Resolution No. 46-95 (Word Version)

WHEREAS, The City of Grand Junction and Mesa County Planning Commissions and planning staffs have diligently worked jointly and cooperatively in a planning process to prepare a neighborhood land use plan for the Orchard Mesa area; AND

WHEREAS, City Staff has reviewed and approves of the methodology used to complete the Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan; AND

WHEREAS, numerous public workshops and meetings were conducted to obtain public input on the development of a neighborhood plan for the Orchard Mesa area and receive comment on the proposed plan; AND

4. developed and presented a draft Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan dated 16 March 1994 to the public for comment; revised the draft plan; presented the revised draft plan dated 3 May 1994 to the Grand Junction Planning Commission and the Mesa County Planning Commission in a joint public hearing at the Intermountain Veteran's Memorial Park on 2 June 1994 and 30 June 1994; AND

1. heard public testimony on the draft Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan on 2 June 1994 and 30 June 1994;

2. conducted public workshops on 13 July 1994 and 27 July 1994 to review public testimony received on the draft plan;

3. directed the City and County planning staffs to revise the draft plan reflecting the Planning Commissions' deliberation on the testimony; AND

WHEREAS, members of the City and County Planning Commissions presented a proposed draft plan dated 14 September 1994 to the Grand Junction City Council and Board of Mesa County Commissioners in a breakfast meeting on 12 October 1994; AND

1. held a joint public hearing on 8 December 1994 on the proposed draft Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan dated 14 September 1994 and after deliberation on the testimony directed staff to make requested changes;

2. held a joint public hearing on 14 March 1995, a continuation of the 8 December 1994 hearing, on the proposed draft Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan dated 15 February 1995, after proper notice; AND

WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission is charged with the duty to prepare and adopt master plans for the City of Grand Junction and adopted the Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan on 14 March 1995; AND

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Junction has authority to adopt master plans for the City of Grand Junction; AND

WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary and important to plan for the future of neighborhoods within the City limits and finds this Neighborhood Plan an important element of the City Comprehensive Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION:

That the "Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan" dated 14 March 1995 and adopted jointly by the City of Grand Junction Planning Commission and the Mesa County Planning Commission on 14 March 1995 is hereby adopted as part of the Neighborhood Plan Component of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Grand Junction.

ADOPTED JOINTLY BY THE CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION PLANNING COMMISSION AND MESA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 14, 1995

Sincere thanks to the Orchard Mesa Citizen Review Committee who contributed over one year of their valuable time and effort!!

Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

· Letter from the Citizens Review Committee (CRC), for informational purposes only and not considered an official part of the Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan

The Orchard Mesa planning effort began in the summer of 1992 as a joint effort between Mesa County and the City of Grand Junction. The study areas includes portions of the Grand Junction City limits on the west end and extends to 33 Road on the east. Orchard Mesa is defined by its location above the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers lying east of the rivers' confluence, the "Grand Junction."

The Orchard Mesa area (including east Orchard Mesa) experienced a 36.8 percent increase in population between the Census years of 1980 and 1990. This compares to a 14.2 percent increase in population for all of Mesa County over the same decade. Since the 1990 Census the Colorado State Demographer's office estimates the County has grown at about a 2.7% annual rate. According to the 1990 Census, approximately 30 percent of the population on Orchard Mesa was under the age of 18 compared to 27 percent in the County as a whole.

Year	Orchard Mesa	% Change	Mesa County
1960	4,956	n/a	50,715
1970	5,824	17.5	54,374
1980	8,084	38.8	81,530
1990	11,057	36.8	93,145
1990	10,344 (study area only)

After conducting land use inventories for the study area a public openhouse/workshop was conducted in August 1992 for the purpose of issue identification. As a result of the open house, the Orchard Mesa Study Area was divided into three distinct neighborhoods for the purposes of this planning document. Each neighborhood has its own special issues and characteristics yet has an impact on the other neighborhoods due to geographic proximity as well as political and service jurisdictions.

West Orchard Mesa: Encompasses that area north of Highway 50 to the Colorado River east to 30 Road as well as lands south of Highway 50 and west of 27 Road to the Gunnison River.

South Orchard Mesa: Encompasses that area South of Highway 50 and East of 27 Road to the extension of the 33 Road line.

Central Orchard Mesa: Encompasses that area East of 30 Road to 33 Road North of Highway 50 and South of the Colorado River.

Neighborhood meetings were conducted in the fall of 1992 to further define issues of concern to the residents. Input from these well attended meetings provided the basis for a survey designed to determine public opinion on goals and objectives related to the various issues. The surveys were sent to all those who attended previous meetings as well as various agencies and interest groups. The survey results were the basis for an issue/response document prepared by a Technical Advisory Committee, made up of representatives from appropriate County and City departments and agencies.

In March of 1993 the Orchard Mesa Citizen Review Committee (CRC) was created. The CRC membership was self selected by interested residents. Each neighborhood was represented by four members and up to four alternates. The CRC spent the next year meeting with various agencies, service providers, and interest groups to obtain a diverse and comprehensive understanding of Orchard Mesa. Neighborhood meetings were conducted and a newsletter distributed over the course of the planning process to keep the residents apprised of the planning process. An estimated 250 individuals participated in the process through surveys, interviews, neighborhood meetings, and group meetings.

The CRC submitted a draft Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan to the Mesa County and Grand Junction Planning Commissions in May 1994. After public review of the document the Planning Commissions conducted a public hearing on the plan on 2 and 30 June 1994. The Planning Commissions then met in a public workshop format on 13 and 27 July 1994 and reviewed all staff reports, the CRC reaction to the staff reports and other public testimony taken in the June hearing. A document with revisions the Planning Commissions agreed upon in the workshop sessions was then reviewed in another joint public hearing on 8 December 1994. Staff was then directed to make further revisions to the draft plan based on comments at the 8 December 1994 hearing. This document is a result of those revisions and further changes that the Planning Commissions approved as the final plan at the March 14, 1995 joint hearing.

The Orchard Mesa Plan has been developed to focus on several topics found to be important to the Orchard Mesa Community. The following Action Plans are based on the "Findings" and "Issues" identified through the planning process for the various topics. "Goals and Objectives" were developed for each Action Plan and are followed by specific "Implementation Strategies". The recommended strategies are prioritized by short-, mid- and long-term implementation timeframes.

The Orchard Mesa Plan should be used as a guide by both the public and private sectors in making decisions regarding development on Orchard Mesa. The plan should also be used by the County and City elected officials as an aide in directing staff with specific direction in the yearly work programs. The recommendations of the plan which involve formal adoption or revision to regulations or ordinances will require further public review and formal public hearings.

Domestic Water, Irrigation/Drainage, Sewer, Solid Waste Management, Public Safety, Schools.

In order to assure the Orchard Mesa Action Plans are implemented, an independent citizen's "implementation oversight" committee should be formed to meet periodically and report to the Mesa County Commissioners, Grand Junction City Council, and the respective Planning Commissions. At a minimum this committee should report annually on the progress of the implementation strategies and suggest any amendments to the plan if circumstances warrant. The Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan should be revised and updated by 2005. There may be occasion to review and revise all or any portion of the plan before 2005.

Where no specific entity is identified as responsible for a strategy/action both the appropriate City and County agencies are responsible.

For questions regarding this plan please contact the Mesa County Long Range Planning section and/or the Grand Junction Community Development Department at 244-1650 or 244-1430 respectively.

· Domestic Water - Ute Water Conservancy District, City of Grand Junction, Clifton Water District

· Electricity - Public Service Company of Colorado and Grand Valley Rural Power Lines

· Sewage Collection - Orchard Mesa Sanitation District and City of Grand Junction/Mesa County Joint Sewer System

· Solid Waste Collection - Residential - City of Grand Junction within City limits, private haulers outside of City;

· Commercial - private haulers and City of Grand Junction (inside City limits).

Geographical Information System (GIS) is a land information data base that utilizes a common set of base maps linked by a coordinate network. Through individual computers personnel will access such information as parcel ownership, socio-economic data, utility ownership and location, transportation data, land use and so on. This information will allow City, County and utility company personnel to perform their responsibilities more efficiently and effectively by simple manipulation of the GIS system.

Domestic water service provided by Ute Water and the City of Grand Junction on Orchard Mesa has been interrupted several times in the recent past due to line breaks. Many existing waterlines do not meet current fire protection standards particularly in terms of line size and looping requirements. Common water system construction standards have been adopted by the City, Clifton and Ute Water.

Irrigation water is supplied to most of Orchard Mesa via the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, (OMID). Irrigation water is pumped from the Colorado River. The on-farm salinity control program the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) offers is an opportunity for more efficient use of irrigation water and results in higher water quality. Although OMID is charged with handling drainage in the area, their focus has been on irrigation with drainage management being a low priority. The City and County are developing comprehensive drainage plans for their respective jurisdictions.

The 201 Sewer Service Planning Area has been expanded to include that part of the master plan study area between 30 Road and 32 Road and north of Highway 50. However, the Orchard Mesa Sanitation District service area generally includes all of Orchard Mesa west of 29 Road.

The 201 Sewer Service Area has been expanded from the current service area shown in the "Comprehensive Wastewater Basin Study," HDR, 1993 to include the Valle Vista subdivision. Since the sewer extension to the Valle Vista subdivision, has been constructed, there is now a possibility of the service area expanding to areas east of 30 Road. The extension will allow relatively easy sewer service to the area south of B Road to Highway 50.

