HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/01/1988, 9 - LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION 0-tiginal` report
/ from 10/0 3 Council meeting
MEAT
I��H��q�►►IdIIIIIIIIII�IIIII�I "7 r TING DE:
Ip�ui►
cityo san lugs ogispo Nom. _� 1988
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT I MI iMBER:
FROM Michael Multari, Community Development Director; BY: Jeff Hook,lkssociate Planner
SUBJECT: Landscape Standards for Water Conservation
CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Landscape Standards
INTRODUCTION
At its August 16th hearing, the council approved various water allocation procedures and
continued the landscape water conservation standards. Council asked staff to clarify the
standards, and to restudy some of the standards considered too stringent. The standards
have been condensed, and address Council, ARC, and public comments raised at previous
hearings. Major changes are highlighted below.
This is one of several water conservation programs initiated by council as part of the
City's Water Management Element. The landscape standards were jointly prepared by
Community Development and Public Works staff, and the ARC. A public workshop was held on
April 27th to solicit comments on the landscape workprogram from developers and design
professionals, and the ARC considered the guidelines at their August 1st and August 15th
meetings (minutes attached).
This is the first part of a broader landscape workprogram. Staff also will prepare a
homeowner's handout on landscape ideas for water conservation, a list of recommended
drought-resistant plants, and revised planting specifications and requirements for public
projects.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Staff expects no significant environmental or fiscal impacts from adopting these
landscape standards. It has been determined that their adoption is not a project
requiring environmental review.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION
During architectectural review and building plancheck, staff and the ARC now review all
landscaping in most new projects. Adoption of landscape standards will guide staff,
commissioners, and applicants in preparing and reviewing plans; and it will allow a more
equitable, consistent application of landscape requirements. An estimated 1/3 to 1/2 of
the city's water goes toward maintaining landscaping. If the landscape standards are not
adopted, the city's water conservation efforts will be hampered.
��� ►�N►�IIIIIII�pn I�III aw or SM LUIS 081spo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Landscape Standards
Page 2
DISCUSSION
A. Proposed Revisions
1. Proiect Catesories - Standards are listed in three categories: 1) those that
apply to all projects, 2) those applying to projects reviewed by the ARC, and 3)
standards applying only to larger or more complex projects. The first category
sets basic landscape standards, and would apply to all new development projects,
including new single-family homes. Medium- and large-sized projects, where the
potential for water savings is greater, would also have to meet more stringent
standards.
2. Submittal Requirements - Submittal requirements have been condensed and
simplified. Plans for simple projects, like houses and small apartment projects,
would now need to include basic landscape and irrigation information. Additional
information would be required for larger or more complex projects.
3. Landscane Standards Deleted - Some of the landscape standards included in the
previous draft have been deleted. For example, the requirements for maintenance
agreements and surety bonds, and separate irrigation water meters were considered
inappropriate and have been deleted. The wording in most of the standards has
been revised to give the ARC or Director added discretion in implementing the
standards.
Other changes:
-Erosion control required for slopes 3:1 or greater (was 4:1 or greater).
-Watering guidelines deleted. (These are educational in nature and more
appropriately included with homeowner landscape ideas)
-Standard added to require recirculating water in decorative fountains.
These standards 'are based on proven landscape design principles. They represent a
measured, low-cost approach to saving water in the landscape. Their implementation would
not radically alter the appearance or cost of landscape development in the city; however
it will result in some important changes:
-Lawn areas will be limited, and alternative ground covers encouraged.
-Additional applicant and staff attention will be paid to landscape/irrigation
plans.
-More California native or drought-resistant landscape plantings will be used.
If the city's water situation worsens, more stringent conservation measures may be
appropriate. Some alternative strategies are listed below. At present, staff believes
that these standards will be effective in reducing landscape water use in new projects.
ALTERNATIVES j
1. Adopt the resolution approving the landscape standards as submitted.
This approach allows the earliest possible implementation, following staff
training in use of the guidelines. The council may wish review
►►��i ��l�ll�p����ll City of San LUIS OBISPO
MoZe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Landscape Standards
Page 3
again in one year to evaluate their effectiveness and consider possible changes.
