CCMIN011993 - Laserfiche WebLink

59 Ms. Mohr asked that if Hacienda needs to refurbish its turf areas in the future, would this ordinance preclude Hacienda from replacing turf with turf. Mr. Swift indicated when a comprehensive landscape plan has been approved, the same plan can continue to be used; however the irrigation system would have to be upgraded to incorporate new water saving technologies. The ordinance further encourages substitutions where possible to achieve the same look but to save water. Ms. Scribner asked how this affected existing residences and what the reasons were for requiring landscape plans and irrigation systems be done by a licensed contractor. She suggested plans could be drawn up by someone else, then certified, thereby saving money. Mr. Swift indicated single family residences, both new and existing, are exempt from the ordinance, if the landscape is installed by the owner. Any existing commercial project would be subject to the ordinance if the property were re-landscaped. With the water budget system, a landscape architect could prepare plans that meet the Code requirements. Mr. Swift stated there are many options for certification, but indicated it would be difficult to have a landscape architect certify that an irrigation system was installed properly since most of it is not visible. The other option is for the certification to be done by the same person who drew up the plan. That certification doesn't necessarily have to be done by a landscape architect, but staff felt that was a way to minimize the process. Mr. Pico had a number of questions. Was this ordinance reviewed by the Planning Commission or Parks and Recreation Commission? Is the State ordinance in effect until the City adopts its own ordinance? Why is there no clear delineation of intent to conserve water at the beginning of the ordinance similar to the State ordinance. Pre-existing multiple family projects seem to be exempt, why is there no enforcement ability to require them to put in water saving methods in the event of rehabilitating landscaping in the future? Why is there no requirement that major consumers such as Hacienda Business Park and Golden Eagle Farms comply with the ordinance in the event of rehabilitation of their landscaping? Mr. Pico indicated a minimum amount of square footage should be used with regard to rehabilitation rather than the 50% designation. In that way, if a development or project which is exempt then decides to rehabilitate a large portion, but not 50%, that the City could require compliance with the ordinance. Mr. Tarver indicated that Council should provide its questions to staff and continue the item.