[1. Call to Order]
[00:00:09]
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. TODAY IS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, CITY OF PARKLAND PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY BOARD MEETING.
WE WILL COMMENCE THE MEETING. PLEASE, EVERYBODY, RISE FOR THE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH
LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THERE SHE IS.
>> ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> NATHANIEL KLITSBERG? ABSENT. TODD ROGERS?
>> HERE. WHITNEY GORDON? ABSENT. VICE-CHAIR TONY AVELO?
[4. Approval of Minutes]
>> HERE. CHAIRMAN, MURRAY ZWEIG?
>> HERE. ITEM 4 ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 8, 2023.
PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY BOARD.
IS THERE A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
>> I'LL SECOND IT. >> MOTION MADE AND SECONDED.
>> MOTION SECONDED BY WHO. >> MR. AVELLO.
>> ANTHONY. >> ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC.
IF ANYBODY IS PRESENT TO HAVE A COMMENT OR ANY COMMENTS ON A NON-AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE INDICATE.
SEEING NONE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAME IN THE EMAIL OR ANY
>> WE WILL CLOSE THE ITEM TO PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS. WE WILL MOVE ON. IS THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? I CAN'T SEE ANY.
THERE IS ONLY ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
>> I HOPE NOT. OTHERWISE, THERE IS NO MEETING.
[8.A. Ordinance 2023-012: Amending the Land Development Code (Landscape Requirements) Consideration of an Ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Parkland, Florida, amending the City of Parkland Land Development code by amending Article 95, "Landscaping and Vegetation", Division 5 "Generally", Section 95-515 "Documents incorporated by reference", Section 95-520 "Definitions", Section 95-1010 "General requirements - Tree removal and tree preservation" and Section 95-1555 "Removal of existing plant material", to incorporate standards by reference, add defined terms for "nuisance tree" and "unacceptable risk", provide permit exceptions for trees posing an unacceptable risk to persons or property on single family residential property, and to clarify permit requirements for removal of exotic species; providing for implementation, codification, conflicts, severability, and an effective date.]
>> I HAVE TO ASK. AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD. ITEM 8, PUBLIC HEARING.
ORDINANCE 2023-012, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PARKLAND, FLORIDA.
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING ARTICLE 95, LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION, DIVISION FIVE, GENERALLY, SECTION 95-515.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE, SECTION 95-520.
DEFINITION, SECTION 95-1010. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, TREE REMOVAL AND TREE PRESERVATION. AND SECTION 95-1555, REMOVAL OF EXISTING PLANT MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE STANDARDS BY REFERENCE. ADD DEFINED TERMS FOR NUISANCE TREE AND UNACCEPTABLE RISK. PROVIDE PERMIT EXCEPTIONS FOR TREES POSING AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK TO PERSONS OR PROPERTY ON SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND TO CLARIFY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL OF EXOTIC SPECIES, PROVIDING FOR IMPLEMENTATION, CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. GAIL?
I APOLOGIZE. I'M GETTING OVER A COLD.
SO I'M A LITTLE SQUEAKY. TONIGHT WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, AND IT IS A LANDSCAPE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT.
BACK IN 2019, THE STATE AND THE COUNTY ADOPTED SOME REGULATIONS THAT RELATED TO REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS TREES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. BACK IN 2019, THOUGH, A LOT OF IMPLEMENTATION CONCERNS WERE SPREAD ACROSS A LOT OF THE CITIES AS SOME OF THE RULES WERE NOT WELL-DEFINED.
FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL WAS THE VERY BROAD TERM. WAS IT ONLY SINGLE-FAMILY? WAS IT SINGLE-FAMILY WITHIN ASSOCIATIONS? MULTI-FAMILY? CONDOMINIUMS, TOWNHOUSES.
OR WAS IT TRULY SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS? AND ALSO THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS OVER THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS REQUIRED TO SHOW THAT A TREE WAS HAZARDOUS OR THE LACK OF REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION.
SO COME 2023, THE STATE AND THE COUNTY HAVE MADE SOME REVISIONS, AND NOW CLEANED UP. WE FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE ADOPTING IT INTO OUR CODE. IT IS REQUIRED THAT WE FOLLOW SUIT. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND EXPLAIN THE CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE TO YOU. SO THE FIRST SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE, WE ARE ADDING A SECTION 95-15.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE.
SO THROUGHOUT THE LANDSCAPE CODE, THERE IS A LOT OF REFERENCES TO MANUALS, AS FAR AS THE QUALITY OR RATING OF TREES.