2. Continue consideration of the standards with direction for changes. Some
alternative strategies include:
A. Single Family Houses - Exempting single-family houses from lawn area
limits or other landscape standards, or increasing the percent of lawn area
allowed.
Comment For maximum effectiveness, the landscape standards should apply to
all new development. The limitation on lawn area requires new homeowners to use
ground covers creatively, while reducing lawn area. Lawn irrigation accounts for
over one-half of all landscape water use, and thus, offers the greatest potential
for water savings. As an alternative, the proposed 20% limit to lawn area could
be increased. Staff feels that 20% is workable, since larger turn areas could be
allowed administratively if special water saving measures (ie. low volume
irrigation heads, irrigation timer) were used.
B. Maintenance Requirements - The standards focus on new development.
Performance standards applying to existing development may be appropriate to
require such water conservation measures as: sprinkler retrofit,
limitations on sprinkler overspray and runoff, lawn area limits, maintenance
requirements, and installation of special irrigation control equipment (for
larger projects). Implementation of these measures could be triggered by i
changes in the city's water situation, or by future council action.
Comment: Existing landscaping should also follow some basic water
conservation guidelines. Staff believes that education may be an effective first
step to encourage homeowners and businesses to use sound water conservation
practices in existing landscapes. Improper or inadequate maintenance can waste
water, and impact community esthetics as much as initial design decisions. A
phased implementation approach tied to water supply/demand, reservoir levels, or
similar measures could return for council approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution approving Landscape Water Conservation Standards, with or
without changes as deemed appropriate.
Attachments:
-Draft Resolution
-Draft Landscape Standards
-ARC Minutes
� '3
Resolution No. (1988 Series)
Page 2
APPROVED:
Adm nistrative Officer
City A t rney
Community Development Director
9-s
RESOLUTION NO. (1988 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING WATER-CONSERVATION LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
WHEREAS, Section 17.89.040 of the Water Allocation Regulations enables the council to
require water-conservation features for projects obtaining water allocations; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.48 of the Municipal Code establishes architectural review and
enables the Architectural Review Commission and the council to adopt architectural review
procedures and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the council has determined that adopting these landscape guidelines is not a
project for purposes of environmental review;
NOW, THEREFORE, the council resolves to adopt the water conservation landscape
standards fully contained in the attached Exhibit A, with standards to be applied to each
project requesting architectural approval or a water allocation, as indicated.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1988.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
gm4/lg-res
Landscape Standards
Page 2
II. Small- to medium-sized projects - These projects require
architectural review, such as new houses on sensitive sites, the
construction of three or more dwellings on a lot, and new commercial
buildings.
III. Large projects - This refers to commercial or industrial projects on
sites of 20,000 sq. ft. or more, and residential projects of 10 or
more units. 1 11
Where a project is reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission, the ARC shall
evaluate projects for compliance with these guidelines. For projects which are exempt
from architectural review, the Community Development Director shall review all projects
for conformance with the guidelines during building plancheck. Development projects
shall conform to these guidelines prior to building permit issuance.
Decisions of the Community Development Director are appealable to the Architectural
Review Commission, and decisions of the Architectural Review Commission are appealable to
the City Council, subject to the appeal provisions of Chapter 17.66 of the Municipal
Code.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
I. Required For All Proiects:
Landscape and irrigation plans which show water conserving measures in sufficient
detail and clarity to judge whether the project conforms to the guidelines,
including:
A. Planting Plan - Showing scale, north arrow, property lines, existing and
proposed structures, streets, major natural features such as creeks and rock
outcroppings; location, size, type, and quantity of proposed plants existing
trees to be removed or retained, noted by type, location, trunk diameter and
height, overall condition and expected lifespan; statistics listing total
paved area, and percentage of total site area devoted to irrigated
turf grass.
