HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 03 24 Regular M Arbor Ordinance Review and Workshop Date
032403 Commission Meeting
Regular "M"
Arbor Ordinanee Review and Workshop Date
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM M
Consent
Informational
Public Hearing
Regular X
March 24, 2003
Meeting
Mgr. M Dept.
.
Authorization
REQUEST: The City Manager requesting the Commission to receive the Report and
Recommendations of the Arbor Ordinance Review Advisory Committee, and set a
Workshop date for review of the recommendations.
PURPOSE: This Agenda Item is needed for the Commission to accept the report provided by
the Arbor Ordinance Review Advisory Committee, and to set a workshop date to begin thorough
review of the report.
CONSIDERATIONS: On July 22, 2002 the City Commission approved the City Manager's
recommendations to create an Arbor Ordinance Review Advisory Committee to review the city's
current ordinance and to make recommendations.
The attached report represents the report of the Committee, and recommendations by the
Consultant. Additionally, staff will have some additional comments on the recommendations
that will be brought forward to the Commission in the workshop.
The report consists of the Committee's recommendations, and additional recommendations the
city's consultant believes the Commission needs to review. Additionally, staff desires to make
additional comments on the report.
The Commission needs to establish a workshop date to being reviewing the details of the various
recommendations and comments.
032403 Commission Meeting
Regular "M"
Arbor Ordinanee Review and Workshop Date
Page 2 Of2
FUNDING: Not Applicable.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that the Commission accept the report of the Arbor Ordinance Review
Advisory Committee, which will include a short presentation, and schedule a workshop for
further study.
ATTACHMENTS:
a) Committee and Consultant Report.
b) August 12, 2002 Agenda Item.
COMMISSION ACTION:
ATTACHMENT
"A"
COMMITTEE AND CONSULTANT
REPORT
qJvonne 9. gho~cheh
Environmental Consultant
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-08 -- TREE PROTECTION ORDINANCE
TREE ORDINANCE ADVISORY BOARD AND
YVONNE I. FROSCHER RECOMMENDATIONS
Yvonne 1. Froscher thanks the City of Winter Springs for the opportunity to assist with potential revisions
to Ordinance No, 2002-08 - Tree Protection Ordinance. The Advisory Board was comprised of a diverse
group of citizens whose attendance loyalty demonstrated their dedication to the review and
recommendation process. I would like to thank Advisory Board Members Marshall Allen, Gary Diller,
Carol Fottler, Darcy Meagher, Brian Oliver, Roger Owen, William Reischmann, and Byron Giltz for their
expressed opinions, focus, and educated compromise. Marilyn Crotty, as facilitator, certainly did her job
encouraging everyone to express their thoughts, encouraging consensus and resolution from differing
opinions, and keeping impeccable track of progress. Debbie Gillespie, Deputy City Clerk, as well as Ian
Talladino, Asstistant to the City Clerk, met the challenge of providing agenda, taping all of the meetings,
and producing minutes to reflect each meeting. Michael Mingea, City Forester, helped us understand
many of the "real life" applications issues related to a tree ordinance, Anthony Garganese, City Attorney,
assisted with our understanding of violations, fines, and due process, Other interested citizens and public
officials also participated during public comment periods. Thank you everyone for your participation,
Through the process we all listened, questioned, and deliberated. The result is the summarization of
constructive recommendations below.
TREE ORDINANCE ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
Advisory Board Recommendation 1: Accept Yvonne 1. Froscher's recommendation to expand the Intent
to include "removal of exotic trees" language. Exotic, pest trees result in adverse effects to Florida's
biodiversity and ecosystems; habitat loss; impacts to endangered species via habitat loss; socioeconomic
impacts (i.e. increased fires, lack of fires). Some species are prohibited by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, some are listed as noxious weeds by the Florida or United States Departments
of Agriculture.
Revision [Sec. 5-2(b)1:
(b) Intent. The intent of this Chapter is to encourage the protection ofthe maximum number of
Trees within the Primary Tree Protection Zone and of Large Specimen Trees within the
Secondary Tree Protection Zone. It is further the intent ofthis Chapter to encourage the
protection of Trees native to Central Florida and to encourage proper removal of exotic, pest
trees.
To this end....
Advisory Board Recommendation 2: Revise definition of "Land Clearing" to be less inclusive-presently
includes any removal of anything by any method anywhere.
Po. BOX 795305- WINTER SPRINGS FLORIDA 32719-5305- (407) 327-2020- FAX (407) 327-7778
2
Revision [Sec. 5-3(k)]:
(k) Land Clearing. Land clearing and grubbing shall include disturbance or removal of vegetation
using backhoes. bulldozers. root rakes. or similar mechanical means which may kill trees or
damage their roots. branches or trunks. Activities governed by a Tree Removal permit are not
included. Routine lawn mowing. sod replacement. planting of landscape materiaL shrub
pruning. and shrub removal shall not be defined as grubbing as long as no grade change occurs.
Advisory Board Recommendation 3: Accept Yvonne I. Froscher's recommendation to eliminate
Appendix C and to have only an Appendix B: Desirable Trees. The Advisory Board further recommended
that the native trees and palms (bold in Appendix B) be given more credit than landscape non-native trees
and palms (regular type in Appendix B).
