Tree Ordinance - Proposed Changes

COMMITTEE MEMORANDUM COMMITTEE:

Committee of the Whole

FROM:

DATE:

August 2 1, 2

SUBJECT:

Tree Ordinance

Attached are proposed amendments to the tree ordinance submitted by Moulton Properties and a counter-proposal submitted by Emerald Coastkeeper's. The documents, in addition to the amendment submitted by Sacred Heart Health System, will be topics of discussion at the August 24" meeting of Committee of the Whole. Attachments

M O U L T O NP R O P E R T I E S INCORPORATED P.O. BOX 12524 PENSACOLA, FLORIDA 3259 1-2524 moulton founder 1909 - 1961

W.W.

PHONE (850)438-5655 FAX (850)438-7187 E-MAIL: [email protected]

380 LURTON STREET PENSACOLA, FLORIDA 32505

www.moultonprop.com

August 21,2009

VIA EMAIL

Al Coby, City Manager City of Pensacola

RE:

Revised Tree Ordinance

Dear Mr. Coby, Moulton Properties, Inc. requests that this letter be included in the information being forwarded to the City Council regarding the tree ordinance. It has been our great pleasure to have been a contributing stakeholder in this process and we thank you and your staff for all of the hard work. Consensus and compromise has produced an ordinance that all of the stakeholders have a vested interest in seeing enacted. However, when this ordinance was last before City Council for action, our national, state, and local economies were in a much different posture. In recognition of the worst economic downturn in decades, Moulton Properties, Inc. put forth our concerns and solutions at the first council workshop (following the council's action last year sending the ordinance back to staff) on June 15,2009. While, our solutions were not adopted by staff, our position has not changed from that meeting to present. We urged the City Council then and now to enact the new ordinance subject to reasonable increases in cost of 20% vice 300% in recoption of the generally poor state of the economy. Therefore, Moulton Properties, Inc. supports the revised tree ordinance subject to the following amendments (these are the same two proposals submitted in June): Increase the mitigation cost per tree to $300.00 vice current $250.00. At section 12-6-6(B)(5)change the language to read "...shall be valued at three hundred dollars ($300.00) each.. .". Keep the replacement ratio of protected trees required to be replanted in Section 12-6-6(B)(4) the same as the existing code. Modify the language of the provisions under section 12-6-6(B)(4)as follows: (a) A trunk diameter of twelve (12) inches to nineteen (19) inches = Two 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. @) A trunk diameter of twenty (20) inches to twenty-nine (29) inches = Four 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (c) A trunk diameter of thirty (30) inches to thirty-three (33) inches = Six 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (d) A trunk diameter of thirty-four (34) inches or greater = Eight 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. Also requires modification of Section 12-6-7(E) to correct reference back to 12-6-6(B)(4)(d)vice 12-66@)(4)(f). Again, Moulton Properties, Inc.'s position has not changed since the City Council's Tree Ordinance Workshop in June. In today's economic climate, Pensacola must be able to compete for quality development that brings quality jobs. Strengthening our existing tree ordinance and increasing its costs by 20% is a positive step forward in protecting the trees in our city. While it is not the sponsor, Moulton supports the hospital exemption and a residential cap proposal.

From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments:

[email protected] Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:52 PM Al Coby Emerald Coastkeeper's Proposals for the Tree Ordinance 08.20.2009 Coastkeeper Proposals with Table Final(4).doc; bottom.letterhead

Dear City Manager Mr. Al Coby: The Emerald Coastkeeper Board of Directors submits the attached for your review regarding the proposed tree ordinance for the City of Pensacola. Sincerely, Elizabeth McWilliarns Director of Development E,'bEWCOASTKEEPER*, mc. 0 : 850.429.8422 c: 850.221-9205 www.emeraldcoastkeeper.orq

Goal of Revised Tree Ordinance for City of Pensacola: Preservation of Pensacola's Existing Trees. Background: For nearly three years the Emerald Coastkeeper, the City of Pensacola's staff, Environmental Advisory Board, Planning Board, along with other stakeholders including Moulton Properties, other business interests and organizations such as the League of Women Voters, have worked together to create a proposed compromised tree ordinance that was in final form as late as Julv 22.2009. Now at the Eleventh hour. as the vrowsed ordinance is under consideration by Pensacola City Council, Moulton hoperties has submitteQcomplgklynew and unyetted " ~ r o ~ s gAmendments" d that d i m l y contradict many of the compromises and positions agreed upon in the many prior meetings and discussions. Disturbingly, though Moulton has claimed all along that it supported the compromise version of the revised ordinance, its new proposed amendments are in some instances less protective than Pensacola's existing tree ordinance.

