Loading...
Agenda 07/12/2022 Item #16A 2 (No further action for public petition requesting that LDC allow homeowners to utilize artificial turf on property)16.A.2 07/12/2022 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to take no further action with respect to a public petition requesting that Collier County amend the Land Development Code to allow homeowners to utilize artificial turf on an entire property. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners takes no further action with respect to Mr. Harlem's Public Petition. CONSIDERATIONS: On May 24, 2022, Mr. John Harlem appeared before the Board under Public Petition. In his Petition, Mr. Harlem requested the BCC revise the current Land Development Code (LDC) requirement that a maximum of 30% of a rear yard may consist of artificial turf to instead allow 100% of yards to consist of artificial turf. In his Public Petition, Mr. Harlem provided testimony, stating: 1. Other municipalities within Florida, including the City of Naples and City of Marco Island allow 100% of yards to consist of artificial turf; 2. Synthetic turf is considered "Florida -Friendly landscaping;" and 3. It was used in a swale on Goodlette-Frank Road. The BCC directed staff to review the LDC and to review the positives and negatives, including environmental impacts, of allowing artificial turf to be used in yards. Staff has reviewed the request and found Mr. Harlem's testimony is incorrect and incomplete in all of the examples he cited as reasons to change the LDC. Staff reviewed land development regulations for other municipalities, including the City of Naples, City of Marco Island, Bonita Springs, Estero, Cape Coral and others throughout the state of Florida. The majority, including the City of Naples, do not allow artificial turf to be used in lieu of sod, mulch, trees and landscaping; most others allow a percentage of a yard to consist of artificial turf. Additionally, the University of Florida and its Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), which provides scientific review of landscaping material, does not consider artificial turf to be "Florida -Friendly landscaping," as it does not meet the principles of "Florida -Friendly." Synthetic turf is primarily manufactured of plastic materials and may include recycled tires or other rubber products; it has a life span of seven to ten years, depending on usage. According to IFAS, synthetic turf must be disposed of in a landfill upon replacement; widespread use of synthetic turf may impact the life span of the Collier County landfill. The specifications and product approvals for the synthetic turf installed by Mr. Harlem have not been provided for staff to evaluate to determine if it is recyclable. With respect to the Goodlette-Frank Road Stormwater swale roadway project, the turf used within the pilot project, is made of entirely different materials (steel, as opposed to the synthetic fibers in artificial turf) and was approved to be used for the project for erosion control. Packet Pg. 570 16.A.2 07/12/2022 Growth Management Community Development staff met with Mr. Harlem on June 29, 2022 to inform him of staff s recommendation based upon research and offered suggestions for Mr. Harlem as potential ways to retain a portion of artificial turf, including seeking a Variance or privately initiated LDC amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: None. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. -DDP RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners takes no further action with respect to Mr. Harlem's Public Petition. Prepared by: Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. OF IFAS Synthetic Turf Article (PDF) 2. Synthetic Turf (PDF) Packet Pg. 571 16.A.2 07/12/2022 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 16.A.2 Doe ID: 22709 Item Summary: Recommendation to take no further action with respect to a public petition requesting that Collier County amend the Land Development Code to allow homeowners to utilize artificial turf on an entire property. Meeting Date: 07/12/2022 Prepared by: Title: Technician — Growth Management Development Review Name: Valerie Kullick 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Submitted by: Title: Environmental Specialist — Growth Management Department Name: Jaime Cook 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Growth Management Department Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Additional Reviewer Zoning Geoffrey Willig Additional