|
Montebello Condominium Unit Owners Association |
|
Advisory committee on Landscape Design and Management |
|
Committee Meeting |
|
1. Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Members introduced themselves. Members present: 5
Members absent: 2
Board Liaison: Present
Guests: 3
2. The Chair welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Landscape Management Design. Given the long name of the group, we agreed to use the name “Landscape Design” to refer to the group. Goals to be accomplished in the first meeting included: reviewing the Terms of Reference, (TOR), agreeing on basic rules of operation for the committee, bringing everyone up to speed on the work already completed, and initiating some substantive work on committee tasks
3. Each member brings something important to the committee: an understanding of the sciences involved, concern for health issues, and interest in an open and transparent process. Our process should inspire confidence in our results and recommendations. At the end of our work, we want the way we’ve operated to provide the community a sense that we’ve done it the right way.
Review of Terms of Reference (TOR)
4. Our BOD liaison, a member of the 2001-2 Lawn Care Ad Hoc Group, gave a brief history of the work done on lawn care over the last four years. The 2001 group concluded that, without more technical expertise than they had been able to gather at that time, it would make sense to define a test area to see what would happen if pesticides and herbicides were not applied. The test area was compromised in the spring of 2005. Shortly thereafter, both the Landscape Working Group and the Operations Committee agreed that they did not have the technical expertise to grapple with the issues involved. They recommended that a committee be formed to address the issue. It was also recommended that the community would benefit from outside expertise—a component that had not been part of the first ad hoc group’s study. The BOD viewed this as an opportunity to get some outside input to move toward the goal of becoming herbicide and pesticide free. The BOD further agreed that a variety of consultants’ opinions would provide more information and different opinions to consider, which, in turn, could lead to recommendations of a more serious, substantive nature.
5. It was also recognized that Montebello could learn from other communities that had been identified as herbicide-/pesticide-free. We want to record their experiences so we are not dealing with anecdotal, unsubstantiated information.
6. The broad task for our committee, then, is to gather information from other communities and consultants, and propose a direction for Montebello that will lead to the reduced use of herbicides and pesticides. There are several considerations and objectives involved. For example, we will need to control costs, including capital investments if we change the landscape—what will be the costs for one-time changes? What are the on-going cost implications of landscape maintenance? What specific steps do we take to reduce the use of herbicides/pesticides? What will be the aesthetic result given the need to retain/improve curb appeal? How do health considerations feed into the recommendations? By Spring 2006, the goal is that the BOD, with our advice, will select a design consultant who will: (i) give design and maintenance recommendations to reduce the use of herbicides/pesticides, which can be presented to the community, (ii) revise the recommendations as needed based on community feedback, and (iii) return to the BOD with a final recommendation by our sunset date of June 30, 2006. Whatever those final recommendations are, they will help define the specifications for Montebello’s landscape maintenance contract to be awarded in 2007. They will also be important if we are to incorporate additional landscape costs in the 2007 budget.
7. Current thinking suggests that we will be able to hire at least three consultants, each of whom would walk the property, provide a report of their findings and recommendations, and possible do some follow-up work with our committee. (Committee members may want to walk the property with the consultants for discussion/interview purposes.) To use the $5,000 allocated by the BOD for this project, the work must be completed by December 31, 2005. It was noted that one or more of the consultants might offer to do the work at no charge. The committee will need to decide the importance of cost in making consultant selections. An additional $10,000 has been allocated from the 2006 budget for landscape design purposes.
8. Members discussed the need to focus on the reduction of chemicals as our guiding principle. The title of the committee and wide-ranging discussions (such as which plants might be planted where) could easily lead us astray, so we will need to be sure the idea of being chemical-free is always paramount in our deliberations.
9. The committee discussed the pros and cons of having a consultant who is comfortable working with residents, given the concern for science, aesthetics, and health issues. Town meetings may be a component of the process. We anticipate that the design consultant would work with this committee and with our landscape contractor.
10. The committee agreed that we might prepare a brief description to send to potential consultants that will include what is required, our schedule, and selection criteria. This document would set out the requirement to pursue a pesticide-/herbicide-free environment, a description of the multiple uses of our property, and a request for demonstrated knowledge of, and experience with, Integrated Pest Management (IPM), among other things. The consultant will be responsible to this committee until our recommendations are made to the BOD. Our BOD liaison will find out how the committee should go about obtaining consultant bids and making its selections, specifically to ensure that we do not interfere with Management or BOD functions/processes
11. Reference was made to the question about “maintaining the integrity of the total lawn area.” The words “pesticide-free” and “herbicide-free” would seem to dictate future actions. For example, some plants, such as clover, would be tolerated as part of the lawn turf as opposed to trying to maintain 100% grass turf.
12. The committee noted that the TOR included reference to forested areas, as well as the gardens and turf. With cost as a major consideration, the committee will need to decide how much emphasis should be placed on each of these categories if we are to maximize our opportunity to reduce chemical use on the total property.
13. It was also suggested that it is important for us to understand what and how much of various chemicals are currently used on the property, so that we can measure a reduction with whatever proposal we recommend. For example: how many pounds or gallons of spray are we using in an herbicide application today? How much money of our contract is spent on the purchase of chemicals? We will ask Management to help identify current practices and useful data along these lines. A member suggested that we might be able to compare ourselves to single unit homeowners. She will help with calculations needed to understand our use of chemicals.
14. The Chair agreed to write a first draft of the one-page document that could go to consultants to set out requirements and obtain bids (#10, above). It will be reviewed at the next meeting.
|
|
We agreed to use the name “Landscape Design” to refer to the group. |
November 3, 2005 |
