ° `, Zo ` o 0 II I I'5.,/..-2' en a, '. O 0 9 — I — —-...�_i_ •_.--- -- p • O I • O O . 7 O o — —�— — i I / — — I I I C. , `a •.•p o ._ C- - O w 0 1 0 - 0 -0 ---- 0--- - o f v o a p, o 0 0 O O 0 o 9 O 0• O 0 n- O 0 `� O o .0 0 a -- 0 0 l) o o , V O-- 0 -_e. 1O —__ .— . , _—J __--__ _. _- _ -- _o____0`_ iV _ _ __-_J _ ._—_.--1 2 ft : : FL Z : '7 Z -. .7 Z 7 ::-. LI .1 = ::. : : • . .: : . ••• . .. ••.: 1 • 1 • - • • • I ...-.! t; t - 1 • 1 . a sz a ' N trN. 1(l.t1:7. dir`k5' C' k. r .1,.r.: i '-• . , Z % k• t 41 •••,•;:c IZI I I –1 ! ilt ihri',. 4 i•A-- 'e‘ trs. ' t "I• t V tf' tit 11 i I N I • • t t 1. t % ‘ .F„N lil i t Az —- . .a1-.- lc i k - S . • rt. V ^••••1 o ,.. •••••••t c•.• T.• . .4t - i . h . _ 0 0 0 0 i J . I . o o olio, 00 to 2 : 1 ,; 0 co viol. .. 0- .1,t ,Ci 1 - o o' , It 0..A €1,4/ . :, • , i 01 .1 r ' 00(4 ) 0011/ i . 0o od ; 001,:t ol' 0004' o oro•,,Ar-iZ ' 4 . 0000 00/ ,. _ 4 of.o.,),17 roc; 1 s e .1 000 PL , roPorAr ,i ' II I _ . ....: te. 0 •..... -.... ; I es . . ''• _ _ - • cs - o I ..a. . o o . o . ! 0 •••• e e 0 Cs •,„1 ".. 1... . • ; -..-,--,--- .=._____ ,...,...., ________ ,...,,---,-,_ . • h i ‘.1 ''t • IT. T.1 to. i•-• 0 ‘..1 Q (z. 0 0 IQ • .1a, Q. .... ..r., Q....1, - I .1- "....1 Td •• c., ..... o co ,r- co co o ! 1 ; . CI c_. ... o., 0 o - O. o ..% .,•. cr cr. cs 0 .- 0 •%. i o, o . co 0 o yr o cr % • , • .. . _ .. , . . . • . • , . • , • • - . .- . • . • - ,(.... 3,3 . . * -- ‘ ' _ 0 "-N c. k. cs • .0 0 0 .4 0 • • w. _______ s.,. N. i ".... e0- b 0 .., c••• N 0 -..-- 0 0 O es 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1-.4 `,. 0 .....—.7,....--;,-. ...---- .7, s. t k.. 1 _ _ _ _...•*. __;. C 4\ - • . 0 0 0 o • . - - - . - -_.-. - . -......,-.,; -..._. : 1 1 t .,_ ,-,......a., .....,,- .,-..--. ,-...- ;•-••••••-..------ ! N. ..... N%. . .•••• • • I __ . . ..,_•.__ :7'0 '.'r.. _.__ _ _ _ A....A. v a.. )i ,4 1 0 o o C. 0 0 C. 0 . ' • 0 ,0 o 0 I t. 0 . :0 C. C. c.... - . • 1 i --iN :, . i • 4 1 s - : Xo e- : :•: 0 ..- (z. .,:,,,. ,„s.. 0 c9t.. 0 o I - . _ • i -. • , .-...-..... . .- — . - ....... , -.......- ...k. . (.., e..4 1.) 1• --‘0. . ts ..% ....0 . ._ _ 0 ._.._ 0 Is t.3 0 It- gzi, - . 0 . t,,, o tt. 0 0 0 0 )". A.,. N., __ :_____ _ .c. ._ I. 0 . '. _ . fa, 1 '4 0 1 0 .4 44. ••••6 0 0 CT__ ,7 1.' ..e. • . . . • . , 'C. 0 tk_e 1 • -....... . • ..—..... • ... . -..- 7 i . • . . I - --• . 1 _ `." - •_ t z —8 E — b Nt L - -. --- O 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0. o 0 O O 0 ro ..,, L„.k.„,,,, '. ,k i .ti• Z. i',; t t 1 t ..' i 4: 1 V ;11‘‘ 1 [6:`' O 0 `k. . • to o • O O o 0 0 0 0 - ..n AN O - -O s: - 0 00 0 O O o 0 0 O i-= • j O V e� 44. L Oo Os O -- - - 0 0 0 0 ry `e O O 0 0 (� a Z i 0 • 0 0 Cs 0 0 0 o S O J o O p o � p O -_ Q-- -_Q- 0 O o T O O o. • C 0 O O O 0 0 c.z �. 1., 1 v V -- - `" -0 V 'i `% ---- -'' v•- --- 0 0 0 % O o o 0. t, p ! o- e O O o C O 0 O O 0 0 0Y N. `_1ti.- _ Ac.1 O Co o O o 0 O 0 O O O o A ' o O c O O ... • .1-T- _ 1” -\ V t.. c' N. Na V t__ c o O o o o. - 00 .O 0 0 O P 0 0 0 0 1kt 0. V O r • 0 0 •_ O s, O 0 0 0 O 0 G - .mom- . _--r--._-..-T_--,_.- O V- p o O O C- 0 O 0 0. .. V ----�----T---�.- _-{-.- rte: O 0 >i o p o f I' O O O C G G • - O O C O O O O C C o C f o. 0 ` 0 o n ( I •_ O o • o c O 0 O 0 a 0 O O - _..O O 0 o - O O 0 o . O O O O � — - i_ -i -i_- = t. C. t ci Y • 7 ? -__.-.11 k ,►e _-. , 7 . • o O. O G .:' Q O CLQ r I t . i0 • 0 O 0 1 , �0• • -2-o t It I � ft, • - - 'Dae w E- ��r ��k It I.TT1TT!!". r J%r) y 097 jf 0 O -C V— -o a' 0 Cs 0 C. Co G O O C Z.— . • V 0 0 J o D O ca__ ••• c• 0 L O O O0 ►L 0 0 o o 0 0 O v V ._ >p3 •• o — 0 ?.. O O O o O Q 0 p o _g \ O o 0 o 0 o O C 0 0 0 0 O 444,411.• o e• "4 o L 0 0 o o 1. 0 a C c c- O o : O • 0 O o o -o 0 0 C. 4 .J 1,6 C �I i ti 4 - v 0. O 0 P 0 0 0 O C O O O o 3 .i• . O `O •1 o. O o 3 0 `N • 000.0.0 - r o V 6 o. P O 0 0 O • o 0 3 ` ti 0 O o c n J { I F .5.4 -- .0 0 i O Co S o •- r, I 4. �; 0 0 t o o J Ijt II .I - _J__ _._J_ _ b O o:\ 0. 0 14 *. `o .� 1v ``-- 0 0 0 0 •c p o ° r • - - l _-_ _ _ •• . . • Book 416 Recorded at 4:b2 P.M. January 20, 1971 • • page 344 Reception No. 248730 Ella Stephens,Recorder. WESTBANK RANCH SUBDIVISION, FILING NO. 1 -41- • • PROTECTIVE COVENANTS . WPstbank Ranch No. 1, Ltd., a Colorado limited partnership, by and through its duly authorized general partner, Westbank Development Co., Incorporated, a Colorado corporation, as the fee owner of West - bank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, desiring to insure the develop- ment and continuity of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, as a residential subdivision for itself, its successors, legal represen- tatives, assigns and grantees, hereby d.clares to and for the benefit of all persons who may hereafter purchse.and from time to time own lots in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, riling #1, that said ownership' and holding of said lots shall be subject to the following protective covenants and ,onditions, all of wich shall be deemed to be appur- tenant to and run with the land and inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the owners of said lots, their heirs, successors, and assigns& ARTICLE I Purpose of Covenants 1. It is the -intention of thefee owner of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, expressed by the execution of this instrument, that the lands within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, riling #1, be dev- eloped and maintained as a highly desirable rural residential area. It is the purpose of these covenants that the present natural beauty, natural growth, and native setting and surrounding of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, always be protected insofar as is possible in connection with the uses and structures permitted by this instrument. ARTICLE II Definitions 1. Westhank Ranch Subdivision. Whenever the terms "Westbank Ranch Subdivision", "Westbank Ranch", or "Westbank" are used in these covenants, they shall mean all the lands included in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, and as described on the plat filed for record with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. • 2. Residence. The term "Residence" as used herein shall be construed and held to include single family dwellings and to exclude apartment houses, condominiums, or any dwelling place contpining more than one family unit. 3. Residential Purpose. The term "Residential Purpose" as used herein shall be construed and held to include the use of a res- idence as a home and principal dwelling place by the owner thereof. 