Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Availability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodland Park commissioners add water-availability review language to subdivision and zoning rules
Summary
Planning staff presented a draft ordinance to require applicants to document water availability for new subdivisions, zone changes and site plans. Commissioners agreed the language should require verifiable, authenticated documentation and asked staff to prepare a named study format and coordinate with the Utilities Director for implementation.
Woodland Park’s Planning Commission reviewed a draft ordinance that adds water-availability review criteria to the city’s subdivision, Planned Unit Development, zoning change and site-plan processes. Commissioners told staff the language should require verifiable, authenticated documentation of water supply for proposed lots, uses or structures and asked staff to provide a standardized study form for applicants.
Why it matters: The draft ordinance inserts water-availability checks into several parts of the municipal code so city reviewers can assess whether the water system can serve proposed development or changes in use. The commission said the language will help the city evaluate projects during a period when water planning and commercial-use tap allocations are more complex.
What was discussed: Planning staff described where the new language appears — in subdivision approval requirements, preliminary and final plat sections, sections that cover zone changes and conditional uses that increase density, Planned Unit Development (PUD) review and plan-change language, and in the zoning-development-permit/site-plan review provisions. The draft asks applicants to submit "detailed, verifiable and authenticated documentation" showing the availability of adequate water for proposed projects; staff recommended the item be part of the preliminary application packet so utility impacts are identified early.
Commissioners and staff agreed on several implementation points:
- Scope and form. Commissioners asked what "detailed, verifiable and authenticated" means in practice. Staff and the Utilities Director said the draft is intended to start the requirement at a policy level while the city develops more detailed study standards. The commission asked staff to create a named study (for example, a "water-availability study") or a standardized submittal form that specifies what supporting materials the city expects — similar to how traffic studies are standardized — and to coordinate that form with the Utilities Director.
- Review authority. Several commissioners noted that zoning changes, conditional use permits and PUD approvals are ultimately Council decisions. They asked that references to an individual staff title (for example, "approval and acceptance of the city utility director") be revised so the ordinance uniformly references the city as the approving authority and preserves the Utilities Director’s role as the technical reviewer/advisor. Staff said they will change the ordinance wording (for example, "approved by the city") and include internal procedures or a form to capture the utility director’s technical review.
- Implementation timing. Staff cautioned that a full, technical methodology for water modeling and commercial tap allocations will take additional time and resources. The commission accepted a two-step approach: adopt the ordinance language now to make water availability a required review criterion, and develop more detailed study and technical standards later.
Staff and the Utilities Director also explained current practice: the city maintains baseline water-usage data and allocates water taps as requests arrive; tap allocations are a separate process and a development’s entitlement to a final tap occurs at the tap-permit stage. Commissioners asked staff to clarify the mapping between ‘‘tap allocation’’ and the ordinance so applicants understand when and how water commitments are made, and staff agreed to bring clarifying material to the public hearing.
Next steps: Staff will (1) refine the ordinance language to use consistent approval wording ("approved by the city"), (2) draft a named water-availability study submittal form or packet and coordinate it with the Utilities Director, and (3) return the revised ordinance for public hearings and the formal public review process.
Speakers referenced by name in the discussion included the city’s Utilities Director Kip and the city attorney Nina; commissioners participating in the exchange included Larry, Don, Karen and others.
