CITY OF SARASOTA MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE June 13, 2018 at 3:00 p.m. in to City Commission Chambers Members Present: Shawn Dressler, Chair Michael Halflants, Vice Chair (arrived 3:12p p.m.) Members Mary Fuerst, Chris Gallagher, Michael Gilkey, Jr., Rob Patten, Trevor Falk (arrived at 3:47 p.m.) Members Absent: All members were present. City Staff Present: Timothy Litchet, Director of Development Services and Secretary to the Tree Advisory Committee Joe Mladinich, Legal Counsel Mark Miller, Senior Arborist Don Ullom, Arborist Angela McLeod-Wilkins, Development Services I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL TAC Chair Dressler called the meeting to order at 3:05 p. m. Secretary Litchet read the roll call. TAC Chair Dressler reminded everyone to speak into the microphones for clear audio recordings. II. PLEDGE OF CONDUCT Secretary Litchet read the Pledge of Conduct adopted by the City Commission of Sarasota. III. CITIZEN's INPUT 1. Lou Costa - Mr. Costa approached the TAC: regarding the 50% native tree requirement. Mr. Costa stated that he would like to see a change to the tree ordinance that would emphasize the right tree in the right location rather than keeping with the 50% native tree rule. 2. Joe Russo - Mr. Russo stated that he is a developer in the City of Sarasota and that it is a challenge to cooperate with the tree ordinance and give home owners the trees they prefer. Mr. Russo stated that the majority of his clients prefer palm trees and noted that he will be giving a presentation at the next Tree Advisory Committee meeting to address the placement of trees on lots. Mr. Russo expressed his opinion that owners should determine the types of trees on their property rather than the code dictating the type of tree. Mr. Russo suggested that there be a change to the tree ordinance that allows City staff to approve different trees for different locations. Mr. Russo also stated that the size of code compliant trees has increased making them difficult to obtain and expensive. Minutes of the' Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 2 of 13 Chair Dressler stated for the record that Vice Chair Halflants had arrived. Secretary Litchet stated that Joe Mladinich, the legal counsel for the TAC, was present at the meeting and would be attending the majority of future Tree Advisory Committee meetings. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MAY 23RD MEETING MINUTES There was a motion by Vice Chair Halflants, seconded by Member Fuerst to approve the May 23rd meeting minutes. All were in favor. None were opposed. V. COMMITTEE TOPIC - DISCUSSION RELATED TO PHASING OF RECOMMENDATIONS Chair Dressler suggested that as the committee members are framing recommendations, they should specify whether they are interim recommendations to make the current code more operable versus recommendations that are aimed at implementing an urban forestry plan. Member Fuerst stated that she would like to see the whole code reworked and agreed with Member Patten's email related to the responsibility of the TAC to: fix current problems with the tree ordinance and make possible recommendations in favor of an urban forestry plan in the future. Member Gilkey asked whether the TAC will provide recommendations to city staff for updates and changes and then they will be given back to the Committee for approval or if the Tree Advisory Committee will be writing the additions and updates? Chair Dressler suggested that the TACbe as specific as possible when giving recommendations: and stated that the TAC should give both detailed and conceptual recommendations to city staff. Chair Dressler stated that he thinks either type of recommendation is valid and the TAC needs to make sure that in either case they are very clear. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that the TACassemble a plan of action and getf feedback from city staff. Vice Chair Halflants considered that the TAC would extend beyond editing the existing ordinance. Chair Dressler stated that he had a similar thought to Vice Chair Halflants, but with a different conclusion. As an example, Chair Dressler presented the idea that there should be different barriers to tree removal within an existing single-family residential property. Chair Dressler then suggested adding a section to the existing ordinance to support such changes, specifically to single family lots. Chair Dressler suggested an addition to such added section as a supplement that would note possible future changes that may need to occur if an urban forestry program is implemented. Chair Dressler stated that the TAC should be able to give the City Commission guidance as to how the current ordinance would be impacted. Vice Chair Halflants considered adding sections to the ordinance and providing guidance about future urban forestry design to be tied together. Vice Chair Halflants presented the example of paying into the tree mitigation fund and using that fund for something substantial in the future. Chair Dressler agreed. Minutes of the' Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 3 of 13 Member Patten stated that one of the approaches will take more time than the other. Member Patten stated that city staff] has outlined 7 of the most problematic portions of the existing ordinance for which the Tree Advisory Committee should develop recommendations. Member Patten recalled Chair Dressler's example of adding sections to the current