By Chris Caesar
Newport Beach resident Connie Hollstein is just in love with her synthetic lawn.
It keeps her water and gardening bills low, allergies at bay, and home
— once occasionally marred by her dogs' muddy paws — conspicuously
clean.
"It looks nice — people walk by and don't even know its artificial
grass," she said, adding neighborhood kids often knock on her door for
permission to play on the lawn.
Considering the significant amounts of water typically consumed by a
square foot of conventional grass — about four feet annually — it's no
wonder the synthetic turf has become a cherished lawn ornament of
conservationists. Indeed, the Municipal Water District of Orange
County even offers a 30 cent per square foot refund to encourage
property owners to install the product.
But while modern synthetic turf has come a long way since the
Astroturf of the 1960s, the laws governing its installation have not.
Unlike Newport Beach, Costa Mesa prohibits the product in most of the
city's development zones, including single-family residences like
Hollstein's.
"[Costa Mesa has] an ordinance which dates back 16 years, when
'synthetic turf' still meant Astroturf and cheesy plastic plants,"
said Costa Mesa Principal Planner Willa Bouwens-Killeen. "It's
actually come a long way, so we were hoping City Council can come up
with something to give us better direction."
City staff cautiously suggested the Costa Mesa City Council reconsider
its ban on the product, saying the models could save the city water
and money, but could also deteriorate if neglected. Following a
preliminary discussion of the proposal at a study session last week,
some members seemed hesitant about changing some aspects of the city's
regulations.
"These days, everyone's looking at every alternative to conserve
water, though at the same time we want to keep our city looking nice,"
said Councilman Allan Mansoor. "I think it's important to keep all
options on the table — I've seen some places where that looks good in
front of homes, and if it's done right, I think that a homeowner
should have the right to do it."
"I don't see a problem in giving property owners the right, where it
makes sense," said Councilwoman Wendy Leece. "But I don't think Costa
Mesa is going to go for pulling out live grass and trees, and putting
in fake grass for the sake [of] efficiency."
While local experts said they saw some benefit to easing restrictions
on synthetic turf, they characterized the potential environmental
benefits as, at best, a mixed bag. While run-off is lessened and water
conserved, the product is developed with plastic — a petroleum-based
product — and is an inorganic addition to local ecosystems that may
rely on it.
"Intuitively, my reaction would be is that it's not obvious that it's
a really good thing for the environment, and it's not obvious it's a
bad thing," said Michael Goulden, a UCI professor specializing in
ecological cycles. "It has to beat mowing the lawn, though."
"There are a few trade-offs," said David Feldman, a UCI professor of
social ecology. "In Orange County, we use a tremendous amount of
water, and any extent to which you can save water is a huge benefit.
Most artificial turfs are using recycled plastics, too, so you're not
generating all of the bad side effects you typically do when creating
plastic from scratch. On the whole, I won't say it's a perfect
benefit, but it's a pretty fair trade-off."
City staff will likely schedule the issue for a council meeting
sometime in the next few weeks, Mansoor said.