The "Comprehensive Wastewater Basin Study," prepared by HDR in 1993 for the Joint Sewer System identifies existing basins (areas) not currently being served by sewer. Sewer policies and procedures are currently being adopted by the City Public Works Department, the Sewer System Manager, that address the sewer availability issue. The City, under Resolution 94-93 has adopted the HDR Study. The Basin Study is part of the sewer policies and procedures adopted by the Sewer System Manager.

The Solid Waste Management Plan for Mesa County, as drafted by the Mesa County Waste Management Division was adopted by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners on 26 July 1994. The County recently purchased the landfill site from the Bureau of Land Management and now owns over 1,000 acres in the immediate vicinity of the landfill. The Orchard Mesa Landfill has been renamed the "Mesa County Landfill" at the request of Orchard Mesa residents.

The Mesa County Planning Commission adopted a Waste Management Policy as part of the Mesa County Land Use and Development Policies (Policy #32) in 1990. The Policy includes the following: "Wastes from Mesa County should generally be disposed of within Mesa County, and conversely, wastes generated outside of Mesa County should not be disposed of in Mesa County." (page 3 - Waste Management Policies).

The Mesa County Landfill operates under a Mesa County Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Certificate of Designation. The CUP was adopted pursuant to the Mesa County Land Development Code which requires annual review of the CUP.

Public safety services within the planning area include: Fire protection - Grand Junction City/Rural Fire Districts Station #4 at 27 Road and B 1/2 Road and the Central Orchard Mesa Volunteer Fire Department at B 1/2 and 32 1/2 Roads; Law enforcement is provided by the Mesa County Sheriff's office, the Grand Junction Police Department and the Colorado State Highway Patrol. The historic low crime rate on Orchard Mesa may relate to the several active neighborhood watch programs throughout Orchard Mesa. The City Police Department has an Orchard Mesa "beat" assigned to patrol the Orchard Mesa area. The County Sheriff's office does not routinely patrol the area but has an excellent response record. The City Police Department reviews development proposals for elements of crime prevention through design, e.g. limited access to properties (cul-de-sacs, and minimizing opportunities for criminals to hide (landscaping). Multiple access points to developments are often encouraged by the fire departments to ensure emergency vehicle access in case an access is blocked.

Lincoln Elementary School, established in 1895, was the first school built to serve Orchard Mesa. Orchard Mesa Middle School also serves as a recreational resource providing an indoor swimming pool and other outdoor recreational opportunities. Phase I expansion of the Orchard Mesa Middle School Sports Complex began in the summer of 1993 and includes outdoor lighted basketball courts, sand volleyball courts and lighting for the tennis courts. The School District owns an additional 10 acres south of Mesa View Elementary School for expansion. The other elementary schools are very limited in their ability to expand. In 1993 the school district expressed a need for a fifth high school, and geographically, Orchard Mesa is a logical location. Enough vacant land is available to accommodate future school sites.

	1992	1993	1994
Columbus Elementary	312	360	343
Lincoln O.M. Elementary	432	415	421
Mesa View Elementary	628	637	592
Orchard Mesa Middle School	629	592	588
Total Students	2001	2004	1944

1. Need for system upgrades to current standards in terms of quantity and quality.

1. Ensure adequate domestic water is available in terms of quality and quantity for all development (existing and future).

2. Inventory and prioritize needed system upgrades with the applicable water district (Ute, City, Clifton) to provide adequate service to existing development.

3. Encourage capital improvement plans for water service which meets the needs of Orchard Mesa for the next 10 years.

1. Share and combine data on line sizes for all three water providers onto one Geographic Information System as an inventory of existing conditions in Orchard Mesa.

2. Water providers should prepare and coordinate 10-year capital improvement plans and coordinate construction on an annual basis for operations and street cut purposes.

3. The City should continue to require and the County should begin requiring new development to meet existing standards for water service by requiring developers to upgrade the water delivery system when existing facilities do not meet current standards in terms of line size and looping requirements.

1. Water providers should identify and prioritize areas on which water service does not conform to the agreed standards, and develop plans to bring service up to the standard.

2. Ensure historic and traditional irrigation uses that are disturbed by new development are mitigated.

3. Develop consistent irrigation and drainage maintenance, management and conservation policies with the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District.

4. Minimize conflicts in demand and timing of delivery of irrigation water within subdivisions and between residential and agricultural uses.

6. Ensure O.M. Irrigation has the opportunity to comment upon plans for new development.

1. Require site specific irrigation and drainage plans for all new developments to meet the applicable adopted standards of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, the County Drainage Manual, and the Grand Junction Storm Water Management Plan if the development will be using Orchard Mesa Irrigation District water.

2. The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District will continue to be a review agency for irrigation issues and should become involved in educating water users in how to avoid conflicts among users.

3. The Orchard Mesa Irrigation District should provide review comments on drainage issues and become more active managers of drainage in the area.

1. The City, County and Orchard Mesa Irrigation District should develop a comprehensive drainage plan for Orchard Mesa.

2. Will the area East of 30 Road be served by sewer and which entity will provide collection service.

1. Ensure adequate sewer service is available for all development (existing and future) in the West O.M. Neighborhood.

3. Prioritize needed system upgrades with the applicable sewer district and the City of Grand Junction/Mesa County Sewer System to provide adequate service to existing and future development per the 1993 HDR Sewer Basin Study.

1. The County and the Orchard Mesa Sanitation District should adopt the HDR Sewer Basin Study (1993) and utilize the study for capital improvement planning updates annually.

2. The City, Orchard Mesa Sanitation District, and County should adopt common sewer extension & connection policies for new and existing development.

3. New development required to connect to a public sewer collection system will be required to provide sewer service by tying into existing sewer lines. Dry lines will not be allowed as an alternative.

1. To allow only non-hazardous, solid waste materials to be disposed of in the landfill.

2. Eliminate litter along local roadways including Highway 50 and strengthen enforcement of litter control laws and regulations.

3. Establish a successful recycling program and encourage incentives for curbside recycling.

6. Maintain adequate buffers (visual, noise, odor, etc.) between the landfill and residential areas.

1. The County should monitor and keep the south Orchard Mesa neighborhood informed on the implementation of the Mesa County Solid Waste Management Plan.

2. Mesa County Waste Management Division and the City Sanitation Department, BLM, Mesa County Department of Health, and private landowners should establish an action plan with local law enforcement agencies regarding illegal dumping and roadway littering.

3. The Mesa County Sheriff and District Attorney should enforce illegal dumping and littering ordinances.

4. The County Waste Management Division and the private haulers should establish a public education program regarding recycling programs and trash service rules. The City should continue its public education efforts to promote recycling efforts.

5. The Mesa County Landfill should retain its current AFT zoning which requires a conditional use permit (CUP).

3. Ensure all water lines are supplying sufficient fire flows and upgrade all waterlines currently not meeting required fire flows.

1. Establish neighborhood watch programs throughout study area and reactivate inactive programs.

2. The Sheriff's Department should provide each neighborhood watch program copies of the Mesa County restricted firearms shooting zone map and regulations for distribution to property owners and work with property owners on posting appropriate areas.

3. Water providers should adopt a common upgrade program to include in each entity's Capital Improvements Plan annually.

4. Law enforcement and fire departments should continue to review and comment on all new developments to ensure the designs meet their needs for crime prevention and adequate fire protection.

The School District 51 master plan of schools should be updated and include provisions for a future high school in Mesa County to be built on Orchard Mesa and a new elementary school.

District 51 should establish a citizen's participation program to update the master plan of schools.

District 51 should secure a location for a new high school in the vicinity identified in the Future Land Use Map of this plan.

A basic issue of the residents of Orchard Mesa is the image of Orchard Mesa. Many residents have referred to Orchard Mesa as a "dumping ground for the County" and "the City's stepchild." A feeling that equitable capital improvements have not been made by the City and County on Orchard Mesa is also prevalent.

The Highway 50 corridor is a major entryway to the Grand Junction area and offers visitors and residents their first view of the urban area. The image many people have of Orchard Mesa and the Grand Junction area is based on their experience along this corridor.

Access to the nearby open spaces of the Grand Mesa slopes, the magnificent views, agricultural uses, and low density development, define the rural atmosphere on the majority of Orchard Mesa. This rural atmosphere and the proximity to downtown Grand Junction combine to make attractive drawing cards for new development. A strong community interest in cleaning up the area provides an opportunity to develop a more positive image of Orchard Mesa and the community as a whole.

The City and County Code Enforcement staffs are currently able to respond to complaints; however, proactive enforcement is not possible without additional personnel. The City has recently increased its enforcement staffing level and initiates proactive code enforcement as time permits. The City code enforcement division has established a set of criteria upon which to prioritize its work efforts. Generally, code violations which could effect health or cause property damage are enforced on a high priority basis. Code enforcement resources will be applied throughout the City, including Orchard Mesa, according to these established criteria.

· Due to the relatively low rate of residential development in the area, opportunity exists to maintain the existing rural atmosphere and open spaces outside of the urbanizing areas of Orchard Mesa, a major reason people choose to live on Orchard Mesa.

· Due to geologic hazards, the river bluffs provide an opportunity to preserve the blufflines from visual impacts of new development.

· Current planning for the Mesa County Landfill provides opportunities to assure the compatibility of the landfill with adjacent uses.

