Lawn watering banned in part of our city

Discussion in 'Irrigation' started by DanaMac, Sep 13, 2006.

  1. DanaMac

    DanaMac LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 13,156

    This appeared in our local paper today -

    BILL HETHCOCK THE GAZETTE
    Lawn-watering will be banned starting Sept. 22 for thousands of homes and businesses in the Cimarron Hills and surrounding areas east of Colorado Springs.

    The area’s water supplier, the Cherokee Metropolitan District, has an all-time low supply, and the outdoor-watering ban is necessary to prevent faucets from running dry, said Kip Petersen, the district’s general manager.

    A state Supreme Court hearing today could give Cherokee access to more water in the future, but the court isn’t expect- ed to rule until December.

    In the meantime, people in the district should conserve, Petersen said.

    “All
    outside irrigation needs to be stopped,” Petersen said. “We needed to take this step or a few months down the road there would be no water inside, and that just can’t happen.”

    Car-washing is also prohibited and no sod or seeding permits will be issued for the rest of the year, according to a letter Cherokee mailed its customers Thursday. Hand-watering of gardens, shrubs and trees will be allowed, Petersen said.

    Since June 1, homes and businesses in the Cherokee district have been restricted to watering two days a week. Many residents, upset at that restriction, were shocked by the outright ban.

    Forty angry homeowners descended on Cherokee’s board meeting Tuesday night.

    Norbert Pirri said his biggest worry is that the ban will lead to dead lawns and lower property values.

    “I’m going to water my yard, because if I don’t I’m going to have to pay $3,000 to resod,” he said.

    Keith Hudson of Cimarron Hills said he could deal with more restrictions, but not a ban.

    Joyce Glaser of Cimarron Hills was furious that the water shortage was not addressed years ago.

    The district’s board of directors in March declared a “water emergency” because of dry weather and a court ruling against the district.

    The court ruling limited Cherokee’s use of eight of the district’s 17 wells, knocking 40 percent out of the district’s water supply, Petersen said.

    The district will reach its pumping limits on four more wells by the end of September, leaving the district with only five wells to pump from, Petersen said. The district will lose an additional 25 percent of its supply when the pumping limits are reached.

    Cherokee is a metropolitan district, which means it provides water and other municipal services. It gets most of its water from the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Groundwater Basin.

    Basin managers and Cherokee are embroiled in a court battle over how much water Cherokee can pump from the basin. The state Supreme Court will hear arguments about that question today.

    The high court’s decision will affect subdivisions in progress and planned in the fast-growing area. No new development has been approved in the area in 18 months because of the water shortage, Petersen said. Seventeen subdivisions that had preliminary approval are on hold. Another 22 developers are seeking approval to build new subdivisions, but Petersen said he won’t give them the go-ahead until the shortage is solved.

    Existing water customers take priority over new development, said Ted Schubert, president of the Cherokee board.

    Cherokee provides water to about 5,250 homes and 350

    businesses in Cimarron Hills. It also serves the 300-acre Claremont Ranch development under construction and other developments, primarily along Marksheffel Road. Cherokee’s boundaries run roughly east of Powers Boulevard, north of Platte Avenue and west of U.S. Highway 24.

    Cherokee’s borders extend beyond the Black Squirrel basin. Some water pumped from Cherokee’s wells in the basin is exported to users outside the basin, which led to the dispute now before the Supreme Court.

    Meanwhile, Cherokee is looking for water sources outside the Black Squirrel Basin.

    If it doesn’t find new water sources or win in court, the next step would be limiting commercial use of water inside businesses and banning hand-watering before the faucets run dry, Petersen said.
     
  2. Dirty Water

    Dirty Water LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 6,794

    Couple thoughts on this:

    A. The drought seasion is about to end.
    B.

    "“I’m going to water my yard, because if I don’t I’m going to have to pay $3,000 to resod,” he said.".

    This guy is a idiot. Grass doesn't die, it goes dormant, all he will need to do is kill the weeds and water and it will come right back.

    C. I doubt a temporary ban will stop people from wanting to new installs...who knows.
     
  3. DanaMac

    DanaMac LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 13,156

    Since the ban will start Sept 22, they have maybe a good 4 weeks left of watering. We've been getting torrential downpours almost every afternoon. And I have a buddy in that neighborhood that hasn't watered in 8 weeks due to the rain and his looks great. No, they shouldn't complain right now. If it is still in place next year, then they can complain and try to find a solution.

    Good news is, I can winterize those ones early! We don't have many over there though, maybe 10-12 at the most.

    In the article it talks about the growth in that area. There are some major sub-divisions going in for that district, and they are going to run into a lot of water issues out there. Hey GroundMaster, keep pushing the underground NetaFim out there. The water district can't see it working and prove they are watering. More business for you!!
     
  4. Critical Care

    Critical Care LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,654

    But won't things look a bit fishy when every other lawn in the area is bleached brown?
     
  5. DanaMac

    DanaMac LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 13,156

    They could at least keep it alive, without it having the lush golf course look to it. Which reminds me, there are 2 small golf courses on that water district. I wonder what they will have to do.
     
  6. Seems like another area to push S.M.A.R.T controllers.

    This is a common theme here also in the VALLEY also. Though, we are not so bad. The area keeps on growing, yet water districts have a limited ability to expand water sources. There has not been a major reservoir built here in CA since the early 70's but the population keeps on growing.

    This would be a time to invest in a recycled water system as they are now doing more and more at least in my neck of the woods.

    I do believe up to a certain point that we as installers need to push the newer technologies out there to conserve water. I don't see the NetFim as a practical solution, however it should be considered practical and if somebody's deep pocket is involved. Isn't that what it boils down too, MONEY!
     
  7. Ground Master

    Ground Master LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 505

    et contollers rock! I installed one at my house and the damn thing is awesome.
     
  8. PurpHaze

    PurpHaze LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 5,496

    I was informed yesterday that two new elementary schools to be built next year and open in 2008 will have irrigation wells installed instead of relying on the city's domestic supplier. Something to do with "water rights" issues but I haven't gotten the whole skinny on it yet. I do know that the local provider has made inquiries as to how much water we're using on selected sites in areas where they're having problems supplying adequate water/pressure.

    I've been a proponent for several years of cutting off watering to major non-used field areas during the summer months and only watering the fronts of sites and those fields necessary for specific summer programs. The savings in both water and power (for pumps) would be tremendous. Then fire up the field systems two weeks before school starts back up and the turf will come back even better. Two sites that were without water for two months this summer due to a well/pump problem have some of the best looking turf right now.
     
  9. speedbump

    speedbump LawnSite Member
    Posts: 117

    Get used to it. Once they start, they never stop. You will have them every year after this one and pretty soon you will have water cops like we do in Florida. It's the biggest ruse there is, but they get away with it. People will believe anything the Gov't tell them. We haven't ever really had a drought here, but to listen to the powers to be, you would thing we are all going to die of lack of hydration.

    Enjoy the $500.00 fines that go with watering on the wrong day.

    bob...
     
  10. DanaMac

    DanaMac LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 13,156

    Colorado Springs Utilities started restrictions in 2002 when our drought was the most severe. Half way through the summer they went to 3 days a week. Next year they went to 2 days a week. I think '04 and '05 were 3 days, and due to full or close to full reservoirs they LIFTED all bans for this year. Hmmmmm.... how about thinking ahead dumbasses. But the utility was losing money by not charging enough volume. I am totally in favor of keeping 3 days a week forever.

    We have multiple water districts in the area and they all chose if they want restrictions or not. The funny thing is they all set their restrictions different from each other. So I need to keep a list of the different schedules.
     

Share This Page