4. Family. The term "Family" or "Family Unit" shall mean a household composed of man and wife, and children, and/or other relatives having natural or moral duties to care for one another. • -42- • • ARTICLE III Membership in Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association 1. All persons or associations (other than the Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Association)_ who own or acquire the title in fee to any of the lands in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing I1, or other lands owned by the Declarant adjacent to said subdivision which may be subsequently subdivided by the Declarant and included by it in the Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Association (other than lands dedicated to public use) by whatever means acquired, shall auto- matically become members of the Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Assoc- ` iation, to be created as a non-profit Colorado corporation in accor- dance with the Articles of Incorporation of said Westbank Ranch ;;caneowners' Association, its successors and assigns, to be filed with the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County,'Colorado. Once the 1, • • Book 416 Page 345 Articles of Incorporation of said Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Association are file' as referred to above, subsequent fee owners of property within the Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, shall become members of said association in accordance with the Articles of Incorporation as presently in effect and as the same may be du:y amended from time to time and also recorded in the records of Garfield County, Colorado. ARTICLE IV Architectural Control Committee 1. . The Architectural Control Committee shall consist of Mr. Arthur Small and Mr. John Huebinger, or three or more members appointed by them, which members shall be owners of lots in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1. Said Architectural Control Committee shall have and exercise all of the powers, duties and responsibilities set out in this instrument. 2. Approval by Architectural Control Committee. Before anyone shall commence the construction, remodeling, addition to, or alteration of any building, swimming pool, wall, fence, coping, or other structure whatsoever, on any lot, there shall be submitted to the declarant for transmittal to the Architectural Control Committee, two complete sets of the plans and specifications for said work and no such structure or • improvement of any kind shall be erected, altered, placed or maintained upon any lot unless and until the final plans, elevations and specifications therefor have received such written approval as herein provided. Such plans shall include plot plans showing the location on the lot or property of the wall, fence, coping, or other such structure proposed to be constructed, placed, altered, or maintained, and elevation of same, together with the proposed color schemes for roofs, and exteriors thereof, indicating materials for same. The committee shall have the right to refuse to approve any such plans or specifications, which are not suitable or desirable irk its opinion, for aesthetic or other reasons, and in so passing upon such plans and specifications, it shall have the right to take into consideration the suitability of the proposed building,, structure or other improvement and of the materials • of which it is to be built, to the site upon which it is proposed to erect the same, the harmony thereof with the surroundings and the effect of the building or other structure as planned, . • _ t or disapprove, in writing,aiid Mans and specifications within thirty clays from the rece;p • ihereof. One set of said plifs and specifications with the ap Oval or disapproval shall ba retained by the committee. In the event no action is taken to approve or disapprove such al h plans and specifications within said thirty day period, the provision requiring app of said plans and specifications shall be deemed to have been waived. 4. Architectural Control Committee Not Liable. The Architectural Control Committee shall not be responsible to any person or entity in any manner whatsoever for any defect in any plans or specifications submitted nor as revised by said committee, or for any work done pursuant to he requested changes of said plana and specifications. • ARTICLE V General Rei _rictions on Use 1. Zoning Regulations. No lands within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, shall ever be occupied or us::d by or for any structure or purpose or in any manner which is contrary to the applic =ole zoning regulations of Garfield County, Colorado. 2. Mining, D illing or Quarrying. No mining, drilling, quarrying, tunneling or excavating for any suhstance within the earth, including oil, gas, minerals, gravel, sand, rock and earth shall be permitted within the limits of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing 'F1. 3. :Business, Commercial or Trade uses. No lands within Westbanlc Ranch Stn ivision, Filing #l, shall ever be occupied or used for any commercial, business or shall be done on any of said lands which ,is a nuisance or might t . ade purpose and nothing Book 416 Page 346 .•become a nuisance to the owner or owners of said lands, excepting use of a portion of the lands for sale of lots by the.Declarant shalrbe permitted. 4. Animals and Agriculture. Residents may keep dogs, cats or other animals which are bona fide household pets on lands within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, so long as such pets are not kept for commercial purposes and do not make ohjectional noises or otherwise constitute a nuisance or inconvenience to any of the residents of Westbank Ranch. No cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, p6u1try or other livestock shall be kept or maintained on any lot. Horses may be kept on lots exceeding three acres in size only if such lots are approved and, in the case of any such approval, the number of horses for any such approved lot shall be limited to two (2), limited by the declarant. No lands shall . be used for agricultural purposes except for normal residential gardening of flowers, - fruits and vegetables. 5. 'Sibs. No advertising or sibs of any character shall be erected, placed, permitted or maintained on any lot or structure within Westbank Ranch other than one "For Salo" or one "For Rent" sign approved by the Architectural Control Committee and a name plate and street number of the occupant. 6. Resubdivision. No lot described in the plat of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, shall ever be resubdivided into smaller lots or tracts, nor conveyed or er.curnbere, in .nv 1eA4 than the fall nricrinal dimensions as shown on said recorded plat. -44- 7. Conibini lots. 11 two or more contiguous sidcntial lots aro owned by • the same owner, they ma e combined ir�t.o one lot by mean•f a written document executed and acknowledged by the owner thereof, approved by the Architectural Control ' Committee, and recorded in the real property records of Garfield County, Colorado. 