BLRReport

Planning Department
30 S. Nevada, Suite 301

Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor
Shared Obligation Study
MAY 2007
Planning Department

Shared Obligation Study
Planning Department
Table of Contents
Table of Contents Page ii
Acknowledgements Page iii
Banning Lewis Ranch Annexors - February 2007 Page iv
The Study
• Introduction Page 1
• Background Page 1
• Methodology Page 2
Recommendations Page 7
Cost Sharing/Reimbursement Program Page 9
Summary Page 14
Appendix A Study Timeline and Benchmarks

Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement
Appendix B
and Overview of Annexor Obligations
Appendix C Settlement Agreement
Appendix D Annexor Obligations

Wastewater System Infrastructure Provided
Appendix E
by Colorado Springs Utilities
Water System Infrastructure Provided by
Appendix F
Colorado Springs Utilities
Appendix G Existing Reimbursement Methods
Current School/Park Fee Calculation
Appendix H
Methodology
Appendix I Cost Estimates Prepared by PCI
Appendix J Annexor Obligation Map

Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan Parcel
Appendix K
Data
Cost Sharing/Reimbursement Program
Appendix L
Options 1-6
Appendix M Literature Review: Impact Fees
Appendix N Village One Analysis

Assignment of Reimbursements and
Appendix O
Execution Instructions
Resolution and Proposed Changes to City
Appendix P
Subdivision Regulations
ii
Planning Department
Acknowledgements
The Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study would not have been possible without the
efforts and contributions of the many individuals and groups who spent hours reviewing and discussing
the contents of the Study. The City Planning Project Team expresses our sincere thanks and
appreciation to them all.
CITY PLANNING PROJECT TEAM:
Paul Tice
Larry Larsen
Erin McCauley
CITY INTERNAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
Sam Azad City Police Department

Lisa Bigelow City Budget & Finance
Craig Blewitt City Transportation Planning
Tom Bonifas City Development Review
William Davis City Utilities
Bill Healy City Planning & Community Development Director
Leslie Hickey City Budget & Finance
Ira Joseph City Comprehensive Planning
Saleem Khattak City Streets
Sarah Keith City Parks and Recreation
Darlene Kennedy City Real Estate Services
Brett Lacey City Fire Department
Dave Lethbridge City Engineering
Christian Lieber City Parks and Recreation
Dave Litzelman City Comprehensive Planning
Scott Logan City Traffic Engineering
Wynetta Massey City Attorney’s Office
Mike McCauley City Parks and Recreation
Pat McDivitt City Attorney’s Office
Cam McNair City Engineering
Ron Mitchell City Public Works Director
Ann Nichols Development Consultant
Nina Rikoski City Fire Department
Brent Schubloom City Utilities
Andrea “Drew” Sloat City Utilities
Debbie Wutt City Budget & Finance
CONSULTANT SUPPORT: Professional Consultants, Incorporated
Alvaro J. Testa, Ph.D., P.E.

Thomas J. Wendland, LSI
iii
Planning Department
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexors—February 2007

609 PLUS ASSOCIATES
AE94 LLC
CHEROKEE WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT
CHURCH FOR ALL NATIONS
CMS2 LLC
COLORADO CENTRE JV
COLORADO CENTRE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
COLORADO SPRINGS LAND ASSOCIATION
CPH BANNING-LEWIS RANCH LLC
CYGNET LAND CORPORATION
FALCON TRUCKING COMPANY
FHK DEVELOPMENTS LLC
M3 LAND COMPANY LLC
MARKSHEFFEL-150 LLC
MARKSHEFFEL-WOODMEN INVEST LLC
MGF ACQUISITION CORPORATION
OPTIONS INVESTMENT CORPORATION
OZBURN, JAMES C. AND DELIA L.
POWERS, RAYMOND L. REV. TRUST
TUCSON/COLORADO ASSOCIATES
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
VENWEST PARTNERSHIP LLP
VILLANI PARTNERSHIP LLP
iv
Planning Department
The Study
Introduction
When the Banning-Lewis Ranch (Ranch) was annexed to the City of Colorado Springs (City) in 1988, the
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement (Annexation Agreement) outlined complex Annexor
responsibilities including the requirement that each Annexor share in the costs of certain public
improvements and infrastructure required to support the development of the Ranch. The Annexation
Agreement also required that an administrative body, known as the Banning-Lewis Ranch Planning
Association (BLRPA), be established to oversee completion of the obligations and to appropriate the
costs and reimbursements equitably among the Annexors of the Ranch. In 2001, two receivers of a piece
of property within the Ranch brought a lawsuit against the City. They alleged that the Annexor obligations
were far too numerous and far too restrictive on property owners and as a result, made the property
unmarketable. They also stated that the BLRPA had never been established and therefore, no system of
equitable apportionment existed within the Ranch. In 2004, the City and the two receivers reached a
settlement (Settlement Agreement) that clarified several responsibilities outlined in the Annexation
Agreement. District Court issued an Order asserting that the Annexation Agreement would apply to all
Annexors. Further, the court approved a Settlement Agreement, under which the City was required to
assume the duties of the BLRPA, to conduct a Study of the shared infrastructure obligations, and to
develop a method to equitably apportion the costs and reimbursements of the identified shared
infrastructure among the Ranch Annexors.
This Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study (Study) describes the process City Staff
used in complying with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Study sets forth specific cost
sharing/reimbursement mechanisms and defines an implementation program. Finally, this Study fulfills
the City’s obligations set forth in the Settlement Agreement.
Background
As the largest Annexor, the Banning-Lewis Ranch Management Company hired Professional Consultants
Incorporated (PCI) in 2005 to work with the City to prepare the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared
Obligation Study (Study). The goal of the Study is:
1. To satisfy the obligations of the Annexation Agreement dated September 23, 1988;
2. To satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement Cases 99-CV-1944 and 01-CV-0566;
3. To ensure equitable and proportional shared distribution and reimbursement among the Annexors of
the costs and reimbursements for the obligations, public improvements, and infrastructure required by
the Annexation Agreement, and subject to existing law, rules, regulations, policies, and standards
(standards) of the City or other approved entity within the annexed area encompassed by the
Annexation Agreement; and
4. To satisfy the February 14, 2006 approval conditions imposed by the City Council of Colorado
Springs (City Council) on proposed developments in the Ranch.
The Study was delivered to the City by PCI on May 3, 2006, at which point City Staff undertook an
internal review. A timeline detailing the internal review process can be found in Appendix A. As part of
the review, Staff sought to receive input from as many of the Annexors as possible. To accomplish this
task a total of eleven Annexor meetings were held to discuss the content of the Study and different cost
sharing/reimbursement programs. On September 12, 2006, Colorado Springs City Council accepted the
Study and directed Staff to further develop a specific cost sharing/reimbursement program for future
Council consideration and approval. This expanded Study, prepared by Staff, fulfills that City Council
directive.
1
Planning Department
Methodology
1. After careful scrutiny of the Annexation Agreement, the City and PCI created a comprehensive list of
all Annexor obligations identified in the Agreement. Appendix B includes a highlighted copy of the
Annexation Agreement and a brief summary identifying those obligations. The City was not to be
responsible for any costs associated with the development of infrastructure, fire stations, or
acquisition of land parcels to the extent these are described in the Annexation Agreement.
Nevertheless, it was the City’s goal and responsibility to establish an equitable distribution of
Annexors’ obligations under the Annexation Agreement among all of the individual Annexors.
Appendix C contains the Settlement Agreement, which guided the City in the preparation of this
Study.
2. Annexor obligations under the Annexation Agreement were then classified as either:
A. Non-reimbursable (an on-site project and/or developer responsibility, referred to in the

Settlement Agreement as an “site development cost”) or
B. Reimbursable (“shared,” referred to in the Settlement Agreement as a “shared infrastructure

cost”).
Definitions of the obligation classifications are as follows:
A. Non-reimbursable (On-site Project) Obligations – refers to certain public and/or private

improvements and obligations constructed, dedicated and/or otherwise provided for a specific
development project, generally required per City Codes and policy, which typically provide
project-specific benefits. Examples: on-site streets, sidewalks, street lighting and minor utility
distribution and collection systems.
B. Reimbursable (Shared) Obligations – refers to certain improvements and obligations to be

constructed, dedicated, and/or otherwise provided for under the provisions of the Annexation
Agreement and Settlement Agreement that provide broad-based benefits to all Annexors.
These are the obligations that stretch above and beyond normal development obligations as
set forth in the City standards. Examples: the Banning-Lewis Parkway/Highway
24/Constitution Avenue Interchange, major utility and drainage facilities, land dedications for
public facilities, construction costs of fire stations, and construction of a wastewater treatment
facility.
Obligations classified and determined to be non-reimbursable or site development obligations were

then removed from consideration in the cost sharing/reimbursement program. These obligations are
standard development requirements under existent City codes and regulations and are not shared
obligations.
The City created a database of the Annexor obligations that are classified as shared obligations and
are subject to some level of reimbursement (refer to Appendix D).
The following summary identifies Annexation Agreement obligations that are considered to be shared
upon all Annexors and are eligible for some level of reimbursement and cost sharing:
A. Regional drainage improvements.

B. Dedication of land to the City for various public facilities (i.e., park sites, school sites, fire
stations, a park and ride site, trash sites, water tank storage sites, police substation sites,
electric substations, and public works service center sites)
C. Banning-Lewis Parkway right-of-way dedication and construction
D. Grade separated interchange at Banning-Lewis Parkway/Highway 24/Constitution Avenue
E. Drainage basin studies
F. The regional wastewater treatment plant and interceptor lines (see Appendix E)
2
Planning Department
G. Water (see Appendix F), electric, and gas distribution infrastructure
Next, the shared Annexor obligations that could be reimbursed through existing City and/or Utility
means and methods were identified. Existing means and methods include the following:
A. Water and Wastewater Facilities Participation, Utilization & Service Agreement fees
B. Standard City Utility recovery agreements, tariffs and fees
C. Drainage basin fees
D. Jimmy Camp Creek Flood Conservancy District
E. City subdivision land dedication, or fees in lieu of, for park and school sites.
A complete description of the existing means and methods listed above can be found in Appendix G.
3. Cost Estimates were prepared for all of the reimbursable (shared) obligations. Estimates were
based upon best available information. Costs were determined through meetings with City
departments and private developers. Road construction costs (including streetlights and signs) and
drainage construction costs were furnished by City Engineering and development consultants. Fire
station construction costs were furnished by the Fire Department. Costs of the two drainage basin
studies were provided by Banning Lewis Ranch Management Company (BLRMC), which contracted
for the preparation of each study.
For the purpose of arriving at consistent value for land, Staff used the 2007 allowance of $76,602 per
acre that the City has established for the value of land dedications for park and school sites. Detailed
methodology regarding how allowance is calculated can be found in Appendix H. This value is used
solely for Study purposes and is not a reflection of the actual fair market value of the land.
An explanation of the interpretations of the Annexation Agreement is included in this Study in

Appendix B. PCI further refined the cost estimates associated with the shared obligations. A
significant effort was made to accurately reflect the costs for all the shared obligations. However, due
to the lack of any significant level of design for some of the infrastructure items and facilities, as well
as the lack of land appraisals, the costs presented in this Study are estimates based upon the best
current available information. This is especially true of cost estimates for the following large-scale
infrastructure:
A. Jimmy Camp Creek Regional Drainage Facilities

B. The regional wastewater treatment plant and interceptor lines (see Appendix E).
C. Water service and distribution, water pump-station and suction storage facilities (see
Appendix F).
The lack of accurate cost estimates for these large scale infrastructure obligations does not affect the
validity or reliability of the Study since the cost sharing/reimbursement mechanisms for these large-
scale obligations are via existing methods. None of these large-scale obligations were included in the
calculations establishing new Annexor obligation fees because they are subject to existing cost
sharing/reimbursement mechanisms.
Appendix I provides additional detailed cost estimate information for the shared obligations while
Appendix J contains a map that depicts the shared obligations that can be geographically located.
Appendix K contains the current approved Banning-Lewis Master Plan Land Use Parcel data that was
used in this Study.
The Banning-Lewis Ranch Shared Obligation Cost Estimate Table was prepared based on cost
estimates (Appendix D). The table presents a general overview summary of the estimated costs of
the total shared obligations for all of the Annexors. It is estimated that the total value of the shared
obligations equals $891,842,467. The table further identifies existing funding mechanisms that are in
place for the majority of these obligations ($701,572,891), leaving $190,269,575 worth of shared
Annexor obligations for which new cost sharing/reimbursement mechanisms must be created. Of
3
Planning Department
these $190,269,575 shared obligations, $147,963,288 are costs associated with the Banning-Lewis
Parkway and $42,306,287 are other General Annexor Obligations.
The new obligations together equal approximately $190,269,575, a sum to be subject to a new cost
sharing/reimbursement program that equitably shares the costs of these obligations and
reimbursements among all Annexors. All estimates are in 2006 dollars.
D. Cost sharing/reimbursement program options were analyzed. The Study not only identifies the
obligations and their estimated costs that are eligible for cost recovery or reimbursement but also
explores different cost recovery/reimbursement program options that could equitably apportion the
total cost of the obligations among the Annexors.
The Annexation Agreement and Settlement Agreement both identify the use of special districts and
fees as the primary new financial mechanisms to be used to fund the reimbursement of the costs of
the shared obligations. Section XVII of the Banning-Lewis Annexation Agreement allows, “for the
formation of special districts for the purpose of the acquisition, design, construction, installation,
financing and/or maintenance of improvements and facilities, and for the provision of certain services
which may be required to develop the property, which improvements, facilities and services the
Annexor is obligated or permitted under this Agreement to provide.”
The following is a summary of possible cost sharing/reimbursement program options for the costs of
the shared Annexor obligations for which reimbursement mechanisms do not exist:
Option 1: Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; General Improvement District for
Banning-Lewis Parkway
In an effort to equitably apportion obligation costs throughout the Ranch, the City explored a cost
sharing/reimbursement program that would apportion cost based on acreage. Option 1, as it was
known, was a flat, per-acre fee assessed based on net planning acreage alone. It allocated the
Annexor obligations through an equal per-acre rate across the entire net planning acreage of the
Ranch.
Option 1 assumed that a General Improvement District would be created to share costs associated
with the Banning-Lewis Parkway.
Option 2: Fees for General Annexor Obligations Based on Traffic Generation Associated with Specific
Zoning Designation; General Improvement District for Banning-Lewis Parkway
The second cost sharing/reimbursement program the City explored was a fee system based upon the
traffic generation rates associated with the ten Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan approved zoning
districts. Since roughly 85% of the total cost in Annexor obligations needing to be financed through a
new mechanism under this option was attributable to arterial construction ($257,087,651), Option 2
divided the arterial cost based on the traffic impact each created by each zoning through trip
generation. This option also based the residual, non-arterial obligations on net planning acreage.
Option 2 rested on the premise that each zone should pay its proportional share of the total Annexor
obligation based on its traffic impact.
Option 3: Fees for General Annexor Obligations Based on Traffic Generation Using Consolidated
Land Use Categories; General Improvement District for Banning-Lewis Parkway
Option 3 resembled Option 2 in many ways, but split Annexor obligation fees into two zoning
categories, Residential and Commercial, Office, Industrial (COI), instead of into ten zoning districts.
Option 3 used a hybrid traffic generation factor made from several land use categories that fit into
4
Planning Department
each new zoning category and divided the residual non-arterial obligations by the net planning
acreage of the Ranch.
Option 4: Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations Not Including Arterial Roads; Ranch-
Wide Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees Based on the Current School/Park Value
The fourth cost sharing/reimbursement program explored by the City was also based solely on net
planning acreage. It was similar to Option 1, but did not include any arterial reimbursement. The
result was a lower obligation amount that needed to be shared through a new reimbursement
mechanism. Any reimbursement for arterial streets and traffic signals would be handled through the
existing City Subdivision Code provisions (§7.7.705 (D)).
Banning-Lewis Parkway fees were calculated on a Ranch-wide basis. Right-of-way value was
assessed at the current school/park value of $76,602 per acre. Construction estimates for the
Parkway and interchange were provided by PCI.
Option 5: Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; Ranch-Wide Banning-Lewis Parkway
Fees Based on Recent Land Sale Values
Option 5 was identical to Option 4, except that the per-acre value assigned to the Banning-Lewis
Parkway right-of-way acreage ($8,434 per acre) was derived from recent land sales within the Ranch
and was not based on the current school/park land value of $76,602 per acre.
Land sale data from 2002 to 2007 was compiled at random from the El Paso County Assessor’s
Office for areas within the Ranch. The total sale amount was divided by the acreage sold to achieve
a per-acre value. These per-acre values were then averaged to find a value that reasonably reflected
Ranch-wide land sales.
Option 6: Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees Split into
Areas and Based on the Current School/Park Value
The sixth cost sharing/reimbursement option also separates fees into two categories: General
Annexor Obligations and Banning-Lewis Parkway Obligations. All obligations identified as General
Annexor Obligations combined to equal $46,306,287. This sum was then divided by the total net
planning acreage (17,962 acres) to arrive at a per-acre fee of $2,355. All Annexors will pay General
Annexor Obligation fees.
It was determined that south of Drennan Road, the existing four (4) lane portion of Marksheffel Road
will eventually become the Banning-Lewis Parkway through that portion of the Ranch. Much of the
existing Marksheffel Road corridor contains 210 feet of dedicated right-of-way and an existing four (4)
lane arterial that will need relatively minor additional right-of-way dedication and construction
improvements. Therefore, Banning-Lewis Parkway fees were split according to geographic area with
Drennan Road as the dividing line. Annexors who own property north of Drennan Road will pay
Parkway fees for right-of-way dedication (assessed at the current school/park value of $76,602 per
acre) and construction for that portion of the Parkway north of Drennan Road. Annexors who own
property south of Drennan Road will be required to dedicate the remaining Parkway right-of-way
width and construct any improvements without reimbursement in lieu of paying fees with the following
exceptions:
1. Banning-Lewis Parkway constructed on the boundary of another Annexor’s property shall

be subject to cost recovery from the Annexor having frontage on the other side of the
arterial in accord with §7.7.705 (D).
5
Planning Department
2. Annexors required by the City to construct the Banning-Lewis Parkway through property
owned entirely by another annexor shall be eligible for cost recovery from theos
Annexors having frontage along said arterial in accord with §7.7.705 (D).
All Annexors (north or south of Drennan Road) will pay the platting fee associated with the Banning-
Lewis Parkway/U.S. Highway 24/Constitution Avenue interchange.
Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees
The total cost of the Banning-Lewis Parkway can be broken down into three different components:
Right-of-way costs north of Drennan Road = $55,855,114;

Construction costs for the Parkway north of Drennan Road (including four travel-lanes and any
necessary turn lanes and bridges) = $67,108,174;
Interchange costs = $25,000,000.
The Parkway elements north of Drennan Road were divided by the net planning acreage north of
Drennan Road (15,062) to reach two, separate per-acre fees. The interchange element of the total
Banning-Lewis Parkway cost was divided by the total developable acreage in the Ranch under 2006
zoning (17,962 acres). Elements associated with the Parkway area south of Drennan Road were not
calculated into per-acre fees, as Annexors south of Drennan Road are required to dedicate the
remaining right-of-way and construct any improvements with no possibility of reimbursement.
For the area north of Drennan, those Annexors who plat will pay Parkway fees, while those who
dedicate right-of-way or construct Parkway obligations will receive reimbursements. Fee collection
will occur at time of platting, but the fees for the Banning-Lewis Parkway will be collected and
reimbursed separately from the other General Annexor Obligation fees.
The Banning-Lewis Parkway fees collected from plats north of Drennan Road will be deposited into
two separate accounts; one account will contain the right-of-way fee and the construction fee, while
the other account will contain the interchange fee from all plats within the Ranch. It is desirable to
segregate the interchange fee to ensure that funds are available to reimburse the Annexor and/or
government entity who will ultimately construct the interchange located on the Banning-Lewis
Parkway at Banning-Lewis Parkway/U.S. Highway 24/Constitution Avenue.
Detailed methodologies and analyses concerning all six cost sharing/reimbursement program options
can be found in Appendix L.
As part of the Study, Staff has included an analysis of possible fees and reimbursements required
from, or due to, each Annexor (refer to the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Fees and
Reimbursements, included at the end of the Study). This table provides an estimate of the projected
fees or reimbursements. The fee or reimbursement amount reflects credits given to Annexors who
construct/dedicate shared obligations. The analysis includes the scenarios for fees collected under
Option 6.
District financing of the estimated $190,269,575 in new shared Annexation Agreement obligations
does not appear to be feasible due to existing land values and development timing issues.
Staff explored using districts to cost-share the obligations associated with the Banning-Lewis
Parkway (i.e. right-of-way dedication, travel and turn-lane construction, and interchange construction).
The City established a committee known as the Banning-Lewis Parkway Subcommittee (BLPS),
which included the Annexors who owned Parkway right-of-way and City Staff from various
departments. The committee was tasked to investigate the issue of Parkway cost-sharing further.
After careful analysis and several meetings, the BLPS concluded that a Ranch-wide district cost-
sharing mechanism that would build the Parkway at one time was not a feasible option.
6
Planning Department
With districts ruled out as a cost-sharing mechanism, the City looked at other alternatives. After
extensive research, it was concluded that charging impact type fees was the most viable option. Staff
conducted a comprehensive literature review on impact fees, which can be found in Appendix M.
Similar to an impact fee, an Annexor obligation fee would be collected at time of subdivision plat
recording for all acreage contained within each plat, except for:
1. Park sites and trail corridors, including those owned by Districts, for which parkland
dedication credit will be granted by the City.
2. School sites for which school land dedication credit will be granted by a public school
district.
3. Public facility site dedication required by the Annexation Agreement and identified within
the approved BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study.
4. Right-of-way dedicated for arterial roadways or the BLR Parkway and Interchange.
5. Property within the BLR located south of Drennan Road shall not be subject to the BLR
Parkway Right of Way or the BLR Parkway Construction platting fee.
It should be noted that the platted Village One area of the Ranch has been excluded from any of the
computations for this Study. Village One will neither contribute to nor receive credits for the shared
Annexor obligation costs.1 The Village One area encompasses 347 gross planning acres or
approximately 263 net planning acres or about 1.5% of the total net planning area. A complete
analysis of the fees and obligations located within Village One can be found in Appendix N.
Fees in each cost sharing/reimbursement program option are based on total developable acreage,
known as “net planning acres.” The net planning acreage for the Ranch was calculated by
subtracting from the total Ranch acreage (24,684 acres), the acres to be dedicated for public
facilities, major street right-of-way, park and schools sites etc., the Rock Island Railroad corridor
dedication, previously platted drainage facilities and Village One. The total net planning acreage
within the Ranch used for the Study equals 17,962 acres. The net planning acreage may be
decreased in the future as a result of City decisions to increase the amount of acreage dedicated to
public facility purpose. Said decrease shall be subject to City Council approval of an amended
Master Plan, Annexor Obligation Study, and associated platting fees.
A fee system based on net planning acreage was recommended to handle the equitable
apportionment of all of the shared costs, including those associated with the Banning-Lewis Parkway.
Fees under Option 6 will equal approximately $11,910 per acre for the area north of Drennan Road
and approximately $3,747 for the area south of Drennan Road.
Recommendations
After thorough exploration of each cost sharing/reimbursement option, Staff recommends Option 6 for
several reasons. First, Option 6 is the most equitable and proportional option, both initially and long-term.
Options 2 and 3 might be equitable at the beginning but as land uses/zonings change, fee systems will be
unable to reflect those changes. Options 1, 4 and 5 create inequality by not recognizing the existing
constructed portion of the Parkway south of Drennan Road. In contrast, Option 6 is minimally impacted
by future Master Plan land use/zoning changes and addresses the reduction in the additional Parkway
right-of-way dedication and construction costs.
1
City Council accepted the recommendation for approval of a major amendment to the approved Banning-Lewis
Ranch Master Plan subject to the condition that “Banning Lewis Ranch Management agrees to forgo any
reimbursement request for Shared Infrastructure constructed within the Village 1 area in accordance with the terms of
the Metropolitan District Service Plan for this development.” See, City Council Formal Meeting Minutes, February 14,
2006.
7
Planning Department
Options 2 and 3 may discourage or preclude commercial development since the impact fees associated
with commercial zones are so high. Option 6 however, is based on net planning acreage and not land
use or zoning, so one type of development is not given preference over the other. Next, Option 6 is easy
to administer and can be kept up to date with a fairly simple annual revision process. Options 2, 3 and 5
require complex calculations that would require significant analysis to revise annually.
Finally, Option 6 allows cost sharing for arterial construction, and Parkway construction south of Drennan
Road to occur in accordance with existent Subdivision Regulations as found in Chapter 7 of the Colorado
Springs City Code. Options 1, 2 and 3 provide for arterial cost sharing and reimbursement in a manner
that is inconsistent with §7.7.705 (D) of the Subdivision Regulations. Arterial cost sharing/reimbursement
under Option 6 is as follows:
Arterial Street Construction
Annexors shall be required to construct all arterial streets depicted by the Master Plan with no
cost recovery from the City or from other Annexors, with the following exceptions:
1. Arterials constructed on the boundary of another Annexor’s property shall be subject to cost
recovery from the Annexor having frontage on other side of the arterial in accordance with
§7.7.705 (C) of the Colorado Springs City Subdivision Regulations.
2. Annexors required by the City to construct an arterial street through property owned entirely
by another Annexor shall be eligible for cost recovery from those Annexors having frontage
along said arterial in accordance with §7.7.705 (C) of the City of Colorado Springs
Subdivision Regulations. In this case, the City will require the Annexor to dedicate the
necessary right-of-way, as per Article III (A) of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation
Agreement, to allow the arterial to be constructed.
3. Marksheffel Road—in accordance with Article 3 (A) of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation
Agreement, the Annexors will be responsible for constructing four (4) lanes of Marksheffel
Road where the Ranch lies adjacent to the road. This obligation will be eligible for cost
recovery from the City on two (2) of the four (4) lanes in accordance with Article III (C) of the
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement. All other construction on Marksheffel Road
interior to the Ranch will not be eligible for cost recovery unless the construction is subject to
either exception (1) or (2) above.
Local/Collector Street Construction
Minor streets constructed by Annexors shall not be eligible for cost recovery under the provision
of §7.7.705 (D).
Traffic Signals
Annexors shall be responsible for all costs associated with the procurement and installation of all
traffic signals in accord with Section III (G) of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement.
Constructing Annexors may file cost recovery in accordance with provisions of §7.7.705 (D).
Reimbursable Annexor Obligations under Option 4 are as follows:
9 Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Obligation Study $75,000

9 Sand Creek Drainage Basin Re-Study $92,500
9 Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Study $300,000
9 Land Dedications:
Park and Ride Site $88,858
Air Monitoring Stations $38,301
City Service Center $2,054,466
Police Sub-station Sites $1,322,151
Street Sweeping Disposal Sites $2,717,073
8
Planning Department
Well Sites $1,195,807

Water Storage Tank Sites $1,374,240
Electric Sub-station Sites $6,986,102
Electric Service Center $2,223,756
9 Fire Stations:
Land Dedication $1,467,694
Improvements $19,180,500
Equipment $2,979,839
9 A sum of money for a Radio Repeater Station $210,000
Shared infrastructure obligations within the Ranch will be constructed by the Annexors when it is
determined by the City that said obligation is warranted to serve a specific development project or a
regional need in accordance with the terms of the Annexation Agreement and subsequent Settlement
Agreement.
The Settlement Agreement (refer to Appendix C) addresses reimbursement and cost recovery. The
Settlement Agreement indicates that monies collected for the shared cost obligations shall be deposited
in the City administered Banning-Lewis Ranch Improvement Fund (Fund). The Settlement Agreement
further states that the City shall be responsible for:
1. Allocation of development costs among property owners;

2. Implementation of reimbursement and cost recovery in accordance the provisions of the
Settlement Agreement;
3. Collection of all service and impact fees required by the Annexation Agreement; and;
4. Segregation, and preservation in, and proper disbursements from the Fund of all fees,
assessments and other charges.
Each shared infrastructure obligation within the Ranch will be constructed by the Annexors or their agents
who would then be eligible for equitable reimbursement through one of a variety of existing and newly
created reimbursement mechanisms such as:
1. Standard City Utility Recovery Agreements or Advance Recovery Agreements

2. Park and or School fee credits for park and school site land dedications;
3. Reimbursement from the Sand Creek Drainage Basin fee collection or the Jimmy Camp
Creek Flood Conservancy District; and
4. Banning-Lewis Parkway fees as defined above and Annexor obligation fees as defined in
cost sharing/reimbursement program Option 6.

Applicability
The provisions of this part shall apply to all property contained within the Annexation Plats of the Banning-
Lewis Ranch Annexations, Filings 1-20.
Fee Establishment
The General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees shall be established by Resolution
passed by City Council. Said fees shall be based upon the findings of the adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch
Annexor Shared Obligation Study.
Fee Adjustment
The General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees may be modified by City Council as
follows:
9
Planning Department
A. General Annexor Shared Obligation Fee

1. The land dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect any
adjustment in the fee in lieu of park/school land dedication established in accord with part
12 of article 7 of this chapter (the “park/school fee”).
2. The cost to construct and equip the five (5) fire stations required by the BLR Annexation
Agreement will be evaluated annually by the Colorado Springs Fire Department. The
Annexor Shared Obligation Fee will be adjusted to reflect the Fire Department’s revised
estimates for the cost for these facilities.
3. All other elements of the general Annexor Shared Obligation Fee shall remain fixed per
the costs identified in the Annexation Agreement and/or the BLR Annexor Shared
Obligation Study.
B. Parkway Fee
1. The right of way dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect any
2. The construction element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect changes in
construction costs as determined by the Colorado Springs Construction Index. Annexors
may independently commission engineering studies regarding BLR Parkway design and
construction costs at their own expense. Any annexor engineering studies shall be
subject to review and approval by the City and may be used by the City to adjust the BLR
Parkway Fee.
3. Interchange Fee
1. The right of way dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect any
2. The construction element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect changes in
construction costs as determined by the Colorado Springs Construction Index. Annexors
may independently commission engineering studies regarding the Parkway/Highway
24/Constitution Ave. Interchange design and construction costs at their own expense.
Any annexor engineering studies shall be subject to review and approval by the City and
may be used by the City to adjust the BLR Interchange Fee.
Fee Payment
A. Payment with Subdivision Platting

The General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees shall be paid in
conjunction with the recordation of any subdivision plat recorded after the adoption date of
the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study. The General Annexor
Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees shall apply to all acreage contained within the
plat, with the following exceptions:
1. Park sites and trail corridors, including those owned by Districts, for which
parkland dedication credit will be granted by the City Parks Department;
2. School site for which school land dedication credit will be granted by a public
School District;
3. Public facility site dedication required by the Annexation Agreement and identified
within the adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study;
4. Right-of-way dedicated for arterial roadways or the Banning-Lewis Parkway and
Interchange; and
5. Property within the Banning-Lewis Ranch located south of Drennan Road that
shall not be subject to the Banning-Lewis Parkway right-of-way or the Banning-
Lewis Parkway construction platting fee.
B. Platting Fee Credit
10
Planning Department
Annexors who have received reimbursement credits for constructing shared infrastructure,
or for fulfilling shared Annexation Agreement obligations identified as reimbursable shared
obligations within the adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study,
may apply their reimbursement credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or Parkway
owed.
C. Payment Prior to Platting

General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees may be paid prior to platting at
the option of the Annexor. However, a 20% early payment surcharge will be added to the
fee amount owed.
D. Escrowing of Fees
The City shall escrow all General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees
collected into a separate “BLR Reimbursement Fund(s)” to be used for the dedicated
purpose of reimbursing those Annexors who construct shared infrastructure, or who fulfill
Annexation Agreement obligations identified as reimbursable shared obligations within the
adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study.
Reimbursement
A. Eligibility
Annexors who construct shared infrastructure, or who fulfill Annexation Agreement
obligations identified as reimbursable shared obligations within the adopted Banning-Lewis
Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study, shall be eligible for reimbursement from the “BLR
Reimbursement Fund” or receive credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or
Parkway platting fees owed. Any shared Annexor obligation fulfilled after the approval date
of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement (September 23, 1988) shall be eligible
for reimbursement, with the exception of the previously dedicated Jimmy Camp Creek
Regional Park site.
B. Credit/Reimbursement for Public Facility Dedications

Annexors dedicating land for any of the public facility sites as required by the Annexation
Agreement, and identified as reimbursable shared obligations within the adopted Banning-
Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study, shall be eligible for a reimbursement or
credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or Parkway platting fees owed. These public
facility site dedications include:
• Park and Ride Site
• Air Monitoring Stations
• City Service Center
• Police Sub-station Sites
• Street Sweeping Disposal Sites
• Well Sites
• Water Storage Tank Sites
• Electric Sub-station Sites
• Electric Service Center
• Fire Station Sites
The reimbursement, or credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or Parkway platting
fees owed associated with these public land dedications shall be calculated by multiplying
the City adopted park/school per-acre land dedication value in effect as of the date of the
site dedication, or deed acceptance by the City, by the acreage of the public site
dedication.
C. Credit/Reimbursement for Constructing and Equipping Fire Stations

Annexors constructing and equipping fire stations as required by the Annexation
Agreement, and identified as a reimbursable shared obligation within the adopted Banning-
11
Planning Department
Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study, shall be eligible for a reimbursement or
credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or Parkway platting fees owed. Said
reimbursement shall be based upon actual construction and equipment costs incurred by
the constructing Annexor.
D. Credit/Reimbursement for Other Shared Annexor Obligations

Annexors fulfilling any other obligations identified as a reimbursable shared obligation
within the adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study shall be eligible
for a reimbursement or credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or Parkway platting
fees owed. The value of these obligations shall be as set forth in the adopted Banning-
Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study. These reimbursable shared obligations
include:
• Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study

• Sand Creek Drainage Basin Re-Study
• Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Study
• Payment for a Radio Repeater Station.
E. Credit or Reimbursement for Dedication of Right of Way and/or Construction of BLR

Parkway.
1. Annexors dedicating right-of-way and/or fulfilling Parkway construction

responsibilities for the segment of the BLR Parkway located north of Drennan
Road as set forth in the Annexation Agreement shall be eligible for a
reimbursement or credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR
Parkway fees owed. The value of these obligations shall be as follows:
a. The value of the BLR Parkway right-of-way dedication shall be calculated

by multiplying the City’s park/school fee in effect as of the date of the
right-of-way dedication by the acreage of the dedication.
b. A preliminary reimbursement shall be determined for BLR Parkway

construction based upon the cost estimate for Parkway construction
approved by the City in conjunction with the posting of the financial
security for the Parkway construction. The final reimbursement amount
shall be determined based upon actual construction costs submitted by
the constructing annexor and accepted by the City. Adjustments in
reimbursement, or fees owed, will be made if the final reimbursement
amount differs from the preliminary estimate.
2. Annexors dedicating right-of-way and/or fulfilling Parkway construction

responsibilities for the segment of the BLR Parkway located south of Drennan
Road shall not be eligible for a reimbursement from other annexors, or receive
credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed
except as follows:
a. BLR Parkway constructed on the boundary of another annexor’s property

shall be subject to cost recovery from the annexor having frontage on other
side of the arterial in accord with § 7.7.705(D).
b. Annexors required by the City to construct the BLR Parkway through property
owned entirely by another annexor shall be eligible for cost recovery from
those annexors having frontage along the BLR Parkway in accord with §
7.7.705(D).
12
Planning Department
F. Credit/Reimbursement for Banning-Lewis Parkway Interchange Construction

Annexors fulfilling the Banning-Lewis Parkway/Highway 24/Constitution Avenue Interchange
construction obligation as set forth in the Annexation Agreement shall be eligible for a
reimbursement or credit against Interchange platting fees owed. The value of the Banning-
Lewis Ranch Parkway interchange construction shall be equal to the cost estimate for the
Banning-Lewis Parkway/Highway 24/Constitution Avenue Interchange provided by the
constructing Annexor and accepted by the City in conjunction with the approval of the
interchange design.
G. Reimbursement or Platting Fee Credit

In conjunction with the filing of each subdivision plat, the City shall calculate all platting fees
and reimbursements associated with the plat and determine the net platting fees owed or
reimbursement due. In the event that platting fees are owed, the Annexor may apply
reimbursements to cover these fees as set forth above.
H. Payment of Reimbursement Owed

The City shall process all Annexor reimbursement requests in a timely manner and shall pay
approved reimbursement requests from the “BLR Reimbursement Fund” on a quarterly basis.
All reimbursement payments will be on a first-in, first-paid basis and be governed by amount
of monies available in the fund.
I. Transfer of Reimbursements or Credits

The City will process reimbursements from the “BLR Reimbursement Fund”, and/or apply
credits owned to the Annexors who have constructed shared infrastructure, or who have
fulfilled Annexation Agreement obligations identified as reimbursable shared obligations
within the adopted Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study. The City shall
recognize the transfer of reimbursements to other parties subject to the filing, and City
acceptance, of an “Assignment of Reimbursements” Form (See Appendix O).
Charge for Reimbursement, Credit and Platting Fee Processing
The City may impose a fee or a charge to cover all expenses associated with the intake of
reimbursement/credits, collection of platting fees and administration of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor
Shared Obligation Study.
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement Impact Fees
The General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees s shall be separate from, and in addition
to, the “Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee” and the “Urban Service Extension Fee” as set forth in the
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement.
Amendments to the Study
In addition to the annual adjustments to the General Annexor Obligation, Parkway and Interchange fees
as previously discussed it may be necessary to amend this Study due to significant changes to conditions
within the Banning-Lewis Ranch. Changes to the Banning-Lewis Ranch that may require this Study to be
amended, and the shared Annexor obligations to be re-calculated, include the following types of events:
1. Changes to the Master Plan that significantly increase or decrease the amount of developable
acres that would be platted and subject to the Annexor obligation fee; or
2. Creation of a toll road authority, or some other type of district or entity, that would assume
responsibility for construction of the Banning-Lewis Parkway; or
3. Changes to the Master Plan that would revise the alignment of the Banning-Lewis Parkway that
would significantly impact the length of the Parkway; or
4. Significant increases in the amount of land owned by the City for public facility purpose (whether
or not the Master Plan is amended or the site is rezoned); or
13
Planning Department
5. Changes to the Annexation Agreement that would modify the extent of the shared Annexor
obligations.
Any amendments to this Study should follow the same process as the original Study creation, including
review by appropriate City Staff, discussions with Annexors and final approval by City Council.
Summary
City Staff recommends that this Study be approved by City Council at that the accompanying Resolutions
be adopted. Staff further recommends that City Council adopted the modifications to the Subdivision
Regulations that are necessary to implement the reimbursement and fee collection program (Appendix
P).
14
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexors Under the Colorado Centre Differential
BLP REIMBURSABLE COSTS INCURRED ON BEHALF OF

