Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Conservation Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Water board debates "ultra-efficiency" plan that would bar pools and lawns in some developments
Summary
The Hurricane Water Board discussed a draft 'ultra-efficiency' development plan from the water district that would bar pools and lawns and set an 8,000-gallon monthly cap for participating developments; members agreed to review a draft and return with recommendations in August.
The Hurricane Water Board spent much of its meeting reviewing a draft "ultra-efficiency" development plan from the water district that would restrict outdoor water use in participating subdivisions, including prohibiting pools and limiting overall household water use.
The board's staff member (Speaker 5) said one explicit item in the draft is a ban on pools, noting, "one thing that's in the plan for this is no pools. Period." The draft aims to couple development rules with water-savings measures such as strict landscaping limits and an internal cap the board discussed around 8,000 gallons per month for qualifying properties.
Committee member (Speaker 3) pressed on enforcement and long-term effect, urging limits on water features during drought: "anytime we go into a drought, even stage 1, I don't think we have a right to approve any water feature in any subdivision," and proposing tiered permit or fee structures to deter high water use. Several members discussed tying restrictions to permits, deed notices or development agreements so future buyers are aware of the limits.
Members raised concerns about how developers might try to game the system. Committee member (Speaker 6) said he was wary of developments that become short-term rentals or Airbnbs under a cut-rate water regime: "I have a bigger problem with that type of a development being ultra efficient... if it was residential homes, not a bunch of rentals and Airbnbs, I would have a different feeling about it."
Staff summarized how the city would coordinate with the water district and the mayor's office, and outlined the next steps: board members will review the district's draft and an example from Washington City, compile suggested changes, and reconvene for a formal discussion in August. No formal adoption vote was taken at this meeting; the board directed staff to prepare a recommended version for consideration by the board and, if approved, referral to city council.