8. Service yards and Trash. Each residence must maintain an enclosed service yard of sufficient size to conceal garbage cans, clothes lines, wood piles and storage piles from lots, roads and all common areas within or adjacent to Westbank ranch . Subdivision, Filing #1. No above ground oil, gas or water tanks shall be permitted on any lot. • 9. Underground Utility Lines. All utility pipcsand lines within the limits of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, must be buried underground and may not be carried on overhead poles nor ac:,ve the surface of the ground. All such services must be buried underground from the ,- :,int where said utilities take off from transformers and terminal points supplied by the developer. 10. Construction of Dtivelling House. All construction and alteration work shall be prosec-ted diligently and each building, structure or improvement which is commenced on any residential lot shall be completed within twelve months from the commence- ment of construction. No persons may live in or use as a dwelling place a partially constructed building. In the event of a breach of this covenant, the Declarant and/or • Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Association shall have the right to complete construction of any ir.completed building, structure and improvement under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 2 hereof. 11. Temporary Structures. No temporary house,. trailer, tent, garage or outbuilding shall be placed or erected upon any part of any lot in Westbank Ranch Subdivision Filing #1; provided, however, that during the actual construction of any improvement on any lot, necessary temporary buildings for the storage of materials may be erected and maintained by the person doing the construction. 12. Towers and Antennas. No towers or radio and television antennas shall be erected or permitted to remain on any residential lot within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, except that normal radio and television antennas attached to a dwelling house may project up to six feet above the highest point of the roof of the structure. 13. Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting and light standards on residential lots shall be approved by the Architectural Control Committee for harmonious development and the prevention of lighting nuisance to other residents of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, , Filing #1. •. . Book 416 Page347 -14'. Garbage Disposal and Sanitary Systems. Each awelling house containing a kitchen in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1. shall be equipped with a garbage grinder or garbage disposal unit of a type approved by the Architectural Control Committee. No sew- age disposal system, sanitary system, cesspool or septic tank shall be constructed or used on any lot unless fully approved as to design, capacity. location and construction by all proper public health agencies of the State of Colorado and the County of Garfield, and also by the Architectural Control Committee. Sewage disposal systems constructed on lots containing less than 1.3 acres in total area shall be equipped with secondary chlorination treatment units. 111. `;i!1. :. 40, ---- --------:.----- -, tl.rrrlcNs mild stops, Glj�,ll bo other improvement, other th:►n ences 0 feet frr,m the .set at least 50 et from the street lot e,a3 the Ssafe mre side lot lines and 3 feet from the rear lot 1. shown on the recorded plat of Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #/1. Placement of any and all structures on lots within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing //1, must be approved by the Architectural Control - Committee prior to the commencement of. construction. 16. Walls and Fence:. Walls, fences and coping shall be limited to six feet in height measured from the adjoining ground surface inside the wall or fence; provided, however, no fence shall be permitted to abut any golf course constructed adjacent to Wstbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, and any fence so constructed Ehall be removed, whether the same was constructed before or after the con- struction of any such golf course. Boundary+planting along any lot lines, except trees with single trunks, shall not be permitted to grow higher than eight feet. No chain link fences shall ever b.• • permitted in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1. • i7. Cleanliness and Unsightly Growth. Each lot shall at all times be kept in a clean, sightly and wholesome condit-_on. No trash, litter, junk, boxes, containers, bottles, cans, ir2lements, machinery, lumber, or other building materials shall be permittee to remain exposed on any lot so as to be visable to any neighboring lot, road, or the Westbank Ranch Golf Ccvrse, except as is necessary during the period of construction. Each lot shall at all times be .kept clear of weeds and other unsightly griwth, and any and all landscaping that becomes objectionable or interferes with the operation of the golf course, on demand by the,declarant, shall be forthwith removed by the property owner. 18. Golf Course. The Westbank Ranch Golf Course, when constructed, shall abut some of the property within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1. Easements to permit the doing of every act necessary and proper to the playing of golf on the golf course adjacent to any of the lots which may be subject to these restrictions are hereby granted and established..,:Th se.,acts shall include, not be limited to, the recovery of goif:calls over and upon such lots, the use of necessary and usual equipment upon such golf course, the usual and common noise level created by the playing of the game of golf, together with all the other usual and common activity associated with the game of golf and with the normal and usual activities associated with the operation of a golf or: country club. ARTICLE VI Easements Reserved 1. Easements and rights of way in perpetuity are hereby reserved for the erection, construction, maintenance and operation of wires, cables, pipe, irrigation ditches (in addition to any irrigation ditches which now exist in place), conduits and apparatus for the transmission of electrical current, telephone, television and radio lines and for the furnishing of water, gas, sewer service, or for the furnishing of other utility purposes together with the. right of entry for the purpose of installing, maintaining and im- proving said utilities along, across, upon and through a strip of ]and eight feet in width along the • rear and side lot ] ines of all loth in W1'ctbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing %!1. All easements of record and areas deritnated "Green Belt Area" or "Common Area" on plata o:' ',,,inti.n;c Ranch Subdivision, as finally recorded, arc hereby r,.. 