Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLnscp Btfctn Cmte - 10/21/09 _ � s CITY OF PALM DESERT ���-� � � MINUTES -- LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING ' � Wednesday, October 21, 2009 — 11:30 a.m. Administrative Conference Room — Palm Desert Civic Center 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260 I. Call to Order 11:30 a.m. II. Roll Call Present: Absent: Chairman H. Spencer Knight Vice-Chairman � ^��r� e.,'���^ (Alt. Tony Baga��Y COUNCILACTiON Member Martin Alvarez A� �'�nVFn n�Nl�� Member Homer Croy RI:CI:IVED ;� �� � pTE{FH Member Mark Greenwood, P.E. M�;�,T[NG DAT � _ Member Richard S. Kelly /� �G L� — AYES: �' ' �� i�SO/' e���ipi�e(� /�-�i/r� - Member Connor Limont Noes: c� � Member (Alt. Janis Steele) A13SF,NT: ti'��e.-- Member Bob Spiegel �E3ST,�t�v: �� MemberJohn M. Wohlmuth vc�ttt�[r�� 13Y: �'-n� � Ori�;inal on File with City Clcrk s Oflicc . Also Present: . . � � Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Hart Ponder, Code Compliance Manager Randy Purnel, Landscape Architect Fred Jandt, Palm Desert Campus, CSU — San Bernardino Cameron, Barrows, Ph.D., UC Riverside Tamara Hedges, UCR Palm Desert Carolyn M. Stark, UCR Palm Desert Bertha A. Gonzalez, Recording Secretary III. Oral Communications The Committee was asked to move Item A of Continued Business to first item of discussion. Upon a motion of the Committee, the item was discussed as requested. . , � APPROVED MINUTES LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE October 21, 2009 IV. Consent Calendar A. MINUTES of the Regular Landscape Beautification Committee Meeting of Wednesday, August 19, 2009. Approve as presented. Upon a motion by Chairman Knight, second by Member Spiegel, and 8-0 vote of the Committee Board, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. Member Wohlmuth arrived at the meeting at 11:42 a.m., after approval of the Consent Calendar. V. Consent Items Held Over None VI. Continued Business A. UCR/CSUSB View Corridor Landscape Desiqn At the City Council's request, the Committee was asked to review the UCR/CSUSB View Corridor landscape plan and give its approval before presenting it back to the City Council. A review of the plan was presented by Cameron Barrows, Ph.D., of University of California Riverside (UCR). Highlights of the presentation were as follows: • The project is located at the corner of Cook Street and Frank � � Sinatra Drive; two-thirds of the property belongs to Cal State University and one-third to UCR. • The project's primary concept is to develop a project of sustainability. • Additional objectives included: demonstrate an ecological pattern; emphasize the plant material that is native to the desert; research how people can use plant material that is more sustainable; and, document how much water and energy is used to maintain this kind of plant material. • The project will include pedestrian paths between the two campuses, trails to the different plant communities, a pond with endangered fish, plant material from the Salton Sea, and samples on how residents can convert their yards to desertscape. Representatives from both campuses believe that the character of this project will set it apart from other desert gardens in the Coachella Valley. 2 APPROVED MINUTES LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE October 21, 2009 Questions and concerns included: • The project seems to leave a lot of bare space on the Cal State side of the project. Are there any plans of expanding the project to cover that area? There are no intentions of expanding the landscape project, since Cal State might have some building structures built on that area. • How is irrigation being dealt with? Irrigation is being separated between the two universities. • There were some trees planted along Cook Street; are they part of the project? No. • Who will be responsible of maintaining the landscape? Both campuses will be responsible. • How will the campuses ensure that proper maintenance is being performed? According to Mr. Barrows, it will be specified in the contract, and because there is a research component to the project, specifications might be developed in order to minimize cost, uphold pruning standards, and maintain the standard of the research project. • Will there be signage? Yes. • What is the availability of the plant material? The universities are having the Living Desert propagate and grow the plant material. • Is there an estimated timeline for the project? It will depend on the availability of funds. The Committee believes that in order for the City Council to approve the construction of the ring road, a timeline will be necessary. The Committee advised the representatives from both campuses to present to the City Council an explanation of the project issues along with a tentative timeline. This might persuade the City Council to approve the plan and move forward with the . construction of the ring road. . . • Are there any federal grants available? Both campuses have tried to get a grant without success. • Concern was expressed with view from the road; there seems to be none. According to Randy Purnel, Landscape Architect, the plan did not call for the project to be viewed from the road and because of the changes in elevations; it will be especially difficult to be seen. Upon a motion from Member Spiegel, second by Member Limont and a 9-0 vote of the Committee Board, the UCR/CSUSB View Corridor landscape design concept was approved as presented. 