AND YOU WILL SEE IN 95-15, WE ARE ADDING ABOUT 10 OR 11
[00:05:03]
DOCUMENT THAT IS CAN BE NOW REFERENCED THROUGHOUT OUR CODE.TWO NEW DEFINITIONS ARE BEING ADDED TO HELP CLARIFY SOME OF THE TERMS THAT ARE BEING USED IN THE NEW ORDINANCE.
AND SO WE ARE DEFINING NUISANCE TREE, AND THOSE ARE SPECIFIC TO SOME SPECIES. AND THEN WHAT IS AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK? THAT IS THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE TREE BASICALLY QUALIFIES FOR THIS EXEMPTION.
SO UNDER B, FOR PERMITTING, NUMBER 5, THIS IS WHERE WE KIND OF GET INTO THE MEAT AND POTATOES OF THE ORDINANCE.
IT TALKS ABOUT BASICALLY,-- OOPS, SORRY.
IF YOU HAVE PROPER DOCUMENTATION ON A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT FROM AN ISA ARBORIST OR A FLORIDA LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, THAT SAYS THE TREE HAS AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK WHICH MEANS IT POSES A HAZARD TO PEOPLE OR PROPERTY, THEN YOU CAN REMOVE THAT TREE WITHOUT HAVING GOVERNMENT.
ALSO THERE WOULD BE NO MITIGATION REQUIRED TO REMOVE THAT HAZARDOUS TREE. FOLLOWING UNDER C AND D, MANGROVE AREAS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS REQUIREMENT.
AND THEN D, ALSO IN THAT ORDINANCE, CLARIFIES WHAT SOME OF THE TERMS MEAN. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MEANS SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED BUILDINGS ON A LOT.
SO THERE IS NO CLARIFICATION BETWEEN MULTI-FAMILY, TOWNHOUSES, CONDOS, COMMON AREAS OF ASSOCIATIONS THAT MIGHT BE A SINGLE-FAMILY COMMUNITY. AND THEN IT IS MORE SPECIFIC ON WHO AND WHAT KIND OF DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED.
UNDER K AND THEN THE LAST SECTION OF THIS ORDINANCE, IT IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CLEANUP THAT WE ARE DOING THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COUNTY.
AND THE STATE. THE REGULATIONS.
WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT OUR CERTIFIED CITY ARBORIST IS QUALIFIED TO MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS AND DELETING THE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS "LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT." UNDER K. AND THEN B, HAD TO DO WITH REMOVAL OF EXISTING PLANT MATERIAL AND EXOTICS.
THE CODE WASN'T CRYSTAL-CLEAR THAT EVEN IF THEY ARE INVASIVE, THAT THEY STILL REQUIRE A PERMIT.
WE ARE JUST CLARIFYING THAT LANGUAGE BY ADDING THE LAST LINE IN THE SECTION OF THE CODE. ANTHONY IS HERE.
HE IS KIND OF MORE WELL-VERSED ON THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF ADOPTING THIS ORDINANCE. AND PATTY, OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO PLANT
MATERIALS OR SPECIFICATIONS. >> THANK YOU.
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO INPUT?
>> I WOULD QUICKLY NOTE THAT MOST OF WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU OTHER THAN THOSE TWO LAST ITEMS ARE DICTATED BY STATE LAW AND COUNTY ORDINANCE. SO WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THEM.
WHETHER IT IS IN THE CODE OR NOT, THE PROVISION IS ABOUT BEING CERTIFIED AS, YOU KNOW, A CERTIFIED ARBORIST PROVIDING DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY BELIEVE A TREE SA NUISANCE AND IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. WE HAVE TO DO THAT WHETHER OR NOT IT IS IN THE CODE. BECAUSE OF THE COUNTY CODE TRUMPING THE CITY CODE IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT WITH RESECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION WHICH WOULD INCLUDE TREE PRESERVATION, WE ALWAYS HAVE TO FOLLOW THE COUNTY'S TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AS THE MINIMUM STANDARDS.
ESSENTIALLY, WE ARE INCORPORATING THOSE PROVISIONS, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE CLEANUP AT THE END.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALEX, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'M GOING TO GO DOWN THE LINE.
I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY GO DOWN THE LINE TONIGHT.
WE HAVE ONE AGENDA ITEM. >> OKAY.
