Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHandout - Memo from Uban Water ConservationURBAN WATER CONSERVATION 2317 SCR 3E Fort Collins, CO 80525 970-490-]080 www.urban-water-conservation.com Notes for Jan 22 Boulder water board meeting Concems: The SF budgets look very good, they are easy to configure; very few angles or hidden features. Large properties such as MF and commercial can be much harder. For example, the Residence Marriott hotel in Boulder is a jigsaw pattern of tiny sections of turf hidden by trees and structures. So, my concem is on large landscape properties using millions of gallons per year. 1. Looking at the city water budgets on the city website I see several large properties that have been given budgets faz in excess of actual landscape area. For ex, one MF condo assoc. has been given 4000 gaUmo per unit, plus twice the actual irrigated landscape area. The excess amount of landscape water comes to 990,000 gallons per season at the base rate. This property has shared taps, indoor and landscape. The indoor allorinent is 480,000 gaUmo. About half the units have one residem, using on an average 1000 to 2000 gaUmo. What all this means is this property can use far too much water in the landscape and never go into the second tier, wtrich defeats the purpose of the program. In the case of this property, the indoor/outdoor allowance for July would be 984,000 gal, where actual would be 633,000 or less. The property would have to go over by more than an acre foot in July to hit the second tier. I suspect there are numerous properties in this situation, but I cannot research them all pro bono. In another case, the courtyard marriott hotel, the city has allocated water for 60,000 sq feet. 9/lOths ofthis landscape was removed 2 years ago, but the city is using photos that are 3 years old. Thus this hotel is receiving about 10 times too much landscape water allowance. Some of the taps in all complexes irrigate large portions of the landscape, others very little. The city has apportioned them all the same. Therefore some might go over their budget, the program will have to be tweaked. It also appears the city has allotted the same amount of landscape water for each month, no bell curve. This flat line watering means properties can overwater significantly in Spring and Summer and stay in the base rate. Brett Hill and Paul Lander have told me that they are relying on the property owners to let them know when there is an error in the budget calculations. Mr. Lander says he expects property owners to find an auditor like me and hire them at their expense. However, If the properties aze receiving two or three times their needed water amounts ai the base rate, they are not going to tell the city or hire me to wrrect their use levels. They are not going to contact the city complaining of paying too little for their water. Once word gets out that the budgets are far too lenient, large properties will just sit tight and hope no one will notice. Indeed, once word gets out that many budgets are way off the mark, any property could appeal their budget as inaccurate and demand a field measurement. Therefore, I hold that it is in the city's interest to do field invesigations to ascertain correct budget levels for large properties. I can understand giving some leeway to property owners, but allowing several million gallons over budget is way too much. You, the water boazd will have to decide which is more important- saving money on personnel or saving water. 2. Qualified contractors: I have been reseazching among my peers in the Boulder market. Tlris came up last Fall, when the CRC wanted to do some sprinkler upgrades. We had a hard time finding contractors that had any sort of qualifications or certifications to do the work. I am sorry to say water conservation and water management has not been a priority for them. Most of the companies I contacted said they were not sure what I am talking about. Besides myself, I only found two other landscape companies in boulder area with a certified auditor, neither have ever done any audits. I also called some of the lawn chemical companies, this was a completely new area for them. The Boulder CRC program is a simple system check with recommendations, not an actual audit in most cases, no certified auditors on staff The CRC cannot do repairs and upgrades without becoming a conflict of interest. I spoke to Paul Lander about this, there is a city mandated program but no segment of service industry qualified to address the field repairs needed. We both see a strong need to require some sort of city qualifications for irrigation auditors and repair companies. As you know, Colorado is almost the only state in our region that has no state licencing or certification requirements for irri~gation companies. As a result ow systems aze often poorly installed. Casde Rock is requiring registratioq you could follow their model.