Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03/16/2017 - Planning And Zoning Board - Supplemental Documents - P&Z Supp Documents
Poudre River – Citizen Email 1 From: rockymntnauto@gmail.com [mailto:rockymntnauto@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Ault Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2017 2:34 PM To: Ted Shepard Subject: Kayak Park on vine drive My issue and continuing....is the continued issues w homeless and bums doing damage close and nearby and failure by the city to contain this issue. Currently my neighbors and I have on going issues with these people. So hopefully this new "bum haven" at night will be patroled and guarded as well as property nearby. Maybe city cops are to busy ticketing people 4 smoking on public streets instead of protecting businesses that supply revenue to the city. Iam out of town of course 4 this meeting but.. i as well as my neighbors may errect a fence to protect my property and my customers since police fail at this. So hope that will look attractive 4 the city...to have fences up, like jail! Wayne Ault Owner 108 E Vine Drive 1 Jason Holland From: Deanna Adams <waypointco@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 4:03 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Waters Edge Project Development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Copied for P&Z Jason, I received your letter in the mail last night and would very much like to be at the meeting on the 16th. However, that is spring break week in Fort Collins and we plan to be out of town. I know this development is moving along despite what all of us at Richards Lake want/think. I would like to pass along my one concern though and that is the 48 multi-family dwellings. I understood from some of his first talks with our group that this was going to be single family homes and single family attached, but not remembering there being the multi-family dwellings. Not sure how those will work in a neighborhood such as ours and those across the street where they are all single family homes. I would really prefer the properties out there stay that way. I"m not sure if my opinion counts for anything, but that's my concern. If that can be passed along that would be great. Thank you. Deanna Adams Waters' Edge - Adams Email 1 Jason Holland From: John Daharsh <john@daharsh.net> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 12:30 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's edge development Attachments: 3-Waters Edge Planning Narrative.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged To whom it may concern. My name is John Daharsh and I am the president of the Board of Directors of the Serramonte Highlands HOA. I live at 3223 Turnberry Road in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. I am writing to make you aware of our concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. I speak for the HOA Board, the residents of our neighborhood, as well as for my family and wish to communicate that we vehemently oppose the current proposal to develop the area south of the Serramonte Highlands into several concentrated areas of high density neighborhood. The current neighborhoods to the south and east of us are similar, although they do not have the addition of multi-family residences that the current proposal does. To plan a high density development adjacent to open fields, as has been done in those neighborhoods, makes sense as there is minimal impact on neighbors (there are none) - but planning a high density development right up to the fence line of an established, rural neighborhood - zoned for farming - dramatically and negatively impacts all those who live in that neighborhood. I received a letter - sent to a small number of residents within our neighborhood - last week, letting us know that there is a hearing this Thursday night to discuss the proposal. Beyond this communication - several meetings and other conversations have taken place that we were NOT included in. Our neighborhood will be most significantly impacted by this proposal yet we have had very limited inclusion in the discussion. Early plans for this development sought to "sell" this area as "65 and over" - however in an email sent from you last week (to my knowledge not directly to residents in our neighborhood) you made it clear that the 249 single-family residences would have no restriction on age. This seems to be a direct conflict with the original "sell" of this area - and virtually guarantees that the 249 residences would largely be occupied by those not in that original target demographic. We recognize that development is inevitable, however the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. - Decrease in peace and quiet - Increase in light pollution - Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road. - Increase in animals-at-large. We've faced an increase in dogs running through our neighborhood as pet owners have increased walking animals off leash along the south edge of our neighborhood - resulting in harassment of livestock within our neighborhood. Fortunately no livestock deaths have been reported in the past year, but tampering with animal enclosures, harassment of small animals and poultry, and charging and barking at horses have all happened. - Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road - Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection - Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. - Decrease in home values due to these issues - Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20-105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all Waters' Edge - Deharsh Email 2 In the past year and a half, in addition to revising the initial narrative of a 65-and-older community, the narrative has changed to reduce buffers around abandoned oil wells from 350 feet to 150 feet, and currently seek to reduce the buffer to 100 feet. Additionally, the developer is now seeking for further reduce the landscaping required. In the original Planning Narrative Document (attached,) dated September 1, 2015 - under the "Project Narrative'" item E describes the neighborhood as being compatible with surrounding neighborhoods: "Compatibility with surrounding area - Being a residential community, Waters Edge is very compatible with the surrounding developed areas and continues the lot patterns started with the adjacent Richards Lake and Hearthfire Communities. We are also providing a large landscaped buffer adjacent to Serramonte [sic.]Estate" The buffer described is smaller than the existing buffer to the West of Serramonte Highlands, and with the much smaller lots puts homes very close to the south edge of our neighborhood. Page 6 of the same document goes on to describe in verbose language the desire to serve the "65-and-older" community, yet in your email last week it is clear that 100% of the single-family residences will have no restriction on who may purchase or reside in them. The document describes "vehicle-free" lifestyle (page 7,) yet every illustration of planned construction includes a garage. As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love in Larimer County. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood plan and instead request a development of only single family homes with lot sizes that are more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. We will be at the aforementioned hearing to voice our concerns and we will secure legal representation should the current plan continue forward past this meeting. Thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns. Sincerely, John Daharsh President, Serramonte Highlands Homeowners Association Board of Directors 970-988-5138 Waters' Edge - Deharsh Email Waters' Edge - Dauth Email Waters' Edge - Dauth Email Waters' Edge - Dauth Email 1 Jason Holland From: Blaine Gaither <blaine.gaither@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:25 AM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland, My name is Blaine Gaither and I live at 1600 Serramonte Dr. in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. I am writing to discuss with you my concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. My family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. We feel it is a conscious decision to move to the northern, outer edge of Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy the feeling of a more rural lifestyle. Although development is inevitable, the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. -Decrease in peace and quiet -Increase in light pollution -Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road! -Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road -Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection -Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. -Decrease in home values due to these issues -Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20-105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love in north Fort Collins. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood plan and instead request a development of ONLY single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. Blaine Gaither Waters' Edge - Gaither Email 1 Jason Holland From: Joseph Horan <joho7218@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2017 2:23 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Waters' Edge Development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Copied for P&Z Hi Jason, We won't be able to attend the meeting on March 16, and my wife and I felt that we would like to express our views on the Waters' Edge development. We have lived in Hearthfire since October of 2012. We love the "peace and quiet" our location provides. We do understand that Fort Collins is growing - no stopping that! However, we feel it is important for the city to do its best to maintain the life and lifestyle most people love about our fair city. Adding stoplights and turn lanes does help control traffic, but does nothing to reduce traffic. Turnberry, Country Club, Mountain Vista, and Timberline are two lane roads. Dramatically increasing the automobile traffic on these roads - which this development will certainly do - will make simple chores as grocery shopping, and doctor visits, increasingly annoying and time consuming. We already have loads of "cut-through" traffic from Douglas Rd. through Hearthfire to reach destinations to the south and east. The density of the proposed Waters' Edge development can only Waters' Edge - Horan Email 2 increase this problem, negatively impacting home values, neighborhood safety, and day to day life in our neighborhood. It seems to us, that if the city wants to approve such a development, it should at the very least address simple and practical issues such as widening Mountain Vista, Timberline and Turnberry, BEFORE adding the traffic, rather than after. One has to wonder the logic in asking residents to suffer annoying traffic issues for extended periods, and then after the fact, widen roads, adding to the misery of trying to navigate them for whatever period of time it takes to complete the task. Further, in a town that has a high "anti oil well" attitude, reducing buffers from well-heads seems long-term unwise. What are the long-term implications of a capped well site. Steel corrodes, subsidence occurs. Who is liable for problems left there in 30, 40 , or 50 years? The developer will be long gone. Does the city assume liability? We are all in favor of responsible growth. We are not in favor of high density developments juxtaposed to lower density developments. We feel the approval of this development as proposed is inappropriate for this part of Fort Collins, and unfair to those who will be subjected to the problems it creates. Respectfully, J. Joseph Horan Ellen B. Horan 3209 Town Center Ct. 80524 Waters' Edge - Horan Email 1 Jason Holland From: Katie Howie <khow1983@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 8:08 AM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge Development Proposal Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland, My name is Katie Howie and I live at 1617 Serramonte Drive in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. I am writing to discuss with you my concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. My property directly borders the proposed development. My family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. We feel it is a conscious decision to move to the northern, outer edge of Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy the feeling of a more rural lifestyle. Although development is inevitable, the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. -Decrease in peace and quiet -Increase in light pollution -Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road! -Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road -Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection -Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. -Decrease in home values due to these issues -Concerns for health and safety with such a close building proximity to the oil wells being allowed -Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20-105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love about living in north Fort Collins. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood plan and instead request a development of ONLY 1-2 story single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. Thank you for your time. I will attend the meeting on Thursday. Katie Howie Waters' Edge - Howie Email 1 Jason Holland From: robert lyons <r.w.lyons@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 1:07 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge Development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland My name is Robert Lyons and I live at 1801 Serramonte Drive in the Serramonte Highlands Sub‐division. I am writing to discuss with you my concerns for the Water's Edge Development off of Turnberry Rd. My family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. When we returned to the U.S. after a long period of time abroad working, we chose North Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy a more rural lifestyle after living in major cities for more than 30 years. Although development is inevitable the current plan is not suited to this area. It is simply too dense a concentration of people, houses and cars. The following is a list of some of the issues our sub‐division and the neighboring Hearthfire sub‐division face, if this development proposal goes ahead as planned. ‐ decrease in peace and quiet ‐ increase in traffic through Hearthfire sun‐divison, Douglas and Turnberry roads ‐ increase in traffic on the intersection of Douglas road and Highway 1 already a very dangerous intersection ‐ increase in lake use of Richard's Lake ‐ decrease in home values due to the above issues and others ‐ potential increase in crime ‐ potential trespassing on our property by people from Water's Edge ‐ potential leakage from the capped wells Development is inevitable, however, we hope the city will maintain the beauty, quiet and all of the other elements we love in North Fort Collins. We respectively request a development of only single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, Maple Hill and Richard's Lake. Sincerely, Robert W Lyons Waters' Edge - Lyons Email 1 Jason Holland From: Jim Miles <jmilesupnorth@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 11:32 AM To: Martina Wilkinson Cc: Jason Holland; Nicole Hahn Subject: Re: Waters Edge PDP Review @ March 16, 2017 P&Z Board Meeting Martina, Thank you for your timely, thorough and informative response. I am pleased to hear about the traffic signal installation at SH1 and Douglas Road! I understand your thinking about the situation at Vine and LeMay Roads......it is truly a very complicated problem. I wanted to let you know that I will continue to raise this issue with City Officials. While I understand and respect your perspective about Waters Edge and its impact, I feel like its a "death by 1000 cuts" situation at Vine and LeMay. Every little bit hurts. Again, thank you for your professionalism and follow up. Regards, Jim Miles Sent from my iPad On Mar 8, 2017, at 3:29 PM, Martina Wilkinson <mwilkinson@fcgov.com> wrote: Hi Jim – Thanks for writing in, and I’m not sure if I can fully respond to all the details in your email, but will try to provide an overview. As we’ve discussed before, we cannot legally require a developer to fix existing issues. We can require a developer to mitigate their own impacts in a way that is proportional to their impact. So our goal in the review of this project was to determine the big picture of operations in the area, the level of impact of Water’s Edge, and what proportional mitigation looks like. In areas where the function is a challenge, a developer can either limit their impact, or make improvements (or both). In the case of Vine and Lemay, there is no ‘easy fix’ nor