>> WELL-DONE, AS ALWAYS. MY ONLY QUESTION WAS THE DOCUMENTS, WAS THERE-- IS THAT FROM THE STATE STATUTE? SHOULD THAT BE-- OR THE LATEST EDITION? I SAW THOSE WERE VERY SPECIFIC. EVEN CALLING OUT THE YEAR OF THE MANUALS. WHERE DID THOSE COME FROM? SHOULD WE BE NOTING THE LATEST OR MORE STRINGENT --
>> ALL RIGHT. THAT LIST CAME FROM THE COUNTY
ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE. >> IT WAS FROM THE STATE
STATUTE. >> PATTY, CAN YOU-- YEAH.
SO IT CAN BE PUT ON THE RECORD. >> PATTY, CITY ARBORIST.
THE DOCUMENTATION AS IT RELATES TO THE LATEST EDITIONS, THE COUNCIL FOR TREE AND LANDSCAPE APPRAISER, ONE OF THE BOOKS REGULATING THE GUIDELINES IS THE LATEST EDITION, IT WAS JUST NOW OCTOBER, '22. IN ALL OF THE ORDINANCES, AND THE STATE, WHEN IT SAYS "OR LATEST EDITION." LIKE NOW THE TERMINOLOGY HAS GOTTEN MUCH MORE STRICT, AND THE
[00:10:03]
VALUATIONS, THE ISA TREE APPRAISALS, THE VALUE OF THE TREES, IT IS A WHOLE SHEET OF MATH.SO THE TREE APPRAISALS HAVE REALLY GONE UP SIGNIFICANTLY.
FROM THOUSANDS TO TENS OF THOUSANDS.
>> YEAH. >> I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE
STATE WAS GEARING AT ALSO. >> MAYBE I MISSED IT.
DOES IT SAY "OR LATEST EDITION" THIS THIS ORDINANCE?
IT DOES NOT. >> IT DOES NOT IN THE STATE LAW EITHER. ACTUALLY, IN THE STATE LAW, IT DEFINES IT AS DOCUMENTATION, AND IT SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES SECOND EDITION, 2017. THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT IS WORDED
IN THE ORDINANCE. >> THEN IT IS W WHAT IT IS, THE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT IS ALL I HAVE.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, AGAIN, THIS IS FOR A RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY HOME? SO, LIKE, MULTIFAMILY TOWNHOMES,
THAT DOESN'T APPLY HERE? >> CORRECT.
THAT IS ALL I HAVE. >> AND THE AREA, THERE IS A LOT OF SMALL FRONT YARDS. SMALL FRONT YARDS THAT HAVE FAR TOO MANY TREES. FROM 25 YEARS AGO.
HOW DO WE CLASSIFY TREES THAT END UP BEING-- I DON'T KNOW.
CALL IT SUBSERVIENT, ONE TO THE OTHER.
RIGHT? YOU HAVE ONE TREE THAT IS BEAUTIFUL, IT IS NICE. THE TREE THAT THEY PLANT-- THEY ARE ALL OAKS. THE OAKS THEY PLANTED RIGHT NEXT TO IT. IT BARELY GROWS.
IT IS TERRIBLE. IT GROWS UNDER THE SHADE OF THE OTHER TREE. AND IT IS STOPPING GRASS FROM GROWING. I HAVE PEOPLE ON THE MASTER ASSOCIATION. PEOPLE ASKED ME ABOUT THIS.
>> I HAVE WORKED WITH MANY ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN THE CITY.
THIS NEW ORDINANCE IS MEANT FOR TREE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION WHEN THE TREE DOES NOT MEET ANY OTHER CRITERIA AND A HOME OWNER WANTS TO REMOVE THE TREE. BUT WE HAVE-- IN OUR TREE REMOVAL ORDINANCE, THAT IS WHY I GO OUT THERE.
YES. YOU MAY REMOVE THIS TREE.
IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THIS AREA.
AND EVEN TO PUT A NEW TREE BACK IN IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
THAT IS WHEN THEY PUT THE VALUE OF THE TREE INTO THE TREE TRUST FUND. AND THEY REMOVE IT.
WE HAVE DONE IT WITH COMM COMMUNITY-WIDE, AND I HAVE DONE IT FOR HOME OWNERS, EACH HOME OWNER.
>> HOW DO WE VALUE THOSE TREES? >> IT IS PART OF THE BIG FORMULA. WHAT THE CITY OF PARKLAND DOES IF IT IS NOT A MALICIOUS ACT AND SOMEONE HASN'T KILLED A GREAT OAK TREE OR HUGE PINE, WE VALUE IT RIGHT NOW AT $200 AN INCH.
THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD COST. THAT IS TECHNICALLY THE WHOLESALE PRICE IF YOU DO THE MATH.
