St. Albert residents will be asked for their opinions about a proposed bylaw to introduce watering restrictions in the summer and require low-flow plumbing fixtures.
Council asked city staff at Monday’s council meeting to report back on the public consultation by August.
The bylaw, as currently drafted, would require low-flow plumbing fixtures for all new construction or renovation projects in the city.
Outdoor water restrictions, which would limit watering activities to between 7 p.m. and 9 a.m., would also be introduced. There are some exceptions for drip irrigation, hoses with nozzles and using water for recreational use.
Staff consistently suggested to council, however, that the bylaw would be difficult to enforce, especially the low-flow indoor plumbing fixtures.
For the most part, enforcement of the bylaw would be on a complaint basis.
Some on council had concerns about a potential invasion of privacy, because the only way municipal enforcement officers could check for low-flow fixtures would be to enter private homes.
“I'm not sure there's a role for the city in the bathrooms of St. Albertans,” said Coun. Cam MacKay.
Mike Mellross, the city’s environment and sustainability manager, said that a low-flow fixture bylaw might have been helpful in reducing water use in St. Albert before such fixtures became the market norm.
He speculated that about 15 per cent more water could be conserved during the summer months due to watering restrictions, but he doesn’t think the bylaw would likely have a big impact.
“Only a portion of that 15 per cent would be captured by watering more efficiently,” he said. Mellross added that some research has shown water rates tend to have a greater impact.
Edmonton passed a low-flow fixtures bylaw in 2006.
Coun. Tim Osborne opted to not support the motion to seek public opinion. He said he “wholeheartedly” supports the goal of water conservation, but isn’t convinced the bylaw is the way to achieve the city’s goal of reducing daily water consumption to 200 litres per person by 2020.
Statistics from 2014 show daily water consumption per person was down to 251 litres from 280 litres in 2009.
Most on council supported the idea of finding out what residents think of the proposed bylaw, though some choked on a suggested $30,000 budget, which would have included a phone survey in addition to other consultation activities.
Even Coun. Cathy Heron, who pushed for the water conservation bylaw to go forward last summer and was still supportive of it Monday, didn’t want to spend the $30,000, observing that previous rounds of public engagement on other topics haven’t carried such a steep price tag.
“I’ve never heard of this. We do SurveyMonkeys, not this,” Heron said, referring to a free online survey software often used by the city.
Ultimately council didn’t address a recommended motion to spend the $30,000 on consultation, though MacKay gave his colleagues notice he plans to bring it back for discussion in a few weeks.
While he’s against the bylaw, MacKay said in an interview Tuesday he wants more details on what the public consultation would entail, and said he thinks council would benefit from more opinions on water conservation.