Reviewer Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Geoffrey Willig Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Transportation Growth Management Department James C French Growth Management County Attorney's Office Derek D. Perry Level 2 Attorney Review Office of Management and Budget Debra Windsor Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Office of Management and Budget Geoffrey Willig Additional Reviewer County Manager's Office Amy Patterson Level 4 County Manager Review Board of County Commissioners Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending Skipped 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Skipped 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Skipped 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Additional Reviewer Skipped Skipped 07/06/2022 2:15 PM Completed 07/06/2022 2:54 PM Completed 07/06/2022 2:56 PM Completed 07/06/2022 3:01 PM Completed 07/06/2022 3:24 PM Skipped 07/06/2022 3:28 PM Completed 07/06/2022 4:43 PM 07/12/2022 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 572 OF I S Extension UNIVERIFASM of FLORIDA 16.A.2.a uFiiFas ENH1348 VEER REVIEWED https://doi.org/l 0.32473/edis-EP612-2021 Synthetic Turfgrass and the Nine Principles of Florida - Friendly LandscapingT11 Jason Kruse, Bryan Unruh, Jennifer Marvin, Tom Wichman, Lynn Barber, Norma Samuel, John Bossart, Claire Lewis, and Esen Momolz Introduction Homeowners in Florida are offered many different species and cultivars of natural turfgrass to consider for their lawns, each offering varying levels of shade, maintenance, water, disease, and pest resistance, as well as differences in color, texture, and overall aesthetics. Recent additions to the list of available turfgrasses have benefited from extensive breeding programs to develop cultivars that need fewer inputs (e.g., water and fertilizer), have fewer pest problems, and require less mowing, all traits that contribute to their appropriate use in Florida -Friendly Landscaping- (FFL) (Momol et al. 2021). However, in addition to these living turf options, some homeowners replace natural turfgrass with synthetic turf, also referred to as artificial turf. Originally developed as a durable, low -maintenance playground surface, synthetic turf is a manufactured product that utilizes synthetic fibers that mimic the aesthetic look of natural grass. Essentially outdoor carpet, artificial turf is typically composed of nylon, polypropylene, or polyethylene fibers connected to a reinforced backing material. While designed to imitate the look of natural turf, synthetic turf does not provide the ecosystem benefits of a natural turf system. This publication examines the properties of synthetic turf in relation to each of FFUs nine principles. Florida -Friendly Landscaping": The Nine Program Principles FFL protects Floridas natural resources by conserving water, reducing waste and pollution, creating wildlife habitat, and preventing runoff and erosion (Momol et al. 2021). Landscapes in Florida can be Florida -Friendly if designed and maintained according to the nine Florida - Friendly Landscaping' principles (FYN Handbook 2015). Each of the nine Florida -Friendly Landscaping- principles are evaluated below as they relate to living turfgrass and its potential replacement by synthetic turf. Right Plant, Right Place: FFL's mission is to provide science -based information for creating resilient, sustain- able landscapes of living plants that have been specifically selected and appropriately installed so that they require little or no irrigation, fertilizer, or pesticide. Because synthetic turf is not alive, it does not meet the criteria 1. This document is ENH1348, one of a series of the Environmental Horticulture Department, UFAFAS Extension. Original publication date December 2021. Visit the EDIS website at https:Hedis.ifas.ufl.edu for the currently supported version of this publication. 2. Jason Kruse, associate professor, Environmental Horticulture Department; Bryan Unruh, professor and associate center director, Environmental Horticulture Department, UFAFAS West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, FL; Jennifer Marvin, statewide FYN coordinator, UFAFAS Florida -Friendly Landscaping— Program; Tom Wichman, assistant director and statewide GI-BMP coordinator, UFAFAS Florida -Friendly Landscaping — Program, UFAFAS Center for Land Use Efficiency; Lynn Barber, program county Extension agent II, Florida Friendly Landscaping—, UFAFAS Extension Hillsborough County; Norma Samuel, Extension agent IV, PhD, Florida Friendly Landscaping— and urban horticulture, OF/IFAS Extension Sumter County; John Bossart, Extension program manager, OF/IFAS Florida -Friendly Landscaping'" Program; Claire Lewis, statewide FFC coordinator, UFAFAS Florida -Friendly Landscaping' Program; and Esen Momol, director, UFAFAS Florida -Friendly Landscaping— Program; OF/IFAS Extension, Gainesville, FL 32611. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other UFAFAS Extension publications, contact your county's UFAFAS Extension office. U.S. Department of Agriculture, UFAFAS Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Andra Johnson, dean for OF/IFAS Extension. FA .2 a `0 N c 0 c E 0 m as 0 ti N N 0 Q m z _ LL U_ c 0 E U cc .-I Q Packet Pg. 573 of a plant choice for an FFL landscape. As a living plant, natural turfgrass plays an important role in cooling the environment that synthetic turf cannot. Average surface temperatures of a natural turfgrass lawn have been reported to be as much as 70°F cooler than a dormant brown lawn and as much as 100°F cooler than synthetic turf surfaces. Higher surface temperatures increase the surrounding air temperatures and result in an increase in the energy required for mechanical cooling of adjacent homes and buildings. Caludio (2008) describes heat island effects generated by larger installations of synthetic turf. Living turfgrass also provides a root zone, which helps to filter and slow runoff and stop erosion. Syn- thetic turf cannot do this, because part of its installation requires compacting the earth below, increasing runoff beneath the synthetic turf. 2. Water Efficiently: Synthetic turf systems do not require supplemental irrigation; however, installations may require water use for different reasons. As mentioned above, synthetic turf can become excessively hot, with one author (Kruse) measuring surface temperatures on synthetic turf as high as 160'E Because of these high temperatures, it is common for users to spray the surface with water to cool it for use, which may negate some of the perceived benefit from the system not requiring "ir- rigation" In addition, many manufacturers recommend weekly wash downs of the artificial turf surface to remove contaminants such as dust and pet waste and its odor. These washings, especially those to remove pet urine, often use quite a bit of water because the waste must pass through the artificial turf, the underlying substrate, and the weed barrier before being carried away. This wash water will generally not infiltrate into the ground below because of soil compaction conducted before installation of the synthetic turf. As noted in The Ultimate Artificial Grass Maintenance Guide (neograss.co.uk): If your lawn has not been installed on a free -draining sub -base, then you may need to purchase one of the many artificial grass cleaning products available on the market that will remove the smell of urine and sanitize your lawn. Living turf, on the other hand, helps cool the environ- ment, absorbs pet urine, and does not require washing to remove odors or dust. Once established, living turf needs minimal water during times of drought. 3. Fertilize Appropriately: Synthetic turf systems do not require fertilization. However, the lack of a root system and its associated microbial community in synthetic 16.A.2.a turf systems eliminates the water filtration benefit that is gained through the installation of a living turfgrass system. 4. Mulch: In an FFL landscape, mulch is often incorporated within ornamental beds and around shrubs to maintain soil moisture and control weed growth. However, mulch application is not applicable to synthetic turf systems. 5. Attract Wildlife: An FFL landscape will often incorpo- rate elements that attract wildlife, including the instal- lation of host and pollinator plants to attract butterflies and native bees, as well as mixes of shrubs and trees that provide food, cover, and nesting opportunities for birds and other wildlife. This effect is amplified when natural wildlife preserves, and other green areas are adjacent or nearby. Research has shown that turfgrass lawns support an abundance of beneficial arthropods, such as beetles, bees and wasps, as well as worms, which in turn support larger wildlife such as birds and other ground -feeding wildlife (Shimat et al. 2020). Synthetic turf does not offer any benefits that attract or support wildlife. 