AND WE SHOULD BE CHARGING THE RETAIL PRICE WHICH WOULD BE DOUBLE THAT AMOUNT. SO IF YOU WENT OUT TO BID OR GOT A LANDSCAPER TO PUT IN A 12-FOOT TREE, USUALLY IT COSTS BETWEEN $600, $700, $800. NOW IT GOES UP AS MUCH TO
$1,200. >> TO PUT IN A NEW TREE, VERSUS BASICALLY DYING-- I MEAN, MOST OF THEM ARE MINIMUM, SIX INCHES.
>> THAT IS $1,200 TO REMOVE A TREE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? >> SAY IT AGAIN?
>> $1,200? >> NOT TO REMOVE A TREE.
THE TREE REMOVAL IS $140 PER TREE.
>> YOU MAKE THE OPTION, SAY I HAVE FIVE TREES ON MY HOUSE.
I HAVE ROOM FOR ONE MORE OVER THERE.
I JUST DON'T WANT ANY MORE. I'M DONE.
WHAT ELSE CAN I DO? I DON'T WANT ANY MORE TREES.
YOU PAY INTO THE TREE TRUST FUND.
YOU PAY INTO THE TREE TRUST FUND IF YOUR TREE IS 17 INCHES AND SMALLER. IT IS NOT A SPECIMEN TREE, THEN.
IT IS ONE TO ONE. THREE INCHES.
THREE-INCH REPLACEMENT TREE. THREE-INCH CALL PER CALL PERI.
IF YOU HAVE A TREE THAT IS 18 INCHES, WHICH MAKES IT A SPECIMEN TREE, 8-10 INCHES AND UP, IT IS INCH TO INCH.
>> THAT IS-- HOW ARE YOU PAYING INTO THE FUND IF YOU ARE NOT
PUTTING A TREE IN? >> YOU ARE NOT PUTTING A TREE BACK IN. IT IS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE TREE
IT DOESN'T COST US TO REMOVE. YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY IT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY ON THE NEW LANGUAGE, ANTHONY, YOU MENTIONED, IT IS STATE LAW.
CORRECT? >> PRIMARILY, STATE LAW, AND THEN THERE IS SOME DEFINITIONS THAT ARE ALSO FROM THE COUNTY ORDINANCE WHICH WE NEED TO ADHERE TO.
>> AND YOU HAD MENTIONED-- SOMONE MENTIONED FROM THE STAFF THAT THIS CAME DOWN AROUND 2019 WHICH IS FOUR YEARS AGO.
SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED THAT IT TAKES-- IT TAKES US FOUR YEARS
[00:15:04]
TO GET LANG LANGUAGE FROM A CONTROLLING AUTHORITY AND THEN IMPLEMENT IT HERE? TELL ME SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE RAN INTO THAT IT TOOK FOUR YEARS.>> SO YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE FROM THE STATE LAW AND ORDINANCE OR NOT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO IT.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME CONCERN WHEN THAT LAW CAME OUT, POTENTIALLY, THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE TWEAKED OR FURTHER INTERPRETATION. ADDITIONALLY, WHENEVER THE COUNTY DOES AN UPDATE TO THEIR TREE PRESERVATION, IT GENERALLY TRIGGERS AN UPDATE ON OUR ORDINANCE.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A TIMING ISSUE.
JUST WAITING FOR THE COUNTY TO DO THEIR NEXT ROUND OF REVISIONS. THINKING WE COULD DO THEM ALL AT THE SAME TIME. THAT MAY HAVE SOMETHING TO DO
WITH IT. >> THE ONLY THING I CAN ADD FURTHER IN OUR INDUSTRY, WE KNEW AS SOON AS THAT STATUTE WAS WRITTEN, THE NEXT DAY, THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WAS BOMBARDED WITH EVERYBODY WITHDRAWING. WITHDRAWING.
THE SAME THING HAPPENED BEFORE AND AFTER.
THOUSANDS OF TREES WERE LOST RIGHT OFF THE BAT BECAUSE IT WAS SO POORLY WRITTEN WITH NO DEFINITIONS.
BASICALLY, ANYBODY COULD SAY, IT IS A HAZARDOUS TREE.
REMOVE IT. SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.
WE ARE NOT SAYING DETACHED. NOTHING-- IN COMMUNITIES EVERYWHERE, THEY WERE REMOVING ALL OF THEIR TREES.
IT WENT BACK TO WHOMEVER-- HOWEVER THE STATE CHANGES LAWS.
IT WENT BACK TO THAT TO BE CHANGED AND TO BECOME MUCH STRICTER AND MORE DEFINITION. NO MORE AMBIGUITY.