Revision [Appendix B: Desirable Trees]
Attached
Consistency Revision [Sec. 5-3(m)]:
(m) Preferred Plants. Preferred Plants shall mean the plant materials listed in Appendix B: Desirable
Plants and shall be of the size(s) specified in the column labeled "Preferred Plant Size/Minimum
Height."
Advisory Board Recommendation 4: Revise definition (p) to ensure a fonnidable barrier.
Revision [Sec. 5-3(p)]:
(p) Protective Barrier. Shall be a polygon of 2" X 4" wide stakes spaced a maximum of eight (8) feet
from each other at the perimeter of the Tree Protection Zone and which extend out of the ground
at least thirty-six (36) inches, with the top four (4) inches marked with fluorescent orange paint
or tape,
Advisory Board Recommendation 5: Revise definition (s) to increase diameter of specimen tree size to
24" and to accept Yvonne I. Froscher's recommendation to exclude certain species that are not healthy
when they get older.
Revision [Sec. 5-3(s)]:
(s) Specimen Tree. A Tree, other than an undesirable tree, structurally unsound tree that cannot be
recovered by pruning, dead tree, or diseased tree, that is twenty-four (24) inches or more in
diameter. Specimen Trees shall not include laurel oak (Ouercus laurifoliat sand pine (Pinus
clausat or cherry laurel (Prunus carolinina).
Advisory Board Recommendation 6: Revise definition (w) to include palms which are not anatomically
trees.
Revision [Sec. 5-3(w)]:
(w) Tree, Self-supporting wood, perennial plants of species which have a trunk with a diameter of at
least four (4) inches measured at Cal iper and normally grow to an overall Crown height of a
minimum offifteen (15) feet. Cabbage {Jalms greater than fifteen (15) feet tall.
Advisory Board Recommendation 7: Silvicultural activities should be exempt.
3
Revision [add Sec. 5-4(b)(9)]:
(9) All trees planted specifically for silvicultural pUI:poses shall be exempt from the tenns and
provisions ofthe Chapter if: a) the property owner can document income representing harvest of
planted mature trees of typical harvestable size and type. or b) can document registration ofthe
site as a silvicultural site with the Division of Forestry.
Advisory Board Recommendation 8: No permit fee should be required for trees which are removed
because they are a safety hazard or because the tree is diseased or damaged. Necessity to remove a tree
should also include removal of Trees with severe structural defects.
Revision [Sec. 5-4(c)(1)):
(1) Necessity to remove Trees which pose a safety hazard to pedestrian or vehicular traffic or
threaten to cause disruption to public services and public easements through Encroachment. If
the Tree must be removed to eliminate the safety hazard or disruption of public services. no
pennit fee will be required.
Revision [Sec. 5-4 (c)(2)]:
(2) Necessity to remove Trees which pose a safety hazard to buildings and other improvements on a
lot or parcel of land, No permit fee will be required for removal of a tree posing a safety hazard
to buildin~s.
Revision [Sec. 5-4 (c)(3)]:
(3) Necessity to remove a) diseased Trees or b)Trees weakened by age, stonn, fire, or other injury or
Trees with severe structural defects that pose a safety hazard to people, buildings or other
improvements on a lot or parcel of land. No pennit fee will be required for removal of a diseased
Tree or Trees weakened by natural causes (age. fire. storm) which pose a safety hazard to people
or buildings.
Advisory Board Recommendation 9: The Forester is the person closest to the on-site activities to know
whether violations of a pennit are occurring or if a pennit has not been attained by the property owner.
Issuance of a temporary cease and desist until the City Manager can assess the violation will ensure that
serious violations can be stopped.
Revision [Sec. 5-5 (c)(5)):
(5) To issue cease and desist work orders upon the property owner in violations of this Chapter for a
period oftwo working days. Upon review ofthe violation by the City Manager or his designee,
the City Manager or his designee may extend the cease and desist work order until the project is
in compliance and all incurred fines have been paid.
Advisory Board Recommendation 10: The Forester should be on the Development Review Committee
(DRC) so that the Forester can have input regarding tree removal and planting during the site plan review
phase of a project. Amending the Land Development Code may be required to allow for the City Arborist
to be on the DRC.
Revision [Sec. 5-5 (c)(12)]:
(12) To serve as a member ofthe Development Review Committee,
4
Advisory Board Recommendation 11: The Forester should be responsible to educate City personnel
responsible for tree trimming, planting, and maintenance.
Revision [Add Sec. 5-5(c)(13)]:
(13)To educate City personnel responsible for tree removal. planting and establishment. pruning. and
maintenance.
Advisory Board Recommendation 12: "A scale of one (1) inch equals three hundred (300) feet or
greater" is likely incorrect, since as the scale increases, the drawing gets smaller. Also, one (1) inch
equals three hundred (300) feet is probably not an appropriate scale for assessing tree removal on most
development sites. Needs language so that sketch can be limited to the portion ofthe site to be developed;
such as a homeowner who may want to do improvements on a small portion of a large tract.