a proportional one. So the goal there was to limit the Water’s Edge impact. When the project was first submitted, there were almost 800 dwelling units as well as retail and office. Then the project was reduced to include only 379 dwelling units without retail or office Finally, the project was further reduced by legally restricting about 1/3 of the dwelling units by age. The result is the impact of Water’s Edge at Vine/Lemay is now only 2%. The City is actively working on improvement options for that intersection with current funding for right of way acquisition and design. We’re also working with other developers whose projects are much closer than 3.5 miles away to see what type of interim improvements at Vine/Lemay are feasible and proportional to their projects. You ask about trip generation. The generation can come from either a nationally accepted standard, or they can submit a request for using their own generation. As for senior housing rates, at first they provided their own data, but we were reluctant to accept the data. We’ve required use of the national Waters' Edge - Miles Email 2 standard. Some people argue the numbers should be higher because people are staying in the work force longer, and others argue they should be lower because people are more willing to carpool and are more active (ie biking) to a greater degree than before. Those numbers are updated occasionally, so cultural variations are generally taken into account. You ask about distribution. It is a bit of an art as much as science. The bigger the distribution, the greater impact area, but less impact per intersection. If the distribution is very narrow, there’s a big impact on fewer intersections, which limits the scope of potential improvements and you may miss troublesome spots. We try to find the middle ground. In this case, there was a request to lower the distribution through Vine/Lemay if other corridor improvements are made which we did not accept. As for improvements, using the broad scope of the study, we tried to identify specifically needed improvements in the area, whether Water’s Edge can be legally responsible for them based on feasibility and proportional impact, and how other improvements might be constructed. For off‐site improvements, Water’s Edge is building ¼ mile of arterial, additional auxiliary turn lanes, geometric improvements and a signal at Turnberry and Country Club, and providing $250,000 fee in lieu for the City to use, likely towards the signalization of Vine/Timberline (that’s complicated by the required RR circuitry and approval, so the City will take on the management of the project). The developer argued that once signalized, Timberline will draw traffic from Lemay, which may be true but we did not allow that assumption in the calculations. SH1 and Douglas is the other intersection you mentioned, and we worked with the County and CDOT to apply for, and received a $1/2 million dollar safety grant to signalize that. So ultimately in addition to the adjacent improvements, the area will see 2 new signals, and funding towards a third. Staff’s recommendation is that those improvements are meaningful and proportional to the impact created by the Water’s Edge development. It doesn’t fix everything, and we know there remains much work to do. We’ll continue working on those issues both through the City and with other developers. Thanks ‐ martina PS – you also mentioned Capstone. We restricted their access on Lemay to inbound only, so there is no exit allowed from the development to Lemay. This, coupled with very limited destinations to the north (CSU, retails etc is all to west or south), limited their impact to Vine/Lemay intersection. As overall mitigation, they are building a ‘back door’ exit for Andersonville residents to the east instead of to Lemay, and are building a new arterial to the east of their development as well. Martina Wilkinson, P.E. PTOE Assistant City Traffic Engineer City of Fort Collins Traffic Operations mwilkinson@fcgov.com 970-221-6887 From: James Miles [mailto:jmilesupnorth@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 12:21 PM To: Jason Holland; Martina Wilkinson Subject: Waters Edge PDP Review @ March 16, 2017 P&Z Board Meeting Dear Jason and Martina, Waters' Edge - Miles Email 3 I am writing you to request further information regarding the current Waters Edge submittal for review at the above stated meeting. Of particular note, I am interested in the rationale for the recommendation to proceed given the information presented in the Traffic Impact Analysis which was included in the material provided. Before I get into the Traffic Impact Analysis, let me commend both of you for your (and the Developer’s) efforts to provide what appears to be a well thought out proposal. Upon reviewing the materials, I find that the site plan, landscaping plan, streets plans and all appear to represent this development as an example of what we would hope to see in the way of development in the City of Fort Collins. That said, I am flummoxed by the lack of specific recommendations for improvements in the Vine and LeMay Roads intersection, and to a lesser degree with the lack of any conversation/recommendations for the near term regarding the conditions at the intersection of State Highway 1 and Douglas Road. According to the information contained in the Traffic Impact Analysis on page 16, Year 2021 Background Conditions: "Only two locations will not meet these LOS standards: Intersection No. 11, Vine Drive/Lemay Avenue (Signalized) – With the increases in traffic projected for the Year 2021 timeframe, overall intersection operations during the PM peak hour will degrade to LOS F even with some signal timing optimization (same cycle length and offset; only modifications to allotted green time). Specifically, the eastbound and westbound through/right movement, and the northbound and southbound approaches will operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. Intersection No. 12, Vine Drive/Timberline Road (All-Way Stop) – The northbound approach will reach LOS F during the PM peak hour.” Then on page 17, Table 1 there is a recommendation for achieving the LOS requirements for the Vine/LeMay intersection: "Add additional NB & SB laneage – 2nd through lane and exclusive left turn lanes in both directions” again to satisfy the background condition. The Trip Generation Estimates on page 18 relative to the "Sr. Housing Trip Category” do not provide the background assumptions for how this particular categorization applies. While one might assume that by restricting this stated portion of housing to exclusively age 55+ that might lead to some fewer trips than the under age 55+ categories, proof of this assumption isn’t provided. In fact, given the current economic conditions and the widely stated observation that many seniors are staying in the workforce well beyond the “normal” retirement age, one might expect that the “Sr. Housing Trip Category” data are invalid or, at the very least must be interpreted with some injection of statistical significance to understand potential variability. In addition, the Trip Distribution estimates shown in Figure 10 on page 19 also do not provide the statistical variability of the projections. This is important so that one may understand how much variability there might be in the data given the relatively small sample size of the DU numbers. All of this is significant to the conclusion on page 20 regarding the impact on Adequate Public Facilities that the projected volume of traffic due to the Waters Edge development is within the required maximum of 50, being determined to be at 49. Given that the projection is so close to exceeding the APF maximums, I believe it is necessary to provide the statical variability of the data so that one might have a more complete picture. Finally, the Capstone Cottages Project now under construction will add approximately 900 beds and about 750 parking spaces for residents. Its assumed that those residents will utilize LeMay Road for access to shopping in north Fort Collins. This will add additional stress on the Vine/LeMay intersection. Waters' Edge - Miles Email 4 So, what’s the plan for Vine/LeMay and when will it commence? What’s the plan for SH1 and Douglas Road and when will that commence? Thanks for your time and attention. Regards, Jim Miles Waters' Edge - Miles Email Waters Edge PDP Review City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board Meeting March 16, 2017 Hello. My