B. Irrigation Plan - Showing scale, north arrow, property lines, existing
and proposed structures, streets, and existing trees to remain and major
natural features; below-ground utilities; location, size, and type of
irrigation components. If legible, the irrigation plan can be combined with
the planting plan.
1I. Required For ARC Proiects: (' Denotes items already required for ARC review)
In addition to the information listed above, the following information should be
provided:
A. Planting Notes - Describing how landscape design meets the esthetic or
functional requirements of the site or of the proposed use, for example
landscape privacy screening, solar access, climate control, erosion control,
and water conservation (*).
9 - 7
►�i�►i►���������iHii����i�►III�IIiII���►������ Illy city of sAn lues oaspo
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR WATER CONSERVATION
PURPOSE
The City of San Luis Obispo requires attractive, water-conserving landscaping in all new
development projects. We live in a semi-arid, mediterra nean-type climate which poses
special landscape problems and opportunities. Consequently, developers, landscape
architects, contractors, designers, homeowners, and others involved with landscape design
need to make efficient use of increasingly limited water supplies through sensible,
carefully planned landscape design, installation and maintenance.
These standards explain the City's expectations for landscape water conservation in new
development. They are to be used by the public, city staff, and the Architectural Review
Commission in preparing and reviewing public and private landscape plans. While
innovative and varied landscape design is encouraged, applicants and designers will be
required to use landscape water efficiently.
INTENT
Conserving water through sensible landscaping is one of several ways we can help to
better balance water supply and demand. Through these guidelines, the City intends to
reduce the amount of water used for landscaping businesses, houses, apartments, parks,
and public buildings. There is a wide variety of plants, supplies and design techniques
available which can save water while beautifying the landscape. New public and private
development projects, and major remodels need to follow these guidelines, which encourage
use of these water conserving measures.
Site conditions, esthetic tastes, and budgets vary, and not all of the recommended water
conservation measures are feasible or desirable in every landscape situation. Landscape
plans should, however, clearly show that water conservation measures have been included
where feasible and appropriate; or explain why such measures are infeasible or
inappropriate for the proposed project.
PROCEDURES
There are three categories of landscape standards. All development projects will fall
under one or more of the categories, depending on its size and where it requires
architectural review. For example, basic landscape requirements are listed in category I
and apply to all projects. Larger, more complex projects, where the potential for water
savings is greater, must meet the additional requirements listed under categories II and
III:
I. All Projects - This includes all new development projects, including
those which are exempt from architectural review, such as individually
built, single-family houses and duplexes;
9—�
Landscape Standards
Page 3
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS (continued)
B. Section/Elevation View - Provide a cross-section/elevation through site
showing the relationships between planting design, buildings, site
improvements, design and/or water conservation concepts. (')
C. Irrigation Notes - Include notes or written description explaining
water-conserving measures used in irrigation design.
11
III. Reauired For Laree or Complex ARC Projects (For Staff Review):
In addition to the information listed above, landscape and irrigation plans for
these projects shall be prepared by a landscape architect or other qualified
professional, and shall include the following:
A. Planting and Irrigation Details - Show planting, irrigation, staking,
and other pertinent details which explain the landscape design and/or
conservation measures. (')
B. Maintenance Program - Describe general maintenance procedures, including
frequency and responsiblities for watering, replanting, pruning, irrigation
equipment repair and programming, weed control, and fertilizing.
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
I and II. Standards Applying To All New Development Projects:
1. Irrigated turf areas should not exceed 20 percent of the site's total
area.
Lawn areas typically require more watering than other types of ground covers, trees, and
shrubs. Therefore, although lush, green lawns are traditional in most residential
landscaping, their use for purely decorative purposes is discouraged. The ARC may allow
larger turf areas where special water conservation measures are used, and where their
primary purpose is for recreation rather than esthetics, as in parks, playgrounds, and
private rear yards.
2. Use water-conserving turf varieties or turf substitutes where appropriate.
Warm-season turf varieties like Zoysia, hybrid Bermuda, Tall Fescue, and St. Augustine's
grass require less water to maintain their health and appearance than some other
varieties and are encouraged. Many colorful, flowering ground covers are available which
tolerate drier conditions and should be used instead of turf where little or no foot
traffic is expected.
