tree preservation workshop Planning Commission requested
What the county recorded
This item is not from the published agenda
It is a stretch of the recording that this archive identified as a separate matter — a call to order, a recess, or something taken up that the agenda does not list. There is no official title, no staff recommendation and no disposition, because the county never recorded one. Everything below is inferred.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Planning Commission, Jun 5, 2025
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Planning Commission, Jun 5, 2025
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 1h 42m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 73% of 379 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
All right. Thank you. Is there somebody Oh, hey Terry.
Uh good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman Mariano's Petos Planning Development and Economic Growth. Uh this item is the tree preservation workshop that the Planning Commission requested I believe it was at the March twenty, twenty twenty five or thereabouts. Um Planning maybe it was March twenty two. Uh Planning Commission and Uh the topic for the discussion that was requested was um what are the big ideas that we want to pro uh to per pursue and propose for the ordinance that
was presented that day at the Planning Commission. That would help to move the needle some more. To date, we have identified increasing fees, and actually there's a resolution that's moving to the Board of County Commissioners that will increase the fees associated with tree mitigation on a developable acre basis. And then the amendments that were previously presented to the board to the Planning Commission, and we have those redline if we need to reference them during this
workshop discussion. Those amendments were mainly about cleanups, reformatting of the text. Closing various loopholes, further defining definitions, and basically memorializing current practices. But one of the comments from the from the dais was, you know, what are we doing to uh advance the needle in terms of tree preservation? Thus the request for the workshop, and thus today. Um to note, uh, we did mention and advertise the well We did mention
the workshop at the May nineteenth roundtable meeting in order to invite additional uh stakeholders to participate in this public session should they wish to attend and and provide their commentary. So uh with that it's really the Planning Commission's workshop. Um I don't have anything to present more than um what was already previously presented in terms of a draft ordinance, but we do have that copy available if we want to put it on the board.
So Terry just procedurally Did were people led to believe that they could come speak at this workshop? Because I'm I'm only asking 'cause normally when the board conducts a workshop there is it's just staff on the board, there's no members of the public that speak, but did but I don't if we led people to believe they'd be able to speak today, I don't want to Deter that if we if we made that representation.
Yes, I think at the horizontal round table I did mention that if any of the engineers are any of the stakeholders wanted to come to share their ideas, they could.
Okay, th then my advice, Mr. Chairman, is that you do open it up for public comment any public comment that wants to speak.
Okay.
All right, again I'd like to w welcome everybody uh to the uh tree preservation workshop and give you an opportunity to give us your input if you have any thoughts or ideas. It's You know, it's uh become uh it's come to our attention. Um especially recently that uh we need to do something to try to preserve some of our forests in Pasco County rather than just
going and clear cut and develop. And um so we're we're trying to come up with some best practices and some regulations that would um um steer us in that direction. So if anybody isn't here is here today that would like to speak on that sop topic or have some ideas, please come forward, give us your name and address, and we'd be happy to listen to you.
Jennifer Sini, [address removed]. I feel like I just rolled backwards in time a few centuries. Um, it feels like I should be done with this, but y'all keep bringing up really interesting topics. Um so about the tree ordinance. To be honest with you, I was a little surprised to hear Mr. Pitos say that he had let the public know about this, 'cause I heard nothing. The last information I had was
from Kristen King in June of twenty twenty four. Now if I'm understanding correctly, you have gone through some revisions, you've been adding some things, you've been doing some work. So please forgive me, I do not have the latest and the greatest from y'all. But I will tell you what my reaction was last year and I think it would still hold true today. Um My opinion last year was the uh ordinance that was being proposed was was just
unnecessarily complex. It had expanded to several more pages than the original, and there was a uh tree value matrix that was a little bit and my mind difficult to follow. Um So My feeling was, if you'll forgive me for saying this is you need to get more simple. So why not start with Please bear with me. keep your hands off
of any native or non-invasive tree of X diameter or larger and keep your hands off any endangered tree completely. So this would be appl applicable to individuals, developments, government, utilities. So That's my opinion, but here's the reality. The reality is there are always legitimate reasons for messing with trees. Um but if you start with
the premise, the goal. clearly defined of don't mif mess with the trees period then some simple things can be added to that for those obviously going to happen necessary exemptions to that rule. So start simple and then add simple. and I have some ch some s suggestions. Um number one, When clearing any Land or
lot. for build out always have a tree plan and a permit. Two. If a site is rendered unbuildable due to tree coverage, then clear only the minimum Necessary. three, clear cutting an entire area or site or lot is not allowed. Number four, replace any trees removed with only natives or non invasive trees, on an inch for inch
basis, mixing species to avoid a monoculture. Make sure the tree is the right plant for the right place. Use the best management practices. And here's the kicker. No bonuses. No incentives, no exceptions. then follow that with the um Breaking these rules will cause or result in a fine for each tree removed. To me, that's a simple place to start. I'm not saying throw the baby out with the bathwater
because the staff has worked really hard on this, but I think a deep breath and a step back. And starting with s pardon me, something a little bit more simple will give you a better product. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. Appreciate your comments. Mr. Chairman. Just as a matter of point of clarification, I noted that it was I spoke to to the horizontal round table on May nineteenth. Not that my announcement was any kind of public notice.
I'm sorry, I I taper you tapered off on the land there, Terry.
M my note previously was that uh I told the horizontal round table uh that there would be this discussion on June the fifth. My announcement wasn't necessarily a public notification like you would put in a newspaper or anything like that. It was just telling area stakeholders who regularly attend our monthly meetings that this workshop was going to take place.
Okay. However I would note that your agenda is pub published on our website so it's not like it's hidden from anybody. I mean that would talk about it.
Yeah. I I and I do think it's a good idea to hear public comment on these items. Uh And the I I liked a lot of the suggestions that the last person just made, so let's uh see who's next.
Terry Terry, just real quick for clarification, just so I'm aware. You said there's there's a fee revision that's going through the ordinance process right now.
Is that what you said at the beginning? It's not going through an ordinance process. So if you recall when the tree the changes to the tree ordinance were brought to the Planning Commission
I don't want to oversimplify this, but you basically said it wasn't good enough. Right. Um and there was a suggestion made that to increase their fees, they could just do that by resolution. Okay, so resolution. So the resolution is merely addressing the increase in fees if you choose to to remove a tree, how much you have to pay to the tree mitigation fund, and then what are the uses of that mitigate tree mitigation fund. It's not addressing
And the Seni just talked about or that the Planning Commission was concerned about in terms of clear cutting the tree. It's simply how much do you have to pay into the tree mitigation fund? And what and what can that m fund be used for? That's all it's addressing.
and the revisions or the or proposed ordinance that came to us last year is basically been on hold to till we got to this workshop.
Yes, those those uh the the draft that was presented in March did not advance um and the workshop is happening before we make any further refinements to that draft. Um I will note that some of the things that um the speaker re just mentioned regarding Complex tables and things like that. That's not in the draft that was presented in March. So she's probably seen a very much older version of an earlier idea.
Um so just FYI, that's not in the red line that we might share on the overscreen on the overhead if you if you l wanna see that um document from March.
Okay.
All right, Gary,
thank you. Any other questions? All right. Could we get your name and address please?
My name is Karen Byrd, uh [address removed]. And the main reason I came today was because when I did see the notice about this meeting, I noticed there was going to be at least some discussion about trees. Um I'd like to compliment the previous lady who spoke because I think she put it very well. Um I wasn't able to find uh the current requirements for builders, but I think we're all Just
about everybody is concerned about the excessive building that is going on all over our county and particularly on the east side here. and in the course of that a lot of trees are just yanked out and destroyed. Uh it's very frustrating and I feel that there should be definitely some requirements with these large um uh buildings that are going on, apartments,
single family homes, whatever. There should be something in the requirements that they're required to plant trees, the appropriate kind of tree for Florida, because uh for central Florida that does make a difference. I'd also like to point out um some comments From the Resilient Pasco project, that Pasco County over the past 30 years has experienced an increase of approximately 5.9 degrees Fahrenheit of maximum
maximum temperatures during the summertime months. And as we all know, the forecast every year, each summer, seems to be getting hotter and hotter. Extreme heat events, the loss of vegetation to development can lead to higher temperatures in cities, referred to as the urban heat island effect, etc. The greater Zeppel Hills area. was identified as a focus area for extreme heat vulnerability
to more closely examine the impact of extreme heat on a local level. parts of the area lacking in green spaces and this lack of green space is a contributing factor to urban heat. So I think that's extremely important that we have something in the requirements for builders that they do not only replace trees but add more trees. I know there's currently a requirement for retention ponds, which I think needs to be
updated, but by the same token I think trees, adding trees and taking care of them should also be added. And I see that in the vision you showed, prevent the elimination of mature native trees from new development. So hopefully um there will be more about this. And I think you end I was having a hard time hearing for some reason. Uh you mentioned there's going to be another workshop on trees. Oh
Um not sure that there'll be another workshop. That hasn't
been decided. Uh the we would uh uh again we would probably send out a notice if it if we're gonna do that. But we're trying to get as much done as we can at this workshop and then we'll see where it goes from there.
