Approved - 6 to 0.

West Junction Metropolitan District

Case: SDS-2020-322
Consider a request by Foothills Housing 2 LLC for review and approval of the Consolidated Service Plan for the West Junction Metropolitan District, for the Halandras Planned Development on 177 acres of land within the City of Grand Junction.
Videos & Files
Comments & Feedback
1

Options for attending and submitting public comment for items on this agenda are listed here:


1. Provide a comment below by 6 p.m. on July 27. 

2. Leave a phone message at 970-244-1590 by 4 p.m. on July 28. This message will be public testimony and will be played for the Planning Commission to consider in review of each application. 

3. Attend the meeting virtually by clicking here. 

4. Attend the meeting at City Hall, 250 N 5th Street. As recommended by Mesa County Public Health, those attending in person will be asked to wear a face mask. Other social distancing measures will be in place.


To view meeting live stream click here. (Available 6 p.m. on July 28, 2020).

Videos

Applicant Presentation

Staff Presentation

Files

Development Application with Service Plan ( 8.0 MB )
Applicant Presentation ( 1.98 MB )
Staff Report ( 0.17 MB )
Maps and Exhibits ( 1.25 MB )
Draft Resolution ( 0.07 MB )
Decision Making Criteria

The jurisdiction shall disapprove the service plan unless evidence satisfactory to the Council of each of the following is presented: 

(a)  There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized service in the area to be serviced by the proposed special district.

(b)   The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed special district is inadequate for present and projected needs.

(c)  The proposed special district is capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within its proposed boundaries.

(d)   The area to be included in the proposed special district has, or will have, the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis.


The jurisdiction may disapprove the service plan if evidence satisfactory to the Council of any of the following, at the discretion of the Council, is not presented: 

(a)  Adequate service is not, or will not be, available to the area through the City or other existing municipal or quasi-municipal corporations, including existing special districts, within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis. 

(b) The facility and service standards of the proposed special district are compatible with the facility and service standards of the jurisdiction within which the proposed special district is to be located and each municipality which is an interested party under C.R.S. §32-1-204(1).

(c) The proposal is in substantial compliance with a master plan adopted pursuant to C.R.S. §30-28-106, C.R.S.

(d) The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted county, regional, or state long-range water quality management plan for the area.

(e) The creation of the proposed special district will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served.

Comments & Feedback

Comments
 
This case is closed, online commenting is no longer available.

Ute Water Conservancy District Comments:

Representatives of Ute Water Conservancy District (Ute Water) met with representatives of the Applicant for the proposed West Junction Metropolitan District (Metro District) by telephone on July 24, 2020. The parties discussed the draft service plan for the Metro District, which identifies Ute Water as the entity that will provide domestic water service within the Metro District. The service plan provides that all Public Improvements (as that term is defined in the service plan) shall meet the standards and specifications required by Ute Water and other public entities, and the parties discussed some of Ute Water’s requirements, standards and specifications. The parties also discussed the following specific matters relating to the proposed service plan:

1. Since Ute Water does not provide irrigation water, Ute Water’s representatives requested that the “Water” paragraph of Section V.A.1 of the proposed service plan be divided into two paragraphs, one dealing with potable domestic water (which will be provided by Ute Water) and a second dealing with nonpotable irrigation water (which will be provided by a different entity). Corresponding changes should also be made to the water provisions of Exhibit C, with one Part dealing with domestic water and a separate Part dealing with irrigation water.

2. In connection with Section VI.D. of the proposed service plan, Ute Water noted that any infrastructure that will be conveyed to Ute Water must be conveyed free and clear of any liens or encumbrances.

3. Ute Water noted that it would like a few changes to be made to the Water Main Plan that is attached to the proposed service plan, and its representatives offered to meet with the Applicant’s engineer to review those changes. Ute Water’s understanding is that the Water Main Plan is preliminary and that changes can be made to it through the City’s land use approval process.

Otherwise, the proposed service plan that Ute Water discussed with the Metro District’s representatives (which was dated July 10, 2020) is satisfactory to Ute Water. Ute Water appreciates the opportunity to review and comment upon the proposed service plan.

07/27/2020 10:05 am
Mark Hermundstad, General Counsel
4 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment

Your Question has been submitted.