Require Water Efficient Landscaping
Alec LeSher (author), Jonathan Rosenbloom & Christopher Duerksen (editors)INTRODUCTION
Efficient landscaping ordinances combine several techniques to reduce costs and time in the maintenance of landscapes.[1] These ordinances can be implemented in areas where there is too much or too little water.[2] They can be drafted to address flooding challenges or to supplement irrigation needs in particularly dry areas.[3] The ordinances include techniques such as the use of native and climate adapted plants to reduce the need for additional irrigation and maintenance.[4] Ordinances addressing water flow issues through landscaping may either create incentives to promote particular design and implementation by offering landscaping credits, or require certain landscaping during the development and approval process.[5]
EFFECTS
Water consumption is a primary concern associated with many types of landscaping.[6] Traditional lawns require large amounts of water to remain healthy and ascetically pleasing.[7] The use of this water places strain on the water supply, especially in drier climates, and is very costly to both the consumer and the local government.[8] Placing too much demand on the water supply can result in depletion of groundwater reserves and an increase in costs to maintain municipal water supplies.[9] Some landscapes also require chemical products to maintain healthy appearances, such as fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides.[10] Many of these products can run-off their area of application and contaminate both ground and surface water, adding to costs and damaging ecosystems.[11]
Providing water to customers is also an energy intensive process.[12] Addressing stormwater run-off and providing potable water are some of local government’s largest uses of energy.[13] Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions needed to provide water should be considered in light of the utility of hydrating grass lawns.[14] In addition, lawn equipment, such as lawn mowers, may consume fossil fuels adding GHG emissions.[15] Switching to efficient landscaping can reduce and eliminate many of the costs associated with traditional landscaping, while reducing GHG emissions.[16] Selecting native and climate-adapted plants can reduce the need for irrigation as these plants are suited for area-specific precipitation patters.[17] Native plants are those that occur naturally in a region in which they evolved.[18] Once established, native landscapes outcompete weeds and eliminate the need for the harmful herbicides and pesticides required to maintain traditional turf grass, and greatly reduce the amount of GHG emissions from law care.[19] Laws exempting native species from being classified as weeds[20] can allow homeowners and municipalities to implement cost effective native alternatives to traditional turf grass, as native plant landscapes are largely self-sufficient.[21] Finally, thriving vegetation can help capture GHG emissions and lower energy costs involved with heating or cooling adjacent buildings.[22]
EXAMPLES
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Fort Lauderdale requires new developments to submit landscaping plans as part of the development permit process.[23] Developer landscaping plans are required to follow specific criteria in regards to the plant species used in the landscaping.[24] Fort Lauderdale organizes plant species into lists and sets a limit to the percentage that those species can be used.[25] For example, Norfolk Island Pine, Indian Rosewood, and Silk Oak are listed on the same list that limits them to no more than 10% of the trees present on a site.[26]
The ordinance also establishes criteria for the application of xeriscaping.[27] Xeriscaping is the inclusion of landscaping methods that promote water conservation.[28] Landscaping credits are provided for the preservation of native trees present on the site.[29] This continues to encourage developers to take advantage of present trees and native vegetation in the landscaping as opposed to replacing the plant life with non-native and potentially water-intensive species.[30]
To view the provision see Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (2009).
California, Model Ordinance
The State of California publishes and maintains a model water efficient landscape ordinance for use by local governments. Multiple municipalities in the state have adopted water efficient landscaping ordinances based on this model.[31] A key feature of this model ordinance is the requirement for a Landscape Design Plan.[32] The plan requires developers to make plant selection choice that are native to California and water efficient.[33] The plan also prevents the use of turf grass on steep slopes and requires special consideration for fire prevention in areas prone to wildfire.[34] Other parts of the model ordinance encourage the use of graywater (waste water from baths, washing machines, sinks etc.) and recycled water systems for irrigation.[35] The model ordinance also recommends the integration of stormwater management practices, such as rain gardens, infiltration beds, and constructed wetlands.[36] The model ordinance includes additional sections that should be considered when drafting a local ordinance including topics on public education, irrigation design, and water waste prevention.
To view the model ordinance see Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23 §§ 490-495 (1992) (current through 2018).
ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES
Aurora, CO, Building and Zoning Code § 146-1437 (2004) (allowing a buffer reduction for landscapes that use xeriscaping or efficient landscaping practices).