However, if any additional regul then land development regulations were to come out of this workshop. those would come back to the Planning Commission at a notice public meeting. So they're and they would go to the Board of County Commissioners as well. So there would have to be future meetings to discuss any land development changes that came out of this workshop.
Okay. Thank you.
Planning Commissioner's Clark Hobby, one hundred nine North Brussel Street, Tampa, Florida. Um I wasn't gonna speak on this, but I I missed the first hearing and I I heard the hubbub about it and and so on and so forth. And I don't know what staff's been doing over the last year on it, but in my mind there are three things that we need to keep in mind when we work on this ordinance to try to bring it forward. And I know there's a lot of building community anxiety on different parts of it and some of those guys are really into the minutiae
and what the costs are gonna be. But as I think about this and try to take a long-term view on it, there's probably three big issues we need to be focused on at the macro level. And I think the first is we need to incentivize keeping the trees that we want, which is really and for most of us really oak trees. Uh and live oaks in particular. And whatever system we bring forward, it needs to incentivize people to leave them. So, as an example, if it were me and I were designing
this ordinance, I might say if you already had a payment into the mitigation fund of X amount, $50,000. Maybe if you have a mature oak tree and you choose to leave it, maybe there's a credit for keeping the tree up for a certain amount of time. That way, and this is something that Commissioner Gray and I are very much aware of the people who are out doing the site work for our clients are mindful and the designers are looking at the mature
trees and the oak trees in particular. and being more mindful of it because what I find is a lot of the times when it gets down to the mass grading exercise, we don't have enough of an incentive and or disincentive with the Oaks in particular to get these guys to design around them. And I think it's kinda i irresponsible for people not to do that. So that's the first thing. Uh the last two are are a little bit uh Interrelated and they're more words of caution, having spent a lot of time working
on the 2004 tree and landscaping ordinance that kind of started all this stuff. I would just remind you all that in 2004 and and in some uh subsequent drafts over the years, staff has tried to bring forward ordinances that basically would have the development. Reforesting areas that don't have trees at all right now. And that was a big bone of contention. And staff really fought us in 2004. And the first draft actually required people
who had hay fields. If you did any development, you have to come in and end up with a certain number of trees per acre. And that is just way out of line, in my opinion. We've got to be careful. About that. Don't
we sort of do that already today? So, for instance, one could go develop a hay field, and in our MPUD, we require X many trees per lot.
You you do, but the way it was done in 2004, where the development started and began or and ended was unclear. So, like if you had a thousand-acre ranch and you were just going to build one house on it, the implication out of the drafts in 2004 was you had to reforest the entire ranch. And that was, I mean literally hours of discussion about that. So you need to be careful on the drafting. And then the last thing is just Always have to be mindful of the ag guys and the
legitimate ag exemptions that are available under state law because we have clients right now that have to go out and take down oak trees sometimes and they plant orange trees. And if they're doing that for ag, they're allowed to do it, even though we may not like it. And I know Commissioner Simpson did that a few years ago in East Pasco and at first people were worried about it. I said he's planting orange growth. I mean, he's allowed to do that. That's the state law. So I just anyway, you guys are much more attuned to this
stuff. I didn't make the previous hearing, but I wanted staff to be aware that we always gotta be mindful of these things as we're bringing these ordinances forward.
Thanks. Okay, thank you.
Anyone else?
Going once. Go on twice. Alright, no, I didn't do it too.
You didn't stand the past up Nancy.
Nancy Hazewood [address removed]. Um So I think Jim Frissini did a wonderful job on this. I think she had a lot of great ideas. Um but I don't like the idea of uh tree mitigation fees uh or incentives for trees actually. Uh tree mitigation is probably a good idea. We'll see where that goes.
But the incentives for trees, I don't know about that. Um Long time ago when I first started this we didn't have this tree problem. They left up trees. I don't quite understand what happened. And um what Clark was talking about reforestation is now called rewilding. And I don't think that's a bad idea. Um, basically when they're taking trees, they're not only taking trees, they're taking things from the whole county. We need those trees to support our water
and to support our air and the heat index. So I'm not sure about some of those things. Let me make sure I've covered everything here.
I didn't hear about the workshop either. I would love to see a a workshop done with the public because um you do hear about the problems with the trees and Well, they're taking 'em down all over the county and stripping 'em from everything. I'm not sure that's such a good idea. That's gonna come back and bite us sooner or later. Thank y'all.
Thank you. Anyone else?
You'd need to state your name and address again.
Yes. Cindy Boggle. [address removed]. Okay, the trees. I like the idea of a a tree mitigation, but I don't like the idea of giving these developers any more incentives than they already get. We are already giving them incentives to get the business out here, which we the tax paypayers are going to be picking up. Um, recently I live on Frontier Drive.
which dead ends into the upper Hillsborough Wildlife Management area. We have one way out of our road, And that is to go down to Marks, the gateway to fifty four. They just cleared 27 acres that were loaded with 100-year-old oak trees that were loaded with squirrel nests, um, bird nests, um, gopher tortoises that were killed. Um But at any rate, yes,
the heat gets it gets warmer here every year. I work with horses every single day. and they'll tell you it's ninety five but feels like a hundred and seven? No, it's a hundred and seven. When you take trees down and you put replace it with concrete and asphalt, you're going to get heat. It isn't it isn't fossil fuels, it's over development and the entire state of Florida is doing it. But Pasco is passing every other county In Florida, and
how fast and rapidly they are bulldozing trees down. In this instance, they had orange fencing around trees that they were to save. And for some reason they didn't now. I actually drove onto the site, stopped the person with the bulldozer that was pushing trees down in the orange fence and asked him why he was doing it. His answer was We accidentally started to take some big branches down,
and we were instructed just to take 'em all down. They saved one tree, Out of seventy-five live oak trees that were over seventy five to a hundred years old. So Mitigation I like. We do have to start saving the trees. We cannot plant seedling oaks. They don't provide any shade and palm trees, let me tell you, I lived in the keys for a long time. Palm
trees are rat and roach nests. That's what you get with palm trees, and that's a fact. So anything you all can do to start saving some of the trees, I am all for it. Thank you.
All right, thank you.
Alright, and anyone else?
Not saying any one. Let's uh have a discussion from up here.
I do have a question from Terry or Patrick. I don't know which staff persons and sort of leading the charge on this. Is that you Patrick or Ter Who?
It it was Pat Jack. The project's transitioning over to us now.
Okay. So um
but he can help if he's got the
Well I the the question really was
I mean, this is not an issue unique to Pasco. So there probably are jurisdictions in the state of Florida where they're adequately protecting even if you just go with Mr. Hobby suggesting the large oak trees or you know, the certain categories of trees are the ones that Jennifer seemingly mentioned. Um Um it seems to be there's some agreement that there's a certain category of trees that should be protected and not clear cut. Has anybody researched how other jurisdictions
save those trees and where it's actually working and Mean.
Our you know, our our tree canopies are probably not materially different than they are in the rest of the Florida. So have we done any research to can we just cut and paste somebody else's regulations that are doing this the right way?
I I think research has been done in that regard. I haven't personally seen it to dig into it, but yes, the idea is well taken that we can go to another ordinance, see how they have uh affected. I mean I've driven through other
I've driven through other communities where they're actively under development and I see some barriers around the large tree. that they're not being clear cut. So It seems to me that that would be fairly easy to Go find out what are they doing that to to protect that tree that from the bulldozers.
Sure.
Well. Mega?
