Douglas County Water Commission hears staff presentation on draft water-plan land-use chapter after commissioner resigns

The Douglas County Water Commission opened the meeting with the acting vice chair announcing that Commissioner Jack Hilbert had submitted his resignation from the water commission, citing personal reasons and an inability to continue serving. The commission then received a staff presentation focused on Chapter 3 (land use planning) of the county’s draft water plan.

County staff led the briefing: Lauren Pulver (staff), Steve Coster (deputy director of community development) and Kurt Wikanut (long‑range planning manager). "Title 32 sets up county land-use powers generally," Coster told commissioners, placing the county’s review authority in the Colorado Revised Statutes and explaining how comprehensive plans, zoning and subdivision regulations implement those powers.

Staff described how two statutory tracks shape review of water supplies for development: Title 30 requires the county to assess adequacy of water supply during subdivision review, and Title 29 establishes broader documentation and minimum standards the State Engineer and county use to evaluate proposals. Staff said the county typically harmonizes both by making the formal adequacy determination at the preliminary-plan stage (and confirming conditions at final plat). Commissioners were told preliminary-plan approvals commonly expire after one year if not acted on.

The briefing covered Douglas County Zoning Resolution Section 18A, the countywide water-supply overlay. Staff described the overlay’s supply zones (Pike Rampart, Margin A, Margin B and the Central Basin) and the county’s presumptive demand metrics: staff referenced a common standard of about 0.75 acre‑feet per year for many household calculations and a 1.0 acre‑foot per year requirement for residences in rural and agricultural zone districts. Margin rules differ by location: the Central Basin may rely more on groundwater, while the Pike Rampart and Margin A impose stronger renewable-water or transfer requirements.

Staff also reviewed documentation minimums required for an adequacy determination: an estimate of demand through buildout, descriptions of physical sources, yield estimates under varying conditions, and a description of conservation and demand‑management measures. They said the county aims to accept a single, cohesive package of materials to satisfy county, consultant and State Engineer needs.

Commissioners heard programmatic examples of county support for water alternatives and conservation. Lauren Pulver said the Board of County Commissioners provides $25,000 to support the South Metro Water Supply Authority’s conservation initiatives including the QWEL (Qualified Water Efficiency Landscaper) program and a turf‑replacement program. Staff summarized the Douglas County Water Alternatives Program, which funds feasibility studies, pre‑design and cost estimates to help homeowners and small providers evaluate connections or treatment options. Examples cited included treatment or connection work in Louviers, design upgrades in Sedalia and feasibility studies for Bell Mountain Ranch, Keen Ranch, Castle Oaks, Castle Mesa and several Larkspur properties.

Procedural business included a motion to approve prior meeting minutes by Commissioner Sean Toner, seconded by Roger Hudson; the motion carried. The commission also reviewed a county referral for a Perry Park replat and agreed to advise the Board of County Commissioners that it had no comment.

Staff said the commission’s comments are welcome for Chapter 10 and that commissioners can bring recommendations at the next meeting so consultants can incorporate them into the next draft. Staff also announced focus-group outreach for developers, well users and water providers as part of public engagement work on the plan.

The meeting adjourned after member discussion with no further formal actions recorded.