name is Jim Miles and I am a resident in the Hearthfire Subdivision, which is located just west of the Waters Edge Development site. Myself and others from our neighborhood have spent many hours going through the various proposed project plans and submittals for this project. Summarizing the results of an internal neighborhood survey of concerns/issues we focused on the this projects’s potential impact on neighborhood esthetics, emergency response times and impact of the anticipated traffic increases. By and large I/we are impressed with the degree of professionalism exhibited by the various City Officials we worked with: Jason Holland-Planning, Martina Wilkerson-Traffic Engineering and Ann Turnquist and Holger Durre-Poudre Fire Authority. Having met with them multiple times and gone through documents multiple times, we have been convinced that appropriate considerations have been incorporated into this final proposed project plan.We recognize that the developer has “come to the party” on many issues, not the least of which is making significant modifications to particular traffic intersections most significantly impacted by this development. However, what is not being adequately addressed in this plan is the situation at the intersection of Vine and LeMay Roads. The Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the Developer deals with projections of traffic volumes under various considerations: Background (meaning traffic volume growth within the next 5 years excluding this proposed development), year 2021 projections (presuming this phase of the development is built out in this timeframe) and year 2040 projections (presuming full development of the whole developer’s property). In that study, the Developer’s engineers are assuming that some revision of the Vine/LeMay intersection will have occurred. I am aware of no such implementation plan. Further, in just the Background Projections they report that the intersection will deteriorate to a Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Level of Service F, which exceeds the standard. (Some might suggest that the intersection already operates at that level frequently in the current environment.) By the year 2021, and adding in the impact of this development’s traffic volumes (which were adjusted due to the plan to restrict portions of this project to age 55+ and by downsizing the scope of the proposal) the situation only gets worse. However, the developer was able to just narrowly miss the legal limit of volume that would trigger the City Code for Adequate Public Facilities by making the deed restriction and downsizing changes. The max limit is 50 per hour at peak and the projection came in at 49 per hour. This is awfully close to exceeding the max and one could argue that the age 55+ assumption is not wholly correct and thus the project would exceed this requirement. I am not aware that the City has a workable plan to alleviate the conditions at this intersection. I know City Council is studying it, but this issue has been on the table since at least 2004. My recommendation is to provisionally approve this project and parse out the number of building permits at a pace consistent with the City’s action plans to resolve the problem. This way the developer can proceed and the rest of the affected citizens of the City will be considered as well. Thank you for considering my input. 1 Jason Holland From: jan orecchio <bullruncreekranch@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:23 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: WATER'S EDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT.. Oil Spill - South of Serramonte Highlands Attachments: Oil Spill Sept. 1995 Serramonte Subdiv..pdf; Oil Spill Pictures.pdf; Oil Spill Pictures - 2.pdf; Oil Pump Spill 1996 S Serramonte Subdiv..pdf; Wildlife Affected by Density.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear John Holland, My name is Jan Orecchio. My husband Steve and I have lived in Serramonte Highlands since January 1982 on 3 1/2 acres. We live in a beautiful part of Ft. Collins. We are close to town but still feel we are in the the country. When the Hearthfire subdivision was built we were of course saddened but knew it was inevitable. The developer's of Hearthfire did listen to our concerns. We were granted a 50 ft. easement and larger lots behind the west side of Serramonte Highlands. We share the same thoughts of all the homeowners in our subdivision. We would also like a privacy fence along the 50 ft. easement on the south side of Serramonte Highlands to differentiate between high density and 2 1/2 acre plus lots. Beyond what our wishes there are some real concerns with this development. I have attached pictures of some severe oil spills to the south of this subdivision. One well still in operation and the well to the southeast of our property had a pipe break. Another concern is the Elco water line is in the same trench with gas and electric. I recently talked to Elco workers who had concerns about the hazard of all utility's in one line. Apparently there was a problem (explosion) with the line around Richard Lake. We would appreciate you looking at all the attachments on this email. We believe our concerns are legitimate and should be reviewed. Jan Orecchio waters' Edge - Orrechio Email waters' Edge - Orrechio Email waters' Edge - Orrechio Email waters' Edge - Orrechio Email waters' Edge - Orrechio Email waters' Edge - Orrechio Email 1 Jason Holland From: Jann Peterson <JANNPETERSON@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 12:39 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason, I live at Hearthfire and am concerned about the Water's Edge development because the plan shows a HIGH density neighborhood including lots of apartments and town homes which will change the rural feel of the area. Specifically, I'm concerned about: An increase in traffic on Douglas Road and Turnberry Road. An increase in traffic on Hearthfire Drive due to folks traveling through Hearthfire to get to Douglas Road. A decrease in peace and quiet. An increase in light pollution. An increase in Richard's Lake use leading to over-fishing and pollution. An increase in crime. A decrease in property values due to the above issues. While I realize that development is inevitable, my hope is the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and rural feel we love in north Fort Collins. I lived in Old Town for almost 20 years and moved to Hearthfire for the peace, quiet, and beauty. A more appropriate development would be one of single family homes ONLY. Sincerely, Jann L. Peterson Waters' Edge - Peterson Email 2 Waters' Edge - Peterson Email 1 Jason Holland From: Byron Sayers <byrons.tsm@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:09 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland, My name is (name) and I live at (address) in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. I am writing to discuss with you my concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. My family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. We feel it is a conscious decision to move to the northern, outer edge of Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy the feeling of a more rural lifestyle. Although development is inevitable, the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. -Decrease in peace and quiet -Increase in light pollution -Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road! -Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road -Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection -Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. -Decrease in home values due to these issues -Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20-105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love in north Fort Collins. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood plan and instead request a development of ONLY single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. -- Byron Sayers Cell 303.888.5412 ByronS.tsm@gmail.com Waters' Edge - Sayers Email Waters’ Edge – Schindler Email From: Karleene Schindler [mailto:karleenes@me.com] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 3:10 PM To: Jason Holland Cc: Karleene Schindler; Dallace Unger Subject: DR 236 - Water's Edge Hello Jason, We are new Hearthfire owners and would like to give our input on the Water’s Edge development scheduled for the area just east of Hearthfire. First of all, a primary reason we moved to Hearthfire from the South end of town (College and Fossil Creek Parkway) was to get away from the high density housing and traffic that area had become. We really liked this north end of town for it’s more laid back feel, the rural aspects of this area, and the access to the lake. At our closing, the people buying our Fossil Creek house were telling us they grew up in Serramonte Highlands and their neighborhood was instrumental in ensuring Hearthfire was not too densely populated so that the feel of the area would be preserved and the dark skies would be preserved. We are very concerned that many of the aspects of what drew us to Hearthfire and Richards Lake will be diminished or destroyed. Our concerns are below: • Hearthfire was required to make their lots less dense - why is it acceptable for Water’s Edge to have this. It is not consistent nor is it appropriate for the surrounding housing. We are concerned with the number of homes and people increasing the light noise and tripling the number of vehicles that use the single lane roads. • Hearthfire is a development of 48 homes, Serramonte has about 30 homes, plus another couple hundred in the Richards Lake development. o Richards Lake is a small lake, you are looking at tripling the number of homes with access to this lake, we’ll be wall-to-wall people! There is a concern for the fish in the lake - will the fish be healthy with the lake used that much and how are we going to keep the fish stocked for everyone who wants to fish. o Most people up here keep their light noise low, in deference to the fact this is a dark skies area. Tripling the housing will greatly increase the light noise in the area. o Tripling the number of homes will bring extra noise to the area - making it more like the South end of town. • Traffic: o I understand there was a traffic study completed which indicated the residents from Water’s Edge would transverse throiugh Hearthfire about 5% of the time to get to Douglas Road. This is flat out incorrect. Currently, the residents from the Richards Lake development, which is furhter away than Water’s Edge will be, cut through Hearthfire all the time to get to Douglas Road. When you look at a map, if they want to get to College Ave, the fastest, most direct route, is to take Morningstar to Hearthfire and access Douglas Road that way. Assuming they would go out through Turnberry is incorrect, they currently go through Hearthfire and this would increase by the 800 houses at Water’s Edge. The increase in traffic through our neighborhood would lbe massive. Waters’ Edge – Schindler Email o Access to Lemay also often comes through Hearthfire. There are 2 ways residents access Lemay: Turnberry to Country Club, with a left on Lemay. That’s a lot of vehicles on Country Club with houses that let out directly onto Country Club. Those are expensive houses whose value may be decreased with the massive increase in traffic. Morningstar to Hearthfire to Douglas to County Road 13 (a non-paved road) to Gregory, which will turn into Lemay. This is the faster, more direct route and is quite busy now. Again, there are many houses that let out directly onto this path who would be directly affected by the three-fold increase in traffic, including devaluing their homes. o I understand there would be a light at Turnberry and Country Club - that is needed now, even without the Water’s Edge. There are so many near misses at this intersection and it is very dangerous. o Douglas and Hwy 1 - This could be the most dangerous intersection in town, especially at night. The people flying down Hwy 1 from Wellington every morning are going 45-60 mph. It is very difficult to get across Hwy 1 at times, and we have seen several accidents and so many near misses. Putting a traffic circle for the curent traffic would be good as it would slow the Hwy 1 traffic down, but with the increase in traffic from Water’s Edge, you would have to put a light in here. o Lemay and Vine - This interesection is already a huge mess and desperately needs to be widened. 800 - 1600 more vehicles going through this intersection would be awful. We understand there will be a Water’s Edge development. We are asking that you reconsider the high density of the development. 800 new homes is simply not sustainable in the Richards Lake area on multiple levels. We would strongly encourage you to consider only homes and remove the high density apartments from this development. We are concerned that Water’s Edge will detract from our rural feeling (horses, cows, and alpacas all live up here), quality of life, and value of our homes. Thank you Karleene Schindler and Dallace Unger Hearthfire Owners 1 Jason Holland From: -christine schraeder <bleu.heron@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 7:00 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland, Our names are Christine Schraeder and Kari Stauffer and we live at 2025 Serramonte Dr. in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. We are writing to discuss with you our concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. Our family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. We made a conscious decision to move to the northern, outer edge of Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy the feeling of a more rural lifestyle. We enjoy the very dark sky at night, and are not wild about the increase in light pollution that this development will surely bring to our neighborhood. We exist at the base of the Rockies and want to feel as if the surrounding developments appreciate the same environmental beauty that we do. At very least, we ask that you choose lights that are Dark Sky compliant. We understand fully that this cannot deter reflected light, but ask that you perform due diligence in your street light and outdoor lighting selection. Although development is inevitable, the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. -Decrease in peace and quiet -Increase in light pollution -Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road! -Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road -Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection -Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. -Decrease in home values due to these issues -Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20-105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love in north Fort Collins. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood plan and instead request a development of ONLY single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. Sincerely, Christine Schraeder and Kari Stauffer Waters' Edge - Schaeder Email 1 Jason Holland From: Terry Sykes <tsykes9428@aol.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 5:48 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Water's Edge Development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Jason Holland, My name is Terry Sykes and I live at 3405 Turnberry Rd. in the Serramonte Highlands subdivision. I am writing to discuss with you my concerns for the Water's Edge development off of Turnberry Road. My family is vehemently opposed to the current proposal. We feel it is a conscious decision to move to the northern, outer edge of Fort Collins in an effort to enjoy the feeling of a more rural lifestyle. Although development is inevitable, the current plan is not suited for this area. The following is a list of issues our subdivision and the neighboring Hearthfire subdivision face upon development. -Decrease in peace and quiet -Increase in light pollution -Increase in traffic; many of the Water's Edge residents will be driving THROUGH Hearthfire to access Douglas Road! -Significant increase in traffic on both Douglas Road and Turnberry Road -Significant increase of traffic issues on intersection of Douglas Road and Hwy 1, an already dangerous intersection -Significant increase in lake use-Richard's Lake is a small lake that will quickly become over-fished and polluted with such a dramatic increase of residents allowed access. -Decrease in home values due to these issues -Increase in crime - here is the Fort Collins neighborhood update map for the past year. I've highlighted the areas to the south and east of us, removing traffic incidents (which were the biggest category of incidents). Here is the link if you are interested: http://myneighborhoodupdate.net/?center=40.556330443427605%2C%20- 105.07770538330078&zoom=11&c=all As I said above, development is inevitable, however it is our hope that the city will