Well we have to do is enforce the code we have. Okay, well there you go. The purpose of M P U D districts are A To encourage innovations in residential and non-residential development and redevelopment so that the growing demand for housing in the county may be bet may be met by greater variety in type, design, and layout of dwellings. To encourage the thoughtful consideration inclusion of supporting non-residential uses where appropriate, and to encourage the
effective use of open space in recreational areas. And this same section about the purpose of M PUD districts R ends with E. Um sorry, D. To encourage more flexible land development, which will respect and conserve natural resources such as streams, lakes, floodplains, groundwater, wooded areas, steeply sloped areas, and areas of unusual beauty or importance to the natural ecosystem. Since I've been back on this planning commission which is
coming up on We're about three years coming up right about now.
I've watched almost every c I haven't seen but a handful of Euclidean zonings come through here and Terry and I had a nice discussion about some of the things he's working on for the new comp plan and trying to fix this.
We use and we abuse. the MPUD. The MPUD is supposed to be for something that's special, that's out of the ordinary. What we've now d done is use the MPUD as a vehicle to maximize the density on every piece of property. And we don't negotiate our MPUDs. I suggested this when we had the last discussion about treats. We need a new way of doing business. When
a developer comes in, we start with you start with R4, 60 by 100 lots. You get 40 by 100 or 40 by 70 or 40 by 80 lots. after you preserve wetlands, after you preserve trees, after you preserve topography topography, then we let you cluster the houses and build them all ten feet apart if that's what you want to do after you save those things. We don't give those things to you on day one. And I see that from from
what I've seen, that's what we do. I come in here and I see MPUDs that have nothing that's unique associated with them. They're a grid pattern of streets of forty-five foot wide they s when I first got here they were forty foot wide lots, now they're forty-five. And we just cram 'em and jam them in as much as we can. The other thing that I think we need to do is we need to understand Why are trees killed? It's our own land development regulations, and I'm not saying that
there's anything wrong with these land development regulations, but we have to understand this. When we design a development It all starts with stormwater. And water flows to the lowest point. So over on the coast, that's the Gulf of America. In the middle of the county that's the groundwater. The wetland intersects the groundwater. That's the bottom. So that
starts where's the bottom of our retention storage starts there. Then we have to store all of the runoff up. Then we have to go uphill to the roadway. Then from the roadway we have to go uphill to the house because everything has to flow downhill. And I hear this, I hear the constant complaint from the public, all of this new development is five and six feet higher than the other development and all the water's running down on us. That's exactly why.
Well, unfortunately because if we had no stormwater regulations, then you would be flooded even worse than you're getting it now. that appears to be the only technical solution, but When you go in and you add feet of fill to a sight you smother the trees, therefore it becomes necessary for the provision of stormwater drainage to eliminate all the trees. So
one of the things that I've been thinking about and how this discussion came about I know Mr. Gray was very upset after seeing the Newport corner's development and I can tell you having lived over there for almost the entirety of my life I was very upset to see the clear cutting of that development. And what we have is a Lot and Block Subdivision. We don't have clustering, we just have cramming. Of homes. How many homes can we cram onto
this land? With no regard to the preservation of the resources that were there. Maybe we need to start treating trees or stands of trees, not not individual ones, but stands of trees, just like we do wetlands.
And right now in our comprehensive plan If you preserve a wetland. you get a density bonus for preserving that wetland. Well maybe we should treat those large stands of trees just like wetlands and you can have a density bonus for preserving the trees. to force you into clustering away from the trees and allow those trees to escape the filling that's necessary when you develop. And the worst place that this happens is in the middle of the county. In
the mid the middle of our county has lands which have groundwater Sometimes in the summertime, right at the surface or just inches below the surface. So the bottom level is the gr is the the level of the ground today and everything has to be filled up. From there. So there's no chance to build in the middle of the county without significant
filling. Which then requires smothering the trees. So the only way you're not going to smother the trees is not developing the area where the trees are, or to reserve some areas on those properties for the preservation of tree stands of trees. I've worked in lots of cities and counties that have a lot of crazy ordinances about grand trees and historic trees. and I've seen all kinds of super heroic efforts tried to work around and
save one tree.
But Pardon the old adage here, we're we're missing the forest for the tree. We saved one tree and we spent millions of dollars to save one tree while we mowed over entire forests. that we could have preserved simply by observing what the purpose of our MPUD zoning district is. We just don't observe that anymore. And I will say this, I'm encouraged. I had a nice discussion with Mr. Petos yesterday about his thinking
on the twenty fifty comp plan and the future land use scheme and I'm sure there'll be lots of discussion. later, but he's thinking about these things. He's thinking about the overuse and abuse of the MPUD and trying to create a new future land use scheme that will utilize more of the Euclidean district standards so that we're not giving away the farm on day
one. And I I appreciate the thought he's put into it. I think some of the devil will be in the details we talked about, but he's clearly put some thought into this and When we talk about the comp plan, hopefully some of this can get solved. But that's just the way I see that from up here, is that we we've abused the MPUD and I even see it with the commissioners in the the requirement now for these binding concept plans, right? We used to get MPUDs and they kind of showed us the layout
and then the MPUD plans have evolved into four arrows that show how we're gonna get in and out of the site and a big blank canvas for the developer to do whatever the hell they want. Thanks. That's not an MPUD plan. That's just a list of I want this entitlement, that entitlement, and the other entitlement, and I paid a lawyer enough money to get it for me.
That's my thoughts. Is that And when ch Mr. Gray and I had some conversations about this one of our suggestions and make and I know Mr Goldstein has some different opinions about it, but in our current count plan We give a bonus, a density bonus to developers to preserve wetlands. which in ninety-nine out of a hundred cases they can't get a permit to develop in the first place. So why are we giving
you a bonus to save something that you're not allowed to touch to begin with. Yeah, you're allowed to lop off a little corner of a wetland here and there. to accomplish a project, but you're not allowed to wholesale blitz wetlands. We've got state and federal laws that stop that. But yet we give them a bonus for complying with the law. Think about that. Now I know David had said that that's because you assign some value to their wetland property and I guess I'll have to do some thinking about that, but
maybe we should treat those large stands of densely forested areas the same way as we do the wetlands.
Yeah, I wanna be clear. I'm not opposed to giving a bonus for preserving tree canopy. What I've had concerns with was you taking away the bonus for wetland preservation because you in theory could have a site that is heavily has heavy amount of wetlands and if you don't give them some value for that that those wetlands that they can sort of move to their upland areas you might potentially have a takings argument or a regulatory takings argument. Sure. So I'm
not in favor of removing the bonus we give for Weldons, but I'm not opposed to giving an additional bonus for preserving tree canopy. I do want to make one comment though about MPVDs being the tool. Okay. I get your point that the existing code probably has more teeth than we're actually using However, I also believe in some level of predictability for the development community and I think when a developer is operating in the county, they have the right to know, Hey,
this is this is what I can do in Pasco County in terms of these are the trees I gotta protect, these this is you know, this is the bonus I'm gonna get and I think that should be codified, not case by case depending on which MPD reviewer is you're negotiating with on that particular case. I think You know. Clark shouldn't get a better treatment than Barbara when it comes just because they had a different MPD reviewer negotiating with them. So I think there needs to be some predictability
in our code that says these are Pasco County's treat requirements. Whether it's Euclidean, whether it's MPD, we should be baseline requirements that. That all developers who operate in our county know this is what you've got to do. Whether it's bonuses codified, whether it's you know, incentives that Clark's talking about.
Point. Not all development is the same either. We're we're here talking about this more in the residential development.
Context. and not talking about it in the commercial development context. And I would tell you that they're two different animals. If I'm buying a two acre site to build a sit down restaurant.
I it's probably presumed I need all of that two acres in order to provide the restaurant, the parking and the stormwater retention and if there's a tree in the way it's going to be it's going to be removed and there's going to be a payment to a tree bank. in the residential context, what I'm trying to say is we should use the MPUD. The MPUD is a canvas which we can create different zonings to
fit a certain site. We use our MPUDs more like a Euclidean district. When we come out with and Terry, I'm sorry 'cause I'm not trying to pick on you personally by this, but when we come out with a PM twenty six or whatever that says you shall have that all MPUDs shall have a minimum lot size of no less than forty five feet. Well we're giving you forty five feet from day one. Well then that might as well just be a Euclidean district, just like R four is. It's sixty by a hundred. It's
like we've created with PM twenty six we've created a new u t y new Euclidean district for the MPUD that's so long as you follow this memorandum This is what you get when the whole purpose of the MPUD was to provide for flexibility so that we can save things. And we're like like wetlands and other natural slopes that in fact are specifically mentioned here in the purpose of the MPUD district. That's the part we're missing here.