ANNEXOR ACRES OTHER ANNEXORS PLATTING FEES NET REIMB- NET REIMB-
TOTAL URSEMENT URSEMENT
BLP OTHER REIMBUR- NET FEES @ OWED TO DUE FROM
BLP ROW CONST- DEDIC- SABLE PLANNING $8,778/ OTHER OTHER
@ $76,602 RUCTION ATIONS COSTS ACRES ACRE ANNEXORS ANNEXORS
$11,910/
North of Drennan Road ACRE
609 PLUS ASSOCIATES 51.89 $3,974,878 $4,775,691 $8,750,569 527.28 $6,279,905 $2,470,664
AE94 LLC $0 121.29 $1,444,564 $1,444,564
CHEROKEE WATER AND
SANITATION $0 0 $0 $0
CHURCH FOR ALL NATIONS 2.68 $205,293 $246,654 $645,755 $1,097,702 40.79 $485,809 $611,893
CMS2 LLC $0 105.27 $1,253,766 $1,253,766
COLORADO SPRINGS LAND ASSOC $71,748 $71,748 260.27 $3,099,816 $3,028,068
CPH BANNING-LEWIS RANCH LLC 651.09 $49,874,796 $59,923,009 $61,120,309 $170,918,114 13210.3 $157,334,673 $13,583,441
CYGNET LAND LLC $0 1.85 $22,034 $22,034
FALCON TRUCKING CO $0 39.11 $465,800 $465,800
M3 LAND LLC $0 290.96 $3,465,334 $3,465,334
MARKSHEFFEL 150 LLC $0 146.61 $1,746,125 $1,746,125
MGF ACQUISITION CORP $0 24.53 $292,152 $292,152
OPTIONS INVEST CORP $0 23.51 $280,004 $280,004
OZBURN JAMES C. & DELIA L. $0 9.79 $116,599 $116,599
POWERS, RAYMOND REVOCABLE
TR. $0 82.25 $979,598 $979,598
TUCSON/COLORADO ASSOCIATES $0 41.09 $489,382 $489,382
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC
COMMITTEE $0 136.25 $1,622,738 $1,622,738
$3,747/
South of Drennan Road ACRE
COLORADO CENTRE JV 2.27 $0 $0 $0 48.04 $180,006 $180,006

COLORADO CENTRE METRO
DISTRICT 0.39 $0 $0 $4,372,190 $4,372,190 0 $0 $4,372,190
CPH BANNING-LEWIS RANCH LLC 15.47 $0 $0 $0 2156.77 $8,081,417 $8,081,417
FHK DEVELOPMENTS LLC 0.88 $0 $0 $0 48.44 $181,505 $181,505
MARKSHEFFEL-WOODMEN INVEST
LLC 6.15 $0 $0 $847,984 $847,984 545.17 $2,042,752 $1,194,768
VENWEST DEV LTD PARTNERSHIP 3.63 $0 $0 $0 45.24 $169,514 $169,514
VILLANI PARTNERSHIP LLP $0 56.34 $211,106 $211,106
15
Planning Department
Appendix A
Study Timeline and Benchmarks
September 29, 2006
Shared Obligation Study Banning-Lewis Parkway financing meeting with

Annexors and City Staff
Timeline
March 23,
2007
September 22, 2006 Ninth Annexor May 22, 2007
Banning-Lewis Parkway financing meeting
Study and Subdivision
meeting with Annexors and City Staff Regulations go to City
Council for first reading
March 16, 2007
November 17, 2006 Eighth Annexor

September 12, 2006 meeting occurs
July 21, 2006 Third Annexor
City Council formally accepts Study May 7, 2007
Internal Review meeting occurs
Study goes to Informal
Meeting
City Council
March 2,
May 3, 2006 September 8, 2006 January 2007
12, 2007
PCI delivers Second Annexor November 13, 2006 Seventh
completed Study to June 2, 2006 meeting occurs Fifth Annexor May 3, 2007
City Staff Banning-Lewis Parkway Annexor meeting
Internal Review meeting Study goes to Formal City
financing meeting with occurs
Meeting occurs Planning Commission
Annexors and City staff
February September November December February

March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 October 2006 January 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007
2006 2006 2006 2006 2007
October 13, 2006 June 12, 2007

June 23, 2006 August 18, December 5, 2006 April 5,
2006 Internal Review and February 16, 2007 2007 Study and
Internal Review Fourth Annexor meeting
February 14, 2006 planning meeting Subdivision
Meeting First Annexor occurs Sixth Annexor Tenth
meeting occurs Annexor Regulations go
City Council Decision meeting
meeting to City Council
regarding BLR Village 1 occurs
occurs for second
and Rancho Colorado
reading
Master Plan
amendments. Specified October 13, 2006
that BLR Annexor
Banning-Lewis Parkway financing
Obligation Study be April 26, 2007
meeting with Annexors and City
accepted and approved
staff Study goes to Informal City Planning
by City Council
Commission
April 27, 2007

October 27, 2006
Eleventh
Banning-Lewis Parkway financing meeting
Annexor
with Annexors and City staff
meeting
occurs
A-1
A-2
Planning Department
Appendix B
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement
and Overview of Annexor Obligations
Overview of Annexor Obligations
The summaries presented below are not meant to replace the contents of the Annexation
Agreement but, rather, show how the Annexation Agreement has been interpreted for the
purposes of this Study.
Streets
All public streets within the Ranch are to be paid for and constructed by Annexor to the extent
described in the Annexation Agreement. Similarly all rights-of-way must be dedicated to the City
at no cost to the City. Only the right-of-way dedication and construction costs associated with the
Banning-Lewis Parkway and interchange north of Drennan Road have been identified as shared
costs.
Storm Drainage
Any drainage costs are assumed to fall under one of two alternatives for cost sharing and
reimbursement. In one alternative, the City established fee will apply within the basin (i.e. Sand
Creek and other minor basins). Annexors who construct regional facilities within this basin will be
eligible for reimbursement from this fund. In the other alternative, the Banning-Lewis Ranch
Flood Control Conservancy District will charge an annual mill levy that can be used for
construction and maintenance of regional drainage facilities within the Jimmy Camp Creek
Drainage Basin. The only items that will be left to be shared under this Study are the cost of the
new Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Planning Study and the update to the Sand Creek
Drainage Basin Study.
Parks, School and Transit
In accordance with the Annexation Agreement, parks and school site dedications, or fees in lieu
thereof, will be handled by the normal City Subdivision Regulations that apply to these facilities. A
regional park was conveyed to the City prior to any of the current ownership of the Ranch,
therefore, is not accounted for in this report. A not-to-exceed 30’ multi use trail right-of-way is to
be dedicated by Annexor to the City at no cost, but is included as a line-item in this Study.
The Annexation Agreement also requires that Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan parcel 268.04
be dedicated to the City for park-and-ride purposes. Accordingly, this parcel has been included in
the Facilities/Shared Land category of the Study.
Environmental
Annexor is required to dedicate two sites to the City of 0.25 acre each for air quality monitoring
purposes. These have been included in the shared cost estimate.
Support Services, Fire, Police, and CATV
Annexor is required to pay on demand by the City up to $210,000 for the purpose of constructing
a radio repeater station to the east of the City. This cost has been included as a shared cost.
Three parcels have been targeted in the Master Plan for conveyance to the City for satellite
municipal services. These parcels are 290.02, 329.01 and 329.04. These parcels have been
included in the shared cost estimate.
Fire
The Annexation Agreement requires the conveyance of land for and construction of five fully
equipped fire stations. These parcels are 293.09, 307.04, 342.09, 331.11, and 270.14. These
B-1
parcels have been included in the cost share estimate. The cost for the fire stations was provided
by the City’s fire department.
Police
The Annexation Agreement requires the conveyance of parcels 274.03, 274.06, 310.10 and
347.08 are to be dedicated as police substation sites. These parcels are included in the cost-
sharing estimate. Another site, 342.09, is to be jointly used with fire protection but is accounted
for under the fire cost allocation.
Street Division
The Annexation Agreement requires the conveyance of parcels 271.12 and 338.08 to be
dedicated to the City for the dumping/disposal of non-putrescible waste. These sites have been
included in the shared cost estimates.
Water
The Annexation Agreement requires Annexor to:

• provide any and all property (not to exceed ten thousand square feet per existing well
site) for construction and operation of water in the Ranch;
• fully pay for all pump stations and suction storage (see Appendix F); and
• convey to the City parcel Nos. 273.03, 293.07, 307.04, 321.06, and 372.14 for water
storage tanks. These parcels have been included in the estimate of costs.
Wastewater
The Annexation Agreement requires Annexor to design and build a regional wastewater
treatment plant to serve the area (see Appendix E).
Electric
The Annexation Agreement requires Annexor to:

• dedicate to the City all rights-of-way for installation of electric transmission facilities;
• pay for the costs of, or construction of, road improvements adjacent to utility
corridors;
• deed to the City the five major transmission lines as shown on the Master Plan (this
obligation may have been fulfilled); and
• dedicate to the City parcel nos. 329.01/329.04, 295.02, 301.05, 309.02,
329.02/329.05, 338.09, and 344.02. These parcels have been included in the
estimate of costs
B-2
! -
--:I
. .
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
,THIS AGREEMENT, "~~reement",made and entered into this@!'day of
by and among F & D ASSOCIATES, an Arizona general r%l

p&tnership; FRANK R. KREJCI, Individually; KVI COLORADO CORP., a Nebraska
rn
corporation; ARIES PROPERTIES INCORPORATED, a Colorado corporation; COLORADO
SPRINGS LAND ASSOCIATES, a New York general partnership; THE SPRINGS COMPANY,
an Arizona general partnership; SPRINGS CENTER LAND CORP., a Delaware
corporation; H. PIKE OLIVER, Individually; JONATHAN ARIES, Individually;
KATHRYN M. MOLLER, Individually; CHARLES J. FUHR, Individually; STEVEN A.
DOUGLAS, Individually; A.C. ISRAEL ENTERPRISES, INC., a Delaware corporation;
FEIT 6 AHRENS, a New York general partnership; FALCON TRUCKING COMPANY, a
Michigan corporation; UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE, a non-profit corporation 1

incorporated by an act of Congress; COLORADO CENTRE J.V., an Arizona general
partnership; CS RANCH COMPANY, an Arizona general partnership; CCM DEVELOPMENT
ASSOCIATES, an Arizona general partnership; all of whom hereinafter are
collectively referred to an "ANNEXOR", and the CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, a home
rule city and a Colorado municipal corporation of the County of El Paso, State
of Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "CITY". BANNING LEWIS RANCH PLANNING I

ASSOCIATION, INC., a Colorado non-profit corporation has an interest in the
property covered by this Agreement and consents to its terms as provided
herein; and. CHEROKEE WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT and COLORADO CENTRE
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, Colorado quasi-municipal corporations, join this
Agreement as an ANNEXOR to the extent that either of them owns property in the
area to be annexed. Colorado Centre Metropolitan District further consents to
the provisions of Article XVIII below.
.-. 8 / 9 / 8 8 a 175626
. .. u. i- ., -,-
W I T N E S S E T H :
WHEREAS, ANNEXOR is the owner of the property described in Exhibit "A",
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein and hereinafter the

I1
Property", and
WHEREAS, ANNEXOR has filed petitions to annex approximately 24,311 acres
to the CITY and this will constitute the single largest piece of property
annexed to date to the CITY, and
WHEREAS, the proposed master plan for the Banning Lewis Ranch indicates a
mixture of residential, commercial and industrial uses with approximately
76,000 residential units with an approximate population of 180,000 people at
full development and approximately seventy-nine million square feet of
colmnercial, office and industrial floor area at full development, and
WHEREAS, considerable study has been undertaken by the ANNEXOR and CITY to
ensure fair and equitable annexation of the Property into the CITY, and
WHEREAS, the parties mutually agree and recognize that annexation is
desirable for the development of the Property by ANNEXOR; and
WHEREAS, CITY has determined that it is a logical extension of and in the
best interests of CITY to annex the,Property and to provide municipal services

1 and receive revenues from the development to occur on the Property; and
I WHEREAS, it is the intent of the parties that the annexation and provision
of public facilities and services to the Property not create additional cost or
1 impose additional burdens on the existing residents and ratepayers of the CITY,
as provided for by the terms of this Agreement; and

I WHEREAS, annexation of the Property is in accord with Policy 2.1.1 of the
I Comprehensive Plan and the annexation will result in a community benefit.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the
covenants, promises and agreements of each of the parties hereto, to be kept
and performed by each of them,
IT IS AGREED:
INTRODUCTION
"ANNEXOR" as used in this Agreement shall mean and refer collectively to
ANNEXOR, its successors, assigns and designees. "Code" shall mean and refer to
the Code of the City of Colorado Springs 1980, as may be amended from time to
time. "douthern Area" shall mean those lands currently within the Colorado
Centre Metropolitan District being annexed. "Banning Lewis Ranch Planning
Association" or similar entity or entities shall mean and refer to the
association of landowners within the Property designated to enforce and
administer the covenants, conditions and restrictions of record, including this
Agreement, applicable to the Property. "Master Plan" shall mean and refer to
the approved Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan, as may be amended from
time-to-time in accord with the Code. Parcel number references in this

I agreement are references to the parcels shown on the Master Plan.
I Although the Property is currently being used for agricultural purposes it
is within the Potential Urban Growth and Planning Area of the CITY, and the
I growth of the Colorado Springs Metropolitan area makes it likely that the
Property will experience development. Both the CITY and ANNEXOR are desirous
I of providing for the annexation of the Property into the CITY in order to
I ensure its orderly development.

LA,$ II
C
PLANNING, ZONING, AND BUILDING
m
A. The parties recognize that it is the intent of ANNEXOR to develop the
Property in a manner consistent with the Master Plan. Zoning of the Property
L
shall be as ultimately approved by City Council and such zoning may include
conditions that must be complied with before building permit issuance. Those
portions of the Property in the Corral Bluffs Area and Jimmy Camp Creek
Regional Park which contain significant historical, archaelogical and
paleontological features will be identified and preserved in accordance with
the terms of the zoning established for these areas.
B. Vesting of property rights shall occur as such vesting may be provided
for in the Code and pursuant to applicable Colorado law.
C. The CITY shall allow ANNEXOR to sell off parcels of real property
without platting or subdividing provided that no building permits shall be
granted before compliance with the CITY Subdivision Code. Because of the
detail of the Master Plan and the' exactness of the legal descriptions of the
zoning of parcels on the Property, ANNEXOR assures CITY that selling off of
parcels without platting will not interfere with public infrastructure
development as shown on the Master Plan.
D. ANNEXOR has provided CITY with a list of all current uses and the
location of such uses on the Property establishing legal non-conforming uses.
This list shall be Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. Any existing leases or
tenancies on Exhibit "B" may continue in accordance with their terms, and may
be extended at ANNEXOR'S discretion.
E. Banning Lewis Ranch Planning Association shall share with CITY any
plans it may complete or adopt in order to coordinate the effective provision
of municipal and utility services.

F. Farming and r a n c h i n g u s e s i n t h e Code's a g r i c u l t u r a l zone d i s t r i c t
s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d on u n p l a t t e d l a n d s of t h e P r o p e r t y , s u b j e c t t o a l l zoning
r e s t r i c t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l zone d i s t r i c t , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g
t h a t such p r o p e r t i e s a r e zoned o t h e r w i s e .
G. CITY and ANNEXOR acknowledge t h a t on o r b e f o r e August 15, 1989,
Western S t a t e s P r o p e r t i e s , I n c . may a c q u i r e c e r t a i n p r o p e r t y formerly owned by
the Chicngo Pacific Corporation and used as a railroad right-of-way with
associated facilities such p r o p e r t y b e i n g described in a deed recorded on
October 11, 1985 i n Book 5074 a t Page 0069 of t h e r e c o r d s of t h e C l e r k and
Recorder of E l Paso County, Colorado. In the event such acquisition is
completed, CITY and ANNEXOR agree to reconsider the land use and zoning
adjacent to said right-of-way and associated properties to nake such
adjustments i n l a n d u s e s a s a r e r e a s o n a b l y r e q u i r e d t o accommodate any l e g a l
r i g h t s of Western S t a t e s P r o p e r t i e s , I n c . and t o p r o v i d e f o r a p p r o p r i a t e l a n d
uses and zoning adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. Nothing in this
Agreement s h a l l be c o n s t r u e d a s t h e CITY g r a n t i n g t o Western S t a t e s P r o p e r t i e s ,
Inc., t h e r i g h t t o o p e r a t e a r a i l r o a d e i t h e r on o r o f f t h e P r o p e r t y .
STREETS
A. GENERAL - ANNEXOR s h a l l d e d i c a t e a l l rights-of-way owned by ANNEXOR
f o r p u b l i c s t r e e t s and i n t e r c h a n g e s f o r t h e f u l l width t h e r e o f a s r e q u i r e d by
CITY'S Major T r a f f i c Thoroughfare P l a n o r t h e Master P l a n i n accordance w i t h
whichever shows t h e g r e a t e r width. The s p e c i f i c l o c a t i o n of any s t r e e t s o r
interchanges a r e subject t o reasonable relocation a s development plans a r e
finalized, and a s determined by t h e D i r e c t o r of P u b l i c Works. Except w i t h
r e g a r d t o t h e Banning-Lewis Parkway, ANNEXOR s h a l l d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t a l l

public streets, and at-grade intersections that are entirely within the
boundaries of the Property to CITY standards without cost to the CITY as such
are contained in the Subdivision Design Manual as it now exists or is hereafter
amended or the Master Plan, whichever standards are higher. Except for
Marksheffel Road, public streets and at grade intersections one half of which
are on the Property shall be fully constructed by ANNEXOR and ANNEXOR will be
allowed cost recovery from adjacent developers in accord with CITY Subdivision
Code. There shall be no partial reimbursement to ANNEXOR for arterial streets
or arterial bridges within the Property as may otherwise be provided for in the
City Code. Dedication of streets shall occur at the time of subdivision
platting; however, the ANNEXOR agrees to dedicate rights-of-way owned by
ANNEXOR at an earlier time when determined by CITY to be required for
commencement of construction of such streets or for extension of utilities.
Location of major streets on and off the Property shall be in accord with the
Master Plan and the CITY'S Major Traffic Thoroughfare Plan as it now or in the
future exists. Dedication shall be by plat, provided that ANNEXOR only shall
be required to plat the boundary of any proposed street or interchange through
unplatted land and ANNEXOR shall be responsible for all fees to the extent that
the payment of such fees are the responsibility of ANNEXOR under the Code at
the time such payments are to be made. ANNEXOR agrees to pay the CITY'S lawful
share of any grade separations to accommodate any warranted railroad crossings
on the Property.
B. BANNING LEWIS PARKWAY -

1. Generally. ANNEXOR shall dedicate the ultimate Banning-Lewis Parkway
(B-L Pkwy) right-of-way and, over time, construct a four lane roadway with
at-grade intersections (except at U.S. Highway 2 4 ) , adequate associated turn
lanes, and shall have grading and bridge abutment responsibilities as

specifically delineated below. Construction of the B-L Pkwy may be phased in
accordance with the 25% absorption transportation analysis as updated and/or
further refined from time-to-time.
2. Right-of-way. ANNEXOR shall dedicate the right-of-way owned by
ANNEXOR for the B-L Pkwy (typically three hundred feet in width), together with
the right-of-way for associated interchanges and on and off ramps for the full
width thereof as required by the ultimate design of the parkway, as set forth
in the Conceptual Design Report for the B-L Pkwy (1988) prepared by Wilson &
Company Engineers, (the "Design Report"), which is subject to the approval of
the Director of Public Works.
3. Grade Separated Interchange. ANNEXOR shall construct an initial grade
separated interchange at the intersection of U.S. Highway 24 and the B-L Pkwy
in accordance with specifications to be approved by the Director of Public
Works, using the Design Report for design guidance. ANNEXOR shall not be
required to construct other grade separations or on and off ramps, nor shall
ANNEXOR be responsible for expansion of the initial grade separated
interchange.
4. Bridge Abutments. ANNEXOR shall be responsible for constructing
bridge abutments at the creek banks to handle the ultimate bridge width when
constructing initial bridges on the B-L Pkwy, generally as shown on Exhibit 't~ll
attached hereto. It is anticipated that there will be dual bridges, and that
each bridge will be designed to handle an initial two through lanes,
anticipating ultimate construction of an eight lane roadway. Bridge piers, if
any, and superstructure of the initial construction shall be designed and
constructed to accommodate the final loads of the ultimate eight lanes.

Bridges shall be designed in accordance with the Colorado Department of ..4
Highways criteria. ANNEXOR shall design bridges for ease of expansion to the
ultimate width. :::-I -

*-
5. Initial Gradinn and Construction between U.S. Highway 24 and State 1

Highway 94. ANNEXOR shall grade the B-L Pkwy to accommodate a full eight lane
facility between U.S. Highway 24 and State Highway 94 generally as shown on
Exhibit "D" . On this portion of the B-L Pkwy, ANNEXOR will construct four
initial through lanes with adequate associated turn lanes, also as shown on
Exhibit "D" .
6. Grading and Construction Elsewhere. Except for that portion of B-L
Pkwy located between U.S. Highway 24 and State Highway 94, ANNEXOR shall grade
I and initially construct two initial through lanes with adequate associated turn
lanes generally as shown on Exhibit "EN. ANNEXOR shall grade and construct two
i additional through lanes and associated turn lanes generally as shown on
Exhibit "F" (typical B-L Pkwy cross-sections) when traffic volumes warrant, as
I determined by the Director of ~ubiicWorks based on an analysis conducted in
I accord with the ITE Traffic and Transportation Engineering Manual (herein "ITE
Manual"), or earlier at ANNEXOR'S discretion.

I 7. Drainage Structures. ANNEXOR shall construct the drainage structures
for the ultimate width of the B-L Pkwy (eight lanes) between U.S. Highway 24
I and State Highway 94, generally as shown on Exhibit "Dl1 and shall construct
I such drainage structures for four lanes elsewhere, generally as shown on
Exhibit "F".
I 8. Center Median. There will be no curbing of the center median on the
B-L Pkwy. ANNEXOR shall be responsible for landscaping the median and
I maintaining such landscaping in accordance with landscaping standards in the
I Design Report.
I 8 8/9/88 a 17JC26
9. Off-Site Construction of B-L Pkwy. CITY agrees that upon annexation
of any unannexed property that abuts, adjoins or is in the vicinity of the
Property and for which a study codducted in accord with the ITE Manual shows a
direct traffic impact on the proposed B-L Pkwy, it will obligate the owners to
dedicate, improve or enter into repayment agreements for their equitable
proportion of benefit received from B-L Pkwy. This Agreement does not cover
any lands owned by ANNEXOR off of the Property relative to construction of the
B-L Pkwy, such interests to be governed by separate agreement. However, the
Property's share of off-site traffic impacts on the B-L Pkwy are included in
the Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee considered below.
C. MARKSHEFFEL ROAD - Where the Property is adjacent to Marksheffel Road
ANNEXOR shall dedicate all right-of-way for Marksheffel Road and associated
at-grade intersections within the width of Marksheffel Road right-of-way as set
forth in the Master Plan or as later determined by the Director of Public
Works. The cost of improving Marksheffel Road to a four-lane street shall be
borne as follows: First, ANNEXOR9shall bear the full cost of improving the
street where both sides of the right-of-way are located within the Property,
without any partial reimbursement for arterial streets or arterial bridges as
may otherwise be allowed by the Code. Second, where the Property abuts
Marksheffel Road on its eastern right-of-way boundary, ANNEXOR shall bear the
cost, as provided in the Code, of improving the street to a full four-lane
width and shall be eligible for partial reimbursement for arterial streets or
arterial bridges. Where Markshef £el Road abuts CITY'S gas propane plant
property, ANNEXOR shall be responsible for the full cost of improving such to a
four lane width without any recovery or reimbursement. ANNEXOR shall be

I entitled to recover a portion of its cost for full width construction in
I accordance with the CITY'S standard recovery agreements subject to any prior
20% 5 5 5 2 % ~ 41
. .
agreements between the CITY and other adjacent property owners (METEX). Third,
,, ANNEXOR shall be required to contribute Off-Site Roadway Improvement fees as
set forth in Article 111(E) below, for the Property's impact on those segments
of Marksheffel Road between Woodmen Road on the north and U.S. Highway 24 on
the south which are not located adjacent to or within the Property. The
necessity and timing of the improvements to Marksheffel Road and associated
at-grade intersections shall be constructed in phases as determined by the
Director of Public Works based upon a study conducted in accord with the ITE
Manual (up to four (4) lanes) as required to accommodate traffic generated by
the first twenty-five (25%) percent development of the Property. Once
Marksheffel Road has been improved in accordance with this Agreement, ANNEXOR
shall not be required to contribute to any further improvements of Marksheffel
Road.
D. BARNES ROAD - ANNEXOR agrees to construct Barnes Road to a four-lane
width between the existing eastern terminus of Barnes east to Marksheffel Road
and shall be eligible for partial reimbursement for arterial streets or bridges
I as provided for in the Code. ANNEXOR agrees to transition Barnes from its six
lane width at its eastern terminus to four lanes in accordance with a design
I approved by Director of Public Works. ANNEXOR shall be entitled to recover a
portion of its cost for the construction of Barnes Road in accordance with the
I CITY'S standard recovery agreement. The CITY agrees to use its powers of
I condemnation for such Barnes Road right-of-way after ANNEXOR has made all
reasonable negotiations with other property owners to obtain land for Barnes
1 extended to the Property. ANNEXOR, subject to recovery from private parties,
is responsible for all Barnes Road right-of-way costs.

I
E. OFF-SITE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT FEE -
1. Generally. The 25% absorption transportation analysis of the Property
and the region reflects that additional transportation facilities are needed
off of the Property to serve development on the Property and elsewhere. Such
transportation facilities and the cost thereof shall consist of the
improvements shown on Exhibit "G", attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference. The necessity and timing of the designated improvements shall be as
determined by the Director of Public Works based on an analysis conducted in
accord with the ITE Manual. ANNEXOR agrees that an Off-Site Roadway
Improvement Fee may be assessed by CITY to recover the Property's pro rata
share of the improvement and extension of these designated off-site roadways.
If the total cost of a designated improvement is greater than shown on Exhibit
"G", ANNEXOR'S direct contributions and the fee revenues allocated for the
improvement will not be adjusted. CITY agrees that it will require future
developments to bear their pro rata share of such improvements based on the
analysis above.
2. Computation of Fee. The Off-site Roadway Improvement Fee has been
computed by CITY using the estimated cost of improvements and the pro rata
share of such improvements allocable to the Property based on the 25%
absorption transportation analysis. The Off-site Roadway Improvement Fee also
includes a portion of the improvements to Marksheffel Road described in
Article III(C) above, as set forth in Exhibit "G". The fee has taken into
account the committed and known obligations of third parties to dedicate
rights-of-way or construct street improvements pursuant to any existing
annexation agreements or the Code, and has taken into account anticipated
obligations of third parties or other governmental entities to dedicate
rights-of-way and construct street improvements in connection with future

development within the CITY, and has taken into account arterial road or bridge
reimbursements that are anticipated pursuant to the Code.
3. Assessment of Fee. The Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee will be
assessed on a one-time basis at the rate of $ . 3 9 for each square foot of floor
area as defined in the Code for buildings on the Property, but not to include
parking garages associated with commercial, office or industrial buildings.
The Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee shall apply to all structures or new
construction for which a building permit is issued, except for governmental,
utility, municipal or quasi-municipal structures, and shall be due and payable
when the building permit issues. The Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee shall
not exceed $ . 3 9 per square foot of floor area, and will remain in effect until
the Property's share of the designated improvements as described in Exhibit "G"
has been financed and/or recovered, notwithstanding that such recovery may
require extension of the fee beyond 25% development absorption. All Off-Site
roadway improvement fees collected by the CITY shall be deposited in a separate
account established by the CITY to be known as the "Banning-Lewis Ranch
Off-Site Roadway Improvement ~ccount" and shall only be expended for
construction of the improvements described in Exhibit "G".

I F. DIRECT CASH ADVANCES FOR OFF-SITE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS -
I 1. Generally. In the event that development on the Property necessitates
a designated off-site improvement before revenues are available either from the
I Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee, or from contributions by other landowners in
accordance with the Code, ANNEXOR will make direct cash advances against future
I revenues of the difference between the estimated total cost and available
I revenues as provided herein.
2. Limited Construction. To the extent that ANNEXOR is required to make
I direct cash advances for a designated off-site roadway improvement due to a

lack of fee revenues or revenues from other developments, these improvements
will be phased and shall be limited to essential roadway and related drainage
facilities necessary to meet traffic flows attributable to the Property. The
landscaping, sidewalks, and other improvements shall not be ANNEXOR'S
responsibility.
3. Limited Obligation. ANNEXOR'S obligation to make direct cash advances
for any of the designated off-site roadway improvements shall be limited to
$40.7 million, representing the total anticipated contributions from other
properties as described in Exhibit "G". ANNEXOR shall not have the obligation
to make cash advances for revenues that are anticipated from the State, El Paso
County, the United States Government, or for construction costs that are the
responsibility of the CITY pursuant to Exhibit "G".
4. Recovery of Direct Advances. If ANNEXOR is required to make direct
advances for any of the designated off-site roadway improvements due to the
lack of anticipated revenues from the Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee or from
other developments, ANNEXOR shall be entitled to recover such direct advances
from other owners through recovery agreements established pursuant to the Code,
or from Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee revenues above the amounts needed to
complete any reaaining improvements shown in Exhibit "G". CITY shall cooperate
in the establishment and administration of any such recovery agreements.
5. Delegation of Obligations. ANNEXOR may delegate any obligation for
direct contributions of off-site roadway improvements to special districts or
similar entities formed on the Property, subject to any limitations set forth
in Article XVII of this Agreement, which districts shall have the right to
issue bonds to satisfy any such obligation. Accordingly, any such district
will be entitled to recovery from adjoining landowners and from fee revenues to
the same extent as ANNEXOR would be allowed recovery. CITY will cooperate to
allow such districts to collect or recover fee revenues, and recover payments
from adjoining landowners, and to pledge such future revenues as security for
repayment of debt incurred in making such off-site roadway improvements.
6. Street Improvements. Once ANNEXOR has fulfilled its street dedication
and improvement obligations described above, CITY shall not withhold
development approval as to that portion of the Property served by the street
dedication and improvements because of traffic constraints or the need for
additional roadway improvements.
G. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND STREET LIGHTS - ANNEXOR shall pay for
installation of traffic and street signs and traffic control devices, permanent
barriers, and street lights, together with all associated conduit for all
streets within or contiguous to the Property as determined necessary by the
Director of Public Works in accordance with uniformly applied criteria. Street
lights will be required on minor streets only after homes have been completed
along at least fifty (50%) percent of the street frontage as determined by the
Director of Public Works. Streef lights will be required on collector and
larger streets or at intersections for public safety as determined necessary by
the Director of Public Works. Traffic signals will be required at a specific
intersection, only after the intersection meets at least one of the warrants as
outlined in the manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices in use at the time or
other nationally accepted standards and only if the CITY is utilizing those
standards for installation of traffic signals throughout the CITY. Once the
intersection meets the criteria, CITY will notify ANNEXOR in writing and
ANNEXOR will install the traffic signal within one hundred twenty (120) days.
ANNEXOR will be responsible for all components of the signal, except the CITY
will supply the controller equipment and cabinet to be reimbursed by ANNEXOR.

H. EXISTING STREETS - ANNEXOR shall be responsible for the maintenance of
all roadways on and through the Property in accordance with Public Works
standard maintenance categories through December 31, 1992, or as may be
extended by the parties, as set forth in Exhibit "H", the Contract for Street
Maintenance. The computation of ANNEXOR'S resurfacing obligation during the
contracting period shall be solely on the existing streets as listed in Exhibit
"H" . City Administration will cooperate with ANNEXOR'S request to vacate
Tamlin Road.
IV
STORM DRAINAGE
A. ANNEXOR shall at its sole expense be responsible for preparation and
submittal of a drainage basin planning study for the Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage
Basin. This drainage basin planning study must be approved by the City Council
prior to any platting. It is understood this drainage basin planning study may
be amended and ANNEXOR will comply with such amendments.
B. ANNEXOR shall prepare and submit a restudy of the Sand Creek Drainage
Basin, which restudy is subject to approval by the Director of Public Works.
When submitted and approved, the restudy shall govern ANNEXOR'S development
within the Sand Creek Basin. ANNEXOR shall dedicate rights-of-way owned by
ANNEXOR and shall design and construct storm drainage facilities within the
Property in conformance with the regulations and ordinances of the CITY.
ANNEXOR shall participate in the CITY Drainage Basin Program for the portion of
the Property in the Sand Creek Drainage Basin, including payment of the per
acre drainage basin fees for the basin-wide facilities established by the
CITY'S Master Drainage Plan and ordinance for Sand Creek as updated by
ANNEXOR'S s t u d y and s h a l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r conveying d r a i n a g e flows from t h e
P r o p e r t y t o s a f e o u t f l o w p o i n t s a s determined by t h e C i t y Engineer.
ANNEXOR may e s t a b l i s h an o v e r a l l f l o o d c o n t r o l d i s t r i c t t o i n c l u d e t h e
P r o p e r t y w i t h i n e i t h e r o r b o t h t h e Sand Creek Drainage Basin and Jimmy Camp
Creek Drainage Basin, o r any o t h e r b a s i n s w i t h i n t h e P r o p e r t y , provided t h a t
such d i s t r i c t w i l l n o t adversely affect other property located within the
basins. I n a c c o r d w i t h t h e d r a i n a g e o r d i n a n c e s of t h e CITY, i f ANNEXOR d e s i r e s
t o complete t h e development of any p o r t i o n of t h e P r o p e r t y p r i o r t o completion
of t h e storm d r a i n a g e improvements t o major drainageways, ANNEXOR may make
t h o s e improvements a t i t s expense. CITY may a t i t s o p t i o n , a g r e e t o reimburse
ANNEXOR a t a f u t u r e d a t e from t h e Sand Creek Drainage Basin Fund f o r ANNEXOR'S
c o s t f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of s a i d improvements. The manner i n which CITY may repay
such c o s t s from t h e Sand Creek Drainage Basin Fund s h a l l be a g r e e d upon a t t h e
time such c o s t s a r e t o be i n c u r r e d by ANNEXOR. If C I T Y does n o t e l e c t t o
reimburse ANNEXOR f o r s u c h improvements, ANNEXOR s h a l l be e n t i t l e d t o a c r e d i t
on a per-acre b a s i s a g a i n s t t h e per-acre d r a i n a g e b a s i n f e e s f o r basin-wide
facilities.
C. A s t o t h e Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin ANNEXOR o r a d e s i g n a t e d
district shall dedicate rights-of-way owned by ANNEXOR and shall design,
construct and maintain storm drainage facilities within the Property in
conformance w i t h t h e Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Study s u b m i t t e d by ANNEXOR
and approved by CITY and f i n a l s u b d i v i s i o n p l a t s a s approved by t h e CITY.
ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o comply w i t h t h e r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s a s adopted f o r t h e
Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin, i n c l u d i n g conveyance of s u r f a c e water r u n o f f
t o s a f e o u t f l o w p o i n t s a s determined by t h e C i t y Engineer. CITY w i l l not
impose any d r a i n a g e b a s i n f e e s f o r p o r t i o n s of t h e P r o p e r t y l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e
Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin without the consent of ANNEXOR; provided
however, that upon request of ANNEXOR, CITY may impose a storm drainage utility
fee and remit said fee to ANNEXOR'S designated District pursuant to an
intergovernmental agreement between such District and CITY.
D. ANNEXOR shall be responsible for design and construction of all under
drain systems for control of groundwater. All proposed systems shall be
submitted to the Wastewater Division and the City Engineer for review and
approval prior to construction. Groundwater drainage systems ate not eligible
for reimbursement from any drainage basin funds.
E. ANNEXOR shall be responsible for maintenance of all drainage
facilities for five (5) years from the date of this Agreement. CITY shall not
be responsible for maintenance of drainage facilities in the Jimmy Camp Creek
basin during the term of the Agreement; provided however that the CITY Park and
Recreation Department may, at its discretion, assume responsibility for
maintenance of natural greenways or ponds.
v
AIRPORT
A. ANNEXOR agrees to provide an avigation easement to apply to all the

I Property which lies under the Part 77 approach surfaces as defined by the
I Federal Aviation Administration prior to platting any property impacted by
aircraft traffic as determined by the Director of Aviation. CITY and ANNEXOR
I have agreed upon the form and content of the avigation easement and such is
attached hereto as Exhibit "I", which will supersede any prior avigation
I easements on the Property.
B.
I ANNEXOR acknowledges that CITY is currently in the process of planning
a new terminal for the Airport, the location of which is depicted on the CITY'S
I Airport Master Plan. If the new terminal is constructed the CITY will
construct a street from the new terminal directly south to existing Drennan
Road. CITY also plans to construct a new runway for the Airport, as depicted
on the CITY'S Airport Master Plan, that will necessitate the closure of
existing Drennan Road from the intersection of the new terminal road east to
Marksheffel Road. When this portion of Drennan Road is closed to accommodate
the new runway, the CITY will extend the access street to the new terminal
directly south to the southern edge of the Airport property if the new terminal
is constructed. This entrance street, initially extending to existing Drennan
Road and ultimately extending to the southern edge of the Airport property,
will have a minimum width of two lanes, and shall have the capability of being
expanded. The cost of constructing and maintaining this entrance street shall
be borne by the Colorado Springs Municipal Airport Enterprise Fund.
C. The parties hereby understand and agree that no use of the Operational
Areas of the Airport, as defined in Section 19-4-201 of the Code of the City of
Colorado Springs 1980, as amended, directly from :he Property to such
Operational Areas (commonly kno& as "through the fence operations") , is
granted by virtue of this Agreement, nor should any inference be drawn that
such use will be granted in the future. The CITY will consider such requests
for access and use by the ANNEXOR, or any other party, at any time on a
case-by-case basis and the decision on such a request shall be within sole
discretion of the City Council and subject to the requirements of the Federal
Aviation Administration.
vI
PUBLIC LAND DEDICATION GENERALLY
ANNEXOR agrees to dedicate land owned by ANNEXOR for municipal and utility
purposes as required by this Agreement or the Code at the time such lands are
needed f o r t h e i n t e n d e d p u b l i c purpose. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t h a t a l l l a n d d e d i c a t e d
o r deeded t o C I T Y f o r m u n i c i p a l o r u t i l i t y purposes i n c l u d i n g park and s c h o o l
s i t e s s h a l l be f r e e and c l e a r of l i e n s and encumbrances t h a t may a d v e r s e l y
a f f e c t CITY'S use of t h e l a n d . ANNEXOR s h a l l , a t i t s c o s t , extend a l l s i t e and
p u b l i c improvements to t h e boundary of any p r o p e r t y dedicated to the CITY
including but not limited to, water, wastewater, gas, electric, and shall
c o n s t r u c t a d j a c e n t t o t h e boundary of d e d i c a t e d p u b l i c p r o p e r t y , c u r b , g u t t e r ,
and s t r e e t s where required. ANNEXOR s h a l l n o t be responsible f o r s i t e o r

iL
p u b l i c improvements, e x c e p t a s provided h e r e i n , w i t h i n t h e boundaries of any