Revision [Sec. 5-6(a)(1)1:
(1) A Tree inventory. for the portion of the site to be developed. consisting of a) a scaled drawing (1)
inch equals fifty (50) feet or less for undeveloped land or b) a sketch approximatelv (1) inch
equals fifty (50) feet or less for developed single familv residential land less than one quarter acre
indicating:
Advisory Board Recommendation 13: Tree protection and removal on should be subject to review under
the DRC process.
Revision [Sec. 5-6(b)(1) and (2)]:
(1) All new subdivisions shall be required to submit an application for a Tree Removal or Land
Clearing permit, at the time of initial submittal of the subdivision plan, to the City Forester so
that due consideration may be given to protection of Trees during the subdivision design process.
Each application for a Tree Removal permit shall be subject to review under the Development
Review Committee process,
(2) Any commercial, industrial, multi-family or other use requiring a site plan approval under the
City land development regulations shall be required to submit an application for a Tree Removal
and Land Clearing permit at the time of site plan submittal so that due consideration may be
given to the protection of Trees during the site plan process. Each application for a Tree
Removal permit shall be subject to review under the Development Review Committee process.
Advisory Board Recommendation 14: Accept Yvonne T. Froscher's reconmlendation--for small existing
single family lot where a full canopy has been retained, restrictions should be lighter than for areas of new
development or on lots where canopy has not been retained.
Revision [Sec. 5-6(b)( 4)]:
(4) All existing single family dwelling units shall be required to submit an application for a
Tree Removal prior to removal of any tree. If the lot is less than one-quarter acre and if
greater than fifty percent canopy cover will remain within the pervious portion of the yard
(after the permitted removal). as determined by the City Arborist or his representative. a
permit for removal of a single tree will be granted for any tree with less than 24" at Caliper
one time only every 10 years per lot. If less than fifty percent (50%) canopy will remain. as
determined by the City Arborist or his designee. planting of Replacement Trees. Preferred
Trees. or a Tree Bank Contribution \\~1l be required as specified in Sec. 5-9. For any lot.
areas within conservation or drainage easements shall not be included in the remaining
pervious area. For lots greater than one-quarter acre. replacement as specified under 5-9
will be required.
5
Advisory Board Recommendation 15: Change the Specimen Tree size to be consistent with the newly
recommended size.
Revision [Sec. 5-8(a)]:
(a) .... Specimen Trees are all Trees (other than "Undesirable Trees" identified in Appendix A, dead
Trees or diseased trees) which are twenty-four (24) inches or more in ....
Advisory Board Recommendation 16: The Beautification Board of Winter Springs is perhaps the most
appropriate entity to designate historic trees in lieu of tree issues dominating City Council time.
Revision [Sec. 5-8(a)]:
(a) Designation. ....... .Determination that a Tree is a Historic Tree shall be made by resolution of
the City Commission, based on a recommendation of the Beautification Board of Winter Springs,
and the City Forester shall keep pemlanent record....
Advisory Board Recommendation 17: Make attaining a certificate of occupancy contingent on
replacement and decrease time in which replacement must occur to 30 days.
Revision [Sec. 5-9(a)]:
(a) .,. .or such other Trees properly approved by the City Forester. Replacement shan occur prior to
issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Replacement shall occur within thirty (30 days) of
removal or destruction unless a greater replacement period is provided for good cause bv permit.
Advisory Board Recommendation 18: City should retain jurisdiction over transplanted trees for one year
only rather than having "perpetual jurisdiction."
Revision [Sec. 5-9(b)(4)]:
(4) "., The City shall retain iurisdiction for one (1) year to ensure compliance with this Chapter.
Advisory Board Recommendation 19: City Commission can waive the Tree Bank Contribution for
economic hardship.
Revision [Sec. 5-9(b)(5)]:
(5) Waivers o/Replacement TreeM Specifications or Tree Bank Contributions. The number... .. .value
of the trees being replaced. The contribution to the Tree Bank mav be waived bv the City
Commission. if a homeowner can demonstrate that he will incur undue economic hardship as a
result of the payment.
Advisory Board Recommendation 20: Trees in wetlands should not provide tree replacement credits.
Revision [Sec. 5-9(b)(6)(B)]:
(B) For each tree located within a public conservation area (excluding wetlands as defined by the St.
Johns River Water Management District. or the U.S, Army Corps of Engineers, or as shown on
Map V-3:Existing Wetlands in the Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan) dedicated to the
City... .....
6
Advisory Board Recommendation 21: Sec. 5-9(e) should be 5-9(c)-typographical error in current
ordinance. Costs should be the responsibility of the property owner.
Revision [Sec. 5-9(c)]:
(c) Replacement Cost. The property owner shall be responsible for incurring the cost of replacing the
Trees.
Advisory Board Recommendation 22: In keeping with the expanded intent to encourage removal of
exotic, pest Trees, the Advisory Board has accepted Yvonne I. Froscher's recommendation to require
removal of those Trees where practical.
Revision [Sec. 5-9]:
Sec. 5-9. Tree Replacement and Undesirable Tree Removal Guidelines.