· The City has an abatement/enforcement program which allows staff to ticket and collect fines or abate the violations.

· The County Planning Commission and the Grand Junction City Council have adopted the Grand Mesa Slopes Management Plan (January 1994) which recognizes the need to maintain the open character of the eastern fringes of the study area.

· An Orchard Mesa Beautification Committee has been formed which will provide assistance in the Highway 50 corridor image issues.

· The City's Master Plan of Parks, Recreation and Open Space recommends development of a confluence point park.

The City conducted an inventory of structures that were either boarded up and unoccupied or abandoned and unsecured during the month of April, 1994 and found 8 structures within the City limits on Orchard Mesa.

2. Clean-up of Highway 50 corridor through the development of an Orchard Mesa beautification program including landscaped highway right-of-way from the Colorado River to 29 Road.

3. A clean, well maintained and litter free Highway 50 corridor, and an active adopt-a-highway program for the entire Highway 50 corridor.

5. For Development within Unincorporated Orchard Mesa: Maintain potentially important view corridors of Grand Mesa, Bookcliffs, and Plateau, and maintain the open space character of the Grand Mesa Slopes.

7. Encourage attractive, well maintained, cohesive properties and neighborhoods and develop incentives for neighborhood cleanup.

1. The Grand Valley Beautification Council should establish a beautification program; study the following topics; and report its recommendations to the City and the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce:

c) Design guidelines addressing building facades, signage, private landscaping, parking lots, access control, etc.

e) A mechanism to organize and publicize an Orchard Mesa Community Pride program.

2. Adopt recommended performance standards or other implementation methods for the above topics.

3. The Grand Valley Beautification Council should work with the Colorado Department of Transportation, citizens groups, the City of Grand Junction, and Mesa County on establishing and ensuring a complete and ongoing adopt-a-highway program on Orchard Mesa.

4. For Development within Unincorporated Orchard Mesa: All new development proposals should identify important views potentially impacted by the development and address measures to maximize the protection of important views from each building site and minimize impacts each development will have on views from surrounding lands.

5. New development that includes visually prominent hilltops and blufftops, should be designed with colors, textures, and architectural features which blend with the surrounding, natural landscape. These design elements should be incorporated in subdivision covenants and enforced by homeowner associations.

6. Expand the County's and local trash haulers' participation in the City's Freshazadaisy program by offering more no-fee landfill days at the Mesa County Landfill and notification to the neighborhoods each year in cooperation with the County Waste Management Division and City Sanitation Department.

7. Adopt land use and zoning strategies to preserve the rural character of Orchard Mesa outside of the urbanizing area as identified in the Agriculture section of the Land Use and Zoning Action Plan.

8. New developments should be required to be serviced by underground utilities and replacement and/or upgrading of power lines should be required to be located underground.

7. Impacts of noise from Intermountain Veteran's Memorial Park, construction, and other sources.

1. Establish strong, consistent enforcement of zoning, development and building codes as a priority within the City and County portions of Orchard Mesa.

2. Establish and enforce consistent, strict penalties for noncompliance with the City's and County's respective Codes. Violators should be pursued and if necessary prosecuted.

3. Eliminate junkyards in residential zones and permit no additional junkyards on Orchard Mesa.

4. Better standards for outdoor storage and displays through evaluation of existing standards and establishment of acceptable performance standards by the City and County for all existing and new development.

6. Develop and publicize a common definition of junk, trash and weeds within the City and County.

8. Identify and relocate, where possible, nonconforming uses which negatively impact the area.

1. The County should develop and adopt abatement/enforcement programs which allow staff to ticket and/or collect fines from violators or abate the violations.

2. The City and County Planning staffs should assist the Grand Valley Beautification Council in conducting a comparative analysis of existing outdoor storage and display standards in other communities to determine what revisions should be made to existing standards.

3. Publish definitions of junk, trash, and weeds in the City newsletter and insert in utility billings and/or newspaper.

4. Neighborhoods are encouraged to actively participate in homeowner's associations (HOA) and keep restrictive covenants up-to-date and enforced and provide assistance to property owners to remove and dispose of and/or recycle large junk items. The City and County Planning staffs will provide examples to neighborhoods wishing to create HOAs and adopt covenants.

5. Adopt revisions to City and County development codes as necessary setting strict performance standards for outdoor storage.

6. Encourage the City and County to provide adequate staffing for City and County Code Enforcement.

1. The City and County zoning and code enforcement offices should emphasize proactive code enforcement.

2. Conduct inventories of junkyards and legal nonconforming "grandfathered" uses, then work with the property owners to identify potential relocation sites or appropriate uses on their properties. An ordinance should be adopted by the City which will amortize out certain legal nonconforming and or inappropriate uses such as junkyards.

3. The Mesa County Air Quality Planning Committee and the Air Quality Control Division of the Colorado Health Department should monitor and enforce air quality standards on Orchard Mesa.

A Land Use Survey of the study area was conducted during the summer of 1992 for the City and County. Six land use categories were identified: agriculture, residential, business, commercial, industrial, and public/quasi-public. Of these six land uses, agriculture was dominant, making up approximately 60% of all land use on Orchard Mesa, followed by approximately 20% of the area being residential.

Residential uses include single family, two family, multiple family, and mobile homes. In 1990, the area had 4,334 total housing units. A majority of the recent residential construction in the Orchard Mesa area has been centered around the Village Nine subdivision and the replatting of a number of small Village Nine lots into larger lots. The areas near 29.5 and A.5 Roads and 27 and B Roads have also seen several homes constructed over the past three years. Three mobile home parks are located along Highway 50. With the 1991 approval of the Chipeta Golf Course Planned Unit Development (40 lots), between 29 and 29.5 Roads and B and B.5 Roads, there is an increased growth potential for the surrounding area, including the Loma Linda subdivision.

The urbanizing area of Orchard Mesa is located west of 30 Road and includes the entire portion of Orchard Mesa within the City of Grand Junction. This is an area of many older homes, well established neighborhoods and several vacant tracts of land. The area has existing water and sewer infrastructure necessary for urban density development.

Public and Quasi-public uses consisting of schools, parks, open spaces, and churches, make up approximately 15% of the total land use. Public facilities on Orchard Mesa include Intermountain Veteran's Memorial Park; Columbus Elementary; Lincoln Elementary; Mesa View Elementary; Orchard Mesa Middle School; a Grand Junction Fire Station #4 at 27 Road & B 1/2 Road, and the Central Orchard Mesa Volunteer Fire Station at B 1/2 and 32 1/2 Roads, the County Road shop at 32 and C 1/2 Roads, City water treatment plant and cemeteries on the Gunnison bluffs, and the CSU Agricultural Research Station on B 1/2 and 31 3/4 Roads.

Business, Commercial and Industrial uses make up the remaining approximately 5% of the land use on Orchard Mesa. Major employers within the Orchard Mesa neighborhood include the Department of Energy, City Market, Dixson Electronics and BFI. Commercial uses generally occur along U.S. Highway 50. Most of these are neighborhood retail businesses. Orchard Mesa Plaza between Linden and 27 Road north of U.S. Highway 50 is a neighborhood shopping center with a large discount store, a hardware store, a mini-bank, and numerous small retail and service businesses. A supermarket, City Market, is located on B 1/2 Road just north of Highway 50 at 27 3/4 Road. A smaller grocery store, Orchard Mesa Market, is at 29 Road and Highway 50. The potential for additional commercial development exists east of City Market. Industrial uses are limited to five gravel pits, a salvage yard on Highway 50 at the landfill entrance, and the landfill operation. Fruit and vegetable stands are scattered throughout the eastern third of the study area.

Mineral resources are indicated in a general sense on the Orchard Mesa Mineral Resources Map and are predominantly upland gravel deposits on both the Colorado River and Gunnison River bluffs as well as floodplain deposits along both rivers. The current, five gravel pits in the area are all outside of the City limits. Some coal deposits exist along the Gunnison River near the Department of Energy facility. These resources are all identified in the County's Mineral Extraction Policy (adopted by the Planning Commission and County Commissioners in 1985) and mapped in the Mineral Resources Survey of Mesa County (1978). (See Mineral Resources Map)

Pursuant to State law, the Mesa County Mineral Extraction Policies protect undeveloped, commercially valuable mineral resources from other types of development and require new extraction operations in residential areas to mitigate impacts on existing developments. As Orchard Mesa grows, the potential for land use conflicts increase between gravel operations and other development. The current Mesa County Agricultural Policies (Policy # 17 of the Mesa County Land Use and Development Policies) which encourages the retention of large tracts of prime and unique agricultural lands are often in conflict with the Mineral Extraction Policies. Mineral extraction is an allowed use in the County's Industrial zone and requires a Conditional Use Permit in the Agricultural Forestry Transitional zone.

Agricultural uses include on-farm residences, orchards, row crops, pasture, and a dairy. The topography and soils of this area lend themselves well to irrigation and are considered among the best soils in the Grand Valley for crop production. Nearly all the irrigable lands below the Orchard Mesa Irrigation Canals are or have been cultivated for a variety of crops, most notably peaches, apples, cherries, grapes, other fruits, and vegetables. Nearly all undeveloped land in Orchard Mesa is considered prime irrigated farmland and other areas are considered unique by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. A dairy operates near the top of the Fifth Street Bridge within the City limits.

