Are small developments that pay little attention to water use better in the long run than larger planned communities that emphasize walkable neighborhoods, open space and water conservation?
That’s the question we must grapple with in the wake of a Douglas County District Court judge’s ruling last week.
As The Denver Post’s Bruce Finley reported, Judge Paul King reversed the county’s approval of the Sterling Ranch planned community, finding that developers had not demonstrated they had secured adequate water for the entire project at build-out as required by a 2008 state law.
When it’s complete in 20 years, the community would see about 30,000 people in 12,000 homes on 3,400 acres. It would emphasize clustered villages, open space and trails.
Given the scarcity of water in the arid West, we don’t take issue with making sure that developers have water rights lined up. But with a development of this magnitude, we wonder if it’s practicable to have it all lined up on the front end.
Yes, we know many among you hate the idea of another Highlands Ranch, or something similar. But the fact of the matter is that many people find suburban living of that style an appealing and affordable option.
Is it worse than smaller subdivisions that aren’t part of a larger master plan? Would you prefer 35-acre ranchettes?
If King’s ruling stands, those might remain the best options for accommodating future growth in the area.
In the case of Sterling Ranch, we think the county and the developer reached an appropriate compromise that balances the groundwater depletion in the area and the scarcity of water in the region with projections of future growth.
Under that deal, developers would have been required to demonstrate that they had secured appropriate water before beginning each new phase of the planned development.
And Sterling Ranch would be among the most water-conscious developments ever planned in Colorado — one intended to sip, rather than guzzle.
Frankly, it is the type of water-wise development that should be encouraged.
That the plans between the county and the developer didn’t pass legal muster, in our view, says more about problems with the 2008 law than the development plans for Sterling Ranch.