maintain the beauty, quiet, and all of the other elements we love in north Fort Collins. It is our goal to stop the high density neighborhood Waters' Edge - Sykes Email 2 plan and instead request a development of ONLY single family homes that are suited to the surrounding neighborhoods of Serramonte Highlands, Hearthfire, and Richards Lake. Sent from my iPad Waters' Edge - Sykes Email From: Roxanne To: Jason Holland Subject: Fwd: Water"s Edge Development Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 10:56:36 AM Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Roxanne <rocksandw1@aol.com> Date: March 15, 2017 at 9:53:30 AM GMT-7 To: jholland@fcgov.com Subject: Water's Edge Development To: Jason Holland, Developer of proposed Water's Edge We are residents of Hearthfire. Our home is located on Town Center Dr which is on Richard's Lake. We are DEEPLY upset and concerned about the proposed Water's Edge Development. We bought and built our home (year 2006) in Hearthfire ON Richard's Lake specifically because of the beauty, serenity and rural feel of this neighborhood. This development we are told is inevitable. As proposed, Water's Edge Development, will take away EVERYTHING for which we bought and built our home. Below you will see the cut and pasted segment of a fellow concerned neighbor who has expressed exactly in detail our concerns. Put yourself in our shoes and of those of the other concerned residents of Hearthfire, Serramonte Highlands, etc for whom many of us spent hundreds of thousands of dollars "developing" our homes for a lifestyle with a peaceful rural setting and now may have that taken away from us by this high density OVER developed Water's Edge neighborhood. Very concerned Hearthfire resident, Waters' Edge - Waechter Email Jim & Roxanne Waechter Sent from my iPhone Waters' Edge - Waechter Email 1 Jason Holland From: Celia Walker <3333csw@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:52 PM To: Jason Holland Subject: Comments regarding Water's Edge proposed development Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mr. Holland: I am a 16‐year resident of Hearthfire, and am unable to attend the City meeting about the Water’s Edge development on Thursday evening. I would like to comment on several aspects of that development in this e‐mail, in lieu of attending. Thank you for the City’s efforts to modify this development to better fit into the surrounding communities. Unfortunately, I don’t think the modifications have been sufficient. 1. I moved into an area in 2001 that I felt would have a rural sense to it, yet be a neighborhood. The density of the proposed development is diametrically opposite of what Hearthfire represents, as well as the surrounding neighborhoods of Richards Lake and Serramonte. Apartments and zero‐lot‐line residences are more suitable for in‐town densities, not for the fringes of town. 2. Richard Lake is too small to support the population of the development as planned. Again, this affects the property values of those homes surrounding the lake. Gone will be the avenues for wildlife to get to the water. 3. With such density will come increased crime. Already a comparison of police responses in Maple Hill, Richards Lake and similar communities, when compared with Hearthfire and Serramonte, are striking. Yet Water’s Edge would pack far more people adjacent to us. Although density is of course not the exclusive factor in crime rates, it is one, as indicated in studies such as Indiana University’s, “Land Use and Violent Crime” Stucky/Ottensmann, https://publichousing.wikispaces.com/file/view/Land+Use+and+Violent+Crime_pt1.pdf Hearthfire’s public trails will certainly attract more Water’s Edge residents – strangers‐‐ to our neighborhood. 4. Traffic issues are still not resolved. a. Most of those MANY new residents, when they travel west, will be coming through Hearthfire, where we already have a problem with excessive and speeding traffic from those communities to our east. The city will not allow speed bumps on Hearthfire (we’ve asked), has to my knowledge never patrolled that street for speed, and the street itself is deteriorating at the NE section. The drastic increase in traffic will undoubtedly reduce the values of those homes, which will now be in an extremely busy thoroughfare. I used to own 3333 Hearthfire Drive, and know for a fact at least one potential buyer withdrew after seeing just the traffic level about 10 years ago. The corner of Morningstar and Hearthfire Drive is a school bus stop, which would probably become the busiest intersection of our development, thanks to the density of Water’s Edge b. The intersection of Douglas Road and Hearthfire Way is without a stoplight, and at the top of a hill, often with brush blocking the view. It has the potential of becoming a significant hazard with yet more traffic. c. The intersection of Douglas Road and Highway 1 is already hazardous. It, too, is without a stoplight, and one often has to wait multiple minutes for traffic to clear now. With the additional traffic, that dangerous intersection will become horrible and deadly. d. Although some remediation is planned for several intersections, there are more that will be problematic: Douglas Road/Turnberry, Turnberry/Mountain Vista, Mountain Vista/Timberline, Timberline/Vine, Turnberry/Country Club (and the increased traffic on Country Club), Country Club/Lemay/Gregory (already deteriorated), Lemay/Vine, Douglas Road/Shields, Douglas Road/Giddings. Waters' Edge - Walker Email 2 5. I was recently present when an ambulance had to be called to Beamreach Place. I didn’t time the response, but it was probably around 12‐15 minutes, and the EMT’s comment when he entered the door was “sorry it took us so long…this is pretty far out.” The response time for a fire engine for a grass fire last summer was around 10 minutes, I believe. Add to that the density proposed by Water’s Edge and the availability and response time of emergency equipment, and yet another problem is apparent: this area lacks city infrastructure to support the proposed density. 6. I remain confounded by this developer’s insistence on Water’s Edge being considered a 55‐and‐older community (and I know his background and prior involvement with such communities). We have no public transportation, and it will not reach out here for decades, if ever. Grocery stores are miles away, and even with a shopping center on Mountain Vista, too far to walk. He is thus inviting individuals to move here who, in near future years, are a) less likely to drive and b) more likely to experience medical emergencies, with transportation unavailable and emergency services slow. Again, this is a City infrastructure deficit that speaks against such a development. I need to be clear that I am not against development; we in Hearthfire have known all along that the meadow east of us would someday be developed. However, it should be developed in a manner respectful of the surrounding neighborhoods, and Water’s Edge as currently designed is not‐‐‐virtually solely so the developer can make a lot of money at the expense of our property values and the surroundings we sought when we purchased those properties. Not every corner of Fort Collins needs to be built densely, and this is most certainly one that needs to be preserved as a relatively open option, with plenty of wildlife avenues and a more rural feel. Infrastructure and traffic remain inadequately addressed. Celia Walker 3120 Barn Swallow Cir Fort Collins, CO 80524‐1793 3333csw@comcast.net Waters' Edge - Walker Email Prospect Energy, LLC. Abandonment Proposal P&A bid for the following well: Fort Collins Muddy Unit #30-4 Larimer County, Colorado Prepared for: Ward Giltner Date: March 13, 2017 Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Cost Estimate Plug and Abandonment Ward, We truly appreciate the opportunity to submit prices to abandon this well. If after reviewing our proposal you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact us. Fort Collins Muddy Unit #30-4 $ 29,545.78 Bid includes: Mob and de-mob 161 sacks of 15.8# class G neat 1.15 cu.ft./sack yield cement 5-1/2” 15.5# Junk catcher/Gauge ring run to 4,802’ Wireline set 5-1/2” 15.5# 10K, CIBP at 4,802’ w/2 sacks Wireline casing cut at 400’ Casing un-landing spear and handling equipment NOTE: Third party H2S services and equipment will be charged at cost to Prospect Energy, LLC. Bid does not include: Dirt work/snow removal or catting needed to allow ingress/egress of