IT IS CLEAR NOW. WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO.
>> THE LEGISLATURE AND ITS HISTORY HAS HAD MANY LAWS THAT WERE SLOPPILY WRITTEN. IT IS NOT UP FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND TO KIND OF LABEL IT AS SLOPPY OR NOT.
IT IS THE LAW. THAT IS WHAT'S ON THE BOOKS AND SHOULD BE ENFORCED. SO IN MY VIEW, YOU KNOW, IT SHOULDN'T TAKE FOUR YEARS FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND-- WELL, WE GOT THE LAW. WE KIND OF DON'T LIKE IT.
WE SEE IT IS KIND OF SLOPPY. PEOPLE ARE REMOVING THINGS.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE LAW IS THE LAW.
I'M HAPPY THEY WENT AND REVISED IT.
THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE RELATING TO THAT IS WHEN THE LAW CAME OUT, AND WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY LIKE IT BECAUSE OF ITS SLOPPINESS, WAS THERE ANYBODY WHO WAS ADVERSELY AFFECTED AND FINED? SO GOING RETROACTIVELY, DID WE FINE RESIDENTS IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS?
>> IT WOULD BE THE OPPOSITE. >> JUST LET ME-- DID WE FINE ANYBODY FOR REMOVING A TREE THAT COMPLIED WITH THE LAW FOUR YEARS AGO THAT AFTER THE CHANGE, NOW THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE.
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYBODY WHO WAS FINED.
AND IF I MAY, MR. AVELLO, I WANT TO POINT OUT, THE LAW WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 2019. THE CLARIFICATION WAS 2022.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF IT WAS SLOPPY IN 2019, THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CLAIMED, HEY, I CAN REMOVE THE TREE.
YOU KNOW, RELATING TO THIS 2019 RULING, AND NOW WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. WE ARE GOING TO FINE YOU.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT.
THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAVE.
AND ALEX, YOU JUMPED IN WITH SOMETHING.
I ACTUALLY DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID WHEN YOU JUMPED IN.
>> I WOULD ASSUME THAT LIKE YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, PATTY, MORE TREES WOULD HAVE GOTTEN CUT DOWN WITH THE SLOP-- THEY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE LAW IN THE BEGINNING.
>> AND THEY DID. WE HAD MANY RESIDENTS HERE, I COULD SAY, WE LOST PROBABLY 20 SPECIMEN TREES.
>> YEAH. >> WELL, I KNOW SOME ANECDOTAL STORIES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE CALLED THE CITY AND HAVE SAID THAT "I HAVE A TREE. THE BRANCHES ARE FALLING ON MY ROOF. IT IS FALLING ON MY DRIVEWAY.
ALMOST HIT MY GRAND MOTHER." AND WE ARE TOLD THEY COULDN'T REMOVE IT. THOSE ARE STORIES.
I DON'T EVEN WISH TO GO BACK WHETHER THEY ARE TRUE OR NOT.
I KNOW IF PEOPLE TALKING TO ME ABOUT THOSE, I WANTED TO KNOW THAT, HAS ANYBODY BEEN FINED BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IN THEIR MIND, HEY, I'M FOLLOWING THE 2019 SLOPPY LAW, BUT THE CITY RULED-- NO, NO, WE WILL WAIT UNTIL WE KIND OF LIKE IT.
WE ARE ALL STRAIGHT NOW ON THAT. THAT WAS MY POINT.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS? I'M GLAD TO SEE IT.
I THINK IT WILL HAVE CLARIFICATION TO A LOT OF HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS. I ACTUALLY SENT IT TO MY HOA, SO THEY ARE AWARE OF IT. HOW IT WILL IMPACT THEIR ARC GUIDELINES GOING FORWARD. GREAT WORK.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.
>> TODD? >> THANKS FOR BRANCHING OUT THERE ON THAT. I HAVE NO COMMENTS.
I CAN'T FOLLOW THAT. >> I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK
[00:20:04]
QUESTIONS. THE WORD "CITY ARBORIST" WAS REMOVED. IS THAT ACCURATE?ON PAGE-- WHERE IS IT? >> LANDSCAPE.
>> UNDER EXCEPTIONS, NUMBER 1, THE WORD "CITY," THE WORD "CERTIFIED" AND "ARBORIST" WAS ADDED.
THE TITLE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WAS REMOVED.
CERTIFIED, CITY ARBORIST. IS THAT ACCURATE?