Revision [Sec. 5-9(d)]:
(d) Required Removal o{Undesirable Trees and Shrubs. The natural vegetative communities existing
within the city limits shall be protected by the control and elimination of invasive, nonnative
species.
(1) Planting of trees and shrubs listed on Appendix A, Undesirable Trees is prohibited.
(2) Removal of trees and shrubs listed on Appendix A, Undesirable Trees from commercial,
office, industrial, or multifamily sites (excluding wetlands) shall be completed, where
practical, as a requirement for approval of the final permit inspection and prior to issuance of
the certificate of occupancy.
(3) Control and elimination procedures shall in no way promote the proliferation ofthe species
through dispersal of seed or other vegetatively reproducing parts.
(4) Control and elimination procedures shall in no way harm or cause the decline of preserved
or planted trees and landscaping.
Advisory Board Recommendation 23: Reference Appendix D: Calculating Tree Protection Zone.
Re,ision [Sec. 5-10(a)]:
(a) ... ..within the Tree Protection Zone, as calculated according to Appendix D: Calculating Tree
Protection Zone, before or during construction. Before....,
Advisory Board Recommendation 24: Prohibit construction of walls, structures and pavement near trees
of adjacent property owners.
Revision [Sec. 5-10(j)]:
G) Walls. structures. and pavement shall not be placed in anv wav which will result in damage to
roots within the Tree Protection Zones of Trees on adiacent properties.
Advisory Board Recommendation 25: Provide definitions for shearing, hat racking, topping, poodle
trimming (lollipop), lions-tailing, pollarding.
7
Revision[Sec.5-10(i)):
(i) Shearing. Hat Racking. Topping. Poodle Trimming (Lollipop), Lions-tailing. Pollarding of Trees.
Inappropriate pruning techniques shall not be used on Trees intended for shade pur:poses.
Excessive shearing. pruning or shaping. shall only be allowed with a pemlit by demonstrating
necessity or without a pemlit in times of emergency only. Following are excessive pruning
techniques not allowed on shade Trees:
(1) Lions-tailing is the improper practice of removing most secondary and tertiary branches
from the interior portion orthe canopy leaving most live foliage at the edge of the
canopy.
(2) Toppin,? hatracking. stag heading. de-homing. lopping. and rounding over all refer to
the improper practice of reducing tree size by making heading cuts through a stem more
than 2 years old: a pruning practice that destroys tree architecture and serves to initiate
discoloration and perhaps decay in the cut stem,
(3) Pollarding is a pruning technique that removes sprouts back to the same location
annually or biannually maintaining a tree at a specified height.
(4) Shearing is typically accomplished with cuts made through wood less than one year old
at the sides of the canopy to create unifonn dense canopies.
(5) Poodle trimming combines shearing and removing lower limbs to create tree forms that
look like "lollipops."
Revision [Sec. 5-10U)):
(j) Shade Tree Pruning. Trees intended for shade purposes shall be allowed to reach their mature
canopy s\Jread and shall be pruned I) in accordance with the ANSI A 300 Part 1 Pruning
standard and ANSI 2133.1 safety standard. Pruning. should be done with defined pruning
obiectives and according to a specific pruning plan to accomplish the objectives including the
minimum and/or maximum branch size to be removed.
Advisory Board Recommendation 26: The permit should be posted on the permit posting board for
commercial developments and should be visible from the street for existing single family residences until
final inspection or a certificate of occupancy is issued,
Revision [Sec. 5-12(d)):
(d) Permit display. The permit shall be located and maintained upon the site at all times. For
commercial development the pennit shall be on the "posting board" with other permits, For
existing single family residences. the permit shall be displayed so as to be easily visible from the
street. The pennit shall be displayed until final inspection or until issuance of a certificate of
occupancy,
Advisory Board Recommendation 27: Adjust the minimum number of approved Trees - rework items A
through c,
Revision [Sec. 5-13(a) and (b) and (c)):
(a) Any new single-family or duplex dwelling unit on a lot of less than 6,000 square feet: not fewer
than two trees.
8
(b) Any new single-family or duplex dwelling unit on a lot equal to or greater than 6,000 square feet:
not fewer than 2 trees plus 1 additional tree for each 4,000 square feet over 6,000 square feet.
(c) Any commercial, industrial, multi-family or other structure requiring site plan approval under
the City land development regulations: not fewer than six (6) Trees or four (4) Trees per acre,
whichever is greater,
Advisory Board Recommendation 28: Add "petroleum products" to "Restrictions during Construction,"
Revision [Sec. 5-14(a)l:
(a) Restrictions During Construction. It shall be unlawful for any Person, during the construction of
any structures or other improvements, to place petroleum products. solvents, paint or ....
Advisory Board Recommendation 29: Signage should be included in addition to the protective barriers,
so that persons understand why the area is barricaded,
Yvonne I. Froscher Recommendation: This section should be congruent with Appendix C: Calculating
Tree Protection Zone and with the definition for Protective Barrier. This change is consistent with
Advisory Board Recommendation 4,.