'r ve ; tt.o co-.non u:rn o. they owners of lotc within Westbank ?,rr!. ror recreational purpono:r or ouch purponec aa may ' Annnciatiori. Book 416 Page 34B -46- ARTICLE VII Enforcement • 1. Judicial Relief. Ally violation of the provisions, conditions, or restrictions contained herein shall warrant the declarant or any other lot owner to apply to any court of law or equity having jurisdiction thereof for an injunction or proper relief in order to enforce same in court, and, in its discretion, may award the plaintiff his court costs and reasonable attorneys f3es. No delay on the part of the declarant or any other person in the exercising of any right, power, or remedy contained herein shall be construed'as a waiver thereof or an acquiescence therein. .Various rights and remedies of all persons hereunder shall be - cumulative and the declarant or any other property owner may use any or all of said rights without in any way affecting the ability of the declarant or any other property owner to use or rely upon or enforce any other. right. 2.' Declarant's Right to Remedy Violations. If the Owner of any lot in Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing #1, shall default in the performance of any covenant or condition hereof or shall violate any of the covenants or rules herein contained, the dec- larant or the Westbank Ranch Homeowners' Association may, after 30 days notice to said owner, or without notice, if in the opinion of the declarant or association an emergency exists, perform such cove- nant or condition or remedy such violation for the -account and at the expense of the said owner. If the declarant or association shall incur any expense, including reasonable attorneys fees in instituting, prosecuting(including an action against an owner for default or violation), or defending any action or proceeding in- .stituted by'reason of any default or violation, said expenses shall be included and added to any judgement made or given to the declarant or party prosecuting same. ARTICLE VIII General Provisions 1. Covenants to Run. All the restrictions and covenants contained herein shall constitute covenants running with the land as to all of the lands within Westbank Ranch Subdivision. It shall continue to be binding upon the owners of said lands in all persons claiming by, through, or under said owners for a period of twenty- one years from the date this document is filed for record with the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado, and shall there- after automatically be extended for a further period of ten years; provided, however, that the owners of seventy-five percent of the lots in Westbank Ranch Subdivision may release all of the lots hereby restricted from any one or all of these restrictions by executing and acknowledging an appropriate instrument in writing for said purpose and filing same for record with the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado, in the manner then required for the recording of land instruments. • • • 2. Benefit of All. The provisions contained herein are for the benefit of and shall be binding upon the declarant, its purchasers, and subsequent owners of each of said lots. Each pur- chaser of lots included within this declaration, by acceptance of a deed to same, shall be subject to each and all of the restrictions, conditions, covenants and agreements contained herein and to the jurisdiction, right and power of the declarant. And by such accep- tance, shall for himself, his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns, covenant and agree and consent to and with the grantees and subsequent owners of each of said lots, to keep, observe, comply with and perform said restrictions, crvenants, conditions and agreements contained herein. 3. Variances. The declarant hereby res3rves the right to grant a reasonable variance or adjustment of these conditions and restrictions in order to overcome practical difficulties and prevent unnecessary hardships arising by reason of the application of the restrictions contained herein. ' Such variances or adjustments shall be granted only in cage the granting thereof shall not be materially detrimental or injurious to other property or improve- ments of the neighborhood and shall not defeat the general intent and purpose of these restrict ic:ls .. Book 416 gage 349 4. Severability. In the event any one or more of the provisions, conditions, restrictions, or covenants contained herein Shall be held by any court of competent jurisdict on to be null and void, all remaining restrictions and covenants ,herein set forth - shall re -main in full force and effect. r • Executed this 27 day of a✓6mt , 1970. 1 WESTBANK RANCH NO 1, LTD, by its General Partner, Westbank Development Co. , • Incorp • By Arthur Small, President, Westbank Development Co. , Inc. G-eneral Managing Partner. ' • res Secretar ueoier 1 • . .STATE OF COLORA Do ) . • ) ss. • COUNTY OF GARFIELD) • • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 27th day of November, "1970, by,Arthur Small as President and Dolores J. Huebinger as Secretary of Westbank Development Co., Inc., a Colorado Corporation. Witness my. hand and notarial seal. My commission expires December 12, 1973. . • `; a iijll Vii;• +ruup•4T• • 4//;f_‘2.7h- ZA(,) Notary Public •. . _49_ • r:. .:. J 6„. AMENDMENT TO WESTBANK RANCH SUBDIVISION, FILING 'NO. 1 PROTECTIVE COVENANTS /t' G�th�iJ C,..,, -!y 11.>14 WESTBANK RANCH NO. 1, LTD., a Colorado Limi:ed Partnership, by and through its duly authorized General Vianaging Partn _ _ , Wcstbank Colorado Corporation, being tJ owner of all of t Development Co. , Inc., a � division: :� fling No. 1, as lots in Westbank Ranch Planned Development Su.• the same appears on Plat filed as Document No. 243729 of the records in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado (said sub- division being also sometimes referred to asWestbank Ranch Subdivision,. Filing No. 1), does hereby amend the protective cove: ants set forth in that 1� t "Westbank , R� Subdivision, Filing _ , certain instrument entitled ti� es�GG-�n i.ci1CC1 Sii , Protective Covenants" recorded on January 20, 1971, as Reception _ pion No. 248730 in Book 416 at Page 344 of said records, to read and provide as follows (all numerical and descriptive titles referring to the aforesaid recorded document): ARTICLE II - Definitions "1. Westbank Ranch Planned Development Subdivision, Filing No. 1. -\ Thenever the terms, "Westbank Ranch Subdivision", "Westbank Ranch Sub- division, ub-division, Filing No. 1","Westbark Ranch" or "Westbank" appear or are used -in these covenants, they shall mean- all the lands included in Westbank Ranch Planned Development Subdivision, Filing No. 1, as the same are described on Plat filed as Document No. 248729 of the records in the office of the Clerk and Recorder. of Garfield County, Colorado. ARTICLE V - General Restrictions on Use "4. Animals and Agriculture. Residents may keep dogs, cats or other animals which are bona fide household pets on lands within Westbank Ranch Subdivision, Filing 11, so long as such pets are not kept for commercial purposes and do not make objectional