Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Conservation Drip Irrigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heath resident proposes drip‑pipe retrofit to cut irrigation use, offers pilot funding idea
Summary
A Heath resident said retrofitting lawns with buried drip irrigation could reduce residential water irrigation by about 50%, and proposed a city-funded pilot subsidy to demonstrate savings and reduce peak demand as the city considers new supply options.
At the Heath City Council public comment period on March 11, 2025, resident David Murray described a grassroots proposal to reduce the city’s peak water demand by retrofitting lawns with buried drip irrigation lines.
Murray said winter water use in Heath is about 2 million gallons per day and rises to about 6 million gallons per day in warmer months; he estimated roughly 4 million gallons per day of that increase is due to irrigation. Drawing on pilot work he said he and the Heath golf course agronomy manager, Shane Hayes, have done in common areas, Murray estimated buried drip irrigation could cut irrigation water use by about 50% in lawns.
Murray offered conservative calculations: if 1,000 homes adopted buried drip and each achieved a 50% irrigation savings, the city could save roughly 500,000 gallons per day in peak season. He said the retrofit cost for a typical 3,000-square-foot lawn is about $2,500 today, and suggested the city could offer a $1,000 subsidy to homeowners to kick-start a pilot; he said he already has some private customers and would be willing to show completed installations.
Murray described retrofitting as a one-day job with minimal lawn disturbance and said new construction would be easier to outfit. He acknowledged technical and coordination issues — including connecting buried drip lines to existing sprinkler systems — and said he believes the homeowner would recoup the cost over time through reduced water bills.
Council and staff did not take action on Murray’s proposal during the March 11 meeting. The suggestion was raised during a public-comment period and will require staff follow-up to verify the estimates, review permitting/utility connections, and explore funding options.
