An Investigation into What Planning Departments and Water Authorities Can Learn from Eleven Communities' Waterwise Landscaping Ordinances

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorAnderson, Kristin M.
dc.date.accessioned2004-06-28T23:01:16Z
dc.date.available2004-06-28T23:01:16Z
dc.date.issued2004-06-28T23:01:16Z
dc.description.abstractIn the United States we are using billions of gallons more water every day than is replenished by the hydrological cycle. Because water applied to landscaping is often the single largest use of the water supplied by most water utilities in areas requiring landscape irrigation, planners and water authorities are adopting ordinances that reduce the amount of water required by landscaping. This report focuses on ordinances which require or encourage the use of waterwise plants and/or that limit the area of lawns or offer incentives for reducing lawn area. I analyzed eleven ordinances from eight states (Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Washington) and interviewed twelve planners and eight landscape architects from ten of these communities. This report provides information on the many options available in waterwise landscaping ordinances, how various ordinance elements are enforced in real life, the advantages and disadvantages of various elements, and landscape architects’ and planners’ views and recommendations. In addition to my analysis and recommendations, the report includes a literature review that is a primer on water shortage issues, the relationship between landscapes and water consumption, and the theory of waterwise landscaping ordinances; a matrix comparing the eleven ordinances and community factors (such as evapotranspiration and cost of water); and a compendium of 25 waterwise landscaping ordinance elements.en
dc.format.extent576732 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1794/179
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.subjectLandscapingen
dc.subjectOrdinances, Municipalen
dc.subjectPlanningen
dc.subjectWaterwise gardeningen
dc.subjectWater shortageen
dc.subjectDroughtsen
dc.subjectPlanning departmentsen
dc.subjectLandscape gardening -- Water conservationen
dc.subjectWater useen
dc.subjectPlantsen
dc.subjectVegetationen
dc.subjectXeriscapingen
dc.subjectLawnsen
dc.subjectTurf managementen
dc.subjectPlannersen
dc.subjectLandscape architectsen
dc.subjectGrassen
dc.subjectWater harvestingen
dc.subjectIrrigationen
dc.subjectReclaimed wateren
dc.subjectSoilsen
dc.subjectMulchingen
dc.subjectSlopes (Physical geography)en
dc.subjectIncentives in conservation of natural resourcesen
dc.subjectArizonaen
dc.subjectGilbert (AZ)en
dc.subjectGlendale (AZ)en
dc.subjectCaliforniaen
dc.subjectSanta Rosa (Ca.)en
dc.subjectNevadaen
dc.subjectLas Vegas (Nev.)en
dc.subjectReno (Nev.)en
dc.subjectNew Mexicoen
dc.subjectAlbuquerque (NM)en
dc.subjectSanta Fe (NM)en
dc.subjectNorth Carolinaen
dc.subjectGreensboro (NC)en
dc.subjectOregonen
dc.subjectWhite City (Or.)en
dc.subjectTexasen
dc.subjectLeander (Tex.)en
dc.subjectWashington (State)en
dc.subjectPierce County (Wash.)en
dc.subjectEvapotranspirationen
dc.subjectPrecipitation (Meteorology)en
dc.subjectSubsidences (Earth movements)en
dc.subjectGroundwateren
dc.subjectPrice of wateren
dc.subjectCost of wateren
dc.subjectLaw enforcementen
dc.subjectInspectionen
dc.subjectAestheticsen
dc.subjectConservationen
dc.subjectDrought-tolerant plantsen
dc.titleAn Investigation into What Planning Departments and Water Authorities Can Learn from Eleven Communities' Waterwise Landscaping Ordinancesen
dc.typeThesisen

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Anderson_final_project_2004.pdf
Size:
563.21 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.23 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Planning, Public Policy and Management Capstone and Terminal Projects