Laserfiche WebLink
5.03: Consider Draft Ordinance Amendment Addressing Irrigation Requirements <br />(Discussion Purposes Only) <br />Presentation <br />City Planner Anderson presented the staff report stating over the past two months, the <br />Environmental Policy Board (EPB) has discussed a potential ordinance amendment regarding <br />irrigation requirements for multi -family and commercial/industrial developments. The intention <br />originally was simply to eliminate the City Code requirement that in -ground irrigation systems <br />shall be installed in all multi -family and commercial/industrial projects. However, based on <br />information received at their January meeting from a guest speaker, the EPB directed Staff to <br />revise the DRAFT Ordinance so that it also stipulates that if an irrigation system is installed <br />(including single family parcels), it shall be equipped with a rain sensor (per state statute) as well <br />as one or more water efficient technologies. This could include, but would not be limited to, a <br />smart controller, soil moisture sensor(s), and/or an evapotranspiration (ET) sensor(s). This <br />provides enough flexibility so that as future advances in water efficient irrigation technologies are <br />developed, it will not require additional ordinance amendments. <br />City Planner Anderson explained the cost of these `smart', water efficient technologies has come <br />down as they have become more commonplace. Again, based on input from a guest speaker from <br />Conserva Irrigation, including a smart controller, for example, to a new irrigation system, only <br />adds about $250 to $350 to the overall cost. It is more expensive to retrofit existing systems with <br />the more water efficient technologies, approximately $650 to $750. However, the Return on <br />Investment (ROI) for a standard residential system could be realized relatively quickly, maybe in <br />as few as two to four years (and would be even quicker on larger, commercial systems). <br />City Planner Anderson reported as water supply continues to be a prominent concern for the City <br />and as the `smart' technologies become more commonplace (and therefore with prices coming <br />down), the EPB believes that requiring water efficient technologies is appropriate. However, the <br />EPB has also noted that they want to ensure that this is enforceable. Thus, staff is still assessing <br />how the water efficient requirement could be verified in the field. At this time, it does not appear <br />that it could be addressed through any existing inspection. Additional review is still needed on <br />this aspect. <br />Commission Business <br />Chairperson Bauer supported the City being proactive on the City's water usage and its proper <br />management. <br />Commissioner Anderson agreed. <br />Commissioner VanScoy also supported the City addressing this issue and asked if the proposed <br />plan went far enough. He questioned if something other than sod should be considered in order to <br />reduce the City's dependence on water. <br />