Revision [Sec. 5-14(c)]:
(c) Protective Barriers and Sign age Required. Protective Barriers shall be installed (as determined
using Appendix C: Calculating Tree Protection Zone) around every Tree or group of Trees to be
preserved. Waterproof. rigid "Protection Zone Area" signs. as shown in Appendix D and not
smaller than 2' X 3'. shall be posted at 100' increments along the Protective Barriers.
Advisory Board Recommendation 30: The "owner" of a property should be responsible for ensuring that
the Ordinance is followed,
Revision [Sec. 5-14(d)]:
(d) Site Impections. The City Forester may conduct periodic inspections of the site. It is the
responsibility of the property owner to ensure that all provisions of tins Chapter are met.
Advisory Board Recommendation 31: Adjacent property owners should not have damage imposed onto
their trees by development activities.
Revision [Sec. 5-14(e)]:
(e) Tree Protection on Adiacent Prooerties. Design and construction of structures should protect the
Tree Protection Zone of Trees on adiacent properties.
Advisory Board Recommendation 32: Delete the last sentence of Section 5-15, since many residents
plant landscape material in the rights-of-ways knowing that it may be in jeopardy with road widenings,
utility installations, etc.
9
Revision [Sec. 5-15):
... ..under this Chapter. No tree or pl8:Rt shall be planted ',yitltin n City rigHts of way or casement withotlt
express permission from the City Forest.
Advisory Board Recommendation 33: The Board of Adjustment is perhaps the most appropriate entity to
grant waivers and oversee appeals in lieu of tree issues dominating City Council time,
Revision [Sec. 5-16(a) and (b)):
(a) Waivers. The Winter Springs Board of Adiustment may grant a waiver....
(b) Appeals. Any Person adversely affected by an administrative interpretation ofthis Chapter may
appeal that interpretation to the Winter Springs Board of Adiustment by filing a written notice of
appeal of said interpretation within thirty (30) days of said interpretation. Failure to file an
appeal within said time period shall result in the administrative interpretation to be declared
final. The Winter Springs Board of Adiustment shall decide said appeal within thirty (30) days
of the City's receipt of said notice of appeal and the Winter Springs Board of Adiustment's
decision shall be final.
Advisory Board Recommendation 34: Eliminate the last sentence in Section 5-l7(b) requiring
undesirable trees to be replaced with desirable trees.
Revision [Sec. 5-17(b)):
.... .before issuance of a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion. Undesirable Tr'Ces must be
replaced with a desirable species.
Advisory Board Recommendation 35: The Advisory Board requested guidance on who establishes the
penalties, who levies the penalties-Section 5-18 may require more clarification on process.
Revision [Sec. 5-18(c)):
The City Attorney can better address this reconunendation.
Other AdviSOr)' Board Recommendations:
1. The Land Development Code should refer to the Tree Protection Ordinance.
2. Provide for formats outside the ordinance (to allow flexibility) for public education which might
include 1) awareness of needing a permit for tree removal, 2) proper tree protection, and proper
tree planting, Possibilities for education might include the water bill, the City newsletter, City
sponsored tree planting workshops, and pamphlets to be handed out at inquiry or permit
application.
3. A landscape ordinance may more appropriately address proper installation of replacement
material.
4. Natural buffers within commercial, industrial, and multifamily sites were recommended by the
Advisory Board consistently and frequently during discussions. With rapid growth in the Town
Center vicinity and in certain other areas, residents felt an urgency to impose natural buffers
adjacent to property boundaries to screen intense land uses from existing or planned single family
development. The buffers would provide a visual screen and an opportunity for zones of tree
preservation. A landscape ordinance may more appropriately address a requirement of natural
buffers at the edges of properties abutting residential development.
10
APPENDIX D: TREE PROTECTION AREA SIGNAGE
TREE
PROTECTION
AREA
Machinery, Dumping, Construction,
Parking, or Storage of Any Materials is
PROHIBITED
By City of Winter Springs
Violators are subject
to municipal infraction citations of up to
$5000 per violation.
Enforced by the City Forester
or the City Manager
The sign shall be made of rigid material such as wood, metal, or durable plastic. Non-rigid materials such
as paper, cardboard, cellophane, or foil are not acceptable, The sign shall be two (2) feet wide by three (3)
feet long.
11
YVONNE I. FROSCHERRECOMMENDATIONS
Following are recommendations made by Yvonne 1. Froscher which were not assessed in detail by the
Advisory Board due to lack of time.
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 1: Definition (u) Topping could be deleted as it is included in the
section on excessive pruning. See Advisory Board Recommendation 25.
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 2: Definition (aa) Tree Replacement Credit should be revised to
concur with changes to Sec 5-9(5) below.
Revision [Sec. 5-3(aa)]:
(aa) Tree Replacement Credit. The Tree Replacement Credit shall be equal to two hundred fifty
dollars and no cents ($250.00) in Tree replacement value.
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 3: Correct typographical error
Revision [Sec. 5-6(d)]:
(d) ...... to be established....
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 4: Inclusion of several additional items ensures that information
provided for the City Forester's assessment is thorough and ensures that trees used for replacement credit
are identified and that a protection plan is provided for them. No objections to these recommendations
were voiced by the Advisory Board upon presentation.