' -=*
such d e d i c a t e d p u b l i c property. Except a s provided w i t h i n t h i s Agreement,
ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o p l a t and, a t t h e time of p l a t t i n g t o pay a l l f e e s , i n c l u d i n g -

d r a i n a g e , a s s o c i a t e d w i t h development of t h e l a n d s d e d i c a t e d o r deeded t o C I T Y ,
b u t o n l y t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t such p l a t t i n g and payments f o r p u b l i c l y d e d i c a t e d
land a r e t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of ANNEXOR under t h e Code a t t h e time such payments
a r e t o be made.
VI I
PARKS, SCHOOLS AND TRANSIT
A. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o d e d i c a t e l a n d f o r s c h o o l and p a r k purposes o r pay
cash in lieu thereof at the time of platting in accord with' t h e CITY
S u b d i v i s i o n Code. The l a n d t o be d e d i c a t e d i s g e n e r a l l y shown on t h e Master
P l a n , and t h e e x a c t l o c a t i o n w i l l be i d e n t i f i e d when t h e a d j o i n i n g l a n d s a r e
platted. School and p a r k s i t e s s h a l l be d e d i c a t e d when s u c h s i t e s a r e r e a d y t o
be used f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of s c h o o l o r p a r k f a c i l i t i e s .
B. Jimmy Camp Creek Regional P a r k - Because of t h e s i z e of ANNEXOR'S
a n n e x a t i o n and development ANNEXOR v o l u n t a r i l y agrees to g i v e t o CITY the
r
approximately 693 g r o s s a c r e s i t e known a s t h e Jimmy Camp Creek Regional Park
w i t h i n f i v e ( 5 ) y e a r s of t h e d a t e of t h i s Agreement, o r upon f i n a l a p p r o v a l by
I t h e C i t y Council of t h e Park Master P l a n , whichever i s sooner. CITY agrees
t h a t i t w i l l p r e p a r e a Park Master P l a n w i t h i n f i v e y e a r s of a n n e x a t i o n , which

I Park Master P l a n s h a l l be s u b j e c t t o ANNEXOR'S a p p r o v a l . CITY acknowledges
i t h a t t h i s d o n a t i o n i s n o t r e q u i r e d by C i t y Code. CITY f u r t h e r acknowledges
t h a t planned u s e s i n t h e park s h a l l be p r i m a r i l y of a p a s s i v e n a t u r e s o a s n o t
I t o d i s t u r b n a t u r a l s i t e f e a t u r e s u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e provided f o r i n t h e approved
P a r k Master P l a n . CITY s h a l l be allowed to c o n s t r u c t underground u t i l i t y

i
I
f a c i l i t i e s through t h e park. ANNEXOR s h a l l n o t be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r compliance
i w i t h A r t i c l e V I of t h i s Agreement a s t o f e e s f o r t h e Jimmy Camp Creek Regional
Park. The Jimmy Camp Creek Regional Park, because i t s h a l l be p r i m a r i l y of a
passive nature, s h a l l not be used i n computation of any drainage fee as
provided f o r i n A r t i c l e I V of t h i s Agreement.
C. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o p r o v i d e by deed o r easement s u f f i c i e n t right-of-way,
t o t h e e x t e n t owned by ANNEXOR, n o t t o exceed t h i r t y f e e t (30') i n w i d t h f o r a
multi-use t r a i l i n t h e Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin and f o r t h e Rock I s l a n d
loop a s shown i n t h e Master Plan.
D. ANNEXOR s h a l l p r o v i d e w i t h o u t c o s t t o t h e CITY t h e l a n d shown on t h e
Master P l a n a s P a r c e l No. 267.08 f o r a park and r i d e s i t e . ANNEXOR w i l l
participate i n t h e p r o v i s i o n of transit s e r v i c e s a s a p p l i e d throughout the
cIm.
VIII
ENVIRONMENTAL
A. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o dedicate t o CITY l a n d for two (2) a i r quality
m o n i t o r i n g s t a t i o n s a t s i t e s of s u f f i c i e n t s i z e , n o t t o each exceed .25 a c r e s ,

a s may be m u t u a l l y agreed upon between t h e D i r e c t o r of U t i l i t i e s and ANNEXOR
with dedicated access roads.
B. As a c o n d i t i o n of o b t a i n i n g development plan approval o r building
p e r m i t s f o r l a n d a d j a c e n t t o major roadways n o i s e impact assessments may be
r e q u i r e d t o be submitted by ANNEXOR t o Support S e r v i c e s Department i n accord
w i t h zoning c o n d i t i o n s a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e P r o p e r t y o r a s uniformly r e q u i r e d by
the Code. If the noise impact assessment determines a need for noise
attenuation, ANNEXOR s h a l l be responsible for providing noise attenuation
features, subject to approval of Director of Support Services, a s may be
r e q u i r e d by t h e zoning of t h e P r o p e r t y o r t h e Code.
IX
SUPPORT SERVICES, FIRE, POLICE, AND CATV
A. CITY radio communication to ANNEXOR'S Property requires the
c o n s t r u c t i o n of a n e a s t e r n r a d i o r e p e a t e r s t a t i o n f o r p o l i c e , f i r e , u t i l i t i e s
and o t h e r communication networks r e l a t e d t o t h e p r o v i s i o n of e s s e n t i a l CITY
services. ANNEXOR s h a l l p r o v i d e t h e CITY w i t h a sum of money n o t t o exceed
$210,000.00 w i t h i n n i n e t y (90) days a f t e r demand by t h e CITY t o be a p p r o p r i a t e d
by t h e CITY f o r t h e purpose of a c q u i r i n g p r o p e r t y , e q u i p p i n g , and c o n s t r u c t i n g
the CITY'S eastern radio repeater station. The CITY s h a l l n o t a l l o w any
commercial u s e r s t o u s e t h e r e p e a t e r s t a t i o n s i t e . Because t h e s i t e i s on
I
o t h e r t h a n ANNEXOR'S P r o p e r t y , t h e CITY a g r e e s t o r e c o v e r from o t h e r unannexed
p r o p e r t y owners who b e n e f i t from t h e s e r v i c e a r e a of t h i s r e p e a t e r s t a t i o n upon

I
1 a n n e x a t i o n of t h o s e p r o p e r t i e s a p r o r a t a c o s t of t h e r e p e a t e r s t a t i o n a s s i g n e d
I t o t h o s e annexing p r o p e r t i e s on an a c r e f o r a c r e b a s i s a t time of a n n e x a t i o n
and r e m i t such t o ANNEXOR. The s i t e d e d i c a t i o n and c o n s t r u c t i o n s h a l l be a s
I determined by t h e D i r e c t o r of Support S e r v i c e s .
r y P- --
.' BUOK ~ d 5 PAGE
'
B. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o d e d i c a t e t h e l a n d shown g e n e r a l l y on t h e Master Plan
a s P a r c e l Nos. 290.02 ( a 22 a c r e s i t e ) , and 329.011329.04 (one s i t e c o n s i s t i n g
of 26 acres which will include an electric service site) for satellite
municipal s e r v i c e centers.
C. FIRE -
1. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o p r o v i d e t h e s i t e s a s shown on t h e Master P l a n
a s P a r c e l Nos. 293.09, 307.04, 342.09, 331.11, and 270.14 f o r f i v e (5) s t a t i o n s
and such o t h e r u s e s a s determined by t h e CITY. A dormitory a t t h e f i r e s t a t i o n
l o c a t e d on P a r c e l No. 342.09 (Southern Area) w i l l be c o n s t r u c t e d and equipped and
w i l l be t u r n e d over a s b u i l t and equipped t o t h e CITY on J a n u a r y 2, 1992 o r a t
such o t h e r d a t e a s may be m u t u a l l y a g r e e d upon. I n a d d i t i o n a second f i r e
s t a t i o n s h a l l be c o n s t r u c t e d and equipped i n 1992 o r a t such o t h e r d a t e a s i s
mutually agreed upon on P a r c e l No. 307.04. A t h i r d f i r e s t a t i o n i s t o be
c o n s t r u c t e d and equipped i n t h e y e a r 2002 o r a t such o t h e r d a t e a s i s m u t u a l l y
agreed upon. The l o c a t i o n of t h e t h i r d f i r e s t a t i o n w i l l be P a r c e l No. 293.09.

I
All construction and equipment requirements shall meet Fire Department
s p e c i f i c a t i o n s and s t a n d a r d s . Financing of c o n s t r u c t i o n and e q u i p p i n g of t h e
f i r e s t a t i o n s s h a l l be a s s e t o u t i q h r t i c l e X I .
2. Based on p r o j e c t i o n s of growth and geographic d i s p e r s i o n the
f i r s t t h r e e (3) f i r e s t a t i o n s s h o u l d be adequate t o s e r v e t h e P r o p e r t y u n t i l
I
2010 o r beyond. If, however, t h e development of t h e a r e a exceeds c u r r e n t
projections, the additional (2) f i r e s t a t i o n s may need t o be on-line sooner.

I
The F i r e Department's p l a n n i n g t h r e s h o l d f o r b r i n g i n g s t a t i o n s o n - l i n e i s 200

I
1 alarms p e r y e a r ( c a l l s f o r service) i n t h e a r e a t o be s e r v e d from a f i r e
I station location. F i n a n c i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n of such a d d i t i o n a l f i r e s t a t i o n s
s h a l l be a s s e t o u t i n A r t i c l e X I .
3. Colorado C e n t r e M e t r o p o l i t a n D i s t r i c t s h a l l p r o v i d e o r c o n t r a c t
with Security Fire Department, or other established Fire Authority, for
s t a f f i n g of t h e f i r e s t a t i o n i n t h e Southern Area through January 2, 1992.
D. POLICE -
1. The f o l l o w i n g s i t e s s h a l l be d e d i c a t e d f o r p o l i c e s u b s t a t i o n s :
P a r c e l Nos. 274.031274.06 (one s i t e ) , 310.10, 347.08 and 342.09 (an 8 a c r e s i t e
t h a t may a l s o c o n t a i n a f i r e s t a t i o n ) .
2. Police Service. For p o l i c e s e r v i c e through t h e y e a r 1992, t h e E l
Paso County Sheriff's Department shall provide patrol services, and the
2
Colorado S p r i n g s P o l i c e Department s h a l l p r o v i d e i n v e s t i g a t i v e and r e p o r t i n g
s e r v i c e s a s s h a l l be e s t a b l i s h e d by an i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l agreement between
E l Paso County and t h e CITY a t t a c h e d a s E x h i b i t "J". ANNEXOR s h a l l b e a r t h e
f u l l c o s t of t h e s e r v i c e s provided by t h e E l Paso County S h e r i f f ' s Department,
and s h a l l remit q u a r t e r l y payments for such s e r v i c e s to the CITY by the
f i f t e e n t h day of t h e month p r e c e d i n g t h e s t a r t of t h e new q u a r t e r . CITY w i l l
p r o v i d e i n v e s t i g a t i v e s e r v i c e f o r "crimes and t r a f f i c a c c i d e n t s , and t h e f u l l
time e q u i v a l e n t ,FTE) c o s t t h e r e o f w i l l be i n c l u d e d i n t h e annual f i s c a l impact
analysis set forth in Article X I below. After 1992, CITY will assume
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r providing p o l i c e s e r v i c e s necessary t o s e r v e the Property
and t h e c o s t of p o l i c e s e r v i c e s t o be provided e x c l u s i v e l y on t h e P r o p e r t y w i l l
be i n c l u d e d i n t h e f i s c a l impact a n a l y s i s d e s c r i b e d i n A r t i c l e X I below.
E. CATV - Except t o t h e e x t e n t r e q u i r e d by t h e Code, o r by s t a t e o r
f e d e r a l law, o r a s may be r e q u i r e d f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n of e s s e n t i a l C I T Y s u p p o r t
services, such a s p o l i c e , fire, and u t i l i t y services, the CITY s h a l l n o t
d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y engage i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n , i n s t a l l a t i o n , o p e r a t i o n , o r
maintenance of communication f a c i l i t i e s on t h e P r o p e r t y . ANNEXOR acknowledges
that before operating a cable television system f o r which a franchise is

required as set forth in Article XI1 of the City Charter and as set forth in
Community Telecommunications, Inc. v. The Heather Corporation, 677 P.2d 330
(Colo. 1984), ANNEXOR will apply for and obtain such a franchise from the CITY,
unless an agreement with any CITY franchisee or licensee is obtained.
Without limiting the foregoing, ANNEXOR shall have a non-exclusive
right to use public rights-of-way and easements dedicated for compatible use in
accordance with 47 U.S.C. 541 and utility easements within the Property
boundary for ANNEXOR'S telecommunication facilities and shall retain private
ownership of any such facilities on or under publicly dedicated land. Unless
prohibited by law, ANNEXOR may adopt protective covenants that restrict the use
of communications facilities on the Property provided that no restrictive
covenant shall prohibit or limit the use of public, rights-of-way, easements
dedicated for compatible uses in accordance with 47 U.S.C. 541, or utility
easements by a utility, cable television operator or provider of communications
facilities or provider of communications services on public property. Use of
public rights-of-way and easements conveyed to CITY shall be subject to all
applicable CITY ordinances or regulations. ANNEXOR contemplates applying for
zoning of certain "teleport" sites or other major telecommunication facilities
on the Property, and CITY agrees to cooperate in the establishment of such
zoning.
As used above, "communications facilities" include without limita-
tion, all wires, lines, switches, transmitters, receivers, antennae, satellite
reception and transmission equipment, hardware, electronics and all other
equipment and facilities used in the provision of communications services as

*
defined in the next sentence. As used above, "communications services" means
and includes all services involving the conducting, transmission or transfer of
information in any form (for example, without limitation, video, voice and
computer and o t h e r d a t a ) by e l e c t r i c a l , e l e c t r o n i c , o r o p t i c a l means between
I separate points; and "communications services" include, without limitation:
telephone (including long distance telephone), television, radio, cable

I television, cable radio, cellular radio and telephone, fiber optic trans-
I mission, microwave t r a n s m i s s i o n , d a t a transmission, e l e c t r i c a l or electronic
s e c u r i t y , v i d e o t e x t , s a t e l l i t e t e l e p o r t s and computer networking.
STREET DIVISION
ANNEXOR w i l l d e d i c a t e P a r c e l Nos. 271.12, 338.12, and 338.08 for the
dumping/disposal of CITY s t r e e t sweeping waste a s w e l l a s o t h e r CITY c o l l e c t e d
non-putrescible r u b b l e and t r a s h . D i s p o s a l s h a l l be i n accordance w i t h C I T Y
Environmental S e r v i c e D i v i s i o n procedures. The use of such s i t e s s h a l l be
primarily for non-putrescible rubble and trash generated on t h e Property.
ANNEXOR s h a l l n o t have any c o n t i n u i n g o b l i g a t i o n t o make a d d i t i o n a l sites
a v a i l a b l e t o C I T Y when t h e s e s i t e s a r e no l o n g e r u s a b l e . CITY s h a l l n o t permit
t h e dumping of any t o x i c o r hazardous materials on such s i t e s , and s h a l l
m a i n t a i n and p r o p e r l y s c r e e n t h e s i t e s t o minimize a d v e r s e v i s u a l impacts and
noxious o d o r s . CITY a g r e e s t h a t such s i t e s s h a l l be p r o p e r l y r e c l a i m e d a s
determined by t h e CITY'S Environmental S e r v i c e s D i v i s i o n . These s i t e s when
reclaimed w i l l be o f f e r e d t o ANNEXOR a t no c o s t t o ANNEXOR. ANNEXOR, w i t h
CITY'S c o n s e n t , s h a l l have d i s c r e t i o n t o purchase s i m i l a r s i t e s w i t h i n t h r e e
(3) m i l e s of t h e P r o p e r t y , d e d i c a t e and o b t a i n p e r m i t s f o r such d i s p o s a l s i t e s
t o C I T Y f o r purposes of t h i s A r t i c l e i n l i e u of t h e d e d i c a t i o n requirement f o r
on-site disposal locations.

DEVELOPMENT SEQUENCING AND EXTENSION OF URBAN SERVICES
A. Development w i l l be planned and conducted i n an o r d e r l y f a s h i o n and
may occur anywhere on t h e P r o p e r t y provided t h a t e s s e n t i a l municipal f a c i l i t i e s
a r e i n p l a c e and e s s e n t i a l m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e i n accordance w i t h
t h e terms of t h i s Agreement o r t h e Code.

ri
B. Although t h e P r o p e r t y i s c o n t i g u o u s t o t h e p r e s e n t e a s t e r n boundary of m
t h e C i t y of Colorado S p r i n g s , ANNEXOR acknowledges t h a t t h e P r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d
l!IlIB
beyond t h e a r e a of e x i s t i n g CITY s e r v i c e s . I n o r d e r t o o f f s e t any c o s t of

rn
br
e x t e n d i n g CITY s e r v i c e s t o t h e P r o p e r t y i n e x c e s s of C I T Y revenues a t t r i b u t a b l e
to the Property, including police, fire, recreation, p u b l i c works, support
s e r v i c e s , and o t h e r g e n e r a l CITY s e r v i c e s (and o n - s i t e capital costs related
thereto), ANNEXOR agrees to the following: first, ANNEXOR agrees t o make
c e r t a i n c a p i t a l improvements a s provided i n A r t i c l e XI(C); second, a n Urban
S e r v i c e Extension Fee a s provided i n A r t i c l e XI(D), i s hereby e s t a b l i s h e d t o
h e l p o f f s e t such c o s t s ; and t h i r d , ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o make c a s h payments t o
o f f s e t any remaining d e f i c i t s a s provided i n A r t i c l e XI(F).
C. ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o c o n s t r u c t a l l n e c e s s a r y c a p i t a l improvements t o t h e
breakeven y e a r a s d e f i n e d i n A r t i c l e XI(D) w i t h o u t any subsequent r e c o v e r y of
t h e c o s t t h e r e o f , and i n some c a s e s e q u i p such c a p i t a l improvements a s p r o v i d e d
f o r i n A r t i c l e XI(H). A f t e r t h e breakeven y e a r a s d e f i n e d below, but p r i o r t o
t h e t e r m i n a t i o n of ANNEXOR'S o b l i g a t i o n t o make a n n u a l payments a s provided i n
A r t i c l e XI(F), ANNEXOR s h a l l c o n s t r u c t n e c e s s a r y c a p i t a l improvements t o reduce
o r e l i m i n a t e t h e e s t i m a t e d a n n u a l d e f i c i t , which such c o s t s s h a l l be s u b j e c t t o
recovery from future fee revenues as provided in Article XI(F). The
a p p r o p r i a t e CITY Department Head w i l l determine t h e t i m i n g and s i z i n g of such
c a p i t a l improvements. ANNEXOR may d e l e g a t e its obligation t o finance such
c a p i t a l improvements t o p r o p e r l y a u t h o r i z e d s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s .
26 8/9/88 a 17JC26
D. The Urban Service Extension Fee shall be $.I1 for each square foot of
floor area as defined in the Code for buildings on the Property, but not to
include parking garages associated with commercial, office, or industrial
buildings. The Urban Service Extension Fee shall apply to all structures or
new construction for which a building permit is issued, except for govern-
mental, utility, municipal or quasi-municipal structures, and shall be due and
payable when the building permit issues.
For the purpose of this Article, the "breakeven year" will refer to the
year that the General Fund revenues to be generated by development of the
Property after December 31, 1992 will be equal to or exceed the cost of
providing services to the Property in accordance with Articles XI(E) and XI(F).
The Urban Service Extension Fee will continue until ANNEXOR'S obligation to
make annual payments terminates and ANNEXOR has recovered all such payments, as
provided in Article XI(F).
All Urban Service Extension fees collected by CITY shall be deposited in a
separate account entitled "Banning Lewis Ranch Urban Service Extension Fee" and
shall be transferred to the CITY General Fund to offset excessive costs only to
the extent that the fiscal analysis described below identifies CITY General
Fund expenditures in excess of General Fund revenues until ANNEXOR'S obligation
to make annual payments as provided in Article XI(F) terminates. After
ANNEXOR'S obligation to make annual payments terminates, all Urban Service
Extension Fee revenues shall be transferred to ANNEXOR until such time as
ANNEXOR has recovered all cash payments made as provided in Article XI(F)
below. In the event that there are Urban Service Extension Fees in the account
after ANNEXOR has recovered any annual cash payments made, such remaining fee
revenues shall be transferred to the CITY General Fund.

E. Prior to the beginning of each year a fiscal analysis estimating CITY
General Fund and fee revenues and expenditures attributable to the Property
will be conducted by the CITY. ANNEXOR will have the opportunity to review and
comment on the municipal service levels, revenue estimates, development
absorption assumptions, etc. used by the CITY in the analysis. The analysis
will include a retrospective analysis of revenues and expenditures for the
previous year as well as a prospective analysis of the upcoming fiscal year.
If ANNEXOR disagrees with the results of the fiscal analysis, it can request
that an independent audit and review of the analysis be conducted. Such an
audit will be conducted by a firm mutually acceptable to CITY and ANNEXOR and
will be paid for from funds available in the Urban Service Extension Fee
Account or by ANNEXOR if there are insufficient funds in the Urban Senrice
Extension Fee account. Such a request for an independent audit must be
addressed to the City Manager within 20 working days of ANNEXOR'S receipt of
the analysis. The findings of the independent auditor will be subject to City
n
Council review and approval.
F. If the combination of capital improvements to be made by the ANNEXOR,
any funds available in the Urban Service Extension Fee account, and General
Fund revenue attributable to the Property do not equal or exceed the CITY
expenditures identified in the fiscal analysis, ANNEXOR will 'make cash
payments, quarterly during the year to eliminate the deficit. This obligation
of ANNEXOR to eliminate annual deficits shall continue for a period of each
three (3) consecutive calendar years of General Fund revenues from the Property
exceeding General Fund costs of services to the Property after 1992 (which may
include the breakeven year), or the day and month of this Agreement in the year
I
2010, whichever occurs first. ANNEXOR shall receive a credit toward any annual
I deficit after the breakeven year for any annual surplus. ANNEXOR agrees that
it shall not be entitled to reimbursement from CITY'S General Fund but such
sums shall be credited to ANNEXOR'S obligation as set forth above. To the
extent ANNEXOR has made payments to eliminate annual deficits ANNEXOR shall
recover such payments exclusively from the Urban Service Extension Fee account after
its obligation to make annual payments terminates.
G. To guarantee to CITY that ANNEXOR will make necessary cash payments to
mitigate revenue shortfalls identified in the CITY fiscal analysis, ANNEXOR
agrees to place all proceeds of the sale to the CITY Utilities Department of
the electrical transmission corridors [pursuant to Article XVI(G) below]
identified in the Master Plan into an escrow account to be held in trust by a
financial institution under terms and conditions mutually acceptable to ANNEXOR
and CITY. This escrow account shall be utilized and: drawn upon only if and to
the extent that ANNEXOR is in default by failing to make annual payments as
required in Article XI(F) above. Unless there is a default, ANNEXOR shall be
entitled to all principal, interest or other income earned remaining in the
account when the trust is dissolved. The trust will be dissolved when ANNEXOR
has satisfied its obligation to make annual payments in accordance with
Article XI(F) above. CITY and ANNEXOR will jointly establish this account.
The account need only have such amount to reasonably secure the elimination of
the annual deficits as described in this Article. Any excess may be drawn down
by ANNEXOR upon written approval of CITY when no longer needed.
H. ANNEXOR agrees that near-term development will be concentrated in
three development nodes. The nodes will be established in accordance with the
CITY Fire Chief's standards for fire service as development occurs as uniformly
I applied throughout the CITY. If development occurs outside of these three
nodes requiring additional fire stations and fire service prior to the
I breakeven year, ANNEXOR agrees to bear up to the breakeven year the total cost
of constructing, staffing, and o p e r a t i n g those s t a t i o n s with the r i g h t to
delegate this obligation to a properly authorized special district. If
development o c c u r s o u t s i d e of t h e t h r e e nodes p r i o r t o t h e breakeven y e a r ,
r e s u l t i n g i n a n i n c r e a s e i n t h e number of m i l e s of r o a d s t o be maintained by
t h e CITY, ANNEXOR a g r e e s t o b e a r t h e t o t a l c o s t of t h e maintenance of such
a d d i t i o n a l roads.
I. For purposes of administration of this Article Aries Properties
Indorporated will administer the provisions hereof on behalf of ANNEXOR,
i n c l u d i n g e s t a b l i s h m e n t of t h e t r u s t account a s s e t f o r t h i n A r t i c l e XI(G), and
s h a l l be s o l e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r any a n n u a l c a s h payments t o e l i m i n a t e a n n u a l
d e f i c i t s a s may be r e q u i r e d p u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e XI(F), and s h a l l be s o l e l y
e n t i t l e d t o r e c o v e r any such a n n u a l c a s h payments made, u n l e s s such o b l i g a t i o n
and r i g h t of r e c o v e r y i s s p e c i f i c a l l y d e l e g a t e d t o a n o t h e r p e r s o n , e n t i t y , o r
district.
UTILITIES GENERALLY
A. L i m i t a t i o n of A p p l i c a b i l i t y - The U t i l i t i e s code, t a r i f f s , r e g u l a t i o n s
and p o l i c i e s a s they e x i s t o r a r e h e r e i n a f t e r amended s h a l l a p p l y , and e x c e p t
a s e x p r e s s l y provided h e r e i n , t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s Agreement s e t f o r t h t h e
r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e CITY Department of U t i l i t i e s i n e f f e c t a t t h e time of t h e
a n n e x a t i o n of t h e Property. These p r o v i s i o n s s h a l l n o t be c o n s t r u e d as a
l i m i t a t i o n upon t h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e CITY t o adopt d i f f e r e n t o r d i n a n c e s , r u l e s ,
regulations, resolutions, policies, t a r i f f s , o r codes which change any of t h e

1
I
provisions s e t f o r t h i n t h i s Agreement s o long a s t h e s e a p p l y t o t h e CITY I
i!
generally.
B. Utility Recovery Agreements - Utility Recovery Agreements entered into
1 by the CITY for recovery of monies expended by the ANNEXOR for oversized,
both on and off site, utility facilities to be recovered from subsequent

I
I
developers will be as provided for in the Code, Electric and Gas Tariffs, or as
I may be approved by the CITY.
C. Interim Utility Service - If interim utility service is required
I ANNEXOR shall dedicate such lands as are necessary to the CITY and pay all the
cost of the facilities except as otherwise expressly provided. Such land shall
I revert to the ANNEXOR when the interim facilities are no longer needed,
I provided
facilities.
that such reversion shall not adversely affect CITY permanent
1 D. Southern Area - It is understood and agreed as to the Southern Area
that no utility service will be provided by the CITY until debt restructuring
I is successfully completed as set forth in Article XVIII.
WATER
A. The CITY and/or ANNEXOR will extend water service facilities to the
I Property in accordance with the CITY'S ordinances, regulations and policies in
effect at the time of specific water requests. Specific water requests are
I subject to the necessary improvements and facilities being constructed and
I available for use. Once the Property is annexed to the CITY the CITY will
serve the Property with water so long as such water is available and facilities
1. are in place to deliver the water. Allocation of supply is on the basis of
first-come, first served throughout the CITY.

I B. ANNEXOR shall dedicate to the CITY all necessary rights-of-way, owned
r by ANNEXOR for installation of mains and associated facilities within the

~ 3 es5-
k
bc; f. PAGE
Property, which rights-of-way shall be free and clear of liens and
encumbrances that may adversely affect CITY'S use of the land.
C. All pump stations and suction storage are to be paid fully by ANNEXOR;
the distribution storage shall be paid by the CITY. Recovery agreements shall
be entered into between ANNEXOR and CITY to provide that developments which
receive benefit from the pump stations, suction storage and off-site
improvements will reimburse ANNEXOR on a pro rata basis.
D. ANNEXOR grants in perpetuity to the CITY the sole and exclusive right
to withdraw, appropriate and use any and all groundwater underlying ANNEXOR'S
Property and all surface water rights located on the Property. Water in the
Southern Area owned by ANNEXOR as of January 1, 1988 and water owned by
Colorado Centre Metropolitan District as of January 1, 1988 shall be excluded
from the provisions of this Article XI11 and covered by Article XVIII. ANNEXOR
irrevocably consents in perpetuity, on behalf of itself, and any and all
successors in title, pursuant to Section 37-90-137(4) of the Colorado Revised
Statutes, as now existing or later amended, to the withdrawal, appropriation
and use by the CITY of all such groundwater and agrees to execute any
additional or supplemental consents thereto that may be required to the CITY to
withdraw, appropriate or use said groundwater. Wells constructed by the CITY
outside the Property may withdraw groundwater under the Property without any
additional consent. The CITY shall allow ANNEXOR to use groundwater under its
Property for irrigation, cooling tower purposes and such similar non-potable
uses subject to specific agreements entered into by and between ANNEXOR and
CITY. If at any time the CITY deems it in the best interest of the CITY, the
CITY may use the water underlying the Property for municipal and utility
purposes by the CITY in the CITY.
E. ANNEXOR shall provide, without cost to the CITY, any and all necessary
property not to exceed ten thousand (10,000) square feet per well site for
32 8/9/88 a 17JC26
c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of w e l l s on t h e P r o p e r t y f o r which t h e r e a r e w e l l
applications pending or approved. Additionally, ANNEXOR shall provide
reasonable access t o s a i d w e l l s i t e s . The w e l l s i t e s s h a l l be w i t h i n 200 f e e t
of those sites as presently decreed unless the CITY and ANNEXOR agree
otherwise.
F. ANNEXOR s h a l l d e d i c a t e t o t h e CITY t h e l a n d g e n e r a l l y shown on t h e
Master P l a n a s P a r c e l Nos. 273.03, 293.07, 307.04, and 321.05 o r a t such o t h e r
l o c a t i o n s a s m u t u a l l y a g r e e d upon between t h e CITY'S Water D i v i s i o n Manager and
ANNEXOR, for four (4) water storage tank sites and such other uses as
determined by CITY.
G. The CITY s h a l l d e v e l o p , s u b j e c t t o agreement by ANNEXOR, a Master
Water S e r v i c e P l a n f o r p r o v i d i n g water s e r v i c e t o t h e P r o p e r t y which p l a n may
be amended from time to time by the parties. The p l a n s h a l l p r o v i d e for
a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s f o r development of water s e r v i c e f o r v a r i o u s s c e n a r i o s and
s h a l l be r e v i s e d and updated p e r i o d i c a l l y a s n e c e s s a r y . The CITY s h a l l be
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n g i n e e r i n g and & s i g n of a l l f a c i l i t i e s r e q u i r e d under t h e
Master Water S e r v i c e P l a n under each s c e n a r i o . ANNEXOR s h a l l g i v e t o t h e CITY
e i g h t e e n (18) months advance n o t i c e of i t s need f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s
n e c e s s a r y t o p r o v i d e water s e r v i c e t o a r e a s t o be developed i n o r d e r t h a t t h e
CITY has time t o budget, s e l e c t , and d e s i g n t h e s p e c i f i c f a c i l i t i e s which s h a l l
be provided and t o a c q u i r e n e c e s s a r y rights-of-way and t o c o n s t r u c t f a c i l i t i e s
prior to actual time that water service is required. The cost of such
f a c i l i t i e s s h a l l be p a i d by t h e CITY a n d / o r ANNEXOR a s provided by a p p l i c a b l e
CITY o r d i n a n c e s , r e g u l a t i o n s , and p o l i c i e s i n e f f e c t a t t h e time of t h e r e q u e s t
f o r water s e r v i c e . I f t h e CITY i s unable o r u n w i l l i n g t o t h e n pay i t s s h a r e of
these costs, and ANNEXOR is willing to accelerate the 18 month notice

requirement subject to engineering constraints, ANNEXOR may pay the CITY'S
share and shall be reimbursed for such share pursuant to a recovery agreement.
With respect to the proposed Banning-Lewis Parkway, it is understood and
agreed that parcels of land adjacent to the parkway shall generally not receive
water service directly from major distribution mains within the parkway
right-of-way; individual services shall generally be connected to secondary
mains within frontage or other secondary roads or in streets which intersect
the parkway. Exceptions to this planning principle may be allowed on a
specific basis by the Water Division Manager. Because installation of
distribution water mains in Banning-Lewis Parkway may not be necessary for some
time, payments pursuant to the CITY'S major main policy for distribution mains
eventually required in Banning-Lewis Parkway are to: be made as initial water
service is extended to properties adjacent to Banning-Lewis Parkway; the CITY
will then install the distribution water mains in Banning-Lewis Parkway, as
they are needed, at no additional cost to the ANNEXOR.
H. Except as provided in Article XVIII, if the Property is de-annexed,
1 the CITY will continue to serve the then existing customers at outside CITY
1
rates, but no connections for new customers will be made without prior City
1
i
c Council approval.
I. ANNEXOR consents to the inclusion of the Property in the Southeastern
4
Colorado Water Conservancy District on the terms and conditions set forth in
-
li the Decree of the District Court, Pueblo County, Colorado, in Case No. 40487.
J. Any provisions made for interim water service that is not a part of
the Master Water Service Plan prior to the construction of water facilities as
envisioned by the Master Water Service Plan, shall be at the sole expense of
E the ANNEXOR. Construction of interim service shall meet all standards of the
k.. Water Division.

XIV
WASTEWATER
A. General. CITY agrees to provide and extend wastewater service to and
within the Property in accordance with the CITY'S ordinances and regulations in
effect at the time of each specific wastewater request. Where

- - such service is
provided by the Lower Fountain Metropolitan Sewage Disposal District (hereafter
"LFMSDD") service shall be governed by the LFMSDD Service Agreement or-.g-=h

agreement as may be negotiated between the CITY and LFMSDD.
B. Interim Service. It is recognized by the CITY and ANNEXOR that until
such time as a new wastewater treatment facility is constructed, the Property
may, by geographic and economic necessity, have interim wastewater service
provided by either the CITY, providers other than CITY, or as may be otherwise
permitted by the Code and Health Department regulations. Other providers
include but are not limited to the Fountain Sanitation District and Cherokee
Water and Sanitation District. ANNEXOR is responsible for costs associated
with the design, construction and installation of all interim wastewater needs.
These interim service needs will be identified by the Wastewater Service Master
-
Plan described below. CITY acknowledges that Intergovernmental Agreement dated
August 17, 1987, between the Colorado Centre Metropolitan District and the
€ Fountain Sanitation District, described in Exhibit "K" attached hereto, wherein
the Fountain Sanitation District agrees to provide wastewater services to the
1 Colorado Centre Metropolitan District until a "regional wastewater treatment
P
plant" or other long term treatment options that may be provided by the CITY or
IF;- other governmental entity is constructed. Connection Charges shall be as

C n
-.
determined in Paragraph C, of this Article XIV. Wastewater Service Charges
shall be computed and charged in a similar manner as those of other customers
inside the CITY limits.

C. Permanent Service.
1. Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility. The CITY and ANNEXOR agree
that a new regional wastewater treatment facility will be constructed to serve
that portion of the Property within the Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin and
that portion of the Property within the Sand Creek Drainage Basin if the latter
can be more economically served by said new facility. Unless otherwise agreed
between CITY and ANNEXOR, CITY and ANNEXOR agree that the new wastewater
treatment facility shall be located on that site presently optioned by the
LFMSDD southeast of the City of Fountain (Exhibit "L"), and that said plant
will provide sewer service for governmental entities other than CITY as well as
private contracting parties. It is contemplated that the terms and
conditions of receiving wastewater treatment from said plant shall be governed
by the LFMSDD Service Agreement, or such future agreement that may be reached
between CITY and LFMSDD. The CITY agrees to use its best efforts in providing
wastewater service to the Property in a timely manner when needed for
development.
2. Interceptor. The CITY and ANNEXOR acknowledge that a new sewer
interceptor line is required to be constructed'both on and off the Property to
connect the Property to the new wastewater treatment facility and that the use
of the interceptor off the Property shall be governed by the LFMSDD Service
Agreement or such future agreement that may be reached by the CITY and LFMSDD.
It is also acknowledged that a second, parallel sewer interceptor may be
required at future time to service the full development of the Property. Such
interceptors shall be built to CITY standard specifications at request of CITY
and to the extent ANNEXOR can comply. At the request of ANNEXOR, CITY will
collect a recovery charge as provided by a recovery agreement from users all
such sums to be rebated to ANNEXOR for the interceptor costs.

3. Costs. ANNEXOR is responsible for costs associated with the design,
construction and installation of all wastewater facilities to serve the
Property as may be provided in the Code, Article 5, Wastewater Treatment Code
(12-5-601), including its share of the regional wastewater treatment facility
and the interceptor. To the extent that portions of the Property (e.g. Sand
Creek Basin) are not serviced by the new plant and interceptor, Connection
Charges shall be assessed in accordance with the ordinances of the CITY then in
effect. For that portion of the Property that is to be serviced by the new
plant and interceptor, CITY shall establish and collect a Connection Charge
based on actual costs. The CITY'S System Development Charge shall be
established based upon the total cost of the regional wastewater treatment
facility and interceptor and such other facilities as have been agreed upon by
CITY and ANNEXOR. The CITY agrees that the System Development Charge will be
calculated consistent with the manner in which said Charge is calculated for
the balance of the CITY. The revenue realized from the collection of the
System Development Charge shall be first utilized to reimburse ANNEXOR and/or
any Districts which have been formed pursuant to Article XVII hereof, for
total costs incurred in constructing the regional wastewater treatment plant,
interceptor or other facilities as have been agreed upon by CITY and ANNEXOR
and second, shall be set aside for any such future costs. All such revenue may
be pledged by ANNEXOR and/or any Districts for the repayment of debt incurred
to construct the interceptor and wastewater treatment plant.
The procedure for collecting the Connection Charges shall be as set forth
in the CITY'S ordinances at the time of collection unless otherwise agreed by
CITY and ANNEXOR. Wastewater Service Charges shall be computed and charged in a
similar manner as those of other customers inside the CITY limits.