Yeah, again, like I said, I'm not I wouldn't be opposed to revisiting how we're using M PUDs. I just my only point is that I think even if we go to Morgie Clidian districts, which I support what you're saying, there should be defined requirements for which trees you have to protect and then which trees you can take down and if so, what you need to do to mitigate for it. And I and I Part of my concern here is we we seem to be overly focused on the protection side of the equation
And I'm not saying that's totally misplaced, but We're kind of also ignoring the mitigation side of the equation
too. The problem with that is How long have we had a tree ordinance in Pasco County that requires an inch for inch payment for trees? Had it as long as I've been doing it here. I'm getting close to where I'm gonna be retiring from this business and we've been paying fifty dollars an inch and I don't care if it's a hundred dollars an inch.
If I can write a check to kill a tree, I'm just gonna write the check. And that was the problem that we had when we discussed this ordinance. and the crazy scheme that was presented before us And I tried to make this a very simple example. for a thirty inch oak tree At $50 an inch, I pay $1,500. If you double the fee I'm pay three thousand dollars to be able to kill that 30 inch oak tree, it's a
big tree, right? You see?
If the lot I'm building is worth a hundred thousand dollars, does it matter if I pay fifteen hundred dollars or three thousand dollars or five thousand dollars to kill the tree? The math doesn't work in favor of the tree. When it comes to the money, the payment of the mitigation, unless you're gonna make the mitigation a hundred thousand dollars. For the tree? How are you ever gonna make a dent in it?
So I didn't
get
to finish my sentence. Um I don't I agree with you that the existing process isn't working. My point was that There may be some communities where they did take down trees but what they replaced is pretty good. I mean, Chuck and I live in a community Long Leaf that We have a very nice oak tree canopy along our I mean I mean I don't know if you've driven through Longleaf, but I mean pretty nice tree canopy there. And how old is Longleaf now?
Okay, so we've had twenty five years of tree growth. Those were when they were planted, the trees were this big, now they're all on my point.
Yeah, so my point is th th there probably are examples where there was some clear cutting but we've got replaced Ended up being a pretty good product. I I don't know what caused the developer of Long Wave to plant so many oak trees that have now developed into a pretty nice canopy, but maybe we should figure that out. Wha why do we have some communities that clear cut it and then replaced it and created a pretty good canopy, and then we have others that what got built is just It doesn't have much there.
Well you can you can go on the northern section of uh Penellas County and you can see lots of densely populated areas there that are full of trees and have walls uh you know not plastic fences. And they look great. And uh they somehow managed to do it. We did it at years ago in Beacon Woods. That was all built with curve curve linear streets. You know, because just because you have a 40-acre piece of property
doesn't mean you need to have a straight street everywhere you go. So you know they need to be some curve and some and some
dynamic to it and Beacon Woods was a master plan MPUD that actually adhered to what the intent of the MPUD district.
I I guess where I'm going with this though is that was just I'm not even sure that was regulatory what occurred in Beacon Woods or Long LinkedIn. It appears that The master developer just thought that would be a benefit to the selling of homes. Exactly. So I'm trying to figure out
well wh why is that? Why is it I mean I I think you gotta keep in mind there's a lot of moving parts and a lot of things in play here. I mean I've I've been doing business in this county for twenty years as myself, and I've seen different regimes and different theories in the planning department that Directs you With one goal in mind that may be detrimental to another. For example, it wasn't that long ago everybody was being pushed to grid street patterns. because of pedestrian and connectivity and getting vehicles off the road. Well what does that do? That impacts
the trees indirectly. So i I mean th there's there's a bunch of moving parts, there's a bunch of things that need to be kept in mind in in play. as we go through the process.
Yeah. Although I point out that Longleaf has a grid
tree
branch and tree.
Right.
So it
is
possible to be done.
Right. Maybe the maybe the answer I mean when you look around and there's other municipalities, I mean maybe the answer is is Maybe the the starting point or the planting value, maybe that's not sufficient. You know, planting these little tiny trees, I get it. I go around all the time and I look at these little trees that are being planted and I'm like, man, my kids aren't even gonna see these things be big enough to be worth anything. But if they survive it long. Well
I will also tell you the other problem we have is that sometimes the county will say plant plant those little trees.
Right.
And then the C D D or H O A leader comes in and rips them all out because they say, Oh, it's interfering with our sidewalk maintenance or whatever it means that they're
straight trees that interfere with the utilities and then uh you know, all the other uh things that are all in in play.
So we actually
and that's typically because
the lots of five in a three foot wide utility strip between the back of the curb and the sidewalk, which Again I'm sorry you're gonna mean to keep attacking the P M twenty six, but that's that's that's the consequence of that and then we're gonna go through all kinds of crazy machinations about root barriers and all kinds of stuff and
Well the reason just as a historical perspective, the reason that we get we're into this place is because when the rapid development started here in n in the sixties, it was because we had a big freeze and it killed all the oranges. And so w w what did we have? We had a acres and acres and acres of dead orange trees. So you come in and you build homes on those trees and that was an the an alternative to replanting, which it was just too expensive to do at the time. So
You th now where you have some of those orange trees you have forest and so we're going in and instead of there being dead orange trees, there are beautiful trees there that we're just ripping out. And I just think it honestly, I think Miss C had some pretty good ideas, uh, as far as designating tr certain trees that unless you have a you know, a compelling reason to remove the tree, you just can't
remove it. Yeah, because exactly what you said. Make the make the you know, make make the fine thousand dollars, five thousand dollars, ten thousand dollars. Y if you're a national developer you can come in and write the check. And take the tree down. Right. Um, you know, the in in those days in the early sixties it we didn't have any national developers to speak of. They were all mom and pop developers, you know, so they weren't gonna write any big checks to take trees down. And
Um so but I think exactly what Jamie said, I mean there's so many things that come into play that the county has done in you know, with all good intent. But
pulling factors has has made a made us given us a situation that's untenable. We can't keep doing it that way. And when I drive down the little road and I see that all that clear cut area there, it just I I pull my hair out what a little bit I have. And uh it's it just drives me crazy because I think how come I couldn't stop that? You know, it was just it's just crazy because
I've been involved over the last few weeks and a lot of discussions with Mr. Hobby and Ms. Will Hight and the staff over the conservation element. of the comprehensive plan. And one of the pushes in the proposed conservation element is for open space. And I'm trying to think about that. Maybe Terry you can help
me. I'm drawing a blank. We don't really have If someone comes in and does an MPUD, that we don't have any requirement in our comp plan that says you need to reserve 10%, 20%, 30%, whatever a number may be of the property as open space.
Other than our neighborhood park ordinance, no.
Other than the neighborhood?
That's
the only as far
as I'm
the park ordinance.
And we've allowed that to be whittled away. Well well okay, I take that back. There are s there's certain areas of the county like that have conservation subdivision requirements. So Who does those? Th there's been a couple in in the northern part of Pasco that have preserved open space that is not a neighbor park. But but I agree with you it's a rare situation. I was where
in a lot of the open space parks there's no trees.
I think the other observation too, to Mr. Moody's point, is that the codes are all designed specifically to Can I use the word react to single family detached type of development? Whereas we get we often get different kinds of even residential product but the code is organized in such a way where your neighborhood parks requirement basically wants to treat multifamily townhomes, apartments, whatever, the same way as single family. And then you get these variations
that you s you that Mr. Moody's probably referring to in the MPUDs. Um that's just an observation to consider. When we're thinking about open space requirements.
Correct. And right. And when we talk about open space I remember one of the discussions we had quite lengthy d debate about during one of these comprehensive plan meetings. was not all open space is the same. Demanding open space out of a one-acre commercial piece for a fast food restaurant results in what? A piece of lawn? Whereas demanding 10 or 20% open space from a 500
acre M P U D maybe results in a significant stand of trees being saved. Keep away from that.
