Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates appeal rules and timing for Crow's Nest water review
Summary
Commissioners cautioned that large master-plan changes such as the Crow's Nest proposal should be brought to the Water Commission earlier because developers had suggested groundwater as the fallback when municipal providers did not commit; Harold Smethals questioned whether the county could set appeal ground rules to require connection to nearby renewable systems.
Commissioners raised timing and appeal concerns related to large master-plan projects, citing Crow's Nest as an example. Tricia Bernhardt said the commission had not yet received a referral on Crow's Nest’s water supply, and noted that developers had tried approaching Parker Water and Castle Pines without firm commitments; in that case, groundwater becomes the default option. "So what does that leave you with? Groundwater," Bernhardt said, urging earlier commission input on large proposals.
Harold Smethals asked whether the county could set ground rules so that urban-level development near renewable water providers would be required to connect or would not be eligible for a water appeal; commission members debated the legal limits of denying appeals before they are filed. Staff (Lauren Pulver) recalled the discussion and said there had been no consensus and that the language could be revisited in the plan. The commission deferred detailed action and scheduled further review when staff compiles public comments.