Land development in the area has been typified by "leapfrogging" into agricultural areas. This type of development leaves large amounts of vacant land mixed with residential. This development pattern can drive out agricultural uses and diminish the rural flavor of an area. An important result of leapfrog development is increased costs of utilities and urban services in the future as evidenced by the failed sewer lagoons of the Valle Vista Subdivision along 32 Road. The issues of how urban services, such as sewage collection and parks development and maintenance, are to be provided to the area as it grows is unanswered.

The Orchard Mesa Sanitation District has extended a sewer line from Mesa View Elementary School on B Road to the east to 31 Road then southeast to Valle Vista Subdivision.

Zoning in the west neighborhood allows much higher residential development than current land use trends indicate will occur. A large area in the City west of 27 Road and north of Highway 50 is zoned RMF-16 (residential multifamily, 16 units per acre) and is currently developing at low (0-4 units per acre) to medium (4-8 units per acre) densities. An area north of Unaweep and east of Orchard Mesa Middle School was recently downzoned in the City from RSF-8 to RSF-5 in response to a neighborhood petition.

County zoning east of 29 Road is primarily AFT (Agricultural Forestry Transitional). The AFT zone allows one dwelling unit per 5 acres, single family residential uses, and agricultural uses. The AFT zone does not currently have a minimum lot size; however, sewer service is a determinate of minimum lot size, e.g. the minimum lot size for a house with an individual sewage disposal system is 1/2 acre, soil conditions permitting. Smaller lots are permitted if central sewage collection and treatment is provided. The Mesa County Agricultural Policies (Policy #17 of the Mesa County Land Use and Development Policies) and Chapter 4 (Standards for Development Permits) of the Mesa County Development Code encourage the retention of large tracts of prime and unique agricultural lands and recommend clustering of houses to minimize loss of these lands.

The Village 9 and Lynwood areas are zoned for 4 to 8 residential units per acre. Zoning is in place for a planned mobile home park on the north side of C Road just east of the City limits. The entire west neighborhood outside of the City limits is also within the County Persigo Planned Development Overlay Zone (the urbanizing area) which allows development proposals to be reviewed in a one-step process as an incentive for in-fill development.

Zoning in the south neighborhood is primarily R-2 (residential 3.5 units per net acre) and is within the County's Persigo Planned Development Overlay Zone (the urbanizing area). The Intermountain Veterans Memorial Park land is zoned Planned Unit Development for a variety of uses. The landfill and the Gunnison bluffs in the southern part of the neighborhood are zoned Agricultural Forestry Transitional (AFT).

Zoning in the central neighborhood is primarily AFT. About 10 acres at the northwest corner of 32 and C Roads and the RV sales business at Highway 50 and 29 3/4 Road are zoned Planned Commercial.

Some planned unit developments (PUD) have been approved over the years which do not seem to meet the intent and purpose of the planned development concept. PUDs should encourage flexible standards as long as compatibility with surrounding land uses are ensured and public benefits are derived from the project.

1. The need for building setbacks for new developments along the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers to protect unstable slopes and minimize visual impacts of development.

2. Leapfrog development trends have created in-fill development opportunities which have not been taken advantage of in the urbanizing areas of Orchard Mesa .

1. Establish appropriate bluffline setbacks and/or height limits for all new development to protect the Gunnison and Colorado blufflines along the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers from development impacts and encroachment.

1. All new development on the Colorado and Gunnison River blufflines should be required to assess potential impacts in terms of geologic hazards, as well as aesthetics and establish appropriate height limitations and setbacks.

2. Develop and adopt incentive programs to encourage infill development such as development impact fees which consider location in determining amount of fee or offer density bonuses.

3. All future City and County Land Use Plans which affect Orchard Mesa should consider structure height limitations.

1. Incompatible uses encroaching on existing agricultural operations and permanent loss of agricultural lands, open space, and natural areas to development.

1. Encourage residential development which preserves open space, sensitive natural areas, agricultural lands, and the rural character.

2. Encourage residential development on land that is unsuitable for agriculture and require sufficient buffering adjacent to prime agricultural land.

3. Preserve productive agricultural farmland designated prime and/or unique per the Soil Conservation Service.

4. Ensure the CSU Agricultural Research Center is allowed to operate and provide its valuable role to the fruit industry.

1. The County should encourage and provide developers, farmers, and landowners information on the use of conservation easements as a means of preserving agricultural lands.

2. Revise Development Codes to require a minimum buffer of 100 feet between new residential structures and agricultural uses outside of the urbanizing area.

3. New development should provide a buffer area on the perimeter of the CSU Ag Research Station.

4. The County should adopt an open space development overlay zone for that area identified on the Future Land Use Map as Open Space (OS) Overlay in the Central Orchard Mesa Neighborhood east of 30 Road and between 29 1/2 and 30 Roads north of B 1/2 Road. The overlay zone may be utilized at the option of the land owner/developer to subdivide metes and bounds tracts of land over 10 acres in size. The overlay zone should be adopted by Mesa County concurrently with the adoption of this Orchard Mesa Plan. See "Zoning" section of this Action Plan for details.

2. Some urbanizing portions of the County are underzoned (AFT) for efficient and cost effective provision of sewer service.

4. Visual impacts of the current development and outdoor storage along Highway 50.

1. Zoning should be compatible with existing development densities on Orchard Mesa.

2. Zoning standards should require buffering between differing uses to ensure new commercial/business development is compatible with residential and other adjacent uses.

4. The density of future development should be lower than allowed by current zoning in much of the area within the City.

7. Business/commercial development should occur in appropriate areas where compatibility with other uses is ensured.

8. Future use of planned development zoning should comply with the Colorado Planned Unit Developments Statute.

1. The City should rezone some residential areas to better reflect current land use trends as identified on the Future Land Use Map especially those areas currently zoned Residential Multifamily - 16 units per acre (RMF-16).

2. The City should create a duplex residential zone and apply it to the area shown as a maximum of eight dwelling units per gross acre on the Future Land Use Map.

3. The area in the County along the Gunnison River south of the Water Treatment Plant should be rezoned from Industrial to AFT or Conservation/Open Space which would require a Conditional Use Permit for gravel extraction.

4. Establish and adopt an overlay zone with design guidelines and performance standards for the Highway 50 corridor to ensure new commercial/business development is compatible with residential and other adjacent uses (SEE COMMUNITY IMAGE/CHARACTER ACTION PLAN).

5. The County should revise the definition of the HS (Highway Services) zoning district to be consistent with the City's HO (Highway Oriented) zone.

6. The City and County should rezone to HO and HS all those areas identified on the Future Land Use map as Highway Commercial.

7. Rezones on Orchard Mesa should be allowed only in accordance with the Future Land Use Map in this document. In areas indicated as single family/multi-family, 8 units per acre, densities greater than 8 units per acre may be appropriate. Any rezoning to a density greater than 8 units per acre should occur through a planned development zone only. Such rezones must demonstrate the adequacy of existing public services necessary for the development (see General Services Action Plan); provide adequate open space; meet planned development design standards; and demonstrate compatibility with adjacent uses and the neighborhood.

8. The area east of 32 Road, south of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation Canal No. 1 and north of Highway 50 should retain AFT zoning; however, the land uses identified as industrial in nature, with the exception of mineral extraction, should not be permitted as conditional uses or allowed uses, e.g. salvage yards, solid waste disposal sites, power plants, and heavy equipment storage.

9. The Mesa County Landfill should retain its current AFT zoning which requires a conditional use permit for its operation and annual reviews of the permit.

10. Commercial land uses at the northwest corner of 32 Road and C Road (Grandview Commercial Park) should be limited to agricultural and neighborhood services as uses are approved in the Planned Commercial zone.

12. All future use of planned development zoning should meet the purpose and intent of both Colorado statutes and local zoning codes for Planned Unit Developments.

13. The County should adopt an open space development overlay zone for that area identified on the Future Land Use Map as Open Space (OS) Overlay in the Central Orchard Mesa Neighborhood east of 30 Road and between 29 1/2 and 30 Roads north of B 1/2 Road. The OS Overlay Zone should include the following minimum standards:

A. Developments which utilize the OS Overlay zone shall be required to retain a minimum of 50% of the development tract in permanent open space and group dwellings in clusters.

B. A maximum density of one dwelling unit per 2.5 gross acres is allowed (twice the density of the underlying AFT zone).

C. Appropriate permitted uses of the open space should be determined on a case-by case basis and may include:

3. passive recreation areas (trails, community gardens, lawn, picnic areas, etc.);

5. easements for drainage, access, sewer or water lines, stormwater management facilities;

Minimum size of 5 acres of which a maximum of one acre may be developed with a single family dwelling and accessory uses. The undeveloped portion of the lot may be counted toward the minimum 50 % open space requirement for the development and must be restricted from future development and further subdivision by a permanent open space easement. Dwellings on homestead lots count toward the maximum density permitted on a tract.

D. Above ground utilities and road rights-of-way areas may not be counted toward the required 50 % minimum open space land requirement.

E. Open space should maximize common boundaries with open space on adjacent tracts.

F. Safe and convenient pedestrian access should be provided to open spaces where appropriate. Access to land used for agriculture may be restricted.

G. Use of motorized vehicles is prohibited except within approved driveways and parking areas. Maintenance, law enforcement, emergency, and farm vehicles are permitted, as needed.

H. Natural features should generally be maintained in their natural condition. Permitted modifications may include: buffer area landscaping, revegetation, streambank, riparian, wetlands protection and management.