6. Manage Yard Pests Responsibly: A fundamental component of FFL is using the appropriate combinations of plants (see FFL Principle No. 1: Right Plant, Right Place) maintained through proper irrigation and fertilizer protocols, so that yard pests are controlled with little or even no need for pesticide application. This holistic pest management approach forms the basis of integrated pest management, or IPM. As discussed above, while synthetic turf plays no role in attracting or supporting wildlife, it also does not contribute to the mix and balance of landscaping plants that promote IPM. 7. Recycle Yard Waste: FFL promotes the recycling of yard and landscape clippings into mulch and compost. This not only reduces the amount of yard waste that must be picked up curbside and transported for disposal, but yard waste converted to compost and used as fertilizer decreases the need for a homeowner to buy other fertil- izers, especially synthetic fertilizers. Because synthetic turf is primarily plastic, it does not directly generate yard waste such as leaf litter and clippings, although falling leaves that accumulate on the synthetic turf must still be removed to prevent wear and tear. More importantly, however, synthetic turf has a finite life span, perhaps 10 to 20 years depending on the quality of ongoing care includ- ing rinsing, removing leaves, and sanitizing. At the end of its life, the synthetic turf will need to be removed and replaced, with the ultimate disposal of the old synthetic turf most likely in a landfill. F-A Q L 0 0 c 0 c aD E E 0 m as 0 ti N N as Q a z r c Co Co Q o_ D c m c� a Synthetic Turfgrass and the Nine Principles of Florida -Friendly Landscaping - Packet Pg. 574 16.A.2.a 8. Reduce Stormwater Runoff: The primary base construc- tion for synthetic turf systems in residential landscapes involves removal of a portion (2"-3") of the topsoil followed by heavy compaction of the remaining soil to establish a firm, uniform base on which to install the synthetic turf product. This compaction reduces soil infiltration rates and increases the risk of runoff from the landscape. While it may be possible to use rain gardens, berms, and swales to retain runoff on the property, there remains a significant risk of increased runoff when compared to natural turfgrass, which has been shown to increase soil infiltration rates. A recent study by Simpson and Francis (2021) demonstrated that synthetic turf lawns had more runoff and decreased water retention compared to living turf lawns. A similar study (Chang et al. 2021) found that living turf provided greater runoff control than synthetic turf. a. In addition to runoff volume, synthetic turf runoff has been shown to contain zinc in concentrations that pose a potential risk to surface waters and aquatic organisms (Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 2010). Another synthetic turf study in New York found that runoff water from rain or from spraying or misting contained some 25 different chemical species and four metals (zinc, selenium, lead, and cadmium) that were released into water from the rubber infill incorporated into the synthetic turf (Claudio 2008). b. In contrast to synthetic turf, a healthy, established natural turf system consists not only of the dense cover of the aboveground grass blades, but also an underlying deep, intricately intertwined root zone that can filter and absorb contaminants. Natural turf installations improve soil structure over time and as a result enhance water filtration and infiltration into the soil. A robust root zone with healthy soil will also absorb dissolved nutrients, decrease nutrient leaching into the underlying ground water, and sequester carbon. Because, by definition, synthetic turf systems do not consist of plant material, they have no capacity to provide these same ecosystem services as a living turf. 9. Protect the Waterfront: Synthetic turf systems lack the soil -stabilizing benefits offered by the rootzones of flood - tolerant plants that are typically found along the edges of water bodies. The presence of these plants protects the shoreline from erosion and has been documented as having a significant impact in reducing the concentration and amount of contaminates that enter bodies of water through stormwater runoff. Installation of a synthetic turf system along the edge of a water body increases the risk of soil erosion due to the lack of an established soil -stabilizing rootzone. In addition, the increased risk of runoff due to compaction of the soils during installation will