Landscape Guidelines
Page 4
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS (continued)
3. Design planter and turf areas for maximum water efficiency and ease of
maintenance.
Turf in unusually shaped, narrow, or sloping areas is difficult to maintain and uses more
water than level, regularly-shaped lawns of comparable size. For example, turf should
generally not be used in narrow planters, foundation plantings, raised beds, and other
relatively small planters where watering and maintenance are likely to pose problems.
Turf planting in these areas, or on slopes over 15% causes excessive irrigation runoff,
and is discouraged.
4. Use decorative paving and alternative ground covers such as pathway bark,
crushed rock, wood chippings, concrete, brick, or wood pavers to
attractively landscape pathways, service areas, or difficult to maintain
areas.
Alternative ground covers can be attractive. They conserve water in difficult-to-plant
areas, and in commercial and industrial projects where conventional planting would be
ineffective or inappropriate. Decorative paving for pathways adds color and texture
variety to the design and reduces watering and maintenance.
5. Select plants carefully to suit growing conditions (ie. sun, soil type,
slope aspect, expected level of maintenance).
Growing conditions may vary significantly on a site. Select plants carefully according
to their soil, sun, and moisture preferences. For example, plants which prefer moisture
conditions will often perform better in low or shady areas, or on north-facing slopes.
Sun loving or drought tolerant species often prefer well-drained, sunny, south-facing
areas.
6. Group plants according to similar horticultural needs.
To simplify watering and maintenance, plants with similar horticultural requirements
should be grouped. Interplanting drought-tolerant plants with moisture-loving ground
covers should be avoided. Planting schemes should rely primarily on deep-rooted trees,
shrubs, and vines rather than shallow-rooted ground-covers. Canopy tree plantings should
be used to create cool, moist microclimates below for shade loving plants.
7. Use water-conserving plants.
Plant selection should clearly emphasize the use of drought tolerant and
water-conserving plants. Many plants native to California, the Mediterranean region,
Australia, and South Africa are highly ornamental and require minimal or no water once
established.
Landscape Standards
Page 6
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS (continued)
12. Define planter edges to reduce irrigation runoff.
Curbs, headerboards, pavers, and other decorative materials should be used to define
the edges of planters to reduce irrigation runoff into non-planted areas, and to define
turf areas. Excessive runoff and irrigation overspray onto paved areas wastes water and
is not allowed.
13. Water features should be designed and maintained to use water
efficiently.
Pools, ponds, decorative fountains, and other similar ornamental water features should
use recirculating water. Water features should be of a design, shape, and size that
minimizes water loss through evaporation.
III. Standards For Laree or Comnlex Proiects:
14. Developers shall provide homeowner design/maintenance guidelines for
residential and commercial subdivisions.
Developers shall provide landscape design, irrigation and maintenance guidelines for
homeowners' use in new subdivisions. The guidelines shall be included in a package of
landscape water conservation information provided and distributed by the subdivider to
homeowners, and shall include as a minimum: recommended plant types and sample designs
for water conservation, suggested watering and maintenance schedules, horticultural
measures to reduce landscape water use, and financial and/or other homeowner incentives
to encourage appropriate and timely installation of water-saving landscapes.
15. Subdividers shall design and install water-conserving demonstration
landscapes for new residential subdivisions.
Subdividers shall landscape at least two units or model homes using water-conserving
landscaping to demonstrate the feasibility and esthetic qualities of this type of
landscaping. The demonstration gardens shall follow the City's Model Home Landscape
Development Criteria (criteria being prepared), and shall include appropriate signing
explaining design strategies and plant materials for water conservation.
jhlndscpc/xeros
9/22/88
Landscape Standards
Page 5
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS (continued)
A list of selected water-conserving species for San Luis Obispo is available from the
Community Development Department; however, many other plant lists and references on
drought tolerant plants for coastal California are available. Local nurseries are
another good source for up-to-date information on water-conserving plants.