Revision [Sec. 5-6(a)(1) and Sec. 5-6(a)(1)(B) and (F) and add (G), (H), (1), (J),(K) and Sec. 5-
6(a)(2)]:
(1) A Tree inventory. for the portion of the site to be developed. consisting of a) a scaled drawing (1)
inch equals fifty (50) feet or less for undeveloped land or b) a sketch approximatelv (1) inch
equals fifty (50) feet or less for developed single family residential land less than one quarter acre
indicating:
(B) Locations of all Trees. common or scientific names of Trees. and Caliper of Trees.
(F) The location of existing and proposed improvements, if any. including proposed
additions to existing buildings as well as existing and proposed buildings. structures.
other impervious surfaces. pool decks. pervious drives and parking areas. stormwater
retention areas. utilities. and other physical improvements.
(G) A replacement plan indicating the means of compensating for the loss of any tree(s) to
be removed including the species and size of any replacement tree( s).
(H) Locations oftrees preserved for replacement credit.
(1) If significant grade changes are proposed on the site. a grading plan drawn to scale must
be provided,
12
(1) A protection plan describing how preserved trees located on or adiacent to the subiect
property will be protected from any adverse effects of tree removaL construction. or
grade change.
(K) Aerial photograph showing boundaries of the propertY.
(2) Valid reason for removal of Trees
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 5: Minor changes are required due to changes in appendices,
Under the tree replacement guidelines a couple items were added to 1) ensure that smaller trees are used
under powerlines to minimize cost of maintenance and the need for extreme pruning, 2) ensure that
quality material is used for trees removed from the urban forest, 3) limit use of cabbage palms which are
being heavily harvested from natural systems (, 4) ensure that diversity remains in the urban forest, 5)
ensure that a contribution to the Tree Bank allows for not only the purchase of a new tree, but also allows
monetarily for the cost of establishment of the tree after installation. Table 1: Tree Replacement
Standards (referenced in Sec. 5-9(a)) is attached. No objections were voiced by the Advisory Board
regarding these recommended changes.
Revision (Sec. 5-9(a)]:
(a) Tree Replacement. All Tree that are removed or destroyed and subject to replacement by this
Chapter shall be replaced by a species of Tree cited in Appendix B, Desirable Trees or such other
Trees properly approve by the City Forester. Replacement trees, when required, shall be provided
based on the trunk diameter measured at Caliper of the trees being removed. See Table I: Tree
Replacement Standards.
Revision (Sec. 5-9(b)(2), (3), (5),(6), (6)(A) and add (7),(8),(9)]:
(2) Size of Replacement Trees. Size of Replacement Tree(s) shall be as specified in Appendix B.
Desirable Trees; or (2) as otherwise agreed upon by the City Commission and applicant.
Replacement trees to be planted in powerline easements shall not exceed mature height of 25'.
(3) Tree Species. Relocated or Replacement Trees shall include only species in Appendix B:
Desirable Trees under this ordinance.
(5) Waivers o{Rev/acement Tree(s) Specifications and Tree Bank Contributions, The number of
required Replacement Trees may be waived by the City Commission. if a) the Commission
detennines that the on site preserved trees are of sufficient number and quality to substantially
complv with the purpose and intent of this Chapter. b) the Commission determines tl\at due to
site conditions or configuration. it is impossible for the applicant/developer to meet the
requirements for Tree Replacement and c) a tree replacement fee is paid to the City's "Tree
Bank." which is hereby established. Monies collected in the Tree Bank shall be used for
enhancement and maintenance of trees on public lands. Substitute Replacement Tree(s) allowed
under this Waiver provision must have the approval of the City Commission. The amount to be
paid into the Tree Bank shall be $250 per Replacement Credit not satisfied by planting of Trees.
The amount paid into the Tree Bank as a Replacement Credit shall be updated by cost-of-living
increases biannually.
13
(6) Replacement A lternative, As an alternative to replacing one removed Tree with one Replacement
Tree, credits may be attained by two methods. Trees listed in Appendix A, Undesirable Trees
may not be counted for replacement credit. An applicant may elect to comply with the adjusted
Tree replacement guidelines based on credits allowed:
(A) For any new commercial, industrial, or multi-family construction, preserving existing trees
will allow credits which may be applied for required Replacement Trees, Credits will be
awarded according to Table 2: Replacement Credit and will apply anywhere on the
development site, excluding wetlands, utility and drainage easements, and existing
conservation easements. The applicant shall be responsible for protection of preserved trees
according to Sec. 5-14.
TABLE 2: REPLACEMENT CREDIT
1:IIJl.l.lft:II.11~11;111I1::::lllr~U!I~III~111111111i"I~1!:I:!illll:li
4" u to but not includin 8" 1
9" u to but not includin 12" 2
12" u to but not includin 16" 3
16" u to but not includin 20" 4
> 20 Must be reserved
(7) Duality ofReolacement Trees. Planted Replacement Trees shall be Florida Number 1 Grade or
better.
(8) Requirement for Diversitv. If replacement trees are required. not more than twenty percent (20%)
shall be of a single species.