noises or otherwise constitute a nuisanceorrs1 Ponsen-- ience to any of the residents of Westbank Ranch. No cattle, sheep, g poultry or other livestock shall be kept or maintained and only any iyslot. chlots Ho sesa proved may be kept only on lots exceeding three acres in size, by the Declarant for such purposes at the time ofconveyanceof such ctlot,be and,pt on in case such approval is granted, the number of perrnitted lot shall not exceed two (2). No lands shall be used for agricultural purposes except for normal residential gardening of flowers, fruits and vegetables. • -50- "14. Garbage Disposal and Sanitary Systems. Each dwelling house containing a kitchen in Westbank .Ranch Subdivision Filing #1, shall be equipped with a garbage grinder or garbage disposal unit of a type approved by the Architectural Control Committee. No sewage disposal system, sanitary system, cesspool or septic tank shall be constructed or used on any lot unless fully approved as to design, capacity, location and construction by all proper public health agencies of the State of Colorado and the County of Garfield, and also by the Architectural Control Committee." Except as 'hereinabove modified and amended, the undersigned hereby ratifies and confirms all other t-,rovisions. oeclarations.restr�c'.: n:�. ondit:ons and reservations contained in the aforesaid Westbank Ranch Subdivision, • Filing No. 1, Protective Covenants, recorded as Reception No. 248730 in - Book 416 at Page 344 of said records. Executed this 21st day of January, 1971. Attest: _—� Assistant Secretary STATE Or COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD) WESTBAI`TK RANCH NO. 1, LTD., a Colorado Limited Partnership, By its General Managing Partner \XTestbank _nevelopment Co., Inc., a Color .ai -< -,,pora_r-nrio =� ,O, O President The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 8th day of March, 1971, by Arthur Small as President and Gerald D. Hartert as Assistant Secretary of Westbank Development Co.., a Colorado Corporation. Witness my hand and notarial Seal. My commission expires February 6, 1972 Notary Public -2- • • • • • • • • • • • 4 • • • • 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • °°$1' 4 . 5 .ems• • , ••• • 161 e bI-e� s�'yon ,� • • • • • • • Se a.4"ci, it1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5b • SPRING VALLEY Planning for a College -Oriented Community June 1971 ,prepared for SPRING VALLEY LANDOWNERS by JERRY BRO4N Community Planner JEROME F. GAMBA, P.E. Eldorado Engineering Co. PURPOSE • • CONTENTS 1 PLANNING PARAMETERS 2 Base Map 22 Land Ownership 2 Land Slope Problem Drainage Areas 2 2 Vegetation 33 Ground Water Development Potential SPRING VALLEY PLAN 5 Circulation 5 Land Use 6 Utilities 9 IKPLEMENTATION 13 Circulation 13 Land Use 13 Utilities 13 • • PURPOSE The West Campus 9f Colorado Mountain College was located in Spring Valley in 1967 following extensive local public debate. The initial college buildings were constructed in 1967 and opened for instruction in the fall of that year. The site selection was reviewed and reaffirmed by an independent committe se- lected from throughout the college district in 1969. Acceptance of Spring Valley as the permanent site for C.N.C. was approved by the Colorado State Board of Community Colleges and Occupational Education in 1971. In recognition of the fact that establishment of a college campus in a rural setting would provide stimulus for adjacent urban development, the Garfield County General Plan, adopted in,1969, indicated Spring Valley as location for a planned community. This report was prepared as the initial step in attain- ing the objective of a community developed in harmony with the callege and natural attributes of Spring Valley. The intention is to guide deve7.3pment of land in a manner designed to enhance the college campus setting wile pro- tecting the public investment represented by Colorado Mountain College. -1- : SAN N ING PARAMETERS To assist in formulation of the community plan, information was gathered from a number of sources and plotted on a base map overlay series to graphically record the conditions which affect community design decisions. The collected information is shown in detail on original overlays on file with the College. Certain aspects are depicted schematically on the cover page of the large scale drawings accompanying this written report. 1. Base Nap - a map of the Spring Valley area was prepared from 7* minute U.S. Geologic Survey maps at a scale of 1000 feet to the inch with a 40 -foot contour interval. 2. Land Ownership - a base map'.overlay depicting ownership of private land with the owner's name thereon as well as public domain and national forest land. A line is superimposed on a three-mile radius from the existing campus development depicting the area of intensive study. 3. Land Slope - a base map overlay depicting generalized slope of the land in four categories. Slopes in excess of 40% (40 feet vertical in 100 feet horizontal) are a barrier to development, particularly circulation. Slopes ranging between 30;$ and 40% should remain undisturbed but could bo included as greenbelt in subdivision designs. Slopes between 20% and 30% can be uti- lized for spectacular residential sites. Circulation routes and more inten- sive urban development should be located on land sloping less than 10% when- ever possible. 4. Problem Drainages Areas - a base map overlay depicting areas of poor sur- face soil drainage conditions as determined by the U.S. Department of Agri- culture Soil Conservation Service. These lands should be reserved for open space uses. -2- Ve?etation - a.baso map overlay depicting vegetativo cover in generalizod form. The type and ch4ractor of vegatative cover influenced determination of residential densities. For the immediate future, optimum development sitos were chosen to prosorve areas devoted to pasturo and crop land. 6. Ground Water Development Potential - the following roport and accompany- ing map were prepared to provide guidelines for ground water exploration pro- grams in the Spring Valley area. The accompanying map illustrates the author's opinion of those areas in tho Spring Valley region which are most likely to produce sufficient water for residential dovolopmont by moans of drilled wells. Supporting Critoria Critoria used in reaching determinations illustrated on the map is a composite of information dorived from: '1) Geological Survey bulletin 1142J by Bass and Northrop, entitled "Goology of Glenwood Springs Quadrangle and Vicinity, Northwestern Colorado"; 2) field investigations by the author, and 3) well logs of existing wells in the vicinity and discussions with well -drillers fa- miliar with the area. Determinations Primary aquifor in tho Spring Valley rogion is confined to tho basalt flows and volcanic ash deposits which overlay tho Maroon and Paradox formations of the Pennsylvanian