S. Design irrigation systems for maximum watering efficiency.
Projects should have an automatic, underground irrigation system. The systems shall be
designed for maximum watering efficiency. Such techniques as low-precipitation heads,
drip irrigation, moisture-sensors, check valves, and other water conserving techniques
should be used where appropriate to reduce the amount of water being applied and to
prevent excess overspray onto unplanted areas. Sprinkler heads should be properly
selected and located to prevent excessively dry or wet areas.
9. Use temporary irrigation for open space or hydroseeded areas.
Areas which are hydroseeded or planted with native vegetation generally need temporary
irrigation until well established. Temporary irrigation systems should be removed after
the establishment period, usually in 12 to 24 months.
10. Use erosion control measures on planted slopes of 3:1 (33%) or steeper.
Where runoff and erosion are likely, planted slopes shall have jute mesh, straw
matting, or comparable biodegradable material to reduce erosion and allow plants to
become established. Special irrigation design should be used to reduce runoff, such as
low precipitation heads or drip irrigation, check valves (to reduce low head drainage),
recessed planting niches or watering basins at base of plants, and proper soil
preparation.
11. Planted areas should generally have a 2" thick laver of mulch at
planting to reduce soil moisture evaporation and discourage weed
growth.
Mulches such as bark chips, wood shavings and leaf mold, and peat moss cover and cool
soil, minimize evaporation, reduce weed growth and slow erosion. Organic matter also
provides beneficial nutrients to the plants. Mulching also improves the soils's ability
to absorb and hold water, and it reduces the frequency of watering if applied properly.
Leaf accumulation under many trees and shrubs can be left as a natural, low-maintenance
mulch and can be an attractive ground cover substitute.
COMMISSION COMMENTS (From 8/15/88 ARC meeting)
LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
* Wherever appropriate: Should state that irrigation plans must also be prepared by a
professional.
* page 7, no. 1:
change "overall health and condition" to "overall condition and expected
lifespan"
reason: the commission wants to know the likely life of a tree especially if
asked to remove it.
* page ?, Landscape guidelines, A. (Landscape design):
20% limitation should apply only to well-groomed turf; define "turf" and
"non-turf" grasses in plant list.
* page 10, B. 4:
Change 4:1 to 3:1
The commission was convinced that review of irrigation and planting would be
adequate to determine when additional erosion control is necessary. The
commission did not support a blanket requirement.
* page 7, no. 2:
Irrigation plan should include a verbal description of how it saves water, and
does its job - just to make the designer alert.
* page 7, no. 2, 5, 6:
These items not needed for ARC review, but should be submitted for staff
evaluation (one set would be adequate).
* page 9, no. 3:
Add "small areas" to those areas not good for turf - very inefficient to water
small areas
* page 10, C 1:
Mulch should not be required unilaterally. Eliminate or qualify: "where soil6
are easily drained" or words to that effect. Some plants will be harmed by
placement of mulch on top of hard clay - creating water-logged condition.
-/3
p...M ^S '1t.MON yd_r: 3:;:w,+.rr-µ::'r'T,.ti`::.F.`S^:..w.V.•'3...'yr-r
'- _•?+M11::T': :yg': yr•e- _r.�,�'�`t7.�.. �?.-'i�_w.;:^: r;?I`:" ... ` µ-.w t `.
s_. _ _.. . �': �,.�.: ':,.3.3`!e`.'�^'�..�,. :�r- .'1.. „�.-:fir. >,r,Ft'.•'y: :r-•('.,,' es.r.r�XA. Jyypr,�. •� '-L'e,.6. .:' .;_ r�.:'.:.
••••'"'l=. :tel>�. •V `]R+ Vit: T.F� i"4.v..��.i .:TI:.' :/_y2.`-� - �. ". ��4Y'f.':1 '♦•l "T'.`.^1v:'.i•nrt�.:`::.+_...:.� ��
n. v?,sf ey i 1 .'C.�}�,� `3'A7.
`F . • a 5 uy _ti1+ t .+.�� +z s aLrTY
., 4,I'S. r 'f }.1�- .c r.�` 'n `6; �,1r' F ti,st. 'ar�f.