(9) Requirement for Diversitv, If replacement trees are required. not more than twenty percent (20%)
shall be of a single species.
Yvonne 1. Froscher Recommendation 6: Revise "replacement fonnula" section to be consistent with the
newly reconunended Appendix B: Desirable Trees and provide some incentive to preserve what is stated
will be preserved on an approved site plan.
Revision [Sec. 5-17(b)):
(a) Violations Require Remedial Action. Where violations of this Chapter have occurred, remedial
action shall be taken to restore the property consistent with a restoration plan approved by the
City Forester. The restoration plan may require Tree wplaceBlem at not more than a ratio offour
to OHe (4: 1) and require mitigation of any other damage to the property, as well as remediation
action.
(b) Remediation Requirements. Each Tree Destroyed or receiving maior damage during construction
must be replaced or compensated for by I) planting a comparable size Tree Native to Central
Florida. or 2) planting four (4) Preferred Plants Native to Central Florida. or 3) providing a
contribution to the Winter Springs Tree Bank eaual to one and one half (1.5) times the
contribution shown on Table I: Tree Replacement Standards.
14
Yvonne J. Froscher Recommendation 7: Most everyone on the Advisory Board expressed that penalties
for violations needed to be large enough to be a significant deterrent. The following changes are being
proposed although other input from the City Attorney may be appropriate regarding penalties.
Revision [Sec. 5-18(b)(2) and add (4)]:
(2) Each inch in caliper of each Tree removed without a permit as required by this
ordinance. . ,Fine not to exceed $200 per inch,
(4) Each day in which trees are not properly installed or properly maintained on site as
required by this ordinance.. .Fine not to exceed $5.000.00 per day.
Yvonne J. Froscher Recommendation 7: Change Appendix A: Undesirable Trees to include only tree
species and only those species occurring in Central Florida.
Yvonne J. Froscher Recommendation 8: Change Appendix D: Calculating Tree Protection Zone to
Appendix C: Calculating Tree Protection Zone, since Appendix C: Preferred Plant List is deleted. A new
Appendix D: Tree Protection Area Signage has been added.
,"
ATTACHMENT
"B "
AUGUST 12, 2002
COMMISSION MEETING
REGULAR AGENDA ITEM "F"
081202 Regular F Arbor Committee Appointments.doc
COMMISSION AGEN'DA
ITEM F
Consent
Informational
Public Hearing
Regular X
August 12, 2002
Meeting
/'
, 1----.....
Mgr. J / Deot.
Authorization
REQUEST: City Manager requesting the Mayor and City Commission to appoint
members to the Arbor Ordinance Review Committee.
PURPOSE: This agenda item is needed to appoint members of the Arbor Ordinance Review
Committee.
CONSIDERATIONS:
(i
On July 22, 2002 the City Commission approved the City Manager's recommendation to create a
Tree (Arbor) Ordinance Study Committee to determine if recommendations can be identified that
would improve the ordinance.
The Mayor and Commission need to appoint members. The resolution calls for a seven-person
committee with one member appointed by the Mayor and Commission and one appointed
collectively. The resolution also call for the members to be as follows:
1. Persons with interest or background in environmental sciences.
2. Persons with interest or experience in real estate development in Winter Springs.
3. Persons with experience in law and judicial process.
The following persons have submitted applications for consideration to,the Arbor Ordinance
Review Committee.
Ib~tyl IV o("va~
Beth Hollenbeck
Carol Fottler {./
James Pappas
Craig Smith
Darcy Meagher V
Gary Diller~
. t1 ((...,Vv
( FUNDING: No Funding Required
(
(
\
072202 Regular L Arbor Ordinanee Committee
RECOMMENDA TION:
It is recommended the Mayor and Commission appoint one member each, and one member
collectively to the Arbor Ordinance Review Committee.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2002-24
COMMISSION ACTION:
RESOLUTION 2002-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISISON OF THE
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TREE (ARBOR)
ORDINANCE REVIEW ADVISORY COMMITTEE,
SETTING OUT RESPONSIBILITIES, AND REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS THEREOF.
WHEREAS, on March 22, 1999 the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs,
Florida adopted Ordinance No. 711 amending Ordinance No. 451 adopted March 27, 1987
known as the "Arbor Ordinance", and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2002 the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs,
Florida adopted Ordinance No. 2002-08 amending Ordinance No. 711 for the purpose of making
the ordinance more defensible and more effective in proteCting' the urban fOrest of the city, arid
WHEREAS, there has been an expression of concern among certain members of the
public, and that the revised ordinance reduced limitations on developers while increasing
limitations on residents, and
(
WHEREAS, the Winter Springs City Commission desires to provide an open, objective,
and deliberative process to provide ample opportunity for the public to participate in the Tree
(Arbor) Ordinance to determine if improvements can be made thereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Commission of the City of Winter
. Springs establish a Tree (Arbor) Ordinance Review Advisory Committee
Section I. Committee: There is hereby established the City of Winter Springs Tree (Arbor)
ordinance Review Advisory Committee, which shall be an ad-hoc committee composed of seven
members, appointed one each by the Mayor and city Commission, and one by the combined vote .
of the Mayor and Commission.. The members shall serve for the duration of the Committee as
provided herein, and be responsible for carrying out the responsibilities a defined herein.
