The town is exploring the possibility of adding a water feature to the Vistoso Nature Preserve, a concept discussed during last week’s council meeting and covered in yesterday’s article. Based on councilmember remarks during that discussion, it appears a water feature faces five challenges before gaining a council majority approval.
1. Is there enough reclaimed water?
Securing enough reclaimed water is a critical concern for the proposed water feature. At the meeting, Mayor Winfield stated that such a feature could require up to 76 acre-feet of water annually, costing nearly $70,000 each year. Town staff noted that the town is now using nearly all its annual reclaimed water allotment. Only10 acre-feet remain available. Thus, if Winfield is correct, and there no assurance that he is correct, there is not enough reclaimed water for a water feature.
When it comes to cost, the comparison here must be to building and maintaining a desert garden. Here's what we know so far about the issue around cost and a water feature.
Construction Cost
Mayor Winfield believes that building a water feature would be a significant financial undertaking. He believes that “re-creating, operating, and maintaining an artificial pond would cost significantly more than restoring the area to a natural state.” Initial cost would include rehabilitating pumps, liners, and other infrastructure if needed.
Ongoing Maintenance Cost
In addition to construction cost, operation and and maintenance expenses could place a long-term strain on town resources. The cost of water replenishment alone is estimated to cost $70,000 annually. Councilmember Nicholson noted at the meeting: “Ponds can be more expensive to run… it’s definitely more expensive to build than desert revegetation.” This underscores the importance of ensuring the water feature’s cost is at least comparable to creating the desert garden.
3. Will the feature receive a matching grant?
The council has prioritized obtaining matching grant money for the preserve’s restoration. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) offers potential funding. However, staff feedback from Arizona State Parks suggests that a pond may not score well in the grant process unless it includes recreational uses like fishing or kayaking. Consequently, according to town staff, Arizona State Parks has recommended focusing on the desert garden concept, which provides more recreational opportunities and, therefore, a better chance of securing funds. The council has never discussed self-funding a water feature or a desert garden.
Construction Cost
Mayor Winfield believes that building a water feature would be a significant financial undertaking. He believes that “re-creating, operating, and maintaining an artificial pond would cost significantly more than restoring the area to a natural state.” Initial cost would include rehabilitating pumps, liners, and other infrastructure if needed.
Ongoing Maintenance Cost
In addition to construction cost, operation and and maintenance expenses could place a long-term strain on town resources. The cost of water replenishment alone is estimated to cost $70,000 annually. Councilmember Nicholson noted at the meeting: “Ponds can be more expensive to run… it’s definitely more expensive to build than desert revegetation.” This underscores the importance of ensuring the water feature’s cost is at least comparable to creating the desert garden.
3. Will the feature receive a matching grant?
The council has prioritized obtaining matching grant money for the preserve’s restoration. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) offers potential funding. However, staff feedback from Arizona State Parks suggests that a pond may not score well in the grant process unless it includes recreational uses like fishing or kayaking. Consequently, according to town staff, Arizona State Parks has recommended focusing on the desert garden concept, which provides more recreational opportunities and, therefore, a better chance of securing funds. The council has never discussed self-funding a water feature or a desert garden.
4. Is this use of water consistent with town policy?
The town’s zoning code prohibits ornamental water features, emphasizing water conservation. Councilmember Jones-Ivey highlighted this challenge: “If we apply for a grant for fishing or however we’re going to use this pond, and we don’t get awarded that grant, are we then considered an ornamental water feature?” If so, would the town's ordinance not permit that?
5. Will a water feature send a mixed message on the town's commitment to water conservation?
Adding a water feature may contradict the town’s water conservation efforts. While residents are urged to conserve water, the town uses millions of gallons annually on parks and golf courses, which has drawn criticism in the past. Some of this water is drinking water; though in this case, the water that would be used as reclaimed water. Incorporating a water feature risks amplifying this perceived inconsistency and undermining the town’s credibility on conservation issues.
Some other Concerns
Other, concerns include whether the water feature fits the preserve’s natural desert setting, its potential impact on wildlife, increased maintenance demands, and whether the town's residents see it as a valuable use of limited resources.
The council is between a "rock and our place"
The entire discussion of a water feature is indeed very challenging. At the meeting, Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett emphasized the need to balance community desires with environmental responsibilities: “We need to ensure that any development aligns with our commitment to water conservation and the preservation of our natural resources.”
Residents: Are you up for the challenge?
Installing a water feature in the abandoned pond area faces hurdles before gaining approval. None of these, however, are insurmountable. One thing we know is that there’s much more than logic at play in this decision. Residents will need to stand up and make their case. Will they turn out in large numbers to convince the council that a water feature is essential? Are they willing to contribute financially to its maintenance and operation? This is something that supporters of operating and maintaining the town’s golf courses have done. In the past, Vistoso residents have shown their willingness to “put their money where their mouth is.” After all, they contributed $2 million to the purchase of the Preserve. These questions remain unanswered for now, but the next council discussion on this topic is sure to be interesting.
The entire discussion of a water feature is indeed very challenging. At the meeting, Vice Mayor Melanie Barrett emphasized the need to balance community desires with environmental responsibilities: “We need to ensure that any development aligns with our commitment to water conservation and the preservation of our natural resources.”
Residents: Are you up for the challenge?
Installing a water feature in the abandoned pond area faces hurdles before gaining approval. None of these, however, are insurmountable. One thing we know is that there’s much more than logic at play in this decision. Residents will need to stand up and make their case. Will they turn out in large numbers to convince the council that a water feature is essential? Are they willing to contribute financially to its maintenance and operation? This is something that supporters of operating and maintaining the town’s golf courses have done. In the past, Vistoso residents have shown their willingness to “put their money where their mouth is.” After all, they contributed $2 million to the purchase of the Preserve. These questions remain unanswered for now, but the next council discussion on this topic is sure to be interesting.
- - -
