Artificial turf grows support

CITY HALL — The era of fake front lawns in Glendale was put off for a while longer Tuesday after the City Council, citing concerns over wear-and-tear and aesthetics, voted to relegate artificial turf to backyards and other out-of-sight areas as part of an overall measure to start cutting down on irrigation.

With an eye to severe cutbacks in state water imports this summer, City Council members adopted revised regulations that would allow up to 49% of front yard landscaping to consist of non-live plant material, such as decorative rocks, mulch and bark. Previously, regulations required street setback areas, such as front and side yards, be fully landscaped in single-family residential zones.

City planners recommended the change as part of an effort to cut down on irrigation, a main source of water usage citywide, and meet stricter state landscape efficiency standards.

Artificial turf, which is currently allowed in backyards and other private areas not visible to the public, had been reviewed for inclusion in the new rules, but city planners were “seriously talked out of it” by an advisory committee, Planning Director Hassan Haghani said.

The Planning Commission also expressed concerns over the aesthetics of faux-grass, its maintenance requirements and potential environmental impacts.

Rounding up myriad possible products and vendors into a codified set of enforceable regulations would also have proven difficult, Haghani said.

“It’s not completely off of the picture — we know that we will eventually deal with [artificial turf] in our code,” Haghani told the council. “It’s just not there with the industry at this point.”

The concept of fake lawns proliferating Glendale neighborhoods got a tepid response from most City Council members, who directed city planners to study the issue further.

But at least one was ready to make the leap.

Councilman Ara Najarian, citing warnings of mandatory water conservation in the summer and lack of any dangerous trends shown on the sports fields, said he was “disappointed” the artificial turf provision for frontyards didn’t make the cut.

“I think this is a good ordinance, but I really think we need to take a look at the [artificial turf],” he said.