To the Chairman's point though, actually the neighborhood park ordinance somewhat discourages them to be preserved of trees because it actually requires an open player. I agree. So you probably wouldn't be able to have trees. I can disagree. But its purpose was slightly different than preserving trees. Its purpose was going back to John Gower, he wanted a place for the kids to be able to kick a ball. That was his purpose.
Right.
And because we had a number of subdivisions that were being built with no No place, no local park for the kids. As
a kid that grew up in one of the first subdivisions in Port Ritchie with no I hadn't to play softball industry.
Right, but I mean but that ordinance besides the issue of the terrier raise which is it was to build it was designed for single family you know, the development committee has found a way to I would argue work with it in some ta some cases improve on what the minimum requirements. I mean there's a lot of neighborhoods now that have
very nice neighborhood parks. I think one of the mistakes that happens is that when When new regulations are created or contemplated and to Terry's point they're written as one size fits all. And that doesn't That doesn't take into account different housing types and different development patterns. W we write a regulation around what is the problem of the day and we never
kinda think beyond then and then later on as the as the industry evolves and we see these new housing types and whatnot our regulations aren't equipped to handle those. I mean I tell you
I was just in D C and I you know, I saw some blocks where it was a tiny little park that was probably less than a quarter of an acre, but it had so many nice amenities. It was a dog park and a playground. It was heavily utilized But it because of the amenity because of the amenities that own it, not just because it happened to be a quarter acre. So I think you can create in an urban environment more with less. But the problem is, to Terry's
point, I agree with him that in a multifamily scenario you probably should have less acreage devoted to open space, but it should be highly more highly amenitized so that it's usable space, which we don't currently do. I don't believe
Yeah.
Well we'll do another workshop on that one.
Well, but but would you not have some provision that says, you know, part of that open space may not be an true open space, but it's a standard truth. And just that counts as your part. But again, you'd have to figure out what the appropriate
right
balance is of that 'cause you do want true open space or a field or a dog park or whatever, but Why can't a group of trees where somebody can go walk around or
You know, that why not that count to some degree?
I agree.
So Terry, I agree with you that we're here to talk about trees, but parks and trees are somewhat interrelated because there's there's still areas that you're not putting houses on or development, you know. It it's an area you're preserving for some public purpose.
Right.
it is not gonna have house or commercial business.
Right.
And parks. And of course there's other ways that local government owns property too that we can put trees in in terms of m using mitigation fund dollars for example. Um But when we're talking about development and how development is um growing It's usually in the right-of-way setup and in the park setup that we have the most play for the trees. At least at least a play for the trees that can last time. Because a lot of times and our code does this right
now where There is a requirement to plant trees back after you've cut certain things down. I don't think it's a one-to-one ratio though. It doesn't certainly doesn't play out that way. Trees are often planted in rear yards and in front yards. Well that's great on day one when the certificate of occupancy is issued, but over time when a resident doesn't like that tree 'cause they want to put it in a pool, in their backyard the tree goes away.
Well there's other considerations too. So I always remember this. I did a project back in the what was about the two thousand four, I think it was two thousand three, four time frame, and it was a shopping center over in Kissimmee. And the city of Gissimmee had an incredibly tough tree ordinance. Worse than the one that was proposed with the crazy point score and all of
that. And that was the year the four hurricanes right in a row across the state. And Kissimmee was especially hard hit 'cause it had gotten hit by Wilma and whatever the other one is that went over there. And it was amazing to see how quickly the attitude of the city changed after they had to clean up all of the downed trees that blocked all of the roads and took out all of the power. There's a right there's a there's a place for trees and there's a place for not. You know, some people they go to get homeowner's
insurance and the homeowner's insurance company comes by and says That tree's too close to your house. We're not going to ensure your house unless you take that tree down. Well and it turns out that tree was one of the ones we ha were required to plant in their whopping ten foot front yard in our Pasco County M PUD, which if we plant the tree in a ten foot front yard
When it falls, where's it gonna fall? On your house or on your neighbor's house? Doesn't have any other place to go? Whereas the people who live out on an acre. I've had. Multiple trees fall on my property so far so good. I haven't had one fall on my house. I had a close call one time but Blackwood. They they have room to fall. So
Well, you know, I know about that. One thing about where David and I live is that our all of our lines are buried. So if a tree falls not gonna take out any lines. And I don't I never understood why the county didn't require new developments to put their to not put in overhead lines.
I won't necessarily disagree with that. I don't I do know this. I I don't think putting underground lines in a in a residential subdivision is a problem, but I know that the transmission of electricity through underground lines is a problem. They have to use things like oil cooled conduits, it's a big deal to to do that because of the heat generated, but for smaller currents. I know of course you could do that underground.
Well it made a big difference during these last hurricanes 'cause they didn't even lose power. Sure. Everybody else did.
Terry, I I have a question. So along the new fifty two I've Happy to see they're planting lots of trees. Um along the right of way there. Is that is that DOT doing that? Is that Pasco County doing that? What's what um
in the actual State Road 52 right-of-way?
Yeah, where we they the new Clinton Avenue extension, there's been a considerable amount of landscaping and trees that are in there, which is great. I'm happy to see that. I was just curious who was funding that and how that was coming about.
I I'm not sp I'm not sure I do know from past like we did a couple of years ago there was a grant on US nineteen to put in trees in medians and things like that and F D O T I said, you know, if you're gonna put in trees, they're on you, local community. Y um you Uh plat you take the grant, put 'em in, but so they paid for it. But the local jurisdictions then had to maintain those trees. That could be what's happening on Seth Weightman
I don't know. I
mean that that's consistent with D U T's general position is that if they put anything more than grass in, the local government has to assume
maintenance of the landscaping. Is that an agreement the county does with DOT or is that just what DOT says and then here you go your your response to the easement.
There's formal agreements, for example in 19 we had an agre we had to agree to maintain those trees in the median if DOT plans it's Now we thought we had an agreement with the business owners that they would do that and all due respect they sort of defaulted and so the county had to come in and basically maintain the that landscaping. So but my guess is that any landscaping that you're seeing on a state roadway system It's the county's paying to
maintain it. If it's anything more than just grass. Yeah.
I I will just add It's a historical caveat, if you will, that the um the planting project on nineteen went in fairly smoothly. Um and in some defence of the businesses, what then followed was COVID and everything shut down. And uh the the first maintenance years of that project were severely hampered by the the economic drop that took place because of the pandemic. And that kinda
hamstrung the proje that project, unfortunately. But that's some of the background what happened there, in case people think No one's been trying to do something for nineteen.
It looks
a lot better. Okay, then.
But we do have we do have provisions in our comp plan and I think our public works and transportation department we hear mark I think it's like three percent in our comp plan that says that when you build a new roads at least three percent will go towards trees and landscaping of the roadway. So We do make an attempt and when we fail to go, Commissioner Starkey tells us.
Yes.
Um We do make an attempt to make sure that any new roads that we're building have more robust trees on. Now, when they're initially planted, they're fairly small trees sometimes. You see that on Ridge Road. But the hope is that eventually that will develop into more mechanically.
Well and Commissioner Star Starkey gives me in the air full frequently too 'cause, you know, she wants more trees planted in all our schools, which is nice, but then now you have considerable more expense. with our maintenance department who is already stretched and that's what I've sort
of making our point is that that's the money, it it's the maintenance. It's not necessarily the cost of putting the tree in. It's It's like having a child. The real expense is raising the child. It's not having the child. That's
correct. Now you tell me. I would have used the LG
boat, but
But you're right, that is it's very true. And then as John said, you gotta be you know, get a storm come through and now you and not to say we shouldn't be doing trees, but again there is a legitimate expense associated with that.
