The water budget calculation should also consider irrigation source. E.g., using underground drip irrigation (like Netafim Techline, which we use in our front yard) for lawns instead of sprinklers.

Re the statement: ... "The ordinance would only apply to properties going through the city's planning department for other reasons, such as building permits, variances and conditional use permits" ...

This is a potential land mine ... if I apply to the city for permits to redo my kitchen, a review of my landscaping and water usage would be triggered, and I would likely be required to then re-landscape my yard with drought resistant plants. In fact, any permit (new water heater?) could be used as a trigger to require a homeowner to re-landscape.

This seems like a sensible medium-term plan to me. In the long run, however, I think we should price water to reflect its scarcity and the environmental impact of diverting it. That would make better irrigation systems and landscaping choices more desirable for homeowners and businesses.

The story has been updated to address the concern mentioned above by RoxieK. For typical homeowners, unless you do something with your property that is not within its zoning requirements, you will not be subjected to this ordinance.

The Best Way to limit water increases is to stop adding dense housing and more people. There is a limit too how much water the city can get from our water sources, this should be one of the prime considerations for new projects.

Like we need more regulations and higher utility bills. Give me a break.