HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 03 25 Other - Document was Given to City Clerk with Public Input Form
Date: 032502
The following Document was handed into the
City Clerk on 3/25/02 with a number of Public
Input Forms.
City of Winter Springs - Meeting 3-25-02
Re: Ordinance # 2002-08
'WHEREAS, The City Commission is committed to preserving and enhancing green acres of
the City and by assuring the preservation of existing trees on public and private property and
taking steps to require maintenance of existing and installation of new trees in the City, and...."
(page 1 of 18)
As proud as I am to be part of this community and pleased when I travel about I am also
distressed at the purposeful diminishing of our current canopy.
Sec. 5-9. (b) (5) states "The number of required Replacement trees may be waived by the City
Commission" - I do not feel that this is in accordance with the commitment to preserve and
enhance our City and assures the preservation of existing trees - I strongly feel decisions
regarding the waiving of this requirement should fall within the realm of the City Arborists job.
Sec. 5-9. (6)
"one for one tree replacement" supplies a loop hole for developers to bypass the "inch for
inch" required stated in the following section of the ordinance.
In terms of the proposed Ordinance #2002-08 - .. .are required to replace trees "inch for
inch" Sec. 5-9. (b) (2).
(6) (C) - "For each tree located within a public conservation area..." I sincerely hope that this
unnamed area is the City of Winter Springs - not an unnamed area. I also do not agree with
another developers' loop hole of "10 replacement tree credits may be applied to each one (1) tree
replacement requirement for development"
In keeping with the good faith intentions of being a "Tree City" and the statement made
about preserving the existing canopy - again we address the loss of the current canopy to
construction - This will cost us - this current practice is costing us.. . let me take you back some
years to when the ranchlands and the streets oft of Hayes Rd were developed - this homes were
built among the trees - I can name oft several areas such as these - in Oviedo, A1tamonte Springs
The Springs in Longwood - even some of the apartment complexes were developed under the
canopy - And the canopy exists today - yes there were some casualties, however, the bulk of the
canopy remains - the benefits of having that canopy remain - now let me bring you to the future of
our human race - trees create oxygen - they help clean the air of pollutants - and those
irresponsible individuals or corporations or municipalities who continue on the track of
"development", razing the current forests - will contribute to global warming, air pollution and lack
of sustainable watersheds!
How is it that developers of recent history (on 434, across from 'Winding Hollow" and up
the road have been able to clear cut the entire forest in order to develop? I have heard the term
"Developer's Agreement" - What exactly is a "Developer's Agreement" - does it benefit the
canopy? Does it benefit the future homeowners? Does it benefit the production of oxygen or the
cleansing of water or promotion of water or does it take away from these benefits? What exactly
is a "Developer's Agreement"?
Yes, we cut trees for a living - however - it is more important to us and in out best
interests as far as our industry to take care of the current canopy and develop a safer canopy for
the future than it is for us to cut it all down!