equipment to and from location Dirt work beyond back-filling the wellhead Removal of pumping units, tank batteries, production equipment, flow lines, or underground piping Combating water flows or annular gas flows Hot oiling Gyro services Work string (2-3/8” is available at $.40/ft. plus transportation) Crossover spool from 7-1/16” 5K BOP to customers wellhead (if required) This proposal is valid for 60 days. If accepted, the attached standard Terms and Conditions shall also be considered accepted and agreed, whether or not returned properly executed, unless a Master Service Agreement exists between the parties. (See Attached Terms and Conditions) Ranger Energy will be responsible for setting/testing rig anchors or providing self-guying base beam prior to arrival of rig. If down hole problems are encountered (i.e. excessive pressure, casing leaks, cannot get plugs to permitted setting depths, extra squeezes/cement plugs, fish in hole, paraffin, stuck packers/anchor, etc.) and/or the State or BLM changes the scope, extra services will be charged per our attached 2017 Rig Rate Schedule. Prospect Energy is responsible for any fluids and transportation required to cement, kill, roll/circulate, and/or transportation and disposal of any return fluids including cleaning the return tank at the completion of the well/job. Prospect Energy is also responsible for any tankage beyond the 180 bbl. tank Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well provided with our abandonment package. If extreme temperatures are present (below 15° Fahrenheit) additional charges for flameless heaters will be recharged at cost. Salvage credits are offered pending visual inspection: Sucker rods $1.00/each,1.5” tubing and 1.9” tubing $.15/ft., 2-1/16” tubing $.20/ft., 2-3/8” tubing $.25/ft., 2-7/8” tubing at $.30/ft., 3-1/2” tubing $.35/ft. 5- 1/2”, 5-1/2”, and 7” casing at $.40/ft. and larger sizes will be quoted per request. Chad Vannest Josh Anderson Business Development Area Manager Ranger Energy Services Ranger Energy Services (970) 587-5813 (office) (970) 587-5813 (office) (970) 381-5818 (cell) (970) 570-9352 (cell) Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well 2017 Time & Material Price Schedule Plug and Abandonment Double Derrick Rig: $ 275.00/Hour (Double/Triple with Operator, Floorhand, and Derrickman and Cement Transport/Mixing Equipment) Rig Supervisor: $ 400.00/Day Crew Travel: $ 180.00/Hour Per Diem: $ 35.00/Day (In addition to the $35.00/day meal allowance, hotel rooms will be charged at market rate (costs) assuming 2 employees/room) Extra Labor: (when requested) $ 55.00/Hour 7-1/16” 5000# Double Gate BOP w/accumulator: $ 200.00/Day Tri-plex pump w/180 bbl. Tank: $ 500.00/Day 2.5 Power Swivel: (when used) $ 600.00/Day Hawker Hydraulic Catwalk: (when used) $ 600.00/Day Haul Truck: $ 115.00/Hour Back Hoe: $ 90.00/Hour 80 Bbl. Vacuum Truck: $80.00/Hour Washington Head: $ 75.00/ Day Class “G” cement: (required beyond the stated amounts) $ 35.00/Sack Casing Tongs: POR Casing Handling Tools: POR Washington Head Rubbers: Cost Plus 15% Swab Cups/Rubbers: Cost Plus 15% Thread Dope: Cost Plus 15% 3rd Party Services or Supplies at the request of the Company Rep: Cost Plus 15% Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well www.MAGNAES.com Dave Rebol Cell: 970-768-2064 Fort Morgan, CO 17509 County Road 14 Fort Morgan, CO 80701 970.867.9007 Ryan Ludwar Cell: 307-680-8124 Gillette, Wyoming 5903 Hannum Rd. Gillette, WY 82716 307.682.4195 Chad Vannest Cell: 970-381-5818 Greeley, Colorado 23295 US Highway 85 La Salle, CO 80645 970.284.5752 Scott Shackelford Cell: 701-580-7957 Williston, North Dakota 815 4th Street East Williston, ND 58801 701.572.9019 Magna Energy Services, LLC Locations We also have field offices in these locations: Briggsdale, Colorado Douglas, Wyoming Rock Springs, Wyoming Vernal, Utah Corporate Office 385 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 250 Broomfield, CO 80021 Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Magna Energy Services, LLC spe- cializes in turnkey oil and gas well Plug and Abandonment services. Our personnel have been doing well abandonments since 1986. We also offer CBM well P&A, Well Work- over Services, Water Transfer, Water Hauling, Reseeding and Reclama- tion, and Wireline Services out of our various locations. Magna’s employees have over 26 years of experience dealing with oil and gas well servicing. Starting in many different divisions we have acquired a very competent and safe work force. All of our employees are up to date on well control safety, OSHA, and first aid training. We currently have crews working in North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado and Utah. We have also worked in Texas, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Kansas. We also have experience analyzing and producing P&A procedures on a per well basis. Our experience deal- ing with both state and federal regu- lations often facilitate any P&A pro- ject both before and after the actual well has been plugged. Who We Are Our History Other Services Need an estimate? To get the process started please contact any of the offices mentioned on the back of this brochure. We thank you for your consideration Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Page 1 of 3 Casing Type Size of Hole Size of Casing Weight Per Foot Setting Depth Sacks Cement Cement Bot Cement Top Status Casing History Subsequent Report of Abandonment Details: If yes, explain details below If yes, explain details below Wellbore has Uncemented Casing leaks: Yes No Fish in Hole: Yes No Casing to be pulled: Yes No Estimated Depth: Other Reason for Abandonment: Dry Production for Sub-economic Mechanical Problems Longitude: GPS Data: Only Complete the Following Background Information for Intent to Abandon Data of Measurement: PDOP Reading: GPS Instrument Operator's Name: Latitude: Field Name: Field Number: Federal, Indian or State Lease Number: QtrQtr: Section: Township: Range: Meridian: Well Number: County: Location: Well Name: API Number --- This form is to be submitted as an Intent to Abandon whenever an abandonment is planned on a borehole. After the abandonment is complete, this form shall again be submitted as a Subsequent Report of the actual work completed. The approved intent shall be valid for six months after the approval date, after that period, a new intent will be required. Attachments required with the Intent to Abandon are wellbore diagrams of the current configuration and the proposed configuration with plugs set. A Subsequent Report of Abandonment shall indicate the actual work completed. Attachments required with a Subsequent Report are a wellbore diagram showing plugs that were set and casing remaining in the hole, the job summaries from all plugging contractors used, including wireline and cementing (third party verification) and any logs that may have been run during abandonment. State of Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 801, Denver, Colorado 80205 Phone: (303) 894-2100 Fax: (303) 894-2109 WELL ABANDONMENT REPORT FORM 6 Rev Notice of Intent to Abandon Email: Fax: Phone: State: Zip: Contact Name: City: Address: Name of Operator: OGCC Operator Number: Email: For Intent 24 hour notice required, Name: Tel: COGCC contact: Date Received: Document Number: DE ET OE ES Total: 0 zone(s) Formation Code Perf. Top Perf. Btm Date Method of Isolation Plug Depth Current and Previously Abandoned Zones Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Page 2 of 3 *ATTACH JOB SUMMARY Provide Technical Detail: Flowline/Pipeline has been abandoned per Rule 1103 Yes No Type of Cement and Additives Used: *Wireline Contractor: *Cementing Contractor: ft. of inch casing Plugging Date: Additional Plugging Information for Subsequent Report Only Casing Recovered: Plug Type: Plug Tagged: Plug Type: Plug Tagged: Plug Type: Plug Tagged: Plug Type: Plug Tagged: Plug Tagged: Plug Tagged: (Cast Iron Cement Retainer Depth) CICR Depth CICR Depth CICR Depth CIBP #5: Depth with sacks cmt on top. CIBP #3: Depth with sacks cmt on top. CIPB #4: Depth with sacks cmt on top. Set sacks in rat hole Set sacks in mouse hole Cut four feet below ground level, weld on plate Above Ground Dry-Hole Marker: Yes No Set sacks at surface Set sacks half in. half out surface casing from ft. to ft. Perforate and squeeze at ft. with sacks. Leave at least 100 ft. in casing Perforate and squeeze at ft. with sacks. Leave at least 100 ft. in casing Perforate and squeeze at ft. with