{} i ,� y-^ �,'t4A. M i5 ": c t v'4t`.L-• 4 .`• nt � y rix .a a� y(r
iAZ
x s. � jw, Y`"� .l>: "<✓- WIM,
` ' �vim' ,' +r�.G^'aM1-a >.t '. , . "• 1N.a E +�- .M�. r r Y K HA(,i? vim' J1 r 'rY '�Y. as -♦ �.4 S:J 7 ' "[t -rr ...: �Y q r'dfr H•., � '-
' �" � r.
..t-L "r 1r11llute.4 .0 c r u M.�. .y�, .S`•.(.t.'''y`"..h•,`5��1 N���� Y..>- `. r L/' - I `r
ry `:X •..f .F- '%>�J 7 e Df : -i rC?y I�J 1..�..0 f( +r �, '
Page 2. *,.ry,L ?^ i� K��. r - r P, r F Y •yd.
.sem. •T .� 'T �a7�f '£.y ,Y'13 �,'�,�"S6 •"r�+i1 ✓ `'A-L .Y G`/'�ra�d, y 5y.. y y. s .�•v PI%'•"sr
M
j •7•s �v f�r o't d^-'M+C.'•7"•` 7 .ti�r/i.+ rvr...Y�'p•���'72 c , Y���,C d '.' �r7.
ARC 87-102: Citywide;Landscape GuideLnes review and comment on proposed
water-conserving landscape:gutdeliaes. ;. ^`
r �Y > l k [
, ,•• _ '. - ��.ri ,
'w�f� '" _.�N�r.i••.•::..f i ..:f�;,r"- - ,....: :♦_ R vy `,>
ti vrac:."�'�•-�. ..:.._`: - - ..� :. ,. f• •• •{' y ;�z r... ..e ',.i .:o �.
;mss Judith,Lautne= Associate"Plannerpresented'thestaff?report;'cecommending.ahe
commission approve the draf t guidelines:and:forward`them;.with':or:without:changes to
the City-Council for final action. _
Marshill::Och lski felt enforceable standards were pecessa
y ry;.,;Healso felt-that. :
non-turf grasses and turf grasses needed distinction. He suggested not:including
these but-adding them on the list with other grasses. He:felt.:the 4-1. slope seemed '
too flat for-jute mesh::,.He suggested changing "licensed to *qualifiedr.
professional,-licensed by.the state'.: He:felt:irrigation plansahould'_also be done:•_ ,'
by'a licensed professionaL_He.thoughta.20 percent limitation on,turt'area,:was.r:"
okay as a guideline but not as a regulation:' He submitted.a letter,to the
commission summarizing his comments.
Leslie VandeWalle asked about.landscape professionals.:.
John Wallace.noted the difference:.between turf and non-turf grasses.
Commrs. Starr and Morris agreed irrigation should be done by,a professional.and that
"health'.should be replaced by "overall condition and expected life span'..
Commr.:Morris felt small areas were very.inefficient to water. He indicated that
drought-tolerant plants should not sit in a 2-inch thick layer.of 'mulch; having the
plants sitting-in water would cause. root rot.. He wanted to-eliminate the
requirement' for a 2-inch layer of mulch, or qualify it. The following should be
included on page 11, No. 4: "Water only during non-windy and low-heat times of day'
or "between midnight and 6:00 a.m.".
William Voorlis noted that vegetables sometimes are stressed in the middle of the
day.
Commr. Bradford recommended adding.notes on exterior water features such as
fountains.
The commission concurred that comments on the proposed landscape guidelines should
be forwarded to the City Council. -
2. ARC 88-58: 1219 Ella Street; add 4-unit apartment to site.,with-existing house;
R-2 zone; color, window details. lighting,and landscaping review.
page 2
a page I1, no.. 4;
.Add: 'water between midnight -and 6 am!' because these are generally non=windy,
low-heat times of day.
° where appropriate:
Add':notes on exterior water features;such as fountains.,
9