I. Residential Grouping Design, Density and Dimensional Standards should include the following:

5. Maximum density 1 single family, detached unit per 2.5 acres (based on gross density of the tract).

6. All lots shall be grouped into clusters with at least two and no more than 25 lots.

7. Minimum lot size of 1/2 acre for lots utilizing individual sewage disposal systems or minimums established by the County Health Department 4. The area along the Colorado River bluff should restrict future residential lots to a minimum of 2 acres in size. See Future Land Use and Mineral Resources maps.

8. Minimum lot size for lots utilizing public sanitary sewer service should be determined on site specific basis through the subdivision review process.

9. All lots within clusters should be adjacent to open space to the extent possible.

10. Disturbance to mature trees and other significant vegetation shall be minimized.

12. Minimum setbacks between principal residential structures and open space uses as follows:

1. Impacts of new development on the environment including wildlife habitat, natural drainages, floodplains, wetlands, etc.

2. Preservation of wetlands, natural drainages, wildlife habitat, and the river floodplains as open space.

1. The City and County should adopt performance standards within their development and zoning codes for new development which protect the natural environment (wetlands, drainages, wildlife habitat).

2. The City and County should establish a conservation/open space zoning district and apply it to the floodplains of the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers adjacent to Orchard Mesa and other critical areas.

3. In new developments, the City and County should require sufficient setbacks of all structures from natural and constructed drainages to ensure the preservation of the integrity and purpose(s) [aquifer and water course recharge, wildlife habitat, water quality enhancement, flood control, etc.] of the drainages.

1. Impacts of gravel extraction and processing operations on existing residential land uses.

2. Existing residential uses limiting gravel extraction and processing operations.

3. Lack of general knowledge by the public as to the mineral extraction policies and location of resources.

4. Conflict between prime agricultural protection policies and mineral extraction policies.

1. Allow sand and gravel extraction to occur in areas with minimal impact on other uses.

2. Reclaim gravel pits for agricultural, residential, and/or other approved uses.

3. Educate the public on mineral extraction policies and location of valuable resources.

1. Create a map, with the assistance of the local gravel industry, which identifies areas of commercially valuable and retrievable gravel deposits which should be preserved for gravel extraction and prohibited from residential development until such time that the resources are removed and the land is appropriately reclaimed.

2. Gravel extraction areas along the Colorado River bluff should be reclaimed for agricultural, residential, or other permitted uses allowed in the Open Space Overlay zone (See Zoning section above).

3. Encourage gravel extraction in the area east of 32 Road south of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation Canal No. 1 and north of Highway 50 identified as "U2" gravel deposits on the Orchard Mesa Mineral Resources Map.

4. Publish and distribute a Mesa County Mineral Resource and Extraction Policy brochure/handout. (Realtor offices, Assessor's office, etc.).

5. Gravel operations should continue to be regulated on a case by case basis using the Conditional Use Permit process; however, in developed areas, limited impact mining operations in terms of surface disturbances, tonnages mined, and daily vehicular traffic will be encouraged and should be given preference over higher impact operations.

There are seven developed parks located in the plan area. The Orchard Mesa swimming pool, located at Orchard Mesa Middle School, is open to the public and is supported by the School District, the City of Grand Junction, and Mesa County. Leapfrog development has resulted in large areas of vacant land between residential areas. Much of this is used informally for recreation.

In the past, some of the larger developments were required to provide open space for their residents. These sites often have limited, if any, improvements and/or recreational potential. Village Nine is a good example of the diversity in open space and condition of the various public sites. This is due, in large part, to the lack of an overall County recreation plan and no consistent means of providing park development, operation and maintenance services. Unlike the City of Grand Junction, Mesa County has no Parks and Recreation Department. Current City Council policy prohibits development of parks and open space by the City outside of the City limits.

The Intermountain Veteran's Memorial Park is located just outside of the City limits south of Hwy 50. In 1944, the land was purchased and dedicated to honor local veterans. The facility was constructed during the 1950s during the uranium boom as a racetrack and county fair grounds. The grandstand and show pens were completed in 1977. The site is now known as the Intermountain Events Center and is under the control of Mesa County, with an interim on-site manager. An advisory group has been appointed by the Board of County Commissioners to study the long term uses of the facility. A report of their findings to the Board is expected in July 1994. Events ranging from the annual County Fair to rock concerts and monster truck shows have taken place at the facility under Planned Unit Development zoning. The future use of Intermountain Veterans Memorial Park offers numerous opportunities for spin-off commercial uses as well as a recreation and entertainment facilities for Orchard Mesa residents. Due to the size of the facility, impacts of the current and future uses of the Intermountain Veteran's Memorial Park (Events Center) facility have a significant influence on the character of the area.

Future growth could place heavy demands on existing recreational facilities and parks. A potential resource for recreation is the river frontage along the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers as identified in the Grand Junction Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan.

The Grand Junction/Mesa County Riverfront Commission is studying the feasibility of connecting Orchard Mesa to the Colorado River Trail system via a pedestrian bridge. Several bridge sites on Orchard Mesa from 28 Road to Lamplight Subdivision are being considered to connect to the north side of the Colorado River at either the future Colorado River State Park (the old Climax Mill Tailings site) or Watson Island.

7. *O.M. Sports Complex 2736 Unaweep Basketball Court Middle School Tennis Courts, Ball Field

(does not include some school sites, cemeteries, road shops, landfill, State or Federal lands)

Mesa County owns an area east of 32 Road under a Recreation and Public Purpose Agreement with the BLM and leases the property to: Two Rivers Raceway, the Grand Junction Trap Club, and the Modeleers who operate a model airplane site. The Trap Club's leased area was recently expanded to afford the opportunity of expansion of their activities. Several other sites remain available for possible lease for recreational uses.

The Orchard Mesa Plan for parks and recreation follows those items outlined in the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. The timeframes for the implementation strategy years shown were developed following interviews with members of the Riverfront Commission, the Bureau of Land Management, School District 51, Mesa County and the City of Grand Junction Parks and Recreation Department. All governmental entities should be involved in the planning and funding of valley wide facilities for park development. Involvement by the City is dependent upon a number of things such as: the development area must be within the corporate city limits, the need for the project must be well justified and prioritized into the City's ten year capital improvement plan. Identification in the Master Plan does not insure inclusion into the ten year CIP program.

1. Development of the sports complex and neighborhood park at Orchard Mesa Middle School.

3. Future development of "Confluence Point" above the confluence of the Gunnison and Colorado Rivers.

5. Lack of connections to the riverfront trail system, recreation sites, parks, schools, commercial and residential areas.

1. Ensure there are adequate parks and recreational opportunities to meet the needs of the area.

2. Develop pedestrian and bicycle connections between existing and future parks, schools, commercial centers, and the riverfront system (Also see TRANSPORTATION).

5. Continued cooperative support and development of the sports complex and neighborhood park improvements at Orchard Mesa Middle School (Grand Junction, Mesa County, and School District 51).

6. Implementation of the Grand Junction Parks Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan as it applies to Orchard Mesa. (1992 Plan)

7. Encourage a single entity such as the City Parks and Recreation Department to provide long term parks and recreation services (acquisition, operation, maintenance, management of facilities).

9. Develop a neighborhood park on property owned by School District 51 (e.g. adjacent to Mesa View Elementary School).

11. The west end of the IVMP should remain a public owned open space (i.e softball fields, picnic areas, soccer fields, walking areas, etc.).

13. Inventory existing studies and recommendations and update the same for the IVMP operations as they relate to parks, recreation, open space, and the neighborhood.

1. Develop the Orchard Mesa neighborhood park at the middle school and connect to the River Park System.

2. Support the implementation of the recreational element of the Mesa County Solid Waste Management Plan including a trail system along the Gunnison River from the IVMP to Whitewater.

3. The management board of IVMP should always include at least one member who resides in the adjacent Orchard Mesa neighborhood.

4. The IVMP management and neighborhood should jointly identify and inventory impacts of IVMP on the neighborhood and establish an implementation program in conjunction with the annual review of the IVMP by the Board of County Commissioners to minimize these impacts.

5. Support implementation of the Grand Mesa Slopes Management Plan. (i.e. provide technical assistance, lottery funds and actively participate in the Grand Mesa Slopes Advisory Committee).

1. The Riverfront Commission should acquire land for a Confluence Point Park on the west side of the Fifth Street Hill.

2. Complete a pedestrian/bicycle trail along the Orchard Mesa Canal No. 1 which is also identified in the Mesa County/Grand Junction Metropolitan Planning Organization's Multi- Modal Transportation Plan, 1993 with the consent of affected property owners.

3. Support the establishment of the "Colorado/Gunnison Open Space and Recreation Corridor" by the City of Grand Junction Department of Parks and Recreation (per City Parks Plan, 1992).

4. The City and County should establish a conservation/open space zoning district as a tool in implementing the "Colorado/Gunnison Open Space and Recreation Corridor."

5. Redevelop Black Bridge Park with a pedestrian bridge over the Gunnison River.

6. The Orchard Mesa citizens should pursue development of the Orchard Mesa Sports Complex.

1. The Riverfront Commission should develop a Confluence Point Park on the Fifth Street Hill.

2. Develop trails and a passive park along Gunnison River to Whitewater as identified in the Mesa County Solid Waste Management Plan, 1994.