tree ordinance and his recommendations regarding the urban forestry plan and noted that the committee has a limited timeline and may not be able to tackle everything. Member Patten suggested developing recommendations that guide city staffin the direction of an urban forestry program and encourage viewing different types of lots categorically, while attempting to remedy the assigned issues 1 thru 7. Member Patten stated that the TAC should be very specific in some cases, though he noted that he does not think that the current timetable would personally allow for him to rewrite the code the way he would like it to be written. Rather, Mr. Patten suggested giving all recommendations to city staff for review and meeting after the review to explain to the TAC how recommendations can be administered. Member Patten then commented that he prefers flexibility regarding removal ofhealthy trees on privately-owned property. Mr. Mladinich suggested that he begin to incorporate changes to the tree ordinance as the TAC begins to make recommendations, noting that he could redline, strike through, and create additional sections on a meeting by meeting basis. Mr. Mladinich then stated that once the committee has given recommendations on all subparts, he would be able to present a finished version of the ordinance that the Tree Advisory Committee could then review, vote on and eventually present to the City Commission. Mr. Mladinich explained that he has had a lot of experience drafting and amending ordinances for the City. Chair Dressler asked the committee their opinions regarding the frequency of Mr. Mladinich presenting the TAC's written incorporated changes to the members. Member Gilkey suggested that the TAC should agree on the content that Mr. Mladinich should work on at the end of each section to prevent the development of a document that lacks agreement by all members. Member Gilkey then asked Mr. Mladinich about the process of presenting the new ordinance to the City Commission. Mr. Mladinich explained the whereas clauses to the TAC. Mr. Gilkey asked if the City Commission would speak to members of the Tree Advisory Committee if they have questions. Chair Dressler suggested that the TAC choose one or more: representatives from the committee to give a presentation to the City Commission with a member of city staff. Member Gilkey expressed concern that there are some changes that may seem questionable but are: reasonable, such as the size of trees used for mitigation. Mr. Mladinich stated that context is necessary. Secretary Litchet explained that once recommendations have been formulated, the City Commission would like those recommendations to be presented to the Planning Board as well as the City Commission. Secretary Litchet also stated that he had a discussion with Deputy City Manager Marlon Brown and that once the TAC has specific recommendations, the chair and one or more committee members would attend a City Commission meeting in order to brief the City Commission. Secretary Litchet suggested that Tree Advisory Committee attendance is imperative at both the Planning Board and City Commission meetings to highlight the backgrounds of the members and provide contextual information for changes to the ordinance. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 4 of 13 Member Patten inquired whether the TAC's established intent could appear in the new ordinance. Mr. Mladinich explained that a statement of intention could appear in the code. Member Patten asked what section would contain the intent. Secretary Litchet explained that Zone District sections of the zoning code begin with a purpose and intent section and thatitwould be acceptable tol have the intent within the tree ordinance section of the zoning code. Mr. Mladinich stated that a purpose and intent is helpful and can be included if the TAC deems it appropriate. Chair Dressler stated his personal opinion that an explanation of intent is necessary in order to frame specific and broad ideas of the tree ordinance. Member Fuerst suggested that purpose and intent is included in the beginning of the tree ordinance and that the following recommendations should correspond, enabling the TAC to justify the reasons for any changes to the tree ordinance. Chair Dressler agreed with Member Fuerst. VI. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING HOW TO BEST ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF CITY RESIDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE A HEALTHY TREE IN ORDER TO RE-LANDSCAPE THEIR PRIVATELY-OWNED PROPERTIES Chair Dressler asked Mr. Mladinich if the Tree Advisory Committee members are able to send information such as recommendations to the entire committee in between meetings or if such information should be sent to and distributed through the TAC Liaison in order to comply with the Sunshine Law. Mr. Mladinich stated that issues can arise if any member of the committee where to respond to information sent resulting in a Sunshine Law violation. Mr. Mladinich recommended that information be sent to Secretary Litchet or Ms. McLeod Wilkins for distribution to safeguard the committee from an accidental Sunshine Law violation. Secretary Litchet also suggested that members of the TAC send information to Ms. McLeod Wilkins or himself for distribution to the other committee members. Chair Dressler verified that the group would continue to send information to Secretary Litchet and Ms. McLeod Wilkins. Member Patten