increase the risk of pollutants reaching the water body that may have otherwise been caught/filtered out by the natural turfgrass system. Conclusions Protecting and preserving Floridas water resources through sustainable landscaping practices on living landscapes is the primary focus of the Florida -Friendly Landscaping -Program. It strives to achieve this goal through implementation of nine principles designed to reduce the environmental impact of urban landscapes while creating wildlife habitat, preventing erosion, and reducing landscape -based contributions to landfills. When considering the use of a synthetic turf system in the urban landscape, it is important to understand all the potential en- vironmental impacts. Synthetic turf systems have not been shown to improve or create wildlife habitat, do not improve groundwater recharge, can heat excessively in the sun and, in more extensive installations, can cause a substantial heat island effect. In addition, synthetic turf generates higher stormwater runoff than natural turf and has been shown to leach a variety of contaminants, including both organic compounds and heavy metals. Finally, since synthetic turf is primarily plastic it has a finite lifespan and must eventually be disposed of in a landfill, a practice that is counter to the sustainability goals of the Florida -Friendly Landscaping - Program. References Chang, B., B. Wherley, J. A. Aitkenhead-Peterson, and K. J. McInnes. 2021. "Effects of Urban Residential Landscape Composition on Surface Runoff Generation." Science of the Total Environment 783:146977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. scitotenv 2021.146977 Claudio, L. 2008. "Synthetic Turf Health Debate Takes Root." Environmental Health Perspectives 116 (3): 117-122. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1 16-a116 Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. 2010. Artificial Turf Study, Leachate and Stormwater Char- acteristics, Final Report. The Florida Yards and Neighborhoods Handbook. 2015. https://ffl.ifas.ufl.edu/media/fflifasufledu/docs/FYN_Hand- book_2015_web.pdf F-A .2 Q `0 N c 0 c a� E E 0 m as 0 ti N N a2 Q 0 m z r c CO Q u: U_ M c m a Synthetic Turfgrass and the Nine Principles of Florida -Friendly Landscaping- Packet Pg. 575 16.A.2.a Joseph, S. V., K. Harris -Shultz, D. Jespersen, B. Vermeer, and C. Julian. 2020. "Incidence and Abundance of Bees and Wasps (Hymenoptera) in Centipedegrass Lawns in Georgia.' Journal of Entomological Science 55 (4): 547-559. https://doi.org/10. 18474/0749-8004-55.4.547 Momol, E., M. Scheinkman, M. Thomas, T. Wichman, G. Hansen, C. Lewis, J. Marvin, L. Barber, T. Silvasy, T. Free- man, T. McIntyre, E. Brown, A. Peck, and J. Bossart. 2021. "What Is Florida -Friendly Landscaping-?" EDIS 2021 (4). https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-ep6O7-2021 Simpson, T. J., and R. A. Francis. 2021. "Artificial Lawns Exhibit Increased Runoff and Decreased Water Retention Compared to Living Lawns Following Controlled Rainfall Experiments" Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 63:127232. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ufug.2021.127232 Synthetic Turfgrass and the Nine Principles of Florida -Friendly Landscaping - Packet Pg. 576 N N O N r-I Ln 4--j E W L n� W W O U 4� E n O 4.� 4� 0 F 'fir' 4- 0 O O V � +, U o °C o a� co •ago +� o a� ro 1 • - V O W � a-1 � � U -I-- ate-+ a--+ LL G Q G m O cn Q) 0 .0 a- j Ul � � CoCL O U i� ol Q _Q U C6 ate-+ 0� 1-4 O m U cry Rq N LL O LL L y L L J c cc LL 4- C 4-- z +- V c c m U N f6 J LL Q) - 1 LL I LL 0 LL 0 =) LL. N O U U U L cn V) U +- i C: Qu U ro — 4- Qj a� a,Ov 4-j C- � � °' Q > i� N �� O o ro Q� 1 O 4--J ��^ i N O •� •- V 1 ca O a) -0 � 0 c/� � N ca .. •Ln Ln O O > O > +� a E .. • 4-j U U N }, U 4—j C: X O o •N o Ur ' — C6 Ca O O oC .. J .. a--j U U Ln �, ,- ��� ��Ln �� (2) (a) LI) O `~ O U O U l0 �� = (1) lD 0 -0 O � (/) `� � cam a--+ U u 1 1 Qj m U O O 4� nroo O 0 ro 0 ro n ca V 0 J N un O Ln _0 V >� dJ •• _ to E .. is N � N Q _0 ro C: z o U � 4�-+ 4-J — U O U Q Q Ln Ul nV // W U W W � V L/) 4-J ca E > O U C6 Ln Ln " 4-j ca O • E cn •L O Ln ateJ > O }' o Q � W W Ca O 0 00 � O ro U .. L Ln Q) ro a--j c0 • c� � L O U co a-J m a� +-i rl ro O `- Ln � —0 E ° O C M c6 N c6 0 — aro V O U a) D _0 O x L? E O x Lh - O �, 4- p C O O .. � .. — O ca aA C� " �C: Q O V) � a--+ DC W 4-1 Q) O -0 V O •� b N O C6 aj N uI N to O ate-+ " +., . — V N > O i f l'' � V U • c6 � — U C6 � Ln O ate-+ Ln E U U L >- Ln c6 L O Ln O NO " ui J Ca m