Consider Potential Ordinance Amendment to Eliminate the Irrigation Requirement in Multiple Zoning Districts

The purpose of this case is to discuss the potential of eliminating the irrigation requirement found in many of the Zoning Districts.  While this action would not prohibit a project from utilizing in-ground irrigation, it would simply no longer be a requirement.  This topic has been raised several times by the Board, as it seems counterintuitive to the City's desire to reduce demand for groundwater (the City's sole source for it's water supply currently).  The irrigation requirement is found in City Code Sections 117-112 (R-2 Residential), 117-113 (R-3 Residential), 117-114 (B-1 General Business), 117-115 (B-2 Highway Business), 117-116 (E-2 Employment), 117-117 (E-1 Employment), 117-120 (H-1 Highway 10 Business), and 117-121 (B-3 Business).

An Ordinance Amendment could be fairly straightforward and just strike the irrigation language from these sections of code.  However, at the November meeting, the Board briefly discussed alternative options that could be contemplated to encourage more sustainable landscapes that could accompany, or follow shortly thereafter, an Ordinance Amendment.

An irrigation requirement for multi-family and commercial/industrial developments is not uncommon (many communities require it including our neighbors in Andover and Elk River).  The basis for the requirement is most likely to ensure survival of plantings and for aesthetics of a new development.  All plants (trees, shrubs, grass, native plants) need water to assist with establishment. However, the City's topsoil requirement aides in retaining water in the soil and making it available for plants.  Furthermore, new developments are required to provide a Landscape Maintenance Surety to ensure survival over two (2) years.
   
It is assumed that even if the irrigation requirement is eliminated, that many projects would still include an in-ground system to help protect their financial investment in the required landscaping.  It may be more beneficial to explore ways to encourage more sustainable landscapes (native plant community establishment), incentivize newer technologies available for irrigation systems such as EvapoTranspiration Sensors and Soil Moisture Sensors, and enhanced education focused on water efficiency. Staff is seeking policy direction as to whether elimination of the irrigation requirement would also include a requirement to consider other forms of landscape and ground cover when irrigation systems are not used.

The aforementioned opportunities would not need to be fully vetted and in place before an Ordinance Amendment becomes effective.  However, there would ideally be a framework and schedule to ensure that one or more of these, and any other ideas, are potential viable alternatives that can be programmed and implemented.

This case is being handled as part of Staff's regular duties.

Based on discussion.