asked Arborist Miller if removal of healthy trees by owners of private properties in order to re-landscape has been problematic for city staff. Arborist Miller confirmed that he has indeed been confronted with such issues. Member Patten stated that he feels owners or privately-owned properties should be allowed to re-landscape within reason. Member Patten asked Arborist Miller if this is an issue that is very time consuming. Arborist Miller replied that he spent a great deal of time on this issue previously, though it is less time consuming recently. Member Patten provided the opinion that the tree ordinance requires more flexibility forin such matters and that ifowners of private property would like to re-landscape their property and remove a healthy tree, they should be allowed to do SO as long as they provide information regarding what will be planted. Member Patten stated that he is in favor of flexibility and following the principle ofright tree in the right place as long as it does not diminish the canopy significantly, does not involve planting invasive species, and does not include removal of protected, healthy grand trees. Member Patten also Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 5 of 13 suggested a process in which City Arborists would be able to provide permits on site for properties that have previously provided a plan to the City. Chair Dressler explained that for some people, the cost of hiring a professional landscaper to prepare a plan is prohibitive. Chair Dressler stated that it should be as simple as possible for property owners to provide plans, such as providing a hand-sketch. Chair Dressler added that the most challenging aspect of tree removal as it relates to private properties, is trying to achieve balance between allowing the property owner to use their lot in the way they feel it is most valuable and to avoid creating negative impacts to their direct neighbors. Chair Dressler suggested that homeowners should be allowed to remove trees other than grand trees, within the buildable area of their properties with a simplified permit at a low cost. Chair Dressler then added if the tree is in the side yard setback, removal oft the tree would be more likely to impact the neighboring property. Chair Dressler explained that he favors an ordinance that has maximum flexibility within the buildable area for homeowners and a different criterion for setbacks. Member Patten inquired as to the definition of the buildable area. Chair Dressler suggested that buildable area is wherever a house can be built on a property. Vice Chair Halflants asked ifthis definition ofbuildable lot would consider the trunk location of a tree only or if includes the canopy. Chair Dressler stated that the trunk location would be within the buildable lot. Chair Dressler also stated that less restrictive planting and removal within the buildable area will provide more flexibility to home owners than they currently have, and not extending that flexibility to the side yard setbacks will provide protections to neighbors. Chair Dressler stated that the TAC needs to discuss what the criteria should be for removal within a side yard setback. Member Gallagher stated that he would like to discuss the recommendations provided by Member Patten and that the TAC come to an agreement about purpose and intent objectives. Member Gallagher explained that he thinks the TAC should establish some principles by which the details will be approached and decide on goals for the tree ordinance. Member Gallagher suggested that the TAC may reach agreement regarding the following principles: the desire for a healthy canopy, a canopy that is diverse in age and species, a canopy that will be environmentaly sustainable for the area, a public canopy that will be properly maintained, an ordinance that acknowledges differences between the downtown core and the barrier islands, an ordinance that encourages private planting and care oft trees, a reasonable mechanism for private tree management and tree removal, and an ordinance that provides balance to public welfare and private property rights. Member Gallagher noted that the TAC should avoid overwhelming city budget or staff and creating unsafe public or private conditions when making changes to the tree ordinance. Vice Chair Halflants agreed with member Gallagher and stated that it is important to establish guiding principles before getting into the details of the tree ordinance and added Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 6 of 13 that it would be more favorable to start with the whereas clause rather than adding it after the ordinance is written. All members were in agreement. Chair Dressler questioned how the TAC would like to move forward with the suggestions they have discussed. Member Gallagher stated that it would be sensible to review each suggestion and possibly revisit them each week. Mr. Mladinich stated that he could draft changes that are agreed upon after each meeting SO that the TAC could review the changes and approve them at the following meeting. Chair Dressler stated that it would be helpful for the whereas section to have something in writing that each member could use for reference. Mr. Mladinich stated that the TAC seemed to be interested in having this written information supplied for the purpose intent objectives framework and noted that whereas clauses sometimes contain other information. Mr. Mladinich requested the TAC provide him