3. Apply the conservation/open space zoning district to properties identified in an open space master plan for the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers adjacent to Orchard Mesa "Colorado/Gunnison Open Space and Recreation Corridor."

2. The City should acquire the Lions Club Park and Veterans Park (the picnic area) at Intermountain Events Center from the County and develop a community park program.

3. Develop Burkey/Orchard Mesa neighborhood park and connect to Gunnison River system.

4. Connect Veterans Memorial Park to Gunnison and Colorado River systems along 27 1/2 Road via a pedestrian/bicycle trail.

The Orchard Mesa transportation network is almost entirely vehicular in nature and has historically been defined by U.S. Highway 50 entering the area from the southeast and exiting to the northwest via the 5th Street Bridge across the Colorado River. One other bridge crosses the Colorado River on 32 Road (Colorado Highway 141) which is 5.75 miles east of the 5th Street Bridge. Pedestrian networks are very limited and include some subdivision sidewalks, graveled shoulders of roads, as well as many canal and ditch maintenance roads. No mass transit system is provided on Orchard Mesa (nor anywhere in Mesa County) with the exception of demand/response service provided by Mesability for the elderly and disabled. Railroad tracks parallel the Gunnison River through Orchard Mesa.

The major streets in the area are east-west streets which collect traffic from the residential areas and feed into U.S. Highway 50. Approximately 57 miles of roads are within the study area, 40 in the unincorporated area and 17 within the City.

Orchard Mesa residents perceive a need for improvements to all modes of the transportation network including sidewalks, bike routes, paths, lanes, and street widening in some areas, particularly around schools and parks. The need for additional crossings of the rivers continues to be a major concern in the area. The Mesa County/Grand Junction Metropolitan Planning Organization has identified a pedestrian/bicycle bridge project from Orchard Mesa across the Colorado River as its priority in the 1996 enhancement fund applications to the Colorado Department of Transportation.

Computer models of potential vehicular traffic on Orchard Mesa indicate at least one new Colorado River crossing will be necessary with total buildout of the area at the densities recommended in the Future Land Use map. Under a buildout scenario, both the 5th Street bridge and the new river crossing may experience congested traffic at peak times.

1. Lack of capital improvement spending in Orchard Mesa for roads, curb/gutter/sidewalks, drainage facilities, road widening, bridges, street lighting, etc.

1. Identify and prioritize necessary City/County capital improvements projects on Orchard Mesa.

2. Reconstruct Unaweep Avenue with drainage facilities, curb, gutter and sidewalk.

4. Coordinate walking route improvements with the School District, City, and County.

5. Completion of additional river crossing(s) for both vehicular and pedestrian access.

1. Through their annual capital improvements plans, the City and County should inventory and prioritize needed capital improvements on Orchard Mesa.

2. Construct a pedestrian/bicycle bridge across the Colorado River connecting to the Colorado River Trail system.

1. Implement the Grand Junction/Mesa County Metropolitan Planning Organization's Road Needs Study, and Multi-Modal Transportation Plan:

a. upgrade Orchard Mesa urban roads to urban standards (especially Unaweep Ave. and B 1/2 Road),

b. complete planning and design for a pedestrian/bicycle/emergency vehicle bridge across the Gunnison River at or near the old Black Bridge site.

1. Following further studies regarding location, construct an additional bridge across the Colorado River.

2. Construct a pedestrian/bicycle/emergency vehicle bridge across the Gunnison River at or near the old Black Bridge site.

A survey of the condition of housing was conducted for the Orchard Mesa area within the city limits during the summer of 1992. In this survey, houses were given a condition rating between 0 and 10 (0 being poor and 10 being good) depending on the overall exterior condition of the house.

From the data collected, it was concluded that 68.9% of the houses surveyed had a rating of 8 - 8.9, fair condition needing only minor improvements. The next most dominant rating was 9.0 -10.0, making up 21% of the houses surveyed. These houses are considered to be in good condition and are found mostly around the perimeter and towards the east end of the survey area. Houses with a rating of 7.9 and below comprised the remaining 10.1% of the survey and are considered to be in poor condition needing several repairs and improvements. A majority of these houses are concentrated towards the west end of the survey area near the confluence of the rivers, with a few farther to the east. Overall, the housing condition within the City limits on Orchard Mesa is fairly homogeneous except for a few areas whose ratings are affected by a small number of houses.

This survey also included the area outside of the city limits. The results were very similar to those found inside the city. Once again the most dominant housing rating was between 8.0 - 8.9, indicating houses in fair condition. Houses which were considered to be in good condition (9.0 - 10.0) made up the next largest category. The remainder of the houses surveyed outside of the city limits were given a rating below 7.9, poor condition. Because a majority of houses surveyed outside of the city limits are located on large tracts of agricultural land, area or neighborhood trends were not apparent.

The Energy Office, offers low interest home improvement loans to qualified low and moderate income families. This program receives funding from state and federal grant programs to the extent that local matching funds are available. The Grand Junction Housing Authority provides rental assistance to eligible families with very low incomes. Approximately one hundred families who participate in this program rent housing units on Orchard Mesa.

According to the 1990 Census, the percentage of renter occupied dwelling units in the Orchard Mesa study area is slightly lower than Mesa County as a whole (33% versus 35%). One exception to this trend is found in the area of Orchard Mesa west of 27 Road where more than 50% of housing units are renter occupied and the housing condition survey indicated a preponderance of houses in poor condition.

Non-federally approved mobile homes are found scattered throughout the study area. The City has no mechanism in place to require the removal of the non-federally approved mobile homes. These will gradually be removed by obsolescence by the owners themselves or by action of the City if they are a "danger" under the Uniform Building Code.

2. Central and South OM neighborhood statistics do not include areas south of the OM Canal No. 2 (Valle Vista Subdivision is excluded).

3. Mortgage costs may include large tracts of land as well as residential lots (e.g. farms).

4. Mobile homes which do not meet current federal manufactured home standards (HUD or equivalent).

3. Ensure diverse housing types are available to meet the needs and preferences for all income levels.

4. Educate the public on the availability of housing rehabilitation programs and fully utilize public and private funding available for such improvements.

6. Organize neighborhood efforts to ensure minimum levels of upkeep on abandoned and neglected houses.

7. Increase the percentage of owner occupied housing units in west and south Orchard Mesa.

1. Adopt common, performance standards for mobile home parks for the City and County.

2. Adopt regulations which phase out all mobile homes which do not meet federal standards and not allow them to replace existing non-federally approved structures.

3. The Grand Junction Housing Authority should continue its public relations/education program on housing assistance programs in cooperation with the Energy Office and Mesa County Social Services.

4. The City and County should provide technical assistance to neighborhood groups on methods to ensure minimum levels of upkeep on abandoned and neglected houses (model covenants, assistance with grant applications, e.g. CDBG, volunteer house painting, Community Alternative Sentencing Program, and other community programs/efforts).

5. The Housing Authority should continue working with lending institutions and other community organizations to establish low interest rate programs and other incentives to make home ownership available to a wide range of income levels.

Orchard Mesa, like all of Mesa County, was Ute Indian territory until 1881 when the area was

opened for immigrants. In that year, George Crawford, the founder of Grand Junction, first viewed the Grand Valley from a point above the Fifth Street Bridge on Orchard Mesa. It was from here that the junction of the Grand (Colorado) and the Gunnison Rivers was viewed and the location for a new townsite determined. Orchard Mesa Heights, the earliest recorded subdivision in the study area, was recorded in 1890 and 1895 at 26.5 and C Roads on approximately 120 acres and created standard city lots (100 feet by 25 feet) and blocks.

The first orchards on Orchard Mesa were established during the late 1800's. The main crops in order of priority were apples, pears, and peaches. The Orchard Mesa Land and Investment Company set out 240 acres (50,000 trees) of fruit trees in 1891. Irrigation water was pumped from the rivers for private use and by the 1920s the US Bureau of Reclamation began a drainage project to solve alkali problems. As part of the Bureau's project the Orchard Mesa Irrigation Company was established consolidating numerous private companies. In the 1920s the Rose Glen Dairy was established on the west end of the mesa by the Clymer family and continues to operate today.

Orchard Mesa's main road during the late 1800's and early 1900's followed Unaweep (C Road) through the Four Corners area (29 Road and B 1/2 Road) and then ran parallel to the Gunnison River to Whitewater along the old Whitewater Hill Road (commonly believed to be part of the Salt Lake Wagon track). This route became State Highway 340 until the current location of US Highway 50 across Orchard Mesa was established in the 1940s and attracted various motel and eating establishments.

Three bridges have spanned the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers to Orchard Mesa. The Fifth Street Bridge was constructed in 1886 and was later replaced by a two lane bridge in 1933. In 1989 the original 1933 northbound truss bridge was replaced to match the existing two lane southbound bridge. The old Black Bridge across the Gunnison River, which was listed on the National Register of Historic Places, connected Orchard Mesa with the Redlands and Glade Park. It was closed to traffic in 1983 due to damage to its stone foundations caused by flood waters and was taken down in September of 1988 by Mesa County. The bridge at 32 Road (State Highway 141) replaced the old Clifton Bridge whose old abutments can be seen up river of the present bridge.

Lincoln Elementary School, located on B 1/2 Road near 29 Road, was established in 1895 as the first school built to serve Orchard Mesa. The original building no longer stands but was utilized as part of the elementary school as recently as the late 1980s.