A LOT OF THE WORK YOU DO IS NOT OPINION, BUT IT IS A GUIDE TO DIRECT A CERTAIN HOME OWN, CERTAIN SITUATION, HOW TO ADDRESS ISSUES. AND I SEE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT. I THINK YOU DO A WONDERFUL JOB, AND IT ISN'T EASY. BECAUSE EVERYBODY CURTAILS THEIR TREE ISSUE TO WHO KNOWS HOW OR WHY, BUT I'M SURE YOU HEAR A LOT
(LAUGHTER). >> I DON'T ENVY YOUR WORK.
CAN YOU JUST DEFINE THE DIFFERENCE-- NOT THE DIFFERENCE.
DEFINE PRUNING AND DEFINE TRIMMING OF TREES.
YEAH, PATTY. >> BRING THE MICROPHONE UP SO IT
RECORDS YOU. >> DEFINE PRUNING AND DEFINE TRIMMING, BECAUSE THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT IF PRUNING OR TRIMMING IS DONE, IT CAN BE A DETRIMENT TO THE TREE.
>> THOSE ARE INDUSTRY TERMS THAT MEAN THE SAME THING.
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE, YOU TRIM YOUR HEDGES.
YOU PRUNE THE TREES. YOU KNOW, IT IS JUST HOW IN THE INDUSTRY TERMS. YOU KNOW? THAT IS WHAT WE REFERENCE-- WE ARE TRIMMING OUR HEDGES, PRUNING TREES. MOWING YOUR LAWN.
THAT WOULD BE THE EASE WEST WAY TO EXPLAIN IT.
DIFFERENT DEGREES OF THICKNESS OF THE BRANCHESMENT.
>> RIGHT. >> IS THERE A POINT IN SIZE OR AGE OF A TREE THAT REQUIRES AN ARBORIST TO OVERSEE OR BE PART
OF THE TRIMMING OF A TREE? >> FOR ANY TRIPPING OF THE TREES, YOU SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE A CERTIFIED ARBORIST ON SITE.
IN MY PERSONAL OPINION. I'M DOING THIS FOR SO MANY
YEARS. >> FROM A CODE STANDPOINT.
>> FROM A CODE STANDPOINT -- >> WHEN IS SA PERMIT ISSUED IN.
>> WE WOULD NOT STAND GUARD ON SOMEONE PRUNING A TREE.
WE RECOMMEND A CERTIFIED ARBORIST AS A CONSULTING PERSON AND TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS LICENSED AND INSURED.
WE TELL THEM THAT ALL THE TIME. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR CONTRACTOR IS LICENSED, INSURED. WHEN THEY SAY "I'M DOING IT MYSELF," I HAND OUT THE BROCHURE FROM THE ISA.
HOW TO PRUNE YOUR TREES CORRECTLY.
I SAY, IF YOU DON'T PRUNE LIKE THIS, YOU WILL END UP WITH A PROBLEM. WATCH THE LINES.
BUT WE DON'T BABY-SIT IT. YOU KNOW, WE ARE REACTIVE.
OR ELSE I WOULD JUST NEED 400 MORE OF MY.
>> THANK YOU. LIKE I SAID, I DON'T ENVY YOUR-- THE TASK YOU ARE GIVEN. IS THERE ANY OTHER INPUT? IS THERE ANY EMAIL OR CORRESPONDENCE? I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC.
I DON'T SEE ANY FROM THE PUBLIC HERE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.
I WANTED TO REACH OUT TO SEE IF THERE IS OTHER COMMUNICATION.
I WILL NOW CLOSE THIS ITEM TO THE PUBLIC.
>> BEFORE YOU CLOSE IT, INSTEAD OF US WRITING ALL OF THESE BACK TO DOCUMENTATION, SORRY TO BRING IT UP AGAIN.
SHOULD WE JUST REFERENCE THE STATE CODE, THE STATE ORDINANCE
IN CASE THEY CHANGE IT AGAIN? >> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
ACTUAL WRITING OF THE ORDINANCE? >> NO.
NOT EVEN THE ORDINANCE. I MEAN, MAYBE THE WHOLE ORDINANCE. MAINLY THE DOCUMENTS.
YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE BOOKS. IF THAT CHANGES AGAIN, DO WE ALL WANT TO COME HERE TO MODIFY JUST FOR THE BOOKS?
>> I WROTE A NOTE. IT IS FUNNY YOU SHOULD ASK THAT.
I WROTE A NOTE AFTER REVIEWING THE PAPERWORK FOR THE ORDINANCE.