.

I

1.

,

Cap fees for residential property owners at $3,000.00. Add the following .. p a r w p h to section 12-6-2: dmr

n o t The Emerald Coastkeeper has always supported a cap for residential property owners, however, the $3,000.00 cap is much more in line with the other progressive cities in Florida and far more protective of the existing trees. 2.

Increase the mitigation cost per tree to $500.00. This is the amount agreed upon in the proposed compromised tree ordinance as it stood on July 22, 2009. At section 1266(B)(S) the language should remain as "...shall be valued at five kM .-i I) &I.,..",

3.

As the to replacement ratio of protected trees required to be replanted in Section 12-6-6(B)(4), the suggestion to keep the ratio the same as the present existing tree ordinance is a step backwards for the City of Pensacola The current ratios for replacement trees are inadequate to maintain current air quality in the City. Oxygen production will decrease, carbon sequestration will decrease and particulate matter will increase. The science is very clearratios must be increased to hold the status quo on air quality. The human health effects of dirty air has increased asthma and health care costs, the City of Pensacola is on the verge of not meeting federal Clean Air Act minimum air quality standards. The City of Pensacola is predicted to reach Nonattainment status next year at which time tens of millions of dollars of

federal highway funds will be lost, and we will have to purchase more expensive blends of gasoline. The United States Environment Protection Agency recognizes tree protection and preservation as a part of a Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) that the City of Pensacola will have to develop. A weakened tree ordinance will bring the full weight of the USEPA and the Clean Air Act down on us. The city will lose millions of dollars. The language should remain the same as was set out in the proposed compromised tree ordinance as stated on July 22,2009. This says nothing of the water quality issues that also depend in great part upon the quality of our tree-preservation practices. Benefits of Trees in Urban Area

Data from the USDA Forrest Service Diameter Oxygen Ratio Carbon Ratio Pollution Ratio Average at Produced For Sequestration For Removed For Ratio Breast (Ibdyr) Oxygen (Ibslyr) Carbon (Ibstyr) Pollution Height

0-3 inches 9- 12 inches 18-21 inches 27- 30 inches > 30 inches

1'

--

'

Emerald Coastkeeper stands by the compromise figures in the existing proposed ordinance that City staff has recommended to council that reads as follows: (41 Replucement off>rutecredfrees. When a protected tree is approved for removal, it shall be replaced with a like species of the tree removed. The prescribed number of trees shall be planted for each tree removed. The minimum diameter of a replace tree shall be (3) inches DBH. (a) A trunk diameter of four (4) inches to eleven (11) inches = Two 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (b) A truck diameter of twelve (12) inches to nineteen (19) inches = Three 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (c) A truck diameter of twenty (20) inches to twenty (29) inches = Six 3inch DBH trees planted for each one removed.

(d) A truck diameter of thirty (30) inches to thirty-five (35) inches = Twelve 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (e) A trunk diameter thirty-six inches to forty-three (43) inches = Sixteen 3-inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. (f) A truck diameter of Forty-four (44) inches or greater = Eighteen 3inch DBH trees planted for each one removed. 4.

The proposal that Healthcare facility mitigation be limited to $5,000 per acre for is a major step backwards in tree protection. It is Jess restrictivp than the current ordinance, which has been in place for 10 years. For example Select Care paid $150,000 tree mitigation under the current ordinance, but would only pay $85,000 under Moulton's proposed $5,000 per-acre language. Even a figure of $10,000 per acre for a hospital would barely meet the status quo. A figure of $15,000 per acre would be required to realize any improvement in the existing code. Furthermore, Coastkeeper takes exception to the hospitals arriving at the last minute to foist amendments never before vetted during the years that this matter has been under public consideration. The hospitals were invited like every other member of the public to participate in the lengthy process that brought this compromise proposal before the council. Rather than seeking special treatment (with no proffered justification), the hospitals should take a leadership role by embracing this compromise ordinance. Instead, Coastkeeper views this last-minute posturing as the classic "Old Boy" politics that the community resoundingly rejected during the last election. No other community in Florida or elsewhere has granted such privileged status to hospitals. It is not warranted here. Financial records reflect Ascension Health Care (Sacred Heart) owns 65 hospitals and numerous nursing homes and rehab centers and enjoyed $13.5 billion in sales in 2008. Hospitals should be leaders advocating for positive environmental human health issues and air quality in the community.

Coastkeewr DroDoses Healthcare facilities should e o m ~ l vwith the samg peaulations set out in the tree ordinance as anv other commercial pusiness. whether lam or small. in the Citv of Pensacola.