Orchard Mesa is the site of several cemeteries, all of which are located adjacent to one another above the Gunnison River near the Fifth Street Hill. These include Potter's Field, Calvary, Municipal, Orchard Mesa, Veteran's, Ohr Shalom, the I.O.O.F and Masonic Cemeteries. The Bannister Cemetery was the first cemetery in Orchard Mesa and is now part of the Orchard Mesa Cemetery. George Crawford's grave is also located on Orchard Mesa.

2. Lack of knowledge by the public of historic preservation programs and eligibility requirements.

2. Develop an inventory of historic structures and places as a means for listing properties on official historical registers (national, state and local).

3. Official designation, preservation, adaptive reuse, restoration, or relocation of eligible historic structures and places.

1. The City of Grand Junction Community Development Department and Mesa County Planning office should develop and make available an up-to-date, comprehensive inventory of historic structures and places (reconnaissance survey) in cooperation with the Museum of Western Colorado and the Mesa County Historical Society.

2. The City of Grand Junction Community Development Department and Mesa County Planning office should provide technical assistance to parties interested in historic designation/preservation/interpretation.

3. Coordinate the Riverfront Commission's efforts related to the Old Spanish Trail and the old Salt Lake Wagon Trail across Orchard Mesa with the BLM, State Division of Parks

and Recreation, City of Grand Junction, Museum of Western Colorado, and Mesa County.

1. In Cooperation with the Museum of Western Colorado, the City of Grand Junction Community Development Department and Mesa County Planning office should complete an intensive level survey of potentially eligible properties for designation as an historic place/structure/district.

2. The Museum of Western Colorado and the Mesa County Historical Society should explore the concept of an "Historic Dairy Park" at the top of the Fifth Street Hill.

Nearly 14 percent of the Orchard Mesa planning area is within the Grand Junction City limits (1.67 square miles). The City limits include the Colorado River on the North, B 1/2 Road on the South, Southern Pacific RR tracks/Grand Junction Water Treatment Plant on the West and Mountain View Street/Highland Drive on the East.

Portions of Orchard Mesa have been a part of the city limits of Grand Junction since 1966 when the first annexation occurred. Two major annexations occurred later in 1972 and 1973. The largest annexation, Reservoir Hill, brought in 106.7 acres. Numerous smaller annexations have taken place with the most recent being the Western Hills annexation effective February 7, 1993. Annexation to Grand Junction offers the provision of urban services.

In the public meetings held on the Orchard Mesa plan a recurring comment was expressed that the City has not fulfilled all of its commitments associated with previous annexations. Specific commitments were not identified. The Orchard Mesa Citizen's Review Committee felt the City's annexation policies were unclear to the general public.

After discussion of these issues the City and County Planning Commissions agreed that the City should educate citizens and take into consideration the wishes of the majority of property owners during the annexation process. It was also agreed that this issue is more than a neighborhood plan issue and should be considered in the comprehensive plans and policies of the City and County.

At the City Council Workshop held on Monday, December 5, 1994, staff was given direction to create an appendix of the Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan that would include a summary of the cost estimates of the plan. Staff presented to City Council cost estimates of the Implementation Strategies in the Plan that would be the responsibility of the City of Grand Junction. This staff report summarizes the costs estimated by City Staff to implement the following implementation strategies. Please note that the costs are only estimates. Staff assumes that the City will only be responsible for implementing projects within the City limits and when Action Plan Implementation Strategies cross over jurisdictional lines, additional money and participation would be required from affected entities. The following staff report was revised to reflect direction received from City Council.

1. Action: Share and combine data on line sizes for all three water providers onto one GIS as an inventory of existing conditions on OM. (pg 8)

Staff time required: The City has been working on a Geographical Information System (GIS) since 1991 and anticipates a completion date of 1997 for the target area. The target area consists of 27 square miles and includes all of the City limits and some additional areas adjacent to City boundaries. The Orchard Mesa area of the City's GIS project will include all areas on Orchard Mesa within City Limits and some additional unincorporated areas to the east and south. There is a very large area of the Orchard Mesa Plan area that will not be covered by the City's GIS efforts. Mesa County's GIS will cover the remainder of the area, but at much less detail. The County's level of detail, digitized off of USGS maps, is designed to aide in land use planning purposes where information such as zoning, school/park locations, jurisdictional boundaries, transportation routes and traffic analysis zones, etc. are provided at a scale of plus or minus 50 feet for accuracy. Whereas, the City's GIS accuracy based on surveying instruments at a scale of less than 1 inch, will have exact locations of all utilities, sidewalks, driveways, curbs, gutters trees in the ROW, etc. as well as land use data such as zoning information, current land use, etc. tied to each individual parcel of land. The City and County will share GIS information and combine the data which will allow both entities GIS information for the entire area.

The Orchard Mesa portion of the entire GIS project will be completed by July of 1996 under the current schedule.

Estimated Cost: The entire 27 square mile GIS project to be completed over 7 years will cost an estimated $1,285,000. Staff is now completing their fourth year on the project.

2. Action: The City, County and OM Irrigation District should develop a comprehensive drainage plan for Orchard Mesa. (pg 9)

Staff time required: The City currently has money budgeted for 1995 to do a Drainage Master Plan in conjunction with Grand Junction Drainage District for portions of the City. Orchard Mesa City limits area is one of the priority areas being considered for study.

Estimated Cost: Total budget for the project is $57,500 with the City's share of that at $32,500.

3. Action: Encourage the City and County to provide adequate staffing for Code Enforcement. The City and County zoning and code enforcement offices should emphasize proactive code enforcement. (pg 15)

Staff time required: A policy issue for the City Council is whether there should be proactive code enforcement on Orchard Mesa only or proactive code enforcement for the entire City. It is assumed here that "proactive code enforcement" pertains to proactive code enforcement of the City Codes pertaining to junk and zoning, exclusive of signs. Proactive code enforcement on Orchard Mesa only would require the addition of one full time Code Enforcement Officer, along with an additional vehicle. If the policy decision were made to have proactive code enforcement for the entire City, assuming the City's current city limits, the additional number of Code Enforcement Officers needed is two (2).

Cost Estimate: The cost estimate for first year personnel and operating expenses for one position is $55,500, and approximately $44,000 each year thereafter, not counting for inflation. The estimated cost in the first year for 2 additional Code Enforcement Officers is $111,000, and approximately $87,000 each year thereafter, not counting for inflation.

4. Action: Conduct inventories of junkyards and nonconforming "grandfathered" uses, then work with the property owners to identify potential relocation sites or appropriate uses on their properties. (pg 15)

Staff time required: It is assumed that the task of "identifying relocation sites" would be limited to pointing out the areas in the City that are currently zoned for the types of uses that are found to be nonconforming; we would not identify specific parcels that the nonconforming uses could be relocated to. It is estimated that it would take approximately 80 hours of staff time to inventory junkyards and nonconforming uses on Orchard Mesa, and notify the property owners of the location of zoning districts within which their uses would be appropriate by zoning.

Estimated Cost: No additional staff is needed for this task. However, it would be considered a "special project" and would need to be prioritized along with all other demands on staff time.

5. Action: The City and County Planning Staffs should assist the OM Beautification Committee in conducting a comparative analysis of existing outdoor storage and display standards in other communities to determine what revisions should be made to existing standards. Adopt revisions to City and County Development Codes as necessary setting strict performance standards for outdoor storage. (pg 15)

Staff time required: Assisting the Committee in the comparative analysis will take about 20 to 30 hours of full staff work. The City's planning consultant will be developing code revisions and performance standards for outdoor storage.

Estimated Cost: No additional out-of-pocket costs for staff time to assist in the comparative analysis, except for phone calls and copying expenses. The planning consultants costs are already budgeted for.

6. Action: Develop and adopt incentive programs to encourage infill development such as development impact fees which consider location in determining amount of fee or offer density bonuses. (pg 19)

Staff time required: The City's planning consultant, Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle, will be considering the issue of infill development as a part of the Growth Plan project. It is anticipated that the consultant will give guidance on the topic of infill, but City staff will have to develop the details of the infill program. This will involve the entire City, not just Orchard Mesa. Until the Growth Plan project is completed, it is not known what the infill policy will consist of, nor is it possible to accurately project staff time requirements. A very rough estimate at this time is that it will take about one month of full time effort by various City staff members to develop the details of an infill program.

Given the timing of the Growth Plan project, it is not likely that substantial progress will be made on the infill development strategy, policies and program until late in 1996.

Estimated Cost: Without completion of an infill development strategy and policies, it is not possible to project the cost in staff time to develop the detailed program. If developed by in-house staff, there would be no additional out-of-pocket expenses. If a consultant were hired to develop the detailed infill development program, a very rough cost estimate is in the range of $20,000 to $50,000.

7. Action: The City and County should adopt performance standards within their development and zoning codes for new development which protect the natural environment (wetlands, drainages, wildlife habitat) open space and avoid geological hazard areas. (pg 21)

Staff time required: The City currently requires all development that have any wetlands on the proposed site to be reviewed by the Army Corp of Engineers for Wetlands Mitigation and 404 permits. The Division of Wildlife has mapped wildlife migration routes for Mesa County, including in and around the City, and that map will soon be available to Staff to use in reviewing a development proposal. To develop standards for development impacts on the environment will require staff to work with the Corp, DOW and other agencies, compile all current information available, then draft an appropriate text amendment. Staff time needed would be approximately 100 hours.