Okay. And the and and it's It's a conundrum because the idea of the M P U D is that we want to cluster the development so that we can save natural features of the land, but the mo the the tighter we pack them in the worse it gets for planting a tree in somebody's yard because now the ha the tree is two feet from the foundation of the house or three feet from falling on the roof.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So I'm not sure we came up with any answers today. I the
I think it would be helpful to staff, in my opinion, is if you all do work in other jurisdictions, sorry. I mean if there are if you're aware of other jurisdictions that this it goes back to my original point that are doing a better job than us when it comes to preserving trees or replanting trees. Maybe we should start there and say because developers are working in those other jurisdictions. Apparently they're building things in those other jurisdictions. You know, it wouldn't be s
so crazy if we said we borrowed this from Pecks County or City where other developers
are working. I think it's important to understand
that we created the MPUD as a tool to try to work around the resources. If we just get back to using it in the way it was intended, a lot of this problem may work itself out. The problem is we've gotten away We've gotten we've gotten some of the national builders addicted to We've almost created them a new Euclidean zoning district. by telling
them, okay, if you come in and do an M P U D and your lots are forty five by this and you agree to do these architectural things and you agree to put in these curbs and these side it's all gonna be done for you. Well that's no different than we just you just defined R four a different way. It's now R six or R eight. Whereas the MPUD was intended to you need to work around these wetlands, you need to work around these significant stands of trees or the slopes in the east side of the county. You
know, we've got
so so I agree with you Mr. Mooney, but I'm gonna also disagree with you a little bit because We've had this opportunity to do this with MPDs for I don't know how many years. And for example, even on the replanting of trees, until PM twenty six until we came up with the exact standards that are in PM twenty six. It just wasn't happening, which we're talking about. So The reason Terry had UPM twenty six is because there was no predictability. I don't well wait
a minute. I'll disagree with you on that. Our current tree ordinance has a minimum number of trees per lot. That's been there, and that's been there for twenty-five plus years that I know of. That's not something new. PM26 didn't create that. There's always been, if you have a lot, and there's a table in 80, whatever number this is in the land development code, there's a table that says if your lot is this size to this size, you have to have this many trees. If it's this size to this size,
you need to have this many number of trees. And that's been So that's just somebody not a force of
code that they can. Oh understood. I think what David is getting at though is if you were building a unit or a structure that was more than one unit The code sort of fell you fell off the cliff, kind of. Because it was designed for the single family detached concept. So even if you were doing duplexes, there wasn't clear direction in the land development code that thou shalt do X or Y in order to plant a tree. PM twenty six identified duplexes townhomes enough on how to deal with trees on site.
I don't know. I'm not trying to make this a personal insult, but how long would it have taken us to write a code amendment to go in and fix that little problem?
Barbara Wilhe t tells me it took twenty years to do PM twenty six.
So uh she never fails to no she's still online but
my my my point is whether you love or hate PM twenty six It created some predictability. And and so I I'm not I get your point that MPDs are being abused, but
I think the development community has the right to pr some level of predictability, whether it's I agree that our current regulations are not cutting it, but
then let's fix them. I I don't I don't like relying on a process that changes every with every different MP that comes in I understand that they're all psych have their own sight constraints in terms of which are the best trees. But there should be some level of predictability as to what our requirements
are. Okay. Well then maybe that maybe P M twenty six needs to have an open space component added to it. to or a tree preservation component added to it to so that there's some predictability. Okay, I know I'm gonna be required to predict to protect any stand of trees greater than X many trees. If I've got fifty trees clumped together I'm gonna be told I need I I can't touch those. Or I need to work around them. Or
if they're absolutely in my way, then I'm gonna have to reserve at least that much space over in a corner of the property over here and plant it for us.
Yeah, I mean I
Then you have something predictable that addresses the problem. I'm not suggesting that I just wrote the next ordinance, but
Well. But even for that, I w you know, I I think it would be helpful to find out how other communities are doing this where they're creating better protection of their tree stands. Yeah.
So but you have to look at that not we have sixty-seven counties in Florida. And the topography in all sixty-seven counties is not identical. Okay, the drainage problem that I have in central Pasco County is not the same drainage problem I have in the city of Tallahassee. Because I uh I'm uh in Tallahassee I'm on a hill. I'm not starting at the groundwater and going up. Mr. Gray brought up Deacon Woods as an
example. Beacon Woods is a little different. in that the streets in Beacon Woods are cut into the hills. We had we didn't fill Beacon Woods to build, and that's why they could save those trees, because we could cut and build the homes on the existing ground. We had the advantage of topography that allowed the water to naturally drain. When we're in the when we're in the central part of this county where the land is flat and the water has no place to go, we are forced to fill.
Yeah, you hit the nail on the head with i that explanation, John, and I think that's what a lot of people don't realize is in a lot of places in Pasco where you have the clear cutting done it it's it's not done so they can necessarily get more lots, it's done because that's the only way they can develop the land. I mean you gotta bring in the fill which kills the trees. They could leave the trees there but then they'd be dead.
Um so but I agree with both you on that point and maybe the focus needs to be more on the mitigation side.
No, I I I I agree and I I think looking at the other municipalities I mean there's other municipalities that have the same issues that find other ways around it. I mean let's face it our our tree ordinance is fairly old.
I I have a question um and mainly for the for those for the folks watching at home. So since we have engineers on the panel here, um i if filling is killing the trees, because essentially You're putting more dirt between the sun and the clouds and the root structure, right? And the water can't percolate down. Um Can you design Like well system like a I don't know what the right word is, is like a well system that allows the tree
that's I guess there are things there there are all kinds of systems out there. Yeah. The most common one is the tree well. Okay, and then there's things called wane drains which allow food and oxygen to be added to the root zone of trees when you need to pave around a tree. There are And so if I was doing a commercial development and I was
interested in saving a particularly large specimen oak tree and I needed to build a parking lot around it, I might be able to use the tree well technique or the wane drain technique. But it's not a tool that I'm going to use in the thousand home subdivision context.
Is it it just 'cause it's you can't grade that or it's too expensive or?
Well, it also depends on where does the tree fall. If the tree falls in the middle of the lot, I can build all the retaining walls I want a l around the tree, but if it doesn't allow a house to be built on the lot then the lot's useless.
I know that was always a burning question in my mind until
Well and there are and I mean there and there's lots of examples where engineers have used tree wells to to save specific trees.
Well and and th that's exactly one of the reasons why I think you need to somehow and I I don't know exactly the answer how you do it, but I think you need to incentivize this somehow because at the end of the day Like it or not, I mean i if if it costs more for the developer, the developer's just gonna pass it on. And the it's just like raising impact fee. They just get passed through and and that's why in my opinion we're at this I mean, things have gotten so expensive, costs have gotten so high, and then you start starting to hear about affordable housing and all that. Well this is going the other way. But I I agree and I think everybody up here agrees
that it is an issue that needs to be handled. I mean nobody likes going by seeing the the clear cut open fields with open sunlight and no shade anywhere to be seen.
So Again, and I agree with you that not the topography of all of Florida is not identical, but there probably are counties in Florida that have similar topography to us.
Sure.
So I d if we think there's some that are doing it well. We should be
Well even in our county though we have to recognize that we have varied topography in the in the northeast rural area for example we're concerned about preserving preserving the hills the hills. in the central county, in the central part of the county, well we don't have any hills to to worry about. Over in the northwest portion of the county we have the coastal sand ridge which Beacon Woods is a part of and that allowed that development to save
trees because that topography existed.
And then as we get further in the southwest part of the county, we get down into the real low swampy as we're going down to the Anclote River. And this becomes a big problem for us. Were the water tables this far below the ground? And again requires all of this fill. And when we're in the coastal areas We have to go up in the air to get away to get above the hurricane level, the storm surge levels. So
these are all things that have to be considered in crafting. I think one of the things we're probably realizing here is it is not one size fits all. It's going to depend upon almost on a project by project basis.
However, I do think that on the mitigation side it can be a little more uniform and predictable. I mean I'm just gonna give you the example of you know so Chuck and I live in Long Lave. There's a neighborhood right next to us, Ellington. Literally you drive down that street, there's not a single tree in the entire subdivision. So There's something different with our mitigation requirements that they probably were this identical
topography to start with. But somehow one community developed with this amazing tree canopy and the other hasn't None whatsoever. So there's there probably is something different that's occ you know, occurring. I don't know, maybe one of you all can explain why.
That tells me that your development did something above and beyond what was required. Oh
I know.
So you mean the stewards of the land that that neighborhood was named after actually did care about the land, unlike the unfair beat down that they take on Facebook every day about their improper stewardship of the land. They actually did care and plant trees. How about that?
Right, but I'm just there probably was the you know, I agree with you probably it was the stewards of the land but to me that shows that there are probably mark good market reasons to actually plant a good tree canopy and that the residents can enjoy it afterwards.