Leavenworth, KS, Code of Ordinances, App. E § 6.06 (A) (2016) (providing bonus landscape credit for preserved native vegetation).
Sanibel, FL, Code of Ordinances § 126-675 (d) (2006) (requiring that 75 percent of vegetation be native when a parcel is developed or redeveloped in certain zones).
Scottsdale, AZ, Code of Ordinances § 46-106 (1989) (requiring that a person obtain a permit before removing any protected native plant species or face a fine of up to $2,500 or up to six months imprisonment).
Albuquerque, NM, Albuquerque Water Utility Authority Xeriscape Rebate (providing a rebate on water utility bill if the customer replaces traditional landscaping with low water use xeriscape).
Tuscon, AZ, Unified Code of Development § 7.6.4 (2015) (requiring use of drought resistant vegetation for new developments, with some exceptions, but allowing properties a small “oasis” zone where non-drought resistant vegetation may be planted).
CITATIONS
[1] Tobias Leanne & George Vavaroutsos et al., Retrofitting Building to be Green and Energy-efficient, 41 (2009); Sarah Schindler, Banning Lawns, 82 George Washington Law Review 394, 414 (2014).
[2] See, e.g., Aurora, CO, Building and Zoning Code § 146-1437 (2017); Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (2018).
[3] Leanne et al., supra note 1, at 41; Aurora, CO, Building and Zoning Code § 146-1437 (2017).
[4] See Leanne et al., supra note 1, at 41; Aurora, CO, Building and Zoning Code § 146-1437 (2017).
[5] See, e.g., Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (2018); Leavenworth, KS, Code of Ordinances § 6.06 (A) (2018).
[6] Avi Friedman, Fundamentals of Sustainable Dwellings, 199-200 (2012); Schindler, supra note 1, at 408-09.
[7] Friedman, supra note 6, at 199-200; Schindler, supra note 1, at 407-08.
[8] See Friedman, supra note 6, at 199-200; Schindler, supra note 1, at 410-11.
[9] Friedman, supra note 6, at 169-70; Schindler, supra note 1, at 408.
[10] Friedman, supra note 6, at 200.
[11] Friedman, supra note 6, at 200; Schindler, supra note 1, at 410-11.
[12] Schindler, supra note 1, at 409; Environmental Protection Agency, Energy Efficiency in Water and Wastewater Facilities, 1 (2013)
[13] Schindler, supra note 1, at 409; Environmental Protection Agency, supra note 12, at 1.
[14] Schindler, supra note 1, at 409; Environmental Protection Agency, supra note 12, at 1.
[15] Friedman, supra note 6, at 200-01.
[16] Schindler, supra note 1, at 414;.
[17] Friedman, supra note 6, at 211.
[18] Environmental Protection Agency, Landscaping with Native Plants: Factsheet (2012), https://perma.cc/F354-VEJ7.
[19] John Ingram,When Cities Grow Wild: Natural Landscaping from an Urban Planning Perspective, Natural Landscaping: A New Landscape Ethic?, Wild Ones Natural Landscapers (1999).
[20] See e.g., Lee’s Summit, MO Code of Ordinances § 30-36 (2018) (exempting native vegetation from classification as a weed, which would have required the owner of the property to destroy the vegetation).
[21] Environmental Protection Agency, Landscaping with Native Plants: Factsheet (2012), https://perma.cc/CV22-D5XP.
[22] Friedman, supra note 6, at 19-21; Department of Energy, Landscaping for Energy-Efficient Homes, Energy.gov (Last visited Aug. 31 2017).
[23] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (C) (2009).
[24] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (F) (2009).
[25] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (F) (4) (e) (2009).
[26] Id.
[27] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (F) (9) (2009).
[28] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (B) (cc) (2009).
[29] Fort Lauderdale, FL, Unified Land Development Code § 47-39.A.13 (F) (4) (g) (2009).
[30] Id.
[31] See e.g., Menlo Park, CA, Menlo Park Municipal Code §§ 12.44.010 – 12.44.220 (2017); Sonoma County, CA Code of Ordinances §§ 7D3-1 to 7D3-9 (2018); Davis, CA Davis Municipal Code §§ 40.42.010 – 40.42.220 (2018); Redding, CA Code of Ordinances §§ 16.70.010 – 16.70.080 (2018).
[32] Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23 § 492.6 (1992).
[33] Id.
[34] Id.
[35] Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23 § 492.15 (1992).
[36] Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23 § 492.16 (1992).