Estimated Cost: Assuming this is done with in-house staff, there would be no additional out-of-pocket expenses. However, the task would need to be prioritized along with all other possible tasks of the Community Development Department's work program.

8. Action: The City and County should establish a conservation/open space zoning district and apply it to the floodplains of the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers adjacent to Orchard Mesa and other critical areas. (pg 21)

Staff time required: It is estimated that this task would take approximately 80 hours of full time work to develop a proposed conservation/open space zoning district, and approximately another 80 to 100 hours of full time work to get it to a City Council public hearing. This would need to involve time to meet with property owners.

9. Action: The City should rezone some residential areas to better reflect current land use trends as identified on the Future Land Use Map especially those areas currently zoned RMF-16. (pg 23)

Staff time required: It is estimated that it would take about 120 hours of full time staff work to accomplish this task. Staff estimates between 10 and 15 rezone proposals will accomplish this task. The more controversial each rezoning is, the more staff time will be needed.

Estimated Cost: Assuming the cost of advertising the public notices is borne by the City, it would cost about $35 to $70 per rezone application for most of these rezonings.

Staff time required: This task is part of the scope of work in the City's planning contract with Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle. The duplex zone will be created for the City as a whole, rather than just of Orchard Mesa.

Estimated Cost: Since this task is already part of the contract, there should be no additional out-of-pocket costs for this task.

11. Action: Establish and adopt an overlay zone with design guidelines and performance standards for the Hwy 50 corridor. (pg 23)

Staff time required: The planning contract with Freilich, Leitner and Carlisle will provide the City with an update to the Corridor Guidelines. This should provide the basic elements for an overlay zone for the Hwy 50 Corridor, but more detailed design guidelines will require the help of an urban designer. The expertise is not available in-house. It is anticipated that a contract with an urban designer may be needed to help develop detailed design guidelines for major highway corridors. Guidance would also be provided by the OM Beautification Committee. A very rough estimate of in-house staff time also required for this task is 80 hours of full time work, plus another 80 hours of full time work to get the proposed overlay zone to the City Council public hearing.

The Hwy 50 Corridor Overlay Zone could not be developed until after the City's planning consultant completed work on the update of the corridor guidelines and an urban designer were hired on a contract basis. This task could not be accomplished until late 1996 at the earliest--then the task would need to be prioritized along with all other possible tasks in the Community Development Department work program.

Estimated Cost: A very rough cost estimate for just the Highway 50 corridor for the detailed design guidelines is $10,000 to $15,000.

12. Action: The City and County should rezone to HO and HS all those areas identified on the Future Land Use map (along Hwy 50) to Highway Commercial. (pg 23)

Staff time required: It is estimated that this task would take about 15 hours of full time staff work.

Estimated Cost: The only out-of-pocket cost would be the cost of the legal notices for the rezoning.

13. Action: Upgrade OM urban roads to urban standards (especially Unaweep Ave.and B 1/2 Rd). (pg 30)

Staff time required: Unaweep Avenue (from Hwy 50 to eastern City limits) has been scheduled for design in 1995, utility construction in 1996, and street construction in 1997 as part of the City's C.I.P. Also, the C.I.P shows 27 Road (from Unaweep Avenue to Hwy 50) scheduled for reconstruction in 2001 and B 1/2 Road (from Hwy 50 to 28 Road) targeted for reconstruction beyond 2004 in a year unassigned.

Portions of B 1/2 Road within the City limits will not be reconstructed under the current schedule during the Mid Term (1998-2001), but will be reconstructed sometime after 2004.

14. Action: Adopt common, performance standards for mobile home parks for the City and County. (pg 33)

Staff time required: City staff is currently working on a proposed text amendment which will address performance standards for mobile home parks that will tentatively go to Planning Commission and City Council in early to mid 1995.

Cost estimate: An estimate of in-house staff time required for this task is 80 hours of full time work.

15. Action: Adopt regulations which phase out all mobile homes which do not meet federal standards and not allow them to replace existing non-federally approved structures. (pg 33)

Staff time required: Community Development Staff have been working on a text amendment which would not allow a non-federally approved mobile home to replace a non-federally approved mobile home anywhere in the City limits except in mobile home parks. This text amendment will not go back to City Council until after the City's Growth Plan consultant has a chance to make their recommendations.

Cost estimate: An additional 10 hours of full-time staff time is anticipated to complete this task in addition to the consultant.

16. Action: The Grand Junction Community Development Department and Mesa County Planning should develop an inventory of historic structures/places. (pg 35)

Staff time required: This project is being proposed as part of a larger historical survey project which includes several other areas within the City limits only. The entire project is scheduled for 1995. The City just received notice that the State Historical Society will help fund this inventory with a $51,500 grant. Community Development staff will administer the grant.

Cost estimate: Total dollars budgeted for the Historical survey is $85,000. This includes $51,500 from the State Historical Society, $31,000 already budgeted by the City in 1995, and $2,500 of inkind match (money that is included from the City's administration of the grant).

17. Action: The Grand Junction Community Development Department and Mesa County Planning should complete an intensive level survey of potentially eligible properties for possible designation on historic registers. (pg 35)

Staff time required: Depending upon the level of detail obtained from the 1995 historic inventory survey (see Action 17), there may be adequate information to satisfy an intensive level survey which allows for the potential designation of properties on historic registers. If additional survey work is needed, additional dollars would be need to complete this task. Additional grants from the State may be acquired. Additional money needed could run as high $20,000.

Implement the actions recommended in the Grand Junction Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan

18. Action: Develop the OM neighborhood park at the middle school and connect to the River Park System. (pg 27)

Staff time required: The City is currently designing the OM neighborhood park that will be constructed along the bluff behind the Middle School along with seven other parks around the Community.

When to be accomplished: The Orchard Mesa Plan calls for the Neighborhood Park to be completed within the short term of 1995-1997. The OM Neighborhood Park along with seven other parks around the community are being targeted for construction sometime in the current 10 year C.I.P. Completing the OM Middle School Neighborhood Park within the short term may not be accomplished. Completion by the end of the mid term 1998-2001 may be possible.

Note: In addition to the OM neighborhood Park at the Orchard Mesa Middle School, the City is also currently doing the design for a neighborhood park at Oxford and Arlington on Orchard Mesa.

This action is ongoing and parts of the pedestrian network improvements will be accomplished over time. For example, when Unaweep Avenue is widened and improved to current City standards, sidewalks will be constructed.

20. Action: The City should acquire the Lions Club Park and Veterans Park (the picnic area) at IMEC from the County and develop a community park program. (pg 27)

Cost estimate: Typical park construction with basic park amenities currently costs approximately $90,000 per acre.

21. Action: The City and County should establish a conservation/open space zoning district as a tool in implementing the "Colorado/Gunnison Open Space and Recreation Corridor". (pg 28)

Staff time required: THIS ACTION IS ALREADY COVERED ABOVE UNDER THE CREATION OF A CONSERVATION ZONE.

22. Action: Develop Burkey/OM neighborhood park and connect to Gunnison River system. (pg 27)

Cost estimate: Typical park construction with basic park amenities currently costs approximately $90,000 per acre.

23. Action: Connect Veterans Memorial Park to Gunnison and Colorado River systems along 27 1/2 Rd. via a pedestrian/bicycle trail. (pg 28)

Actions 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15 & 21 can be accomplished by either existing staff and/or through the City's existing contract with Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle.

Actions 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 are NOT Budgeted, including unscheduled CIP (excluding Code Enforcement) = $3,143,600

Action 3, Code Enforcement = $111,000 for the first year plus 87,000 + inflation each year thereafter.

I, John Elmer, Chairman of the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Junction, hereby certify that the attached document titled: Orchard Mesa Neighborhood Plan has been duly adopted by the Grand Junction Planning Commission and is part of the City of Grand Junction's Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. 31-23-201, et seq.

	SOUTH	WEST	CENTRAL	OM STUDY AREA	MESA COUNTY
Population	2438	6998	908	10344	93145
Households	1054	2508	325	3887	36294
Persons/Hshld	2.31	2.79	2.79	2.66	2.64
% Vacant Units	4.6	4.1	4.1	4.3	7.6
% Owner Occ.	65	69	87	67	65
% Renter Occ.	35	31	13	33	35
Median Rent	394	370	368	375	359
Median Rent as % Hshld Income	23.3	28.5	32.9	27.8	23.8
Median Mortgage Costs	570	523	800	564	566
Median Mortgage As % Hshld Income	19.4	20.8	20	20.4	20.6
Median Year House Built	1970	1967	1967	1967	1967

No.	Annexation Name	Acres	Date
67	Orchard Mesa	79.20	November 2, 1966
81	Palmer Park Cemetery	49.40	May 6, 1970
88	Western Cemetery	42.80	October 7, 1970
89	Eastern Cemetery	15.00	November 7, 1970
95	Reservoir Hill	106.70	December 19, 1972
97	Central Orchard Mesa	684.70	December 19, 1973
105	Green Acres	4.01	July 17, 1974
120	Phipps	11.45	April 17, 1977
122	Orchard Mesa Bank	7.64	October 9, 1977
161	Phipps #2 (#1938)	6.00	February 8, 1981
163	Phipps #3 (#1964)	26.00	May 6, 1981
179	Southgate	14.00+	July 24, 1983
245	Western Hills #1	1.51	February 7, 1993
246	Western Hills #2	19.86	February 7, 1993