Yes. The other thing that I'd love to see in any tree ordinance too is And I heard the one lady get up here and talk about palm trees and all they do is a track rats and roaches or whatever. Well Let's not forget that the state tree in Florida is Disabled Palmetto, okay. We heard Messini talk about the preservation of native native trees. That's our state tree. There's a place for palm meadows
and I grew up in an area that was a hammock. I grew up around pine trees in palm meadows. They're not so bad, but they do provide relief. They do provide shade. Man, I like eating swamp cabbage too. So I mean it's br
nice the other thing is is they can be relocated. Yes they can. There's no reason to knock 'em down.
So what's the next step?
Well, I see Terry taking copious notes over here, so I'm hoping he might To summarize.
Well I think that's a good thing. Well okay.
trees are killed in the development process. We've talked about some of the zoning issues. And the staff, their job is to focus on regulatory, so now maybe they've heard the purpose of the workshop is so you can come out and talk about issues and ideas and then I assume Terry's taking notes because he's gonna go back and think about it. But
I would also hope that Terry would talk to whether it's the Starkey's or whoever if we think there's communities in Pasco that have done it right, either through preservation or mitigation. Maybe we should be talking to those developers and saying what caused you to develop this the right way? You know, even though you're subject to the same market conditions that the clear-cutters are, you chose to develop your community in this way. What what what were the
barriers to that? Like what you know What what would have caused you to go the other direction and clear cut as opposed to what you actually did? And maybe we should talk to the developers that are actually having to write the checks and figure out what would we need to do to get you to Do what you did as opposed to clear cut. I mean I why not talk to the actual customers and say You know, And
there are no hills on that fifty-four corridor that like we nope. So I mean it can be
done. No, and I you should speak w th those stakeholders should be consulted with and they're the people that understand the costs of building those subdivisions. So absolutely you should speak with them.
So, as you're driving through the county, if you find some communities that you think did it right, besides where Chuck and I live, okay, that's pretty good. Um, maybe tell Terry about 'em and say, hey, that one did a good job with their preservation, that one did a good job with their mitigation. Maybe we should talk to them and figure out what did they do They apparently did it for market reasons, not maybe not even for regulatory reasons, but what what incentivized them to do that? And what can the county do to push them in that direction. Maybe it's just
a simple nudge that we can do with a density credit or a credit against some other fee, but but Since it's happening through natural market conditions anyway, in some communities maybe there's not as much of a push as we Well and
then the other thing that we should talk about is So the way we do require in the current tree ordinance, inch for inch mitigation. But When you're planting a new two inch or three inch diameter tree to make up for a 30 inch diameter tree, that means you need to put 10 3 inch ones in, right? And you can't plant you need to have 20 feet of space or 30 feet of space between each one of those trees. Eventually you run out of space. to plant replant trees, so there's
a deficit and you need to make a payment to the tree mitigation fund. Well for twenty years we collected money in a tree mitigation fund and then didn't spend any of it. It's time to spend some of the money and go out and plant some trees. Or buy some land to preserve some trees is another or maybe the commissioners need to talk about what uses there can be for the money that they collect in the tree makes it.
That is that is that is going to occur anyway as part of this update to the resolution. So that issue I would argue is already in the process of being fixed.
Yeah.
Sounds like they could plant some trees on schools for for crest too.
Well can it's
our maintenance guy, I'll appreciate that. It's it's been used to help commercial businesses plant some trees for landscaping that are currently devoid of trees. I mean so
Right, but there's still even that, even for that use, they haven't drawn that fund down to, you know, next to nothing. I mean there's Yes, it's there. And it's capped and I will tell you That's right. giving them ten thousand dollars Go out and see what ten thousand dollars buys you if you want to do a commercial landscape package. All right, it ain't much. All right.
So
That'll that's all part of this new resolution that will fund the use of funds that's gonna happen anyway. So I think you can assume that That issue has a quick fix.
I get scared when you say things like that. Well, I I guess I shouldn't say quick fix because one thing we need to talk about through this whole thing is there's a bill that Pass the legislature. We don't know if the governor's going to sign it, but it's sent in Bill 180 and it basically prohibits us from adopting any more burdens restrictive or burdensome regulation. between now and October first of twenty twenty seven.
under the theory it was put into an emergency management bill under the theory because we were impacted by the hurricanes and therefore we can't do anything more restrictive or burdensome. So even if we come up with a solution if that bill gets signed by the governor.
Is there a definition of restrictive and
no there's not there's not a definition. And the worst part is is if we if you do it you can be sued and and have to pay attorney's fees. Yeah. And this was put in at the eleventh hour by the legislature literally the last day of the session. It was tacked on to an emergency management bill, which there was nothing wrong with that bill until this got tacked on at the very end. Um So it is it's potentially gonna affect our comp plan update. All the stuff that Terry's talked to you about potentially are gonna affect any land development regulation
that we have kind of in the works. So don't know if the governor's gonna sign it. There's a lot of people asking that it be vetoed, but I don't The problem is it's part of an emergency management bill that otherwise is probably okay. Except it has this provision in it. So um and the crazy thing is it applies to any place where the federal declaration occurred for these hurricanes, which is literally the entire state of Florida. Yep. Wow. It's not just it's not just the counties like us that we're actually.
Right. It's almost the entire state of Florida. Um that's prohibited from doing anything that's more restrictive or burdensome. So
We don't know where that's gonna end up. I'm hoping that it gets vetoed, but if it doesn't, you may not see many regulations coming through here until Terry must
have
been.
Even though it's a draft ordinance that w hasn't yet moved forward and we're still working on it. Does that count in terms of the tree ordinance that we have to do? Oh it is not
only it's worse than that, Terry. It's retroactive to the date of the hurricane. So even regulations we've already adopted that that are potentially subject to having to be repealed.
Right.
Wow.
My my suggestion is that we press forward in even if we have to put October 1, 2027 effectively.
Because there'll be another law in the future that does the same thing.
Just a workshop comment.
I'll throw out Mike Madey as one that I think conservation and the tree preservation was done well. And I know the reason why it was done that, because it was done by local Tampa philanthropists who actually used to use the land for his enjoyment and the leg. So he put it there was a lot of personal touches that were were done in it. It's whether wildernessly preserved. which was right across from the the high school on 41. Um and I think that's the difference between a a local developer who actually used to use that land. I've had conversations
with him on how much he used to enjoy it for personal um his family and the and the like up there but But it's gonna be tough to have that same connection with national developers that are coming in and looking to maximize profit.
I took a note. Just have to re reduce their maximum, that's all.
Yeah talks down to economics. I mean it's pretty simple.
It is.
Y you get you get further with honey than vinegar, right? So it's you know, the concept that you brought up about treating tree hammocks like uh wetlands and giving Density credits and things like that, that seems to make a whole lot more sense and seems like it would be more feasible and adoptable by most developers. So
I also agree with Messini and that we need to try to keep it simple so that sure everybody can understand it.
Again, not all Unfortunately all land is not created the same. We had a conversation with a developer this week. who's involved in some affordable housing. And he got asked by his lender could he produced twenty five hundred units in three years and he came to me and he said, I want you to help me develop a template of how we do these. Well Unfortunately There's no
such thing. Every s every land development project is unique from the next. Mm-hmm. And there are no two that are i they're like fingerprints. They're there's no two that are identical. It's
as unique as the land that is.
They may share some commonalities, but they are not you they're they're all unique. That's right.
All right. Terry.
Do you have funny announcements? Do you have any thoughts on what you're supposed to be doing, Terry, or are you
Um just as a recap, we will take a look at other jurisdictions. Um what did they do to protect who are they and what did they do to protect larger trees, but not just larger trees, the forest as a whole, like Mr. Modi was referring to.
We'll take a look at the idea to preserve stands of trees in addition to wetlands, uh and provide what kind of Maybe there's a formula for a density bonus that we can work into uh the code for that. Um
The types of trees to protect? Um well I think as a secondary to some of the big ideas on on the open space requirement. We're gonna have to figure out a threshold of acreage, certain size properties, let's say, that can accommodate a place for mitigation trees to locate perhaps whether that's either whether that's through the tree mitigation fund or the developer themselves sort of offsetting their fund
payment by planting trees.
Obviously we heard the comments to keep it simple. So um we do have the code that we have that does have some cleanup work to be done in there. Um so uh We will do our best to keep it simple within the framework of the overall land development code. We still have to deal with that. Um I think those are the the uh the bigger ideas. Um and I guess one one one idea that's kind of already underway as we were talking about for resolution purposes is the idea of increasing the fee
which is already underworks. So
Yeah, one of the thing that just comes to mind, Terry, is um I keep thinking hearkening back to the little road property. It would have made a lot of difference there if they would have left a hundred and hundred and fifty foot buffer of those woodlands along the l along the road because you you wouldn't be driving down the road and just see a big stark. Blank.
