Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Staff Report 12.09.1987• • PC 12/09/87 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS PROJECT: Saddleback Metropolitan District Service Plan LOCATION: The proposed district is located in portions of Sections 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, and 24; T7S, R95W; more practically described as five (5) parcels of land encompassing 203.74 acres located within the Battlement Mesa P.U.D., south of Parachute. I. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Some relevant Garfield County Comprehensive Plan issues are: Ensure the provisions of legal, adequate, dependable and cost effective sewer and water facilities and to encourage new development to locate in proximity to existing sewer and water facilities. The following goal objective and policy are relevant to the issue of special districts: Objective 5. Policy 5. Discourage the unnecesssary proliferation of private water and sewer systems and special districts. The County will approve only those private water and sewer systems and/or special districts that meet a specific development need and where the development cannot obtain the same services from an adjacent or nearby system or district in an economically feasible manner. Whether or not a new special district should be formed is still a relevant issue and a finding of substantial compliance with the Comprehensive Plan will have to be made by the Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission according to C.R.S. 32-1-203. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Battlement Mesa P.U.D. was originally approved by the Board of County Commissioners in August of 1975. Subsequent amendments to the P.U.D. were approved by Resolution No. 80-82, 5/19/80, and by Resolution No. 82-121, 5/24/82. The P.U.D. encompasses approximately 3,082 acres of land zoned for residential, commercial and recreation/open space uses. In December of 1981, the Board approved the Battlement Mesa Water and Sanitation District by Resolution No. 81-379. The original boundaries of the Battlement Mesa Water and Sanitation District were modified in 1986 to reduce the area included in the district to the developed neighborhoods. Due to the changes in the development of the Battlement Mesa P.U.D., it was proposed to centralize the costs of providing services by the formation of a Metropolitan District surrounding • • the existing water and sewage treatment facilities. The Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District was approved by the Board by Resolution No. 86-129 in November of 1986. The Metropolitan District contracts with the existing service users for the treatment of water and sewage. These entities are Battlement Mesa Inc. (BMI), Battlement Mesa Water and Sanitation District and the Town of Parachute. It is anticipated that when the Battlement Mesa P.U.D. is built out completely, the Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District boundary may encompass the entire area developed, and all of the other districts will dissolve. The five parcels to be included in the Saddleback Metropolitan District include 103.29 acres of proposed patio homes and modular homes, 53.10 acres of proposed condominiums, and 47.35 acres of apartments. It is possible that an additional 201.34 acres of land will be annexed to the Saddleback Metropolitan District at a future date. If all areas, including the projected inclusion area, are developed fully, it is estimated that the 2,747 dwelling units will house a total of 5,594 people by 2010. Portions of the proposed district have existing water and sewer lines in place as a result of the original construction activity of BMI in the early 80's. These facilities will be purchased from BMI by the district. Any new water or sewer lines will be built and paid for by the developer of the property. Treatment of the sewer and treated water will be provided for by contract with the Battlement Mesa Metropolitan District. As a metropolitan district, the following services can be provided legally, in addition to water and sewer: - fire protection - street improvement - safety protection system - television service - public transportation - mosquito control In essence, the metropolitan district has most of the same powers and authorities as a municipality. Financing of the district will be through water and sewer service charges, property taxes, and standby service charge. It is proposed that approximately $1,365,000 in limited obligation financing will be needed to pay for the internal lines, and an additional $2,259,000 for future acquisition may be needed. Any authorization for a debt of this sort will be obtained pursuant to State statutory requirements. III. ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. The formation of a special district requires the filing of a service plan with the County Clerk and Recorder and then action by the County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners must take action within thirty (30) days of the regular meeting at which the service plan is presented to them. Within the thirty day period, the County Planning Commission is required to study the service plan, and present its' recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. The Board can take any of the following actions: 1. Approve, without condition or modification, the service plan; • • 2. Disapprove the service plan as submitted; 3. Conditionally approve the service plan subject to additional information being submitted or the modification of the proposed service plan. The Board must disapprove the service plan if evidence of the following is not presented: 1. There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized service in the area to be serviced by the proposed special district; 2. The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed special district is inadequate for present and projected needs; 3. The proposed special district is capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within its' proposed boundaries; 4. The area to be included in the proposed special district has, or will have, the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. The Board may disapprove the service plan if evidence satisfactory to the Board of any of the following, at the discretion of the Board, is not presented: 1. Adequate service is not, or will not be, available to the area through the County, other existing municipal or quasi -municipal corporations, including existing special districts, within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis; 2. The facility and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facility and service standards of each County within which the proposed special district is to be located and each municipality which is an interested party under Section 32-1-204(1); 3. The proposal is in substantial compliance with a master plan adopted pursuant to Section 30-28-106, C.R.S.; 4. The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted county, regional, or state long-range water quality management plan for the area; 5. The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area to be served. The above noted criteria for denial will be the basis for staff comments in the same sequence. 1. There is an organized service in the area presently. Due to the longer development period than originally proposed, a new service provider is being proposed. This will localize the costs for services in a manner consistent with the property owners ability to pay for the services, and not put the burden of additional costs on existing residents in the Battlement Mesa Water and Sanitation District. • • 2. The existing service is adequate to serve the existing and projected needs, but due to the previously noted financial concerns, a new service provider is proposed. 3. The proposed service district is capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within its' service boundary. 4. The area included in the proposed special district does not have any proposed indebtedness, at this time, that cannot be discharged on a reasonable basis. 5. There is no other existing municipal or quasi -municipal corporation that can or will be able to provide adequate service in a reasonable time and on a comparable basis. 6. The facility and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facility and service standards of the County or interested municipality. 7. The proposal is in substantial compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan since it is not a new service as much as a reorganization and financing of an existing service. 8. The proposal is consistent with the 208 water quality management plan for the area since there are no additional treatment facilities in this proposal. 9. The creation of the proposed district will be in the best interest of the residents of the area to be served. IV. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL of the service plan without condition or modification.