The Committee shall be made up of persons with an interest or background in environmental
sciences, interest or background in urban forest management, persons with interest or
background in development in Winter Springs, persons with experience in law and judicial
process.
Section II. Committee Responsibilities: The Committee shall have the responsibility for
working with the technical resource team, and the legal resource team in reviewing the City's
existing Ordinance and providing recommendations to the City Commission for improving the
( existing ordinance in order to be consistent.
.~ ~,1
Resolution 2002-24
Section III. All meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public as provided by Florida
Law.
Section IV. Environmental Resource Team: There is hereby established an environmental
resource Team which shall be made up of three highly competent professional members whose
area of expertise and experience include. expertise in environmental sciences and/or
administration of ordinances the purpose of which is to manage urban forest resources
Section V. Legal Resource Team Responsibility: the responsibility of the Legal Resource.
Team shall be 'to review the current Ordinance, to review public input, to assist the Citizens
Advisory Committee in analysis of public input and fornmlating recommendations to the current
ordinance and preparing recommendations for the Committee's final report to the Commission
Section VI. Project Coordinator: the City Commission shall contract with the Institute of
government at the University of Central Florida. to coordinate the Tree (Arbor) Ordinance
process on behalf of the City of Winter Springs.
(
Section VII. Duration of Project: The Tree (Arbor) Ordinance Review Committee shall
present its final report and recommendations to the City Commission no later than the first
meeting in October 2002.
Section VIII. Facilitator Meeting Style: The Committee shall employ a facilitator style.
meeting led by a preferred facilitator appointed by the city.
1
. Section IX. Consensus Decision-Making Style. Decision of the Committee shall be reached
by consensus. The goal of the facilitator shall be to facilitate 100% consensus. However, in the
, event a unanimous consensus cannot be reached a consensus of the majority shall prevaiL
Members of the Committee who share views different from those reached by the majority are
welcomed to file written minority position reports.
Section X. Legal Exclusivity. Aithoughthe Committee is encouraged to question and comment
on legal control of the ordinance, final recommendations regarding the legal advisability of
recommendations and the legal content of a revised ordinance shall be exclusively the preview of
the city attorney.
(
- - ~_..-
Resolution 2002-24
Section XI. The project shall be organized as follows:
Organizational Chart
(
Public
Mayor
Commission
Project Liaisons
Ci ty Manager
Project
Coordinator
Technical Legal Legal
Resource Advisory Resource
Committee Committee Team
(
Resolution 2002-24
Section XII. Process: The Ordinance review process shall be as follows:
( ,
I. Adoption of Resolution
2. Agreement with CFU
3. Agreement with Yvonne 1. Froscher
4. Appointment of Citizen Committee
5. Session I - Full Project Team/Public Meeting
a. Project Team Meeting - Orientation
1) Introductions
2) Overview - Resolution 2002-24
3} Schedule Changes
b. Pubic Meetings
1) Introductions
2) Overview - Resolution 2002-24
3) Call for Position Papers
4) Public Comment
c. Project Team Debriefing
6. Session 2 - Full Project Team - Legal Review
a. Project Team Members
1) Overview of Leg~l Requirements
2) Overview of current Ordinance and Legal Content
b. Public Meeting
1) Overview of Legal Review
2) Pubic Input
c. Project Team Debriefing
7. Session 3 - Project Team - Environmental Review
a. Project Team Meeting
(
I
1) Overview of Urban Forest Management
2) Overview of Current Ordinance
3) Strengths of Current Ordinance
4) , Weakness of Current Ordinance
Resolution 2002-24
b. Public Meeting
1) Overview of Current Ordinance]
2) Public Input
8. Session 4 - Project Team - Opportunities for Improvement
a. ProjeCt Team Meeting
1) Opportunities for Environmental Improvements
2) Opportunities for AdministrativeIProcedural Improvements
b. Public Meeting
1) Overview of Opportunities for Improvement
2) Public Input
c. Debriefing
9. Session 5 - Project Team - Recommendations
(
a. Project Team Meeting
1) Discussion of Alternatives for Improvement Draft
2) Consensus on Recommendations
b. Public Meeting
1) Overview of Recommendations
2) Public Input
c. Debriefing
10. Session 6 - Project Team - Review Final Draft
a. Project Team
I) Discussion of Final Draft
2) Consensus on Final Draft
3) Consensus on Minority reports If Required
b. Public Input
I) Overview of Recommendations
2) Overview of Minority report If Required
c. Debriefing
Resolution 2002-24
( "
II. Session 7 - Project Team/Public Meeting
a. Presentation of Final Report to Mayor and Commission
b. Pubic Input
c. Commission Direction to Staff
ADOPTED and approved , 2002 by.the City Commission of the City of
Winter Springs, Florida, duly assembled in Winter' Springs, Seminole County, Florida.
Paul P. Partyka, Mayor
ATTEST:
Andrea Lorenzo-Luaces, City Clerk
Resolution 2002-24