Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/08/2005

Home

seeks out and fixes leaks as part of its efforts to expand water supply to keep up with growth. The county effectively reduced leak- a§e from about 2o percent in ~.99o to ~o per- cent in 2004, saving about $5,ooo and 2,9oo gallons of water per day. Unfortunately, smaller towns often lack the resources to identify and fix leaks. In ~987, the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority cre- ated a leak detection and repair program to help the Boston area conserve water and reduce the need for a new reservoir. The pro- gram has reduced [eakage from approximately 25.6 million gallons per day during the early ~99os to around zo million gallons per day in 2004. Water loss'es, which include water lost to leaks, theft, and metedn§ errors, are easier to measure. Water systems in the U.S. lose about six billion gallons of water per day. Drinking water systems under Iocat ownership lose a total of $800 million per year. Four years after setting the goal of a less than ~5 percent water loss for local systems, the Kansas Water Board conducted a follow-up survey that revealed varied progress. The state's eight regions reported average losses of between 9 and 2o percent. Sixty-one of the 768 [ocal systems reported losses over 30 percent, while other systems reported losses below 3 percent. The American Water Works Association recom- mends that system losses should remain under lo percent. NOT JUST LOT SIZE Incentives and regulations that encourage resi- dential landscaping with minimai irrigation regulations that encourage residential landscaping with minimal irrigation needs can help mitigate the impacts of. lot size on Water demand and consumption. needs can help mitigate the impacts of lot size on water demand and consumption. Las Ve§as pays homeowners one dollar for every square foot of turf removed. Other municipalities (most of them in the West) adopted landscaping ordi- nances requiring landowners to use plants adapted to the local climate. Volusia County, Flodda, restdcLs the amount of irrigated grass for new homes. Homeowners using native vege- ration without irrigation needs can cover a larger percentage of the yard with §rass. Unfortunately, landscapin§ ordinances in many communities exclude single-family homes, which are a principal contributor to overai{ outdoor water use. Furthermore, many homeowners associations require resident5 to plant and maintain "thirsty" turf, even in dry areas. Planners should determine if such requirements are a barrier to water conserva- tion, and when to brin§ them to the attention of other policymakers and elected officials. Several major water utilities provide technical advice for homeowners who are will- ing to use wate~'-efticient landscapin§ and native plants. Local governments may want to set an example by "greening,.public facilities, including rooftop gardens and e. co-roof5 (see "Building Green; Onus or Bonus?" April 2oo5). Denver's water board recently began a rebate program for homeowners who purchase trees and shrubs with iow water needs. Commercial facilities (especially I~rge office parks) stand to gain considerab{y by using native plants that require less water, fer- tilizer, and pesticides. Conservation Oesi§n Forum, an fll[nois:based fandscape design firm', estimates that sustainable commercial landscaping costs half as much to install and maintain as traditional commercial land- scapes of turf, ornamental shrubs, and trans- planted trees. POLICY OPTIONS While water-conserving landscaping can ease the demand for water, large lots still con- tribute to higher infrastructure costs and addi- tional leakage from longer pipes. Planners and elected officials have a vadety of policy measure options to help solve th9 problem. Communities nationwide use smart growth principles to address'a variety of goal;~, ] 98 ZONINGPRAETI(~ 5.05 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION Jpage 4