D. CITY and ANNEXOR shall jointly prepare a Wastewater Service Master
Plan within a reasonable period of time after annexation of the Property. The
Wastewater Service Master Plan shall show the general location and size of all
required on-site and off-site pipelines, 15-inch and larger, lift stations,
force mains and all proposed interim facilities.
E. ANNEXOR shall dedicate to the CITY all necessary rights-of-way owned
by ANNEXOR for installation of wastewater lines and associated facilities
within the Property, which rights-of-way shall be free and clear of liens and
encumbrances that may adversely affect CITY'S use of the land.
F. The CITY agrees to take sewage sludge generated from LFMSDD wastewater
treatment plant delivered to the Wastewater Division Solids Handling Facility
located at the CITY'S Hanna Ranch. The cost of delivery facilities shall be
the responsibility of LFMSDD and a per unit charge for handling said sludge
shall be charged by the CITY, as may be agreed between LFMSDD and the CITY.
NATURAL GAS
A. The Property is substantially within the existing gas service area of
the CITY as designated by the Colorado Public' Utilities Commission. Annexation
I of any lands not in the currently existing gas service area shall be added to
the gas service area and proper certification by the Public Utilities
I Commission shall be obtained by the CITY.
B. The CITY agrees that it will extend gas service to the Property under
I its tariffs, ordinances, and rules and regulations in effect at the time of any
I specific gas service request. Availability will be covered by
ordinances, and rules and regulations in effect at the time of request.

tariffs,
I Annexation does not imply a guarantee of gas service.

C. ANNEXOR shall dedicate to the CITY all necessary rights-of-way owned
by ANNEXOR for installation of gas mains from existing off-site systems and gas
mains and associated facilities within the development, which rights-of-way
shall be free and clear of liens and encumbrances that may adversely affect
CITY'S use of the land.
D. ANNEXOR agrees to dedicate a number of 30-foot by 30-foot gas
regulator station sites. The number and general location of these sites shall
be determined by Gas Division and specific site location shall be by mutual
agreement. The regulator station sites will be deeded at no cost to the CITY
free and clear of all liens and encumbrances that may adversely affect CITY'S
use of the land.
E. Portions of the Southern Area are current&y in Peoples Natural Gas
Company's service area. Peoples has installed facilities and is presently

1 providing gas service to customers. Such portions of Peoples' service area
that are annexed will become the CITY'S service area, and the CITY will
I purchase the appropriate facilities from zeoples Natural Gas Company and will
I install facilities necessary to deliver gas to this acquired system. Peoples
Natural Gas Service will be disconnected except for the 6-inch and 4-inch mains
1 which will be retained by Peoples. These mains will pass through Colorado
Centre from the Colorado Interstate Gas Company meter station to Peoples' gas
service area south of the Southern Area. Peoples will require the continued
[R use of their right-of-way easements and/or the streets and roads for their
mains.
The acquisition of Peoples' facilities by the CITY shall be done at no
cost to the ANNEXOR.

I F. ANNEXOR will execute all extension contracts required and will pay t o
I the CITY an advance deposit equal to the cost of such facilities in accordance
BOOK 5557~h~f
w i t h t h e CITY'S gas e x t e n s i o n p o l i c y i n e f f e c t a t t h e time t h e s e r v i c e i s
requested. The CITY w i l l make r e f u n d s of t h e d e p o s i t t o ANNEXOR i n accordance
with p r e v a i l i n g citywide policy.
G. Reasonable and t i m e l y n o t i c e s h a l l be provided t o CITY i n o r d e r t o
schedule gas service t o the Property. It i s understood and agreed a s t o
Southern Area t h a t no s e r v i c e w i l l be provided u n t i l d e b t r e s t r u c t u r i n g i s
s u c c e s s f u l l y completed a s s e t f o r t h i n A r t i c l e X V I I I .
XVI -
ELECTRIC
A. E l e c t r i c s e r v i c e w i l l be provided t o t h e P r o p e r t y i n accordance w i t h
t h e CITY'S o r d i n a n c e s , tariffs, r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s i n e f f e c t a t t h e time
e l e c t r i c l i n e extensions a r e requested. Recovery, i f any, f o r on and o f f s i t e
e l e c t r i c f a c i l i t i e s s h a l l be i n accord w i t h t h e a p p l i c a b l e e l e c t r i c t a r i f f .
Requests f o r such s e r v i c e s h a l l conform t o t h e Code and T a r i f f s of t h e C i t y of
Colorado S p r i n g s .
B. ANNEXOR s h a l l d e d i c a t e t o t h e CITY a l l n e c e s s a r y rights-of-way owned
by ANNEXOR f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n of a l l e l e c t r i c t r a n s m i s s i o n f a c i l i t i e s , e x c e p t t h e
two (2) major transmission corridors set out in paragraph C. below, and
distribution facilities to include substation sites and other associated
f a c i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e P r o p e r t y , which s h a l l be f r e e and c l e a r of l i e n s and
encumbrances t h a t may a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t CITY'S u s e of t h e d e d i c a t e d P r o p e r t y .
C. F i v e major overhead e l e c t r i c t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e s a r e planned w i t h i n two
( 2 ) major t r a n s m i s s i o n c o r r i d o r s . ANNEXOR'S needs may r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l l i n e s
i n the future. A l l t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e s w i l l be c o n s t r u c t e d when t h e E l e c t r i c
T&D D i v i s i o n d e t e r m i n e s t h e y a r e r e q u i r e d . A l l t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e s w i l l be
overhead and l o c a t e d i n a r e a s which w i l l n o t c o n f l i c t w i t h a i r p o r t s .

D. All lines below 30,000 volts Phase-to-Phase will be installed
underground in accordance with C$TY code. Temporary lines may be overhead and
will be paid for by ANNEXOR including cost of removal.
E. The CITY will not supply electric service to any area within the
service territory of the Mountain View Electric Association until the area is
annexed and service transferred in a phased manner according to the existing
agreement between the CITY and Mountain View. ANNEXOR shall be responsible for
all costs associated with the transfer of facilities and service territory.
Such cost to include any facilities on land developed by the ANNEXOR prior to
annexation and enclave lands not being annexed north of Drennan Road but for
which due to annexation, the CITY is required to take over electric service.
Disconnection from Mountain View and transfer of service to the Property shall
be as follows:
1. The amount to be paid by ANNEXOR for transfer of territory shall
be calculated when the final meter readings for the twelve months preceding the
service territory transfer date are available. It is estimated that
disconnection of the Southern Area from Mountain View shall cost approximately
$61,810, and disconnection of the remainder of the Property is estimated to
cost $53,710.
2. Five electric distribution areas (EDA's) have been established
for disconnection from Mountain View and extension of electric service by CITY.
The five EDA's are depicted on Exhibit M attached hereto and incorporated by
reference. CITY shall endeavor to secure an agreement with Mountain View that
would permit Mountain View to continue to serve existing and new users within a
particular EDA until such time as one of the following conditions is met:
(a) There exists two or more residential customers in a platted
subdivision;
(b) There exists two or more commercial/industrial customers in
one building complex or platted subdivision;
(c) There is demand from one or more customers for an ultimate
connected load of five hundred kilowatts (kw) or more for any
one EDA or one thousand kilowatts or more for two or more
contiguous EDA's;
(d) January 1, 1995 arrives regardless of load demands within
the EDA.
3. When any one of the conditions in Paragraph 2 is met, or if C I T Y
cannot secure an agreement with Mountain View to allow Mountain View to
continue to serve the Property as provided above, C I T Y will supply electric
service to the Property. ANNEXOR will bear the cost of all line extensions to
the Property according to the tariffs and policies in effect at the time of the
extension. Prior to reconnection, ANNEXOR may elect to terminate electric
service to facilities then in service, or provide service with small generators
for small uses, such as stock watering ponds.
4. C I T Y will enter into recovery agreements, as permitted by CITY'S
ordinances, tariffs, rules, and regulations to allow ANNEXOR to recover
off-site improvements and expenses required to serve the Property.
5. Any labor and material cost for the installation of permanent
facilities or the installation and removal of temporary facilities (except
credits for any salvage value) required to serve new customers, beyond the
existing customers on the Property whose service cost is included in the
disconnect fees to be paid by ANNEXOR to Mountain View under Paragraph 1 above,
must be paid by ANNEXOR or the user seeking service.
F. Road Improvements Adjacent to Utility Corridors - ANNEXOR shall be
responsible for the cost of or construction of road improvements adjacent to

u t i l i t y corridors. ANNEXOR s h a l l a l s o be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r r e q u i r e d r e l o c a t i o n
of u t i l i t y l i n e s and f a c i l i t i e s . The CITY Department of U t i l i t i e s s h a l l n o t be
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a c q u i s i t i o n , d e d i c a t i o n o r c o n t r i b u t i o n of l a n d needed f o r road
improvements, nor s h a l l t h e CITY Department of U t i l i t i e s o r General C i t y be
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r road improvements where u t i l i t y c o r r i d o r s a r e a d j a c e n t t o such
l a n d s ; however, C I T Y w i l l permit road c r o s s i n g s and c e r t a i n o t h e r p u b l i c u s e s
a t u t i l i t y corridors. T h i s waiver of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y s h a l l a p p l y i n a l l c a s e s
i r r e s p e c t i v e of t h e manner i n which t h e CITY Department of U t i l i t i e s a c q u i r e s
t i t l e , i.e., f e e s i m p l e , easement, right-of-way, d e d i c a t i o n by p l a t e t c .
G. The CITY has determined t h e l o c a t i o n of two c o r r i d o r s f o r a t o t a l of
f i v e major transmission lines through the Property generally shown on the
Master P l a n , and ANNEXOR s h a l l deed t h e same t o t h e CITY upon r e q u e s t . When
t h e s e t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e c o r r i d o r s a r e deeded t o CITY, CITY w i l l compensate
ANNEXOR f o r t h e f a i r market v a l u e a t t h e time of conveyance. Such compensation
shall be distributed among ANNEXORS in accordance with their ownership
interests. The time and manner a f payment s h a l l be e s t a b l i s h e d by s e p a r a t e
agreement. The payments s h a l l be used a s s e c u r i t y f o r ANNEXOR'S r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
t o cover any a n n u a l f i s c a l d e f i c i t s a s s e t f o r t h i n A r t i c l e X I . ANNEXOR s h a l l
consent to the l o c a t i o n of the transmission l i n e corridor. Easements for
1 d i s t r i b u t i o n l i n e s must be shown on t h e Master P l a n and a l l f i n a l s u b d i v i s i o n
plats. The two ( 2 ) c o r r i d o r s f o r f i v e major t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e s would have been
1 r e q u i r e d even i f ANNEXOR'S P r o p e r t y was n o t annexed.
H. All street right-of-way in residential subdivisions d e d i c a t e d by
1 ANNEXOR s h a l l g e n e r a l l y a l l o w f o r t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n , o p e r a t i o n and maintenance
1 of e l e c t r i c f a c i l i t i e s between sidewalk and p r o p e r t y l i n e o r between c u r b and
s i d e w a l k f o r a r e a s w i t h detached sidewalks. ANNEXOR, w i t h CITY a p p r o v a l , may
1 s e t a s i d e o t h e r a r e a s f o r such f a c i l i t i e s .
I. ANNEXOR s h a l l d e d i c a t e t o CITY t h e e l e c t r i c s e r v i c e s i t e a s shown on
t h e Master P l a n a s a p o r t i o n of P a r c e l NO. 329.01/329.04 (one s i t e ) and s i x ( 6 )
ten (10) a c r e e l e c t r i c s u b s t a t i o n s i t e s P a r c e l Nos. 295.02, 301.05, 309.02,
329.021329.05 (one s i t e ) , 338.09 and 344.02 f o r which t h e ANNEXOR w i l l a p p l y
f o r the Public Facilities (PF) zone w i t h i n e i g h t e e n (18) months of final
a n n e x a t i o n and which s h a l l be d e d i c a t e d f o r e x c l u s i v e u s e by t h e Department of
Utilities.
J. ANNEXOR s h a l l p r o v i d e on each s i d e of a l l a r t e r i a l o r l a r g e r s t r e e t s
i n c l u d i n g s t a t e and U.S. highways and t h e Banning-Lewis Parkway a minimum of
t e n (10) f e e t w i t h i n t h e s t r e e t right-of-way but o u t s i d e t h e u l t i m a t e paved
p o r t i o n e x c l u s i v e l y f o r e l e c t r i c d i s t r i b u t i o n f a c i l i t i e s ; l a n d s c a p i n g s h a l l be
p e r m i t t e d i n accordance w i t h C I T Y U t i l i t y D e p a r t m e n t . p o l i c y .
K. It i s understood and a g r e e d a s t o t h e Southern Area t h a t no s e r v i c e
w i l l be provided u n t i l d e b t r e s t r u c t u r i n g i s s u c c e s s f u l l y completed a s s e t
forth i n Article XVIII.
XVII
DISTRICTS - -
1 A. The CITY shall approve the formation of one or more Districts
("Districts") o r s i m i l a r e n t i t i e s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i n t e n t of t h i s Agreement,
I i n c l u d i n g b u t n o t l i m i t e d t o p u b l i c b u i l d i n g a u t h o r i t i e s , development a u t h o r i -
1 ties, g e n e r a l improvement d i s t r i c t s ( s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s ) , s p e c i a l improvement
districts, maintenance d i s t r i c t s , f l o o d c o n t r o l conservancy d i s t r i c t s , local
I improvement d i s t r i c t s , and i n c l u d i n g m e t r o p o l i t a n d i s t r i c t s f o r n o n - r e s i d e n t i a l
l a n d , f o r t h e purpose of t h e a c q u i s i t i o n , d e s i g n , c o n s t r u c t i o n , installation,
1 f i n a n c i n g a n d l o r maintenance of c a p i t a l improvements and f a c i l i t i e s , and f o r
1 the provision of certain services which may be required to develop the

Property; which capital improvements, facilities and services ANNEXOR is
obligated or permitted under this Agreement to provide. To the extent that
ANNEXOR is responsible therefor, such capital improvements and facilities would
include, but not be limited to: water and wastewater lines and facilities;
storm drainage and detention facilities, including irrigation; traffic and
transportation facilities, including streets, bridges, roads, interchanges,
signalization, safety protection improvements; park and recreation facilities;
police and fire protection facilities and equipment; and communication
facilities and equipment. CITY will permit the formation of such districts so
long as the CITY is not directly or indirectly liable for repayment of any
indebtedness in connection therewith, and ANNEXOR has presented evidence
satisfactory to the CITY that the proposed District has, or will have, the
financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness. Any approval of such
Districts, when requested by ANNEXOR, shall include the following conditions,
unless waived by CITY:
(1) No District shall levy, charge or collect a sales tax.
(2) All services and improvement plans of the District(s) and amendments
thereto shall be subject to review and approval by CITY.
(3) The District(s) shall obtain all necessary permits and pay all
prescribed fees associated with any and all improvements to be made.
(4) All improvements constructed by the ~istrict(s) shall be designed,
construc,ted and warranted in accordance with the standards and
specifications of CITY.
(5) Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the CITY shall be the
sole provider of municipal services to the Property, including water and
wastewater services, fire and police protection, street maintenance,
zoning and code enforcement, and all other services as CITY may provide to
the residents of CITY; provided, however, that the District (s) may, with
the prior approval of the CITY, provide supplemental street, median,
landscape (including irrigation), drainage and other facility maintenance
services.
(6) CITY shall not incur any expense in the formation or operation of the
proposed District(s) or its retirement of capital obligations, exclusive
of ordinary administrative expenses such as review by CITY staff.
(7) Other conditions to the approval of any District may also be applied
by the CITY as a matter of Citywide uniform policy, including
consideration of whether the District will have an adverse impact upon the
financial ability of the CITY or other governmental entities to enter into
bonded indebtedness.
B. To the extent that ANNEXOR has any right or duty under this Agreement
to engineer, furnish material for, install, construct, warrant, maintain,
repair or otherwise provide for or maintain certain improvements and facilities
(public or private) as defined in this Agreement or as otherwise required or
desired by ANNEXOR in connection with development of the Property, all or any
portion of that right or duty may, with the CITY'S consent, be delegated by
ANNEXOR to the District(s) so long as such responsibilities are within the
scope of authority of said District(s). Notwithstanding any such delegation,
the provisions of this Agreement shall run with the land, and the CITY may
enforce against any such District any delegated obligations.
XVIII
COLORADO CENTRE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
A. Within one year and seventy-five days following the date of this
Agreement, ANNEXOR shall secure a restructuring of the existing Colorado Centre

Metropolitan District (CCMD) bonded indebtedness. CITY acknowledges that the
restructuring of the CCMD debt is intended to take place in phases, and that
CITY will cooperate to the extent necessary in the restructuring process. Upon
restructuring of the debt within the following parameters ANNEXOR'S obligation
hereunder will be satisfied:
I. The existing indebtedness, which is secured by water tap
revenues, must be restructured to allow CITY to collect these water tap
revenues.
#
2. The existing indebtedness will be shifted from a mill levy debt
to an assessment lien debt through establishment of a building authority.
Existing CITY residents shall not bear any responsibility for debt repayment.
The Property subject to the assessment lien will be solely on the portion of
the CCMD to be annexed (i.e. the Southern Area), plus the additional lands
within the Property as provided below. As properties within that portion of
the Property subject to the assessment lien are platted, ANNEXOR shall pay a
pro rata share of the debt, and the assessment lien shall be released as to the
platted land; subsequently constructed dwellings shall not be subject to the
assessment lien.
3. CCMD may continue to assess a mill levy of a maximum of eight
mills on the area currently included in the non-annexed portion of CCMD and
will be permitted to collect up to a 10X water connection surcharge, which
revenues may be applied either toward covering the costs of service CCMD will
continue to provide or to prepay bonds of the building authority to the extent
that there are surpluses.
4. Approximately 1,000 acres of additional lands within the Property

may be added to the area to be included in the building authority as a source
for assessments.
5. C I T Y acknowledges that it may take the building authority several
bond issues to restructure the existing CCMD debt.
6. The CCMD service plan will be amended to restrict the district
from borrowing before or after its current debt is restructured, until such
time as the restructured debt is fully retired.
B. While the existing CCMD indebtedness is being restructured, C I T Y will
not provide utility service or plat approval for that portion of the CCMD being
annexed. will continue to provide services to the non-annexed area and
the annexed area until the debt is restructured, and may continue to charge
customary user fees or other fees for services that are provided by CCMD. CCMD
shall be allowed to utilize Well No. 211A during the year and seventy-five day
period in the event the non-annexed and annexed lands' existing water supplies
are terminated.
C. If the restructuring of the existing CCMD debt is not completed within
one year and seventy-five (75) days following the date of this Agreement.
ANNEXOR will petition to disconneit the annexed portion of CCMD from the C I T Y
in accordance with 31-12-501 -

et seq., C . R . S . In the event of disconnection,
the ANNEXOR will retain ownership of the groundwater underlying the Southern
Area. The CITY shall allow CCMD by separate intergovernmental agreement
without charge utilization of Well No. 211A for the purpose of providing
interim water service to the Southern Area for a period not to exceed five (5)
years.
D. If the restructuring of the existing debt is completed as provided
above C I T Y will provide all utility services to the Southern Area on same terms
and conditions as to the balance of the Property. CCMD may contract consistent
with CITY policies for C I T Y water and wastewater service for the non-annexed
portion of CCMD. I f CCMD does not contract with C I T Y for water service, CCMD
shall have the right to utilize Well NO* 211A without cost for the purpose of
providing interb water service to the non-annexed portion of CCMD for a period
not to exceed five ( 5 ) years from date of this Agreement.

E. Subject to the provisions of Article XVIII(C) above, ANNEXOR grants in
perpetuity to CITY the sole and exclusive right to withdraw, appropriate, and
use any and all groundwater underlying the Southern Area and all surface water
rights located in the Southern Area except for groundwater owned by CCMD as of
January 1, 1988. ANNEXOR shall convey the remaining groundwater and
groundwater rights by a consent and instrument of conveyance acceptable to
CITY, which shall include the wells and historical water requirements
associated with groundwater rights conveyed to CITY.
XIX
GENERAL PROVISIONS
, A. This Agreement shall be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder in
El Paso County, Colorado and shall run with the land, and shall be binding upon
and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties
hereto, and all persons or entities now or hereafter having an interest in the
' -i*
Property. Except as noted hereafter, any and all of the rights, duties and
obligations of ANNEXOR or any of them hereunder may be assigned by ANNEXOR to
any person or entity when portions of the Property are conveyed to such persons
or entities. In such event, the assignee will assume all of the rights, duties
and obligations of ANNEXOR hereunder as to the portion of the Property so
assigned and ANNEXOR shall be relieved from all further liabilities, obliga-
tions and duties as to the portion of the Property so conveyed. Notwith-
standing the foregoing, rights to specific reimbursements, refunds or credits
provided for herein shall be placed in a fund, to be known as the Banning Lewis
Ranch Improvement Fund, held in trust by a bank mutually agreed upon by Aries
Properties Incorporated and CITY, for equitable distribution by the Banning
Lewis Ranch Planning Association or similar entity or entities among the
parties bearing the costs to which such refunds, reimbursements and credits
relate. The Banning Lewis Ranch Planning Association or a similar entity or
entities created for the purpose of administering this Agreement, shall remain
in existence until all terms and conditions of this Agreement have been
complied with or until the Agreement terminates. Any future sale of the
Property shall include specific reference to this Agreement and delegation of
the obligations contained herein. Rights to the specific refunds contained
herein shall always be to Aries Properties Incorporated unless specifically
assigned to another person, entity, or district created in accord with Article
XVII.
B. CITY acknowledges that ANNEXOR owns a number of small contiguous
tracts that ANNEXOR will seek to annex upon completion of the annexation of the
\
Property. Upon annexation of such additional tracts, the provisions of this
Agreement will extend to such other tracts as if they originally had been
included in this Agreement. In addition, the Master Plan shall be deemed
sufficient to satisfy the "plan in place'' requirements of the Municipal
Annexation Act, as amended, for the purpose of annexing such tracts.
C. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute or be interpreted
as a repeal of existing Codes or ordinances or as a waiver or abdication of the
CITY'S legislative, governmental or police powers to promote and protect the
public health, safety, or general welfare of the CITY or its inhabitants; nor
shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment by the CITY of any fee which is of
uniform or general application throughout the CITY. Except as specifically
provided herein, CITY agrees to treat ANNEXOR and the Property in a

non-discriminatory manner relative to the rest of the CITY. In addition, any
consent or approval require hereunder either from ANNEXOR or CITY shall not be
unreasonably withheld. CITY will not impose any fee, levy or tax or impose any
conditions upon the approval of development requests, platting, zoning or
issuance of any building permits on ANNEXOR, or make any assessment on the
Property that is not uniformly applied throughout the CITY, unless otherwise
agreed to between CITY and ANNEXOR. Any fees to be paid by ANNEXOR will be
paid at building permit issuance except as specifically may be provided in this
Agreement or the Code.
D. No right or remedy of disconnection of the described Property from the
CITY accrues from this Agreement, other than that provided by 131-12-119,
C.R.S. In the event the Property or any portion thereof is disconnected at
ANNEXOR'S request, the CITY shall have no obligation to serve the disconnected
Property and this Agreement shall be void and of no further force and effect as
~o such Property.
E. If the annexation of the Property or any portion thereof is challenged
by a referendum, all provisions of this Agreement, together with the duties and
obligations of each party, shall be suspended, pending the outcome of the
referendum election. If the referendum challenge to the annexation results in
disconnection of the Pr~2erty from the CITY, then this Agreement and all
provisions contained herein shall be null and void and of no further effect.
If the referendum challenge fails, then ANNEXOR and CITY shall continue to be
bound by all terms and provisions of this Agreement.
F. If the annexation of the Property or any portion thereof is voided by
initiative, the CITY agrees to cooperate with ANNEXOR to continue providing
water, wastewater, electric and gas service to those properties actually
served. The CITY and ANNEXOR agree to pursue all reasonable methods to
continue such service including but not limited to extraterritorial water and
sewer contracts at outside CITY rates. Such agreement to cooperate shall not
constitute a legal obligation on the part of the CITY to continue service.
G. In the event that the annexation of the Property or any portion
thereof is voided by final action of any court (such action not being
associated with a referendum or initiative action), CITY and ANNEXOR shall
cooperate to cure the legal defect which resulted in disconnection of the
Property, and upon such cure this Agreement shall be deemed to be an agreement
to annex the Property to the CITY pursuant to the Municipal Annexation Act.
Any such agreement to annex shall be subject to the terms of this Agreement,
Master Plan, and all other documents referenced herein. ANNEXOR shall reapply
for annexation as and when the Property becomes eligible for annexation as
determined by the CITY.
H. It is specifically understood and agreed that where this Agreement
provides for a determination to be made by a CITY Department Head and such is
approved by the City Manager, an9 such determination may be appealed to and
reviewed by City Council. An appeal for review by City Council of any
departmental determination shall automatically stay this matter until the City
Council has completed its review.
I. It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that if any part,
term, or provision of this Agreement is by the courts held to be illegal or in
conflict with any law of the State of Colorado, the validity of the remaining
portions or provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of
the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain
the particular part, term, or provision held to be invalid.
J. This instrument embodies the whole agreement of the parties. There
are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained

;r-p 5?-iPACE
Ni)KJ
herein; and this Agreement shall supersede all previous communications,
representations, or agreements, either verbal or written, between the parties
hereto except those specific agreements herein referred to. Except with
consent of Aries Properties Incorporated, CITY, and the Banning Lewis Ranch
Planning Association, there shall be no modification of this Agreement except
in writing, executed with the same formalities as this instrument and recorded
as required in Article XIX(A) above. Subject to the conditions herein, this
Agreement may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction.
K. ANNEXOR has obtained and filed with CITY consent to this Agreement
from all parties who hold prior Deeds of Trust or other security instruments in
the Property.
L. The headings set forth in this Agreement for the different sections of
the Agreement are for reference only and shall not be construed as an
enlargement or abridgment of the language of the Agreement.
M. In the event either party alleges that the other is in default
hereunder, the non-defaulting party shall first notify the defaulting party in
writing of such default. The defaulting party shall have twenty (20) working
days from receipt of such notice within which to cure such default before the
non-defaulting party may exercise any of its remedies hereunder. If such
default is not of a nature that can be cured in such twenty (20) day period,
corrective action must be commenced within said period by the defaulting party
and be thereafter diligently pursued. If the default is not cured in a timely
fashion, then the non-defaulting party may elect, at its discretion, either to
cure the default and recover the cost thereof from the defaulting party, or
seek to enjoin the default if of a continuing nature, or seek specific perfor-
mance and/or damages. All of these remedies shall be considered cumulative,
and shall not be exclusive of any other remedy provided for in this Agreement.
N. Because it is anticipated by CITY and ANNEXOR that development of the
property will be a long term endeavor, this Agreement shall be in force and
effect for a period of sixty (60) years from the effective date hereof or until
all terms and conditions contained herein have been complied with, whichever
occurs first. Thereafter, so long as the Property is located within the
municipal boundaries of CITY, it shall be subject to the uniform ordinances,
rules and regulations of CITY generally applicable throughout CITY on a
non-discriminatory basis.
0. CITY shall use its best efforts to determine that the Banning Lewis
Ranch Planning Association or a similar entity or entities created by it has
reviewed all platting, site development plans, concept plans and requests for
building permits prior to their submittal to the CITY or Regional Building
Department. The Banning Lewis Ranch Planning Association, or similar entity or
entities created by it shall in general be responsible for facilitating and
coordinating ANNEXOR'S compliance with this Agreement and the Code, but shall
not have any liability for violation of the Code or the Agreement by others.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have set their hands and seals the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS

...... .
-..-- L' ,
" r . 'a.
......u'
Mayor
City Clerk
TEMPORARY UlW
WALL (CUT MWn
WINO W E N WIDEWW
SWLASTRUCTURCI
8ARRIW
RAIL
PLAN
INITIAL _ , , 11' L WE t 11' LANE 10. SIIWLDE~
I I
I I
/ I
" fl r) " " "

II 1 -1
II II 16"
1
11 II
\
ELEVATION
FUTURE CONSTRUCTION FUTURE CONSTRUCTION
BANNING- LEWIS PARKWAY

(FROM JUST SOUTH OF SH94 TO JUST NORTH OF U S 2 4 )
FUTURE CONSTRUCTION
112.t1 0 ' - 4 8 ' - - f 6 ' 1
BANNING-LEWIS PARKWAY
(FROM JUST SOUTH OF SH84 7 0 HIGH PLAINS D R I M )
(AND FROM JUST NORTH OF US24 TO JUST NORTH OF BARNES ROAD)
Planning Department
Appendix C
Settlement Agreement
Court: CO El Paso County District Court 4th JD
Judge: Thomas Kelly Kane

EFILED Document
Date: 11/19/2004 CO El Paso County District Court 4th JD
Filing Date: Nov 19 2004 2:35PM MST
Case Number: 2001CV566 Filing ID: 4645507
Review Clerk: Jeanne Golding
Case Name: LEWIS, C RANDEL et al vs. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS et al
/s/ Judge Thomas Kelly Kane

GRANTED Movant shall serve copies of this ORDER on
any pro se parties, pursuant to CRCP 5, and
file a certificate of service with the Court
within 10 days.
Thomas K. Kane
District Court Judge
DATE OF ORDER INDICATED ON ATTACHMENT
EFILED Document
CO El Paso County District Court 4th JD
Filing Date: Sep 22 2004 2:56PM MDT
Filing ID: 4256926
Review Clerk: Donna Maes
Planning Department
Appendix D
Annexor Obligations
Gross-
Infrastructure Parcel
Obligation Section Category
Roads Owner Cost Notes
Acreage No.
Pay City’s share of any grade separations to III (A)
Reimbursable -- -- -- -- No RR-X envisioned…N/A
accommodate any warranted railroad crossings p. 6
III (B) 3 Acreage north of Drennan
Banning-Lewis Parkway Right-of-way Reimbursable 729.16 -- -- $55,855,114 Road
p. 7
Construction for the
III (B) 3
Banning Lewis Parkway Construction Reimbursable 729.16 -- -- $67,108,174 acreage north of Drennan
p. 7 Road
Prepare and submit a study of the Jimmy Camp Creek IV (A)
Reimbursable -- -- -- $300,000
Drainage Basin p. 15
Prepare and submit a restudy of Sand Creek Drainage IV (B)
Reimbursable -- -- -- $92,500 Finished
Basin p. 15
BLRMC granted deed to
VII (D) El Paso County for P/R site at this
Park and Ride Site Reimbursable 1.16 268.04 County $88,858 location. County agrees to
p. 20
construct facility.
Dedicate land for two air quality monitoring stations at VIII (A)
Reimbursable 0.25 (2) -- -- $38,301
sites of sufficient size, not to exceed .25 acres p. 20
A sum of money not to exceed $210,000.00 for the
IX (A)
purpose of acquiring property, equipping and Reimbursable -- -- -- $210,000
p. 21
constructing eastern radio repeater station
Banning Lewis
IX (B) Ranch
Dedicate land for satellite municipal service center Reimbursable 26.82 290.02 Management $2,054,466
p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (B) 329.01/ Ranch Site also to be used as an
Dedicate land for satellite municipal service center Reimbursable 29.03 329.04 Management $2,223,756 Electric Substation
p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (C) Ranch
Dedicate land for, construct and equip fire station (PF-F) Reimbursable 0.75 293.09 Management $5,389,520
p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
Dedicate land for, construct and equip fire station (PF- IX (C) Ranch
Reimbursable 9.01 307.04 Management $6,022,252
W) p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
Dedicate land for, construct and equip fire station (PF- IX (C) Ranch
PF) p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (C) Ranch
p. 22
Company
D-1
Banning Lewis
IX (C) Ranch
p. 22
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (D) 1 Ranch
Dedicate land for police substation Reimbursable 6.36 274.03 Management $487,189
p. 23
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (D) 1 Ranch
p. 23
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (D) 1 Ranch
p. 23
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (D) 1 Ranch
p. 23
Company
Banning Lewis
IX (D) 1 Ranch
p. 23
Company
Banning Lewis
Dedicate land for the dumping/disposal of CITY street X Ranch
sweeping waste and non-putrescible rubble and trash p. 25
Company
Colorado
Dedicate land for the dumping/disposal of CITY street X Centre
Reimbursable 9.28 338.12 Metropolitan $710,867
District
Colorado
Dedicate land for the dumping/disposal of CITY street X Centre
Reimbursable 8.20 338.08 Metropolitan $628,136
District
64—Banning
Provide any and all property not to exceed ten thousand Lewis Ranch
XIII (E) Management
square feet per well site for construction and operation of wells
on the property for which there are well applications pending
Reimbursable 15.64 -- Company $1,198,055
p. 32-33 4—Colorado
or approved Springs Land
Assoc.
Banning Lewis
XIII (F) Ranch
Dedicate land for water storage tank Reimbursable 7.93 273.03 Management $607,454
p. 33
Company
Church For All
8.33 Nations Inc. $638,095
XIII (F) Banning Lewis
Dedicate land for water storage tank Reimbursable 293.07
p. 33 1.59
Ranch
$121,797
Management
Company
Banning Lewis
XIII (F) Ranch
p. 33
Company
D-2
Banning Lewis
XIII (F) Ranch
p. 33
Company
Banning Lewis Land cost already
Dedicate electric service site as shown on the Master XVI (I) 329.01/ Ranch
Reimbursable -- 329.04 Management -- accounted for as fire
Plan p. 44 station site
Company
Banning Lewis
Dedicate electric service site as shown on the Master XVI (I) Ranch
Plan p. 44
Company
Banning Lewis
Reimbursable 10.42 301.05 Management $798,193
Plan p. 44
Company
Banning Lewis
Plan p. 44
Company
Banning Lewis
Dedicate electric service site as shown on the Master XVI (I) 329.02/ Ranch
Plan p. 44
Company
Banning Lewis
Plan p. 44
Company
Banning Lewis
Plan p. 44
Company
D-3
Planning Department
Appendix E
Wastewater System Infrastructure
Provided by Colorado Springs Utilities
Wastewater System Infrastructure
for the Banning-Lewis Ranch and Adjacent Areas
A summary of the policies establishing the costs and recovery agreements for the proposed
wastewater facilities that will serve Banning Lewis Ranch (BLR) and others areas within the
Jimmy Camp Creek wastewater service basin is described below.
I. REQUIREMENTS
A. Contractual Requirements
1. The Banning Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement (XIV Wastewater, Page 36) states that
“Annexor is responsible for costs associated with the design, construction and installation of all
wastewater facilities to serve the Property,….. including its share of the regional wastewater
treatment facility and interceptor.”
2. The Wastewater Facilities Participation, Utilization and Service

Agreement between Colorado Springs Utilities (Utilities) and the Banning Lewis Ranch
Company, states:
III. General Provisions, H. Cost Recovery

“Despite anything to the contrary, except as detailed in VII. regarding cost recovery in the case of
a District, Developer shall be eligible for cost recovery as established by Utilities Rules and
Regulations for actual costs expended for: the design and permitting of the Facilities; for the
applicable cost and fair market value of easements within Developer’s property that are granted
to Utilities for the On-Site Interceptors (valued at the time Developer is required to grant such
easements) unless restricted by City or Utilities’ policy and unless such easement will ultimately
be also used as a City street, City sidewalk, City crosswalk, or City walking trail; for the applicable
cost and fair market value Developer pays for easements outside of Developer’s BLR real
property that Developer is required to grant to Utilities for the Off-Site Interceptors; and for
construction of Phase I, the On-Site Interceptors, the Off-Site Interceptors, and any Next Phase
for which Developer is the Annexor First in Need. Such cost recovery shall be carried out in a
manner similar to that detailed in the Annexation Agreement for the case in which facilities are not
funded through a special district.”
“Annexation Agreement means the Annexation Agreement recorded with the El Paso County
Clerk and Recorder on September 23, 1988, in Book 5557 at Page 405 as clarified by that
settlement agreement dated September, 2004 addressing issues raised in the declaratory
judgment action, Case No. 01-CV-0566.”
B. Colorado Springs Utilities Rules and Regulations (URR’s)
1. Wastewater Extension Policy

As per the URR’s, “A property Owner or developer is responsible for the cost of engineering,
construction, and materials for all wastewater system infrastructure and related appurtenances
necessary to serve the Premises or development. Utilities will approve the plans and
specifications of such facilities and appurtenances and inspect and approve the actual
construction prior to connection of such facilities.”
2. Interim Facilities
The URR’s provide that the developer is responsible for all costs including interim system costs:
“Interim facilities are those not in conformance with Utilities’ long-range system master plan. If
interim or temporary facilities are necessary to serve a proposed development, the property
Owner or developer will be responsible for the full cost of the interim and permanent facilities on a
non-refundable basis. The nature and timing of necessary interim or permanent facilities is at the
E-1
sole discretion of Utilities. When interim facilities are being utilized, Utilities may approve an
Advance Recovery Agreement based on its estimate of the total recoverable cost for the
permanent facilities.”
3. JCC Wastewater Service Area Pipeline and Liquid Treatment Capacity

The URR’s provide that development is responsible for the costs of pipelines and treatment
infrastructure required for development:
“Development within the JCC Wastewater Service Area must fully fund the initial cost of pipeline
capacity and liquid treatment capacity necessary to serve the development as per an annexation
agreement. If the necessary capacity is under construction at a developer's expense or has been
previously funded by a developer, the proposed development is responsible for its cost share of
any outstanding Advance Recovery Agreement or Recovery Agreement under the applicable
agreement terms and conditions. If the necessary capacity is not available, the proposed
development must pay the cost of constructing additional capacity in the quantity determined by
Utilities. All costs advanced by Utilities for participation in such additions will be recoverable as
Recovery Agreement Charges for connection to the system at the time such connections are
made or as stipulated in the Recovery Agreement.”
4. Wastewater Recovery Agreement Charge

Consistent with the URR’s, any facilities that are developer obligations that Utilities constructs or
plans to construct shall be recovered through Recovery Agreements or Advance Recovery
Agreements with developers both inside and outside of BLR:
“A Recovery Agreement charge may be assessed for each connection to a collection line or other
facility, where such line or facility is planned or constructed by Utilities or is the subject of a
Recovery Agreement between Utilities and the property Owner(s) or developer who constructed
such line or facility. Consistent with such agreements, the charge will be in an amount which
represents a pro rata share of the cost of construction of the line or facility.”
JCC Wastewater Service Area Outside City Interceptor and Liquid Treatment Capacity:
“Within the JCC Wastewater Service Area, a Recovery Agreement Charge may be assessed for
each connection to treatment plant capacity or off site pipeline that a property Owner or developer
has provided funding for its construction where such existing or planned facility is the subject of a
Recovery Agreement between Utilities and the property Owner or developer who funded, or will
fund, the construction of such facility. Agreements for recovery of pipeline or liquid treatment
costs will include the methodology for establishing recovery of reasonable interest charges.
Consistent with such agreements, the charge will be in an amount which represents a pro rata
share of the cost of construction of the pipeline or facility. The terms of the specific Recovery
Agreement will establish when a property Owner or developer desiring to connect to the system
will be responsible to pay the pro rata share, but in all cases it will be collected prior to issuance
of a building permit. No credits or refunds will be made for these charges.”
II. RECOVERY AGREEMENTS
The following costs will be included as a Recovery Agreement Charge for the subject
development areas.
A. Treatment Plant Costs

In 2005, a concept design report was completed for the Clear Spring Regional Water
Reclamation Facility by Carrollo Engineers. The report detailed costs for the proposed facilities
for the build out of the Banning Lewis Ranch.
As per Table 7.1 from the Carrollo report, the cost for the proposed plant at the East Site is
$161,095,000 (in August 2005 dollars).
E-2
* Note that are concept level cost estimates. The final actual costs may vary significantly
from these estimates.
As of March, 2007 the first phase of the proposed plant is in design for an 8 mgd treatment
facility. Cost estimates will be different from the table listed above and will be updated as the
design and construction progresses.
B. Interceptor (Pipeline) Costs

As per Table 7.5 from the Carrollo report, the cost for the Two Interceptors to the proposed plant
at the East Site is $44,980,000 (in August 2005 dollars).
E-3
* Note that are concept level cost estimates. The final actual costs may vary significantly
from these estimates.
Areas included in the Recovery Agreement service areas are BLR, Toy Ranches (if annexed),
other small properties within the current City Limits and any other parcels that have an
application submitted to the City of Colorado Springs for Annexation if that parcel will be served
by these facilities once approved by City Council.
The estimated costs for each phase and type of facility will be updated periodically as engineering
studies are completed and once actual construction is completed. When construction is
complete, the actual cost basis of each facility will be determined and the Recovery Agreements
will be updated to reflect the balance of costs not yet collected. Each Recovery Agreement will
establish the methodology for developing the residential and non-residential cost per unit for the
service area of the respective facilities.
E-4
Planning Department
Appendix F
Water System Infrastructure
Provided by Colorado Springs Utilities
Water System Infrastructure
For the Banning-Lewis Ranch and Adjacent Areas
A summary of the policies establishing the recovery agreements and costs for the proposed water
facilities that will serve Banning Lewis Ranch (BLR) and others areas is described below.
I. REQUIREMENTS
A. Contractual Requirements
The Banning Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement (XIII Water, Page 32) states that “pump
stations and suction storage costs shall be fully paid by Annexor.” Pump stations and suction
storage are infrastructure components of the finished water distribution system that are used to
distribute water into higher elevations or pressure zones.
B. Colorado Springs Utilities Rules and Regulations (URR’s)
1. Water Extension Policy

As per the URR’s, “A property Owner or developer is responsible for the cost of engineering,
construction, and materials for all water system infrastructure and related appurtenances
necessary to serve the Premises or development. Utilities will approve the plans and
specifications of such facilities and appurtenances and inspect and approve the actual
construction prior to connection of such facilities. The property Owner or developer is also
responsible for any required pumping facilities (including pressure relief valves, pressure reducing
valves and flow control valves) and vaults, and all fire hydrants that are necessary to serve the
Premises or development.”
2. Pumping Facilities
The URR’s provide that the developer is responsible for all costs except for Colorado Springs
Utilities’ (Utilities) engineering for pumping facilities.
“In the event that pumping facilities are required, the cost of such facilities, land, and all
appurtenances, is the responsibility of the property Owner or developer for the Premises served;
provided however, that Utilities provides the necessary engineering at no expense to the property
Owner or developer.”
3. Distribution Storage
The URR’s provide that Utilities is responsible for costs associated with distribution storage. “In
the event that water distribution storage facilities are required (hydropneumatic and above-ground
storage), Utilities will be responsible for the costs of land, design and construction..”
4. Water Recovery Agreement Charge

Consistent with the URR’s, any facilities that are developer obligations that Utilities constructs or
plans to construct shall be recovered through Recovery Agreements or Advance Recovery
Agreements with developers both inside and outside of BLR:
“A Recovery Agreement charge may be assessed for each connection to a Water Distribution
Main or other facility, where such line or facility is planned or constructed by Utilities or is the
subject of a Recovery Agreement between Utilities and the property Owner(s) or developer who
constructed such line or facility. Consistent with such agreements, the charge will be in an
amount which represents a pro rata share of the cost of construction of the line or facility.”
“Utilities will recover the cost to construct such facilities, with interest, through a Recovery
Agreement charge from the Owner(s) or developer of unserved or undeveloped lands prior to
connection to such facilities. Utilities may implement a Recovery Agreement charge to collect the
cost of the facilities in advance of its construction. Advance Recovery Agreements are based on
estimated costs and are limited to Utilities’ designated projects to the extent Utilities determines,
in its sole discretion. “
F-1
II. RECOVERY AGREEMENTS
A. Eight Facilities
In accordance with the Finished Water System Master Plan for the implementation of the
Southern Delivery System, there are eight major water facilities and pressure zones to serve
BLR, Toy Ranches, and areas of the Briargate Pressure Zone that is east of Powers Boulevard to
Marsheffel Road and Research Parkway south to an area north of Dublin. These eight facilities
consist of four tanks and four pump stations. As each tank and pump station serves different
geographic areas of BLR, Advance Recovery Agreements will be setup for each of the facilities.
The estimated cost of each facility is based upon costs from the 2005 Finished Water Distribution
System Planning Study, prepared by Black & Veatch. As per the URR’s, Utilities is responsible
for the costs of engineering (15% estimated) for pump stations, and suction storage, and the
complete costs of distribution storage. Distribution storage costs are not included below.
The pump stations and suction storage facilities and costs are listed as follows:
Costs of Pump Stations and Suction

Storage *
Facility BLR Costs Outside Total
BLR Costs Estimated
Costs
Southern Delivery System Treatment $27,517,56 $22,217,882 $49,735,443
Plant Clearwell 0
Reduced Northfield Tank $5,258,297 $4,589,249 $9,847,546
Reduced Templeton Tank $4,021,105 $3,898,578 $7,919,683
Powers Tank $280,852 $3,033,200 $3,314,052
Southern Delivery System Finished Water $26,608,40 $21,483,824 $48,092,229
Pump Station 5
Reduced Northfield Pump Station $16,606,71 $14,493,736 $31,100,454
8
Reduced Templeton Pump Station $9,661,174 $4,912,926 $14,574,100
Powers Pump Station $378,153 $4,084,047 $4,462,200
Sub-total $90,332,26 $78,713,443 $169,045,707
4
Less Engineering (15%) Paid by Springs $13,549,84 $11,807,016 $25,356,856
Utilities 0
Total $76,782,42 $66,906,426 $143,688,851
4
* These are concept level cost estimates. The final actual costs may vary significantly from these
estimates.
The cost for each of the eight facilities is allocated to each of the eight water pressure zones that
require the facilities. These pressure-zones consist of the following: Briargate, Reduced
Briargate, Templeton, Reduced Templeton, Northfield, Reduced Northfield, Highline, and Lowline.
Areas included in these Recovery Agreement service areas are BLR, Toy Ranches, properties
that are in the current City Limits which include an area of the Briargate Pressure Zone (east of
Powers Boulevard to Marsheffel Road and Research Parkway south to an area north of Dublin)
and any other parcels that have an application submitted to the City of Colorado Springs for
Annexation if that parcel will be served by these facilities once annexation is approved by City
Council.
Unlike other parts of the city, due to the scope and size of these facilities, through the Southern
Delivery system project, Utilities will finance the cost of the infrastructure and will construct the
facilities and implement Recovery Agreements to recover the cost. The estimated costs will be
updated periodically as engineering studies are completed and once actual construction is
F-2
completed. When construction is complete, the actual cost basis of each facility will be
determined and the Recovery Agreements will be updated to reflect the balance of costs not yet
collected. Each Recovery Agreement will establish the methodology for developing the
residential and non-residential cost per unit for the service area of the respective facilities. The
methodology will be based upon system modeling to determine the service area of the facilities.
F-3
Planning Department
Appendix G
Existing Reimbursement Methods
Existing Cost Recovery Mechanisms
Banning Lewis Ranch
Introduction
The Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study (Study) aims to create an equitable
relationship among the 27 Annexors of the property with respect to shared infrastructure. The Study
identifies and quantifies Annexor infrastructure obligations included in the 1988 Banning-Lewis Ranch
Annexation Agreement (Annexation Agreement) and proposes both new and existing cost recovery
mechanisms for equitable cost distribution.
Each Annexor infrastructure obligation was analyzed in the Study to determine if it fell within one of the
City’s existing cost recovery mechanisms. If no such mechanism was identified, the obligation was added
to a list of items that would need to be managed by a new mechanism. If however, an applicable
mechanism was identified, the obligation would follow the guidelines set forth in that mechanism. Most of
the obligations fall into a category that needs a new mechanism for cost recovery. The remaining
infrastructure items, i.e. parkland and school sites, utility water and wastewater infrastructure, and
drainage infrastructure, are covered by mechanisms that are governed by the Colorado Springs City
Code and already in place. A description of each program follows.
Park and School Land Dedication
The Annexor obligation to dedicate school and parkland sites is provided by current provisions of the
Colorado Springs City Code.
Section 7.7.1201 of the Colorado Springs City Code explains the policy and purpose behind school and
parkland dedications:
“…Whenever land is proposed for residential use, the owner of the land should provide
land for school needs generated by the proposed residential use, and the owner of the
land should provide land or fees primarily for park needs generated by the proposed
residential use and secondary fees.”
The amount of land to be dedicated can be found in Section 7.7.1207 and is as follows:
1. Parks
“The amount of land required to be dedicated by the subdivider for parks shall be
0.0165 acres (719 square feet) per dwelling unit for residential land densities in
excess of eight (8) dwelling units per acre, and 0.02325 acres (1,013 square feet) per
dwelling unit for residential land densities of eight (8) dwelling units per acre or less.”
2. Schools
“The amount of land required to be dedicated for school sites shall be 0.0048 acres
(209 square feet) per dwelling unit where the residential land density is greater than
eight (8) dwelling units per acre, and 0.02 acres (871 square feet) per dwelling unit
where the residential land density is eight (8) dwelling units per acre or less.”
The City requires new developments to dedicate land for school and park purposes to serve the need
generated by the new development. It may be determined however, through internal review, that the City
or the school district would require a fee in lieu of land for parks or schools, respectively.
G-1
The fee in lieu of land amount is established annually by City Council upon recommendation from the
School/Park Fee Advisory Committee, which is described in Section 7.7.1207 (C)(2) of the City Code.
The Committee is comprised of “seven (7) members appointed by City Council for three (3) year terms”
with one member being “a certified land appraiser doing business in the City; one member [being] a land
developer experienced in subdivision and improvement of land; one member [being] a person actively
engaged in the construction and sale of housing; one member [being] a member of the Park and
Recreation Advisory Board; and one member [being] a person actively engaged in the design and
development of recreational parks, and one member [being] a citizen at large.” Furthermore, “the school
districts within or partly within the City shall appoint one member who shall be a representative of school
board/administrator.” The school/park fee for 2007 is set at $76,602.
As for collection methods, fees are collected at building permit issuance and land is dedicated to the City
when required or at time of platting. Fees in lieu of land are collected at the building permit stage on a lot
by lot basis. The per-dwelling unit fee is derived by dividing the school/park fee amount by the required
acreage to be dedicated for either parks or schools, which is provided in Section 7.7.1207 of the City
Code. For example, the per-dwelling unit park fee for 2006 for residential land uses in excess of eight
dwelling units per acre would be:
$76,602 X 0.0165 required acres = $1,263.93.
Similarly, the per-dwelling unit school fee for residential land uses in excess of eight dwelling units per
acre would be:
$76,602 X 0.0048 required acres = $367.69.
In areas where the residential land density is eight dwelling units per acre or less, the calculations would
be as follows.
The per-dwelling unit park fee would be:
$76,602 X 0.02325 required acres = $1,781.00,
and the per-dwelling unit school fee would be:
$76,602 X 0.02 required acres = $1,532.04.
For example, Developer Bob owns ten acres of residential land. Five of his acres have densities of four
dwelling units per acre and the other five acres have densities of eight dwelling units per acre. Developer
Bob will put up 20 dwelling units on his low-density ground and 40 dwelling units on his high-density
ground. Developer Bob would need to pay fees on each dwelling unit at the time he is issued a building
permit. His park fees would be:
$1,263.93 X 40 dwelling units = $50,557.20 for parks in his high-density areas;
$1,781.00 X 20 dwelling units = $35,620.00 for parks in his low-density areas;
$367.69 X 40 dwelling units = $14,707.60 for schools in his high-density areas, and;
$1,532.04 X 20 dwelling units = $30,640.80 for schools in his low-density areas.
Developer Bob decides to dedicate to the City a three-acre park site for which he will receive credit
against his fees and which is valued at $229,806 (or $76,602 X 3 acres). Developer Bob’s total park fee
equals $86,192 and is therefore less than the $229,806 of park credit, so he would not have to pay any
park fees on any of the dwelling units located within his ten acre development. Additionally, Developer
Bob would have $143,614 ($229,806 - $86,192) leftover park credit, which he could apply to any following
development.
G-2
Since Developer Bob did not dedicate any school-land in this scenario, he would still have to pay his
school fees of $45,348.40.
As another example, if Developer Bob had decided to dedicate a one-half-acre park site to the City
instead of a three-acre park site, he would have also had to pay park fees. Developer Bob’s half-acre
park site would be worth $38,301, which he could apply as credit to his existing fees. Developer Bob
would therefore only have to pay $47,876.20 in park fees, or would not have to pay fees on approximately
thirty of his forty high-density dwelling units. On the remaining ten high-density and twenty low-density
dwelling units, Developer Bob would still pay park fees.
Each developer must either dedicate land or pay school and park fees based on the need generated by
his or her subdivision. Those dedicating amounts of land above and beyond their subdivisions’ needs
receive credit for the overage, making the process equitable.
Utilities Water/Wastewater
The Annexor obligation to provide water, wastewater, electric, and gas utilities and land sites is governed
under current provisions of the Colorado Springs City Code.
Section 12.1.107 (A) of the City Code describes utility rules and regulations:
“Determined by City Council: The rates, charges and regulations, including conditions, for
all classes of regulated electric, streetlight, natural gas, water and wastewater services
shall be determined by the City Council for customers and users inside and outside of the
corporate limits of the City and shall be set forth in tariff sheets to be adopted by
resolution as provided in this section.”
These rules and regulations are a collection of ordinances and can be found on Colorado Springs Utilities’
(CSU’s) website at www.csu.org. Per Colorado Springs Utility Rules and Regulations, the cost recovery
process for water and wastewater infrastructure is carried out through Recovery Agreements. In this
process, cost recovery occurs after the facility is constructed.
Upon completion of construction, the developer or constructing party submits a request for a Recovery
Agreement to Utility staff. Staff determines if the applicant is eligible for cost recovery by analyzing the
location of the water/wastewater facility and the surrounding geographical areas. If other properties can
benefit from the facility, the applicant may be eligible, but if the facility only serves the applicant’s
property, he or she is not eligible. If the applicant is eligible, he or she then submits cost information to
CSU.
Cost information includes contractor costs, material costs, civil engineering costs for design or surveying,
easement acquisition costs, permit costs, project management costs, and any other direct costs. No
indirect or overhead costs will be considered in the cost recovery process. Utility staff then verifies the
cost information.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software is then used to determine the area that will benefit from
the new facility. The number of developable acres within the boundary is applied in the calculation of the
Recovery Agreement payment. Utility staff develops the Recovery Agreement contract and submits it to
the applicant for review and signature.
Recovery Agreement payments are collected from affected properties at time of issuance of the Service
Contract and are then issued to the holder of the Recovery Agreement.
For example, Developer Andrew owns ten acres of residential land that is surrounded by undeveloped
land. The land can support 60 dwelling units, but before any building permits are issued for these
G-3
dwelling units, Developer Andrew must build water and wastewater infrastructure to serve his 60 units.
Developer Andrew actually ends up building water and wastewater infrastructure that can accommodate
120 dwelling units. Because Developer Andrew over-sized his utility infrastructure, he is eligible for cost
recovery and signs a Recovery Agreement with CSU.
Developer Bob owns a ten-acre tract of land adjacent to Developer Andrew’s tract of land. Developer
Bob will also have 60 dwelling units when his development is complete and will need to have water and
wastewater infrastructure to support his dwelling units. Luckily, Developer Andrew has already built water
and wastewater infrastructure that can support Developer Bob’s 60 in addition to his own 60 units. Thus,
Developer Bob does not have to build any infrastructure and can hook into Developer Andrew’s instead.
Developer Bob will instead pay fees to Colorado Springs Utilities that will go to reimburse Developer
Andrew under the Recovery Agreement.
Recovery Agreements are used in this course of action to create an equitable system. Through this
process, developers can serve their subdivisions and receive reimbursement from anyone who benefits
from water and wastewater systems they built.
Drainage Basin Fees
The Annexor obligation to provide drainage facilities and land sites is also governed by current provisions
of the Colorado Springs City Code.
Section 7.7.901 (A) of the City Code explains the purpose behind subdivision drainage:
“The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares the urgent necessity of providing
storm drains and other facilities for the drainage and control of flood and surface waters
including facilities or best management practices (BMPs) to control storm water quality
within areas and territories to be subdivided and developed and the City Council further
finds and declares that the facilities are required for the proper and orderly development
of the areas and territories in order that storm and surface waters may be properly
drained and controlled along with storm water quality and that the health, property, safety
and welfare of the City and its citizens may be safeguarded and protected.”
Furthermore, City Code Section 7.7.901 (B) places drainage requirements on developers:
“The City Council further finds, determines and declares that it is necessary under all the
attendant circumstances that the owner and developer of the subdivision shall provide
the drainage facilities within his subdivision necessary for the drainage and control of
surface water within his subdivision and also to provide the facilities required to convey
such drainage waters to such outflow or discharge point as shall be indicated in the
master drainage plan for the drainage basin area within which the subdivision is located.”
Drainage basin fees are the mechanism for cost recovery among developers with subdivisions located in
the same basin. The fees are set through a careful analysis of several drainage studies from the very
broad to the very specific. First, the developer commissions a Drainage Basin Planning Study, which
identifies needed drainage infrastructure within the region. Each development within the basin then
submits its Master Development Drainage Plan, which identifies the regional infrastructure located within
the development for which the developer is responsible and estimates the cost of said infrastructure. The
final Subdivision Reports fine-tune the locations of each drainage facility.
Each basin’s drainage fee is then calculated by totaling all of the estimated costs identified by the Master
Development Drainage Plans and dividing that number by the net developable acreage within the basin.
These fees are collected at time of plat and go to reimburse other developers who over-size their
drainage facilities to receive flow from outside their subdivisions.
G-4
For example, Developer Andrew, Developer Bob, and Developer Cal all own 30 acres each of
developable land within the Green Stream Drainage Basin. They commission a Drainage Basin Planning
Study that identifies $900,000 worth of drainage infrastructure needed within the Green Stream Basin,
making the Green Stream Drainage Basin Fee $10,000 per acre. Each developer then commissions his
Master Development Drainage Plan. The plans identify that Developer Andrew is responsible for
$200,000 worth of drainage infrastructure, Developer Bob is responsible for $700,000 and Developer Cal
does not have any drainage responsibilities.
As it so happens, Developer Bob is downstream from both Developer Andrew and Developer Cal, so the
drainage structures on his property must be sized to absorb the flow from developments upstream. Since
Developer Bob’s development alone does not generate the need for $700,000 worth of drainage
infrastructure, he is eligible for cost recovery from Developer Andrew and Developer Cal.
At time of platting, Developer Bob brings to the City his receipt showing that he built $700,000 worth of
drainage structure. Developer Bob plats his 30 acres, on which he would have to pay $300,000 (30 acres
@ $10,000 per acre) worth of drainage fees. Since Developer Bob built $700,000 worth of drainage
infrastructure however, he ends up with a credit of $400,000. When Developer Andrew plats his 30
acres, he shows the City that he has built $200,000 dollars worth and therefore only has to pay $100,000
rather than the $300,000 in drainage fees. Developer Cal also decides to plat his 30 acres and has to
pay $300,000 worth of drainage fees. Finally, Developer Cal’s $300,000 drainage fee and Developer
Andrew’s $100,000 drainage fee will then be combined by the City to reimburse Developer Bob.
Drainage basin fees are a necessary mechanism for equitable distribution of the cost of drainage
infrastructure. Through this process, every developer ends up paying for the impact of his or her
subdivision to the City drainageways.
Conclusion
Current City Code provisions address certain Annexor obligations set forth in the Annexation Agreement.
Reimbursement and/or cost recovery for land dedication for park and school sites, utility infrastructure,
and drainage infrastructure are all carried out through existing mechanisms and thus, do not need to be
included in the ranch-wide reimbursement program.
G-5
Planning Department
Appendix H
Current School/Park Fee Calculation
Methodology
City of Colorado Springs
Current Process for School and Park Fee Calculations
The following process is completed by the School and Park Fee Advisory Committee to determine the
land value recommended to City Council for use in calculating the fee-in-lieu of land for school and park
sites as well as other land-related fees such as land designated for drainage plans.
Land Value Calculation
Step 1
Following the current Ordinance, the Advisory Committee will meet beginning in the fall of each year.
Land sales that fit within defined criteria will be analyzed to determine the average cost of an acre of raw
land for the current year. Criteria include the following:
• Parcels should be between 5 and 75 acres in size.

• All utilities should reach the site.
• The site should be zoned residential.
• There should be no entitlements that would benefit buyer’s ultimate use (such as already master
planned, platted, etc).
Step 2
Approximately ten (10) land sales are evaluated in this process. The Advisory Committee will make
adjustments to the sale price in order to make the properties as comparable as possible. Percentage
reductions may be applied regarding entitlements, location, amenities and size. As the City grows and
less in-fill takes place, there are fewer raw land sales available to use for sample data.
Step 3
After determining the adjusted per-acre price for each land sale, the highest and lowest prices are
dropped and the remaining prices are averaged. The resulting figure is the recommended value for an
acre of land to be used in the school and park fee calculations. In 2007, this value is $76,602 per acre.
Park Fee Calculation
Step 1
Determine the required park land per 1,000 persons.
Per current ordinance, we require 7.5 acres /1,000 persons (National Recreation and Parks
Association standard). This equates to .0075 acres/individual.
Step 2
Identify average number of individuals per owner-occupied dwelling and renter-occupied dwelling.
Per current ordinance using 1970 Federal Census data, there is an average of 3.1 persons per
owner-occupied and 2.2 persons per renter-occupied.
Step 3
Identify density of owner-occupied developments and renter-occupied developments.
Per current ordinance, owner-occupied is usually eight (8) units per acre and renter-occupied is
greater than eight (8) units per acre.
Step 4
Determine the density multiplier for owner-occupied development.
Multiply the required park acreage per person by average number of individuals per dwelling unit.
.0075 x 3.1 = .02325 for 8 units or less per acre
H-1
Determine the density multiplier for renter-occupied development.
Multiply the required park acreage per person by average number of individuals per dwelling unit.
.0075 x 2.2 = .01650 for more than 8 units per acre
Step 5
Determine the fee per dwelling unit.
Multiply the density multiplier by the average land value per acre.
.02325 x $76,602 = $1,781 per owner-occupied dwelling unit
.01650 x $76,602 = $1,264 per renter-occupied dwelling unit
Step 6
Determine total fees due for development.
Multiply the fee per unit by the total number of units.
School Fee Calculation
Step 1
Determine the minimum acreage requirements for school sites.
Per current ordinance, the following requirements are used:

Elementary school 790 students 10 acres (.0127 site acres/student)
Junior high school 1,000 students 20 acres (.02 site acres/student)
Senior high school 2,000 students 45 acres (.0225 site acres/student)
Step 2
Identify average number of students per owner-occupied dwelling and renter-occupied dwelling.
Per current ordinance using a 1973 school population study of Colorado Springs, there are an
average of:
Elementary
5,499 units owner-occupied 4,032 students total .7332
students/dwelling unit
2,651 units renter-occupied 469 .1769
Junior High
Senior High
Step 3
Identify density of owner-occupied developments and renter-occupied developments.
Per current ordinance, owner-occupied is usually eight (8) units per acre and renter-occupied is
greater than eight (8) units per acre.
Step 4
Determine the density multiplier for owner-occupied development.
H-2
Multiply the average number of students per dwelling unit by average site acres required per
student.
Elementary .7332 x .0127 = .0093 acres per dwelling unit

Junior High .3075 x .02 = .0061
Senior High .2071 x .0225 = .0046
Total = .0200
Determine the density multiplier for renter-occupied development.
Multiply the average number of students per dwelling unit by average site acres required per
student.
Elementary .1769 x .0127 = .0022 acres per dwelling unit

Junior High .0509 x .02 = .0010
Senior High .07 x .0225 = .0016
Total = .0048
Step 5
Determine the fee per dwelling unit.
Multiply the density multiplier by the average land value per acre.
.02 x $76,602 = $1,532 per owner-occupied dwelling unit
.0048 x $76,602 = $368 per renter-occupied dwelling unit
Step 6
Determine total fees due for development.
Multiply the fee per unit by the total number of units.
H-3
PARK AND SCHOOL FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE NO. 4768 AS AMENDED - DEDICATION OF LAND OR FEES OR

COMBINATION OF BOTH PARKS AND SCHOOLS FOR RESIDENTIAL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL JANUARY 2007
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 24, 2007, RESOLUTION NO. 13-07
PARK
1. DENSITY/UNIT - 8 UNITS PER ACRE OR LESS
LAND DEDICATION PER UNIT FEES PER UNIT

.02325 ACRE (1,013 SQ. FT.) $1,781.00
A. LAND DEDICATION FORMULA FOR PARKS - NUMBER OF UNITS

X.02325 ACRE =
B. FEES FORMULA FOR PARKS - NUMBER UNITS X FEES =
2. DENSITY/UNIT - GREATER THAN 8 UNITS PER ACRE

.01650 ACRE (719 SQ. FT.) $1,264.00
A. LAND DEDICATION FORMULA FOR PARKS - NUMBER OF UNITS

X .01650 ACRE =
B. FEES FORMULA FOR PARKS - NUMBER OF UNITS X FEES =
SCHOOL
3. DENSITY/UNIT - 8 UNITS PER ACRE OR LESS

.02 ACRE (871 SQ. FT.) $1,532.00
A. LAND DEDICATION FORMULA FOR SCHOOLS - NUMBER OF UNITS

X .02 ACRE =
B. FEES FORMULA FOR SCHOOLS - NUMBER OF UNITS X FEES =
4. DENSITY/UNIT - GREATER THAN 8 UNITS PER ACRE

.0048 ACRE (209 SQ. FT.) $368.00
A. LAND DEDICATION FORMULA FOR SCHOOLS - NUMBER OF UNITS

X .0048 ACRES =
B. FEES FORMULA FOR SCHOOLS - NUMBER OF UNITS X FEES =
PARK AND SCHOOL FEES ARE BASED ON LAND VALUE OF $76,602 PER ACRE
(This would reflect an approximate 45.7697% increase from 2006)
H-4
Planning Department
Appendix I
Cost Estimates Prepared by PCI
Date: 4/23/2007 Banning-Lewis Ranch Description: COSTS
ANNEX. Shared Obligations Cost Estimate Table
REF.
NEW OR
CATEGORY COST ESTIMATE ($) NOTES
EXISTING
SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS STUDY NEW $75,000 Estimated total cost of this report by PCI
III. STREETS/TRAFFIC
BANNING-LEWIS PARKWAY
ROW (North of Drennan Road) NEW $55,855,114 729 acres, approximately - New District financed and built.
12,007' grade 8 / pave 4 lanes, plus 44,988' 4 lanes, plus bridge abutments
IMPROVEMENTS (Full Annexation requirements
NEW $63,608,174 for 8 lanes. Traffic Signals added = $2,080,000. New District finanaced
North of Drennan Road) and built.
BLR PKWY - INTERSECT. & OVER/UNDER PASS
North of Drennan Road NEW $3,500,000 7 @ $250,000 each, 1 overpasses @ $750,000 each
Estimate for all accel, decel, turn lanes, design, const. et.c ROW included
BLR PKWY/SH-24 INTERCHANGE NEW $25,000,000 under the roadway category
IV. DRAINAGE
SAND CREEK
RE-STUDY NEW $92,500 Estimate
Use Drainge Basin Fee: (6736 acres) x ($8,133/ac Drainage + $511/ac
REGIONAL IMPROVEMENTS EXISTING $70,269,952 Bridge + $1,788/ac Pond)
JIMMY CAMP CREEK
STUDY NEW $300,000 Estimate
Use an estimated $9,000/ac Drainge Basin Fee and $2,000/ac Pond Fee,
REGIONAL IMPROVEMENTS EXISTING $183,876,000 only. (16,716 acres) x ($9.000/ac Drainage + $2,000/ac Pond)
VII. PARKS, SCHOOLS & TRANSIT

LAND DEDICATION SITES
PARKS EXISTING $93,801,524 1,225 acres, approximately.
SCHOOLS EXISTING $70,160,538 916 acres, approximately.
BLRMC required to dedicate with no reimbursement in conjunction BLR
ROCK ISLAND TRAIL ROW NEW $0 Annexation filing 8
PARK & RIDE SITE NEW $88,858 Parcel 268.04, 1.16 acres
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL
AIR MONITORING STATIONS NEW $38,301 Two 0.25-acre sites
IX. SUPPORT SERVICES, FIRE & POLICE

RADIO REPEATER STATION NEW $210,000 Site not selected yet. Amount per Annexation Agreement.
CITY SERVICE CENTER NEW $2,054,466 Site 290.02
FIRE STATIONS
Sites 270.14, 293.09 & 331.11 just for Fire Stations. Site 342.09 for Fire and
LAND DEDICATION NEW $1,467,694 Police, and Site 307.04 Fire and Water Tank.
IMPROVEMENTS NEW $19,180,500 5 Fire Stations at $3,836,100 each
EQUIPMENT NEW $2,979,839 5 Equipment at $595,968 each
Sites 274.03, 274.06, 310.10 & 347.08. Site 342.09 is shared and has been
POLICE SUBTATION SITES NEW $1,322,151 counted in Fire already.
X. STREET DIVISION
STREET SWEEPING DISPOSAL SITES NEW $2,717,073 Sites 271.12, 338.08 and 338.12
XIII. UTILITIES - WATER

WATER SERVICE EXTENSION
Site 273.03 plus $76,782,424 allowance for pump and storage as provided
PUMP STATION & SUCTION STORAGE EXISTING $77,389,878 by CSU. (See Appendix F)
WELL SITES NEW $1,195,807 68 well sites at 10,000 sf each, 15.64 acres
WATER STORAGE TANK SITES NEW $1,374,240 293.07 & 321.05 for tanks only. Site 307.04 included in Fire
XIV. UTILITIES - WASTEWATER

REGIONAL WASTEWATER
East site from Carollo Study - 10 mgd initial plant option + future (2005
TREATMENT FACILITY EXISTING $161,095,000 DOLLARS) (See Appendix E)
East site from Carollo Study - two interceptor option minus ROW (2005
INTERCEPTOR EXISTING $41,451,000 DOLLARS)
TRACTS EXISTING $3,529,000 East site from Carollo Study - ROW present and future (2005 DOLLARS)
XV. UTILITIES - NATURAL GAS

REGULATOR STATION SITES EXISTING $0 City-wide Fees and CSU recovery apply.
XVI. UTILITIES - ELECTRIC

SUBSTATION SITES NEW $6,986,102 Sites 295.02, 301.05, 309.02, 329.02, 329.05, 338.09 & 344.02
SERVICE CENTER NEW $2,223,756 Site 329.01/329.04
TOTAL OF ALL: $891,842,467 ALL AMOUNTS ARE IN 2007 DOLLARS, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN
TOTAL EXISTING: $701,572,891
TOTAL NEW ANNEXATION OBLIGATION FEE: $42,306,287 All Shared Costs minus BLP ROW and Improvements
TOTAL NEW BANNING-LEWIS PARKWAY FEE: $147,963,289 All BLP ROW and Improvement Costs
NOTES:
EXISTING: INDICATES AN OBLIGATION IS SUBJECT TO AN EXISTING REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM

NEW: INDICATES AN OBLIGATION THAT REQUIRES A NEW REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM
Prepared by:
Planning Department
30 S. Nevada Avenue
Page: I-1 Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Date: 4/23/2007 Banning-Lewis Ranch Description: ROADS
Shared Obligations Cost Estimate Table
LENGTH ROW AREA LAND COST DEVELOPER LAND SHARED LAND DEVELOPER ROAD SHARED ROAD
ROAD NAME CLASS LANES ROAD COST ($)
(FT) (FT) (ACRES) ($76,602/ac.) COST ($) COST ($) COST ($) COST ($)
BLP - US24 to Hwy94 12,007 Parkway/Freeway (2003) 332 237.775 4 $18,214,041 $0 $18,214,041 $13,286,249 $0 $13,286,249
Banning Lewis Parkway 44,988 Parkway/Freeway (2003) 332 491.385 4 $37,641,074 $0 $37,641,074 $48,241,926 $0 $48,241,926
Banning Lewis Parkway 14,354 Parkway/Freeway (2003) 332 28.790 4 $2,205,372 $0 $2,205,372 $15,392,207 $0 $15,392,207
State Hwy 94 17,420 Parkway/Expressway (1987) 300 123.460 4 $9,457,283 $1,260,910 $8,196,372 $18,679,967 $5,176,902 $13,503,065
State Hwy 24 17,943 Parkway/Expressway (1987) 250 83.697 4 $6,411,358 $1,298,767 $5,112,591 $19,240,795 $5,332,328 $13,908,467
Barnes Road 17,902 Major Arterial (1987) 210 87.623 4 $6,712,097 $1,295,799 $5,416,298 $18,021,669 $5,320,143 $12,701,526
Bradley Road 8,907 Major Arterial (1987) 210 78.830 4 $6,038,536 $644,715 $5,393,821 $8,966,541 $2,646,996 $6,319,545
Fontaine Blvd. 5,277 Major Arterial (1987) 165 9.994 4 $765,560 $381,965 $383,596 $5,312,275 $1,568,227 $3,744,048
Marksheffel Rd. 49,940 Major Arterial (1987) 165 124.255 4 $9,518,182 $3,614,803 $5,903,378 $50,273,834 $14,841,244 $35,432,590
North Carefree Cir. 14,924 Major Arterial (1987) 165 55.841 4 $4,277,532 $1,080,243 $3,197,290 $15,023,762 $4,435,137 $10,588,626
Vista Del Tierra Dr. (S) 33,708 Major Arterial (1987) 165 124.741 4 $9,555,410 $2,439,883 $7,115,527 $33,933,328 $10,017,394 $23,915,934
Falcon Meadow Blvd (S) 51,088 Major Arterial (1987) 165 191.925 4 $14,701,839 $3,697,899 $11,003,940 $51,429,508 $15,182,408 $36,247,099
301.02 - 322.02 14,115 Major Arterial (1987) 165 51.981 4 $3,981,849 $1,021,685 $2,960,164 $14,209,355 $4,194,717 $10,014,638
307.03 - 312.04 14,343 Major Arterial (1987) 165 52.809 4 $4,045,275 $1,038,188 $3,007,087 $14,438,879 $4,262,474 $10,176,404
321.05 - 327.01 19,576 Major Arterial (1987) 165 73.118 4 $5,600,985 $1,416,968 $4,184,017 $19,706,860 $5,817,625 $13,889,235
308.03 - 347.09 34,282 Major Arterial (1987) 165 123.833 4 $9,485,855 $2,481,431 $7,004,424 $34,511,165 $10,187,976 $24,323,189
328.05 - 333.02 17,553 Major Arterial (1987) 165 62.872 4 $4,816,121 $1,270,537 $3,545,584 $17,670,337 $5,216,427 $12,453,910
334.01 - 333.05 15,824 Major Arterial (1987) 165 54.125 4 $4,146,083 $1,145,387 $3,000,696 $15,929,779 $4,702,600 $11,227,179
Stetson Hills Blvd. 14,443 Principal Arterial (2003) 160 54.581 4 $4,181,014 $1,045,427 $3,135,587 $14,539,547 $4,292,192 $10,247,355
Dublin Blvd. 11,832 Principal Arterial (2006) 160 46.563 4 $3,566,819 $856,435 $2,710,384 $11,911,093 $3,516,252 $8,394,842
Vista Del Tierra Dr. (N) 7,483 Major Collector (2006) VAR 15.035 4 $1,151,711 $541,641 $610,070 $6,261,955 $2,223,809 $4,038,145
Vista Del Oro Blvd. 14,440 Varies VAR 28.011 3 $2,145,699 $1,045,209 $1,100,489 $8,207,726 $4,291,301 $3,916,425
Colorado Centre Blvd. 16,800 Major Collector (1987) 140 52.115 4 $3,992,113 $1,216,033 $2,776,080 $14,058,644 $4,992,649 $9,065,995
311.02 - 320.06 19,845 Major Collector (1987) 140 61.988 4 $4,748,405 $1,436,439 $3,311,966 $16,606,774 $5,897,567 $10,709,207
299.04 - 311.03 11,446 Major Collector (1987) 140 35.207 4 $2,696,927 $828,495 $1,868,432 $9,578,288 $3,401,539 $6,176,749
299.03 - 310.12 24,680 Major Collector (1987) 140 75.692 4 $5,798,159 $1,786,410 $4,011,748 $20,652,818 $7,334,439 $13,318,379
310.08 - 310.09 1,290 Major Collector (1987) 140 4.017 4 $307,710 $93,374 $214,336 $1,079,503 $383,364 $696,139
Drennan Rd 11,615 Collector (1987) 110 20.223 3 $1,549,122 $840,728 $708,395 $6,601,990 $3,451,763 $3,150,227
Vista Del Prado Blvd (S) 9,814 Collector (1987) 110 23.907 3 $1,831,324 $710,366 $1,120,958 $5,578,298 $2,916,539 $2,661,758
277.01 - 292.01 24,865 Collector (1987) 110 61.500 3 $4,711,023 $1,799,801 $2,911,222 $14,133,317 $7,389,418 $6,743,899
276.02 - 283.02 12,600 Collector (1987) 110 30.900 3 $2,367,002 $912,025 $1,454,977 $7,161,866 $3,744,487 $3,417,379
285.01.02 - 288.02 7,647 Collector (1987) 110 18.544 3 $1,420,507 $553,512 $866,995 $4,346,570 $2,272,547 $2,074,024
282.04 - 282.06 1,433 Collector (1987) 110 3.201 3 $245,203 $103,725 $141,478 $814,520 $425,861 $388,659
289.02 - 292.04 7,235 Collector (1987) 110 17.433 3 $1,335,403 $523,690 $811,712 $4,112,389 $2,150,108 $1,962,281
323.01 - 325.01 17,261 Collector (1987) 110 42.569 3 $3,260,871 $1,249,402 $2,011,469 $9,811,188 $5,129,650 $4,681,538
323.06 - 325.04 5,088 Collector (1987) 110 12.463 3 $954,691 $368,284 $586,406 $2,892,030 $1,512,059 $1,379,970
333.02 - 333.05 5,199 Collector (1987) 110 8.181 3 $626,681 $376,319 $250,362 $2,955,122 $1,545,047 $1,410,076
349.02 - 349.03 2,646 Collector (1987) 110 6.252 3 $478,916 $191,525 $287,390 $1,503,992 $786,342 $717,650
344.01 - 349.01 10,214 Collector (1987) 110 25.365 3 $1,943,010 $739,319 $1,203,691 $5,805,659 $3,035,412 $2,770,247
344.01 - 349.04 6,756 Collector (1987) 110 16.763 3 $1,284,079 $489,019 $795,060 $3,840,124 $2,007,758 $1,832,366
Vista Del Prado Blvd (N) 10,294 Major Collector (2006) 96 22.972 4 $1,759,701 $745,110 $1,014,591 $8,614,267 $3,059,186 $5,555,081
Vista Del Valley Rd. 1,173 Major Collector (2006) 96 2.469 4 $189,130 $84,905 $104,225 $981,595 $348,594 $633,001
Falcon Meadow Blvd (N) 2,731 Major Collector (2006) 96 6.223 4 $476,694 $197,678 $279,016 $2,285,367 $811,603 $1,473,764
Horizonview Drive 7,663 Collector (1987) 80 13.983 3 $1,071,126 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Foreign Trade Zone Blvd. 2,780 Collector (1987) 80 5.355 3 $410,204 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Aerospace Blvd. 7,535 Collector (1987) 80 13.754 3 $1,053,584 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Import Court 584 Collector (1987) 80 1.191 3 $91,233 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Vista Del Pico Blvd. 7,918 Collector (2006) 72 13.535 3 $1,036,808 $573,128 $463,680 $4,500,607 $2,353,083 $2,147,524
Vista Del Flores St. 1,257 Collector (2006) 72 2.055 3 $157,417 $90,985 $66,432 $714,481 $373,557 $340,924
Vista Del Lago St. 392 Collector (2006) 60 0.515 3 $39,450 $28,374 $11,076 $222,814 $116,495 $106,318
Vista Bonita St. 421 Collector (2006) 60 0.656 3 $50,251 $30,473 $19,778 $239,297 $125,113 $114,184
Circulo Del Sol Loop 4,987 Collector (2006) 60 7.091 3 $543,185 $360,974 $182,211 $2,834,621 $1,482,044 $1,352,577
ROAD TOTALS 684,511 2,570 $196,835,580 $43,907,986 $150,301,448 $593,828,646 $180,272,378 $413,556,268
DATA IN SHADED CELLS HAS NOT BEEN USED IN THE STUDY
Planning Department Prepared by:

30 S. Nevada Avenue
Date: 4/23/2007 Banning-Lewis Ranch Description: FACILITIES
FACILITY MASTER FACILITY FACILITY COST

AREA (ACRES) LAND COST ($) SHARED COST ($)
PLAN PARCEL CODE ($)
270.14 1 0.85 $65,112 $5,332,068 $5,397,180

293.09 1 0.75 $57,452 $5,332,068 $5,389,520
331.11 1 1.02 $78,134 $5,332,068 $5,410,202
268.04 (Old 267.08) 2 1.16 $88,858 n/a $88,858
271.12 3 17.99 $1,378,070 n/a $1,378,070
338.08 3 8.20 $628,136 n/a $628,136
338.12 3 9.28 $710,867 n/a $710,867
293.07 4 9.92 $759,892 n/a $759,892
273.03 4 7.93 $607,454 $76,782,424 $77,389,878
321.05 4 8.02 $614,348 n/a $614,348
274.03 5 6.36 $487,189 n/a $487,189
274.06 5 1.73 $132,521 n/a $132,521
310.10 5 7.12 $545,406 n/a $545,406
347.08 5 2.05 $157,034 n/a $157,034
295.02 6 23.36 $1,789,423 n/a $1,789,423
301.05 6 10.42 $798,193 n/a $798,193
309.02 6 21.25 $1,627,793 n/a $1,627,793
329.02 - 329.05 6 11.51 $881,689 n/a $881,689
338.09 6 13.59 $1,041,021 n/a $1,041,021
344.02 6 11.07 $847,984 n/a $847,984
342.09 7 7.53 $576,813 $5,332,068 $5,908,881
290.02 8 26.82 $2,054,466 n/a $2,054,466
329.01/329.04 8 29.03 $2,223,756 n/a $2,223,756
307.04 9 9.01 $690,184 $5,332,068 $6,022,252
FACILITIES TOTALS 246 $18,841,794 $103,442,764 $122,284,558
Facility Codes 1 = Fire Station 4 = Water Site 7 = Joint Police and Fire
2 = Park and Ride Site 5 = Police Station 8 = P.W. & Serv. Ctrs.
3 = Trash Site 6 = Electric Substation 9 = Joint Fire and Water
Prepared by:
Planning Department
30 S. Nevada Avenue
Date: 4/23/2007 Banning-Lewis Ranch Description: MISCELLANEOUS
MISCELLANEOUS ITEM ESTIMATE ($) COMMENTS
BLP - Bridge abutments $400,000 4 @ Parkway Interchanges @ 94 and 24 only - $100,000 each
BLP - At grade intersections $3,500,000 7 @ $250,000 each, 1 overpasses @ $750,000 each
BLP/US-24 - Interchange $25,000,000
Traffic Control Signals Parkway Only) $2,080,000 Approx. 13 signals @ $160k each
Jimmy Camp Creek Basin Study $300,000
JCC - Basin drainage facilities $183,876,000 Est. @ $9,000 Drainage, $2,000 Pond Fees/acre on 16,716 acres
Sand Creek Basin Re-study $92,500
SC - Basin drainage facilities $70,269,952 $8,133 Drainage, $511 Bridge, $1,788 Pond Fees/acre on 6,736
Design / Construct under drain systems for n/a
Wastewater facilities n/a CSU recovery rules apply
30' wide Rock Island Loop $1,344,365 Est. @ 30' wide by 25,486 ' long or 17.55 acres @$76,602/ac
Dedicate land for air quality monitoring $38,301 2 sites of not more than 0.25 acres each
Noise attenuation features n/a
Radio repeater station $210,000
Water mains n/a CSU recovery rules apply
Pending well sites $1,195,807 10,000 sf per well site - Assume 68 sites
Water pump stations $0 CSU recovery rules applies
Gas mains n/a CSU recovery rules applies
30'x30' Gas regulator stations n/a CSU recovery rules applies
Electric rights-of-way, line extensions and n/a CSU recovery rules applies
Traffic Control Signals Parkway Only - $480,000 Approx. 3 signals @ $160k each
BLP - At grade intersections - Colorado $1,000,000 1 @ $250,000 each, 1 overpasses @ $750,000 each
MISCELLANEOUS TOTALS $289,786,925
Prepared by:
Planning Department
30 S. Nevada Avenue
Date: 4/23/2007 Description: ROAD SECTIONS
Banning-Lewis Ranch
Planning Department Prepared by:

30 S. Nevada Avenue
Planning Department
Appendix J
Annexor Obligation Map
Planning Department
Appendix K
Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan
Parcel Data
DATE: 4/23/2007 BANNING-LEWIS RANCH MASTER PLAN - 2006
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

PARCEL SUB SUB ISLAND 1988 1988 ZONING PARCEL PROPOSED MAJOR GROSS PARKS / PUBLIC EXISTING RAILROAD PLANNING
NUMBER # # RR? LANDUSE CODE ACRES PARKWAY ROADS ACRES OS SCHOOL FACILITIES FLDPLAIN ACREAGE ACRES
329.03 N R&D PIP-2 70.59 12.99 6.95 50.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.65
334.01 N AI M2 321.36 0.00 10.49 310.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 310.87
335.01 N R&D PIP-2 218.16 39.45 12.95 165.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 165.76
272.12 N RL R1-6000 5.51 0.00 2.34 3.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.17
272.13 N RL R1-6000 19.56 0.00 4.30 15.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.26
273.06 N RM R5 61.18 16.94 3.11 41.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.13
273.07 N NR PBC-1 9.06 0.00 3.14 5.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.92
283.01 .01 N IDP PIP-2 56.99 0.00 7.64 49.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.35
284.01 .01 N IDP PIP-2 89.34 0.00 5.73 83.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 83.61
284.03 .02 N RMH R5 2.30 0.00 0.85 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.45
285.01 .01 N RMH R5 78.66 11.88 6.29 60.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.49
285.02 N P-S R5 4.81 0.00 0.82 3.99 3.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.03 N ES R5 7.99 0.00 0.00 7.99 0.00 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
286.01 .01 N OH OC 48.08 14.76 2.74 30.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.58
272.14 N PF-W R5 2.22 0.00 0.00 2.22 0.00 0.00 2.22 0.00 0.00 0.00
293.04 N P-S R5 3.93 0.00 0.00 3.93 3.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
293.07 N PF-W R5 9.92 0.00 0.00 9.92 0.00 0.00 9.92 0.00 0.00 0.00
293.08 N RM R5 47.81 4.23 2.79 40.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.79
293.02 .01 N P-COS PARK 552.04 24.32 7.13 520.59 520.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
293.02 .02 N P-COS PARK 142.70 0.00 0.00 142.70 142.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
328.05 N AI M2 31.37 0.00 1.56 29.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.81
328.06 N AI M2 26.01 0.00 1.09 24.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.92
283.01 .03 N IDP PIP-2 44.34 0.00 5.23 39.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.11
311.01 N IDP PIP-2 30.78 0.00 6.25 24.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.53
328.01 N R PBC-2 10.01 0.00 2.50 7.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.51
328.02 N R PBC-2 20.46 0.00 1.27 19.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.19
321.01 .02 N OL OC 5.03 0.00 0.77 4.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.26
321.04 .02 N R&D PIP-2 27.82 0.00 4.31 23.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.51
267.07 N RVL R-ESTATE 11.28 0.00 2.21 9.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.07
311.02 N IDP PIP-2 86.73 0.00 8.66 78.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.07
311.03 N R PBC-2 7.97 0.00 1.91 6.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.06
311.04 N IDP PIP-2 45.46 0.00 6.06 39.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.40
301.03 N INST SU 101.09 0.00 6.20 94.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 94.89
301.07 N INST PBC-2 48.91 0.00 7.04 41.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.87
328.03 N AI M2 220.69 0.00 6.38 214.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 214.31
313.01 N ACL PBC-2 78.19 0.00 17.60 60.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.59
315.01 N OL OC 63.21 28.01 4.19 31.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.01
315.02 N OL OC 27.69 2.91 3.50 21.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.28
268.04 N PF-P&R R-ESTATE 2.22 0.00 1.06 1.16 0.00 0.00 1.16 0.00 0.00 0.00
298.01 .01 N R&D PIP-2 11.63 0.00 6.50 5.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.13
298.01 .02 N R&D PIP-2 27.42 0.00 8.07 19.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.35
299.02 N R&D PIP-2 91.11 0.00 14.90 76.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.21
300.01 .01 N R&D PIP-2 37.55 0.00 10.59 26.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.96
300.01 .02 N R&D PIP-2 42.50 0.00 10.45 32.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.05
300.02 .02 N R&D PIP-2 4.31 0.00 3.16 1.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.15
300.03 N OL OC 23.00 0.00 6.53 16.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.47
PAGE: K-1
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

300.04 N R&D PIP-2 26.43 0.00 11.08 15.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.35
264.10 N RL R1-6000 62.40 0.00 2.62 59.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.78
264.11 N P-L R1-6000 25.77 0.00 0.00 25.77 25.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
264.12 N MS R1-6000 17.27 0.00 1.28 15.99 0.00 15.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
264.13 N RL R1-6000 42.24 0.00 4.59 37.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.65
265.01 N RL R1-6000 45.80 0.00 2.53 43.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.27
265.02 N RL R1-6000 32.98 0.00 2.21 30.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.77
265.03 N RM R5 23.14 0.00 1.28 21.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.86
265.04 N R PBC-2 23.58 0.00 3.79 19.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.79
265.05 N RH R5 47.53 3.64 0.00 43.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.89
265.06 N ES R1-6000 7.93 0.00 0.00 7.93 0.00 7.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
265.07 N P-L R5 22.33 2.20 0.00 20.13 20.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
265.09 N RH R5 95.01 12.68 2.99 79.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79.34
265.10 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
265.11 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
266.01 N RH R5 95.22 18.04 3.60 73.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.58
266.02 N P-L R1-6000 40.99 0.00 2.39 38.60 38.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
266.03 N RL R1-6000 27.55 0.00 1.30 26.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.25
266.04 N R PBC-2 9.48 0.00 1.94 7.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.54
266.05 N RL R1-6000 91.79 0.00 9.17 82.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82.62
266.06 N R PBC-2 20.93 0.00 3.02 17.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.91
266.07 N ES R1-6000 10.04 0.00 0.61 9.43 0.00 9.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267.01 N RL R1-6000 79.50 0.00 4.57 74.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 74.93
267.02 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267.03 N ES R1-6000 9.39 0.00 0.00 9.39 0.00 9.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267.04 N RM R5 36.88 0.00 4.45 32.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.43
267.05 N RL R1-6000 121.07 0.00 2.67 118.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 118.40
267.06 N NR PBC-1 6.81 0.00 1.38 5.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.43
267.08 N RVL R-ESTATE 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88
267.09 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267.10 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
268.01 N RVL R-ESTATE 43.54 0.00 2.47 41.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.07
268.02 N P-S R-ESTATE 6.62 0.00 0.60 6.02 6.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
268.03 N RVL R-ESTATE 22.60 0.00 3.90 18.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.70
268.05 Y RVL R-ESTATE 20.36 0.00 3.47 16.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.89
269.01 N RM R5 39.82 0.00 4.82 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00
269.02 N RL R1-6000 36.21 0.00 1.47 34.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.74
269.03 N NR PBC-1 7.28 0.00 1.17 6.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.11
269.04 N ES R1-6000 8.02 0.00 0.00 8.02 0.00 8.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
269.05 N P-S R1-6000 4.03 0.00 0.00 4.03 4.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
269.06 N RM R5 48.44 7.01 2.67 38.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.76
269.07 N RH R5 64.17 12.36 2.98 48.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.83
269.08 N P-L R5 33.02 3.17 0.00 29.85 29.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
269.09 N RH R5 38.31 6.31 0.00 32.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.00
269.10 N RL R1-6000 25.39 0.00 2.32 23.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.07
269.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-2
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

269.12 N P-S R5 2.01 0.00 0.00 2.01 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
269.13 N P-S R1-6000 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
269.14 N RM R5 4.27 2.09 1.48 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
270.01 N RMH R5 138.23 28.59 5.39 104.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 104.25
270.02 N RM R5 31.84 0.00 3.84 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.00
270.03 N RMH R5 42.34 0.00 7.66 34.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.68
270.04 N RM R5 48.14 0.00 1.82 46.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.32
270.05 .01 N HS R1-6000 22.06 0.00 1.12 20.94 0.00 20.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.05 .02 Y HS R1-6000 5.27 0.00 0.88 4.39 0.00 4.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.05 .03 N HS R1-6000 9.14 0.00 3.19 5.95 0.00 5.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.06 N ES R5 8.47 0.00 0.31 8.16 0.00 8.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.07 N P-S R5 5.15 0.00 0.00 5.15 5.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.08 N RM R5 34.86 0.00 3.58 31.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.28
270.09 N P-L R1-6000 58.34 0.00 4.57 53.77 53.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.10 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.12 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.13 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.14 N PF-F R1-6000 1.01 0.00 0.16 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.00 0.00
270.15 N RMH R5 11.37 2.84 2.40 6.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.13
271.01 N RM R5 57.70 0.00 6.63 51.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.07
271.02 .01 N RL R1-6000 37.96 0.00 4.16 33.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.80
271.02 .02 Y RL R1-6000 1.26 0.00 0.00 1.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.26 0.00
271.03 .01 N ES R1-6000 6.26 0.00 0.00 6.26 0.00 6.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.03 .02 Y ES R1-6000 2.79 0.00 0.00 2.79 0.00 2.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.03 .03 N ES R1-6000 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.04 .01 N RH R5 19.75 0.00 3.33 16.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.42
271.04 .02 Y RH R5 0.22 0.00 0.15 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00
271.05 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.06 .01 N RL R1-6000 113.38 0.00 4.09 109.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 109.29
271.06 .02 Y RL R1-6000 3.64 0.00 0.00 3.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.64 0.00
271.06 .03 N RL R1-6000 5.10 0.00 0.00 5.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.10
271.07 .01 N RM R5 33.18 0.00 2.13 31.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.05
271.07 .02 Y RM R5 4.06 0.00 0.16 3.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.90 0.00
271.07 .03 N RM R5 4.24 0.00 0.51 3.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.73
271.08 N NR PBC-1 6.87 0.00 1.51 5.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.36
271.09 N ES R5 10.57 0.00 0.00 10.57 0.00 10.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.10 N RM R5 50.83 0.00 3.18 47.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.65
271.11 N P-S R5 5.18 0.00 0.00 5.18 5.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.12 N PF-T R-ESTATE 20.24 0.00 2.25 17.99 0.00 0.00 17.99 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.13 .01 N RVL R-ESTATE 74.91 0.00 4.97 69.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.94
271.13 .02 Y RVL R-ESTATE 3.72 0.00 0.37 3.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.35 0.00
271.14 N RM R5 18.80 0.00 2.12 16.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.68
271.15 .01 N P-L R1-6000 20.74 0.00 0.05 20.69 20.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.15 .02 Y P-L R1-6000 5.07 0.00 0.00 5.07 5.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.15 .03 N P-L R1-6000 9.60 0.00 0.53 9.07 9.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-3
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

271.16 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.17 .01 N P-S R1-6000 1.29 0.00 0.40 0.89 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.17 .02 Y P-S R1-6000 2.70 0.00 0.28 2.43 2.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
271.17 .03 N P-S R1-6000 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272.01 N RM R5 56.48 0.00 7.72 48.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.76
272.02 N RL R1-6000 90.42 0.00 4.76 85.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 85.66
272.03 N ES R1-6000 7.99 0.00 0.00 7.99 0.00 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272.04 N P-S R1-6000 5.46 0.00 0.00 5.46 5.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272.05 N RM R5 24.23 0.00 0.60 23.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.63
272.06 N RL R1-6000 94.33 0.00 9.12 85.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 85.21
272.07 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272.08 N RL R1-6000 14.51 0.00 1.48 13.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.03
272.09 N RL R1-6000 55.83 0.00 5.55 50.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.28
272.10 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
273.01 N RH R5 66.48 11.54 6.01 48.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.93
273.02 N MS R5 20.18 0.00 2.85 17.33 0.00 17.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
273.03 N PF-W R5 10.27 2.34 0.00 7.93 0.00 0.00 7.93 0.00 0.00 0.00
273.04 N RH R5 37.41 2.84 3.81 30.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.76
273.05 N P-L R5 22.35 0.00 1.38 20.97 20.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.01 N ACM PBC-1 20.97 8.49 0.51 11.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.97
274.02 .01 N RM R5 21.42 0.00 2.30 19.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.12
274.02 .02 Y RM R5 6.03 0.00 0.12 5.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.91 0.00
274.02 .03 N RM R5 26.03 0.00 1.09 24.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.94
274.03 .01 N PF-P R5 4.31 0.00 0.07 4.24 0.00 0.00 4.24 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.03 .02 Y PF-P R5 2.31 0.00 0.29 2.02 0.00 0.00 2.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.03 .03 N PF-P R5 1.88 0.00 1.78 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.04 N ACL PBC-2 30.14 3.76 1.46 24.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.92
274.05 N P-S R5 5.23 0.00 0.00 5.23 5.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.06 N PF-P R5 2.39 0.00 0.66 1.73 0.00 0.00 1.73 0.00 0.00 0.00
274.07 .01 N RM R5 0.56 0.00 0.48 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08
274.07 .02 Y RM R5 0.23 0.00 0.14 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00
275.01 N ACL PBC-2 46.77 5.14 1.40 40.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.23
275.02 .01 N ACM PBC-2 12.80 0.00 2.34 10.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.46
275.02 .02 Y ACM PBC-2 2.74 0.00 0.26 2.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.48 0.00
275.02 .03 N ACM PBC-2 14.94 0.00 2.30 12.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.64
275.03 N ACL PBC-2 43.08 11.94 0.00 31.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.14
276.01 .01 N RH R5 9.32 0.00 0.29 9.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.03
276.01 .02 Y RH R5 1.05 0.00 0.12 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.00
276.01 .03 Y RH R5 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00
276.01 .04 N RH R5 1.89 0.00 0.29 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60
276.01 .05 N RH R5 6.52 0.00 0.53 5.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.99
276.02 N RH R5 15.03 0.00 2.20 12.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.83
276.03 N RH R5 20.14 0.00 3.53 16.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.61
276.04 .01 N RH R5 26.72 0.00 3.92 22.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.80
276.04 .02 Y RH R5 0.69 0.00 0.55 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00
PAGE: K-4
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

276.05 N P-S R5 3.94 0.00 0.00 3.94 3.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
276.06 .01 N P-S R5 4.21 0.00 0.00 4.21 4.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
276.06 .02 Y P-S R5 1.52 0.00 0.00 1.52 1.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
276.06 .03 N P-S R5 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
276.07 N RH R5 20.89 0.00 3.75 17.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.14
276.08 .01 N RH R5 3.44 0.00 0.31 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13
276.08 .02 Y RH R5 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00
276.08 .03 N RH R5 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26
277.01 N ACL PBC-2 152.63 0.00 11.01 141.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 141.62
277.02 N ACL PBC-2 2.90 0.00 0.58 2.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.32
278.01 N RH R5 5.94 0.00 0.54 5.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.40
278.02 N ACL PBC-2 19.15 0.00 3.59 15.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.56
278.03 N RH R5 30.73 0.00 2.73 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.00
278.04 N ACM PBC-2 49.73 0.00 6.55 43.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.18
278.05 N RH R5 4.15 0.00 1.24 2.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.91
278.06 N RH R5 10.40 0.00 2.70 7.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.70
279.01 N ACL PBC-2 14.97 0.00 3.66 11.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.31
279.02 N ACH PBC-2 34.03 0.00 5.70 28.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.33
279.03 N ACL PBC-2 21.26 0.00 3.36 17.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.90
280.01 N RH R5 16.39 0.00 3.62 12.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.77
280.02 N RM R5 22.99 0.00 3.17 19.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.82
280.03 N RL R1-6000 13.38 0.00 2.62 10.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.76
280.04 N RL R1-6000 34.49 0.00 5.27 29.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.22
280.05 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
280.06 N RM R5 10.86 0.00 2.27 8.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.59
280.07 N RMH R5 45.77 0.00 10.49 35.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.28
280.08 N ES R5 10.82 0.00 0.00 10.82 0.00 10.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
280.09 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
280.10 N P-L R5 27.50 0.00 1.12 26.38 26.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
280.11 N P-S R5 5.59 0.00 0.00 5.59 5.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
280.12 N RH R5 57.12 0.00 5.72 51.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.40
280.13 N RM R5 44.16 0.00 0.38 43.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.78
280.14 N RL R1-6000 3.42 0.00 0.40 3.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.02
280.15 N RM R5 30.28 0.00 5.76 24.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.52
281.01 N RH R5 104.21 0.00 15.79 88.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 88.42
281.02 N R PBC-2 17.99 0.00 3.96 14.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.03
281.03 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
282.01 N P-S R5 19.85 0.00 4.03 15.82 15.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
282.02 N RM R5 102.36 0.00 9.26 93.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 93.10
282.03 N RM R5 35.43 0.00 0.62 34.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.81
282.04 N ES R1-6000 14.48 0.00 2.75 11.73 0.00 11.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
282.05 N P-S R1-6000 9.25 0.00 0.00 9.25 9.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
282.06 N RL R1-6000 66.04 0.00 9.36 56.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.68
282.07 N RL R1-6000 64.08 0.00 3.98 60.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.10
282.08 N P-S R1-6000 10.28 0.00 0.78 9.50 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
282.09 N RL R1-6000 34.41 0.00 3.44 30.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.97
PAGE: K-5
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

282.10 N RL N/A 2.73 0.00 0.00 2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.73
283.01 .02 N IDP PIP-2 22.60 0.00 2.72 19.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.88
283.02 N R PBC-2 38.34 0.00 6.21 32.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.13
284.01 .02 N IDP PIP-2 89.64 0.00 6.52 83.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 83.12
284.02 N P-S R5 14.12 0.00 4.07 10.05 10.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.03 .01 N RMH R5 42.54 0.00 2.69 39.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.85
284.04 .01 N HS R5 30.55 0.00 2.13 28.42 0.00 28.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.04 .02 Y HS R5 5.81 0.00 1.20 4.61 0.00 4.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.04 .03 N HS R5 5.83 0.00 2.49 3.34 0.00 3.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.05 N OS R5 2.78 0.00 0.00 2.78 2.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.06 .01 N OS R5 7.53 0.00 0.86 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.06 .02 N OS R5 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.07 N OS PIP-2 4.38 0.00 0.00 4.38 4.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
284.08 N OS R5 3.24 0.00 1.23 2.01 2.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.01 .02 N RMH R5 51.59 2.88 4.74 43.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.97
285.04 .01 N RM R5 15.56 0.00 2.80 12.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.76
285.04 .02 Y RM R5 3.75 0.00 0.24 3.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.51 0.00
285.04 .03 N RM R5 2.89 0.00 0.00 2.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.89
285.05 .01 N MS R5 19.13 0.00 3.29 15.84 0.00 15.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.06 .01 N RH R5 50.90 12.68 1.67 36.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.55
285.06 .02 Y RH R5 3.24 0.79 0.08 2.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.37 0.00
285.06 .03 N RH R5 7.84 0.00 1.36 6.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.48
285.06 .04 Y RH R5 1.53 0.00 0.00 1.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.53 0.00
285.07 .01 N P-S R5 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.34 1.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.07 .02 Y P-S R5 2.10 0.00 0.00 2.10 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.07 .03 N P-S R5 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
285.08 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
286.01 .02 Y OH OC 7.56 0.00 0.48 7.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.06 6.02
286.01 .03 N OH OC 11.32 0.00 3.15 8.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.17
286.02 N RH R5 67.10 11.22 3.88 52.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.00
286.03 N RM R5 19.97 0.00 1.43 18.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.54
286.04 N ES R5 11.83 0.00 0.89 10.94 0.00 10.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
286.05 N RM R5 8.13 0.00 2.21 5.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.92
286.06 N RL R1-6000 32.43 0.00 4.02 28.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.41
286.07 N OL OC 43.76 0.00 3.73 40.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.03
286.08 N P-S OC 9.22 0.00 2.19 7.03 7.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
286.09 N ACM PBC-2 34.74 0.00 4.15 30.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.59
286.10 N ACL PBC-2 30.20 0.00 0.60 29.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.60
286.11 .01 N OL OC 12.55 0.00 2.44 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.11
286.11 .02 Y OL OC 7.07 0.79 0.21 6.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -6.70 12.77
286.11 .03 N OL OC 17.38 4.59 0.00 12.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.79
287.01 N ACH PBC-2 28.93 0.00 5.15 23.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.78
287.02 N ACL PBC-2 40.45 0.00 5.11 35.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.34
287.03 N RMH R5 52.63 0.00 5.33 47.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.30
287.04 N RH R5 43.97 0.00 6.70 37.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.27
287.05 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-6
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

287.06 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
288.01 N RMH R5 125.02 0.00 20.20 104.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 104.82
288.02 N RM R5 40.53 0.00 8.05 32.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.48
288.03 N MS R5 21.08 0.00 5.06 16.02 0.00 16.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
288.04 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
288.05 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
288.06 N P-S R5 5.01 0.00 0.96 4.05 4.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
289.01 .01 N ID PIP-2 89.74 0.00 8.53 81.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 81.21
289.01 .02 Y ID PIP-2 4.77 0.00 2.53 2.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.24 0.00
289.02 N ID PIP-2 83.57 0.00 3.87 79.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79.70
289.03 N IDP PIP-2 56.89 0.00 6.59 50.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.30
290.01 N IDP PIP-2 74.35 0.00 8.32 66.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66.03
290.02 N PF-PW PIP-2 37.47 9.20 1.45 26.82 0.00 0.00 26.82 0.00 0.00 0.00
290.03 N IDP PIP-2 13.05 3.95 0.69 8.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.41
290.04 N R PBC-2 11.93 0.00 2.91 9.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.02
290.05 N IDP PIP-2 88.61 12.68 6.97 68.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.96
290.06 N IDP N/A 22.61 11.06 0.85 10.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.70
291.01 N RM R5 32.60 8.87 1.99 21.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.74
291.02 N NR PBC-1 8.18 0.00 1.70 6.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.48
291.03 N P-L R5 25.72 1.74 0.90 23.08 23.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
291.04 N MS R5 20.71 2.36 2.26 16.09 0.00 16.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
291.05 N RMH R5 29.14 0.00 4.76 24.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.38
291.06 N ES R5 9.80 0.00 1.02 8.78 0.00 8.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
291.07 N RM R5 46.42 0.00 8.42 38.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.00
291.08 N RMH R5 95.31 12.61 7.27 75.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.43
291.09 N RM R5 64.48 0.00 12.06 52.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.42
291.10 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
291.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
291.12 N RMH N/A 22.76 12.78 0.00 9.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.98
292.01 N RH R5 101.98 0.00 14.28 87.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 87.70
292.02 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
292.03 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
292.04 N RMH R5 63.42 0.00 8.36 55.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.06
292.05 N R PBC-2 30.59 0.00 4.82 25.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.77
293.01 N ES R1-6000 9.16 0.00 1.15 8.01 0.00 8.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
293.03 N RVL R-ESTATE 53.04 0.00 2.00 51.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.04
293.05 N RL R1-6000 84.36 0.00 6.06 78.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.30
293.06 N RH R5 60.75 0.00 2.39 58.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.36
293.09 N PF-F R1-6000 1.09 0.00 0.34 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.01 N RVL R-ESTATE(HS) 89.04 0.00 2.28 86.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86.76
294.02 N RVL N/A 48.99 0.00 6.40 42.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.59
294.03 N P-L PARK 15.81 0.00 0.00 15.81 15.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.04 .01 .02 N P-L PARK 36.92 0.00 0.00 36.92 36.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.04 .02 N P-S R-ESTATE 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.04 .01 .01 N RVL R-ESTATE 155.76 1.52 6.51 147.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 147.73
294.05 N ES R-ESTATE 9.16 0.00 1.09 8.07 0.00 8.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-7
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

294.06 N RVL R-ESTATE 147.57 7.48 9.60 130.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.49
294.07 .01 N P-L PARK 89.25 0.00 3.89 85.36 85.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.07 .02 N P-L PARK 6.26 0.00 1.49 4.77 4.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
294.08 N P-L PARK 21.48 0.00 0.00 21.48 21.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
295.01 N RL R1-6000 40.48 0.00 4.01 36.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.47
295.02 N PF-ESS R1-6000 23.36 0.00 0.00 23.36 0.00 0.00 23.36 0.00 0.00 0.00
295.03 N RVL R-ESTATE(HS) 58.16 0.00 2.53 55.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.63
295.04 N RVL N/A 75.14 0.00 6.39 68.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.75
295.05 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 293.98 0.00 11.71 282.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 282.27
295.06 N RVL R1-9000 24.41 0.00 0.00 24.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.41
295.07 N RVL R1-9000 45.96 0.00 6.17 39.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.79
295.08 N HS R1-6000 44.91 0.00 6.12 38.79 0.00 38.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
295.09 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 7.55 0.00 0.00 7.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.55
296.01 N RVL R1-9000 18.58 0.00 0.00 18.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.58
296.02 N RVL R1-9000 72.82 0.00 4.54 68.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.28
296.03 N RL R1-6000 32.74 0.00 0.00 32.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.74
296.04 N RL R1-6000 19.38 0.00 1.52 17.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.86
296.05 N ES R1-6000 8.11 0.00 0.00 8.11 0.00 8.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
296.06 N MS R1-6000 17.08 0.00 1.27 15.81 0.00 15.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
296.07 N P-S R1-6000 4.92 0.00 0.90 4.02 4.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
296.08 N P-L R1-6000 39.33 0.00 2.59 36.74 36.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
297.01 N RL R1-6000 29.87 0.00 4.72 25.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.15
297.02 N RL R1-6000 20.23 0.00 3.49 16.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.74
297.03 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 269.75 0.00 0.00 269.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 269.75
297.04 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 258.80 0.00 0.00 258.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 258.80
297.05 N ES R1-9000(HS) 8.12 0.00 0.00 8.12 0.00 8.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
297.06 N P-S R1-9000(HS) 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
297.07 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 178.77 0.00 0.00 178.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 178.77
297.08 N ES R1-6000 14.10 0.00 0.90 13.20 0.00 13.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
297.09 N RVL N/A 9.15 0.00 0.00 9.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.15
297.10 N RVL R1-9000(HS) 20.01 0.00 0.00 20.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.01
299.03 N R PBC-2 9.83 0.00 1.99 7.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.84
299.04 N INST SU 106.12 0.00 17.55 88.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 88.57
299.05 N INST PBC-2 27.98 0.00 5.25 22.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.73
300.02 .01 N R&D PIP-2 35.04 0.00 6.34 28.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.70
301.01 N R&D PIP-2 261.80 32.29 13.08 216.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 216.43
301.02 N INST SU 78.66 0.00 8.65 70.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.01
301.04 N R&D PIP-2 83.49 10.05 6.48 66.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66.96
301.05 N PF-ESS PIP-2 10.42 0.00 0.00 10.42 0.00 0.00 10.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
301.06 N INST PBC-2 16.71 0.00 3.41 13.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.30
302.01 N OL OC 49.66 0.00 7.16 42.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.50
302.02 N ACL PBC-2 42.61 0.00 11.16 31.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.45
302.03 N ACL PBC-2 5.91 0.00 1.03 4.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.88
303.01 N INST PBC-2 20.42 0.00 4.05 16.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.37
303.02 N ACM PBC-2 48.60 0.00 8.42 40.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.18
304.01 N OL OC 69.65 10.48 8.98 50.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.19
PAGE: K-8
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

305.01 N ACM PBC-2 137.75 0.00 22.73 115.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 115.02
306.01 N OM OC 113.41 22.39 6.56 84.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 84.46
307.01 N RVL R-ESTATE 173.98 6.67 9.19 158.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 158.12
307.02 N ES R-ESTATE 9.47 0.00 1.27 8.20 0.00 8.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
307.03 N NR PBC-1 6.91 0.00 1.93 4.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.98
307.04 N PF-W R-ESTATE 14.88 4.34 1.53 9.01 0.00 0.00 9.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
307.05 N RVL R-ESTATE 134.61 0.00 11.77 122.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 122.84
308.01 N ES R1-6000 8.64 0.00 0.68 7.96 0.00 7.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
308.02 N P-S R1-6000 4.68 0.00 0.68 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
308.03 N RL R1-6000 177.26 33.71 14.24 129.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 129.31
308.04 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
309.01 N P-L R1-6000 61.85 0.00 4.56 57.29 57.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
309.02 N PF-ESS R1-6000 25.04 0.00 3.79 21.25 0.00 0.00 21.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
309.03 N MS R1-6000 17.27 0.00 1.44 15.83 0.00 15.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
309.04 N HS R1-6000 38.68 0.00 8.14 30.54 0.00 30.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
309.05 N P-S R1-6000 19.68 0.00 6.93 12.75 12.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.01 N R PBC-2 35.45 0.00 3.99 31.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.46
310.02 N RL R1-6000 42.38 0.00 2.40 39.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.98
310.03 N ES R1-6000 8.90 0.00 0.95 7.95 0.00 7.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.04 N P-S R1-6000 4.60 0.00 0.00 4.60 4.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.05 N RL R1-6000 26.99 0.00 2.32 24.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.67
310.06 N OS R1-6000 12.50 0.00 2.15 10.35 10.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.07 N RL R1-6000 93.11 0.00 12.66 80.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.45
310.08 N RL R1-6000 81.30 0.00 2.21 79.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 79.09
310.09 N RL R1-6000 64.32 0.00 5.68 58.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.64
310.10 N PF-P R1-6000 7.90 0.00 0.78 7.12 0.00 0.00 7.12 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.12 N RL N/A 27.21 0.00 0.75 26.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.46
310.13 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
310.14 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
311.05 N R&D PIP-2 47.78 0.00 4.38 43.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.40
311.06 N R&D PIP-2 106.15 0.00 9.56 96.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 96.59
311.07 N P-L OC 30.70 0.00 7.78 22.92 22.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
311.08 N OL OC 14.18 0.00 1.31 12.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.87
311.09 N R&D PIP-2 64.40 0.00 9.56 54.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54.84
311.10 N OL OC 26.80 0.00 4.48 22.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.32
311.11 N R&D PIP-2 15.29 0.00 1.81 13.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.48
312.01 N RH R5 30.06 0.00 8.11 21.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.95
312.02 N OL OC 70.95 0.00 11.91 59.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.04
312.03 N RH R5 90.04 0.00 12.53 77.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 77.51
312.04 N OL OC 37.69 0.00 7.92 29.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.77
313.02 N ACL PBC-2 21.98 0.00 3.34 18.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.64
314.01 N ACL PBC-2 48.75 0.00 10.60 38.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.15
315.03 N OL OC 52.21 9.92 4.78 37.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.51
316.01 N RM R5 195.39 17.91 18.38 159.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 159.10
316.02 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
317.01 N R&D PIP-2 50.27 9.02 0.75 40.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.50
PAGE: K-9
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