Age. The basaltic matorial is boli.ovod to be of Quaternary Ago and in many places has been displaced by faulting. Tho rocks on which the basalt was dopositod has boen subjected to diastrophism and orosion prior to the volcanic activity which resulted in a highly irregular surface. During the period of vulcanism, topographic lows were filled with ash and basalt, producing a topography that was more gentle than tho original surface. Sub- sequent erosion of tho volcanic matorials has removod some of tho material entirely or cut new valleys especially along fault lines and other zones of -3- 1 • structural weakness, Tho areas indicated on the map as "probable" are those areas in tho vicinity of apparent fault displacement or aroas appearing or known to be undorlaid by a considerablo thickness of basaltic material. For - tions of tho map indicated as "possible" aro those areas which are undorlaid by an apparently substantial thickness of volcanic material, which to tho best of the author's knowledge, are not enhancod by structural control or havo not been tosted with substantial production. Those areas on tho map indicated as. "indotorminato" aro thoso portions of the region which are oithor devoid of volcanic rock on the surface or appear to be underlaid by a minimal thickness of volcanic material, or while it may havo substantial thickness, does not appear to bo positioned such that ground water recharge quato to sustain a large volume of continuous production, would bo ade- Conclusions and Recommendations a) Portions of tho Spring Valley aroa are undorlaid by aquifers of sufficient capacity to sustain domostic water production in sufficient quantity to sup- port low-density rosidential development as outlined elsewhere in this plan- ning study. b) It is recommended that community water systems be developed utilizing two or three wells in conjunction with storage to serve population areas in- steadof using individual wells for each rosidonce. c) It is recommended that development overlaying or in the noar vicinity of ground water production, that the domestic sewage be disposod of in a community collection and treatment system, and that wherevor possible in extremely low density areas, that individual mechanical plants bo usod for the treatment of sewage as opposed to the use of the soptic tanks. -4- SPRING VALLEY PLAN This plan is presented as a conceptural scheme delineating land use, circula- tion and utilities in an organizational form. Based on the foregoing planning parameters, it is detailed to an extent consistent with reliance on forty -foot contour intervals. Precise design study will be required prior to construc- tion of any included components. 1. Circulation - sub -arterial roadways include Spring Valley Road between Colorado Highway 82 and Red Canyon, the Red Canyon road and a proposed new alignment between C.M.C. and the existing county road at the Public Service substation designed to link the southeastern portion of Spring Valley with C.Y.C, and the commercial area. Minimum right-of-way for sub -arterial road- ways should be 100 feet. Gradient on proposed sections should not exceed 6% for any significant distance. The sub -arterial circulation concept is designed to facilitate access to C.N.C. and the commercial area from all potential resi- dential areas. It is recommended that proposed roadways be dedicated as part of precise subdivision plans and improved consistent with County Subdivision and Road specifications prior to acceptance by the County for maintenance. The collector roadway system is schematic and would probably vary in location to a greater degree than the sub -arterial system based on precise subdivioion plans. Its function is to provide access to the sub -arterial system from each development area. • 2. Land Use Plan - organization of the land use plan was dictated by environ- mental conditions such as topography, soils, drainage, vegetation and ground water development potential. Existing development including the college cam- pus and roadways wore considered as well as reasonable projections of utility plant expansions. Components of the land use plan are shown on the accompany- ing map and are more fully described as follows: a) Colorado Mountain College - it is recommended that the campus bo consoli- dated south of Spring Valley Road and extended southerly to the broad band of public domain. This would create a more unified campus than tho present col- lege land ownership would permit, buffered by circulation and topographic fea- tures. b) Commercial - located north of the college campus but visually separated therefrom by a pinon-juniper covered ridge, this site would bo accessible to utilities and sub -arterial circulation routes. It will be visible from many potential residential areas and particularly convenient to tho college and mul- tiple family development sites. The character of commercial development should be developed around a local service theme oriented to eventual recreation use of the open area to the north. c) Multiple Family Residential - flanking the campus to the wost and north - oast, this area is expected to be devoted primarily to collego-orionted occu- pants, including students, faculty and staff members. The commercial center and multiple family development are the principal areas proposed for water and sewer service through extensions of existing utilities. The R-3-40 Mul- tiple Family Residential District of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution permit a maximum floor area ratio of 0.25 to 1.0, meaning that for each square foot of building floor area there should be.four square foot of lot area. -6- • .1 Development at this density would permit up to thirteen 800 square -foot dwolling units or nine 1200 square -foot dwolling units por dovelopod acre. Theso are maximum densitios and may be roduced in precise dovolopmont plans based on topography, vogotation and building configuration. On rolativoly lovol areas, two-story buildings would be desirable whilo on sloping situs, a three-story split-lovol configuration could bo usod to advantage. Individual buildings should bo limitod to 12 units oach and projocts should include sig- nificant greenbelt areas in the interest of maintaining a rural atmosphere. d) Single Family Rosidential Clusters - 2 Acre Density - land proposod for development under these criteria comprises that which is not located on the aquifor and thus may roquiro a water distribution systom, in most cases de- veloped indopondontly of tho proposod extensions of tho collogo wator system, Two acres is recommondod as the minimum lot size with residences clustered to a degree consistent with the economics of water distribution. Water could be developed in nearby aquifors for tho systom. Tho use of small community or individual mochanical sewage treatment plants is recommended over septic tanks. o) Single Family Residential - 2 to 5 Acre Density - land proposed for dovelop- ment under theso criteria is generally located on the aquifer whore individually drillod wells should bo successful. The uso of individual mechanical sewage treatmont plants is roconnnonded ovor septic tanks. f) Singlo Family Rosidontial - 10 to 20 Acro Density - land proposed for dovelopment under these critoria is partially underlaid by tho aquifer. Ini- tial. dotelopment should procood on land over the aquifor. Tho uso of indivi- dual mochanical sewage treatmont plants aro rocommondod over soptic tanks. The land use plan indicatos generalized areas designated for a particular type of use. It represents the optimum dovelopmont area for each topograph- ically dofined neighborhood. Cropland is preserved whorovor possible and largo -7- • • aroas of open space are indicated between development areas. Precise plans are required to further delineate the schematically drawn use areas and in such precise plans, land shown as open space may be included within lot lines. Some change of agricultural land to community uses is to be expected although each landowner is urged to maintain the open rural character of the Valley. The poorly drained area shown as open recreation should never be developed except for recreation use. Land in Spring Valley'is currently zoned Agricultural under the Garfield County Zoning Resolution. Single family dwellings and agricultural uses are permitted under that regulation and schools - including colleges - are conditional uses. The minimum residential lot size is five acres on unsubdi- vided ladd and two acres on subdivided land. All of the single family devel- opment recommended herein is possible under current agricultural zoning, pro- viding county subdivision regulations are observed. Implementation of the multiple family residential and commercial developments will require amend- ments to the zone district map. f� 3. Utility Plan - following are our projections as to the potential growth life of existing water and sewage facilities at C.N.C. with estimated costs for improvements and extensions. In order that a realistic appraisal can be made of existing facilities for use in development other than college growth, it was necessary to estimate the pro- bable future water and sewer requirements of the college. Estimates of these requirements were computed and are illustrated in Table "A" (water) and Table "B" (sewer) on the cover sheet of the accompanying maps. The population pro- jections used in these tables are from the Interplan report. The production capacity of the existing wells is conservatively estimate Water to be 430,000 gallons per day. The present storage, which is low pressure, is storage to normal 25,000 gallons and the booster pump capacity to raise this service pressure is 300 gallons per minute. Comparing the above with figures from Table "A", the following may be concluded: a) The water well production would be adequate to supply in excess of 300,000 gallons/day to domestic use other than the college in the year 2000. increase in booster pump ca - supply college domestic needs. b) Construction of high-pressure storage and/or padity will be needed in the very near future to is presently inadequate. Lack of high-pres- c) Fire storage for the sure fire storage in the proveldisastrous. A pumper truck pulling water from the existing s full) would be effective for less than one hour. The following recommendations are made for water system improvements to facil- itate better fire protection and institutional growth at the college and to provide service to development in the vicinity of the college. -9- college event of a simultaneous fire and power outage could torage (if a) Construct a domestic water storage tank at an elevation of 270 feet above the college sit© to provido gravity storage at 116 p.s.i. pressure at the col- lege. This storage tank should have 500,000 gallons capacity. Additional booster pump capacity would bo required to fill the storage tank as well as a new main transmission pipeline from the tank to the existing system. The estimated cost of those improvements is as follows: (1) 500,000 gallon steel water storage tank 50,000 (2) booster pump station and telemetering between pump station and tank 7,000 (3) ton -inch main transmission pipeline tank to booster pumps to system 36,000 93,000 5% miscollanoous and contingent 4,650 97,650 13% engineering 121695 total estimated cost - initial improvement 110,345 b) Construct an 8 -inch main from the college system to the potential develop- ment area west of the college. The following estimated cost is based on the pipeline illustrated on tho map extending west from tho existing college system. (1) eight -inch pipeline 20,000 (2) main line meter 1,000 21,000 5% miscellaneous and contingent 1,050 22,050 13% engineering 2,850 estimated total cost 24,900 -10- Socond stage improvements to extend water service to multiple dwelling and commercial development in the college vicinity include facilities shown schematically on the Utilities Plan estimated to cost as follows: (1) main transmission pipeline - 8500 1.f. from water storage tank pipeline north and east along Spring 'Valley road 85,000 1.000 (2) main line meter 5% miscellaneous and contingent 13% engineering 86,000 4.,300 90,300 11,739 total estimated cost - second stage 102,039 Sewage The existing sewage treatment plant has a capacity (under present Health De- partment standards) to serve college needs up through the loading projected for the year 1990.- In addition to this, the lagoons are designed to be ex- panded to double the present capacity at a minimal cost. Therefore, it would appear that sufficient capacity exists in the college sewage treatment system to serve outside development, The cost to serve this additional loading would be spent in the construction of a main transmission line from the development to the college. The following is an estimate of costs for the construction of this sewer line. (1) 2900 1.f. 12" pipeline 26,100 (2) 10 manholes 4,500 30,600 5% miscellaneous and contingent 1,500 32,10o 13% engineering 4,200 total estimated cost - initial improvement 36,300 -11- Second stage improvements to extend sewer service to multiple dwelling and commercial development in the college vicinity includes facilities shown schematically on the Utilities (1) ,8400 1,f, pipeline from at manhole ;';44 north and Valley road (2) 21 manholes Flan estimated to cost as follows: existing college system easterly parallolling Spring 5% miscellaneous and contingent 13% engineering total estimated cost -'second stage -12- 85,000 9,450 94,450 4,722 99,172 12,892 112,064 • IMPLEMENTATION The initial step is agreement by the landowners on the Spring Valley Flan concept. Subsequently, a presentation should be made to the County Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of County Commissioners to acquaint those bodies with your intentions. Further specific steps toward implementation are as follows: 1 Circulation - centerline surveys should be run on .proposed portions of the sub -arterial roadway system to establish precise location. 