AND THE NOTE I WROTE ON MY PAPER WAS "DID ANY OF THE-- "DID ANY OF THESE REFERENCED LATETURE OR PUBLICATIONS, DID ANY OF THEM PROVIDE DIRECTIVES OR CONTRADICTIONS TO EACH OTHER, AND IF THEY DID, WHAT WOULD-- WHO WOULD RESOLVE THE CONFLICT OF THE QUESTION?" THEN WHEN I LEARNED AT THE MEETING TONIGHT THAT IT WAS A COUNTY AND/OR STATE, THAT IS NOT
[00:25:02]
SOMETHING FOR OUR-- I DON'T WANT TO SAY OUR CITY OR OUR BOARD TONIGHT TO HAVE TO DEBATE OR MAKE IT BETTER THAN WHAT IT IS IF IT IS GIVEN TO US TO INPUT INTO THE ORDINANCE.YOU KNOW, IF THAT LANGUAGE CAN BE ADDED AS ALEX SAID, TO ALLOW THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS WRITTEN, IN PARKLAND, TO HAVE SOME LENGTH OF TIME TO BE CURRENT SO THAT IF THERE IS AN UPDATED ONE, WHICH ONE DO YOU USE? YOU REFERENCED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON SOMETHING. FROM A REFERENCE STANDPOINT.
DO YOU USE THE OLD DOCUMENT OR DO YOU USE THE NEW EDITION OR NEW UPDATED ONE? THAT IS AN ANTHONY THING.
THAT IS AN ANTHONY QUESTION RIGHT THERE.
>> AND MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS THING WITH THE LAW COMING DOWN FROM THE STATE AND US GETTING ACTIVELY LOCALLY WITH THE ORDINANCES, ANTHONY, THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
RIGHT? AND HOW DO YOU RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES? WHAT IS THE HISTORY ON HOW YOU
DEAL WITH THOSE? >> VERY CAREFULLY.
(LAUGHTER) SO LET ME-- IF I CAN, I'LL TALK ABOUT EACH ONE OF
THESE. >> PLEASE EXPOUND ON THAT.
>> I FIGURED YOU WOULD WANT ME TO.
ON SECTION 95-515, THE FIRST CHANGE WHERE WE INCORPORATE THESE DOCUMENTS BY REFERENCE, THAT IS WORD FOR WORD FROM THE COUNTY ORDINANCE. THAT DOESN'T COME FROM THE STATE. YOU WILL NOTE IT SAYS THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS AS AMENDED ARE ADOPTED.
THAT IS THE LANGUAGE EXACTLY LIKE IT IS IN THE COUNTY.
I THINK WITH RESPECT TO THE STATE LAW REFERENCE, WHERE IT DEFINES DOCUMENTATION UNDER THE PERMIT SECTION ON THE BOTTOM OF PAGE THREE, IT MEANS AN ON-SITE ASSESSMENT.
WHERE IT REFERENCES 2017. AGAIN, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, STRAIGHT FROM THE STATE LAW. I MEAN, I GUESS WE COULD SAY DOCUMENTATION MEANS AN ON-SITE ASSESSMENT PERFORMED OR SUCH OTHER-- YOU KNOW, SUCH OTHER DEFINITION AMENDED BY STATE LAW FROM TIME TO TIME. YOU KNOW, THERE IS ALWAYS THAT BALANCE. RIGHT? BECAUSE IF YOU START DOING THAT, I THINK THAT THE CONCEPT HERE IS THAT SOMEBODY CAN GO TO OUR C CODE, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO AND REFERENCE THE STATE LAW. SO WE PUT IT IN HERE.
YOU HAVE THAT BALANCE, TOO. YOU WANT TO BE CURRENT.
YOU WANT TO POTENTIALLY MITIGATE THE NEED TO GO BACK AND CHANGE YOUR ORDINANCES EVERY TIME THEY MAKE A TWEAK.
AND BALANCE THAT WITH, WELL, HEY, IF SOMEBODY GOES TO OUR CODE ON-LINE, DO THEY HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED THERE WITHOUT HAVING TO BE A LAWYER OR GO FIND THE COMPARABLE STATE
RIGHT? EXCEPT THE EXCEPTION, EXCEPTION, EXCEPTION. BY THAT TIME, THE TREES HAVE
>> THERE IS 20 REFERENCES. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> YOUR QUESTION?
>> SURE. AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT GIGGING PEOPLE FOR WHAT WE HAVEN'T CHANGED IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THE STATE MIGHT HAVE CHANGED. THAT IS THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I
MIGHT V. YOU ARE NOT DOING THAT. >> YEAH.
