City Planning Director Kevin Walker presented a consolidated service plan for six proposed Contrarian Airport Metropolitan Districts to the City Council on Aug. 11, describing the project area, projected infrastructure costs and a request to permit the districts to use special improvement district (SID) assessment‑lien financing in addition to traditional metro‑district bond issuance.

Walker said the total project area is about 320 acres northwest of the airport near Mark Sheffel Road and Peterson Space Force Base. The applicant proposes six initial metro districts under a consolidated model service plan, and Walker described an issuance limitation request of $400,000,000 and a first‑year operating budget of about $100,000. Engineering estimates in the packet list about $245,000,000 for public improvements (roads, stormwater, utilities), with additional soft costs and issuance assumed to bring total projected issuance to roughly $360,000,000 over multiple phases.

Why it matters: metro districts create localized, developer‑led financing and service delivery for new neighborhoods and commercial areas. The presentation noted limits in the model service plan: a maximum mill levy of 50 mills for district bonds, maintenance mill levies proposed at 10 mills for commercial/industrial and 20 mills for residential, and the applicant’s plan that SIDs would be structured as assessment‑lien bonds against land value. City staff emphasized a policy point: under the proposed language SIDs would be paid off or cleared before a parcel transfers to an end user; in other words, an individual homeowner would not inherit the assessment lien when they purchase a completed lot.

Special improvement district details: Walker described SIDs as a financing tool that uses the land as collateral and permits borrowing against a percentage of land value (he referenced roughly 60% as a ballpark used in practice). The city’s model service plan and staff review flagged that while SIDs are not new in Colorado, they have not been commonly used in recent local service plans; the applicant’s request prompted staff to propose additional model‑plan language clarifying that the assessment lien must be satisfied prior to sale to end users. Several council members asked for a follow‑up meeting or deeper briefing to understand how SIDs work in practice and how developers will retire the assessment lien if parcels are not sold quickly.

Council questions and process: Council members asked about the service‑area mapping (Walker explained the 320 acres can be apportioned in different combinations of district boundaries), how many residential units were anticipated (Walker said the plan shows nearly 2,000 residential units but that final counts are still being worked), and whether the model service plan needs changes to integrate SIDs (staff said current model language can be updated and that staff will return to council with a formal hearing on district formation at the next regular council meeting). Walker said the city’s model service plan — used since about 2006 — provides guardrails and that staff would incorporate the applicant’s clarifying language into the model plan to protect future homeowners.

Next steps: the applicant will seek formation at the council’s next regular meeting; staff will continue reviewing the service plan attachments, and the council indicated interest in an offline briefing to discuss mechanics and consumer protections for SIDs prior to formal approval.