317.02 N R&D PIP-2 60.41 4.13 3.50 52.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.78
318.01 N RMH R5 18.07 0.00 3.03 15.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.04
318.02 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
318.03 N ES R5 7.99 0.00 0.00 7.99 0.00 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
318.04 N RM R5 22.85 0.00 4.03 18.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.82
318.05 N RL R1-6000 39.68 0.00 2.36 37.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.32
318.06 N RM R5 49.54 0.00 5.13 44.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.41
318.07 N RMH R5 49.12 0.00 5.40 43.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.72
318.08 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.01 N RL R1-6000 55.87 0.00 10.26 45.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.61
319.02 N P-L R1-6000 45.07 0.00 0.53 44.54 44.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.03 N ES R1-6000 12.33 0.00 0.96 11.37 0.00 11.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.04 N NR PBC-1 6.87 0.00 1.87 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00
319.05 N RL R1-6000 74.43 0.00 5.18 69.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.25
319.06 N RL R1-6000 22.69 0.00 3.15 19.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.54
319.07 N RM R5 55.90 0.00 6.23 49.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.67
319.08 N RM R5 40.62 0.00 5.10 35.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.52
319.09 N ES R1-6000 8.06 0.00 0.00 8.06 0.00 8.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.10 N P-S R1-6000 6.63 0.00 0.00 6.63 6.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.11 N RMH R5 23.64 0.00 1.93 21.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.71
319.12 N MS R1-6000 33.98 0.00 1.71 32.27 0.00 32.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.13 N RL R1-6000 13.41 0.00 1.29 12.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.12
319.14 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.15 N P-S R5 2.09 0.00 0.00 2.09 2.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.16 N ES R1-6000 11.57 0.00 2.73 8.84 0.00 8.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.17 N P-S R1-6000 1.91 0.00 0.00 1.91 1.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
319.18 N RL R1-6000 11.92 0.00 0.00 11.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.92
320.01 N RL R1-6000 53.31 0.00 4.28 49.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.03
320.02 N RL R1-6000 43.51 0.00 5.08 38.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.43
320.06 N RL R1-6000 77.22 0.00 6.45 70.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.77
321.01 .01 N OL OC 68.57 0.00 5.14 63.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.43
321.02 N R&D PIP-2 34.38 0.00 3.70 30.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.68
321.03 N R PBC-2 8.29 0.00 1.21 7.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.08
321.04 .01 N R&D PIP-2 18.22 0.00 2.33 15.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.89
321.05 N PF-W OC 13.17 0.00 5.15 8.02 0.00 0.00 8.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
322.01 N RM R5 108.41 0.00 8.58 99.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 99.83
322.02 N RMH R5 53.23 11.14 2.42 39.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.67
322.03 N P-L R5 23.19 0.00 1.95 21.24 21.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
322.04 N ES R5 7.94 0.00 0.00 7.94 0.00 7.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
322.05 N MS R5 17.01 0.00 0.88 16.13 0.00 16.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
322.06 N RMH R5 114.16 2.94 2.79 108.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 108.43
322.07 N RMH R5 22.96 4.26 3.48 15.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.22
322.08 N RM R5 60.31 2.78 0.00 57.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.53
322.09 N RMH R5 22.67 8.56 0.00 14.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.11
322.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
322.12 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-10
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

322.13 N ES R5 10.14 0.00 1.13 9.01 0.00 9.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.01 N RM R5 113.19 11.26 5.24 96.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 96.69
323.02 N RMH R5 98.39 19.06 2.39 76.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.94
323.03 N P-L R1-6000 32.70 0.00 0.00 32.70 32.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.04 N ES R1-6000 9.14 0.00 0.54 8.60 0.00 8.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.05 N MS R1-6000 17.11 0.00 0.62 16.49 0.00 16.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.06 N RL R1-6000 106.18 0.00 7.80 98.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 98.38
323.07 N NR PBC-1 10.94 0.00 1.83 9.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.11
323.08 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.09 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
323.10 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.01 N RL R1-6000 166.81 0.00 17.34 149.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 149.47
324.02 N NR PBC-1 6.77 0.00 1.69 5.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.08
324.03 N RM R5 128.34 0.00 14.35 113.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 113.99
324.04 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.05 N ES R5 8.91 0.00 0.84 8.07 0.00 8.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.06 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.07 N P-S R1-6000 3.97 0.00 0.00 3.97 3.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.08 N ES R1-6000 9.33 0.00 1.31 8.02 0.00 8.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
324.09 N ES R1-6000 9.12 0.00 1.14 7.98 0.00 7.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
325.01 N R PBC-2 23.71 0.00 4.68 19.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.03
325.02 N RM R5 59.52 0.00 6.03 53.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.49
325.03 N HS R1-6000 35.32 0.00 5.17 30.15 0.00 30.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
325.04 N P-L R1-6000 75.61 0.00 9.25 66.36 66.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
325.05 N MS R1-6000 19.29 0.00 3.28 16.01 0.00 16.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.01 N RL R1-6000 64.11 0.00 1.94 62.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.17
326.02 N P-L R1-6000 36.28 0.00 1.66 34.62 34.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.03 N R PBC-2 9.53 0.00 2.43 7.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.10
326.04 N RL R1-6000 64.21 0.00 4.47 59.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.74
326.05 N ES R5 8.34 0.00 0.48 7.86 0.00 7.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.06 N P-S R1-6000 7.07 0.00 0.00 7.07 7.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.07 N P-S R5 5.94 0.00 0.00 5.94 5.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.08 N ES R1-5 8.81 0.00 0.83 7.98 0.00 7.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
326.09 N RM R5 97.82 0.00 6.05 91.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 91.77
326.10 N RL R1-6000 55.01 0.00 2.94 52.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.07
326.11 N RL R1-6000 104.84 0.00 8.27 96.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 96.57
326.12 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
327.01 N RL R1-6000 133.08 0.00 14.54 118.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 118.54
327.02 N ES R1-6000 8.84 0.00 0.80 8.04 0.00 8.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
327.03 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
329.01 N PF-PW PIP-2 38.71 8.71 3.29 26.71 0.00 0.00 26.71 0.00 0.00 0.00
329.02 N PF-ESS PIP-2 4.28 2.02 0.00 2.26 0.00 0.00 2.26 0.00 0.00 0.00
329.04 N PF-PW PIP-2 4.25 0.00 1.93 2.32 0.00 0.00 2.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
329.05 N PF-ESS PIP-2 12.67 1.74 1.68 9.25 0.00 0.00 9.25 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.01 N RMH R5 180.02 19.24 3.97 156.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 156.81
330.02 N RL R1-6000 60.56 0.00 6.94 53.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 53.62
PAGE: K-11
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

330.03 N P-S R1-6000 4.40 0.00 0.43 3.97 3.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.04 N ES R1-6000 21.14 0.00 0.61 20.53 0.00 20.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.05 N RL R1-6000 60.51 0.00 10.00 50.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.51
330.06 N RL R1-6000 77.53 0.00 9.15 68.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 68.38
330.07 N ES R5 9.70 0.00 0.00 9.70 0.00 9.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.08 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.09 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.10 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.11 N MS R5 20.31 0.00 1.63 18.68 0.00 18.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
330.12 N RMH R5 14.08 6.82 0.00 7.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.26
331.01 N R PBC-2 23.33 0.00 4.83 18.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.50
331.02 N RM R5 41.64 0.00 6.21 35.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.43
331.03 N RM R5 23.33 0.00 2.35 20.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.98
331.04 N ES R5 8.74 0.00 0.73 8.01 0.00 8.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
331.05 N NR PBC-1 6.10 0.00 1.61 4.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.49
331.06 N RM R5 129.65 0.00 10.05 119.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 119.60
331.07 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
331.08 N P-S R5 5.03 0.00 0.00 5.03 5.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
331.09 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
331.10 N P-S R5 5.17 0.00 0.00 5.17 5.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
331.11 N PF-F R5 1.81 0.00 0.79 1.02 0.00 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.01 N RL R1-6000 54.17 0.00 3.03 51.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.14
332.02 N RMH R5 64.29 0.00 4.00 60.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.29
332.03 N R PBC-2 31.46 0.00 4.46 27.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.00
332.04 N P-L R1-6000 43.58 0.00 1.18 42.40 42.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.05 N P-S R1-6000 22.66 0.00 0.00 22.66 22.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.06 N MS R1-6000 23.61 0.00 2.43 21.18 0.00 21.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.07 N RL R1-6000 108.01 0.00 5.74 102.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.27
332.08 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.09 N ES R1-6000 8.44 0.00 0.44 8.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
332.10 N RM R1-6000 48.14 0.00 4.84 43.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.30
333.01 N MS R1-6000 22.03 0.00 2.66 19.37 0.00 19.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
333.02 N RL R1-6000 157.95 0.00 10.43 147.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 147.52
333.03 N ES R1-6000 8.85 0.00 0.80 8.05 0.00 8.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
333.04 N P-S R1-6000 4.03 0.00 0.00 4.03 4.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
333.05 N RL R1-6000 62.96 0.00 6.42 56.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.54
333.06 N RL R1-6000 43.95 0.00 5.67 38.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.28
333.07 N HS R1-6000 48.94 0.00 7.85 41.09 0.00 41.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
336.01 N R&D PIP-2 210.13 9.13 5.86 195.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 195.14
336.02 N RL R1-6000 152.07 0.00 13.76 138.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 138.31
336.03 N R&D PIP-2 91.16 25.19 0.00 65.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.97
337.01 N RL R1-6000 111.40 0.00 8.07 103.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 103.33
337.02 N ES R1-6000 8.96 0.00 1.02 7.94 0.00 7.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
337.03 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
337.04 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
337.05 N RM R5 71.39 0.00 0.84 70.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.55
PAGE: K-12
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

337.06 N RL R1-6000 81.70 0.00 6.63 75.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.07
338.01 N RL R1-6000 22.21 0.00 1.10 21.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.11
338.02 N RM R5 40.73 0.00 0.88 39.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.85
338.03 N NR PBC-1 8.21 0.00 1.58 6.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.63
338.04 N RM R5 48.57 0.00 5.76 42.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.81
338.06 N ES R5 9.92 0.00 0.82 9.10 0.00 9.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
338.07 N RM R5 85.90 0.00 7.43 78.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.47
338.09 N PF-ESS R5 13.59 0.00 0.00 13.59 0.00 0.00 13.59 0.00 0.00 0.00
339.01 N RL R1-6000 55.81 0.00 6.13 49.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.68
339.02 N RL R1-6000 111.71 0.00 7.57 104.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 104.14
CURRENT
CURRENT CURRENT ZONING PARCEL PROPOSED MAJOR GROSS PUBLIC RAILROAD NET PLANNING
PARCEL SUB # SUB # RR? PARKS / OS SCHOOLS
LANDUSE CODE ACRES PARKWAY ROADS ACRES FACILITIES ACREAGE ACRES
NUMBER
Area outside
Colorado Centre
Total 20787.59 711.43 1733.63 18342.53 1914.85 833.33 210.06 27.14 15357.15
PARCELS WITHIN THE COLORADO CENTRE BOUNDARY

341.01 N R&D PIP-2 39.20 0.00 7.13 32.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.07
341.07 N R&D PIP-2 22.45 5.28 1.20 15.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.97
341.11 N R&D PIP-2 65.93 12.00 5.49 48.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.44
341.09 N R&D PIP-2 57.78 9.97 2.57 45.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.24
340.02 N AI M2 55.73 0.00 4.51 51.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.22
341.03 N R&D PIP-2 22.40 0.00 4.83 17.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.57
341.08 N R&D PIP-2 78.58 0.00 5.00 73.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.58
341.10 N R&D PIP-2 17.39 2.18 0.52 14.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.69
338.08 N PF-T R5 8.59 0.00 0.39 8.20 0.00 0.00 8.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
338.12 N PF-T R5 9.28 0.00 0.00 9.28 0.00 0.00 9.28 0.00 0.00 0.00
342.09 N PF-PF R5 20.86 11.39 1.94 7.53 0.00 0.00 7.53 0.00 0.00 0.00
338.05 N P-S R5 8.52 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
338.10 N RM R5 83.65 0.00 0.96 82.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82.69
338.11 N RM N/A 66.02 0.00 0.59 65.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.43
342.01 N R PBC-2 30.89 8.15 4.42 18.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.32
342.02 N RL R1-6000 76.74 8.75 2.67 65.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.32
342.03 N RL R1-6000 23.75 0.00 1.71 22.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.04
342.06 N MS R1-6000 17.58 0.00 0.66 16.92 0.00 16.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
342.10 N RH R5 51.72 0.00 6.12 45.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.60
342.11 N P-S R1-6000 7.20 0.00 0.00 7.20 7.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
342.12 .03 N HS R1-6000 32.45 0.00 2.23 30.22 0.00 30.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
342.12 .02 N P-L R1-6000 30.65 0.00 3.28 27.37 27.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
342.12 .04 N RH R5 34.87 0.00 8.94 25.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.93
342.12 .01 N RL R1-6000 91.17 0.00 3.14 88.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 88.03
342.15 N RL R1-6000 31.19 0.00 3.01 28.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.18
343.01 N RL R1-6000 62.62 0.00 7.46 55.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.16
343.02 .03 N ES R1-6000 8.74 0.00 0.75 7.99 0.00 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PAGE: K-13
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

343.02 .02 N P-L R1-6000 15.93 0.00 0.94 14.99 14.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
343.02 .04 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
343.02 .01 N RL R1-6000 25.57 0.00 1.51 24.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.06
343.02 .05 N RL R1-6000 41.30 0.00 9.72 31.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.58
343.03 N ES R1-6000 8.88 0.00 0.79 8.09 0.00 8.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
344.01 N IDP PIP-2 29.50 0.00 4.95 24.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.55
344.02 N PF-ESS PIP-2 10.28 0.00 0.00 10.28 0.00 0.00 10.28 0.00 0.00 0.00
346.02 N IDP PIP-2 23.55 0.00 3.76 19.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.79
347.01 N RM R5 108.71 22.16 4.34 82.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82.21
347.04 .01 N RL R1-6000 234.15 0.00 17.31 216.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 216.84
347.05 N P-S R1-6000 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
347.06 N ES R1-6000 7.95 0.00 0.00 7.95 0.00 7.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
347.07 N OL OC 109.98 0.00 4.60 105.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 105.38
347.08 N PF-P OC 2.67 0.00 0.62 2.05 0.00 0.00 2.05 0.00 0.00 0.00
347.09 N RH R5 39.63 0.00 5.73 33.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.90
347.11 N P-S R5 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
348.01 .01 N RL R1-6000 247.12 0.00 20.65 226.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 226.47
348.03 N ES R1-6000 7.99 0.00 0.00 7.99 0.00 7.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
348.05 N P-S R1-6000 4.01 0.00 0.00 4.01 4.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
349.01 N IDP PIP-2 148.15 0.00 19.40 128.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 128.75
349.02 N ID M2 185.67 0.00 13.49 172.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 172.18
349.03 N ID M2 87.30 0.00 4.87 82.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 82.43
350.01 N IDP PIP-2 128.93 0.00 9.35 119.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 119.58
350.02 N ID M2 69.62 0.00 6.40 63.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 63.22
350.03 N ID M2 43.97 12.63 0.52 30.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.82
350.04 N ID M2 302.00 0.00 3.69 298.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 298.31
RANCHO COLORADO AMENDMENT

1344.01 N R&D PUD 60.53 0.00 5.12 55.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.41
1344.02 N Re2 PUD 23.55 0.00 4.08 19.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.47
1345.01 N Rc PUD 32.18 0.00 2.77 29.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.41
1345.02 N Rc PUD 123.70 0.00 4.64 119.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 119.06
1345.03 N P PUD 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1345.04 N Re2 PUD 32.90 14.02 1.42 17.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.46
1346.01 N CC PUD 35.40 0.00 6.07 29.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.33
1346.02 N CC PUD 31.77 13.45 2.17 16.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.15
1346.03 N Rc PUD 64.02 0.00 5.60 58.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.42
1346.04 N Re2 PUD 40.56 0.00 1.16 39.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.40
1346.05 N P PUD 5.75 0.00 0.75 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1346.06 N MS PUD 28.32 0.00 0.32 28.00 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1346.07 N Rc PUD 69.13 5.28 3.51 60.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.34
1346.08 N OS PUD 19.67 12.67 0.00 7.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1346.09 N DF PUD 26.73 5.88 0.00 20.85 20.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CURRENT
CURRENT CURRENT ZONING PARCEL PROPOSED MAJOR GROSS PUBLIC RAILROAD NET PLANNING
PARCEL SUB # SUB # RR? PARKS / OS SCHOOLS
LANDUSE CODE ACRES PARKWAY ROADS ACRES FACILITIES ACREAGE ACRES
NUMBER
PAGE: K-14
CPC MP 05-140 / CPC MP 87-381
1988 ROCK NET

Colorado Centre
Total 3550.02 143.81 249.77 3156.44 111.94 107.16 37.34 0.00 2900.00
TOTAL 24,337.61 855.24 1,983.40 21,498.97 2,026.79 940.49 247.40 0.00 27.14 18,257.15
PAGE: K-15
Planning Department
Appendix L
Options 1-6
Option 1
Flat Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; General Improvement
District for Banning-Lewis Parkway
Introduction The Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study (Study) identifies
approximately $1.2 billion in infrastructure obligations required by the Annexation
Agreement. For approximately $466 million of the $1.2 billion, new
reimbursement mechanisms need to be created in order for cost sharing to occur
among the Ranch’s 27 current Annexors. These reimbursement mechanisms
will be funded by fees assessed at time of platting.
Option 1 is a flat, per-acre fee that is assessed based on acreage alone. It

allocates the Annexor obligations through an equal per-acre rate across the
entire net planning acreage of the Ranch.
Methodology Analysis under this option began by calculating the net developable acreage
within the entire Ranch. Developable acreage, or net planning acreage, is
explained by the Study as the total Ranch acreage minus land dedications for
public facilities, school and park sites, major street rights-of-way, drainage tracts,
floodplains, Rock Island Railroad corridor, and Village One. Thus, the net
developable acreage within the Ranch under this scenario came to
approximately 16,956 acres.
To arrive at the per-acre fee under Option 1, the Annexor obligation amount was
divided by the net developable acreage. Since the Banning-Lewis Parkway cost
had been segregated, the total Annexor obligation amount under Option 1 came
to $299,393,938 ($466,434,805 in total infrastructure obligation minus
$167,040,867 in Banning-Lewis Parkway costs).
The calculations under this scenario occurred as follows:
$299,393,938 / 16,956 acres = $17,657 per acre.
Pros and Cons

Pros Cons
9 Annexor fees are not relative to
traffic impacts associated with
9 Generally equitable and proportional,
approved Master Plan land use /
both initially and long term
zoning (i.e. residential uses pay the
9 Minimally impacted by future Master
same amount as commercial uses
Plan land use / zoning changes
pay)
9 Annual adjustments equal for all
9 Does not address the existing
Annexors
constructed portion of the Banning-
9 Easy to administer
Lewis Parkway south of Drennan
Road
Fees
BLR Developable Per Acre
Acres Flat Fee1
16,956 $17,657
1
Note: These fees do not include any fees associated with the Banning-Lewis Parkway.
L-1
Option 2
Fees for General Annexor Obligations Based on Traffic Generation
Associated with Specific Zoning Designation; General Improvement District
for the Banning-Lewis Parkway
Option 2 is a fee based upon the traffic generation rates associated with the
Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan approved land use and zoning. Since roughly
85% of the $299,393,938 in infrastructure obligations is attributable to arterial
construction ($257,087,651), this option divides the cost based on the traffic
impact each zoning category creates through trip generation. Option 2 rests on
the premise that each zone should pay its proportional share of the total Annexor
obligation based on its traffic impact.
Methodology Property within the Banning-Lewis Ranch Master Plan is zoned in one of seven
zoning districts, which are: Single Family Residential (R1-9000, R-ESTATE, R1-
6000, PUD RL), Multifamily Residential (R5, PUD RM), Planned Business Center
(PBC, PUD C), Planned Industrial Park (PIP-1/PIP-2, PUD OI), Planned Unit
Development (PUD), Office Complex (OC), Special Use (SU), and Industrial
(M2). Each zone allows for several different specified uses. For example uses in
the PBC zone include office/service space, retail, and restaurants as well as
several others.
The analysis under Option 2 began by identifying specific uses of each zone that
were likely to be constructed within each zone so thorough traffic generation
estimates could then be made. Next, the trip generation manual2, published by
the Institute of Transportation Engineers, was used to create a blended trip
generation factor for each zone. The use assumptions and traffic generations of
each zone is as follows:
Single Family Residential (R1-9000, R-ESTATE, R1-6000, PUD RL)
100% single family Code 2103 9.57 trips/dwelling unit/day
Multifamily Residential (R5, PUD RM)
50% condo/townhome Code 230 5.86 trips/dwelling unit/day
50% apartment Code 220 6.67 trips/dwelling unit/day
2
Trip Generation. 7th ed. Washington D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003
3
Codes are those found within Trip Generation. See above.
L-2
Planned Business Center (PBC, PUD C)
50% retail
♦ 50% shopping center Code 820 42.94 trips/1000 ft2/day

♦ 50% supermarket Code 850 102.24 trips/1000 ft2/day
25% office park Code 750 11.42 trips/1000 ft2/day
25% restaurant
♦ 50% fast food w/drive-thru Code 934 496.12 trips/1000 ft2/day

♦ 50% sit-down w/quick Code 932 127.15 trips/1000 ft2/day
turnover
Planned Industrial Park (PIP-1/PIP-2, PUD OI)
50% industrial
♦ 50% industrial park Code 130 6.69 trips/1000 ft2/day

♦ 50% manufacturing Code 140 3.82 trips/1000 ft2/day
Office Complex (OC)
50% medical office Code 720 36.13 trips/1000 ft2/day
Special Use (SU)
Industrial (M2)
50% industrial park Code 130 6.69 trips/1000 ft2/day
50% manufacturing Code 140 3.82 trips/1000 ft2/day.
When a profile of each zone had been created, a blended traffic generation factor
for each zone was calculated. The rates are as follows:
Residential
R1-9000 9.57 trips/dwelling unit/day

R-ESTATE 9.57 trips/dwelling unit/day
R1-6000/PUD RL 9.57 trips/dwelling unit/day
R5/PUD RM 6.29 trips/dwelling unit/day
L-3
Commercial, Office, and Industrial
PBC/PUD C 120.14 trips/1000 ft2/day

PIP-1/PIP-2/PUD OI 8.34 trips/1000 ft2/day
OC 23.78 trips/1000 ft2/day
SU 11.42 trips/1000 ft2/day
M2 5.25 trips/1000 ft2/day
Each respective traffic generation factor was then applied to every parcel in each
zone listed in the 2006 land-use table for Banning-Lewis Ranch. Total traffic
generation for parcels with residential zoning was calculated by multiplying the
traffic generation factor for the corresponding zone by the total dwelling units
found in each parcel. Traffic generation for parcels with commercial, office, or
industrial zoning was calculated by multiplying the traffic generation factor for the
corresponding zone by the gross square footage (divided by 1000) in each
parcel.
The parcels were then grouped by zone and all trips per zone were added
together. The results were as follows:
Trips Per
Zone
Zone
R1-9000/R-ESTATE 20,168
R1-6000/PUD RL 181,705
R5 (8 DU) 115,861
R5 (12 DU)/PUD RM 89,833
R5 (19 DU) 131,055
PBC/PUD C 1,889,819
PIP-1 / PIP-2 / PUD OI 233,173
OC 181,479
SU 18,240
M2 96,329
The trips per zone were then divided by the total trips generated by the entire
Ranch (approximately 2.9 million per day), which yielded the percentage of trips
generated by each zone. The results were as follows:
Percentage
Zone
of Trips
R1-9000 / R-ESTATE 0.68%
R1-6000 / PUD RL 6.14%
R5 (8 DU) 3.92%
R5 (12 DU) / PUD RM 3.04%
R5 (19 DU) 4.43%
PBC / PUD C 63.90%
PIP-1 / PIP-2 / PUD OI 7.88%
OC 6.14%
SU 0.62%
M2 3.26%
L-4
Next, the net planning acreage of each zone was added together to yield the total
acreage per zone. The results were as follows:
Total Net
Percentage
Zone Planning
of the Total
Acres 2006
R1-9000 / R-ESTATE 2107.17 12.42%
R1-6000 / PUD RL 4586.52 27.04%
R5 (8 DU) 2302.52 13.57%
R5 (12 DU) / PUD RM 1187.42 7.00%
R5 (19 DU) 1083.52 6.39%
PBC / PUD C 1217.91 7.18%
PIP-1 / PIP-2/ PUD OI 2494.87 14.71%
OC 569.44 3.36%
SU 240.43 1.42%
M2 1173.88 6.92%
To arrive at the per-acre traffic generation fee for each zone, the percentage of
trips was multiplied by the total arterial obligation of $257,087,651. That quantity
was then divided by the total net planning acres within the zone.
The calculations under this scenario occurred as follows (zone R1-9000/R-

ESTATE used as an example):
(0.68% x $257,087,651) / 2107.17 acres = $835.00 per acre.
The second part of the Option 2 fee was not calculated by trip generation
because the obligations had no relationship to traffic impact. Instead, the
residual obligation of $42,306,287 ($299,393,938 in total obligations minus
$257,087,651 in arterial obligations) was divided by the net planning acreage of
the entire Ranch (16,956).
Calculations occurred as follows:
$42,306,287 / 16,956 acres = $2,495 per acre.
This residual fee was then added to the traffic generation fee for each zone to
arrive at an Annexor obligation fee per zone.
L-5
Pros and Cons
Pros Cons
9 Allocates Annexor fees based on 9 May be equitable and proportional

specific impacts of approved Master initially, but may not be in the future as
Plan land use / zoning future Master Plan land use / zoning
9 Initially equitable and proportional changes cannot be reflected in fees
9 May discourage or preclude
marketable commercial development
9 Complex and potentially difficult to
administer
9 Shifting major costs to the commercial
land uses, which generally develop
after the residential land uses, would
create a shortfall in the reimbursement
fund at initial stages of development.
The extremely high fee for
commercially zoned sites may
discourage commercial development to
the degree that the reimbursement
fund may not be financially solvent
9 The scale of the total build-out of the
Ranch provides an equitable
distribution of costs without the need to
sector the costs among different land
use types
Lewis Parkway south of Drennan Road
Fees
Zone Fees 4
R1-9000 / R-ESTATE $3,327.00
R1-6000 / PUD RL $5,939.00
R5 (8 DU) $6,869.00
R5 (12 DU) / PUD RM $9,071.00
R5 (19 DU) $13,009.00
PBC / PUD C $137,372.00
PIP-1 / PIP-2 / PUD OI $10,619.00
OC $30,197.00
SU $9,089.00
M2 $9,628.00
4
L-6
Option 3
Fees for General Annexor Obligations Based on Traffic Generation Using
Consolidated Land Use Categories; General Improvement District for the
Banning-Lewis Parkway
Option 3 resembles Option 2 in many ways, but splits fees into two zoning
categories, Residential and Commercial, Office, Industrial (COI), instead of ten
zoning districts. Option 3 used a hybrid traffic generation factor made from
several land use categories that fit into each new zoning category. The
calculations were then carried out in the same manner as the calculations under
Option 2.
Methodology The analysis under Option 3 began with the computation of two hybrid traffic
generation factors. Master Plan zoning categories were grouped into two sets:
Residential and COI. The Residential category included the R1-9000, R-
ESTATE, R1-6000, PUD RL, R5 (8 DU), R5 (12 DU), R5 (19 DU), and PUD RM
zones. The COI category comprised the PBC, PUD C, PIP-1 / PIP-2, PUD OI,
OC, SU, and M2 zones.
The traffic generation factors used under Option 2 were then weighted and
averaged to create hybrid factors for the Residential and COI categories. These
Option 2 factors were as follows:
Traffic Generation
Zone Factor
(trips/day)
R1-9000/R-ESTATE 9.57
R1-6000/PUD RL 9.57
R5 (8 DU) 6.29
R5 (12 DU)/PUD RM 6.29
R5 (19 DU) 6.29
PBC/PUD C 120.14
PIP-1/PIP-2/PUD OI 8.34
OC 23.78
SU 11.42
M 5.25
Each traffic generation factor was then multiplied by the net planning acreage for
its respective zone to achieve weighting. The products corresponding to the
residential zones were added together. The sum was then divided by the total
net planning acreage for all residential zones. The same process was used for
the COI zones. The results under this scenario were as follows:
L-7
Traffic Generation
Zone Factor
(trips/day)
Residential 8.24
COI 33.28
Each traffic generation factor was then applied to every parcel in each zone listed
in the land-use table for Banning-Lewis Ranch, just as it was done under Option
2. Total traffic generation for parcels with residential zoning was calculated by
multiplying the traffic generation factor for the corresponding zone by the total
dwelling units found in each parcel. Traffic generation for parcels with
commercial, office, or industrial zoning was calculated by multiplying the traffic
generation factor for the corresponding zone by the gross square footage
(divided by 1000) in each parcel.
The parcels were then grouped and the total trips per zoning category, as well as
the total net planning acreage for each zoning category were derived. The total
trips per zoning category were then divided by the total trips for the Ranch
(approximately 2.9 million) to achieve a percentage of trips for each zone.
The results were as follows:
Percentage of Total Net Planning

Zone Total Trips
Trips Acres
Residential 614965 20.59% 11267.14
COI 2371724 79.41% 5696.53
The percentage of trips under each category was then multiplied by the
$257,087,651 in arterial obligations and then divided by the respective total net
planning acres to arrive at the per-acre traffic generation fees.
The calculations under this scenario, utilizing the residential zoning category
were as follows:
(20.59% x $257,087,651) / 11267.14 = $4,698 per acre.
As with Option 2, the total Annexor obligation fee is comprised of two fees: the
traffic generation fee and the residual fee. The residual fee was not calculated by
trip generation because the obligations had no relationship to traffic impact.
Instead, the residual obligation of $42,306,287 ($299,393,938 in total obligations
minus $257,087,651 in arterial obligations) was divided by the net planning
acreage of the entire Ranch (16,956). Calculations are as follows:
$42,306,287 / 16,956 acres = $2,495 per acre.
The traffic generation fees were then added to the residual fees to derive the
Annexor obligation fees for each zoning category.
L-8
Pros and Cons
Pros Cons
9 May be equitable and proportional

9 Equitably allocates Annexor fees
initially, but may not be in the future
based on specific impacts of
as future Master Plan land use /
approved Master Plan land use /
zoning changes cannot be reflected
zoning
in fees
9 Initially equitable and proportional
9 Similar issues as with Option 2
9 Distributes fee more evenly among
commercial uses than Option 2 does
9 Gets rid of the PBC spike
9 Not as complicated to administer as
Road
Option 2
Fees
Zone Fees5
Residential $6,833
COI $38,333
5
L-9
Option 4
Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations Not Including Arterial
Roads; Ranch-Wide Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees Based on the Current
School/Park Value
approximately $891 million in infrastructure obligations required by the
Annexation Agreement. For approximately $209 million ($466 million under
Options 1-3 minus $257,087,651 in arterial construction) of the $891 million, new
among the Ranch’s 27 Annexors.
Of the $209 million, approximately $167 million is attributed to Banning-Lewis

Parkway costs. This obligation can be further broken down into three different
components:
9 Right-of-way costs: $58,060,486

9 Construction costs (including four travel-lanes and any
necessary turn lanes and bridges): $83,980,381 and;
9 Interchange costs: $25,000,000.
The remaining $42,306,287 is comprised of the following obligations:
9 BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study $75,000

9 Sand Creek Drainage Basin Re-Study $92,500
9 Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Study $300,000
9 Land Dedications:
Park and Ride Site $88,858
Air Monitoring Stations $38,301
City Service Center $2,054,466
Police Substation Sites $1,322,151
Street Sweeping Disposal Sites $2,717,073
Well Sites $1,195,807
Water Storage Tank Sites $1,374,240
Electric Substation Sites $6,986,102
Electric Service Center $2,223,756
9 Fire Stations:
Land Dedication $1,467,694
Improvements $19,180,500
Equipment $2,979,839
9 A sum of money for a Radio Repeater $210,000
Station
Fees assessed at time of platting will fund both the reimbursement mechanisms
for the Banning-Lewis Parkway and the other obligations listed above.
L-10
Methodology The total remaining obligation of $42,306,287 was also divided by the total
developable acreage in the Ranch. The developable acreage under this scenario
equals 17,962 acres (16,956 with floodplain acreage added).
Pros and Cons

Pros Cons
9 Generally equitable and proportional,
both initially and long-term
Plan land use / zoning changes 9 Does not address the existing
9 Annual adjustments equal for all constructed portion of the Banning-
Annexors Lewis Parkway south of Drennan
9 Allows cost sharing for Arterial Road
construction to occur in accordance
with existing Subdivision Regulations
Fees Option 4 Annexor Obligation Fee
BLR Developable Acres Per Acre Flat Fee6

17,962 $2,355
Fee Payment and This reimbursement mechanism is funded by a flat-per acre fee based solely on
Reimbursement acreage. It does not, however, include Arterial reimbursement. Reimbursement
Program for arterial streets and traffic signals will be handled through a separate process
that will be discussed below.
Arterial Street Annexors shall be required to construct all arterial streets within the Master Plan
Construction with no cost recovery from the City or from other Annexors, with the following
exceptions:
1. Arterials constructed on the boundary of another Annexor’s property shall be

subject to cost recovery from the Annexor having frontage on other side of
the arterial in accordance with §7.7.705 (C) of the Colorado Springs City
Subdivision Regulations.
2. Annexors required by the City to construct an arterial street through property
owned entirely by another Annexor shall be eligible for cost recovery from
those Annexors having frontage along said arterial in accordance with
§7.7.705 (C) of the City of Colorado Springs Subdivision Regulations. In this
case, the City will require the Annexor to dedicate the necessary right-of-
way, as per Article III (A) of the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation
Agreement, to allow the arterial to be constructed.
3. Marksheffel Road—in accordance with Article 3 (A) of the Banning-Lewis
Ranch Annexation Agreement, the Annexors will be responsible for
constructing four (4) lanes of Marksheffel Road where the Ranch lies
adjacent to the road. This obligation will be eligible for cost recovery from the
City on two (2) of the four (4) lanes in accordance with Article III (C) of the
Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Agreement. All other construction on
Marksheffel Road interior to the Ranch will not be eligible for cost recovery
unless the construction is subject to either exception (1) or (2) above.
6
This fee does not include Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees.
L-11
Local/Collector Annexors shall be required to construct all minor streets, i.e. collectors and
Street Construction locals, with no cost recovery from the City or from other Annexors, other than by
private agreement.
Traffic Signals Annexors shall be responsible for all costs associated with the procurement and
installation of all arterial traffic signals. Costs will be assessed by intersection
quadrant with each developer owning land adjacent to said intersection
responsible for twenty-five (25%) percent of the total.
Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees (Option 4)

Introduction The Banning-Lewis Parkway Subcommittee, after careful analysis and several
meetings, concluded that a Ranch-wide district financing mechanism that will
build the Parkway at one time is not feasible. Instead, the committee
recommends that construction of the Parkway be done incrementally with
constructing Annexors to be reimbursed by other Annexors. Therefore, Parkway
obligations will be equitably apportioned among Ranch Annexors through fees
assessed on developable acreage, or net planning acreage, at time of platting.
The total cost of the Banning-Lewis Parkway can be broken down into three
different components:
Right-of-way costs = $58,060,486;
Construction costs (including four travel-lanes and any necessary turn
lanes and bridges) = $83,980,381 and;
Interchange costs = $25,000,000.
Methodology Each element of the total Banning-Lewis Parkway cost was divided by the total
developable acreage in the Ranch under this scenario (17,962 acres) to reach
three, separate per-acre fees.
Discussion Those Annexors who plat will pay the Parkway fees, while those who dedicate
right-of-way or construct Parkway obligations will receive reimbursements. Fee
collection will occur at time of platting, but the fees for the Banning-Lewis
Parkway will be collected and reimbursed separately from the other Annexor
obligation fees.
Each Banning-Lewis Parkway fee will be deposited into a separate account. It is

necessary to segregate right-of-way fees to allow those Annexors who dedicate
right-of-way to be reimbursed in a timely manner. The construction fees will be
kept separate not only for timely reimbursement but also so that it will be possible
for the funds to be transferred into a toll road project at a later date. The
interchange fee will also be segregated into an account to ensure that funds are
available to reimburse the Annexor and/or government entity who will ultimately
construct the interchange located on the Banning-Lewis Parkway at State
Highway 24.
Fees
Fee Type Per-Acre Fee
Right-of-Way $3,232
Construction $4,675
Interchange $1,392
Combined $9,299
L-12
Option 5
Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; Ranch-Wide Banning-
Lewis Parkway Fees Based on Recent Land Sale Values
Options 1-3 minus $257,087,651 in arterial construction and approximately $10
million in right-of-way costs) of the $891 million, new reimbursement mechanisms
need to be created in order for cost sharing to occur among the Ranch’s 27
Annexors.
This option is a variation of Option 4. The Banning-Lewis Parkway right-of-way is

valued at $76,602 per acre under Option 4. This option values the right-of-way at
an average value ($8,434 per acre) derived from recent land sales within the
Ranch. The Parkway obligations under this option are as follows:
9 Right-of-way costs: $6,392,550

9 Construction costs (including four travel-lanes and any
necessary turn lanes and bridges): $83,980,381 and;
for the Banning-Lewis Parkway and the other remaining General Annexor
Obligations of $42,306,287.
Methodology The total General Annexor Obligation of $42,306,287 was divided by the total
developable acreage in the Ranch. The developable acreage under this scenario
equals 17,962 acres.
The right-of-way value for the Parkway was derived from several land sales
within the Banning-Lewis Ranch between 2002 and 2007. The sale data
compiled appears below.
TSN Acreage Sale Value Per-Acre Owner
5400000236 55.94 $800,000 $14,301.04 Church for All Nations

5400000209 150 $1,100,000 $7,333.33 Marksheffel 150
5200000324 224.41 $903,800 $4,027.45 Marksheffel-Woodmen Investments
5400000155 14.15 $97,281 $6,874.98 CMS 2 LLC
5300000308 69.02 $1,407,255 $20,389.09 M-3 Land Company
5400000174 135.9 $697,351 $5,131.35 AE 94 LLC
5510200004 49.23 $120,500 $2,447.69 FHK Developments
5400000199 37.46 $261,095 $6,970 CMS 2 LLC
AVERAGE $8,434.36
This average land sale value was then multiplied by the total number of Parkway
acres (757.95) to be dedicated within the Ranch. The total value for each
Parkway component (i.e. right-of-way dedication, construction cost, and
L-13
interchange cost) was then divided by the total developable acreage within the
Ranch to arrive at three separate per-acre fees.
Pros and Cons

Pros Cons
9 Generally equitable and proportional
both initially and long-term
Annexors
9 Fees lower than all other options
Road
9 Allows cost sharing for Arterial
Fees Option 5 Annexor Obligation Fees
BLR Developable Per Acre Flat

Acres Fee7
17,962 $2,355
Fee Type Per-Acre Fee

Right-of-Way $356
Construction $4,675
Interchange $1,392
Combined $9,299
7
This fee does not include Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees.
L-14
Option 6
Flat, Per-Acre Fee for General Annexor Obligations; Banning-Lewis
Parkway Fees Split into Areas and Based on the Current School/Park
Value
Options 1-3 minus $257,087,651 in arterial construction and approximately $20
million in right-of-way dedication and construction costs) of the $891 million, new
among the Ranch’s 27 Annexors.
This option is also a variation of Option 4. Like Option 4, the Banning-Lewis

Parkway right-of-way is valued at $76,602 per acre. Unlike all previous options,
however, this option splits fees relating to Parkway right-of-way dedication and
construction into two areas with Drennan Road as the dividing line.
It was determined that south of Drennan Road, the existing four (4) lane portion
of Marksheffel Road will eventually become the Banning-Lewis Parkway through
that portion of the Ranch. Much of the existing Marksheffel corridor contains 210
feet of dedicated right-of-way width and an existing four (4) lane arterial that will
need relatively minor additional right-of-way dedication and construction
improvements. Therefore, Banning-Lewis Parkway fees were split according to
geographic area. Annexors owning property north of Drennan Road will pay
Parkway fees for right-of-way dedication and construction for that portion of the
Parkway north of Drennan Road. Annexors owning property south of Drennan
Road will be required to dedicate the remaining Parkway right-of-way width and
construct any improvements without reimbursement in lieu of paying fees.
The Parkway obligations are as follows:
9 Right-of-way costs for the portion north of Drennan Road:

$55,855,114
9 Construction costs for the portion north of Drennan Road
(including four travel-lanes and any necessary turn lanes
and bridges): $67,108,174 and;
for the Banning-Lewis Parkway and the other remaining General Annexor
Obligations of $42,306,287.
Methodology The total General Annexor Obligation of $42,306,287 was divided by the total
developable acreage in the Ranch. Similarly, the interchange component
($25,000,000) of the Banning-Lewis Parkway fees was divided by the net
developable acreage in the Ranch. The developable acreage under this
scenario equals 17,962 acres. These two fees will be paid by all Annexors.
The two additional components of the Parkway fee (right-of-way dedication value
and construction cost) were divided by the total developable acreage within the
northern portion of the Ranch (15,062 acres). Only Annexors who own property
L-15
north of Drennan Road will pay these fees. The Annexors who own property
south of Drennan Road will be required to dedicate the remaining right-of-way
width and construct any improvements without reimbursement.
Pros and Cons

Pros Cons
9 Most equitable and proportional
option, both initially and long-term
9 Addresses the existing constructed
portion of the Banning-Lewis
Parkway south of Drennan Road
Annexors
9 Fees lower than all other options
9 Allows cost sharing for Arterial
Fees Option 6 Annexor Obligation Fees
Right-of-
Annexor
Way Construction Interchange
Obligation
Fees Fees Fees Total Fees
Fees
(Per (Per Acre) (Per Acre)
(Per Acre)
Acre)
Annexors North
$2,355 $3,708 $4,455 $1,392 $11,910
of Drennan
Annexors South
$2,355 $0 $0 $1,392 $3,747
of Drennan
L-16
Planning Department
Appendix M
Literature Review: Impact Fees
Literature Review
Development Impact Fees
City of Dover, Delaware. Methodologies for Calculation of Impact Fees in the City of Dover. Dover,
Delaware: City of Dover, 2003.
Provides guidelines for the City of Dover on how to calculate impact fees.
Allows for periodic revision of fees.
City of Lincoln, Nebraska. “Impact Fees.” Municipal Code. Lincoln, Nebraska: City of Lincoln, 2003.
Outlines the impact fees required of developers in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Includes a provision exempting low-income housing from fees.
City of Miami Beach. “Article V. Parking Impact Fee Program.” City of Miami Beach Municipal Code.
Miami: City of Miami Beach, 2002.
Outlines the parking impact fees in Miami Beach.
Evans-Cowley, Jennifer and Larry Lawhon. “The Effects of Impact Fees on the Price of Housing and
Land: A Literature Review.” Journal of Planning Literature 17.3 (2003).
Reviews literature that suggests impact fees contribute to higher housing prices.
Concludes that the homeowner bears the brunt of the impact fee.
Maine State Planning Association. Financing Infrastructure Improvements through Impact Fees: A
Manual for Maine Municipalities on the Design and Calculation of Development Impact Fees.
Augusta, Maine: Maine State Planning Office, 2003.
Discusses the policy behind and effects of impact fees.