It's interesting that
we require perimeter buffers around developments. What I find is interesting and I have no idea 'cause it wasn't involved in that design, but If we remember, most of Newport Horners was silviculture. and they chose to eliminate all of those trees. They could have saved very densely planted pines along Little Road to be used in those buffers. Other than
And maybe we should give some thought to this too. the buffer standards as written in the landscape section are very rigid, right? You need to have a tree every sixty feet and a continuous hedge row Whereas
along where Newport Corners was along Little Road that was Silviculture, they could have taken a fifty foot strip of those pine trees planted in grids and they would have made a nice buffer for that community from the traffic, but yet that buff that buffer of existing pine trees would not have met the requirements on our code. So what I'm suggesting is some flexibility in the code for for things like that. Now we do I will tell you that I've worked with staff on multiple occasions
to use existing vegetation towards the buffer requirements if they accomplish the same general screening. But maybe the language could be fixed to be more flexible with that or not maybe not require as much staff review. I'm not quite sure.
That's a good example though where maybe talking to the developer would be helpful because I think the same developer that did what you d you all just complained about I think developed Copper Spring on 54 where there is a They left a stand of trees along fifty-four and built behind that stand of trees. And I think it's the same.
Right on Little Road and not clear cut on fifty-four?
I think the Newport Corners project was different than Copper Springs in the sense that well firstly Newport Corners was planned way back in 2010 time frame and they made modifications to it I think it was like in the 2021 time frame and uh they didn't start developing or building until 23 or 24. Um Newport Corners had the idea of creating a downtown west or east of Newport
Ritchie, hence the name Newport Corners, because it'll have four corners that will have like a little downtown environment. about halfway between uh Decubilis on the north and um Plath on the south. Yeah. Um so I think that contributed probably. Um the other thing that probably contributed is Silviculture is tree farming, um, for maybe some who are not familiar. I
think the prevailing idea was because it was a tree farm, these w these trees were gonna get cut down anyway. Because they were gonna be farmed at some point or another. They were left alone and I guess they grew up fairly tall and they grew in thick because the tree farming I'm making a presumption here, but the tree farming didn't seem very active when there was so much undergrowth among all of those trees. And so I think that maybe contributed to the idea that well these trees were gonna get chopped regardless at some point. Yeah,
I mean oddly enough I met with uh I met with that developer after the development was approved. And ask 'em about that. Mm. They said, Oh gee, we never really thought about that, but that sounds like a good idea. You know, but it I guess at that time it was too late. Yeah. You know, and uh but
they did it for Copper
Spring. That's what I'm saying. Well but they d I don't know why they that's what I'm saying. Did they use the same land planter? I don't know. I I
I I will say that i for existing vegetation Um there are many projects around the county where we're leveraging existing uh tree lines um and whatnot wherever we can find them. instead of putting an engineered landscape buffer. So that strategy is being used and deployed in quite few projects. Um It that can't happen everywhere all the time because if the tree stand isn't there or if the tree stand is right in front of the main road when
you're gonna be a commercial project, let's say well the not m much chance that that tree stand is gonna survive. If you're on fifty four or fifty six and they want to do a a commercial project or some kind of employment generating.
One of the things that I wanna make sure that we don't do is I don't want to get so rigid and I've seen this in communities where the regulation gets too rigid then then projects become stuck in permit hell.
Correct.
Because there's no flexibility in the language and then I'm thinking
Up where I live on State Road fifty two There's a tractor supply store there. Right at the corner of Parkwood in fifty two and there's accidents there every day. And part of the reason is the roadways on a curve. And the property next to the tractor supply is heavily wooded. And you can't see around the trees to see around the curve so people pull out into fifty-two and they get T-boned because
they couldn't see. I don't want regulations that would not allow us to come in and for instance take trees out so you can improve the sight line and a roadway or to make sure that we don't lose sight of public safety too for the sake of a tree. I we're all for preserving trees but sometimes it become we also have to make recognitions that sometimes you have to take them down. Yeah. I have preserved people too. Yes. Preserve people too.
All right, Terry. Great. Good. Thank you very much for standing there. You must be exhausted. Sounds like Jennifer.
Yes, it is very unusual, but go ahead.
Please let
me just
say something. It'll be copyrighted.
Okay. He said go ahead. I said go ahead. Even before you said that.
Oh well there. Uh Jennifer Sini, 25605, Apple Blossom Lane, Wesley Chapel. I am so glad that you're having this discussion in public. In particular in front of me. Because I am hearing you talk about basic scientific concepts. You're not identifying them. As that, but you are discussing them, which is so important in a tree ordinance or a landscaping ordinance. For example, it
works for trees too. clustering and continuity. So what you look at, mister Moody, in terms of your tree stands, is is it isolated to a few trees in the middle of a big huge open space, scientifically that has very little value, even though you might be saving a tree that you think is beautiful and significant. However, if you've decided to hold a tree stand in the corner
of the property that happens to connect up to another tree stand on another property or lead to, that's the continuity, that is very valuable in terms of wildlife and trees. Trees actually like to cluster. I won't get into the esoteric things that will make you guys fall over backwards. I will say one thing, trees communicate. That has been proven scientifically? And they communicate through their root systems. And
the more you can preserve a cluster of trees nearer another cluster of trees and you continue that throughout the county. Now How do you do that when you take one development at a time? And by the way, I am talking development. I'm not talking about the single tree in the residential lot. although I know that there are commissioners that really want to push that and I can understand that 'cause you have developments all over with forty five
or forty foot lots with no trees. Ugly as sin. and probably hotter than you know where. So there is a purpose for having residential trees, yes, but in development If as a county you want to develop this concept of let's preserve the best we have. You have a resource. It's called the US Forestry Department. And you can go there and you can see the tree cover. You can take it all the way back to the early part of the century. even
into the Uh 20th century, you can go back that far. And you can see where the trees have grown, what trees have grown, where they've clustered. And you can then superimpose your comprehensive plan use map over that, and you can get an idea of where your focus might need to be. Again, simplify but understand the overall. So it was really good to hear you talking about these concepts, even though you
didn't identify them as anything biological or scientific, you are discussing those things and it's important. Saving a single tree In the middle of Pasco County, in the middle of the Cypress Creek Well Field, I do understand what you're talking about, Mr. Moody. I live there. it doesn't have as much value as perhaps that clustered stand of trees on that development in West Pasco or in Southeast Pasco or in Southwest Pasco.
And I will tell you, gentlemen, if you are shocked To see the clear cutting on Little Road? And I know you were 'cause I saw it too. This is what Central and East Pasco have been living with over the last two or three decades. This is de regourd for how we've developed our county. Wes Pasco hadn't seen it for a while. 'Cause y'all don't clear huge parcels of land anymore. But starting
at about Odessa and going east, this is what we live with every day. So please continue to pursue this. I think you're doing a good job and um I appreciate hearing the discussion. Thank you for letting me speak again.
Jennifer, do you think that's the first thing?
I make the assumption that you must have had some conversation at some point with somebody in the Forest Service.
Yes.
is that information you can share with the staff so that as they're looking trying to evaluate how we formulate a regulation, maybe they can consult. It's always good to have a stable of experts that you can consult with, but if you could share that with them, I'm sure they'd find that helpful.
Okay. No problem.
Thank you.
Alright.
Is there anybody else that has anything else else to say?
You again? you
got three speeches. She she's she let her speak three times today. That's right. See
Miss Saney Miss Saney, see what you did?
Nancy Hayeswood [address removed]. Um, I hadn't thought about but as y'all were talking, um, what about a transition to some of those stands of trees? Like if some of 'em are getting out of the way, thin 'em out at a big front. and let 'em grow into back so they aren't in the way of the roads and things. It they'd still be there and maybe it would be of help to put that into consideration also.
All right, thank you. Yeah, so that's clearing up. That wasn't so bad.
Sometimes just clearing out the undergrowth is can go a long way. Just you know just save saving nice trees and then and clear all the undergrowth and that can be really really pretty.
Alright, anything else from up here? If not.