THE STAFF WAS HONORING IT BECAUE WE WERE HOPING THERE WOULD BE A CLARIFY CLARIFICATION QUICKLY FOLLOWING.
IT WASN'T PUT IN THE CODE IN 2019, 2020.
BUT IT WAS BEING IMPLEMENTED BY THE STAFF AND RECOGNIZED IF
PEOPLE WERE ASKING ABOUT IT. >> AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, BECAUSE MY QUESTION CAME ACROSS AS CRITICISM.
I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU, PATTY, THAT YOU DO A WONDERFUL JOB.
WE SHOULD BE HONORED TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS AS DEDICATED.
>> APPLAUSE). >> THROUGH THIS CAUSE OF ECOLOGY AND TREE MAINTENANCE AND ALL THE GREEN STUFF OUT THERE.
I MEAN, I TRULY APPRECIATE IT. DON'T TAKE MY QUESTION AS BEING
AN ANGRY BALD GUY. >> WE ARE, WE ARE --
>> THANK YOU. >> ESPECIALLY IN THIS TOWN.
>> WE ARE A TREE CITY. WE ARE A DESIGNATED OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED TREE CITY, U.S.A. >> HOW MANY RESIDENTS DO WE HAVE? 30,000?
>> IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS AGENDA ITEM?
(LAUGHTER). >> CAN WE CALL THIS THE PATTY HOOT ORDINANCE? NO.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO APPROVE-- WHAT
>> SECONDED BY JOEL. CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.
>> YES. CHAIRMAN MURRAY ZWEIG?
[9. Comments from the Planning & Zoning Manager]
>> THANK YOU. GAIL, ANY COMMENTS?
LAST NIGHT, IF ANY OF YOU WERE WATCHING THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING, WE DID ADOPT ON FIRST READING, THE NEW REDISTRICTING MAP. SO IT WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR A SECOND READING COMING BACK OCTOBER 4, I BELIEVE.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST IN THAT, YOU KNOW, SECOND READING WILL BE THEN. WE WILL BE HAVING A MEETING NEXT
[00:30:03]
MONTH. ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, IF YOU RECALL, WHEN THE CITY WAS GRANTED THE FOUR-ACRE PARK FOR GATOR ACRES AS PART OF THE PR-2 DEVELOPMENT, THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT REQUIRED US TO REZONE THAT TO R-3.BACK WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE DID AN R-3 ZONING. NOW ASKER WE ARE MOVING ALONG, THE PLATS ARE GETTING READY TO BE RECORDED.
WE WANT TO REZONE THAT TO OPEN SPACE FOR THE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY FOR THE PARK DEVELOPMENT.
AND WE DO HAVE SOME OTHER ITEMS BUMPING AROUND THAT ARE IN REVIEW THAT MAY BE ALSO ON THE AGENDA.
IT COULD ACTUALLY BE A VERY BUSY MEETING.
WE KNOW WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE ITEM.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I ACTUALLY HAVE TWO BRIEF ONES.
LY CONTINUE TO REACH OUT. I USUALLY TEXT.
THE BJ'S PLAZA. THE LAKES ARE ALWAYS HORRENDOUS.
>> THE LAKES? >> YOU NOTIFY CODE? YOU ALWAYS TELL US. IT IS CODE.
>> SOMETIMES I LEAVE A MESSAGE WITH CODE.%
>> THEY ARE PRETTY GOOD. >> THE CVS PARKING LOT.
IT IS JUST THAT AREA. YOU KNOW ABOUT IT?
>> ALL RIGHT. >> IT IS JUST GETTING-- YEAH.
MY LAST ONE IS -- >> IT IS A MESS.
>> I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE ANECDOTAL STORIES.
WERE THEY AT THE BARBER SHOPS? >> THE BARBER SHOPS.
>> I CAN REPORT BACK TO YOU, IF YOU REMEMBER THE WATERWAYS OUT-PARCEL. THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT THAT LAKE MAINTENANCE. THAT HAS BEEN MAINTAINED.
NOW IT HAS A SERVICE CONTRACT ON IT.
THAT WAS DONE SHORTLY AFTER THEIR APPROVAL.
>> IT IS NOT EASY WITH THE ALGAE BLOOM.
>> THEY THOUGHT IT WAS PART OF THE RESIDENTIAL BEHIND, I
BELIEVE. >> WITH THE RISK OF MR. KAPLAN ASKING MORE QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO
>> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. >> HAVE A GOOD EVENING.
>> OH, YES. HAPPY NEW YEAR TO THOSE WHO CELEBRATE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.