Provides examples of ordinance format and fee calculation.
Mesa County. A Resolution Adopting Transportation Impact Fee Regulations for New Development and
for Other Purposes. Mesa County, Colorado: Mesa County, 2004.
Outlines the transportation impact fee program in Mesa County, Colorado.

Assesses fee prior to site-plan issuance based on the expected traffic impact of the
development.
Nelson, Arthur C., ed. Development Impact Fees: Policy Rationale, Practice, Theory, and Issues.
Chicago: Planners Press, 1989.
Addresses the issue of timing of development with regard to impact fee payment.
Suggests that all properties be assessed at the same rate but that fee collection be timed to
coincide with expected development to reduce short-term inequity with regard to benefits.
Nelson, Arthur C. and Mitch Moody. The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
”Paying for Prosperity: Impact Fees and Job Growth.” June 2003.
Describes the history of, justification for, and methodology behind impact fees.
Finds a significant correlation between impact fees paid and community growth.
M-1
Nicholas, James C. The Calculation of Proportionate-Share Impact Fees. Chicago: American Planning
Association, 1988.
Provides an in-depth analysis of the methodology behind the calculation of impact fees.
Nicholas, James C., Arthur C. Nelson and Julian Conrad Juergensmeyer. A Practitioner’s Guide to
Development Impact Fees. Chicago: Planners Press, 1991.
Provides a model park impact fee ordinance.
Libby, Lawrence and Carmen Carrion. “Ohio State University Extension Fact Sheet: Community
Development: Development Impact Fees.” Ohio State University. 2006. 26 July 2006
<http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1558.html>.
Addresses policy and legal considerations behind impact fees.

Concludes that impact fees may raise the cost of development and affect growth patterns.
Payson, Arizona, Parks & Recreation Administration. Land Dedication or Impact Fee: Town of Payson,
Arizona. Payson, Arizona: Town of Payson, 2002.
Staff report discussing impact fees in Payson, Arizona.
Preston, Gabe. Paying for Growth: A Methodological Approach. Durango: Rural Planning Institute, 2001.
Provides an in-depth description of the concept of impact fees.

Describes the methodology behind the calculation of impact fees.
Identifies potential problems with impact fees (e.g. the fact that impact fees are dependent on
active real estate markets and may fail to generate adequate revenue in situations where the
market takes a downturn).
“Policy Guide on Impact Fees.” American Planning Association. 2006. 7 June 2006
<http://www.planning.org/policyguides/impactfees.html?project=print>.
Outlines several impact fee standards including that fees be rationally linked to development
impact, that fee-payers receive some benefit as a result of paying the fee, and that fees be
reviewed at least every two years.
Ross, Dennis H. and Scott Ian Thorpe. “Impact Fees: Practical Guide for Calculation and
Implementation.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development September (1992).
Describes the increased utilization of impact fees to fund development as a result of

decreased property tax revenues. Cities have begun relying on impact fees as a way to fund
new infrastructure and capital improvement projects.
Describes two forms of calculation for impact fees: inductive and deductive calculation.
Compares enabling legislation in several states.
Suggests that impact fees could be calculated on population numbers as well as on traffic
generation numbers.
San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association. Planning for Growth: A Proposal to Expand
San Francisco’s Transit Impact Development Fee: Recommendations of the SPUR
Transportation Committee. San Francisco: San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
Association, 2001.
Discusses San Francisco’s transportation impact fee and proposes changes to widen the
collection area.
M-2
“Timing of Impact Fee Payments.” Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington. 1999. 16
November 2004 <http://www.mrsc.org/printfile.aspx?prntPath=%2fSubjects%
2fPlanning%2fFiles>.
Provides a comparison of when impact fees are assessed by several local governments in
Washington.
Most fees are due at time of building permit.
M-3
Planning Department
Appendix N
Village One Analysis
Village One Analysis
Village One in the Banning-Lewis Ranch is exempt from inclusion in the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor
Shared Obligation Study (Study) because it is assumed that infrastructure costs within Village One will
either equal or exceed any fee that would be imposed on the net planning acreage of the area.
Based on this analysis, it is concluded that the infrastructure costs in Village One exceed the fee amount
that would be paid under the Study.
Methodology
Village One has approximately 263 net planning acres with development potential. This acreage does
not include sites for public facilities, parks, or schools. Under Option 6 in the report, the per-acre Annexor
obligation (AO) fee of $2,355 will be applied as a comparative tool.
The Banning Lewis Ranch Management Company (BLRMC) is required to construct Dublin Road to four
(4) lanes on the boundary of Village One. Under Option 6, the BLRMC would not be eligible for any
reimbursement from other Annexors, or from the City. The company could, however, file cost recovery
against adjacent county property owners. Therefore, by omitting Village One from this Study and cost
sharing/reimbursement program Option 6, the BLRMC agreed to forgo reimbursement for two of the four
lanes of Dublin Road. The road length has been measured using ArcGIS and has been determined to
equal 4,704.17 linear feet.
Similarly, the BLRMC will construct Marksheffel Road to four (4) lanes. Under Option 6, the BLRMC
would be eligible for reimbursement from the City on two of the four lanes where Marksheffel is adjacent
to the boundary of Village One. The company would not be eligible for any type of reimbursement or cost
recovery on the road where it is located entirely within the Village One boundary. The road length has
also been measured using ArcGIS and has been determined to equal 2,838.06 linear feet where the road
is adjacent to the Village One boundary and 1,378.62 linear feet where the road is located entirely within
the boundary.
Professional Consultants, Inc. has estimated that a four-lane arterial roadway will cost approximately
$969 per linear foot. Estimates for Marksheffel Road have been provided by the Rural Transportation
Authority (RTA) and equal $641 per linear foot. Since the BLRMC would only be eligible for
reimbursement and/or cost recovery on two lanes of each road, a figure of $484.50 will be applied to the
linear foot measurements of Dublin Road, while a figure of $320.50 will be applied to the linear foot
measurements of Marksheffel Road. Furthermore, the RTA has estimated the cost of intersections on
Marksheffel Road to equal approximately $399,219 each. There are two intersections adjacent to the
boundary of Village One. BLRMC would only be eligible for reimbursement on half of each intersection.
Findings
The total Village One AO fee under Option 4 would equal:
263 acres X $2,355 = $619,365.
The total Village One Banning-Lewis Parkway fee would equal:
263 acres X $9,555 = $2,512,965.
Total fees would equal:
$619,365 + $2,512,965 = $3,132,330.
N-1
The total cost recovery that could be received from adjacent county property owners by constructing
Dublin Road to a four-lane width would equal:
4,704.17 linear feet X $484.50 = $2,279,170.37.
The total reimbursement that could be received from the City by constructing Marksheffel Road to a four-
lane width where adjacent to the Village One boundary would equal:
2,838.06 linear feet X $320.50 = $909,598.23.
Additionally, BLRMC could have received reimbursement on half of each of the two intersections on
Marksheffel Road adjacent to Village One, equaling $399,219.
The total amount of cost recovery/reimbursement that the BLRMC could receive if Village One was
subject to Option 6 then equals $3,587,987.60.
Conclusion
After careful analysis of the construction obligations contained within Village One and the fees the 263 net
planning acres would generate under Option 6 in the Study, it is concluded that the construction
obligations exceed the fee generation for the area.
N-2
Planning Department
Appendix O
Assignment of Reimbursements
and Execution Instructions
Assignment of Reimbursables
(Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexation Obligations)
TO THE CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO:
1.) For valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency which is hereby acknowledged,
(Typed Company Name)
,
(Typed Address) (State & Zip Code)
“ASSIGNOR”, hereby assigns to

(Typed Name)
,
(Typed Address) (State & Zip Code)
"Assignee," those reimbursable facility obligations as allowable under the provisions of the “Banning
Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligations Study” in the original amount of
$______________________for facilities constructed relating to:
____________________________________, for which Assignor is entitled to reimbursement
pursuant to the City Code, Chapter 7, Article 7, Part 1905, and approved by the City of Colorado
Springs on:_____________, 20_____. The Assignor hereby assigns $_______________________
to the Assignee.
2.) The parties acknowledge that no reimbursement may ever be realized and that if such is
the case, Assignee shall not be entitled to any further recovery from Assignor or any other party.
3.) Assignor represents to the City that Assignor has not assigned the assignment amount
indicated in paragraph 1 above to anyone other than the Assignee, and that any reimbursement
due to Assignor should be paid by the City to Assignee. Upon payment in full, or termination under
the original Reimbursement approval, whichever shall occur first, this Agreement shall be void and
of no further force or effect.
4.) Although the City of Colorado Springs is not a direct party to this Assignment provision is
made for acceptance of this Assignment by the City, thereby authorizing the City to pay the
reimbursements to the Assignee herein.
5.) This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties.
O-1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the _______ day of
_______________________, 20____________.
FOR ASSIGNOR:
BY: ______________________________
(signature)
__________________________________
(typed name)
__________________________________
(typed title)
__________________________________
(company)
FOR ASSIGNEE:
BY: ______________________________
(signature)
__________________________________
(typed name)
__________________________________
(typed title)
__________________________________
(company)
O-2
ASSIGNOR NOTARIZATION
State of _______________ )
)ss
County of ______________ )
The foregoing Assignment of Reimbursables was subscribed and acknowledged before me this
____ day of _____________, 20___, by _____________________ as
__________________________
(typed name) (typed title)
for
_____________________________________________________________________________.
(typed name of Assignor)
Witness my hand and seal.
____________________________________
Raised Seal Required Notary Public
My commission expires: ________________
ASSIGNEE NOTARIZATION
State of _______________ )
)ss
County of ______________ )
The foregoing Assignment of Reimbursables was subscribed and acknowledged before me this
____ day of _____________, 20___, by _____________________ as
__________________________
(typed name) (typed title)
for
_____________________________________________________________________________.
(typed name of Assignee)
Witness my hand and seal.
____________________________________
Raised Seal Required Notary Public
My commission expires: ________________
ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS:
________________________________________
(Title)
O-3
Instructions for the Execution of
Assignments of Banning-Lewis Ranch Shared Annexor
Obligation Reimbursements
• All information will be typed in black ink in the spaces provided.
• All signatures shall be written in black ink, (including Notary Public signatures and seals).
• Only the “original format” of this form will be recorded and facsimiles or poor copies will not be
accepted for recordation.
• A recording fee will be required for each assignment form executed.
• This assignment form will be recorded with the County Clerk of El Paso County, Colorado.
• All assignment forms shall be reviewed by the City Engineer, City Planning Director, and the City
Attorney, and are subject to “Approval as to Form” from those departments.
O-4
Planning Department
Appendix P
Resolutions and Proposed Changes
to City Subdivision Regulations
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BANNING LEWIS

RANCH (“BLR”) SHARED OBLIGATION STUDY AND
COST SHARING/REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study has been prepared to
satisfy an obligation of the BLR Annexation Agreement, dated September 23, 1988
pertaining to BLR Annexation plats, Filing Nos. 1-20; and
satisfy a requirement of the Settlement Agreement in District Court Case Nos. 99-CV-
1944 and 01-CV 0566; and
satisfy a condition of approval of two amendments to the BLR Master Plan, MP 05-
00137 and MP 05-00140; and
WHEREAS, the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study has been prepared in
compliance with City Council Resolution No. 146-06 and Council’s request for a shared
infrastructure study; and
ensure equitable distribution of the costs for the obligations, public improvements and
infrastructure required by the Annexation Agreement among all Annexors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

COLORADO SPRINGS:
Section 1. City Council accepts and approves the BLR Annexor Shared
Obligation Study.
Section 2. The limitation of building permit issuance, development plan and
subdivision approvals within the BLR Master Plan, imposed by the conditions of City
Council approval of an amendment to the BLR Master Plan, MP 05-00137 and MP 05-
00140 on February 14, 2006, is hereby lifted.
Section 3. Any future amendments to the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study
are subject to subsequent review and approval by City Council.
P-1
Dated at Colorado Springs, Colorado, this ____ day of ________________,
2007.
_____________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
City Clerk
P-2
RESOLUTION NO. ____-07
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE BANNING-LEWIS RANCH

ANNEXOR OBLIGATION FEE, THE BANNING-LEWIS PARKWAY FEE
AND THE BANNING-LEWIS INTERCHANGE FEE SUBJECT TO THE
BANNING-LEWIS RANCH ANNEXOR SHARED OBLIGATION STUDY
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO:
Section 1. The fees set forth on Exhibit A, attached and made a part of
this Resolution, are hereby established subject to the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor
Shared Obligation Study.
Section 2. All fees established by this Resolution shall become effective July
1, 2007.
Section 3: Future amendments to the Banning-Lewis Ranch fees established
by this Resolution are subject to review and adoption by City Council.
DATED Colorado Springs, Colorado, this _______day of ___________, 2007.
____________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
__________________________
CITY CLERK
P-3
Exhibit A
2007 Banning-Lewis Ranch Fees
Fee Type Proposed 2007 Platting Fee or Charge
Banning-Lewis Ranch General Annexor

$2,355 per acre
Obligation Fee
Banning-Lewis Parkway Fee
$3,708 per acre
• Right-of-Way Dedication
$4,455 per acre
• Construction Costs
Banning-Lewis Interchange Fee $1,392 per acre
P-4
CODE CHANGE REVIEW
ATTY INIT ____________
DATE _____/_____/_____
ORDINANCE NO. 07-__________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 108 (DEFINITIONS) OF PART

1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS), 105 (RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION AND
STREET IMPROVEMENTS) OF PART 7 (STREETS IN SUBDIVISIONS)
AND 1102 (SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT
ISSUANCE) OF PART 11 (ASSURANCES AND GUARANTIES FOR
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS) AND CREATING A NEW PART 19
(BANNING-LEWIS RANCH ANNEXOR FEES AND REIMBURSEMENTS)
OF ARTICLE 7 (SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS) OF CHAPTER 7
(PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING) OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS 2001, AS AMENDED, PERTAINING TO
BANNING-LEWIS RANCH ANNEXOR SHARED OBLIGATIONS AND
BANNING-LEWIS RANCH ANNEXOR FEES AND REIMBURSEMENTS
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF COLORADO SPRINGS:
Section 1. That Section 108 (Definitions) of Part 1 (General Provisions) of Article
7 (Subdivision Regulations) of Chapter 7 (Planning, Development and Building) of the
Code of the City of Colorado Springs 2001, as amended, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
7.7.108: DEFINITIONS:
***
COLORADO SPRINGS CONSTRUCTION INDEX: The annual cost escalation

instrument for improvement construction, regional infrastructure fees and other
shared obligations identified in annexation agreements. The Index has two
components: construction costs and land costs. The construction portion is
adjusted using the annual increase for the unit drainage fees in the City’s drainage
basins. The land portion is adjusted using the annual School/Park Fee as a base. If
no land cost is associated with the required obligation, then the annual escalation of
that fee would be calculated using only the construction portion of the Index.
***
P-5
Section 2. That Section 705 (Right of Way Dedication and Street Improvements)
of Part 7 (Streets in Subdivisions) of Article 7 (Subdivision Regulations) of Chapter 7
(Planning, Development and Building) of the Code of the City of Colorado Springs 2001,
as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
7.7.705: RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS:
***
C. Construction of Public Improvements and Cost Recovery within the

Banning-Lewis Ranch:
1. Local/Collector Street Construction: Minor streets
constructed by Annexors shall not be eligible for cost
recovery under the provision of § 7.7.705(D).
2. Traffic Signals: Annexors shall be responsible for all costs
associated with the procurement and installation of all traffic
signals in accord with section III(G) of the Banning-Lewis
Ranch (“BLR”) Annexation Agreement. Constructing
annexors may file cost recovery in accord with provisions of §
7.7.705(D).
3. Arterial Roadways: In accord with the adopted BLR Shared
Obligation Study all property contained within the Annexation
Plats of BLR Filing Nos. 1-20 shall be required to construct all
arterial streets depicted within the approved BLR Master Plan
with no cost recovery from the City or from other annexors,
except as follows:
a. Arterials constructed on the boundary of another

annexor’s property shall be subject to cost recovery
from the annexor having frontage on other side of the
arterial in accord with § 7.7.705(D).
b. Annexors required by the City to construct an arterial

street through property owned entirely by another
annexor shall be eligible for cost recovery from those
annexors having frontage along the arterial street in
accord with § 7.7.705(D). The City may require
dedication of the necessary right-of-way for arterial
street construction in accord with section III(A) of the
BLR Annexation Agreement.
P-6
c. Marksheffel Road. In accord with section III(A) of the
BLR Annexation Agreement, annexors shall be
responsible for constructing four (4) lanes of
Marksheffel Road where the Banning-Lewis Ranch lies
adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Marksheffel
Road right-of-way. Constructing annexors will be
eligible for arterial street reimbursement from the City
for two (2) of the four (4) lanes in accord with section
III(C) of the BLR Annexation Agreement. Construction
of Marksheffel Road interior to the Ranch shall not be
eligible for cost recovery unless the construction is
subject to either exception contained in subsections (a)
or (b) of this section 7.7.705(C).
4. Banning-Lewis Parkway Right of Way Dedication. In accord

with ArticleIII(C)(2) of the BLR Annexation Agreement,
annexors shall dedicate the full right-of-way for the Banning-
Lewis Ranch Parkway when deemed necessary by the City.
Annexors may dedicate by deed or by plat, as determined by
the City.
C D. Construction Of Public Improvements And Cost Recovery:
***
2. Eligibility For Reimbursement: Whenever such improvements are
made by a subdivider, developer or redeveloper of land (hereafter,
collectively referred to as a “developer”) the developer is entitled to
fair share reimbursement of the cost of the improvements less any
City reimbursement from the owner or owners whose property is
subdivided, developed, or redeveloped within twenty five (25) years
after acceptance of the improvements by the City. The date of
acceptance of the improvement will be the date of final inspection by
City Engineering. However, if a developer has not requested such a
final inspection by the City within eighteen (18) thirty (30) months
after completion of the improvements there will be no recovery right
for the improvement involved.
***
Section 3. That Section 1102 (Specific Requirements Prior to Building Permit
Issuance) of Part 11 (Assurances and Guaranties for Public Improvements) of Article 7
(Subdivision Regulations) of Chapter 7 (Planning, Development and Building) of the
P-7
Code of the City of Colorado Springs 2001, as amended, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
7.7.1102: SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE:

A. Streets and Drainage Improvements:
1. Whenever the tract of land to be platted embraces or abuts a major
street (street with right-of-way width greater than sixty feet (60’
feet) or major drainage improvement, (drainage facilities identified
in the City's DBPS and master drainage plans), or a major street or
major drainage improvement is necessary to serve the land to be
platted, such major street or major drainage improvement, or both,
shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permit or
acceptable assurance guaranteeing the completion of the major
streets or drainage improvements shall be filed with the City. All
subdivision plats that dedicate Banning-Lewis Ranch (“BLR”)
Parkway right-of-way, for which the subdivider will be
requesting a reimbursement from the “BLR Reimbursement
Fund” or a credit against BLR Parkway platting fees owed,
shall include a cost estimate for BLR Parkway construction.
Upon approval of the cost estimate by the City, the subdivider
or applicant shall post an acceptable financial assurance for
BLR Parkway construction prior to plat recordation.
***
Section 4. That Article 7 (Subdivision Regulations) of Chapter 7 (Planning,
Development and Building) of the Code of the City of Colorado Springs 2001, as
amended, is hereby amended by creating a new Part 19 (Banning-Lewis Ranch
Annexor Fees and Reimbursements) to read as follows:
Chapter 7 – Planning, Development and Building

Article 7 – Subdivision Regulations
Part 19 – Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Fees and Reimbursements
Section:
7.7.1901: Purpose And Applicability

7.7.1902: BLR Fees
7.7.1903: Fee Adjustment
7.7.1904: Fee Payment
7.7.1905: Reimbursement
P-8
7.7.1906: Charge For Reimbursement, Credit and Platting Fee Processing
7.7.1907; BLR Annexation Agreement Impact Fees
7.7.1901: PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY:
In compliance with the Banning-Lewis Ranch (“BLR”) Annexation Agreements

(collectively, the “Annexation Agreement”), the Settlement Agreements in District Court
Case Nos. 99-CV-1944 and 01-CV 0566 and City Council Resolution No. 146-06, the
annexors and City have prepared a BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study1. The
purpose of the Shared Annexor Obligation Study was to identify the annexors’ shared
infrastructure obligations and to determine a fair method for cost sharing and
reimbursement among the annexors. This part 19 establishes the BLR cost
sharing/reimbursement program and shall apply to all property contained within the
Annexation Plats of the BLR Annexations, Filing Nos. 1-20.
7.7.1902: BLR FEES:
The BLR General Annexor Shared Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway and Interchange Fees
shall be set by City Council Resolution and shall be based upon the findings of the BLR
Annexor Shared Infrastructure Study. The BLR fee resolution may be amended in
accord with § 7.7.1903.
7.7.1903: FEE ADJUSTMENT:
The General Annexor Shared Obligation Fee and the BLR Parkway, and Interchange
Fees may be modified by City Council as follows:
A. General Annexor Shared Obligation Fee

1. The land dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to
reflect any adjustment in the fee in lieu of park/school land dedication
established in accord with part 12 of article 7 of this chapter (the
“park/school fee”).
2. The cost to construct and equip the five (5) fire stations required by the
BLR Annexation Agreement will be evaluated annually by the Colorado
Springs Fire Department. The Annexor Shared Obligation Fee will be
adjusted to reflect the Fire Department’s revised estimates for the cost for
these facilities.
3. All other elements of the general Annexor Shared Obligation Fee shall
remain fixed per the costs identified in the Annexation Agreement and/or
the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study.
B. Parkway Fee
1. The right of way dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually
to reflect any adjustment in the fee in lieu of park/school land dedication
1
Resolution No. ___-07 approved the Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Shared Obligation Study on
_______, 2007.
P-9
2. The construction element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect
changes in construction costs as determined by the Colorado Springs
Construction Index. Annexors may independently commission
engineering studies regarding BLR Parkway design and construction costs
at their own expense. Any annexor engineering studies shall be subject to
review and approval by the City and may be used by the City to adjust the
BLR Parkway Fee.
3. Interchange Fee
1. The right of way dedication element of this fee shall be adjusted annually
to reflect any adjustment in the fee in lieu of park/school land dedication
2. The construction element of this fee shall be adjusted annually to reflect
changes in construction costs as determined by the Colorado Springs
Construction Index. Annexors may independently commission
engineering studies regarding the Parkway/Highway 24/Constitution Ave.
Interchange design and construction costs at their own expense. Any
annexor engineering studies shall be subject to review and approval by
the City and may be used by the City to adjust the BLR Interchange Fee.
7.7.1904: FEE PAYMENT:
A. Payment with Subdivision Platting.
The BLR General Annexor Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway and Interchange
Fee shall be paid in conjunction with the recording of any subdivision plat,
recorded after the date of the BLR Annexor Shared Infrastructure Study
was adopted and approved by City Council, for property contained within
the BLR. The BLR General Annexor Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway and
Interchange Fee shall apply to all acreage contained within the plat, with
the following exceptions:
1. Park sites and trail corridors, including those owned by Districts, for
which parkland dedication credit will be granted by the City.
2. School sites for which school land dedication credit will be granted
by a public school district.
3. Public facility site dedication required by the Annexation Agreement

and identified within the approved BLR Annexor Shared Obligation
Study.
P-10
4. Right-of-way dedicated for arterial roadways or the BLR Parkway
and Interchange.
5. Property within the BLR located south of Drennan Road shall not
be subject to the BLR Parkway fee.
B. Platting Fee Credit.
Annexors who have received reimbursement credits for constructing

shared infrastructure, or for fulfilling shared obligations identified as
reimbursable shared obligations by the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation
Study, may apply reimbursement credit against platting fees owed.
C. Payment Prior to Platting.
The General Annexor Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway or Interchange Fee

may be paid prior to platting at the annexor’s option. Payment prior to
platting shall be subject to a twenty percent (20%) early payment
surcharge.
D. Escrowed Fees.
The City shall escrow all General Annexor Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway
or Interchange Fees collected into a separate “BLR Reimbursement Fund”
to be used for the sole purpose of reimbursing those annexors who
construct shared infrastructure or who fulfill Annexation Agreement
obligations identified as reimbursable shared obligations within the BLR
Annexor Shared Infrastructure Study. Any interest or investment income
that accrues on these funds will benefit the fund.
7.7.1905: REIMBURSEMENT:
A. Eligibility.
Annexors who construct shared infrastructure, or who fulfill shared

obligations identified as reimbursable shared obligations by the BLR
Annexor Shared Obligation Study, shall be eligible for reimbursement from
the “BLR Reimbursement Fund” or receive credit against General Annexor
Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed. Any shared annexor
obligation fulfilled after the approval date of the BLR Annexation
Agreement (September 23, 1988) shall be eligible for reimbursement, with
the exception of the prior dedication of the Jimmy Camp Creek Regional
Park site.
B. Credit/Reimbursement for Public Facility Dedications.
P-11
Annexors dedicating land for any of the following public facility sites as
required by the Annexation Agreement, and identified as reimbursable
shared obligations by the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study, shall be
eligible for a reimbursement or credit against General Annexor Obligation
and/or BLR Parkway fees owed:
1. Park and ride site
2. Air monitoring stations
3. City service center
4. Police sub-station sites
5. Street sweeping disposal sites
6. Well sites
7. Water storage tank sites
8. Electric sub-station sites
9. Electric service center
10. Fire stations
The reimbursement or credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or

BLR Parkway fees owed associated with these public land dedications
shall be calculated by multiplying the City adopted park/school fee in effect
as of the date of the site dedication or acceptance of the deed by the City,
by the acreage of the public site dedication.
C. Credit or Reimbursement for Constructing and Equipping Fire Stations.
Annexors constructing and equipping fire stations required by the

Annexation Agreement, and identified as a reimbursable shared obligation
by the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation Study shall be eligible for a
reimbursement or credit against General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR
Parkway fees owed. Reimbursement shall be based upon actual
construction and equipment costs incurred by the constructing annexor.
D. Creditor Reimbursement for Other Shared Annexor Obligations.
Annexors fulfilling any obligations listed below and identified as a

reimbursable shared obligation by the BLR Annexor Shared Obligation
Study shall be eligible for a reimbursement or credit against General
P-12
Annexor Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed. The value of these
obligations shall be as set forth with in the BLR Annexor Shared
Obligation Study. These reimbursable shared obligations include:
1. BLR Annexor Shared Infrastructure Study
2. Sand Creek Drainage Basin Re-Study
3. Jimmy Camp Creek Drainage Basin Study
4. Payment for a radio repeater station
E. Credit or Reimbursement for Dedication of Right of Way and/or

Construction of BLR Parkway.
1. Annexors dedicating right-of-way and/or fulfilling Parkway

construction responsibilities for the segment of the BLR Parkway
located north of Drennan Road as set forth in the Annexation
Agreement shall be eligible for a reimbursement or credit against
General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed. The
value of these obligations shall be as follows:
a. The value of the BLR Parkway right-of-way dedication shall

be calculated by multiplying the City’s park/school fee in
effect as of the date of the right-of-way dedication by the
acreage of the dedication.
b. A preliminary reimbursement shall be determined for BLR

Parkway construction based upon the cost estimate for
Parkway construction approved by the City in conjunction
with the posting of the financial security for the Parkway
construction. The final reimbursement amount shall be
determined based upon actual construction costs submitted
by the constructing annexor and accepted by the City.
Adjustments in reimbursement, or fees owed, will be made if
the final reimbursement amount differs from the preliminary
estimate.
2. Annexors dedicating right-of-way and/or fulfilling Parkway

construction responsibilities for the segment of the BLR Parkway
located south of Drennan Road shall not be eligible for a
reimbursement from other annexors, or receive credit against
General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed
except as follows:
P-13
a. BLR Parkway constructed on the boundary of another
annexor’s property shall be subject to cost recovery from the
annexor having frontage on other side of the arterial in accord
with § 7.7.705(D).
b. Annexors required by the City to construct the BLR Parkway

through property owned entirely by another annexor shall be
eligible for cost recovery from those annexors having frontage
along the BLR Parkway in accord with § 7.7.705(D).
F. Credit or Reimbursement for BLR Parkway Interchange Construction.
Annexors fulfilling the BLR Parkway/Highway 24/Constitution Avenue

Interchange construction obligation as set forth in the Annexation
Agreement shall be eligible for a reimbursement or credit against BLR
Parkway Interchange fees owed. The value of the BLR Parkway
Interchange construction shall be equal to the cost estimate for the BLR
Parkway/Constitution Avenue/Highway 24 Interchange provided by the
constructing annexor and accepted by the City in conjunction with the
approval of the interchange design.
G. Reimbursement or Platting Fee Credit.
Annexors who construct shared infrastructure or who fulfill obligations

identified as reimbursable shared obligations by the BLR Annexor Shared
Obligation Study, shall be eligible for reimbursement or credit against
General Annexor Obligation and/or BLR Parkway fees owed. In
conjunction with a request for reimbursement, the annexor may choose to
be reimbursed from the “BLR Reimbursement Fund” or choose to have
the reimbursement applied to current or future General Annexor Obligation
and/or BLR Parkway fees owed.
In conjunction with the filing of each subdivision plat, the City shall
calculate all platting fees and reimbursements associated with the plat and
determine the net platting fees owed or reimbursement due. In the event
that platting fees are owed, the Annexor may apply reimbursement to
cover these fees as set forth above.
H. Payment of Reimbursement Owed.
The City shall process all annexor reimbursement requests in a timely

manner and shall pay approved reimbursement requests from the BLR
Reimbursement Fund on a quarterly basis. All reimbursement payments
will be processed on a first-in, first-paid basis and shall be paid to the
extent that monies are available in the fund.
P-14
I. Transfer of Reimbursement or Credit.
The City will process reimbursements from the “BLR Reimbursement

Fund”, and/or apply credits owed to the annexors who have constructed
shared infrastructure, or who have fulfilled obligations identified as
reimbursable shared obligations within the adopted BLR Annexor Shared
Obligation Study. The City shall recognize the transfer of reimbursements
to other parties subject to the filing, and City acceptance of, an
“Assignment of Reimbursements” form.
7.7.1906: CHARGE FOR REIMBURSEMENT, CREDIT AND PLATTING FEE

PROCESSING:
The City may impose a fee or charge to cover all expenses associated with the intake of
reimbursement or credits, collection of platting fees and administration of the BLR
Annexor Shared Obligation Study.
7.7.1907: BLR ANNEXATION AGREEMENT IMPACT FEES:
The BLR General Annexor Obligation Fee, BLR Parkway and Interchange Fee shall be
separate from, and in addition to, the “Off-Site Roadway Improvement Fee” and the
“Urban Service Extension Fee” as set forth in the BLR Annexation Agreement.
Section 5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage and publication as provided by Charter.
Section 6. Council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title
and summary prepared by the City Clerk and that this ordinance shall be available for
inspection and acquisition in the office of the City Clerk.
Introduced, read, passed on first reading and ordered published this ____ day of
_____________________________, 2007.
_____________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
CITY CLERK
P-15

BLRReport

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BLRReport

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BLRReport

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Planning Department

30 S. Nevada, Suite 301

Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor

Shared Obligation Study

Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor

Acknowledgements Page iii

Banning Lewis Ranch Annexors - February 2007 Page iv

Cost Sharing/Reimbursement Program Page 9

Appendix A Study Timeline and Benchmarks

Appendix D Annexor Obligations

Appendix J Annexor Obligation Map

Appendix N Village One Analysis

CITY PLANNING PROJECT TEAM:

CITY INTERNAL REVIEW COMMITTEE

Sam Azad City Police Department

CONSULTANT SUPPORT: Professional Consultants, Incorporated

Alvaro J. Testa, Ph.D., P.E.

Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexors—February 2007

CHEROKEE WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT

CHURCH FOR ALL NATIONS

COLORADO CENTRE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT

COLORADO SPRINGS LAND ASSOCIATION

CPH BANNING-LEWIS RANCH LLC

CYGNET LAND CORPORATION

FALCON TRUCKING COMPANY

FHK DEVELOPMENTS LLC

M3 LAND COMPANY LLC

MARKSHEFFEL-WOODMEN INVEST LLC

MGF ACQUISITION CORPORATION

OPTIONS INVESTMENT CORPORATION

OZBURN, JAMES C. AND DELIA L.

POWERS, RAYMOND L. REV. TRUST

UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE

VENWEST PARTNERSHIP LLP

VILLANI PARTNERSHIP LLP

A. Non-reimbursable (an on-site project and/or developer responsibility, referred to in the

B. Reimbursable (“shared,” referred to in the Settlement Agreement as a “shared infrastructure

Definitions of the obligation classifications are as follows:

A. Non-reimbursable (On-site Project) Obligations – refers to certain public and/or private

B. Reimbursable (Shared) Obligations – refers to certain improvements and obligations to be

Obligations classified and determined to be non-reimbursable or site development obligations were

A. Regional drainage improvements.

G. Water (see Appendix F), electric, and gas distribution infrastructure

An explanation of the interpretations of the Annexation Agreement is included in this Study in

A. Jimmy Camp Creek Regional Drainage Facilities

1. Banning-Lewis Parkway constructed on the boundary of another Annexor’s property shall

Banning-Lewis Parkway Fees

Right-of-way costs north of Drennan Road = $55,855,114;

Arterial Street Construction

Local/Collector Street Construction

Reimbursable Annexor Obligations under Option 4 are as follows:

9 Banning-Lewis Ranch Annexor Obligation Study $75,000

Well Sites $1,195,807

1. Allocation of development costs among property owners;

1. Standard City Utility Recovery Agreements or Advance Recovery Agreements

Cost Sharing/Reimbursement Program

A. General Annexor Shared Obligation Fee

A. Payment with Subdivision Platting

B. Platting Fee Credit

C. Payment Prior to Platting