2. Land Use - precise planning can proceed for development areas not involved with utility extensions. Cooperation between adjoining landowners in specific development areas is strongly recommended. 3, Utilities - agreement must be reached between owners of land indicated for utility service through extension of college facilities. A utility district approach is recommended for the following reasons: 1) a legally recognized entity with certain specific powers would be created; 2) participating land- owners could control the board of directors; 3) facilities would be tax ex- empt; 4) it would have condemnation power; 5) following initial improve- ments, there would be a possibility of governmental assistance; 6) responsi- bility for initial expansion of college utilities would be clearly defined. A precise service plan must be prepared by the district. For the period when distribt water service is dependent upon sources developed by the college, ser- vice must be limited to the commercial and multiple family residential areas, developments which we feel will contribute most to the college's well-being. Further, we feel that multiple family dwellings should have the fire protec- tion afforded by a water distribution systom and have centralized sewage -13- • treatment services. Oonversely, multiple family development in Spring Valley should be restricted to the district's service area. The district should be totally responsible for the cost of water and sewer lines from their connection point with the present college system. The dis- trict should proportionately participate in cost of the recommended 500,000 gallon water storage tank and 10 -inch line serving it. The district will have to negotiate a water and sewer service charge to be paid to the college. Such agreement must show a clear economic benefit to Colorado Mountain College. Subsequent to formation of the utility district and installation of the im- provements detailed herein, additional water sources could be developed by the district and its service area extended to serve single family residential cluster developments located northeast and southwest of the college campus. „NM -- INS 0 - _�• 1 0\-11.4 -- o ( 4)1 Tb �N NMI_ NM all N iNM 11111111f vMINI 11111111_,,11111 4- Cree4 —+— P i P o Fo 0 '„60, Cor NCre InO C o C 4 � 7 m r i ,— — — um um mit — — — — r O 2 Z Z �c Q° "I a r� rn �50 70 N. z �o 0 GI in = CD , . 0- -I r0 53 a En Imp r c ali* 0 < 0-N• m rim i3ZZ m * m �r 4°?°00X c�0 �r Tz m ��i�rn FAP z cn I.. r M I — — OM N. ■. Id — — — I .. V) aNCcncnC;34 �°Mz�o0>O zrr'� O ; Xryrn r to cn c cryo '7't -z_ -'E,7)1 OOCcznCz a�r0'y" 0,"&) CN r''0zy�'Oz tri CD r rayztOry"xrpv,O�y ✓ odt" H tri <zn �iytjtxri -3ogOOxcn07na zzzMr�dC c�o��zzH 1 c) try � dtmx-•ytnC�� E5r to E5 0 APPROXIMATELY NORTH -SOUTH AND rn ,r, • v, ro O - — O N Z 0 H X� O � � On PI 1-3▪ a z oy rn tri try try O 0 0 I E OM I M I M N I I 1 N M EN N Z O rn n 0 3 c .di w A • • / /— / / r ••/•• •• 0 146 • \4.6.� _ ___ _- C� \\• • m 1C \ j I • \`/1 I \\ \) ( r • • ••_ co 3. •• / / arm e ^ 1 •,./ I 5-:- 1 --_� / ,. • J1 /� ,� / / 1 �� ` ___ )'. / i — — / / / MN 1 M M M M N I N MI 1 = 4Ml-i xx0nti-v��",0--3` > OCCF-3> IgG), -3 7z)>C HC:C OOozrCOxx�n 'T1rx�, roy�X Ong M cM o r M� M 3C7�y�7�v'v�iMMO - cn 7d tnx Mme.. "7CzM C) tll Mv'MZ"ZMtl M C)Xci) u„-�'tiM Cy AWN >'3 ��'4 trl›<C))Z <IUClt0 C�v'z x°O �pzi ,i �_ ij q°n v'pOZ-��v'pr"�< b0,r- C2z� CCO r>';J >OZC7M.�r dpn tTi--y �� r'�j X,�z CrnCA1:5 > Z >tn '�PO �'Z�Z °MO= ,.,.1xn OAOMM�TZ--3-i c) y Yn �'XM pMx ntrr'12to tMMr� tmx .1> c..nMM 70 hi >xp ��M'<p <'°xMr" p'bM0 7-3Y'n `J' H.. xZc 7.p.-3cA 3'�yxp>>M�Cp ���� �r rOM� Mnw ZMnx�z�,�� �od� ro_ nx— X >ZOMMMC7tn<2H 'v>CMY Rr yMZ ��z ZVc�i�d��Q��tCT1�� ���� ��x Mnn .OZ_pytriOd i!HHH �C�t-<ds YrCZr a.(n! • Mu,v7� r C�7� 77�7� .rn r --3..Y vZ-4w ' `ntnnr0`-3%!rC,.,...-C '1 0'1 til ro0O Y p�� G7tyn�xO����2 o• `-- 0 �Otn hi C) 'T1ztd -C'° cnM>ZxnO u,rhc70 Z7i -3O�n OC rn0 aYOMM O n OMrn 7�b Z.Or- 'T1,-<�nCOZcnnZtrn Zc, _ 7�cnr �rn� �� c) xrii 0 -Cs -•(-),1 r M xZ _c" M Oc O O Z O'tt � rorni-1CD -- p:,>H cnppC7 d�'� °�C c��� c z'°ba��cc c zX� �� O d�0 vM,°zz�vlzPV-‹onr t/ dib 7pr cnYC ed cci,°wCMC`C� r MMx Ong broMC xC7° Zr �C2M�M�C7n3M„�n ro,.< �1x 07� d>� n�n�>Z'_CCZZ0 r0~ XIX' Y> YMXm-x .0 u-, M'%i- C7 C r"7.tp ddn�MM� rJ,yny-rz � MX,..0 e71�15>b2C:›'v C7 Ox '-ri> ° c „C' not-lMnpM .3Za goo XJZ pM� �rnrn�`"cr�C d°� ZCZ o° Z(/),,J ° d zrd"a z>_ opo �x h� °,.<wOx z c x GSM til M M to W 00Mz t C7 ° M M n b z°z G1 tat tri zM°0 CMZ x oz� oO irM z rr� ZCC Z M nK— C O.3 ,H Z c, z� r r ,bO p0 tri o�� r r- 0 0 O z 0 rn �zZ � O C7z ZO2 "'3HC Oroc'n tgT,gPc>4. xCxOCx MOM '�n`" '7' CK. '-<OW �O z M,HH tricnMzv'M cn Mir, �C ��yx rrd Mt�r,G�z --3>z7z, btdC4CX 7`�� �vHiN �z nzM MnC �tizo xO %nzcrz> M OY�� �� �yz 00� did Mph opt:i-317n �My ` >-' 7r M›4 zE0 Fxt cMi' CCS xx,›xx McMi'M �rz nX xmx ��(� "i�Cz rbM a+�dy r -3z gyp r0 M�-3c) n�0 X�v'n ��d-.COyz› ,-n`�'3'� ��r� dz ZOO 1� mi t1Mx zaip mxd ppOz_T vC'nx xC,-3›� a y— Mp� C7�x7�g xv'n CX zr" vp.r,� �tC� r' -3n vM'b,c zz M O MO= 7'a Oa '-3ro0 x(:) d^a Mpg nn�xC7C n-=1> Oc>i, "z z� �d �zz Ktrr,0 Ozz M�,7COt�rU v' M� Ycnd MMz 7�C7G� ,-TiC ,.0 >n �cn v'Y ‘.r C-0 Mc"). H>_ Op�M td 0� M o� cMi�"3 Xz �M� ��� MMz3 b�xtm �x� CM 7�z z> �,o0, ��› axm >z,.mxM z�'� M� z �- vc nzt- K�c4 nm� c),-,n�C� C) ,-t Yd 3 d0 r3Z� �� Cyd Y�>��O MZ.� Yr v / O ��O M2Z HC 3 Cdr tdx0 tri ,.-� M r M 0ZH C- '-3C v'M MOO O"� n�7- "OxXxM `TIC C- tm7),,t �H z �>m inn, ���7d9ci' ›bM -3� 74p �y CdM dd› ti r�,� Zx�'�c�„, rcr Mx �� zM p�c�„ �O� Mz> n,nZnc, O� >d np zn Kzy zyn plc) MMoO'� Ocnp9 � zy I1 - 't --"x -� m>x �c�> zMM z�rr� rr1 > 7z) 4> crn� zdn MOp Opp �Cpzzr • �ro cn� �M �� �nz �X , tori tt y t- p, b> C3 OZ cz�M ,-CHP c/'H ��adM� C H aM M'�� 7ycnZci' Z7� <� M rutxy �� MOS dt�r,z zzyyOx Coed z� cn �?C7 Y: �-Czx ncrzCY M zC nm z n< On Oxrr' Ox vC >dz od dr Mo r bO d z y z M cn r c) .c 2 r Z Z 0 0 0Z C') m 0 0 M NM N I I MI = IIIIN w D 0 — — — ----+ 0 11 w Do,= 0 0 w 0 0 (P. Et:* mz rh = c55) m -cog 5: (Or - max cn C 0 0 — w 0 0 at 1 w 0 N 0 0 fi-- — ---� 03 I 1 INN um No mi N 1 N NM M MN M 1 = = E E Kelt VIX (O N MI H = MI MI = M M M I 0 11=111=1•11=11MINEINI=1=11=11MIIIMMIIIIIIMINIII • IIVA3 IIIII IIIII INN MINI IIIMI 111111 IIIIMI =I INN Ell Mil MN INN NM 111•11 IVILN3LOd aWODNI JVIO.L 00'000`SZ6 `9$ • • • • • • 00'000`0017 `9$' 00'OO5`Z£ H _ tTl 00'000`SZS$ TOTAL PROBABLE DEVELOPMENT COSTS 00'000`050 `T$ MISCELLANEOUS AMENITIES 00'000`001$ ON-SITE WATER & SEWAGE TREATMENT 00'000`00£$ W31SAS 1IV2LL 44 • • • • • • • • • 00'000`05 I $ S3LLI TLLf1 GNV SQVO2I 00'000`057$ PLANNING, ENGINEERING, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 00'000`051$'