with input and he will create a draft based on information that has consensus. Member Fuerst suggested that the purpose would be a healthy canopy for the City that is diverse both in species of tree and age, environmentally sustainable, and appropriate for its location. Member Fuerst added that pocket parks and green space are terms that the TAC has heard many times and seem to be what the community desires. Member Fuerst explained that while the Cityhas a great deal ofpark space, 50% of park space is the Bobby Jones Golf Course. Member Fuerst added that the Rosemary District, Downtown Core, and mobile home parks are all in need of trees. Member Dressler stated that Member Fuerst covered several of the objectives listed by Member Gallagher and asked for input regarding wordsmithing or changes to Member Fuerst's statement. Member Patten stated that without trees the City would be a less desirable place to live and that trees raise property value. Member Patten stated that he considers increased property value to be an objective. Chair Dressler agreed. Member Fuerst suggested that after the purpose, the intent could be to approve the appearance of Sarasota, increase and maintain land values, conserve water, and improve air quality. Member Gallagher stated that his company recently conducted some research using the old CRA to confirm how much ofthe urban forest is in the public realm and how much is privately owned, and it was determined that 1/3 is in the public realm and 2/3 are privately-owned. Member Gallagher added that he does not believe that trees always increase property value, such is the case regarding undeveloped pieces of property that are heavily treed. Member Gilkey stated that the right tree in the right place has the potential ofincreasing property value, similar to the way trees have the potential ofdecreasing runoff. Chair Dressler noted that increases to property value could be a goal of the TAC. Chair Dressler stated that the overall vision has to include recognition that there is a conflict between private property owners' rights and goals and the general public and should attempt to strike a balance between the two. Chair Dressler mentioned right tree right place and suggested that the new tree ordinance should include Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 7 of 13 recognizing private property rights and balancing those rights with the general public good as an explicitly stated goal. Member Patten stated that he does not agree that balancing public good and property owners' rights is a major driving force for tree protection and that the larger issue at stake is the health oft the City's canopy. Chair Dressler stated that he believes it should be included in the tree ordinance due to the community's response to the inflexibility oft the current tree ordinance. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that perhaps the goal could be: flexibility rather than property owner's rights. Chair Dressler stated that flexibility or property owners' rights could be stated and that Mr. Mladinich will develop the phrasing. Member Gilkey noted that one of the Tree Advisory Committee's initial statements was to provide flexibility to residents and protect the public. Chair Dressler stated that all of the TAC members seem to have similar ideas regarding flexibility and that it should be clearly noted in the new ordinance because the current tree ordinance does not address the issue. Member Patten stated the motivation behind his primary recommendation involved previous conversations regarding flexibility for property owners and he suggested that the new ordinance not be SO restrictive regarding the right-of-way on private property. Chair Dressler explained that it is important to address criteria in rights-of-way and setbacks because property is defined by these items and added that developing a criterion for these differences will accommodate the framework in which the Zoning Code is written. Member Patten suggested that criteria that deal with trees with setbacks should be considered in another section of the Zoning Code rather than in the tree ordinance, such as the section for driveways or roofs. Member Gallagher stated that the community has come forward and made it clear that trees are important to their properties and to the City, and that public outcry has not been as such for driveways. Most of the community understands that the current tree ordinance is imperfect but understand the value oftrees and will be satisfied with a more attractive and healthier community. Mr. Mladinich explained that the purpose intent objectives should bei ideas for which all Tree Advisory Committee members have consensus but whereas clauses will allow the TAC to address some ofthe more obscure areas, such as balancing private property versus communal rights, allowing both broad and obscure points to be covered within the tree ordinance. Chair Dressler requested a review of all points discussed during the meeting to recognize areas of consensus and opposition to allow for Mr. Mladinich to be able to assemble a draft. Recommendations were as follows: 1) Right tree, right location - no opposition 2) Improves the appearance of the City of Sarasota - no opposition 3) Increases land value by providing trees and landscaping as a capital asset - Chair Dressler noted that this could be a goal but that the application to every situation can be debated. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 8 of 13 4) Conserve water by protecting established and native landscaping - no opposition 5) Encourage the use of plants suited to the growing conditions of the City - included in discussion regarding establishing standards for installation and maintenance of trees. 6) Establish standards for installation and maintenance of trees - Arborist Miller stated that to his knowledge, the maintenance of plants and trees is not to be included as part of the tree ordinance and should therefore be removed as an objective. Chair Dressler acknowledged that the TAC is tasked with developing changes to the tree ordinance, not the landscape ordinance, and suggested that the wording be amended to focus less on installation and more on protection. Member Gallagher suggested that if the focus is al healthy canopy, installation and maintenance would be presumed. Chair Gallagher noted that part of mitigation is installation. Member Fuerst suggested the statement should be "use of trees suited to the growing conditions of our area," I and suggested that instalation and maintenance be explained later. Chair Dressler also suggested that the wording should specify mitigation trees. Member Gallagher questioned whether the statement "Encourage the use of plants suited to the growing conditions of the City" is the same as right tree right location. Chair Dressler stated that he considers it as separate because right tree right location does not consider climate, growing zone, or species. Chair Dressler added that while planting the right tree in the right place on a property is important, iti is slightly different from encouraging the use of plants that are suited to the City's growing conditions. Mr. Mladinich asked if the term to use is Florida-friendly, Florida native or both. Member Gilkey stated that the most appropriate term would be Native and / or Florida-friendly. Secretary Litchet asked ifthe TAC would prefer "Conserve water by protecting established and native trees, encourage the use ofFlorida-friendly trees suited to the growing conditions of our area". Chair Dressler stated that he agreed with Secretary Litchet's statement though he would prefer "encourage the use of native and Florida-Friendly trees". Vice Chair Halflants suggested a more general sentence such as "We are aiming to promote a healthy, diverse, sustainable canopy for the City" and stated that other details could fit within that description. Chair Dressler agreed with Vice Chair Halflants but noted that the statement would be appropriate as a goal but is not detailed enough to be an objective. Member Gilkey explained that he agrees with the idea of clear primary sentence, though he would prefer reinforcing the ideas of flexibility and protection within the statement. Vice Chair Halflants noted that flexibility and balance have been important to members of the community that have provided insight to the TAC. Vice Chair Halflants also stated that he is more concerned with the appearance oft the public realm, such as lining the streets rather than property owner's backyards and suggested that the public realm be specified. Member Patten stated that he agreed with Vice Chair Halflants Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 9 of 13 but stated that he believes the wording is more appropriate for a different section of the ordinance. Vice Chair Halflants restated that he prefers the distinction of City's public realm. Chair Dressler agreed with Vice Chair Halflants in the event that the appearance of property that cannot be seen is the only factor under consideration. Chair Dressler noted that there are other goals that are related to aspects beyond appearance. Member Gallagher agreed with Vice Chair Halflants and stated that ift the guiding principle encompasses all of Sarasota and all other details should flow from the guiding principle, the argument could be made that the ordinance seeks to dictate the canopy in backyards of private property. Member Gallagher added that the TAC is not concerned with the community weighing in on citizen's backyards but TAC wants to have the community participating in a discussion regarding the public realm. Member Patten requested a definition of the public realm. Member Gallagher defined public realm as streets, public parks, rights-of-way and anything the public owns and maintains. Chair Dressler agreed that appearance of private backyards is not the concern of the TAC and noted that there are other goals that are related to aspects beyond appearance. Member Fuerst considered whether it is necessary to differentiate between areas of a privately-owned propertyi ifthe stated purpose of the ordinance to bej proactive to help build and maintain al healthy canopy. Member Gallagher stated that in spiteofthe diverse opinions oft the TAC, it would be interesting to be able to find several items that are agreed upon by all members and then present those ideas to the City Commission. Chair Dressler stated that members may disagree on whether appearance should be mentioned in the whereas clauses and noted that specific ideas will be incorporated as the TAC develops and reviews recommendations. Member Patten noted that if the term "public realm" is to be used as a qualifier, it should be used in each goal or not at all until the TAC begins formulating levels of the tree ordinance that require more detailed. Chair Dressler explained that improving appearance is different from other goals because all other goals are public and private, while appearance is a public matter. Member Fuerst agreed. Member Patten stated that he thinks the term public realm should not be included in a statement about appearance. Vice Chair Halflants explained that it is important that the public realm is improved and that the word appearance may cause issue due to its subjective nature. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that the statement should be measurable, such as increasing canopy or shade. Member Patten restated Member Gallagher's earlier point that the TAC needs to decide which ideas have consensus. Member Gilkey inquired if a healthy canopy includes public safety. Chair Dressler and Member Patten agreed that healthy canopy does not include public safety. Member Gilkey stated that part ofTAC's goal is to ensure a safe and healthy canopy for the public. Member Gallagher stated that the health and the safety should be considered separately. 7) Eliminate invasive exotic species that threaten the native ecosystem - Member Gilkey asked if the TAC aims to require removal of category one versus category two invasive Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 10 of 13 trees. Member Gilkey stated that the TAC does not promote invasive trees though he questioned whether property owners that have invasive trees would be required to remove them. Member Gallagher suggested use of the phrase "encourage elimination" and Member Fuerst agreed. Member Patten explained that the remainder of the statement considered species that threaten native trees. 8) Improve environmental quality through the retention and installation of trees through improved air and water quality, reduction of stromwater runoff, decreased air and noise pollution, decrease glare around buildings - Vice Chair Halflants suggested the goal be to improve the experience of the sidewalk and that trees do not reduce noise pollution. Vice Chair Halflants noted that trees are not as effective as pipes in terms of stormwater runoff. Chair Dressler stated that data exists to support the effectiveness of trees regarding stormwater runoff. The committee considered and discussed the multiple levels of goals, objectives and standards. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that the statement be "improve environmental quality". Secretary Litchet suggested the statement "improve environmental quality through the retention and installation of trees" and stated that the specifics can be noted later. 9) Provide habitats for urban wildlife - Member Gallagher questioned whether squirrels would determine whether or not a tree could be removed. Arborist Milller stated that the current ordinance considers nesting birds and does not consider squirrels. Member Fuerst asked if the ordinance includes Monk Parakeets which are invasive. Secretary Litchet clarified that the current ordinance does not state specific types of birds. Chair Dressler suggested that the TAC could make the tree ordinance more constant with other codes by stating the tree ordinance would provide opportunities for habit for protected species". Member Patten stated that trees will provide habitats for urban wildlife whether or not it is stated in the tree ordinance. 10) Protect endangered or threatened plant species, habitats or ecosystems - Chair Dressler stated that it is unnecessary to note this as an objective unless the City would like to be more stringent than existing codes require. Secretary Litchet stated that the word plant and the word tree should not be used interchangeably, that the ordinance is for tree protection, and that the statement should be more specific to trees if it is to be included. Member Fuerst stated that she is not opposed to removing the statement. Member Patten agreed. Chair Dressler stated that he does not have a strong opinion on whether to keep or remove the statement from the list. Member Falk asked for clarification regarding promotion oft tree canopy coverage. Member Fuerst stated that the promotion ofthe canopy should be an overarching idea that will require bullet points to define. Member Gallagher explained that at some point the City will reach its ideal canopy and that a statement about promotion may not be appropriate. Secretary Litchet considered that a statement regarding the promotion ofcanopy should go into a future urban forestry plan. Mr. Mladinich listed the elements of a healthy canopy mentioned by Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 11 of 13 the TAC. Member Fuerst suggested that the Tree Advisory Committee state that the tree ordinance recommendations support a healthy canopy, but that and an urban forestry program that would promote canopy growth would be preferable. Chair Dressler listed Member Gallagher's recommended objectives. Chair Dressler stated that he prefers the term "resilient" rather than thei term "sustainable". Member Fuerst agreed. Mr. Mladinich requested guidance on the item of increased land values. Member Falk suggested using the words maintain and increase. Chair Dressler requested clarification. Vice Chair Halflants stated that the goal is always to increase land value. Mr. Mladinich stated that trees do not increase land value in every situation. Chair Dressler stated that the TAC will debate whether individual properties land values will increase or the overall equity that trees provide. Mr. Mladinich explained concerns that iflisted as a core value, land value increases could conflict with mitigation expectations. Member Gallagher stated that the lists compiled by Member Patten and himself explain why and how to achieve the main goal of a healthy canopy. Member Gallagher suggested that some of the details may be cumbersome to the main goal and that a metric should be implemented to gage success ofthose ideas. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that the main goal should contain a sentence that endorses a healthy, diverse, sustainable canopy, a sentence that endorses flexibility and balance, and a sentence that endorses increasing the canopy in public spaces. Member Gallagher does not agree that flexibility should be included in the main goal statement. Member Gallagher stated that where the word flexible is noted, the word reasonable should also be noted. Mr. Mladinich stated that he could note options in the draft for some of the contested issues and that they can be revisited. Member Gallagher stated that his recommendations for canopy maintenance, acknowledgment of transects, encouragement of private planting and care of tree, coordination of public urban forests, providing a mechanism for tree removal, and balancing private and public property rights are objectives that detail the main goal and are therefore not appropriate to be included as the main goal of a healthy canopy. Chair Dressler explained that the TAC should still review them. Arborist Miller stated that transects are not mentioned in the current tree ordinance and he believes adding it would create confusion. Chair Dressler agreed and stated that the term transect is specific to The Form Base Code and will require wordsmithing. Chair Dressler added that recognition of the properties in different areas are important. 11) Encourage private planting and care of trees. - Vice Chair Halflants agreed with. 12) Coordinate the public urban forest - Member Gallagher suggest to have the City working in a unified fashion toward the goal of an urban forest with a master plan. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 12 of 13 Chair Dressler questioned whether this statement should be included in the tree ordinance and asked what recommendation Member Gallagher would make within the tree ordinance to further the goal of coordinating an urban forest. Member Gallagher recommended that the all money that is collected from mitigation in the public realm be deposited in thei tree fund and be used by the City to plant trees. Vice Chair Halflants agreed and suggested that the tree mitigation fund be increased sO that planting could be implemented on a street by street or park by park basis, rather than per lot. Chair Dressler questioned how this could be stated with the knowledge of what potential recommendations could arise. Member Patten stated that he would accept having an objective that states the tree protection regulations aret to maintain flexibility and balance. Chair Dressler suggested that flexibility and balance are different than the current set of regulations within the public realm that is supported using mostly private finances. The TAC discussed possible phrasing oft this objective. Chair Dressler then noted that Member Gallagher mentioned that the tree ordinance would seek to avoid overwhelming staff budget or means and avoid the creation of unsafe conditions which Chair Dressler suggested could be included under protection and welfare. Member Gallagher provided the opinion that unsafe conditions should be included in a more detailed area of the ordinance. Member Fuerst and Chair Dressler considered whether the idea of safety should or can be included in a social and environmental goal or objective. Member Gallagher noted that the meeting would be ending soon and there are several agenda items remaining. Mr. Mladinich stated that he would create a draft of what was discussed at the meeting and that he would create options for the items that are not clear. Mr. Mladinich stated that he would coordinate with Secretary Litchet to disperse the drafted material. Secretary Litchet confirmed. VII. DISCUSSION OF UPCOMING TOPICS The next meeting will revisit recommendations regarding how to best address the issue of City residents who would like to remove a healthy tree in order to re-landscape their privately-owned properties. Vice Chair Halflants suggested that a statement regarding government efficiency might be appropriate for the tree ordinance. Chair Dressler suggested the phrasing "to provide a code that is usable and able to be administered by city staff". Mr. Mladinich stated that currently in order for a healthy tree to be removed, there has to be something wrong. Mr. Mladinich stated that it seems that the TAC would like for healthy tree removal to be an option without the existing 10 item criteria. Chair Dressler stated that the TACis not yet prepared to provide recommendations on that item. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting June 13, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in the City Commission Chambers 13 of 13 The next meeting will also include recommendations regarding how to best address the issue of unsafe conditions caused by healthy trees on public property. VIII. DISCUSSION OF NEXT MEETING DATE The date oft the next meeting was confirmed for July 18, 2018 at 3:00 p.m. The meeting will take place in the Commission Chambers. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. nh - Shawn Dressler, Chair Timothy Litches, Secretary