3 APPROVED MINUTES LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE October 21, 2009 VII. New Business A. Updated Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Chairman Knight explained that the previous State Water Ordinance Model was very general in context and very few specific criteria were given to achieve water efficiency. The majority of the general criteria was set forth as suggestions, not mandates; leaving the specifics up to the design professionals. The new model is much more specific in its definitions for achieving water efficiency and has new criteria set forth as mandates. He also informed the Committee that this new criteria will be in effect for new landscapes and renovations. The new criteria included: a. New definitions have been added and the existing ones have been changed in order to reflect the growth in the profession. b. The Water Conservation Statement has been dropped. c. A Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet has been added. d. There is a mandate for SMART irrigation controllers. e. Individual, single family residences over 5,000 square feet are now required to comply with the ordinance, when in the past versions they had been exempt. f. A Certificate of Completion has been strengthened and is now mandated. g. Turf areas used for recreation and sports activities are no longer exempt; they now have specific criteria for water conservation. h. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) now has design criteria for golf courses. The City's updated draft ordinance defers to CVWD's ordinance for these facilities. � � i. An increased responsibility for water efficient landscaping is placed on the local water agency (CVWD) and on design, installation, and maintenance professionals. j. At the completion of a landscape installation, a water audit is required to accompany the application for the Certificate of Completion. k. The regulation of irrigation system maintenance has been mandated at the local level (cities and water agencies) through the implementation of programs requiring regular irrigation system inspections, analysis, and water audits. This responsibility can be assumed by either or both agencies. I. The City's nuisance water prevention will be covered in the City's updated water efficient landscape ordinance. For the most part, the changes will codify what the City has already been doing. The City's updated, draft ordinance maintains the higher existing 4 APPROVED MINUTES LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE October 21, 2009 City standards, where the state standards are lower. The new state model and compliant, updated City ordinance will result in changes to the City's review and submittal process and may increase staff work load. Questions and/or concerns included: • What happens when water goes into the street? Staff will handle it as a water nuisance issue and will put it through its normal notification process. • Item E — Does this include homes or lots? Landscape or Native areas? The Ordinance does not address either. • Item I — Will there be a duplication of effort between CVWD and City? Chairman Knight will consult with CVWD in regards to this item, although to his understanding half of the cities defer it to CVW D. • Item J — Does this item refer to how much water is being distributed? Yes, it will require an irrigation audit, which the owner will have to provide. • Item K —What does this item mean? At the present, the City has an option of asking for a water audit every 5 years. With the changes, the audit will be mandatory. • Who will be responsible for managing the audits? Chairman Knight will attempt to have CVWD do the audits. • Are gray water provisions being addressed? No, gray water is covered by Building Code. • What is the difference between CVWD's ordinance and the City's? There are some conflicts between the two ordinances, but the major difference is that CVWD does not address aesthetics. • Does the City want to address the use of water features? Water . features need approval .from the Planning Dept; therefore, the . Committee believes they do not need to be addressed in the ordinance. • The sprinklers at the Civic Center entrance off San Pablo are watering into the streets. Member Kelly inquired whether this area is part of the current turf renovation project. Chairman Knight informed that Committee that it is not, but will add it in the second phase of the project. Meanwhile, staff will adjust the sprinklers so they will stop wasting water. Chairman Knight informed the Committee that a draft of the new ordinance will be finished this week. It will then be forwarded to the planning department and then to the City Attorney for review. The ordinance needs to be implemented by January 1, 2010; therefore, he will not be able to present it to the Committee for final approval. 5 . .. APPROVED MINUTES LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION COMMITTEE October 21, 2009 After a brief discussion, staff was directed to solve the conflicts between the two ordinances by deferring to CVWD standards for water conservation and addressing the aesthetics standards. If CVWD's standards change and the City is not in agreement, the item can be brought back to the Committee for further discussion. The Committee also asked to be kept informed. Staff was asked to move forward as directed; no motion was required. VIII. Old Business None IX. Reports and Remarks - The Committee asked for the status on the Landscape Conversion Rebate Program. Chairman Knight informed the Committee that the program is scheduled to be implemented on January 1, 2010. When it becomes available, it will be advertised and it will be available on a first come, first serve basis. At the moment, staff is waiting for the agreement from the Coachella Valley Water District in order to move forward. A status report will be presented to the Committee in November's meeting. - Inquiry on what happened with the sawing down of the trees at Homme- Adams Parks. Chairman Knight informed the Committee that a report has been filed with the police department and they are currently investigating. The trees will be replaced. - The Committee was informed that windmills are now being sold for private use? Does the City have anything in place that states they cannot be installed in backyards? According to Tony Bagato, windmill installations need approval from the Planning Department, and per the requirements of the Riverside County, the property needs to meet a minimum of acreage. X. Adjournment With no further business or discussion, and Landscape Beautification Committee Board concurrence, the meeting was adjourned at 12:42 p.m. . pen r Kni t a a Manager ATTEST: ertha A. Gon ez, R rding S etary Landscape Beautification Comm' tee 6