sacks. Leave at least 100 ft. in casing Set sks cmt from ft. to ft. in Set sks cmt from ft. to ft. in Set sks cmt from ft. to ft. in Set sks cmt from ft. to ft. in Set sks cmt from ft. to ft. in CIBP #1: Depth with sacks cmt on top. CIPB #2: Depth with sacks cmt on top. Plug Type: NOTE: Two(2) sacks cement required on all CIBPs. Plugging Procedure for Intent and Subsequent Report Attachment Check List Total Attach: Att Doc Num Name Based on the information provided herein, this Well Abandonment Report (Form 6) complies with COGCC Rules and applicable orders and is hereby approved. COGCC Approved: Date: I hereby certify all statements made in this form are, to the best of my knowledge, true, correct, and complete. Signed: Print Name: Title: Date: Email: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, IF ANY: Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Page 3 of 3 Total: User Group Comment Comment Date Bid for General Plugging Comments Abandoned Well State of Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 801, Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 894-2100 Fax: (303) 894-2109 FIELD OPERATIONS NOTICE FORM 42 Rev 03/15 Document Number: OGCC RECEPTION Receive Date: 03/10/2017 401230897 Meghan Twele Signature: Title: Print Name: Email: Date: mtwele@progressivepcs.net I hereby certify all statements made in this form are, to the best of my knowledge, true, correct and complete. Regulatory Analyst 03/10/2017 OGCC Operator Number: City: Company Name: Address: 10312 PROSPECT ENERGY LLC 880 WOLVERINE COURT CASTLE ROCK State: Zip: 80108 Contact Person: Meghan Twele Phone: ( ) (720) 3591598 CO Email: Fax: mtwele@progressivepcs.net Entity Information 05 - 069 - 06082 - 00 Sec: 30 Twp: 8N Range: 68W QtrQtr: NESE Lat: 40.631797 Long: -105.041103 API #: Facility ID: Location ID: Facility Name: FT. COLLINS MUDDY UNIT 30-4 START OF PLUGGING OPERATIONS - 48-hour notice required Date: 03/14/2017 Time: N/A (HH:MM) Submit By Other Operator Update of a previous Form 42 Notice NO The Form 42 shall be submitted as required by Rule, Notice to Operators, Policy, or Condition of Approval. A Form 42 Update shall be submitted to revise the scheduled date or time on a previous Form 42 - Advance Notice of Field Operations. A Form 42 Update must be for the same well, location, or facility and for the same Field Operation as a previous Form 42. NOTE: Operator's Contact for Advance Notices of Field Operations should be available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and should have the most current scheduling information for the operation. Operator's Contact for other notices should be able to respond to questions regarding the reported information. Date Run: 3/10/2017 Doc [#401230897] Well Name: FT. COLLINS MUDDY UNIT 30-4 Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well Recommended Procedure Plug and Abandonment Operator: Prospect Energy, LLC Well name: Fort Collins Muddy Unit #30-4 Legal: NESE, Section 30, Township 8 North, Range 68 West GPS: 40.631797, -105.041103 Location: Larimer County, Colorado API: 05-069-06082 Surface: 8-5/8” 24# at 284’ Hole size: 12-1/4” TOC: Surface Production: 5-1/2” 15.5# at 4,852’ Hole size: 7-7/8” TOC: 3,214’ (WBD) Open Hole: 4,852’ – 4,882’ (4-3/4”) TD: 6,882’ Note: Deepest water well within 1 mile radius 350’ *Procedure based off of WBD and well history provided by operator. H2S is present in well.* 1. Conduct pre-job safety meeting and complete daily JSA 2. Confirm that bradenhead test has been performed 3. Prior to MIRU, check rig anchors and record initial shut-in pressures on tubing and casing 4. Blow down well/kill if necessary 5. Dig out around wellhead and check surface annulus for pressure and record (If pressure is present call Cam Gracey #970-567-6871 and Chad Vannest #970-381-5818 for orders) 6. MIRU P&A equipment, NDWH, NUBOP, Load and circulate wellbore clean 7. TOH and tally 450’ of tubing to derrick if present 8. RU wireline, PU 5-1/2” 15.5# JC/GR, TIH to 4,802’, TOH 9. PU 5-1/2” 15.5#, 10K, CIBP, TIH and set at 4,802’, TOH 10. TIH and CDB 2 sxs of 15.8# class G neat 1.15 cu.ft./sack yield cement on top, TOH (2 sxs is 17’ in 5-1/2”, TOC: 4,785’) 11. Pressure test casing to 500 psi for 5 minutes (If test fails call Cam Gracey and Craig Owen for orders) Note: If casing pressure test fails (step 11) additional steps/services required by the COGCC/BLM are not included in this bid and will be billed per our 2016 Time and Material Price Schedule. 12. RU casing equipment, unland casing, stretch and determine freepoint 13. TIH and cut casing at 400’, TOH, RD wireline 14. TOH and LD casing, RD casing equipment 15. TIH to 450’ (50’ inside casing stub, 166’ below surface casing shoe), establish circulation to surface 16. Circulate 159 sxs of 15.8# class G neat 1.15 cu.ft./sack yield cement to surface (6 sxs is 51’ in 5-1/2”, 34 sxs is 115’ in 7-7/8” with 30 sxs excess, 89 sxs is 286’ in 8-5/8”) 17. TOH and LD tubing, RDMO, dig out and cut off wellhead, verify cement at surface, top off if necessary 18. Weld info plate onto casing, backfill pit, clean location, P&A complete Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well WELLBORE DIAGRAM: After P&A Operations Company: API: Lease: Well No.: Field: Location: County: State: WELLHEAD: Surface Casing Size: 8-5/8" Wght: 24.0# Type: 8-5/8" @ 284' Depth: 284' Csg ID: Deepest water well in a mile: 350' TOC: Surface Cut casing at 400' Hole Size: 12-1/4" 159 sxs of cement from 450' to surface Production Casing Size: 5-1/2" Wght: 15.5# Type: Depth: 4,852' Csg ID: Csg Drift: DV Tool: TOC: 3,214' Hole Size: 7-7/8" TOC: 3,214' Open Hole Muddy: 2 sxs of cement on top CIBP at 4,802' PBTD: 4,852' - 4,882' 4,852' Prospect Energy, LLC 05-069-06082 Fort Collins Colorado Ft. Collins Muddy Unit NESE, 30, 8N, 68W #30-4 Larimer Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well WELLBORE DIAGRAM: Before P&A Operations Company: API: Lease: Well No.: Field: Location: County: State: WELLHEAD: Surface Casing Size: 8-5/8" Wght: 24.0# Type: 8-5/8" @ 284' Depth: 284' Csg ID: Deepest water well in a mile: 350' TOC: Surface Hole Size: 12-1/4" Production Casing Size: 5-1/2" Wght: 15.5# Type: Depth: 4,852' Csg ID: Csg Drift: DV Tool: TOC: 3,214' Hole Size: 7-7/8" TOC: 3,214' Open Hole Muddy: PBTD: 4,852' - 4,882' 4,852' Prospect Energy, LLC 05-069-06082 Fort Collins Colorado Ft. Collins Muddy Unit NESE, 30, 8N, 68W #30-4 Larimer Bid for Plugging Abandoned Well A LexMundi Member From: TrackingUpdates@fedex.com [mailto:TrackingUpdates@fedex.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 9:25 AM To: Hance, Catherine Subject: FedEx Shipment 702427837650 Delivered Your package has been delivered Tracking # 702427837650 Ship date: Tue, 11/29/2016 Office Services Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP Denver, CO 80202 US Delivered Delivery date: Wed, 11/30/2016 10:22 am C/O Memorial Production Partners LP Prospect Energy, LLC 500 Dallas Suite 1700 HOUSTON, TX 77005 US Shipment Facts Our records indicate that the following package has been delivered. Tracking number: 702427837650 Status: Delivered: 11/30/2016 10:22 AM Signed for By: R.GARZA Department number: C. Hance Purchase order number: J Thomson Reference: 191394-0043 Signed for by: R.GARZA Delivery location: HOUSTON, TX Delivered to: Mailroom Service type: FedEx Standard Overnight Packaging type: FedEx Envelope Number of pieces: 1 Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Weight: 0.50 lb. Special handling/Services: Direct Signature Required Deliver Weekday Standard transit: 11/30/2016 by 3:00 pm Please do not respond to this message. This email was sent from an unattended mailbox. This report was generated at approximately 10:24 AM CST on 11/30/2016. All weights are estimated. To track the latest status of your shipment, click on the tracking number above. Standard transit is the date and time the package is scheduled to be delivered by, based on the selected service, destination and ship date. Limitations and exceptions may apply. Please see the FedEx Service Guide for terms and conditions of service, including the FedEx Money-Back Guarantee, or contact your FedEx Customer Support representative. © 2016 Federal Express Corporation. The content of this message is protected by copyright and trademark laws under U.S. and international law. Review our privacy policy. All rights reserved. Thank you for your business. Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation Waters' Edge - Agreement Confirmation