Laserfiche WebLink
also stipulates that if an irrigation system is installed (including single family parcels), it must be <br />equipped with a rain sensor, per state statute, as well as one or more water efficient technologies. <br />This could include, but would not be limited to, a smart controller, soil moisture sensor(s), and/or <br />an evapotranspiration (ET) sensor(s). He stated that this provides enough flexibility so that as <br />future advances in water efficient irrigation technologies are developed, it will not require <br />additional ordinance amendments. He noted that while not specifically included in the draft <br />ordinance, it may be worth noting that this could be an opportunity to encourage more native <br />landscaping within projects; noting that the Board could contemplate some sort of landscaping <br />credit for projects incorporating a native grass and plant community. He noted that staff is not <br />suggesting that this be contemplated as part of the draft ordinance but something that the Board <br />may wish to keep in mind from a broader water conservation perspective. He noted that staff is <br />still assessing how the water efficient requirement would be verified in the field and any potential <br />action on the draft ordinance could be contingent upon finalizing an effective and efficient <br />inspection methodology. <br />Board Member Anderson asked if there is some sense of how an inspection could occur: <br />City Planner Anderson stated that the building official did not say he could not do an inspection <br />but simply stated that it would not fit in with an existing inspection. He stated that he believes that <br />there is a way to fit in the inspection but simply wants to ensure that the proper methodology can <br />be identified. He stated that he has heard positive comments from the staff members he has spoken <br />with, noting that they all agree that it makes sense to have the sensors as a requirement. <br />Board Member Anderson asked whether staff would be looking for the sensor or ensure that it is <br />functional during the inspection. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that staff is most likely going to check to ensure that it's installed. <br />Chairperson Stodola stated that he likes the language proposed as it provides flexibility for future <br />technology that is developed. He asked if City Planner Anderson believed that the Council would <br />agree with the vague language or whether they would like it more defined. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that there are specific examples listed, but the language simply leaves <br />the door open for future technologies. He stated that if the Council is in agreement with the concept <br />he did not believe that there would be a problem with the language. <br />Board Member Anderson noted that another option would be to use different language and state <br />other approved technologies. She stated that she does prefer the language as proposed but was <br />simply providing an alternative. <br />City Planner Anderson noted that the City Attorney has reviewed the language and approves of <br />the proposed language. He confirmed the consensus of the Board to use the language as proposed <br />and if there is a problem the alternate suggested could be used. <br />Motion by Chairperson Stodola and seconded by Board Member Covart to recommend adoption <br />of Ordinance # 17-04, Amending Multiple Sections of the Ramsey City Code Relating to Irrigation <br />Requirements, contingent upon staff developing an efficient and effective inspection methodology. <br />Environmental Policy Board / February 22, 2017 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />