CITY OF SARASOTA MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE March 21, 2018 at 3:00 p.m. in City Commission Chambers Members Present: Shawn Dressler, Chair Members Mary Fuerst, Chris Gallagher, Trevor Falk (arrived 3:19), Michael Gilkey, Jr., Rob Patten Members Absent: Michael Halflants City Staff Present: Mark Miller, Senior Arborist, Don Ullom, Arborist Kim DeNais, Development Services Angela McLeod-Wilkins, Development Services I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL TAC Chair Dressler called the meeting to order at 3:00 p. m. Mark Miller read the roll call. TAC Chair Dressler reminded everyone to speak into the microphones for clear audio recordings. II. PLEDGE OF CONDUCT Mark Miller read the Pledge of Conduct adopted by the City Commission of Sarasota. III. CITIZEN's INPUT - 3 MINUTE LIMIT (30 MINUTE TOTAL) 1. Wendy Resnick - Ms. Resnick approached the committee regarding a Norfolk Island tree on her property that is causing issues. Ms. Resnick asked the committee to grant a permit for the removal of the tree and expressed her growing concern regarding storm damage from the tree. Mr. Dressler informed Ms. Resnick that the committee does not have authority to make recommendations about permits and that the purview of the committee is to look at the existing code and make recommendations on improvements based on specific concerns. Chair Dressler and Committee Member Patten referred Ms. Resnick to the Director of Development Services, Timothy Litchet, and City Senior Arborist, Mark Miller, for assistance. 2. Lou Costa - Mr. Costa approached the committee regarding his desire for fine tuning of the tree code for the barrier islands. Specifically, Mr. Costa requested flexibility regarding the requirement for 2 canopy trees on the front of a lot and stated his preference for trees to be planted where they fit best or at the discretion of the homeowner. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting March 21, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers Page 2 of 6 3. Richard Happy - Mr. Happy read a letter written by Susan Bishop. In her letter, Ms. Bishop requested alteration of the current ordinance to allow for more. flexibility regarding tree removal and replacement of large Oaks and Pine trees in the Tallywood Community. Ms. Bishop's letter described the landscaping goals of the community as water-wise and Florida friendly, and noted that the current ordinance prevents removal of old trees and replacement with new trees. 4. Diane Happy - Mrs. Happy stated that she is the volunteer landscape coach at Tallywood, a 25-acre property with over 500 trees. Mrs. Happy stated Tallywood has a large tree trimming and planting budget and that the community is committed to caring for their tree canopy, but sometimes find the current policies to be restrictive. Mrs. Happy stated that the Tallywood community would like the ability to deal with crowding and root damage to buildings, and that the community would like to make decisions related to safety and tree growth patterns. 5. Barbara Campo -Ms. Campo appeared in front of the committee and spoke on behalf of Jono Miller. In his letter, Mr. Miller sought to clarify information from the Florida Exotic Pest Plant List by differentiating two types of mangrove, as both had been referred to as Black mangrove. Mr. Miller then suggested the issuance of gift certificates that could be used to purchase noninvasive trees at local nurseries in order to incentivize removal of category 1 and category 2 listed trees. Mr. Miller's letter also noted his concern regarding money in the tree fund and suggested that the TAC compile specific data regarding permitting and violations by tree service companies before going in front of the City Commission. IV. COMMITTEE TOPIC Review proposed canopy tree ordinance and provide comments or recommendations regarding the proposed ordinance Chair Dressler stated specific concerns related to linguistic and categorical inconsistencies in the removal criteria of the tree canopy ordinance. Chair Dressler stated that the tree ordinance criteria should share the same language and base for criteria as the canopy overall tree ordinance, even if the tree canopy ordinance intends to be more restrictive. Chair Dressler then noted his concerns regarding several items that are stated in the overall tree ordinance and are not yet included in the criteria. Among the noted concerns was the difficulty of removing certain categories of trees even when the intent is to replace with higher quality or native trees. Chair Dressler also questioned whether a canopy road zone that extends 15 feet into the lot from the right of way is a viable option as many citizens have expressed the desire for more flexibility. Chair Dressler noted that the canopy tree ordinance does not mention or define reasonable access to the site for removal, nor does it provide information regarding the unwillingness of insurance companies to insure sites which they consider tree removal to be necessary, and that it does not address the 36-inch proximity of trees to existing structures. Chair Dressler also stated that public safety, health, and welfare general criteria has not been defined and that it should be clarified that roads would not be established at the expense of public safety. In addition, the removal canopy of dead or damaged trees that would be unable to contribute to the canopy for a length of time has not yet been addressed in the canopy tree ordinance. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting March 21, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers Page 3 of 6 Chair Dressler questioned the committee as to whether they consider it appropriate to extend the canopy zone 15 feet into private property for the purpose of protecting and promoting canopy roads, or if it is more favorable to include the canopy zone in the Urban Forestry program that uses funds from a source, such as the tree mitigation fund, to plant trees within the right-of-way and maintain them. Discussion on the topic ensued. The TAC engaged in a discussion regarding canopy roads and whether the option of moving 15 feet into the lot from the right-of-way is favorable given repeated requests from citizens for increased flexibility. Member Patten questioned who is able to apply for or request a canopy road and noted some property owners may be aware that a portion of their property would be encumbered due to the designation. Chair Member Fuerst added that thei requirements for a canopy road have not been adequately defined. In addition, Chair Dressler stated he felt that the opportunities to plant trees in the canopy road zone are limited and questioned whether it is acceptable to use the tree fund to plant in the right-of-way. Member Fuerst stated concerns regarding inappropriate" vehicles, specifically tractor trailers, traveling on certain neighborhood roads. Member Gallagher stated that a strong case. has not been made for the importance of streets. Member Gallagher expressed his appreciation for the protection of existing canopy streets and his support for future canopy streets. Member Gallagher questioned if canopy there is a means of buying into a street that is not yet a canopy street and suggested grants, special designations, and/or special privileges be provided to incentivize those who have made efforts to create canopy streets. Member Gallagher supported having a definition and target for citizens who would like to create canopy roads. Member Patten agreed. Chair Dressler stated there was a lack of definition of a canopy tree and questioned if certain trees are to be designated as canopy trees. Discussion continued, during which Member Gallagher questioned the flexibility of the 15-feet right-of-way, suggesting that it not be a static number of feet, and could instead be variable or subject to property owners' preferences. Member Gilkey expressed concerns regarding setbacks, stating that with the current application, 34 of the front yard plantable area could potentially be preserved on trees that may never reach the road. Member Gilkey supported having a specific designation of a canopy tree. Chair Dressler stated that a 4 % DBH tree for a canopy tree is generally 10 feet tall and 15 feet wide and normally not large enough to provide shade for a street. Member Gilkey suggested that information defining the requirements of a healthy tree canopy should be provided by an arborist or landscape architect. Member Fuerst expressed that the definitions of canopy tree and zone are important, as well as the proximity to structure. Chair Dressler made a suggestion for a program that a city may allocate funds specifically toward existing canopy trees. Member Fuerst added that she agrees with the concept of a review committee and stated the review committee should be Minutes of the' Tree. Advisory Committee Meeting March 21, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers Page 4 of 6 looking at canopy trees rather that the Parks and Recreation Department, assuming that the people on the review committee would have knowledge of trees. Chair Dressler stated that recommendations adopted for the new code should continue to be specific and also include flexibility in addressing site specific, unforeseeable situations. Senior Arborist Miller mentioned a letter from citizen, Pola Sommers, regarding extensive detail and pictures of a canopy damaged caused by oversized truck traffic. Discussion ensued. Senior Arborist Miller stated that Member Falk was present for the meeting, for the record. Chair Dressler took the opportunity to inform all present that the most effective way to deliver information to the TAC members is by email and added that the information should also be sent to administrative support. Chair Dressler also recommended that Director of Development Services, Tim Litchet, and Senior Arborist, Mark Miller, are copied. Chair Dressler stated that the intention ofthel board is to review each section ofthe ordinance and make recommendations. He stated that a motion would not be made at during the meeting, but that recommendations would be made in the future. Chair Dressler stated that there is still an item to review and an upcoming meeting with departmental leaders. Chair Dressler questioned the committee as to whether it is more advantageous for canopy trees to have a separate section of code or should it be rolled into the canopy road section ofthe tree mitigation ordinance. Chair Dressler stated that the closer the trees are to the asphalt, the more likely the trees will provide shade and reduce the heat that comes off of road. Discussion ensued regarding damage to trees by oversized vehicles, tree maturity, clearance of 14 feet, and if punitive action should be taken toward truck drivers that damage trees. Photos were presented and Chair Dressler said that the issues presented in the photos were roadway design issues rather than issues related to the tree canopy. Request to Speak Jennifer Ahearn-Koch - Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated that she is a current resident of the Tahiti Park Neighborhood and former president of the Tahiti Park Neighborhood Association. Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated that the Tahiti Park Neighborhood Association created a presentation that was delivered by the Vice President of the Neighborhood Association to the City Commission in 2016. Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated that the presentation is the reason for the current analysis of canopy zone. Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated that the issues are not only the trees but also the integrity of canopy roads which tend to be sub-standard streets which lack sidewalks and curbs and require tight turning radiuses. Photos were shown to provide visual evidence ofi issues, and Ms. Ahearn-Koch explained how drivers in large trucks adversely affected the trees. Minutes of the Tree Advisory Committee Meeting March 21, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers Page 5 of 6 Member Gallagher recalled several meetings and questioned whether a certain type of truck could be prohibited from traveling particular streets. Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated that it has not been resolved. Ms. Ahearn-Koch stated she had previous discussions with both the Sarasota Police Department and Director of Development Services, Timothy Litchet's, office. A discussion ensued regarding signage, codes and enforcement of codes regarding oversized trucks. Member Fuerst referenced information in the packet regarding 18-wheel trucks. Member Gilkey regarded the previous conversation by stating that Ms. Ahearn-Koch had a valid concern and agreed that Ms. Ahearn-Koch resides in a neighborhood with unique circumstance due to the narrow road and lack of outlet. Member Gilkey added that when writing a code that defines what a canopy street is and what it looks like, the committee would want to make surei it could be traveled by trucks. Chair Dressler agreed and stated that Ms. Ahearn-Koch's issue is not a canopy tree issue, rather it is an issue with signage and should be addressed in a different section ofthe ordinance. V. MISCELLANEOUS Chair Dressler addressed the TAC's request to go into the field and view trees in the community. Chair Dressler stated that a field visit, either as a group or individually with city staff, would present several issues to include note taking for minutes and public notice posting. Chair Dressler suggested that city staff could provide a map and that each ofthe members could go into the field on their own time. Member Gilkey stated that Senior Arborists Miller and Arborist Ullom have provided very detailed photos and information and that he does not feel that he needs further explanation. Chair Dressler agreed. Consensus was taken regarding going into the field on the committee members own time. All were in favor. None were opposed. Chair Dressler questioned whether city staff should provide suggestions to the TAC for the purpose of updating the tree mitigation ordinance on subjects such as the appropriateness of the cost sliding scale, size sliding scale, and criteria. Chair Dressler expressed his concern and his preference for staff to provide information rather than recommendations. Member Gilkey noted his comfort with city staff providing information and support rather than making recommendations, provided that the TAC would be able to hear the opinions of city staff and assimilate those opinions into the decisions made by the TAC. Member Patten agreed and noted his specific interest in regards to ratios and sizes. Consensus was taken regarding staff continuing to take an informative approach. All were in favor. None were opposed. Member Patten prepared and presented a statement ofintent and objectives. In this statement, Member Patten noted objectives such as the right tree for the right location, improvement of the appearance of Sarasota, increasing land values by providing trees, water conservation, improvement to environmental quality, and providing habitat. Copies were provided to each committee member. It was decided that this topic would appear as an item on a future agenda. Minutes of the' Tree Advisory Committee Meeting March 21, 2018, at 3:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers Page 6 of 6 Member Patten stated that he contacted the Florida Urban Forestry Council (FUFC) and verified that there are speakers who could speak to the committee regarding the nature of an Urban Forestry Program, the cost, and manpower needed. Copies of FUFC information were provided to each committee member. Chair Dressler expressed interest in test case presentations regarding the current how it applies to deneloymaentinademalaymemi parcels, and how it encumbers developers. ordinance, Chair Dressler recommended such test cases as a future agenda item. Member Gallagher, Member Fuerst, and Member Patten agreed. Member Gallagher suggested that the TAC: have a discussion with Karin Murphy to address tree implications presented in the drafted Form Base Code. Member Gallagher also suggested that baseline information be provided to the City Commission at the end of 12 months. Chair Dressler asked Member Gallagher to prepare a list most relevant baseline information and submitted the list to administrative support. Member Patten added that he is interested in baseline information regarding complaints and violations. VI. DISCUSSION OF UPCOMING TOPICS Next agenda is a workshop with leaders ofvarious city departments. VII. DISCUSSION OF NEXT MEETING DATE The date of the next meeting was confirmed for April 18th at 3:00 p.m. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:48 p.m. Shawn Dressler, Chair fTimothy Litchet Secretary