ELEMENTARY BACK DIFFERENT  STROKES WITHIN AND WHAT WE'RE  DOING IS WE'RE TRYING TO SEE.  YOUR CHILD TEST TO BEFORE IT  BECOMES A CHALLENGE FOR THEM  AT THAT POINT WHAT WE ASSESS  THAT THAT WILL LET YOU KNOW  AND YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND SIGN  YOUR CHILD UP FOR THAT  APPROPRIATE LEVEL THERE. IT'S  IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THESE  SO THAT WAY WHEN WE'RE  TEACHING A LEVEL ONE WE DON'T  HAVE KIDS THAT SHOULD  POTENTIALLY A LEVEL 2 AND  LEVEL ONE CLASS BECAUSE  THEY'RE NOT LEARNING THE  APPROPRIATE SKILLS THAT THEY  NEEDED THAT POINT IN TIME  RIGHT NOW WHEN WE'RE IN FULL  SUMMER WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE  COME BETWEEN 8.10 DEDUCE FROM  EVALUATION JUST AS YOU CAN  HEAR THE WATER SPLASHING IN  THE BACKGROUND SLIDE.  EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT ANY  DAY OF THE THAT OPEN YOU CAN  COME IN AT ANY POINT IN TIME  ENOUGH FOR SOME EVALUATIONS WE  ALWAYS HAVE A CERTIFIED SO  MUCH DOCTOR ON SITE THAT HAVE  YOUR CHILD TAKE A SWIM  ASSESSMENT.  ♪ >> I'M STACEY LASALLE AND THE  EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT  COORDINATOR FOR THE CITY  OF NORTH PORT AND I'M GOING TO  BE TALKING ABOUT HAVING AN  EVACUATION PLAN IT'S A POINT  HAVE AN EVACUATION PLAN AHEAD  OF TIME AND IT'S VERY  IMPORTANT TO WRITE IT DOWN  BECAUSE THAT WAY YOU HAVE IT  SOMEWHERE PRESENT EVERYBODY IN  YOUR FAMILY CAN SEE IT AND  KEEP IT FRESH IN THEIR MINDS  AND YOU ALSO SHARED WITH  PEOPLE IN YOUR FAMILY OR YOUR  NEIGHBORS SO THAT THEY KNOW  WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE AHEAD OF  TIME AND HOW TO GET A HOLD OF  YOUR WAY TO LOOK FOR YOU AFTER  A DISASTER FOR YOUR EVACUATION  YOU SHOULD HAVE MULTIPLE  ROUTES TO GET TO LOCATION.  YOU'RE PLANNING TO GO TO JUST  BECAUSE TRAFFIC WAS TRAFFIC ON  75 MIGHT BE GRIDLOCKED THERE  COULD BE SOME VERY GOOD BACK  ROADS TO GET TO WHERE YOU'RE  GOING THAT COULD GET YOU THERE  MORE QUICKLY WITHOUT BEING  STUCK IN TRAFFIC WHEN YOU'RE  MAKING EVACUATION PLAN. WE  USUALLY TELL YOU 4 DIFFERENT  THINGS YOU SHOULD STAY HOME IF  YOU ARE NOT IN HIS OWN THAT'S  BEING EVACUATED AND IF YOUR  HOME IS BUILT TO WITHSTAND THE  FORECASTED STORM IF YOU CAN  STAY HOME. AND YOU EVACUATE  YOUR NEXT OPTION SHOULD BE TO  GO TO A FRIEND OUR FAMILY'S  HOME THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE  EVACUATION AREA AND IT IS  STRUCTURALLY SOUND TO US AND  THE STORM 3RD OPTION WOULD BE  GO TO A HOTEL. THEY'RE MUCH  MORE COMFORTABLE THAN I BACK  AWAY SHUNS CENTER'S 4TH OPTION  WOULD BE TO GO TO ONE OF OUR  EVACUATION CENTER SARASOTA  COUNTY HAS FALLEN BACK AWAY  SHUNS CENTER'S. THOSE CAN BE  FOUND ON THEIR WEBSITE.  >> WHY DO WE FLOOD. DURING  SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENTS PORT  NEARLY ALWAYS FLOODS IN  CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY.  THIS IS THANKS TO THE LOCALLY  NAMED MYAKKA HACHI CREEK ALSO  KNOWN AS THE BIG SLEW  WATERSHED.  >> THE 195 SQUARE MILE  DRAINAGE AREA FLOWS THROUGH  DESOTO MANATEE AND SARASOTA  COUNTIES THEN THROUGH OUR CITY  TO EXIT AT CHARLOTTE HARBOR.  AS THE CITY OF NORTH PORT IS  LOCATED AT THE LOW END OF THE  BIG SLEW WATERSHED DRAINAGE  SYSTEM. THE CITY'S CURRENT  FLOODING AND WATER QUALITY  CONDITIONS ARE ATTRIBUTED NOT  ONLY TO THE CITY'S GROWTH BUT  ALSO TO UPSTREAM RUNOFF IN THE  DESOTO MANATEE AND SARASOTA  COUNTY PORTIONS OF THE BIG  SLOW. DURING SIGNIFICANT RAIN  EVENTS PONDING CAN ALSO OCCUR  PONDING OCCURS AND LOW-LYING  AREAS THAT ARE CHARACTERIZED  BY POORLY DRAINED OR SUPER  SATURATED SOILS WITH  BACK-TO-BACK RAINFALL EVENTS  THE GROUND IS TOTALLY  SATURATED WHICH INCREASES THE  RUNOFF DURING A STORM. THE  CITY WORKS HARD TO MAINTAIN  ITS STORMWATER CONVEYANCE  SYSTEM WHICH IS COMPRISED OF  ROADSIDE SWALES DRAINING INTO  79 MILES OF NAMED WATERWAYS.  >> AND 132 MILES OF RETENTION  DITCHES THAT INTERCONNECT WITH  EACH OTHER AND WITH THE MYAKKA  HACHI CREEK. THERE ARE 64  WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES OF  WHICH 23 ARE GATED WATER  CONTROL STRUCTURES 5 ARE GATED  DROP STRUCTURES, 28 ARE FIXED.  WE'RE STRUCTURES AND 8 ARE  DROPPED STRUCTURES. THE  CONTROL ELEVATIONS OF THESE  STRUCTURES ARE DESIGNED SO  THAT WATER IS RETAINED IN THE  WATERWAYS AND A STEP-DOWN  ELEVATION SYSTEM  CONFIGURATION.  >> THIS MEANS THE WATER LEVELS  IN THE WATERWAY SEGMENTS  BETWEEN STRUCTURES  PROGRESSIVELY DECREASES  ELEVATION FROM NORTH TO SOUTH  AND FROM EAST TO WEST. THIS  SYSTEM CONFIGURATION ALLOWS  BOTH RETENTION OF STORM WATER  RUNOFF FOR WATER QUALITY  TREATMENT AND STORAGE FOR  POTABLE WATER USE IN  PREPARATION FOR A STORM, THE  GATES ARE OPENED AS NEEDED TO  CONVEY FLOODWATERS.  >> THE CITY HAS AN ONGOING  PROGRAM TO INSPECT AND REPLACE  OLD CORRODED STRUCTURES SINCE  2006 13 OF THE HIGH PRIORITIES  STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN REPLACED  OR REHABILITATED THE CITY ALSO  HAS A PROGRAM TO CLEAR THE  DITCHES OF SEDIMENT DEPOSITS  THAT HAVE ACCUMULATED OVER  TIME.  >> AND CLEAR FALLEN TREES AND  DEBRIS IN THE MYAKKA. THAT.  >> THAT.  IT'S NOT O'CLOCK  EVERYBODY SHE. YES ANYTHING.  WE'RE  >> OKAY IT IS MONDAY 5/6/2024.  IT IS 09:00AM AND WE ARE IN  THE CITY CHAMBERS AND I CALL  THE CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP  TO ORDER. THIS MAY BE A  HYBRID.  MEETING THIS MEETING HAS BEEN  PROPERLY NOTICED THAT WILL BE  CONDUCTED AS A HYBRID MEETING,  NOT REALLY SURE. BUT IF WE DO  REQUIRE THE USE OF  COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA  TECHNOLOGY A PHYSICAL QUORUM  OF VOTING MEMBERS IS PRESENT  AND CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS,  A HYBRID MEETING ALLOWS VOTING  MEMBERS TO ATTEND AND  PARTICIPATE WITHOUT BEING  PHYSICALLY PRESENT IN THE ROOM  WITH WARM IS CONVENIENT. NOT  REALLY SURE COMMISSIONER  EMERICH IS UP THERE. HAD READ  THAT ROLL CALL PRESENT OUR  MYSELF MAYOR. WHY VICE MAYOR  STOKES COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL.  AND COMMISSIONER LANGDON. DO  WE HAVE MUCH. ON THE AIRWAVES  FOR NOW BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE  TO READ THAT STATEMENT SO WE  CAN COME BACK TO THAT. AND  COME BACK TO THAT ALSO PRESENT  WE HAVE CITY MANAGER FLETCHER  CITY ATTORNEYS SLAYTON  ASSISTANT CITY CLERK POWELL  COURT SPECIALIST BOAT WERE.  >> FIRE CHIEF TITUS IN HOUSE  AND PLEASE CHIP GARZA OKAY.  >> RATE I'M GOING TO CALL  MISTER.  >> ENGLISH TOO LEAD US IN THE  PLEDGE. AMERICA THAN WISH  I GOT INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY  JUSTICE FOR ALL. RIGHT GOOD  JOB. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC  COMMENT NOW.  >> I'M MOVING ON TO ITEM TO 24  DASH 0, 6, 3, 8, CITY MANAGER  THIS IS YOUR ITEMS.  >> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, AND  THIS IS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE  DIRECTION REGARDING THE DRAFT  OF UNITED LANDED CO CHAPTER 6.  THAT'S RESOURCES. AND WE DO  HAVE OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR  FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL  SERVICES WHO WILL LEAD YOU IN  A PRESENTATION.  >> GOOD MORNING LORI BARNES  ASSISTANT RECTOR DEVELOPMENT  SERVICE INC.  AND THIS MORNING,  I'M PRESENTING THE DRAFT  UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT  CHAPTER 6 FOR NATURAL  RESOURCES. FOLLOWING THE  PRESENTATIONS STUFF ON CALL OF  NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGER AND  I ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER YOUR  QUESTIONS. CHAPTER 6 NATURAL  RESOURCES IS SEPARATED INTO 8  DIFFERENT ARTICLES OF COURSE,  THE FIRST ARTICLE IS IN  GENERAL AS WITH REMAINING  CHAPTERS WE HAVE  ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC  PRESERVATION. THE CONSERVATION  RESTRICTED OVERLAY ZONE WHICH  APPLIES TO THE MYAKKA HACHI  CREEK. ENDANGERED AND  THREATENED SPECIES PROTECTION  REGULATIONS. FLOOD DAMAGE  PREVENTION REGULATIONS. MYAKKA  RIVER WHICH HANDLES THE WILD  AND SCENIC RIVER DESIGNATION  FOR THE FLORIDA STATUTES. OUR  TREE PROTECTION REGULATIONS  AND WETLAND PROTECTION  REGULATIONS. SECTION 1006.1  OUTLINES THE PURPOSE OF THE  CHAPTER.  >> THE CITY'S UNIFIED LAND  DEVELOPMENT CODE CURRENTLY  DOES HAVE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL  RELATED REGULATIONS BEFORE NOW  WE HAVEN'T HAD A COMPREHENSIVE  OF REGULATIONS. HANDLE  PROTECTION OF OUR NATURAL  RESOURCES WEVE GOT WETLAND  PROTECTION REGULATIONS. THE  CONSERVATION RESTRICTED SOME  BUT NOT MUCH TOWARD PROTECTION  OF OUR THREATENED AND  ENDANGERED SO IF MY EVERYTHING  AND ONE CHAPTER IN THIS REALLY  SENDS A MESSAGE THAT THE CITY  OF NORTH PORT IS FOCUSED ON.  ALLEN SAYING PROTECTION OF OUR  NATURAL RESOURCES,  DEVELOPMENT. WE ALSO HAVE AND  I WANT TO MAKE MENTION THAT  THIS PRESIDENT CHAPTER FOR  U.S. TIED TO ENVIRONMENTAL  RESOURCES. AS OUR  CONSERVATION. CONTACTS  SENSITIVE SITE DESIGN  REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN  CHAPTER 4. CHAPTER FOR THE  CONTACT SENSITIVE SIDE TO  SIDE. ACTUALLY OUTLINES A  PROCESS FOR DESIGNING THE  SITE. SO MANY DEVELOPERS  OBTAIN THEIR SURVEY AND THEY  IMMEDIATELY BEGAN OUTLINING  THEIR SIGHTS WITHOUT  CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL  RESOURCES NATIVE HABITATS  THREATENED SPECIES. SO THIS  OUTLINES THE EXPECTATION FROM  THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE HAS TO  CITE THE WE WANT TO SEE TYPE  GRAPHICAL SURVEY OBTAINED AND  THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT  OBTAINED PRIOR TO THE.  INITIATION OF A CONCEPT PLAN  THAT WAY THEY CAN KEEP THEIR  THEY CAN KEEP THE ENVIRONMENT  IN MIND AS THEY ON THEIR SIDE.  ANOTHER ITEM THAT IS AND THE  CONTACTS SENSITIVE SITE DESIGN  REGULATIONS AS A PROVISION FOR  A MINIMUM PRESERVATION OF 15  TO 25% OF ON-SITE NONINVASIVE  TREATS. I THINK WE ALL NOW  WHEN THE TREE PROTECTION  REGULATIONS WERE ADOPTED THE  SPRING OF 2022. THE INTENT WAS  TO PROVIDE FOR PRETTY  PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION.  UNFORTUNATELY THE RESULTS WAS  THAT THE DEVELOPERS. HAVE NO  QUALMS ABOUT OPENING UP THEIR  CHECKBOOKS IN CONTINUING TO  CLEAR CUT SITES. SO THIS WILL  PROVIDE SOME BALANCE BETWEEN  TREE REMOVAL AND DEVELOPMENT.  YOU WILL FIND. THROUGHOUT THE  SLIDES. SOME REPETITIVE  THEMES, I'M ONE OF THEM IS  ELIMINATION OF UNNECESSARY  WE'RE IN THE MESS. LOGICAL  ORDER INCORPORATION OF TABLES  FOR EASE OF USE AND  UNDERSTANDING AND ELIMINATION  OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS  WITHIN THE REGULATIONS  THEMSELVES. AND ARTICLE WON WE  HAVE A CLEARER APPLICANT  ABILITY STATEMENT WHICH  OUTLINES THAT THESE  REGULATIONS APPLY TO ALL  DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY THAT'S  NOT OTHERWISE EXCEPT. PER  CHAPTER ONE AND CHAPTER 2. IT  SPECIFIES THE TYPES OF  REVIEWS. THAT ARE SUBJECT TO  THE NATURAL RESOURCES. STAFF  REVIEWING THE PLANS THAT COME  AND INCLUDE WANTED REMIND ALL  AND ON LOTS AS WELL AS  SUBDIVISIONS MAJOR SITE PLANS  WHICH LEARN WHICH WE'RE NOW  CALLING SITE DEVELOPMENT AND  INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN. IT  REMAINS THE TREE PROTECTION  FUND AN EXPANSE THE ALLOWABLE  USES PROBLEM THAT THE CITY  COMMISSION IF THEY WISH TO  APPROVE PURCHASE OF  ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE  LAND. A MOTHER FOR PREP  PRESERVATION ON OUR  SUSTAINABILITY PROJECTS SUCH  FLOOD 10 YOU ATION. THE CITY  COMMISSION WILL BE ABLE TO  AUTHORIZE THOSE PURCHASES WITH  THE TREE TOPS. AND ARTICLE 2  ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC  PRESERVATION WHICH WAS  FORMALLY CHAPTER 58, WE'VE  SEPARATED THE PROVISIONS FOR  ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND  HISTORIC BUILDINGS. WITH WITH  CLARIFIED THAT A CULTURAL  RESOURCE ASSESSMENT IS ALWAYS  REQUIRED FOR A SITE THAT IS  LISTED AND FLORIDA MASTER'S  SIDE AISLES AND PROVIDES STAFF  LATITUDE TO REQUIRE CAN TAKE  YOU A SITE THAT MIGHT NOT BE  LISTED. WE HAVE LIMITED  HISTORIC BUILDING REGULATIONS  TO CITY OWNED BUILDINGS ONLY  WITHOUT A LOCAL LANDMARK OR  LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.  ENFORCEMENT OF HISTORIC  PRESERVATION REGULATIONS ON  PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS IS  PROBLEMATIC. A CHAPTER 9 OF  THE CURRENT ULDC INCLUDES  REGULATIONS FOR THE  CONSERVATION RESTRICTED  OVERLAYS ALSO INCLUDE SOME  LIMITED MANATEE PROTECTION  REGULATIONS WHICH WE'VE MOVED  TO THE ENDANGERED THREATENED  SPECIES CHAPTER. THERE IS A  MAP REFERENCE. AND THIS  ARTICLE. THE DAMAGE IS NOT IN  YOUR DRAFT. AND THE REASON FOR  THAT IS. THE CONSERVATION  RESTRICTED OVERLAYS I WAS  NEVER PROPERLY NOT. IT WAS  HAND DRAWN OVER IN 1981 FEMA  FLOOD MAP. BOUNDARIES OF THE  CONSERVATION RESTRICTED  OVERLAY SOUND AS STRONG DID  NOT REALLY LINE WITH THE TEXT  AND THE REGULATIONS OVER  WORKING ON REFINING NOT AND  THE FINAL VERSION POT T WILL  INCLUDE THE MAP BASED ON THE  CURRENT FLOOD ZONES. AND THE  CITY. AND THE SOUTH MYAKKA  HACHI CRITIC MYAKKA RIVER AREA  FROM THIS PARTICULAR ARTICLE  UNDER THE CURRENT ULDC AND  MENTIONS THIS AREA BUT IT  IMMEDIATELY. MAYBE UTLEY  APPLIES THE WETLAND PROTECTION  REGULATIONS FOR THIS  PARTICULAR AREA. AND THEN  JORDAN THREATEN SPACES  REGULATIONS AS I MENTIONED  BEFORE WE DIDN'T HAVE  COMPREHENSIVE SPACES  PROTECTION REGULATIONS PRETTY  MUCH ALL BACK TO THE STATE  REQUIREMENTS, ESPECIALLY FOR  OVER TOWARDS SPARKED THE  MANATEE PROTECTION REGULATIONS  AND THE CURRENT ULDC DID NOT  ALIGN WITH THE COUNTY WIDE  MANATEE PROTECTION PLANS WHAT  STRAPPED FRONT OF YOU.  >> THAT'S ALIGNED PROPERLY  WITH REGULATIONS. WE DID TO  SIGN THE DRAFT TO A BULL WOULD  REPETITION OF FEDERAL AND  STATE PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS  AND CODIFICATION OF  ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES. AND  I'M JUST A NOTE DEVELOPMENT AS  MENTIONED MULTIPLE TIMES IN  THIS ART AND THIS CHAPTER AND  IT IS DEFINED AND THE IMPACT  WILL INCLUDE ALL TYPES OF  EARTH UNDER BRUSH. CLEARING  ETC. CHAPTER 17 UNDER THE  CURRENT ULDC ADDRESSES DAMAGE  PREVENTION REGULATIONS. IS  BASED ON FEMA'S MODEL PLOT  ORDINANCE FEMA DID REVIEW THE  CHANGES THAT WERE BROUGHT  FORWARD TO YOU FEBRUARY MARCH  THIS YEAR. AND THEY HAVE  REVIEWED THE FOREMAN AND HENRY  NUMBERING PROPOSED IN THE ULDC  REWRITE. BECAUSE FEMA VERY  PARTICULAR FOLLOWING THEM ON A  FLIGHT ORDINANCE WE WOULDN'T  RECOMMEND ANY SIGNIFICANT  CHANGES TO THIS ARTICLE.  MYAKKA RIVER PROTECTIONS  REGULATIONS FORMALLY CHOPPER,  57 OF THE ULDC. A LOT OF  COMMON THEMES LOGICAL ORDER  UNNECESSARY WEARING MASK.  AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION  STATEMENTS WHICH ARE PROVIDED  FOR CHAPTER ONE FOR THE ENTIRE  ULDC. WE APPROACH THIS WITH  ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES RATHER  PROHIBITIONS WHICH NOT OF THE  CURRENT REGULATIONS AND WE  ALSO CLARIFIED NON WATER  DEPEND THEM ASSESS RESTRUCTURE  SET AT WHICH WERE NOT THEREBY  THEY WOULD FALL BACK TO.  REGULAR REAR SETBACK  REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE  FAMILY. SO WE MADE SURE THAT  WE INCORPORATED 100 FOOT  SETBACK OR ANYTHING THAT'S NOT  A BOAT LEFT THAT THAT HERE AT  CETERA. TREE PROTECTION THE  BIG TAKEAWAY FOR THAT SINCE  WE'VE INCORPORATED OPTION FOR  ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION FEE  FOR SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS. IT'S  SECRET OUR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS  THAT ARE ON. SEPTIC,  ESPECIALLY REQUIRE A  SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FELT THE  PRODUCT THAT MAKES  PRESERVATION OF TREES  DIFFICULT. THIS WILL BE AT THE  OPTION OF THE PROPERTY OWNER  OF THE CONTRACTOR RATHER THEM.  ENGAGING SOMEONE TO COMPLETE A  TREE SURVEY AND HOW TALL THE  MEDICATION POINTS. THEY CAN  PAY A FLAT FEE OF $8,000. NOW  OF COURSE THAT DOES NOT  INCLUDE ANY HERITAGE TREES  THAT MIGHT BE FOUND ON SITE  NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF WILL  STILL VISIT EACH SINGLE-FAMILY  PROPERTY AND IF THERE'S A  HERITAGE TREE ON SITE TO WORK  WITH THE PROPERTY ON  CONTRACTOR TO PRESERVE TREE IF  POSSIBLE, AND IF NOT THEY'LL  PAY THE ADDITIONAL HERITAGE  TREE OVER AND ABOVE THE  ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICATION CAN A  WETLAND PROTECTION REGULATIONS  FORMALLY CHAPTER 49. WE ADDED  MORE DETAIL DEVELOPMENT  APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS AND WE  HAD A DIFFERENTIAL OFFER WITH  ITS REQUIREMENTS FOR THE  DIFFERENT WETLANDS CLASSES.  UNDER THE CURRENT RISE, IT'S A  25 FOOT. WHAT LIMBAUGH FOR  AREA DOESN'T MATTER THE  QUALITY OF THE WET MONTH. SO  WE'VE INCORPORATED  DIFFERENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR  JURISDICTIONAL CONNECTED  WETLANDS, NOT ISOLATED  WETLANDS AND ISOLATED  WETLANDS. WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED  MORE DETAILED EROSION CONTROL  AND SEDIMENT ALL REQUIREMENTS.  WE ADDED EXEMPTION SECTION  THAT. THAT ALIGNS WITH STATE  REQUIREMENTS OR STATE ALLOWED  SINCE FOR EXAMPLE ACTIVITIES  AND USES AND THE WETLANDS THIS  TREND. WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER  ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS YOU  MAY HAVE AMOUNT OF MAYOR OF  LIKE TO RESERVE SOME TIME ONCE  THE DISCUSSION IS STRONG SO  THAT I CAN GIVE YOU AN UPDATE  OF THE NEXT STOPS ON THE ULDC  OKAY TO BE DONE. YES ON IT.  >> JUMP TO THAT WE HAVE  COMMISSIONER AND RICH UP THERE  SO HE'S GOING TO READ HIS  STATEMENT WHEN YOU'RE READY.  >> MAYOR I'M SORRY I HAD SOME  TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES GETTING  ON THIS HAS AUTHORIZED BY THE  CITY COMMISSION POLICY NUMBER  2021 DASH 10. I AM ATTENDING.  THE HYBRID. THE HYBRID MEETING  COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA  TECHNOLOGIES EXPERIENCING A  MEDICAL CONDITION, INCLUDING  MANY DISABILITIES PRESENTING  ME FROM ATTENDING IN PERSON AT  THIS TIME, THANK YOU.  >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO I'M  LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO  APPROVE THE USE OF CMT FOR  MOVED. ALL RIGHT I HAVE A  MOTION TO APPROVE THE USE OF  CMT FOR THIS HYBRID MEETING  MADE BY COMMISSIONER LANGDON  AND SECONDED BY VICE.  >> MAYOR STOKES WE WILL DO A  VOICE. VICE YES. THEY ARE WHY  DOES THE U.S.. COMMISSIONER  LANGDON YES.  >> YES.  >> AND COMMISSIONER ELRICH.  >> YOU HEAR NOW.  >> COMMISSIONER EMRICH YES.  >> THANK YOU ALL RIGHT SO THAT  PASSES 5 TO 0. WE CAN GET BACK  TO. OUR MEETING HERE  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL.  >> YEAH I SUBMITTED A WHOLE  BUNCH OF QUESTIONS. I  APPRECIATE STAFF GETTING I  WILL FOCUS ON THE ONES THAT  REQUIRE COMMISSION CONSENSUS  AND THEN A FEW OTHER THINGS  THAT FEEL WE MAY NEED TO HAVE  A COMMISSION DISCUSSION ON.  >> THE VERY FIRST ONE THAT  STOOD OUT WAS THE FACT THAT  THE TREE FUND WHICH IS GOING  TO BE RENAMED, I'M GRATEFUL  FOR THAT NEW NAME WE HAVE  TALKED ABOUT THAT. POSSIBLY  BEING RENAMED IN THE PAST TO  AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  FUND. WHEN I READ IT IT SAYS  FUND. I'M SORRY THIS FUN SHALL  BE USED TO SUPPORT THE  OPERATIONS OF THE NATURAL  RESOURCES DIVISION AND FOR. OF  WIRING LAND OF SENSIBILITY  SUSTAINABILITY PROJECTS.  PLANTING OF TREES IN PUBLIC  PLACES MAINTAINING THOSE  TRUTH. AND ALSO TREE  EDUCATION. WE WHEN WE DID THE  NATURAL RESOURCE DIVISION WE  SAID THAT WE WILL. THE NATURAL  RESOURCE DIVISION STAFF WITH  THAT REFUND MONEY BUT WE WOULD  HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO USE MAKE  IT SUSTAINABLE AT THAT REFUND  WOULD NOT BE USED FOR NATURAL  RESOURCE STAFFING. AND ALL OF  EVERYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO  THE NATURAL RESOURCE. SO WHEN  I SAW THAT IT SHALL HE USED TO  DO THE OPERATIONS OF THE  NATURAL RESOURCE. I  IMMEDIATELY SOUGHT WE NEED TO  MAKE BECAUSE THERE MAY COME A  TIME WHEN DEVELOPMENT STOPS OR  SLOWS DOWN CONSIDERABLY THAT  IT MAY NOT BE SUSTAINABLE.  AND. I JUST WANTED TO OPEN IT  UP FOR DISCUSSION WITH MY  FELLOW COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE.  I I I AM STICKING TO THE POINT  OF WHEN WE DID THE NATURAL  RESOURCE TO MISSION THAT IT  WOULD NOT BE FULLY SUSTAINED  WITH THAT REFUND MONEY THAT WE  WOULD HAVE TO COME UP WITH A  PLAN. SO THAT'S MY FIRST ONE  THAT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO  HAVE A DISCUSSION MY FELLOW  COMMISSIONERS ON. COMMISSIONER  LANGDON DR.  >> SOMETHING FOR YEAH I RECALL  THAT ALSO I THINK WE HAD  TALKED AGAIN NO DECISIONS MADE  BUT. IN DISCUSSION THAT  PERHAPS THERE WOULD BE A  SCHEDULE DECLINING INVESTMENT.  OUT OF THAT TREE FUND TO FUND  THE DIVISION SO HOWEVER, WE  ACCOMMODATE THAT AND LANGUAGE  I THINK A SPEAK MYSELF THAT  WAS SORT OF MY INTENTION. THAT  OVER TIME THAT THIS GROUP  WOULD BECOME SELF-SUSTAINING  OR FUNDED THE GENERAL FUND  HAVE TO FIGURE  >> YES MA'AM I'M. OBVIOUSLY  THIS IS THE DRAFT AND IT'S  SOMETIMES OUR MEMORIES DON'T  SERVICE AS WELL AS WE WOULD  LIKE THEM TO STOP DOESN'T HAVE  ANY CONCERNS ABOUT CHANGING  SHALL TO MAY AND REGARDS TO  AWNING NATURAL RESOURCES  DIVISION. DON'T NEED TO HAVE  CONSENSUS ON UP A FINAL DRAFT  WILL INCLUDE MAY.  >> AND PERSONALLY I DON'T  THINK APPROPRIATE AND WE WILL  THIS PEST FUNDING SHOULD  REQUIREMENTS, APPRECIATE  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL BRINGING  THAT UP. COMMISSIONER  MCDOWELL.  >> YEAH THAT THE ONLY REASON  WHY I DID BRING IT UP THIS  BECAUSE WHEN I POSED THIS  QUESTION. STAFF SAID THAT THEY  NEEDED A COMMISSION CONSENSUS.  WELL THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE  IT SO THAT THAT'S GOOD UNLESS  THERE'S NOBODY ELSE WILL THAT  YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT  JUST THAT I MEAN I NO PROBLEM  CHANGING THE LANGUAGE ON GOOD  THAT'S YOU KNOW STAFF THINK  AARON THAT WAS CONSENSUS, THE  ONE THING I POINT TO TO US.  >> IT MIGHT NOT BE SUCH A BAD  IDEA THAT YOU KNOW ANNUALLY WE  ACTUALLY DO LIKE STAFF  ACTUALLY PREPARES A TRIMMING  FUND WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT A  BUDGET. SO WE CAN SEE WHERE  THOSE DOLLARS PROJECTED FOR  THE NEW YEAR GOING TO GO HOW  MUCH OF IT IT WILL BE A  DECLINING PROCESS OVER A  PERIOD OF YEARS TO WEAN  OURSELVES OFF OF THAT  HOPEFULLY OBVIOUSLY SOMEWHERE  TAX DOLLARS ARE GOING TO PAY  FOR THIS DEPARTMENT. YOU KNOW  SO SO IT'S IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S  JUST A QUESTION OF WHO WOULD  BE NICE FOR US THAN WE DID SEE  HOW MANY DOLLARS A MONTH AGO  ACTUALLY PLANTED DOLLARS ARE  GOING TO OVER AN  ADMINISTRATION THAT'S  SOMETHING. WOULDN'T BE FAIR  TERRIBLY COURT. I DON'T THINK  TO DOING IT CERTAINLY WOULD.  SHOT A LITTLE SUNSHINE ON  WHERE DOLLARS ARE GOING THAT'S  ALL.  >> I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE  ACTUAL WE'RE CALLING IT  SOMETHING ELSE NOW IS THAT  GOING TO BE LISTED AS  SEPARATE. BECAUSE I KNOW IN  THE PAST IT WAS ALWAYS SOME  ISSUE ABOUT. IT WASN'T REALLY  A TREE FUND IT WAS PART AND  ACCOUNTING IT WAS JUST PART OF  SOMETHING ELSE GOING TO BE ITS  OWN SEPARATE. FUND NOW OR IS  IT GOING TO BE PART OF.  >> I MEAN WE WILL DEFINITELY  WORK WITH FINANCE ON OUR  PREFERENCE CURRENT THAT REFUND  TO BE A SEPARATE REVENUE ON WE  THINK IT'S MORE TRANSPARENT  AND PROVIDE IS TRACK AND AND  YES, DEFINITELY COMMISSIONER  STOCKS WE WELL AS PART OF THE  BUDGET PROCESS EVERY YEAR BE  PROVIDING ACCOUNTING OF HOW WE  ARE ATTEMPTING TO WEAN OFF  NATURAL RESOURCES FROM THE  ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE POND.  WE WILL NOT BE CAPABLE OF  DOING THAT THIS YEAR BECAUSE  OF THE GENERAL WE'LL CONTINUE  INVEST IT IN WHICH WE CAN  PROVIDE FOR THE NATURAL  RESOURCES DEPARTMENT GETTING  TOO CLOSER TO A SELF FUNDING  OR SELF AND PLUS GENERAL AND  THE FUTURE.  >> I THAT'S GREAT I'M REALLY  GLAD TO HEAR THAT IS THAT PAT.  SOME EXPERIENCE IN THE PAST  TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS IN  THAT RACE AND HOW IT WAS USED  AND THAT'S WHEN I LEARN HOW  MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. HOW  IT'S CLASSIFIED IN ORDER TO  GET IT LIKE YOU SAID SEEING  HOW IT'S BEING IS THIS PEOPLE  CAN SAY EXACTLY THAT IT'S  BEING USED FOR WHAT WE'RE  INTENDING TO BE USED FOR SO I  APPRECIATE THAT. DO WE HAVE  ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT  PARTICULAR ISSUE. ALLEN THINK  AS OTHER.  >> YEAH, I JUST WANT TO WEIGH  IN THERE IS A TREE FUND I  THINK THROUGH COUNT ONE 25  DON'T HOLD ME TO THE ACCOUNT  NUMBER. ALL THE FEES IT'S IN  THE CODE IN THIS IS A GREAT  SEGUE TO MY NEXT QUESTION IN  THE EXISTING CODE 4513 IT SAYS  ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FEES  PENALTIES COLLECTED AS PART OF  ENFORCEMENT OF THIS ARTICLE  WHICH IS THE TREE CODE. SHELL  BE PLACED IN THE CITY'S TREE  FUND. IT'S FUN SHALL ONLY BE  USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF TREE  EDUCATION, ACQUIRING PLANTING  AND PROTECTING TREES AND  REQUIRING IN PRESERVING LAND  WITHIN THE CITY. ANY  MITIGATION FEE HANG ON I'M  GETTING GETTING TO THE GOOD  PART OF IT. ANY MITIGATION BE  IMPOSED BY THE HEARING OFFICER  SHALL BE DEPOSITED INTO THE  TREE FUND THAT SENTENCE IS  MISSING FROM THIS CO. THE  FUNDS SHALL BE ADMINISTERED BY  THE CITY'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT  IT IS ALREADY A SEPARATE FUND  AND IT'S ALREADY TRACKABLE. SO  I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU ALL  KNOW THAT THIS IS ALREADY  BEING DONE. BUT THE SENTENCE  OF ANY MITIGATION FEE IMPOSED  BY THE HEARING OFFICER. THE  HEARING OFFICER IS DIFFERENT  THEN. WHAT I'M READING IN THIS  CODE. CONSERVATION POINT ANY  MITIGATION THAT WOULD BE  DEPOSITED INTO THE NEW TREE  FUND AGAIN. BUT IF RING  OFFICER FINES. COMPLIANCE WITH  THE CODE. THOSE FUNDS ALSO  NEED TO BE DEPOSITED INTO THIS  ACCOUNT AND IT MAY BE  UNDERSTOOD THAT THE HEARING  OFFICER HEAT ISSUES, ANY  PENALTIES OR FEES. IT'S  UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WOULD GO  INTO THIS TREE FUND I'M SORRY  BUT NOTHING IS UNDERSTOOD  UNLESS IT'S WRITTEN IN CODE.  AND IT REALLY NEEDS IN MY  OPINION NEEDS TO BE SPELLED  OUT BECAUSE. I WOULD HATE FOR  YEAR OR 2 FROM NOW AT THE  HEARING OFFICER IMPOSED A  PENALTY OR A FINE. FOR CLEAR  CUTTING LAND WITHOUT A PERMIT  TO THAT $15,000 AND THAT MONEY  NOT AUTOMATICALLY BE PUT INTO  THE ACCOUNT. SO I REALLY I  REALLY THINK WE NEED TO MAKE  SURE IT'S THERE AND IT'S  CLEARLY SPELLED OUT LIKE IT IS  NOW IN OUR CODE. SO I AGAIN  PROBABLY NEED TO GET A  CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMISSION  TO MAKE SURE THAT AND THE  HEARING OFFICER MITIGATIONS  AND PENALTIES AND FEES ARE  ALSO BEING DEPOSITED. INTO THE  STREET FIGHT.  >> I'M SO THE PENALTIES FOR  VIOLATION OF THE TREE  PROTECTION REGULATIONS ARE  PROVIDED FOR AND CHAPTER 2 OF  THE CITY CODE.  >> THAT CHAPTER CHAPTER DOES  NOT SPECIFY THE LOCATION WHERE  THOSE THESE.  >> IMPOSED BY HEARING OFFICER  WILL BE THE POSITIVE. BUT I  THINK FOR OF USE AND  UNDERSTAND FROM HEARING  OFFICER PERSPECTIVE IF WE  COULD INCORPORATE INTO THE  CITY CODE PROVISIONS THAT THIS  PASS THE INCREASED FINES FOR A  VIOLATION OF TREE PROTECTION.  DIRECTION TOO. DEPOSIT THOSE  FUNDS INTO THE TREE  PROTECTION. OR ENVIRONMENTAL  RESOURCES PROTECTION ON. THAT  MIGHT BE A BETTER LOCATION  RATHER THAN IN THE LAND  DEVELOPMENT WILL DEFER TO  COMMISSION ON THIS. WE DON'T  HAVE ANY OBJECTION CLARIFYING  CITY CODE OR OR AND THE TREE  PROTECTION CHAPTER.  >> THANKS FOR THAT. ARIF  OCCASIONS SO COMMISSIONER, HOW  ARE THE ONES WANT CONSENSUS  FOR THAT I.  >> I UNDERSTAND THAT THE  MITIGATION FEE IS IN CHAPTER 2  OF THE CITY CODE. FOR PLANNING  TO ADOPT THIS IN THE VERY NEAR  FUTURE I'M GOING TO SAY WITHIN  4 MONTHS JUST FOR THE HECK OF  IT. BY THE TIME WE GET A CITY  CODE BROUGHT TO IT MAY NOT BE  IN TIME FOR THIS I REALLY  WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT FIXED  HIM PUT IN  HERE NOW THAT WOULD THEN.  THERE'S A TIME WHEN I'M NOT  HERE YOU GUYS WE NEED TO ADD  THIS TO THE CITY CODE THEN WE  CAN DO IT AT THAT TIME I THINK  IT'S IMPERATIVE TO MAKE SURE  IT'S IN THIS COLD NOW INSTEAD  OF WAITING FOR SOME TIME ON  CERTAIN DATE. I'M PUTTING IT  INTO THE CITY'S CODE.  >> COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL WE  WON'T BE WAITING.  >> THERE WILL BE COMPANION  CODE AMENDMENTS COMING TO YOU  ON THE SAME DATE. THE ULDC  ADOPTION. THERE ARE THINGS IN  THE IN THE CITY COUNT THAT  WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE ULDC  REWRITE WON'T A LINE. SO YOU  WILL HAVE MULTIPLE ORDINANCES  COMING AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE  WHICH THE ADDITION OF THAT  LANGUAGE IS AND THIS IS NOT  BECAUSE WE'RE CURRENTLY  WORKING ON DRAFTING THOSE  COMPANION CODE AMENDMENTS.  >> WILL THIS BE INCLUDED IN  THAT. THAT'S WRITING THAT DOWN  LOOK FOR THIS AND THE OLDEST.  >> THANK YOU FOR THAT  CLARIFICATION AND THANK YOU  COMMISSION WITHOUT BRINGING  THAT OUT YEAH RIGHT PARKING.  THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING BUT  SEEING HERE AND I KNOW THAT  THERE'S OTHERS THAT WANT TO  SPEAK SO TRY AND BE QUICK. IF  YOU GO ONTO THE ARCHITECTURAL  I'M SORRY ARCHAEOLOGICAL  SIGNIFICANCE. THERE WAS THE  VERY LONG RESPONSE FROM STAFF  ABOUT. IT WILL GET A ONE IT  SAYS SITE IDENTIFIED IN THE  COMP I HAD SUGGESTED REMOVING  IT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF  SITES THAT CANNOT BE DISCLOSED  BECAUSE THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM  FLORIDA STATE STATUTE.  ♪ >> STAFF GAVE A VERY  ♪ >> LONG REASON AND THEN  ULTIMATELY SAID HEY YOU NEED  COMMISSION CONSENSUS. AND I'D  LIKE TO HAVE STAFF KIND OF.  SUMMARIZE.  >> THAT AND PUT IT IN REALLY  SIMPLISTIC  >> I'M SO THE FLORIDA STATUTES  TO ADDRESS PUBLIC RECORDS  EXEMPTIONS FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL  SITES. HELP I THE STATES ARE  HOW I HAD THE VISION OF  NATURAL RESOURCES. THERE.  THERE SEEMS TO THEM A LOT OF  MISUNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE  PUBLIC RECORDS EXEMPTION  ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE  PAST. IT IS LIMITED TO STATE  HEALTH. NUMBER ONE NUMBER 2,  WHICH YOU WILL SEE SHORT ORDER  THE REFERENCES ANY PARTICULAR  SITES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN ARE LIMITED. WE MENTIONED  WARM MINERAL SPRINGS WE  MENTIONED LITTLE SALT SPRINGS.  SO WE DON'T SPECIFICALLY  MENTION ANY STATE HOUSE  ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES. IN THE  CONTRACT.  >> ALL RIGHT SO THANK YOU FOR  I ADDED ICE SUGGESTED WE ADD A  NUMBER 3. TO THAT SAME SECTION  BECAUSE IT TALKS ABOUT SITES  THAT ARE LISTED ON THE  NATIONAL REGISTRY OF HISTORIC  PLACES. AND I SUGGESTED THAT  WE ADD THE CITY OF NORTH  PORT'S LOCAL REGISTRY OF  HISTORIC SITE AND STRUCTURES  WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THIS  COMMISSION IN 2017 THAT WE DO  HAVE A LOCAL REGISTRY. OF  THESE HISTORICAL SITES. STAFF  SAID IT'S REALLY NOT NECESSARY  BECAUSE. THERE'S NOT THAT MANY  LOCAL REGISTRIES. BUT THEN  WHEN I WENT AND READ THE REST  OF THE COMMENTS. WHEN I SAID  THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME  PRIVATE OWNERSHIP.  SIGNIFICANCE STAFF SAID STEP  DOES NOT RECOMMEND REGULATING  PRIVATELY OWNED HISTORICAL  BUILDINGS WITHOUT A  VOLUNTARILY LOCAL LANDMARK  DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC  DISTRICTS. AND I KIND OF  THOUGHT WELL ISN'T THAT THE  SAME THING IS WHAT WE APPROVED  AT RESOLUTION. WE HAVE WARM  MINERAL SPRINGS MOTEL COMING  ONLINE. IT IS A NATIONALLY  REGISTERED SITE AT SOME POINT  IN OUR FUTURE AND THE REASON  WE. THE RESOLUTION BACK IN  2017 WAS. THERE ARE SITES IN  OUR CITY THAT WOULD BECOME  QUOTE UNQUOTE HISTORIC. AND IF  WE DON'T START RECOGNIZING  THOSE LOCATIONS. THEY'RE DOING  TO FOR DESTRUCTION FOR  RAISING. MANY CITIES  THROUGHOUT FLORIDA HAVE  HISTORICAL CE LOCATIONS THAT  ARE NOT ON THE RECORD STRAIGHT  FOR NATIONAL RECOGNITION, BUT  WE DO RECKON THEY DO RECOGNIZE  AND LOCALLY AND I REALLY THINK  THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP  OUR LOCAL REGISTRY INTACT AND  THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THIS  LIST STAFF IS LOOKING FOR  CONSENSUS AND SO MY TO KEEP  THAT IN PLACE. SO ACT.  >> THE LANGUAGE AND THE  CURRENT CODE.  >> PROVIDES FOR A LOOP. I YOU  KNOW UNILATERAL DECISION ON  THE PART OF THE CITY  ADMINISTRATION TO DETERMINE  THAT THESE SIDE SHOULD BE  ADDED TO THE NATIONAL  REGISTRY. IT DOES PROVIDE FOR  APPEAL. THERE'S YOU KNOW  THERE'S SOME DUE PROCESS  ISSUES HERE FOR A CITY  ADMINISTRATION TO UNILATERALLY  DETERMINE SITE SHOULD BE  CONSIDERED HISTORIC AND  SUBJECT TO REGULATIONS. IF YOU  LOOK OTHER CITIES THROUGHOUT  THE STATE, ESPECIALLY THOSE  WITH. THAT WORK AND COOPERATE  IN THE 1800'S, IT CETERA ET  CETERA. THEY LOCAL AS  NATION'S.  >> TREATS  >> HISTORIC PROPERTIES,  SIMILARLY TO THE STATE OR  NATIONAL REGISTER, THE FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT NATIONAL REGISTER.  WHERE IT'S VOLUNTARY IF  SOMEONE WANTS THEIR PROPERTY  TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A HISTORIC  SITE. THE CITY COULD ESTABLISH  A LOCAL LANDMARK PROGRAM  THROUGH WHICH THOSE SITES  COULD BE DESIGNATED THROUGH A  PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS  VOLUNTARILY A VOLUNTARY  APPLICATION ON HEART. WE HAVE  OF THE OWNER. MANY PEOPLE ARE  INTERESTED HAVING DESIGNATION  HAVE IMPACT PLACED ON THEIR  PROPERTY AND WILLINGLY.  SUBJECT THEMSELVES TO  REGULATIONS THAT WOULD LIMIT  THE EXTERIORS MODIFICATIONS TO  THEIR PROPERTY. IF THAT'S  SOMETHING THE COMMISSION WHICH  IS TO CONSIDER I WOULD  RECOMMEND WE INCORPORATED IN  THE CITY CODE THAT WOULD BE A  CHANGE THAT WHAT HAPPENED DOWN  THE ROAD. A VOLUNTARY  DESIGNATIONS OF HISTORIC  DISTRICTS. A HISTORIC DISTRICT  COULD BE F JUST ONE PROPERTY  OWNER AND THE DISTRICT WISH TO  PURSUE THAT DESIGNATION AND  THEN AGAIN THERE WOULD BE DUE  PROCESS THROUGH PUBLIC  HEARINGS FOR THAT DESIGNATION  TO BE APPROVED AND THERE WOULD  BE PUBLIC INPUT INVOLVED. SO  THAT THAT IS WHERE WHERE STAFF  IS LEANING ON THE  RECOMMENDATIONS. WE DO AGREE  THAT WE SHOULD PRESERVE  HISTORIC PROPERTIES TO THE  EXTENT POSSIBLE, BUT WE'D LIKE  TO DUE PROCESS. THAT AND THE  FOREFRONT. SO THAT WE ARE  MAKING DECISIONS WITHOUT  PROPERTY OWNER AND PUT IT AND  LEAVING THAT I'M IN A POSITION  WHERE THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PAY  A FEE AND MAKE AN APPEAL TO  THIS BOARD WHEN THEY WEREN'T  EVEN INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL  DECISION BEGIN WITH.  >> OKAY COMMISSIONER OKAY WITH  THAT PARTICULAR.  >> REALLY THINK WE NEED TO  INCLUDE LOCAL REGISTRY OF  HISTORIC SITES IN THIS ULDC.  AND AND ONCE IT'S INCLUDED IN  THIS ULDC IN THE FUTURE.  >> WHEN 18.  >> PROPERTY OWNER COMES  FORWARD. AND WANTS THEIR  PROPERTY TO BE IT IT IT'S IT  KIND OF BECOMES THIS PLACE  HOLDER INSTEAD IN THE FUTURE  WE MIGHT ADD. THERE'S A REASON  THAT THE COMMISSION INSTITUTED  THAT RESOLUTION BACK IN 2017.  AND I REALLY DON'T WANT THAT  TO BE LOST OR FORGOTTEN  ♪ AND I REALLY THINK THE WAY  THAT YOU PRESERVE THAT ACTION  IS TO INCLUDE IT  ♪ AND ADD A NUMBER 3 IN SECTION  2006.2.  >> ALL RIGHT SO LET'S GO DOWN  AND SAY WHAT. OUR FROM PAST  THAT COMMISSIONER LANGDON.  >> YEAH, I MEAN AT SOME THAT  ARE SWIRLING HAVING JUST.  >> COME BACK FROM A COUNTRY  THAT MEASURE IS.  >> AT 400 AD. I'M KIND  STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT. WITH  THE DEFINITION OF A HISTORIC  SITE. ASSUMING THERE IS ONE  SOMEWHERE. AND THIS  DOCUMENTATION DO WE HAVE A  DEFINITION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES  COULD SOMEONE REFRESH MY  MEMORY.  >> THAT RESOLUTION IMAGE.  >> 50 YEARS OR OLDER. AND  SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT ABOUT  THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND  WEATHER. THEY ARE YOU KNOW ONE  OF THE LAST REMAINING EXAMPLES  REGION AND STATE OR NATION.  >> WE HAVE ANY OF REALLY.  >> THE 3 BUILDINGS AT WARM  MINERAL SPRINGS. AND NOW  THEY'RE CHILE, THE MOTEL  POTENTIALLY THEM ALL.  >> I'M ALSO TRYING TO WRAP MY  HEAD AROUND.  >> WHY WOULD AN OWNER OF THE  PROPERTY WANT TO HAVE THEIR  PROPERTY.  >> IDENTIFIED AS A HISTORICAL  SITE. IT'S A PROCESS AND COST  INVOLVED WHAT'S THE BENEFIT TO  RECOGNITION.  >> I CAME FROM A SMALL CITY  BEFORE AND ALL ALL AROUND, BUT  MY LAST POST BEFORE I CAME TO  PORT WAS A SMALL CITY IN  CENTRAL FLORIDA THAT WAS  INCORPORATED IN THE WERE  MULTIPLE PROPERTY OWNERS I  CAN'T. YOU NUMBER OF MULTIPLE  PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WANTED TO  BE LISTED AS LOCAL LANDMARK.  THEY THEY TOOK PRIDE AND THEIR  PROPERTY AND THE WAY THEIR  PROPERTY LOT. AND THEY LIKE  THE IDEA OF HAVING A PLACARD  ON THEIR FRONT THAT RECOGNIZE  THE AGE OF THEIR PROPERTY. AND  THE FACT THAT THEY WERE  WILLING TO ENSURE THAT ANY  RENOVATIONS THAT I MADE WERE.  >> CONSISTENT WITH THE  ORIGINAL ARCHITECTURE OF THE  PROPERTY. I MEAN IT IT YOU'D  BE SURPRISED. THE NUMBER OF  PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND HISTORIC  OUR ARE WANTING TO SHOWCASE  UP.  >> WHEN I APPLY THAT TO THE  VERY SHORT LIST OF PROPERTIES  IN OUR CITY THAT MIGHT QUALIFY  AS HISTORICAL. I DON'T SEE  THAT PRIDE OF PLACE. ANYWHERE  NEAR THOSE PROPERTIES SO.  AGAIN I'M JUST NOT SEEING THAT  THIS REALLY APPLIES TO  ANYTHING WE HAVE IN THE  SENATE.  >> AND 2.  >> I DON'T KNOW TO PUT IN  ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE IN  PLACE FOR 4 5 BUILDINGS. THAT  ARE FALLING DOWN. I'M JUST IT  DOESN'T COMPUTE MA'AM SORRY,  SO. NOW THAT'S REALLY ALL I  >> THERE.  >> I'M BOTHERED A LITTLE BY  DUE PROCESS ISSUE AND I JUST  FEEL TOO LIKE I HATE THE  THOUGHT OF LEGISLATING  SOMETHING IF IT'S VOLUNTARY.  YOU KNOW IF THEY PROPERTY STEP  PROPERTY OWNERS, PRIVATE  PROPERTY OWNERS. WOULD LIKE  RENT, YOU KNOW TO CREATE A  RECOGNITION MEAN THIS IT'S A  TOPIC LIKE MAYBE YOU KNOW THAT  IT IS STARK ADVISORY BOARD  COULD LIKE GROUND COME UP WITH  SOME THOUGHTS ON GIVE US SOME  INPUT ON DON'T SEE THE NEED TO  PUT THE THINK. IT'S.  >> AND YOU KNOW PEOPLE COULD  QUALIFY FOR FUNDING RENOVATION  AND I JUST DON'T SEE NEAR  VALUE OF THE BENEFIT. THE  MOTEL FOR EXAMPLE. WANT TO  PARTICIPATE.  >> ALL RIGHT COMMISSIONER,  EMRICH SHOULD YOU HAVE.  SOMETHING YOU WANT AT  >> THE MAIN THING ABOUT IT IS  IS IS CAN YOU HEAR ME. YEAH,  THE MAIN THING ABOUT THIS IS I  BELIEVE STAFF GOT IT, YOU KNOW  PRETTY MUCH NOW DOWN BUT IN  THE FUTURE WE'RE JUST STARTING  THIS PROCESS WE JUST ANNEX THE  PROPERTY THE HOTEL AND DOWN  THE ROAD YOU NEVER KNOW WHATS  ORTIZ AREA ITSELF MIGHT BECOME  A TOTAL DISTRICT AND THEN WE  MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING  WITH THAT DOWN THE ROAD BUT I  DON'T THINK IT'S ANYTHING  THAT'S PRESSING US RIGHT NOW  WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED ABOUT  THE BUILDINGS THAT SPREADS  AND. MORE LIKELY THEY MAY NOT  BE THERE BECAUSE OF FUNDING  BUT WE'RE STILL TRYING AND  WE'LL SEE THAT YOU KNOW LIKE  LIKE I GO WITH THE  COMMISSIONER LINE DID YOU KNOW  I DON'T FORESEE IT BEING A A  HUGE ISSUE RIGHT NOW AND I  WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT UP TO.  YOU KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL  DEPARTMENT AND SEE WHAT'S  GOING ON BECAUSE I DON'T WANT  TO PUT LEGISLATURE DOWN TO  FORCE PEOPLE INTO THIS  DESIGNATION VOLUNTARY IS FINE.  BUT AGAIN WE'RE GETTING INTO  THE WEEDS ON THIS A LITTLE BIT  TOO DEEP IS MY OPINION THAT  THAT'S ALL I GOT ON AIR.  >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AND  I'LL JUST THE WAY IN THAT 50  YEARS THAT MEANS IF ABOUT  SOMETHING BUILT IN 1974.  >> OR BE ON WOULD QUALIFY AND  RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THESE FEW  COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS YOU KNOW  PEOPLE SEE THE VALUE IN SOME  OF OUR OLDER HOMES AS  MIDCENTURY STYLE THAT. IS UP  TO THEM IF THEY WANT TO  EMBRACE THAT AND AND AND BUILD  THAT UP AND AND FOCUS ON HAVE  MENTIONED BEFORE I LOVE  WATCHING THESE HOME  IMPROVEMENT SHOWS AND 10 SOME  OF THESE BUILDINGS THAT ARE  DONE IN HISTORICAL DISTRICTS,  THERE. RESTRICTED FROM DOING  CERTAIN. MODIFICATIONS  BECAUSE.  >> THEY PASSED THEIR  HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL  BOARDED IT DOESN'T STAND.  >> COMMISSIONER EMERICH TO  HAMSTRING PEOPLE THAT IF  THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH  THE HOUSE THAT'S 50 YEARS OR  OLDER, I'M TRYING TO GET IT.  FIXED UP. SO THAT'S WHY MY  TAKE ON THAT.  >> THANK YOU FOR ALL THE  CONTACTS WITH JUST GUYS KNOW  HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE  NATIONAL REGISTER. ALREADY  PLACED PROPERTIES WHICH IS  WARM MINERAL SPRINGS AND THE  MOTEL THAT MORE FOR THE LOCAL  REGISTRY. OF PLACES THAT  PEOPLE SAY WOW YOU KNOW THIS  WAS THE FIRST HOUSE BUILT HERE  IN NORTH PORT JORGE.  >> THIS ISN'T USED TO BE THE  OLD CITY HALL.  >> OR THE OLD POLICE STATION  WAS A LOCAL REGISTRY. THAT  FELT WAS NECESSARY TO CONTINUE  HAVING AND FOR PRESERVATION SO  WITH THAT I'LL MOVE SINCE THE  CONSENSUS WAS GIVEN. IF YOU GO  TO SECTION 2006.3. IT'S THE R  P LOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT SITES.  >> THE.  >> LEVEL ONE IS A SITE THAT  MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR  LISTING. THE NATIONAL  REGISTRY. AND THAT IS  SOMETHING THAT HASN'T. PLACED  ON THE NATIONAL REGISTRY THAT  IT MEETS THE CRITERIA. THE  LEVEL 2 INDICATES THAT THE  SITE HAS THE POTENTIAL. AND  SIGNIFICANCE TO RECOMMEND  ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION  DURING CONSTRUCTION. I REALLY  THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADD  THE LEVEL 3.  >> FOR APPROVED SITES THAT  >> THE NATIONAL REGISTRY OF  HISTORIC PLACES. BECAUSE IT'S  ALREADY BEEN DEEMED AS  HISTORICAL LEVEL ONE AND LEVEL  2 ARE LIKE FUTURE TENSE. SO  WHEN I MADE THAT SUGGESTION TO  STAFF THEY SAID THAT THEY  WOULD NEED A CONSENSUS BECAUSE  IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT LEVEL ONE  PROPERTIES ARE ALREADY  INCLUDED ON THAT LIST OF THE  NATIONAL REGISTRY. SINCE IT'S  ALREADY MET THE CRITERIA. BUT  WHEN YOU READ THE LANGUAGE OF  LEVEL ONE. IT SAYS THE SITE  MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR LISTING  ON THE REGISTRY. BUT IT HASN'T  BEEN RELEASED. ON THE  REGISTRY. SO JUST BECAUSE IT  MEETS THE CRITERIA DOESN'T  MEAN THAT IS ALREADY ON THE  REGISTRY AND I WANT TO PROTECT  THOSE SITES. AND HAVE IT AS A  LEVEL 3 AND JUST DON'T KNOW IF  IT WILL FLY WITH MY FELLOW  COMMISSIONERS BASED ON THE  PREVIOUS CONVERSATION, BUT.  THERE ARE SITES THAT ARE  ALREADY AND APPROVED IN OUR  CITY. I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF  WE SHOULD ADD A LEVEL 3.  BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY THERE  AND I DON'T SEE THE  PROTECTIONS OF THOSE SITE.  >> IT'S FARM CAN YOU ELABORATE  ON THAT WHAT WOULD BE THE  BENEFIT OF DOING THAT OR  DIFFERENCE.  >> I HAVE A I HAVE A  COMPROMISE. COMPROMISES I'M  OFFER THAT UP.  >> WAY WE CAN MODIFY THE  LANGUAGE OR LEVEL LONG.  >> TO INCORPORATE. ALREADY  LISTED OR MEETS CRITERIA FOR  LISTING AND I THINK THAT WILL  PROVIDE FOR A LESS  COMPLICATED. SIDE OF  REGULATIONS AND STILL COVER  THE COMMISSIONERS AND SCOTT.  LOVE IT.  >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER I  WANTED TO HAVE OTHERS  ABSOLUTELY WANT LET YOU  FINISH, ROLE I REMIND WOMEN  JUST I HAVE ONE MORE ON THE  ARCHITECTURE THAT.  >> THERE WAS AND SECTION 6.2 6  ITS DETERMINATION OF  HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.  THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT  FIRST ORACLE BUILDINGS. FOR  CITY OWNED.  >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SEE IF  THERE IS A CONSENSUS BECAUSE  STAFF SAYS ITS THEY DON'T  RECOMMEND REGULATING  PRIVATELY-OWNED HISTORICAL  BUILDINGS.  >> WITHOUT THE VOLUNTARY LOCAL  DESIGNATION. BUT WE DO HAVE  MANY IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP  WARM MINERAL SPRINGS WAS THE  FIRST ONE TO COME MIND. WE  ALSO HAVE NOTICED SPRINGS  WHICH IS ALSO IN PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP. REALLY NEED TO MAKE  SURE THAT WE PROTECTING THESE  BUILDINGS AND OR LOCATIONS. SO  I DON'T KNOW WHERE STAFF IS  NOW THAT I MENTIONED ABOUT  SPRINGS. BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON  THE REGISTRY. AND IT IS IN  PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. JUST WANTED  TO THROW THAT OUT THERE AND  SEE WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDS.  >> STAFF STANDS BY THE INITIAL  OUR INITIAL OUR OUR POSITION  IS PROVIDING FOR DESIGNATION  OR REGULATION OF PRIVATELY  OWNED PROPERTIES IS RESTORE  IT, STANDING PROBLEMATIC  WITHOUT DUE WE WOULD RECOMMEND  AVOIDING. INCLUSION OF.  REGULATING THOSE PRIVATE  PROPERTIES AT THIS TIME. AND  AGAIN COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. I  THINK HAVING THE CULTURAL AND  HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY  BOARD TAKE A LOOK AT THE  POSSIBILITY OF INCORPORATING  SOME SEPARATE REGULATIONS OR  SEPARATE ALLOWANCES DENSITY  CODE THAT WOULD PROVIDE FOR  THAT HISTORIC NATION,  ESPECIALLY AS THE CITY A  CHANCE. YOU KNOW THAT THE  TIME. NOW MAY NOT BE  APPROPRIATE BUT EVENTUALLY WE  DO WANT TO GET SOME  CONSIDERATION TO. SOME OPTIONS  FOR PROPERTY OWNERS. AS WE  MOVE INTO THE FUTURE AND HAVE  MORE AND MORE PROPERTIES OVER  50 YEARS OLD COMING ONLINE.  >> OK I'M GOING TO MOVE  ABSOLUTELY  ♪ AND THEN WE CAN ALWAYS DO  ANOTHER ROUND HERE WHICH ARE  ALIGNED.  >> YEAH, THANK YOU MAYOR, I  JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS I  HAVE SOME OTHER COMMENTS BUT I  ♪ >> THINK THEY BELONG LATER IN  THE CONVERSATION. THROUGHOUT  THE DOCUMENT FRIENDS AND  UNLESS SOMETHING IS DECIDED BY  SPECIAL EXCEPTION.  >> WHO WOULD MAKE THOSE  EXCEPTIONS AND SAID A  COMMISSION GANG INCIDENT IN  THE STRAIT, A THING. IT'S  THROUGHOUT THE  >> A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS A  PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS THROUGH  WHICH THE PLANNING AND ZONING  ADVISORY BOARD WOULD HEAR THAT  RICK ROSS PROVIDE A  RECOMMENDATION TO THE  COMMISSION COMMISSION WOULD  MAKE.  >> THE FINAL DECISION OKAY  GREAT, THANK YOU.  >> IT WAS MENTIONED HERE THE  MYAKKA RIVER PROTECTION ZONE.  RIGHT NOW THE CITY HAS BEEN  BUYING PROPERTIES ALONG THE  CREEK. I THINK THAT CREEK WAS  ALSO IDENTIFIED FOR PROTECTION  ZONE. IS.  >> WELL THIS REPLACE OR LIMIT.  THE CITY BUYING THOSE  PROPERTIES TOO.  >> PREVENT DEVELOPMENT OR WE  IDENTIFIED THAT THERE ARE  THINGS WE CAN SHORT BUYING  THOSE PROPERTIES THAT MAKE IT  VERY UNATTRACTIVE TO DEVELOP  THERE.  >> SO CONSERVATION RESTRICTED  WHICH IS CURRENTLY REGULATED  AND THE ULDC APPLIES TO THE  MYAKKA HACHI CREEK WHERE THE  CITY HAS BEEN ACTIVELY  PURSUING TIER ONE TIER 2  PROPERTY PURCHASES. THE FUTURE  LAND USE MAP AND THE OUT THAT  YOU'LL SEE COMING FORWARD,  WE'VE ACTUALLY APPLIED A  CONSERVATION FUTURE LAND USE  AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION  ZONING. SO THE PROPERTIES THAT  THE ALONG THE MYAKKA HACHI  CREEK. WE CANNOT APPLY  DESIGNATION PRIVATELY ON  PROPERTIES. THE AND THE DRAFT  DO ME THOSE IN THE CURRENT  REGULATIONS WHERE THE  SINGLE-FAMILY CONSTRUCTION  AREA IS LIMITED AND THE  REQUIREMENT OR AND ANNA  ROEBUCK SEPTIC SYSTEM. IT'S  INCORPORATED FOR THOSE  PROPERTIES THAT ARE  DEVELOPABLE UNDER THE  REGULATIONS. AS FAR AS THE  MYAKKA RIVER PROTECTION ZONE.  THERE'S A LIMITED NUMBER OF  PROPERTIES IN THE CITY LIMITS  THAT ARE WITH AND THAT RIVER  PROTECTION ZONE. TO THE SOUTH.  THE SOUTH SOUTHWEST. MUCH OF  THOSE PROPERTIES ARE ALREADY  UNDER CONSERVATION BUT THIS UP  WEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT  DISTRICT.  >> EARLIER IN THE  PRESENTATION. YOU AND  ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION THE  OF $8,000 THAT WOULD REPLACE  THIS IS ON SINGLE-FAMILY  RESIDENTIAL. THAT PEOPLE COULD  ACCESS INSTEAD OF FULL SURVEY  COULD YOU EXPLAIN MORE.  >> HOW AND WHEN THAT COULD BE  APPLIED.  >> IT WOULD BE OPTIONAL.  >> AT THE REQUEST OF THE  PROPERTY OWNER OR THE WE ARE  FINDING THAT.  >> THAT MITIGATION FEES.  >> FOR SINGLE FAMILY CAN RANGE  ANYWHERE FROM $2000 TO  $15,000. THIS WOULD PROVIDE  OPTIONAL APPROACH FOR THOSE  DEVELOPERS. ELIMINATING THE  COST AND THE TIME FOR A TREE  SURVEY, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE  ARE  MITIGATION FEE.  >> MAYBE. IN LINE WITH A FLAT  FEE. AGAIN IT STILL PARTS.  >> PROVIDES FOR PROTECTION OF  THE HERITAGE TREES BECAUSE THE  NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF WILL  STILL VISIT EVERY SIDE.  PROVIDES FOR STREAMLINED  APPROACH FOR SOME MIGHT BE  WILLING MIGHT BE WISHING TO  AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THAT  OPTION AND IT DOES. PROVIDE  AGAIN A STREAMLINED APPROACH  FOR THEM AND LESS INVESTMENT  OF TIME AS FAR AS VERIFICATION  OF TREE SURVEYS CALCULATION OF  MITIGATION FEE IS CALCULATION  OF CONSERVATION CREDITS ET  CETERA.  >> SO AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO  PICTURE WHERE AN.  >> SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO DO  THAT THERE ARE SOME LOTS THAT  ARE MOST WAY OVERGROWTH.  >> AND A COUPLE OF DEAD PINE  TREES LIKE WHEN WOULD THIS  COME INTO PLAY HOW DO YOU SEE  IT BEING USED NOW I'LL SPEAK  TO HOW I SEE IT USED AND THEN  MAYBE STUFF ON CAMPUS AS $0.2  I SEE IT WHERE YOU HAVE A SITE  THAT IS HEAVILY WOODED.  >> THAT INCLUDES A SIGNIFICANT  NUMBER OF TREES THAT HAVE A  DIAMETER CROSS TIE PROVIDES  THAT THEY'RE PROTECTED TREES.  >> AND WHERE THEIR MITIGATION  FEE MIGHT ACTUALLY EXCEED THE  $8,000 AND SO IT MAY BE IN  THEIR BEST INTEREST TO AVOID  THE COST OF THE SURVEY AT THE  TIME INVOLVED AND SIMPLY CLEAR  CUT THE PROPERTY RATHER THEM  TRIED TO PROVIDE FOR  PROTECTION OF TREES WHEN  THEY'RE BRINGING FORTH ENOUGH  ILL AND  >> AND IF I STEPHEN KALIN,  BETTER RESOURCES I WOULD SAY  ANOTHER FACTOR WOULD BE. THE  TIME SAVED FROM OBTAINING THE  TREE SURVEY OR SIMPLY THE  INABILITY A TREE SURVEY OR THE  TIME. DESIRE SO THAT WOULD BE  WHERE THIS OPTION COMING.  >> SO THE CITY'S EXPECTATION  WOULD BE THAT A DEVELOPER WILL  LEAVE. TREES A TREE. OR TOO.  >> AND AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THE  8,000 SIMPLIFIED PROCESS SET  SO DID THE OUTCOME WE'RE  SHOOTING FOR. RATHER THAN JUST  HAVING THEM DO IN NEED CHAIR.  WATCH CLEARING 15 K.  >> WE'RE WE'RE ALWAYS SHOOTING  FOR TREE PRESERVATION.  >> BUT AGAIN.  >> PRESERVING TREES WHERE YOU  BRING IN UNIFIL THE PENDING ON  THE LOCATION THINGS IN  RELATION THAT PART OF THE HOME  AND RELATIONSHIP TO THE  EASEMENTS ON THE SWELL RATING  THAT'S REQUIRED NATURAL  RESOURCES. STAFF IS WORKING  VERY HARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT  COMMUNITY TO ENCOURAGE THE  PRESERVATION OF TREES AND TO  EDUCATE ON THE APPROPRIATE  TREE PROTECTION ZONE, SO THAT  THE TREES THAT THEY'RE  IDENTIFYING TO BE SAY IT CAN  ACTUALLY BE SAFE. BUT THEN  WHEN WE BRING IN THE HEAT. YOU  KNOW WHEN WE BRING IN THE  CURRENT EXEMPTION FOR  SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WE  ARE AND IF THEY HAVE A  CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR  YEAR THEY CAN REMOVE EVERY  TREE ON THEIR PROPERTY THAT  THEY WISH TO.  >> SO FAR WE'RE INVESTING A  WHOLE LOT OF TIME. ENERGY  STAFF TIME MINDING INTO  PRESERVING THESE TREES ON THE  SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS WHEN A YEAR  LATER. A REMATCH THAT'S THE  CURRENT REGULATIONS, BUT YOU  SEE IN OUR CURRENT DRAFT, WE  ARE PROPOSING THE REQUIREMENT  FOR APPROVAL TO REMOVE TREES  ON DEVELOP SITES. RIGHT AND  THAT'S ONE THING THAT I DID  FAIL TO MENTION THAT THE  PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY  BOARD DID REVIEW THE NATURAL  RESOURCE A CHAPTER ON MAY AND  THEY DID RECOMMEND THE  COMMISSION APPROVE CHAPTER 6.  SOME ATTENTION GIVEN TO  CONSIDERATION ABOUT  SINGLE-FAMILY EXEMPTION. UNDER  THE CURRENT CODE BEING CARRIED  FORWARD.  >> AND UNLESS I'M MISSING  SOMETHING IT JUST SEEMS TO ME  THAT WHAT THIS PROVISION WE'RE  LETTING THE DEVELOPER IS OFF  THE HOOK AND MISSING REVENUE.  I I JUST DON'T I DON'T SEE  THAT IT WILL CHANGE BEHAVIOR  ARE OUTCOMES BY GIVING THEM A  SIMPLIFIED PROCESS AND A  $1000. I I MUST BE MISSING  SOMETHING.  >> I THINK YOU KNOW ONE OF THE  CONSIDERATIONS AS THE AMOUNT  OF STAFF ON INVOLVED AND  REVIEWING THESE TREE VERIFYING  THAT THE TREE SURVEYS ARE  ACCURATE. UNDER THIS SIMPLIFY  PROCESS TAKE A LOOK FOR  HERITAGE TREES AND THEY  WOULDN'T BE VERIFYING THE SIZE  OF EVERY TREE SHOWN ON THE  TREE SURVEY AND VERIFYING THAT  YES, THERE IS A. SABAL PALM  AND ITS 4 AND A HALF INCHES.  AND HERE'S THE MITIGATION FEE  THAT GOES WITH THAT. SO THERE  IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF  STAFF TIME INVOLVED IN  REVIEWING THE SINGLE-FAMILY  HOMES WITH NOT A WHOLE LOT OF  PRE PRESERVATION BEING  REALIZED SO THAT'S WHY WE  WANTED TO INCLUDE IT AS  OPTION. COURSE IT'S ENTIRELY  UP TO THE CITY COMMISSION IF  YOU WISH TO PROCEED WITH THAT  AS A VOLUNTARY APPROACH.  ELIMINATED AND MAINTAIN THE  SAME REGULATIONS THAT WE  CURRENTLY HAVE I MEAN IT JUST  SEEMS TO ME IT'S IT'S BEEN MY  GENERAL SENSE AND PLEASE  CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.  >> THAT THE CURRENT BEHAVIOR  IS TO NOT DO. TREE SURVEY AT  ALL JUST KIND OF ALL DOWN AND  PAY THE 15,000.  >> THEY HAVE TO DO THEIR TREE  SURVEY, THERE'S NOT A FLAT FEE  CURRENTLY UNDER OUR  REGULATIONS EVERY SITE HAS TO  COMPLETE A TREE SURVEY AND A  MITIGATION CALCULATION SHEET  EVERY SIDE. SO THIS WOULD  PROVIDE THAT THAT OPTIONAL  APPROACH OR AND WILL FAMILY  HOMES ONLY.  >> AGAIN I'M JUST NOT SEEING A  BENEFICIAL. I COME I THINK THE  TREES STILL GET CUT AND OR  THEY'RE DEAD. AND THE  SOMETHING IF AS MISS BARNES  MENTIONS SO THIS DOES NOT  INCLUDE HERITAGE TREES.  GENERALLY SPEAKING FROM MY  EXPERIENCE WE ENCOUNTER A SITE  WITHOUT HERITAGE TREES WHERE.  THE OLDER OR CONTRACTOR WISHES  CLEAR THE ENTIRE SITE WHICH  THEY HAVE THAT GENERALLY  SPEAKING ARE SEEING MITIGATION  FEE VARYING BETWEEN 2004  $1000. SO THE FACT THAT WE  ARE. OFFERING THIS BE THAT  IT'S IN MY OPINION  SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.  AND WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE PAY  APPROACHING IT THE SO TO SPEAK  CLASSIC WAY. I THINK WE JUST  OFFER THEM AN OPTION THAT THE  OR MOST OF THESE LULLS WHERE  THIS OPTION WILL BE USE IN MY  OPINION THESE CALLS FOR SO I  THINK THAT THEY WILL. THE  MAJORITY WILL PROBABLY THE  MAIN THING THE ORIGINAL  PROCESS WITH THE SURVEY.  >> THANK YOU I'M I'M GOING TO  YOU KNOW THEY HAVE SOME OTHER  SPECIFIC THING THAT IF A  QUESTION YEAH THAT SPECIFIC  ONE YEAH I APPRECIATE  COMMISSIONER LANGDON BRINGING  IT UP BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF  MY QUESTIONS TOO. IF YOU IF  YOU'RE GOING TO SAY HEY YOU  CAN EITHER DO THE TREE SURVEY  OR PAY A $1000 FIRST QUESTION  WHERE DOES THAT A $1000 GO  SAME PLACE ALL UP GO INTO THE  ENVIRONMENTAL TREE WHAT IS NOW  THE TREE FUND OKAY.  >> THE OTHER QUESTION IS IF IF  THEY DECIDE TO JUST PAY THE  $8,000 STAFF IS ALREADY GOING  TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND LOOK  AT THE PROPERTY ANYWAYS TO TO  SEE IF THERE'S A HERITAGE TREE  ON THAT. BUT THE CONE IT IT'S  NOT VERY CLEAR. THAT IT'S THE  $8,000. PLUS MITIGATION FOR  THE THE HERITAGE TREE IF IT'S  ♪ BEING REMOVED. OBVIOUSLY IT'S  COVERED IF THERE'S A  CONSERVATION CRACK YEAR. BUT  I'M NOT SEEN IN THIS CODE.  IT'S A $1000. US THAT  MITIGATION FOR THE HERITAGE  TREE. AND THAT IS A VERY  IMPORTANT DISTINCTION TO MAKE  SURE IS COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD  IN THE CODE. THE OTHER THING  IS IF THEY'RE PAYING THE  $8,000 AND IT TURNS OUT TOO  THAT WHEN STAFF GOES AND WALKS  IT. IT IS A $1000 PLUS  HERITAGE TREES. MAYBE IT'S  MORE THAN THE $8,000 SO TOO  COMMISSIONER LANGDON IS POINT  WE'RE LOSING OUT AND THEY'RE  NOT SAVING THE TREES WHICH IS  THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF US HAVING  THIS TREE.  >> CODE THAT WAS ADOPTED. JUST  A COUPLE YEARS AGO NOT EVEN  THAT SO I'M I'M FEELING THIS  $8,000 OR WE'RE GOING TO SAVE  THE DEVELOPER SOME TIME AND  ENERGY A LOVER DEVELOPERS AND  I UNDERSTAND THAT TIME IS  MONEY TO THEM AND THAT TIME IS  MONEY FOR OUR STAFF BUT THAT'S  WHY WE HAVE A HUGE NATURAL  RESOURCE DEPARTMENT THAT'S THE  MAIN RECENT IN MY OPINION WE  HAVE THIS DEPARTMENT WAS  PROTECT THE TREES IN THE  ENVIRONMENT.  ♪ AND I'M  ♪ JUST NOT FEELING THIS $8,000  THING.  >> I THINK AGE 51 IS THAT  ADDRESS AS YOU DID YOU DID  MENTION THAT THEY HEARD A  TREE, YES, YES AND I BROUGHT  IT UP ON THE THEY WANTED TO A  LOT DURING A TREE REMOVAL.  >> AT THE OPTION OF THE  PROPERTY OWNER. WE'RE IN THE  TREATMENT REMOVAL MAY BE  AUTHORIZED SUBJECT PAYMENT OF  AN ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION  FEE PER THE CITY FEE SCHEDULE,  HOWEVER, IF A HERITAGE TREE IS  IDENTIFIED ON THE PROPERTY BY  NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION  STAFF, HEY MAN UP THE HERITAGE  TREE REMOVAL PER CITY IS  SCHEDULE WILL ALSO BE  REQUIRED. AND YOU KNOW, YES,  THE INTENT OF THE PRESERVATION  ORDINANCE HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO  SAVE TREES BUT IN THE PAST 2  YEARS OF IMPLEMENTING THE NEW  TREATY HAVE WE HAVEN'T SEEN  EFFECTIVELY PRESERVING TREES.  >> SO.  >> YOU KNOW THAT THE  CONSIDERATION FOR  SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS WHERE WE'RE  THAT PRESERVATION OF TREES IS  SO CHALLENGING ON THERE  CONDITIONS EXIST AND THE THAT  WAS THE REASONING BEHIND  SUBMITTING THIS IS A POSSIBLE  APPROACH AND I GOT MISSION.  IT'S NOT FEEL THAT  INCORPORATION OF THIS OPTIONAL  APPROACH IS SOMETHING THAT YOU  WANT TO SEE.  >> YOU KNOW WE'LL WE'LL.  >> WE'LL FOLLOW US.  >> COMMISSION DIRECTION AND  MODIFY THE DRAFT.  >> AS YOU SEE THAT WELL THEN I  FIND  >> IS JUST COME EIGHT-THOUSAND  REALLY DO AND WE'RE NOT GOING  TO SAVE ANYTHING MORE OR LESS  AND WE'RE CURRENTLY SAVING AND  A COMMON POLICY. SO WHY DON'T  WE JUST BE DONE WITH IT TO GET  THE SURVEYS FORGET THE  MITIGATION AND JUST JUDGE  $15,000 FOR CLEARING LOT. SAVE  EVERYBODY A LOT OF HEADACHES.  I PHILOSOPHICALLY I HATE THAT  APPROACH. PRACTICALLY THAT'S  WHAT'S HAPPENING ANYWAY. NOT  JUST A BOMB.  >> I THINK IDEA  >> ENCOURAGING PRESERVATION OF  TREES THAT SHIP SAILED VERY  LONG TIME AGO, BUT THAT JUST  ISN'T BEING DONE YOU KNOW HAVE  I LOOK AT I DRIVE ALL OVER AND  LOOK AT SITES AND THEY DON'T.  >> THEY DON'T SAVE ANYTHING IF  THEY DO GLAD TO SEE THAT YOU  HAVE THE. PROTECTION ZONE A  LOT TO GET ALONG SO AT LEAST  PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF WHAT YOU  HAVE TO DO MINIMALLY TO SAY  THAT RATE IS RIGHT NOW ALL I  SEE IS THEY PUT UP THAT LITTLE  SQUARE RIGHT AROUND THE TRUMP.  THINKING THAT'S GOING TO SAVE  TREES TIME EVEN FINISHED WITH  THE SITE SO YOU STILL ARE LEFT  WITH A CLEAR CUT LOT AND YOU  KNOW HOUSES HAVE GOTTEN BIGGER  PEOPLE WANT AS MUCH AS THEY  CAN AND USE CAUTION THAT  10,000 SQUARE FEET YOU HAVE A  BIG HOUSE YOU HAVE A POOL WITH  POOL CAGE AT THE SHED. I WAS  TALKING TO SOMEBODY AND YET  NOT THAT LONG AGO SAID HER SHE  HAD A GARAGE WAS 1200 SQUARE I  SAID OH MY WHERE I LIKE THIS  WAS JUST HER GARAGE SO IT'S  NOT GOING TO HAPPEN SO THAT  THE NEXT BEST THING IS TO YET  MONEY SO WE CAN UTILIZE IT TO  WHAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING FUN  WITH THESE 4 TO PLANT TREES TO  I'M TOUCHED UNSPOILED LAND  THAT HAVE TREES AND THAT'S THE  BEST WE CAN DO BECAUSE THEY.  THE SAD TRUTH IS YOU KNOW WE  ARE DEVELOPING AND WE HAVE  45,000. QUARTER ACRE LOTS OUT  THERE THAT THAT CAN BE AND ARE  BEING DEVELOPED AND THAT  ANNOUNCED THAT ALL 1000 ACRES  OF LAND AND EVEN THOUGH IT  DOESN'T HAPPEN ALL AT ONCE  IT'S ASSIST SYSTEMATICALLY  HAPPENING THAT WE'RE CLEAR  CUTTING ONE PUERTO AT A TIME.  SO. I JUST WHAT I WANTED ADD  TO THAT, BUT I WANTED TO THE  QUESTIONS BUT I'M GOING TO  HAVE FELLOW BUT OUT THERE MAY  YET  >> YOU WANT BUT JUST TO BUILD  ON WHAT MAYOR SAID. IT  TRIGGERED A THAT WE HAVE A LOT  OF PEOPLE COME BEFORE US  BECAUSE ASSEMBLED 2 OR 3 LOTS.  I COULD SEE IN THOSE  SITUATIONS HAVING MORE  STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS FOR  TREE SAVING. HEADS OF 1200  SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE RECENTLY  HAD IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S 2  OR 3 LAW AND AND THIS BILL TO  HOUSE AND 3 OR 4 CAR GARAGE  SHOULD HAVE COVERED THE  SURFACE OF THAT LOT REALLY LOT  TO DO IT 3 LOSS SO I DON'T  KNOW MAYBE IN THOSE SITUATIONS  WHERE PEOPLE ARE CONSOLIDATING  LOTS. WE WOULD HAVE MORE OF AN  OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY SAVE  SOME TREES ON THE PERIMETER I  DON'T JUST JUST A POT SO  TRIGGERED.  >> I I WANTED WE WE STARTED.  WHERE THE $15,000 FLAT FEE  APPROACH AND  >> CONVERSATIONS WITH STUFF ON  AND HIS TEAM.  >> WE LOOKED AT REDUCING THAT  TO THE $8,000 TO PROVIDE GOT  TALENT'S TO PROVIDE THAT  BALANCE TO GIVE THEM SOME  OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THESE  PROPERTY OWNERS TO POTENTIALLY  SAVE TREES, ESPECIALLY IN  THOSE CASES WHERE THEY'VE GOT  COMBINED LOCKS.  >> AND AVOIDING.  >> THE APPROACH THAT WOULD  JUST ELIMINATE RE SURVEYS  ENTIRELY ALLOW THEY'RE  CUTTING. SO THIS GIVES US SOME  OPPORTUNITIES WHILE STILL  SIMPLIFIED STREAMLINED  APPROACH FOR THOSE WHO WISH TO  AVAIL THEMSELVES OF IT. AND  THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO  MENTION AS FAR COVERING THE  SURFACE THE ENTIRE SURFACE OF  THE 3, 8, 3 LOT SITE. WE ARE  INCORPORATING MOSMAN  IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA  REQUIREMENT AND TO OUR CODE  FOR ALL TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS  TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE  REPLENISHING THE OPERA FOR  MORE MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE  NOT COVERING THE ENTIRE CITY.  >> WHERE PERVIOUS SURFACE  AREAS.  >> MARCH.  >> GIANNIS $8,000. I WAS HERE  U.S. HOW THEY CAME UP WITH  THAT NUMBER BUT JUST EXPLAIN  TO BASICALLY IT'S THE AVERAGE  BETWEEN 2.15. BUT TO ME. THIS  IS THE WAY THAT I LOOK AT HOW  THAT'S BEING PUT OUT THERE FOR  THE DEVELOPERS BENEFIT. THEY  COULD STILL GO IN AND CLEAR  CUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO  IS THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT  8,000 ADDED TO THE PRICE OF  THEIR HOUSE AND IT'S GOING TO  BE GOING TO THE PERSON THAT'S  BUYING THE HOUSE REGARDLESS.  SO IT'S NOT INFRINGING ON THE  DEVELOPERS TO GO OUT THERE AND  STOPPED CLEAR COMING IN THE  STATION OF THE CITIES. TREES  OUT THERE AND AND OUR YOU KNOW  OUR CANOPY NOW MAYBE MAYOR ARE  COMMISSIONER LINED IN HEAD-ON  AND SHE MAY HAVE SAID IT IN  JEST BUT I WAS THINKING ABOUT  TAKING IT TO THE 15,000  HOPEFULLY TO DETOUR. A LOT OF  A LOT OF THAT GOING ON IN THE  FUTURE AND BECAUSE THEN THE  PRICE GOES UP 15 GRAND ON  THESE HOUSES AND IT MAY CUT  DOWN ON A LOT OF THE CLEAR  CUTTING. WE WE HAVE STAFF IN  PLACE TO DO THEIR JOB OF TREE  SURVEYS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE OUT  THERE, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE  OUT THERE AND AND THAT'S WHAT  THAT'S HOW WE'RE PROTECTING  OUR ENVIRONMENT. SO WE'RE  PROTECTING OUR LIVES ANIMALS  OUT THERE, YOU KNOW IT'S. IT  ALL WORKS TOGETHER BUT WET  WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT WE'RE  GOING TO GIVE THEM A FREE PASS  FOR A GRAHAM. YOU KNOW I THINK  YOU SHOULD BE MORE I BELIEVE  THIS SHOULD BE IN PLACE, BUT I  THINK IT SHOULD BE MORE AND  THEN THE CITY COULD DECIDE  WHAT TYPE OF GREEN BELTS THEY  WANT TO PLUG WHAT TYPE TREES  WHEREVER THE CASE MAY BE YOU  KNOW I THINK IT'S NEEDED BUT I  THINK THOUSANDS WAY WE CAN I  THINK IT'S JUST NOT GOING  WORK. SO THAT THAT WAS MY  >> IF I JUST FROM. JUST FROM  STOP SOMETHING THAT I SEEMS  THE INCEPTION OF DIVISION. I  SEE BUILDERS APPROACHING US  MORE FREQUENTLY NOW AND ASKING  US. HOW WE. MAKE THIS WHAT WE  DON'T SPEND AS MUCH. WE DON'T  PLACES. FEEL OUR BUYERS AMES I  FEEL THAT HISTORICALLY THERE  HAS STOPPED BEING THE  OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE AIMS. I  SEE DAILY BASIS. I MUST SAY  I'M. CHANGES WHERE TREES ARE  BEING  AS WE CAN AS WE KEEP EDUCATING  THEM AND EXPLAINING HELP THEY  ALL A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF  THEIR MITIGATION TREAT THE  FEES BY SIMPLY SAVING 2 TREES.  SITES MANY OF THEM WERE EVEN  AWARE OR THEY WERE NEVER EVEN  YET FAMILIAR WITH THIS WITH  THIS RULE I SEE PERSONALLY I  SEE SOME CHANGE AIMS. I THINK  THAT WE'RE JUST GETTING  STARTED AS A TEAM TO DO THAT.  I'M PLANNING A MILL A MEETING  WITH SOME OF OUR LIKELY  TOWARDS END OF THE MONTH.  EDUCATE AND PROVIDE SOME OF  THESE OPTIONS. AND JUST  THROUGH COMMISSIONER AND  REACHES WHOLE. RIGHT THE  BUILDERS THEY STILL AT THE THE  COST OF THEIR MITIGATION FEE.  AND ULTIMATELY THE BUYER IS  THE ONE WHO WOULD WOULD PAY  THE THIS WILL BE THIS OPTION  WITH SERVICE. AND OPTION WHERE  THEY THEY IN THE SITE THEY MAY  DECIDE TO GO THE ORIGINAL.  ROUTES. OR THEY CAN DECIDE TO  GO. THIS ROUTE WITH OR  MITIGATION FEE WITHOUT  INCLUDING HERITAGE TREES.  EITHER WAY THE CALLS. GOES  GETS TRANSFERRED TO THE BUYER  SO.  >> YEAH ABSOLUTELY IT GOES TO  THE BUYER. BUT MY MY  EDUCATION. FOR THE DEVELOPERS  YOU'RE DOING EDUCATION FOR THE  REAL UTTERS THE WORDS THE  EDUCATION FOR THE PUBLIC  THAT'S OUT THERE SEE THE GUN  LOCKS BEING STRIPPED EVERY DAY  AS YOU DRIVE BY. THERE'S YOU  KNOW THIS IS WHAT THIS  COMMISSION HAS LISTENED TO  OVER THE LAST WELL THE WHOLE  TIME I'VE BEEN ON THE DIAS AND  I'M SURE COMMISSIONER ARE  WELL. THEY'RE STILL CLEAR  CUTTING THE LOCKS WHAT ARE YOU  GOING TO DO ABOUT YOU THE  MONEY GOES INTO THE TREE FUND  WHAT ARE USING IT FOR. YEARS  LATER WE'RE NOW STARTING TO  USE THAT TO BENEFIT THE  CITIZENS OF PORT WE NEED USE  IT PROPERLY AND GET THOSE  TREES ARE SOME OF THOSE TREES  SAVED. I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE  NOT ALL GOING TO BE SAVED. YOU  KNOW WE'VE GOT TO DO OUR BEST  AND IT DOES THE JOB THAT YOU  SIGNED UP FOR YOU'RE GOING TO  BE OUT THERE COUNTRY'S DOING  YOUR JOB AND PEOPLE ARE GOING  TO GET CHARGED ACCORDINGLY  BECAUSE I FEEL IF WE DO WHAT'S  RIGHT IT COULD SLOW DOWN THE  DEVELOPMENT JUST A TAD TO  WHERE WE COULD POSSIBLY CATCH  UP WORK ON INFRASTRUCTURE, A  LITTLE BIT MORE AS WELL. YOU  KNOW THEY'RE JUST COMING IN  AND CLEARED EVERYTHING OUT  BUILDING LOOK AT THIS PLACE,  IT'S IT'S GONE. 2 DEVELOPMENTS  CITY IN THE LAST 2 YEARS I  MEAN YOU CAN SEE IT EVERY  STREET YOU GO DOWN. SO WE NEED  TO MAKE SOME CHANGES THAT THAT  ARE TOUGH DISTRICT AND  HOPEFULLY. YOU KNOW NOT NOT  HAVE THAT GO FORWARD ANY  FURTHER ALL SOLD OUT TO  CLUTTERED. SO THAT'S MY  OPINION I JUST THINK THAT THIS  NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT  STRICTER. THANK YOU.  >> AND I'M NOT YEAH, IT.  >> THE ONLY REASON IN MY  OPINION THAT THE DEVELOPERS  AND BUILDERS ARE COMING TO THE  NATURAL RESOURCE DIVISION NOW  GRATEFULLY THAT YOU'RE HERE  AND WE HAVE THIS DIVISION IN  PLACES BECAUSE BUILDING IS  SLOWING DOWN THE COST OF  BUILDING IS GETTING SO  EXPENSIVE AND THEY ARE NOT  GETTING THAT MANY PEOPLE  WANTING TO BUILD SO NOW  THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT  HOW CAN WE CUT EVEN $1000 OFF  THE COST OF THE IF WE SAY THAT  TREE AND THAT TREAT THAT'LL  SAVE US SOME MONEY ON THE COST  TO THE HOME.  >> SO SO IN THAT REGARD. I  THINK SLOWING THE ECONOMY IS  SLOWING DOWN THE DEVELOPMENT  OF OUR CITY NATURAL.  >> IT'S PROVE IT IN THESE PAST  FEW 6 MONTHS OR SO. THE FACT  THAT WE'RE HAVING SUCH A HUGE  DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TREE CODE  AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY EVEN  STARTED HAVING OTHER  DISCUSSION ON THAT RICO. JUST  SHOWS THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THE  ANSWERS ON HOW TO PRESERVE  THESE TREES. WHAT I FEEL LIKE  THIS IS LIKE DEJA MOVE FROM  FROM 3 YEARS AGO.  >> AND.  >> WE ARE LOSING SIGHT OF THE  CONSERVATION CREDITS.  >> AND BY JUST SAYING HEY PAY  THIS A $1000 PUT IT IN THE  BANK $10,000. WHATEVER THAT  MAGIC NUMBER IS IT'S NOT GOING  TO SOLVE.  >> THE GOAL OF TRYING TO  PRESERVE TREES. IF DON'T HAVE  THEM DO 8 STUDY. REMOVES THE  ABILITY FOR STAFF TO SAY HEY.  DID YOU KNOW IF YOU THESE  TREES HERE YOU CAN REDUCE YOUR  YOUR MITIGATION FEES. YOU'RE  LOSING AN OPPORTUNITY TO  EDUCATE NOT ONLY THE BUILDER  BUT ALSO THE PERSON WHO WAS  HAVING THE HOUSE BUILT THAT IS  SOMETHING THAT IS NOT EVEN  DISCUSSED IN HERE SO MANY.  PEOPLE THAT ARE BUILDING THE  HOUSE DIDN'T KNOW HEY IF YOU  SAVE THOSE TREES, IT'S GOING  TO CUT DOWN THE COST OF YOUR  BUILDING OF YOUR HOME THEY  DON'T KNOW BECAUSE THEY'RE  LISTENING TO THEIR BUILDER WHO  JUST WANTS TO BUILD BUILD  BUILD BUILD BUILD IN CLEAR CUT  CLEAR PUT CLEAR CUP.  >> I DON'T KNOW THE MAGIC  ANSWER IS.  >> BUT. ONE THING THAT WE  HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT.  >> IS THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO  REQUIREMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL  PERMIT. THAT IS SOMETHING I  CAUGHT IN THIS IN THIS RIGHT  AWAY STAFF IS CALLING IT  SOMETHING DIFFERENT I WOULD  ALSO LIKE TO HAVE A  CONVERSATION AND WHY ARE WE  REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR  PERMIT TO REMOVE TREES. BUT  WE'RE BACK TO BASICALLY 3  YEARS AGO WITH OUR TREE COAT.  AND IT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE YES  ALL WE SEE IS CLEAR CUTTING. I  HAVE A COUPLE HOUSES IN MY  NEIGHBORHOOD. I DO SEE A FEW  TREES THAT WERE SAVED. THERE  ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF THE  PROPERTY LINE BUT ON THEIR  PROPERTY LINE. WITHIN THEIR  PROPERTY IN THAT SETBACK AREA.  >> SO AT.  >> THIS IS GOING TO BE HUGE  DISCUSSION.  >> THAT YOU WANT ADDRESS THAT  I THOUGHT I TURNED THE  DEPARTMENT QUESTION I WILL  ADDRESS PERMIT AS. ALIGNS WITH  FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. NO A  COMMENT MAKES YOU THINK OKAY,  I'M GOING TO GO TO THE  BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND GET A  PERMIT. WE OURS WE ARE  INTENTIONALLY REMOVING FROM  THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS.  ZONING. REVIEWS. ANYTHING.  WHILE WAY CALVERT ANYTHING  THAT IS ADDRESSED AND THE  UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.  WE ARE REMOVING FROM THE  PERMITTING PROCESS AND THE  REASON FOR THAT SUBSTANTIAL.  WE ARE ALL UNDER. BUILDING  PERMITS UNDER STATE LAW. WE  HAVE 30 DAYS TO REVIEW A  PERMIT. THAT SAME STANDARD  DOESN'T APPLY TO ZONING  COMPLIANCE REVIEWS, BUT AS  LONG AS THEY LIVE WITH THE  BUILDING ON THAT WE'RE HELD TO  THAT STANDARD AND FOR THE PAST  3 YEARS THE FLORIDA  LEGISLATURE HAS CONSISTENTLY  SUBMITTED BILLS TO REDUCE OUR  TIMELINES EVEN MORE IN SOME  CASES NOW TO LITTLE SPY SO THE  ELIMINATION OF THE ZONING  NATURAL RESOURCES AND PUBLIC  WORKS FOR ABUSE FROM THE  BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS  PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US  TO COMPLY WITH OUR SHOP  REQUIREMENTS UNDER UNDER THE  STATUTES RELATED TO BUILDING  PERMITS. AND OUR STAFF  IMPLEMENTING THE ULDC A LITTLE  BIT MORE TIME TO ENSURE THAT  THEY'RE DOING REVIEWS FOR  COMPLIANCE WITH THE ULDC  THAT'S WHY DID NOT SEE PERMIT.  AND THIS SECTION.  >> BUT HOW IS IT GOING TO AND  I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE YES  THE STATE LAW HAMSTRINGING THE  CITY'S MORE AND MORE EVERY  SINGLE YEAR AND IT JUST  AGGRAVATE ME TO KNOW AND THAT  THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE WITH YOU  GUYS. BUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO  BE ABLE TO DO AN  ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE KIND  OF OVERVIEW OR TREE SURVEYOR  ARCHAEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW TO  ENSURE THAT THOSE RESOURCES  ARE NOT BEING DESTROYED  BECAUSE OF THIS 30 DAY OR  WHATEVER.  >> DOES YOUR NUMBER IT WILL IT  WILL ALL IT WILL ALL BE GONE  FOR THE START OF CONCERN AND  BEFORE ARE BUILDING PERMIT  DOWN THE TO HAVE A CERTIFICATE  OF ZONING COMPLIANCE APPROVAL.  AND ONCE THEY RECEIVED  APPROVAL THEY CAN APPLY FOR  THEIR BUILDING ON THAT THAT  CERTIFICATES COMPLIANCE IS  GOING TO GO TO OUR PUBLIC  REVIEWER THE SUMMIT IF YOU'RE  YOU'RE TALKING SINGLE-FAMILY  HOUSE, LET'S TALK  SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. WE HAVE A  A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWER.  HANDLES REVIEW OF ANY ULDC  PROVISIONS RELATED TO GRATING  SWELLS WORK IN THE RIGHT OF  WAY COVERT PIPES, ET CETERA  FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ALSO  GO TO OUR SITE AND PLANS  REVIEWERS AND WILL ALSO GO TO  OUR NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION  STAFF. SO THAT'S YOUR TEMP  GETS OUT COMPLIANCE FOR NEW  SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. ON THE  BASIS FOR UNIFIED LAND  DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND  UNDERBRUSH FROM CROSS KRUEGEL  ON THE FIRST REMOVAL. A TREE  CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY  STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION OF A  NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO. WE  UNDERSTAND THAT IT THAT IT A  STEP IN THE PROCESS, BUT WE  THINK THAT IT'S WARRANT HEAD  WILL PROVIDE FOR BETTER OUR  COMPLIANCE WITH OUR ULDC AND  WILL ALSO I GUESS IN A  POSITION WHERE WE'RE MEETING  THAT A STATUTORY TIMELINES FOR  OUR BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS  EASE.  >> THANK YOU FOR THAT BECAUSE  THE SCIENTISTS WERE 5 LINES  AND THE RESPONSE JUST WENT.  WHAT ARE YOU TALKING THANK YOU  FOR THAT.  >> I WILL FOLLOW UP QUESTION  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL BROUGHT  UP ON SECTION 6 4007.2 TREE  REMOVAL UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.  THAT WOULD BE A.  >> INCLUDES A SINGLE FAMILY,  LOT WITH A HOME ON IT OR IS  THAT SOMETHING ELSE.  >> YES THAT INCLUDES A SINGLE  FAMILY THAT INCLUDES A SINGLE  FAMILY LOT WITH A HOME ON A IT  SAYS A SITE PLAN THEY HAVE SO  THAT WELL YOU WOULD AND IT'S  TRUE AS PERMIT. ARE UP AGAIN  IT'S A CERTIFICATE OF SOUND  AND COMPLIANCE, SO IF SOMEBODY  HAS A DEVELOPED SIDE. AND THEY  WANT TO REMOVE THE TREE ON  THEIR SINGLE-FAMILY HOME SIDE.  THEY WILL APPLY FOR A  CERTIFICATE OUT OF COMPLIANCE  AND THEY'LL GIVE US A LITTLE  INTO PLAN B AND ROCK PLAN  DOESN'T NEED TO BE A SURVEY OR  AN ARBORIST PREPARED.  >> DOCUMENT IT COULD BE HERE  TO MY HOUSE, HERE'S MY TREES.  THIS ONE IS A HAZARD. AND I  LIKE TO REMOVE IT OR THIS ONE  IS WITHIN 15 FEET MY HOME AND  CONCERNED IS GOING TO UPLIFT  MY FOUNDATION MY SIDEWALKS  WHATEVER NATURAL RESOURCES  THROUGH THAT CERTIFICATE IS IN  COMPLIANCE WILL REVIEW AND  THEN THEY WILL DETERMINE IF A  TREE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED.  BECAUSE IF YOU REMEMBER UNDER  CHAPTER 4 WE ARE NOW REQUIRING  SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES HAVE A  MINIMUM NUMBER OF TREES BASED  ON THE SIZE OF THEIR PROPERTY.  >> SO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. IT  WILL BE DETERMINED AND THE  TREE BE REMOVED IF IT HAS IS  IT 15 E IS IT YOU KNOW IT IS  IT WARRANTED TO HAVE THIS TREE  REMOVED WITH REMOVAL THAT THEY  DROP BELOW THE MINIMUM  REQUIRED TREASON DO THEY NEED  TO REPLACE A TREE ON THE  PROPERTY OK AND THAT'S  REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT  TREE WAS THERE WHEN THAT HOUSE  WAS.  >> WAS BUILT. ISOM.  >> CHANCE OR THEY PLANTED  THOSE TREES THEMSELVES ON  THEIR OWN ACCORD THEY. WOULD  HAVE TO APPLY WHAT YOU'RE  TALKING ABOUT TO REMOVE THAT  HER SO DO WE HAVE OTHER  QUESTIONS ABOUT PARTICULAR.  >> DO ON THAT ONE THAT YOU  BROUGHT THAT YEAH. SO TREE  REMOVAL UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.  I HAVE PLANTED MANY TREES ON  MY PROPERTY. I'M IN MY  BACKYARD. IT'S ONE OF THE  ADVANTAGES OF NOT HAVING THE  POOL AND BUILDING 9,000  SQUARE-FOOT HOME ON A 10,000  SQUARE-FOOT BUT LET'S SAY  WHOEVER BUYS THE HOUSE AFTER  WE SELL IT AND THEY WANT TO  REMOVE ONE OR 2 OF THOSE  STREETS. I THINK GOING TO NOT  BE ABLE TO.  >> THERE ARE CRITERIA FOR TREE  REMOVAL.  >> THERE COULD BE  CONSIDERATIONS ADDED TO ALLOW  REMOVAL OF TREES UP TO THE  LEVEL OF STILL MEETING THE  MINIMUM TREE REQUIREMENTS. WE  DON'T THINK IT ALIGNS WITH OUR  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS  FOR PROTECTION OF THE TREE  CANOPY SO YOU KNOW WE'D LIKE  TO SEE SOME CRITERIA FOR  DETERMINATION OF WHETHER A  TREE SHOULD BE REMOVED OR NOT.  ULTIMATELY IT'S AT THE  COMMISSION'S DISCRETION AGAIN  HARLEY THERE'S AN EXEMPTION.  >> ACROSS THE BOARD YOU CAN  REMOVE EVERY NEAR LOT NOT YOUR  HOME FOR YEAR. SO IF THERE  NEEDS TO BE A BALANCE HERE,  WE'D CERTAINLY.  >> LIKE TO HEAR FROM ME OUT  AND I THINK PROBABLY SOMETHING  TO SAY ABOUT THAT AS WELL.  >> I'M HERE FROM STEPHEN AND  THEN I'M GOING TO. COMMENT ON  WHAT WAS JUST SAID.  >> ABSOLUTELY I THINK THAT THE  WORD HERE BALLONS WE ARE  COMPLETELY. THE UO WAY OF THE  SPECTRUM RIGHT NOW BASICALLY  EVERY EVERYONE REMOVE TREES  WITHOUT REASON ON THEIR  PROPERTY, A FOCUS FOR THE  PROPERTY FOR OVER ONE YEAR.  EVEN WITH THESE. DEVELOPMENTS  IN AREAS WHERE A 3 MAYBE SAVE  ITS AIMS THAT LITIGATION. OF  OR DEVELOPMENTS SIGNIFICANTLY  BE REDUCED IT TO THAT 3 BEING  SAFE. THEY QUICKLY WITHIN A  YEAR. FROM THE OWNER REMOVE  THE TREE. IN MY PROVIDES  FLEXIBILITY FOR THE OLDER, BUT  IT'S. AS FAR AS A TREE CANOPY  CITY TREE I THINK THAT THIS IS  NOT. WE'RE TRYING TO COPE WITH  STARS. A TREE PRESERVATION,  PRIVATE WELLS. IT'S HERS. I IT  IS WHERE ONLY. HAZARDS HASN'T  TREASON YOU CASES SUCH OR  RETAIL. NEED TO BE PRESIDENT  43 TO BE REMOVED. BUT AGAIN I  BELIEVE THAT. MAYBE FURTHER  DISCUSSION HERE WILL TO. JUST  THEN TO STRIKE THE RIGHT  HERE'S MY REBUTTAL THAT  >> I OWN A VACANT LOT AND I  WANT TO BUILD A HOME THAT TAKE  LOT. I CAN GO IN IN CLEAR THAT  ENTIRE LOT. BUT IF I OWN AN  EXISTING HOME. THAT HAS 5  TREES ON IT. AND IN SOME POINT  I DECIDED I WANT TO PUT IN A  POOL.  >> AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE ME  REMOVING. 3 TREES. I'M NOT  GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.  THIS DEFIES LOGIC IN MY MIND.  IF IF WE ARE TRYING TO HAVE A  TREE CANOPY. AND WE HAVE A  TREE CANOPY REGARDLESS IF IT'S  IMPROVED LADDER AND AN  IMPROVED LOT. AND IF IF WE'RE  GOING TO SAY WE ARE GOING TO  PRESERVE TREES. AND SOMEWHERE  IN THE BEGINNING OF THIS THIS  WHERE YOU SAID THAT THERE'S A  ♪ 15 TO 25% MINIMUM, ONSITE  TREE.  >> REQUIREMENT NOT FOR WOMEN  IT'S IMPOSSIBLE THINK YOU'VE  GOT ALL THE WAY FOR SITES FOR  IRAN. DEVELOPMENTS PLAN AND  INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN APPROVAL  AND THAT IS WRITTEN AND TO THE  REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER IF  CANNOT PROVIDE FOR 15 TO 25%  RE PRESERVATION ON A QUARTER  ACRE OCCASION BECAUSE I DON'T  REMEMBER YOU SAYING  COMMISSIONER SAID IT AT THE  BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION.  >> NOW REALLY GOES BACK TO  ♪ >> THE POINT. WE WANT TO FOCUS  ON THIS TREE CANOPY IN OUR  COMP PLAN FOR IMPROVED  PROPERTY. MY SINGLE FAMILY  LOT.  BUT YET WE'RE NOT GOING TO  HAVE ANYTHING FOR AID  UNIMPROVED PROPERTY THAT JUST  GOING CLEAR CUT EVERYTHING.  I'M HAVING A SERIOUS PROBLEM  WITH ALL OF THIS AND AGAIN  WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE  WERE 3 YEARS AGO BECAUSE THIS  IS DEJA AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE  THAT BALANCES AND YOU KEEP  SAYING WE WANT BALANCE AND WE  HAVE TO HAVE THIS TREE CANOPY  WHICH I DO NOT DISAGREE. BUT  HOW DO YOU SAY IT ON ONE SIDE  WITH IMPROVED PROPERTY, NO YOU  CANNOT REMOVE 2 OR 3 TREES TO  PUT IN THE POOL, BUT YET THE  PEOPLE RIGHT NEXT DOOR JUST  CLEAR CUT THE ENTIRE FREAKIN  LOT TO PUT IT TO BRING HOME  THAT'S 9,000 SQUARE FEET ON A  10,000 SQUARE-FOOT PROPERTY. I  DON'T UNDERSTAND AND I REALLY  HOPE THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE  TIME THAT WE DO FINAL APPROVAL  THAT THIS WILL BE ADDRESSED  BECAUSE WE CANNOT BE TALKING  OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HER  MOUTH.  >> SO WHILE THE INTENT WAS NOT  TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM  BUILDING A SENSORY STRUCTURES  AND WE WILL CERTAINLY PUT SOME  CLARIFYING LANGUAGE HERE UNDER  THE DEVELOPED PROPERTIES  SECTION. WHEN WE HAVE A SITE  PLAN COME THROUGH FOR THAT'S  RESTRUCTURE. WE'RE CERTAINLY  GOING TO EVALUATE THE TREE  REMOVAL AND WHETHER THAT IS  WARRANTED BASED ON PROPOSED  ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATION  BASED ON THE IMPERVIOUS  SURFACE AREA OF THE SITE AND  BASED ON WHETHER MINIMUM  NUMBER OF TREES ARE PROVIDED  FOR HERE. I WANT TO GO BACK TO  WHAT WHAT STEPHON HAD TO  >> WHEN WE'RE REQUIRING A WHEN  WE'RE REQUIRING.  >> MITIGATION FEES AND THEN  WE'RE GIVING CONSERVATION  CREDITS TO SAVE A TREE ON A  SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT AND  THEN BE REMOVED WITH ANY HERE  WE'RE SHOOTING OURSELVES IN  THE UP WE'RE NOT ACCOMPLISHING  THE INTENT OF THE TREE  PRESERVATION REGULATIONS. SO  WHERE WE ARE LOOKING FOR  BALANCE WE ARE LOOKING FOR  SOME REGULATIONS THAT. GET  THAT BALANCE NOT ONLY TO OUR  OUR PROPERTY OWNERS OR FUTURE  PROPERTY OWNERS ARE DEVELOPERS  ARE CONTRACTORS.  >> AND  >> ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO  ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION ON  THIS.  >> ALL RIGHT SO JUST TO  CLARIFY THAT'S WHEN THE SITE  PLAN WOULD COME INTO PLAY  SOMEBODY. THOSE THE HOUSE THAT  MAYBE THEY RECEIVED  CONSERVATION CREDITS. AND THEY  WANT TO REMOVE ONE OF THOSE  TREES AND A SITE PLAN WOULD  COME INTO PLAY THAT THEY WANT  TO REMOVE THIS TRAIN.  >> RIGHT AROUND WHICH IS NOT  CALLING HERMIT ANYMORE THAT  WHAT YOU'RE SENT HOWEVER. THAT  ITSELF. FOR ALL INTENTS AND  PURPOSES VOLUNTARY MEANING. IS  CUTTING DOWN A TREE IN THEIR  BACKYARD. THERE'S NOT GOING TO  BE ANYTHING POSTED THAT SAYS  THEY HAVE THAT PERMISSION IT  REALLY WOULD DEPEND ON ABOUT  I'M GOING TO TAKE A CUE FROM  KIT COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL  ASKED ABOUT WHEN OUR ORDINANCE  IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO ENFORCE  THIS.  >> IT REALLY JUST BE A MATTER  SOME MAY DROP A  DIME ON RIGHT THEY WILL THEY  SAYING THAT THERE'S SOMETHING  RIGHT.  >> THEY WILL RECEIVE THEY WILL  RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF  AUDIENCE DOCUMENT THAT CAN BE  POSTED ON THE SITE AND THERE  WILL BE INSPECTIONS. I WANT TO  I TOO CERTIFICATE ZONING  COMPLIANCE SO THIS OUTING  INSPECTORS ARE STILL GOING TO  GO OUT AND VERIFY STEP UP THE  NATURAL RESOURCES STOPPED  STILL GOING TO GO OUT AND  VERIFY THAT YES THE TREE WAS  REMOVED AND YES, THE REQUIRED  REPLACEMENT TREE WAS PLANTED  AND THEN THEY'LL FOLLOW  THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT  TREE STAYS ALOFT RIGHT SO  THERE WILL BE INSPECTIONS TIED  TO THAT AND SOUNDING COMPLY  AND IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT  TREATS GOING TO REMAIN LIKE  YOU SAID THERE.  >> IT'S PRETTY BROAD HERE  HAZARD A TREE THAT CONSTITUTES  A HAZARD TO LIFE OR PROPERTY  DOESN'T EVEN TO FIND WHAT DO  YOU CONSIDER TO BE A HAZARD.  POSTED SOMETHING ON SOCIAL  MEDIA BUT VERY LARGE PINE TREE  THAT WAS REMOVED ON SOUTH  BOULEVARD AND.  >> AND I'M SURE AND.  >> PEOPLE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING  TO POSE A HAZARD WITH THE NEXT  STORM AND I'VE HAD PEOPLE  THAT. THAT CONTACT ME AND TELL  ME THAT THEY DON'T.  >> ESPECIALLY AFTER A AND  PEOPLE ARE JUST SOME TREE. YOU  KNOW SCARED, YEAH ASKING EVERY  EVERY TREE IS GOING ON MY  HOUSE AND WE ARE OUR OWN WORST  ENEMIES AND HAVING LIVED HERE  FOR DECADES, OBSCENE HOUSES  AROUND ME THAT WERE THEY  ACTUALLY SAVED TREES ON THE  FRONT YARD AND EACH SUBSEQUENT  OWNER. SYSTEMATICALLY STARTED  CUTTING THOSE TREES DOWN UNTIL  WE HAVE A BARREN LOT WAS JUST  THE YOU KNOW WHILE WE'RE  TALKING ABOUT UNDEVELOPED  PROPERTY AND WHAT WE WANT TO  SEE IT THERE'S REALLY NOTHING  WE CAN DO TO FORCE PEOPLE TO  ABBOTT RATE IF THEY DON'T WANT  IT THAT'S JUST THE REALITY.  AND IT'S SAD. SO THE BIG KEY  IS EDUCATION. BUT EVEN THAT I  WANT I HAVE VERY INTENSE  CONVERSATIONS WITH PEOPLE  ABOUT. TRAINS AND THEY SAY  WELL I SAW THIS TREE GOING IN  THE WIND AND IAN AND I DIDN'T  WANT FALL ON ME SO I CUT IT  DOWN AFTER THE STORM EVEN  THOUGH THAT TREES SURVIVED A  150 MILE AN HOUR WINDS. THEY  SAW NEED TO CUT IT NOW. IT YET  DEFIES LOGIC BUT THAT'S THE  REALITY BUT I JUST WANTED TO  NOTE THERE IS SOMETHING THAT  PEOPLE CAN SAY YES IF YOU'RE  UNSURE ABOUT WHETHER THEY HAD  PERMISSION TO CUT THAT TREE  DOWN THERE SHOULD BE A ZONING.  PAPER OUT THERE SOMETHING THAT  SAYS SAYS THAT BUT THAT TREE  IS STILL GOING TO COME DOWN IF  THEY CONSIDERED TO BE A HAZARD  YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO SAY NO.  TOO BAD YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP  THAT RATE BECAUSE SETTING  OURSELVES UP FOR LIABILITY.  >> I THERE COULD BE SOME CASES  WHERE WE'RE IN THE NATURAL  RESOURCES DIVISION IN THEIR  PROFESSIONAL OPINION. THE TERM  AND THAT THAT TREE IS NOT A  HAZARD. BUT THEN THE APPEAL  PROCESS AND CHAPTER WIND  KICKING AND THAT PROPERTY  OWNER CAN APPEAL. THE STOP  DECISION TO THE ZONING HEARING  OFFICER, I'M JUST LIKE WITH  ANY OTHER. PROVISION ON THE  CODE AND STAFF INTERPRETATION  OF THOSE REGULATIONS. NOW I  THINK STEPHEN SCOTT TO  SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT HOW  THEY WOULD DETERMINE A TREE IS  A HAZARD OR NOT OKAY.  >> THANK  >> THE.  >> INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF  OUR CULTURE OR A CULTURE HAVE  BASICALLY DECIDE DESIGNED TO  PROCESS IT IS NOW DOWN TO A  SIZE WHERE 3 CAN BE THE  PURPOSE AND BY A TRAINED  PROFESSIONAL ARE AND WHETHER  IT IS AS OF THIS OR NOT. WE  HAVE OVER URBAN FORESTER WHO  HAS JUST RECENTLY JOINED OUR  TEAM. HE IS AN EXPERT IN THE  FIELD AS IT'S A ASSIST MANY OF  THESE CASES HISTORICALLY SO  THIS IS A NEW DIVISION NOW WE  HAVE THE CAPACITY TO 8  >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. WE  DON'T HAVE A QUESTION OR  SOMETHING FURTHER ON THAT  TOPIC. WE CAN GO ON FOREVER  WITH THAT'S FRUSTRATING.  >> SO THIS SO. MY HOUSE. I  TREAT. I WANT TO DOWN. I HAVE  TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME OUT AND  INSPECTED TO DETERMINE IF IT'S  A HAZARD OR NOT IF IT'S A  HAZARD THAT CAN HAVE IT  REMOVED. NO PROBLEM. BUT ITS  BEEN DETERMINED THAT IT'S NOT  A HAZARD. AND I STILL WANT IT  DOWN I HAVE TO APPEAL. STAFF'S  DECISION.  >> 2.  >> THE APPEAL.  >> PROCESS. A COST. AND I'M  SURE IT'S NOT A CHEAP COST.  PROBABLY A COUPLE $1000. FOR  SOMETHING THAT'S ON MY  PROPERTY. AND I WANT TO HAVE  REMOVED, BUT MEANWHILE STORIES  BEING CLEARED AS YOU'RE  EXPECTING MY TREE TELLING ME I  CAN'T TAKE IT UP. WELL IT ALL  TO RESPECT THOSE ARE 2  DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS PROPS  THERE ROBIN MY PROPERTY YOU'RE  BUILDING SOMETHING TO START  WITH AND THEN THIS IS.  >> ADDRESSING AFTER ATTACK  COULD HAVE IF WE'RE GOING TO  PUT THESE THINGS PLACE WHEN  THAT PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED HOW  ARE WE GOING TO TO CARE FOR  THE OR TAKE CARE OF THAT SO  CONTINUES AND THOSE TREES  CONTINUE TO GROW AND THAT'S IT  THE SECOND PART OF THE  EQUATION ACTUALLY. BUT I I DO  UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING  THAT THIS IS WHAT I HEAR FROM  PEOPLE I HEARD THIS FOR  DECADES. IT PUT THEIR FINGERS  IN MY FACE PROPERTY, MY TREE I  WANT TO TAKE IT DOWN WHO ARE  YOU TO TELL ME I HAVE TO KEEP  THE TREE MY BACKYARD AND  THAT'S WHEN I BACKED OFF AND I  REALIZE THAT WAS A LOSING  BATTLE EXACTLY AND IT IS A  LOSING BATTLE AND I RECOGNIZE  THAT  >> IT'S SOMEBODY PROPERTY. MY  HOUSE HAS LIKE 5 TREES AND I  HAVE A HUGE AREA THAT IS ALL  NATURAL. AND I WANT TO  PRESERVE IT. BUT THAT'S WHAT I  WANT TO DO SOMEBODY ELSE MADE  I DON'T WANT TO TREE ON MY  PROPERTY ANYWHERE NEAR MY  PROPERTY TAKE THEM OFF MY  NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY TOO WHILE  YOU'RE AT IT. BUT IT'S THEIR  PROPERTY. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS  A LOSING BATTLE AND IT IT'S  IT'S A BATTLE OF THE WILLS AND  I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT  BALANCE IS.  >> BUT I REALLY HOPE THAT WHEN  STAFF LOOKS AT THIS CONE THEY  KEEP IN THEIR MIND.  >> YOU HAVE AN IMPROVE  PROPERTY AND THEY UNIMPROVED  PROPERTY THAT'S BEING CLEARED  AT THE EXACT SAME TIME THAT  YOU GUYS ARE OUT INVESTIGATING  AND DETERMINING THAT YES THAT  PROPERTY CAN KEEP THE TREE CAN  REMOVE ALL THE TREES IN THIS  ONE HAS TO KEEP UP. IT.  >> A LOGICAL AND I WANT TO  CLARIFY BE TO MAKE THE ATTEMPT  GET IT WE NEED TO PUT THIS FOR  THE EDUCATION PROCESS PEOPLE  UNDERSTAND THE VALUE AND  LITTLE BY LITTLE CAN CHIP AWAY  AT A.  >> THE FEAR OF TREES.  >> THAT PEOPLE HAVE BUT NEEDS  TO LEAST A 10 FOOT AND DONE.  >> VICE MAYOR DID YOU HAVE  ANYTHING.  >> WE HAVE MORE TREES MAKE  SURE FIND A WAY. TO MAKE THIS  SUSTAINING SAID THAT 10'S OF  THOUSANDS AND HUNDREDS OF  THOUSANDS OF MILLIONS OF  DOLLARS THAT GET.  >> FOR THIS TREE FUND OR  WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT.  TO PLANT NEW PEOPLE ARE GOING  TO DO IT THAT THEY WANT WAS  HALF THE TIME, DON'T KNOW THE  LAWS CUT DOWN WHAT THEY WANT  TO CUT THEM. REALITY IS MAYER  SAYS. THINK ABOUT STAFF I TO  IT. BEST THEY CAN AND THE  TOUGH TOUGH SITUATION OF SIDE  YOU'RE ON IT WE'VE LISTENING  TO THIS CONVERSATION GO ROUND  AND ROUND TO NOWHERE AND  THAT'S WHAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO  DO FOR EVER. ANSWER IS.  EDUCATE. PLANT MORE TREES.  INCENTIVIZE BUSINESSES  HOMEOWNERS EVERYBODY UNDER THE  SUN TO PLANT MORE TREES. MY  CITY EVERYWHERE. WHAT CAN YOU  TELL.  >> ALL RIGHT I AGREE THAT  THINK MORE CONTROL ENTRIES ON  CITY-OWNED PROPERTY WE CAN DO  THAT IN A HEARTBEAT SO YES  COMMISSIONER LANGDON PROPERTY  TAX REBATES WHEN THEY PLAN A  TREE AND IT'S STILL ALIVE. A  YEAR OR SO AFTER INCENTIVES  RATHER THAN STICKS BUT ANYWAY.  >> I'M GOING TO PROVIDE A  LITTLE COMIC RELIEF TO THIS  CONVERSATION. I HAVE A COUPLE  OF LITTLE NETS THAT I HAVE  QUESTIONS ABOUT ON PAGE OF THE  CHAPTERS SAID  >> ALLOWED ACTIVITIES AND  USAGE ITEM 3 NON MOTORIZED  RECREATION ON WHAT ABOUT THE  BIKES. AGE IT'S 9. SAYS  PASSIVE RECREATION AND NON  MOTORIZED RECREATIONAL USAGE,  INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED  BICYCLING MAX WHAT ABOUT  BIKES. IT'S CERTAINLY NO MORE  DESTRUCTIVE THAN BMX  ACTIVITIES CAN BE A BREAK.  >> WE CAN JUST BECOMING SO  POPULAR AND THEY'RE SUCH GOOD  OPTION, PARTICULARLY FOR OLDER  MIGHT HAVE THE ENERGY TO GET  THERE BUT SOMETIMES HAVE DON'T  HAVE THE ENERGY TO GET BACK  HOME AGAIN AND I JUST DON'T  SEE THEM AS ANY MORE  DESTRUCTIVE.  AND GASP HOW THE SPEWING.  >> I WE'RE HAPPY THAT YOU KNOW  THE INTENT WAS TO AVOID ATV'S  AND AVOID MOTORIZED BOATS IN  THE VOID, THOSE TYPE OF.  >> TYPES OF USES WHICH LISTED  AT BECAUSE I GET THE QUESTION  ALL THE CAN I TAKE MY BIKE  THERE. AND IT THAT'S A GOOD  POINT I HAD THAT TOO BECAUSE  BIKES CONSIDERED THAT THAT'S A  MOTOR I HAVE STOP ENGINE OR  IT'S A BUT HE'S SO WE SAY NOT  MOTORIZED. THAT WOULD INCLUDE  AUTOMATICALLY E-BIKES BECAUSE  THAT'S A MOTOR. SO YOU HAVE  ACTUALLY SECTION IN THEIR  FRONT THE BIKE, ELECTRICAL.  >> WE WILL MODIFY THE LANGUAGE  TO MAKE CLEAR E-BIKES ARE  ALLOWED AND WHEREVER IT  APPEARS IT COULD BE IN OTHER  PLACES AND THEN THE SAME PAGE  ITEM 6. WOULD WE WANT TO  SPECIFICALLY SAY ARE. CLEARING  OF INVASIVE SPECIES I MEAN  THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER  ANY CONDITION. IT'S JUST NOT  SPECIFIED ALRIGHT AND SEE IT.  BUT WAIT WHAT DID IT AGAIN  ITEM 6 AND AT THE SAME.  SECTION AND SELECTIVE.  >> WEARING OR TRIMMING.  >> VEGETATION NOT LISTED AS  THREATENED AND ENDANGERED ART  SPECIAL CONCERNS.  >> BUT THAT DOESN'T. ALLOW FOR  THE CLEARING OF PESO. IT'S  MORE PROTECTING THINGS THAT  THREATENED, BUT. I DO JUST THE  THOUGHT OF KIND OF POPPED  THERE THAT LINE WHICH WAS  CARRIED FORWARD FROM THE  CURRENT CODE AND WE'VE GOT NO  CONCERNS WITH SPECIFYING THAT  INVASIVE REMOVAL IS ALLOWED  UNDER ANY CONDITION.  >> THAT SAID DON'T OKAY.  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL.  >> YEAH, I JUST HAVE ONE  LINGERING QUESTION. THE TREE  DISCUSSION. ONE OF YOU HAD  MENTIONED THAT OUR CODE  REQUIRES HAS A MAXIMUM  IMPERVIOUS SITE REQUIREMENT.  DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE  SINGLE-FAMILY OR TO FAMILY  MAXIMUM SITE. FOR IMPERVIOUS  YES. DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW  WHAT THAT PERCENTAGE BECAUSE I  DON'T WHERE I'M GOING WITH MY  QUESTION IS I WANT TO PREVENT  THOSE 9,000 SQUARE-FOOT HOMES.  ON A 10,000 SQUARE-FOOT LOT.  >> I WE WERE PROPOSED 80% FOR  A SINGLE FAMILY PRE PLATTED  LOT. WE ALSO 4 NEW  SUBDIVISIONS MAXIMUM THE  PERVIOUS SURFACE AREA FOR THE  DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE WHICH  WHICH WHICH DIFFER. WHICH DIFF  IS DIFFERENTIATED FROM EACH  INDIVIDUAL LOT WHAT SECTION OF  THE CODE IS A SENSE I CAN  JUST.  >> I AM I'M LOOKING  COMMISSIONER OUT THANK YOU I  THOUGHT YOU WERE READING.  >> WITNESS ACHES NO, I I  WASN'T I WAS NOT READING THAT  I LYING ON THE MAY OR MAY  >> NOT ACTUALLY ACCURATE AT  THIS POINT IN TIME THAT MAYBE  WE WHAT WE MIGHT NEED TO  >> IF IF YOU CAN GET ME THAT  CODE AND JUST SEND IT TO ME BY  EMAIL I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IS  MAYBE WE NEED TO REDUCE THAT  AMOUNT FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOT.  TO GIVE THEM GREATER  OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO  CONSERVE SOME OF THE TREATS.  IF YOU IT THAT BALANCE IF YOU  ALLOW HUGE AMOUNT OF STRUCTURE  YOU HAVE LITTLE ABILITY TO  PRESERVE TREES WERE A FEW  LOWER THAT NOW THAT INCREASES  THE ABILITY TO PRESERVE  TREATS. AND KEEPS YOU FROM  BUILDING A 9,000 SQUARE-FOOT  HOME AND A 10,000 SQUARE-FOOT  ALL IF YOU COULD THAT I WOULD  APPRECIATE IT TOO. WE'LL GET  MORE TWO-STOREY HOUSES.  >> SURE EVER TO DO HAVE.  >> I DIDN'T WANT YOU TO THINK  WE FORGOT ABOUT.  >> NO I THINK I'M DONE TALKING  ABOUT THAT.  >> OKAY ALL RIGHT.  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL YEAH, I  HAVE A FEW OTHER ONES WE NEED  TO GET A CONSENSUS ON WHEN  YOU'RE LOOKING AT ENDANGERED  AND THREATENED I HAD I HAD A  IDEA THIS MORNING. BECAUSE NOT  IT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE  CHARTS IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ALL  OF THE.  >> LOCAL.  >> CRITTERS THAT ARE PROTECTED  OR THREATENED EITHER BY STATE  SECTION WITH PAGE IT'S SECTION  4006.1 OR ARE DOUBLED FOR. SO  THE FIRST ONE THAT CAME OUT  THAT PROMPTED THE QUESTION WAS  THE BONDED TO BACKED IT IS  LISTED AS A FEDERAL ENDANGERED  SPECIES, BUT IT'S NOT ON THE  LIST. AND STAFFING WHEN A  REVIEW THEIR ANSWERS TO MY  THEY BASICALLY WERE SAYING YOU  KNOW WE CAN'T CONCLUDE ALL. IF  YOU LOOK AT THAT FIRST  SENTENCE A PURPOSE OF THIS  ARTICLE YOU SEE  >> IS NOT TO IS TO LIMIT  DEVELOPMENT  >> FEDERALLY DESIGNATED  ENDANGERED FEDERALLY  DESIGNATED THREATENS STATE  DESIGNATED THREATENED IN STATE  AS NEEDED. SPECIES OF SPECIAL  CONCERN.  >> SINCE THAT ENCOMPASSES  EVERYTHING AND THAT'S THIS  LIST IS VERY FLUID. ONE YEAR  IT COULD BE THREATENED. AND  NEXT YEAR IT'S OFF THE  THREATENED BLITZED SO THIS  LIST BECOMES VERY FLUID IN  THIS TABLE. BUT THE FEDERAL  AND STATE LISTS GET UPDATED  REGULARLY. MY IDEA WAS WHY NOT  JUST REMOVE THE TABLES.  BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE A BODY TO  BACK WHICH IS NOT ON THIS  LIST. YOU THEN HAVE TO GO AND  SEE WHAT IS WHAT IS A BONDED  TO BACK IN IT IS NOW FEDERALLY  THREAT. BUT THE ALLIGATOR WAS  THREATENED AND NOW IT'S NOT  EVEN 9 BECAUSE MADE SOME GREAT  STRIDES AND COMING BACK. I  DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO DO  IT. BUT MY THOUGHT IS REMOVE  THE LISTS. BECAUSE THOSE LISTS  CHANGE MORE FREQUENTLY THAN  OUR COAT. THAT A COMPROMISE.  >> ALL RIGHT SO SO THE LIST  WAS BASED ON THE DATA FROM THE  FLORIDA NATURAL NATURAL AREAS  INVENTORY WHICH THEY HAVE A  DATABASE FOR THE STATE OF  FLORIDA AND THEY IDENTIFIED  THE SPECIES THAT ARE LOCATED  IN CERTAIN GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.  SO WE'VE INCLUDED THE LIST  THAT IS IN SECTION 4006.2  BASED ON THAT DATA OF SPECIES  THAT ARE KNOWN TO OCCUPY  SARASOTA COUNTY FOR SITE FOR  BIRDS RIGHT BIRDS. ARE KNOWN  OCCUPY SARASOTA COUNTY. IF  THEY ENVIRONMENTAL IS  SUBMITTED THAT SHOWS OTHER  SPECIES ARE NATURAL RESOURCES  STAFF GOING TO GO TO THE  SORTS. THIS GIVES A QUICK  REFERENCE FOR STAFF AND  MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITHOUT  HAVING TO GO TO THE FEDERALIST  AND WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO  THE STATE LISTING. IT'S. IT  WOULD. QUITE A LONG LONG LIST  IF WE INCORPORATED EVERYTHING.  THIS HYPER FOCUSES ON WHAT WE  KNOW EXIST SARASOTA COUNTY.  >> TIFFANY DID THAT IS IN  SARASOTA COUNTY AND IT'S NOT  ON YOUR LIST AND THAT THE  POINT THAT I WAS DRIVING HOME  OF I RECOGNIZE THAT THE LIST  IS SUPPOSED TO BE SARASOTA  COUNTY. BUT THERE ARE THINGS  MISSING FROM THE LIST THAT ARE  SARASOTA COUNTY.  >> EITHER A STATE THAT REMOVES  PRESSURE BACK.  >> THAT IS THAT'S THAT'S A  MAMMAL OR SO BUT MAYBE THERE  SHOULD BE AS I KNOW WE HAVE  MANATEES ON HERE MAYBE THAT  WOULD BE THAT MOST PEOPLE PUT  THE BIRD SPECIES BECAUSE IT  FLIES BUT IT'S NOT I  UNDERSTAND THAT AND HAVE MAYBE  IT SHOULD BE UNDER THAT  MANATEE LIKE A MAMMAL  DESIGNATION AND THAT THIS WAY  WE CAN ADD TO IT AS I AGREE  THAT THAT THAT SHOULD BE  PROTECTED COMPROMISE.  >> WHAT WHAT IF WE SIMPLY  ADDED LANGUAGE TO SAY THAT  THIS. BIRDS IDENTIFIED AND  THIS CHARTER REPRESENTATIVE.  THERE IS A MORE COMPREHENSIVE  LIST AND GIVE A REFERENCE I  THINK WE THAT NOT A SECTION  THAT SAYS OTHER PROTECTED  SPECIES AND WILL.  >> THE BONNET ABOUT AND WHAT.  >> OTHER SPECIES THAT DON'T  ALL UNDER A BIRD UNDER A  MANATEE OR A GOPHER TORTOISE  YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THAT CAN  STEPHEN AND I CAN WORK TO  PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL  >> YOU KNOW SOME OF THE WANTED  LIST THAT HAS BIRDS MAMMALS  THAT HAS FOREIGN AND I DON'T I  DON'T KNOW, BUT SOMETHING  NEEDS TO BE DONE BECAUSE ON  ONE HAND WE'RE HEARING. IT'S  ONLY SARASOTA COUNTY FOCUSED  THREATENED ENDANGERED, BUT YET  THERE'S A FEW THAT WE KNOW ARE  NOT INCLUDED ON THIS LIST SO I  JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO  EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION.  >> IF I MAY I THINK  >> IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN  DEFINITELY CLEARLY SPECIFY  THE. MAY KNOW THIS IS NOT A  COMPREHENSIVE LIST REFER TO  THE MOST RELEVANCE. A  STATEMENT FEDERAL LIST AS WELL  FOR EACH OF THESE ARE MOST  COMMON. ABSOLUTELY THAT THERE  ARE OTHER US YEAH.  >> AND THAT WAS ONE OF MY  OTHER SUGGESTIONS OF  COMPROMISE WAS TO ADD SOME  KIND OF LANGUAGE THING THAT'S  NOT ALL. A MAYOR I DO HAVE A  FEW OTHERS. THE CHASE HERE,  I'M NOT SURE WHAT PAGE IT IS  BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE  SHEET THAT HAS MY QUESTIONS IN  THEIR COMMENTS IT'S FIGURE 6.6  POINT 3.1. WHEN YOU LOOK THIS  FIGURE YOU'LL SEE IS OWN 3 ITS  CONSERVATION ZONE, 3. AND ONE  OF MY BIG QUESTIONS IS WHY DO  WE HAVE A HOUSE AND OTHER  STRUCTURES IN ZONE 3 WHICH IS  WITHIN THE 220 FEET OF THE  MYAKKA RIVER PROTECTION ZONE.  AND STAFF BASICALLY SAID THAT  THERE'S THE CLEAR ZONE AND.  >> I DO MINE IS. STAFF IS  SAYING THE HOUSE IS NOT  ALLOWED IN THIS ZONE. THE  PICTURE SHOWS A HOUSE IN THE  AND AND I DON'T QUITE KNOW IF  IT'S IF IT'S A PROTECTED ZONE  FOR THAT 220 FEET. BUT YOU  CAN'T HAVE A HOUSE IN AREA  WHICH DEFIES THE PURPOSE OF  THAT PROTECTION ZONE. IF IT'S  A CONSERVATION AREA. AND IT'S  IN THE PROTECTIONS OWN WHY  WOULD YOU HAVE A HOUSE IN  THERE. I DON'T KNOW MAYBE THE  THE DIAGRAM NEEDS TO BE  CLEANED UP.  >> OR.  >> MAYBE I'M MISSING SOMETHING  HELP HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE  CONFLICTING. VISUAL VERSUS  GORE.  >> THIS LANGUAGE CARRIED OVER  FROM A DIAGRAM IS KAREN FROM  CURRENT CODE ZONE 3 IS THE  AREA BETWEEN THE LANDLORD  EXTENT OF TOWN FOR AND THE  LANDLORD EXTENT OF THE MYAKKA  RIVER PROTECTION EXCLUDING  SOUND WANT AND THEY WIN IF WE  CAN BRING THE DIAGRAM UP  PLEASE.  SOUND WANT IS A FIRE  PROTECTION CLEARS OUT REQUIRE  35 FEET AROUND ANY STRUCTURE  THAT IS PLACED. SOME 2.  >> THE.  >> AND THE FRONT SETBACK.  >> THE REMAINDER.  >> IS THE.  >> FLOOR IS HERE THE 50 FOOT  WIDE MYAKKA RIVER AREA BUFFER  ZONE 3 IS THE REMAINDER. OF  THE LAND WORD EXTENT. DOWN 4.  >> EXCLUDING ZONE, ONE AND 2  WANTED TO IS EXCLUDED.  >> FROM SOUND 3 THAT IS WHY A  CAN BE PLACED IN SOUND ONE AND  2. SO I'M NOT SURE HOW HOW HOW  MUCH MORE CLARIFICATION I CAN  PROVIDE SO IS 3 IS THE  LANDLORD EXTENT LINE BETWEEN  ZONE FOR. AND THE AREAS THAT  ARE EXCLUDED BY SOMEONE AND 2.  >> BUT IF YOU LOOK OVER TO  YOUR FAR RIGHT WHERE IT SAYS  220 FOOT WIDE MYAKKA RIVER  PROTECTION ZONE. NOW OK NOW  TAKE YOUR CURSOR AND PUT IT IN  THAT HOUSE. THAT'S IN THAT 220  FOOT. IT IS AND THERE ARE  RESTRICTIONS THAT PROTECTS.  >> 220 FOOT MYAKKA RIVER  PROTECTION INCLUDING THE  REQUIREMENT FOR A ROBOT SEPTIC  SYSTEM. IF WE'D THIS ALLOWED  CONSTRUCTION ON PLATT OF LOTS  AND THE MYAKKA RIVER  PROTECTION ZONE AND COLLIER  LEE AND A LOT NOTHING AND THE  228 THE CITY WOULD BE BUYING  EVERY SINGLE LOT THAT IS  SUBJECT TO THESE REGULATIONS.  THERE ARE ALLOWED STAND THERE  ARE PROTECTIONS I LIMIT THE  AREA THAT THE HOME CAN BE  PLACED BY RICK I RUN CREDIT  SEPTIC SYSTEM TO PROTECT OUR  WATER QUALITY AND WHERE IS  THIS MYAKKA RIVER PROTECTION  ZONE IN THE NORTH PORT CITY  LIMITS.  >> THAT WAS MY QUESTION  >> I REMEMBER CORRECTLY  THERE'S ONLY ONLY HANDFUL OF  ALONG THE MYAKKA RIVER.  >> THIS IS THE MY THAT.  >> CAN PULL UP PROPERTIES AND  I WILL TRY TO PULL UP THE MAP  AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER.  MOST OF THESE PROPERTIES. THAT  ARE IN THE CITY LIMITS.  >> OUR.  >> RNA UNDER CONSERVATION. ICE  WITH NOT OR THEY'RE OR THEY'RE  DEVELOPED OR THEY ARE ON  INCORPORATE SARASOTA COUNTY.  BECAUSE THIS IS A. STATE  DOESN'T WILD AND SCENIC RIVER  AND THERE ARE AREAS OF IT THE  TOUCH PORT WE ARE REQUIRED TO  HAVE THESE REGULATIONS AND OUR  CODE ALBEIT THERE MIGHT BE A  HANDFUL OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE  SUBJECT TO THESE REQUIREMENTS.  ARE THE AREAS.  >> RIGHT SO THAT IS GOING TO  STATE FOREST IN THE OTHER  PREDS AGRICULTURAL THIS IS  ACTUALLY ON I US WITH MUCH. AS  YOU CAN SEE HERE THERE ARE  PROBABLY IS.  >> THAT ARE ON INCORPORATED  THAT COULD EVENTUALLY BE  ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AND SO  WE YOU KNOW AND SIMILARLY  HERE. THESE PROPERTIES COULD  EVENTUALLY HOME PARKS RIGHT  ACTUALLY WE HAVE A  CONSERVATION DISTRICT PROPERTY  HERE AS WELL. A RESIDENTIAL  SUBDIVISION HERE AS WELL AND I  THINK THE THE INTENTION WHEN  THESE REGULATIONS WERE  INCORPORATED WAS WON. THERE  WAS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE  STATE.  >> TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE  COMPLYING WITH MY OF WILD AND  SCENIC MYAKKA RIVER. TO TO  ENSURE THAT IN THE EVENT ON  THE OF THOSE PRIMARIES TO COME  INTO THE CITY LIMITS IN THE  FUTURE.  >> OR RATHER WAS SOLD RESOUND  REDEVELOPED IN ANY WAY SHAPE  OR FORM. THAT PROTECTIONS  WOULD BE IN PLACE AND AND IT  IN OWNERSHIP HERE FOR YOU ON  THIS  >> IT INTERESTING IF MAYBE  SOME OF THE FOCUS COULD BE ON  THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE  LAND FUNDS THAT THE COUNTY HAS  LIKE MONEY IN. SOME OF THOSE  PROPERTIES WITH ARE JUST USING  THOSE FUNDS THAT ARE VACANT  IT'S REALLY OF NO VALUE TO BE  ABLE TO ALLOW THEM TO DEVELOP  ON THOSE PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW  IF THEY HAVE A WILLING. SELLER  COURSE. BUT ESPECIALLY IF  THEIR NORTH PORT CITY NOT SEEN  VERY MANY THAT ARE CURRENTLY  IN NORTH PORT CITY LIMITS  THERE THERE SO.  >> YOU KNOW THAT THIS THIS  PIECE RIGHT HERE THAT'S THE E  P THAT THAT IS OVER HERE IS  WITH ON.  >> THE FOREST. SO YOU KNOW  WHILE THE REGULATIONS ARE IN  PLACE AND WHILE WE ARE  REQUIRED TO ALLOW  SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT I  THINK MOST OF WHAT IS  IMPACTED.  >> IT'S IN THE CITY LIMITS ON  THOSE REGULATIONS IS ALREADY  UNDER SOME KIND OF  CONSERVATION OR STATE  OWNERSHIP. IT'S JUST YOU KNOW  KEEPING THOSE REGULATIONS IN  PLACE IN THE ABOUT WE HAVE  PROPERTIES IN FUTURE. AND OUR  CITY LIMITS.  >> THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO  MAINTAIN THAT WHILE ENSUE  RIVER BECAUSE THAT IS ONLY IN  THE SARASOTA COUNTY SECTION OF  THE RIVER  ♪ BECAUSE CHARLOTTE COUNTY HAD  ALLOWED SO MUCH DEVELOPMENT  PRIOR TO THIS RIVER  DESIGNATION EVEN COMING UP  THAT THEY CAN EVER QUALIFY FOR  IT SO I GUESS. YOU LOOK AT  THIS AS BEING PROACTIVE THAT  THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE  TOO. SURE WE MAINTAIN THAT  DESIGNATION MYAKKA BUT I  APPRECIATE MISTER IT DURING  THAT UP BECAUSE I AND THE  PRESS AT ALL THE TIME AND  PEOPLE SAY YOU KNOW ALONG THE  MYAKKA RIVER AND CITY OF NORTH  PORT WE DON'T HAVE AND HOUSE  IS ON DIRECTLY ON. RIVER THAT  >> ALL RIGHT MOVING ON TO  SECTIONS AND I'M ALMOST  PROMISE YOU I'M ALMOST MOVING  ON TO TABLE 4007006.2.  >> THE IN THE EXISTING CODE.  >> IT SAYS LIKE A HERITAGE  TREE. AND IT SAYS ALL NATIVE  TREES. IT SAYS THAT THEIR  REMAINING ON SITE. OR THEY'RE  BEING AT PLANTING. STAFF  REMOVED THE REMAINING ON-SITE  LANGUAGE OR AT PLANTING  LANGUAGE.  >> BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF MORE  ♪ >> UNDERSTOOD BY STAFF THAT  THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE TALKING  ABOUT. I AM A FIRM BELIEVER  THAT OUR STAFF KNOWS THAT'S  WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT  THAT THIS DOCUMENT PERSEIDS  ALL OF US. AND IT REALLY  SHOULD BE OUTLINED THIS IS AT  PLANTING THIS IS ON SITE.  >> BECAUSE. I JUST.  >> WANT TO HAVE THAT ADDED  PROTECTION. WHEN I SAID STAFF  HAD SAID THAT THEY NEED A  COMMISSION CONSENSUS.  >> AND THERE'S NO HARM NO  POLLEN ADDING THE SIMPLE  WORDS. TO THIS LANGUAGE.  PROTECTS IN THE FUTURE. AND  IT'S CLEAR EDGE IN THE FUTURE  WHEN STAFF IS NO LONGER HERE  COMMISSION IS NO LONGER HERE  TO VOUCH FOR WHAT WAS THE  INTENT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE UP  TO WHOEVER AT THE HELM TO MAKE  THAT INTERPRETATION OF INTENT,  LET'S MAKE IT CLEAR AND  UNDERSTOOD NOW.  ♪ ♪ AND HAVE REMAINING ON SITE OR  AT PLANTING. BUT ON TABLE  4007006.3. IT'S DIFFERENT.  >> SO IF WE COULD I DON'T KNOW  IF YOU NEED A CONSENSUS TO  STAFF JUST AGREES TO ADD 3  SIMPLE WORDS REPEATEDLY. EACH  ONE OF THOSE IS TO REMAIN ON  SITE OR AT PLANTING.  >> WHAT'S SO RIGHT NOW JUST AS  HERITAGE I DON'T MEAN TO  CONSENSUS ON YOU KNOW QUITE  FRANKLY WE'VE GOT YOUR ON  THURSDAY ON STATE TO STATE.  ONE ONE DAY LAST WEEK.  >> WE WORKED THROUGH THEM  UNFORTUNATELY WITH MY SCHEDULE  AND STUFF ON SCHEDULE WE WERE  ABLE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.  >> SO HE HAS NO OBJECTION TO  INCLUDING THOSE OUR PATIENTS  AND WE WE CAN MOVE ON FROM  THIS OK JUST TO THANK YOU FOR  THAT.  >> IF YOU GO TO THE TABLE  ABOVE.  >> THERE'S A.  >> DBH SLASH 3 IN THE SLASH  PINES LEE.  >> SLASH HAS 2 MEANINGS IT  COULD OR DIVIDED BY I'M THE  FIRST ONE IS DBH DIVIDED BY 3  I THINK IT'S JUST AGAIN CLEAR  AND UNDERSTOOD SAY DBH AND THE  WORDS DIVIDED BY BECAUSE THE  NEXT ONE DOWN IS. SLASH HAS A  DIFFERENT MEANING IT'S 4 POINT  SLASH PALM WHICH MEANS PER  JUST PUT THE SIMPLE LANGUAGE  IN THERE SO THAT IT'S CLEARLY  UNDERSTOOD BECAUSE THERE ARE  THE 2 MEETINGS WITH US LATCH  AND THAT CARRIES OVER. TO  ANOTHER WHERE IT SAYS 12 SLASH  PALM. UNDER THE SABAL PALMS IS  THAT 12.  >> PALMS PER PAUL TO COUNT AS  IT'S NOT CLEAR AND IT YOU NEED  TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S KIND OF  SPELLED OUT FOR CLEAR  INTERPRETATION.  >> IT 12 POINTS POINTS. YES,  12 CREDITS. EVEN SAYING THAT  STOCKS ARE PROBLEM THAT FRONT  COMPLICATION CREDITS PER POINT  BASIS RIGHT HERE. YOU DON'T  HAVE THE SCREEN UP BUT YES  WITH EASY TO DO. WE WILL  ADDRESS THE  >> AS YOU LOVE YOUR LITTLE  PICTURE TO MAYORS POINT ABOUT  THE DRIP EDGE AND STUFF LIKE  THAT REALLY VERY GOOD.  >> I THINK WE ARE BOTH MY LAST  REQUEST SIMPLE LITTLE REQUEST.  IF YOU GO TO SECTION 8006.5  SAYS PROTECTION REGULATIONS  AND IT'S REGARDING WETLANDS.  >> THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN  IN THE DRAFT IS IT'S REMOVING  FIRST SECOND AND 3RD.  >> WE ACTION IN THE CURRENT  CODE EXISTING ULDC IT SAYS.  >> FIRST PRIORITY SECOND  PRIORITY 3RD PRIORITY IN THE  FIRST PRIORITY IS TO AVOID  FEELING WETLANDS. STAFF IS  SAYING THAT YOU KNOW, HEY IT'S  WRITTEN THERE BUT THE PRIORITY  IS NOT. AND IT'S VERY  IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT  IT'S CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THAT  THE FIRST MOST IMPORTANT  ACTION IS TO AVOID FILLING  WETLANDS. THE SECOND IS TO  MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS TO THOSE  WETLANDS AND THE 3RD IS THE  LEAST FAVORABLE AND THAT'S  MITIGATION THOSE WORDS ARE  POWERFUL WHEN YOU ARE TRYING  TO CONVINCE A DEVELOPER HEY  OUR FIRST PRIORITY IS TO  PROTECT THOSE WETLANDS. THIS  IS WHAT OUR NATURAL RESOURCE  DIVISION IS IS SAYING THIS IS  A HUGE PRIORITY COMPARED TO  MITIGATION BECAUSE WHEN YOU  JUST PUT IT IN A LITTLE LESS  LIKE THAT. IT'S MITIGATION.  WHAT WILL DO MITIGATION THAT'S  POLICED ACCEPTED. SO I REALLY  WOULD LIKE FOR THEM FOR THE  CODE TO SPELL OUT. THE FIRST  MOST IMPORTANT ACTION IS TO  AVOID FILLING IN THE WETLANDS  THE SECOND IS TO MINIMIZE  ADVERSE IMPACT AND THE 3RD IN  PRINT THE SEAS LEAST FAVORABLE  ACTION IS TO PROVIDE  MITIGATION I THINK IT WILL  GIVE YOU GUYS TEETH.  AND SHOWS THE WORLD THAT THIS  IS WHAT WE WANT. SO IF WE  COULD GET CONSENSUS TO CHANGE  THAT LANGUAGE. MAYOR. STAFF IS  AMENABLE TO JUST GO AHEAD AND  CHANGE IT ON THEIR OWN THAT  WORK TOO.  >> IN OUR OPINION THE ORDER IN  WHICH WE'VE STATED THOSE  REFLECTS THE.  >> ORDER OF PRIORITY ALONG  WIN. THE CONTACTS SENSITIVE  SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS  PROVIDE FOR PRESERVING THE  FUNCTION INTEGRITY OF NATURAL  FEATURES ON SITE NATURAL  RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL  SYSTEMS WE THINK THE THEME OF  THE ENTIRE ULDC MAKES THAT  CLEAR.  >> AND CERTAINLY MAKE THOSE  CHANGES IF THERE'S CONSENSUS  FROM THE COMMISSION.  >> I REALLY THINK IT'S  IMPORTANT TO SPELL IT OUT  FIRST SECOND AND 3RD FIRST  BEING THE MOST IMPORTANT 3RD  BEING THE LEAST FAVORABLE. SO  MAYOR IF WE COULD GET A  CONSENSUS FOR THAT PLEASE.  >> YOU WANT  >> I WOULD REFERRING ACTION TO  AVOID FEELING WHAT YOU WANT  THAT NUMBER WAS SO WOULD IT  WOULD READ.  >> A CITY SHELTER PRIORITIZE  WETLAND PROTECTIVE ACTIVITIES  AS FOLLOWED.  >> WANT FIRST MOST IMPORTANT  IS TO AVOID FILLING WETLAND  RESOURCES. SECOND IS TO  MINIMIZE ADVERSE IMPACTS TO  THOSE WETLANDS THAT CANNOT BE  REASONABLY BE AVOIDED AND REZA  CECIL LEAST FAVORABLE ACTION  PROVIDE COMPETENCE COMP  COMPENSATE TORY MITIGATION BE  A STATE PERMITTING PROCESS. I  THINK IT ADDS TEETH TO WHAT'S  THERE. SO THAT'S MY CONSENSUS  ME. I LIKE THE NUMBERING  BECAUSE MAKES EACH ONE.  >> ORGANIZED WELL INDIVIDUAL  TO RATHER THAN IT BEING ALL  LUMPED TOGETHER LIKE THIS IS  OUR INTENT TO DO THIS ALL  TOGETHER BUT THE FIRST THING  SHOULD BE AVOID FILLING IN  WELL, I LIKE HIM SO UP.  >> GOOD WITH MISSION.  CONSENSUS. BUT I ASK FOR IS A  CONSENT, YES. MCDOWELL  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL TOGETHER  YOU'RE YES, MICHELLE AND THEN  CLEARS STATED SEMINOLE COUNTY  ARE NOW. OKAY, SO THAT'S AND  CORRECT. GET THE REST OF YES,  I WILL BE FINE.  >> I I MEAN. COMMISSIONER  OKAY, YES, I DID YES.  >> THERE'S YOUR NOW HAVE WE  HAD A MEETING I'D BE GETTING A  MOTION WITH PAST 4 TO ONE. ALL  RIGHT, YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE  COMMISSIONER I DO HAVE JUST 2  LITTLE ONES. I'M LOOKING AT  PREVIOUS CODE FOR THAT REFUND.  THE TREE BANK WE HAD A CODE  AND ULDC CHAPTER 45 DASH 7 SEE  WAS A RELOCATION OPTION. I'M  SURE IT'S NOT VERY FAVORABLE  IT'S NOT VERY LIKELY NEWS, BUT  IT STILL WAS IN THE TREE CODE  THAT IF A DEVELOPER HAD A THAT  COULD BE MOVED TO THE CITY OR  THE SCHOOL BOARD OR THE COUNTY  COULD MOVE IT AT THEIR EXPENSE  TO A LOCATION. THIS WAS  PROMPTED MOSTLY BY ONE PART  AND THEY WERE MOVING TREES ON  THEIR SITE, YES THEY PAID FOR  THAT. BUT IF THERE'S A TREE  THAT'S NEARBY DEVELOPMENT THAT  COULD GO REALLY NICE ON A  CITY-OWNED LOT OR SCHOOL BOARD  LOT. HAVING THIS IN PLACE THIS  RELOCATION IS IMPORTANT AS AS  AN OPTION AND IT'S NOT IN THE  CODE RIGHT NOW AND I'M CURIOUS  IF WE COULD ADD THAT BACK IN  SOMEHOW SOME WAY. AS A VIABLE  OPTION TO BE USED. YOU KNOW  GOING TO PAY FOR IT. WELL,  THIS IS 5TH. LET'S SAY IT'S ON  OF A LOT THAT'S BEING  PRIVATELY DEVELOPED AND THE  CITY GOES MY GOSH THAT TREE  WOULD GO GREAT ON OUR PROPERTY  THAT WE'RE BUILDING NEW POLICE  HEADQUARTERS ON AND IT'S RIGHT  ACROSS THE STREET. WE WILL PAY  TO MOVE THAT PRODUCT THAT TREE  OVER TO OUR PROPERTY USING  TREE FUND MONEY. INSTEAD OF  CUTTING DOWN A HERITAGE TREE.  AND JUST MOVING ACROSS AND  THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE WE HAVE  HAD THIS DISCUSSION WHEN WE  WERE DOING THE TREAT CODE.  JUST A FEW YEARS AGO AND WE  ADDED THAT PROVISION IT AND  NOW IT'S NOT IN THERE SO I  WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE IT BE  PUT BACK  >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A TREE  THAT'S ON ON SITTING PROBABLY  GOING FROM CITY-OWNED YOU TALK  ABOUT PRIVATE COMPANIES GOING  TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY WANT  TO IT DOWN AND THIS AND THAT  NATURAL RESOURCE GOES. OH MY  GOSH THAT'S POINT AS AGE WE  WOULD PAY TO HAVE IT MOVED  ACROSS THE THAT'S MILLIE SEE  THOSE TREES AND HER AS WELL IN  PARK, THERE ARE A $100,000.  HER TRADE HE SPENT A MILLION  DOLLARS I UNDERSTAND THAT I  JUST I DON'T SAY IF YOU WANT  TO PUT IT IN THERE JUST  BECAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD BUT IN  PRACTICALITY I DO EVERYTHING  YOU KNOW ARE WE TO SAY THAT IN  PRACTICALITY IT WON'T WORK MAY  BE MOVING A TREE FOR $100,000  WOULD PRESERVE THIS MASSIVELY  BEAUTIFUL HERITAGE OAK TREE TO  BE MOVED ACROSS THE STREET OR  MOVED ACROSS A LOT LINE TO BE  PLACED ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY.  >> AND OF COURSE THE  COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO  ALLOCATE THE FUNDS FOR THAT  OUT OF THE TREE FUND BUT  THAT'S WHAT WE DREAM AND IS  THERE FOR IS TO USE IT FOR  PLANTING TREES WILL MY NOT  MOVING USE IT FOR FOR MOVING  RELOCATION.  >> YOU WANT TO.  >> WELL I DON'T KNOW IF THEY  WANT TO WEIGH IN ON I'M.  >> WE DIDN'T CARRY IT FORWARD  BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN  UTILIZING LARGER TREES ARE  MORE DIFFICULT OR RELOCATING  THE SURVIVABILITY RATE IS  SUBSTANTIAL.  ♪ SURVIVING IN PARK. AMOUNT OF  MONEY INVESTED ENSURING THEIR  SURVIVABILITY WAS PROBABLY A  SIGNIFICANT POINT IN TIME FOR  THAT MATTER.  >> I THINK YOU KNOW WE CAN  CERTAINLY INCORPORATE THIS  BUT. THAT THE LANGUAGE I I  WOULD PREFER IF THE LANGUAGE  STARTS AT ONE AT THE OPTION OF  PROPERTY IS WE CAN'T FORCE TO  IMPRESS SHOULD WE WE CAN'T  FORCE THE PROPERTY OWNER TO  ALLOW THE CITY TO RELOCATE A  TREE.  >> SO I I THINK THAT LANGUAGE  AS AS IT EXISTS. IT'S TO BE  BROUGHT FORWARD SHOULD BE TO  MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS A  NEGOTIATION AND NOT A MANDATE.  >> AS WITH THE APPLICANTS FROM  SHUN. SO I JUST WANT ITS IN  THEIR 45 7 I COULD BETTER. I  THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY WANTS  A COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU  MAYOR, I JUST WANT REMIND ALL  PARTICIPANTS IN THE MEETING  TODAY THAT WE AS ALWAYS  UTILIZING CLOSED CAPTIONING  SOFTWARE THAT HELPS PEOPLE  ACCESS. THE MEETING IN THE  CLOSE CAPTION SOFTENER DOES  NOT WORK PROPERLY. SPEAKERS  INTERRUPT SO IF YOU COULD JUST  IS VERY DIFFICULT ON STAFF TO  ENSURE THAT WE SPOKE PUBLICLY  SINCE THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER  AMBRIDGE.  >> YES THANK YOU. LISTEN TO I  MEAN. I THINK COULD BE PART OF  THE MITIGATION PROCESS FROM  THE PROPERTY OWNER, NOT NOT  SOLELY ON THE COST TO THE  CITY. YOU KNOW IF THEY WANTED  TO GO AHEAD AND THEY WILL  DONATE HISTORY WILL MOVE THIS  TREE. I'M SURE THE CITY  PROPERTIES AND WILL ACCEPT IT  AND TRY TO TOUCH, YOU KNOW LET  US SURVIVE, BUT NORMAL NORMAL  OUT THERE WHEN YOU WHEN YOU  MOVE TREES, YOU'RE LOOKING AT  A 10% LOSS. AUTOMATICALLY IN  AND MOVING THE TREES BECAUSE  OF DAMAGE TO THE ROOT SYSTEMS  AS YOU KNOW MAYOR, YOU KNOW IT  DOES TAKE A LOT OF PEOPLE GO  AHEAD AND TAKE THAT THAT WOULD  BE LIKE THE CITY'S  RESPONSIBILITY ON THE UPDATE  OF OF THE TREES BUT TO HAVE  THE CITY. A 100,000 OR EVEN  10,000 TO HAVE IT REMOVED OF  PRIVATE PROPERTY ON PROPERTY.  >> I DON'T THINK THAT'S VIABLE  BECAUSE IT'S STILL A GAMBLE.  YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE 100%  ACCURACY ON THAT SURVIVING SO  I I JUST DON'T SEE IT AS BEING  NECESSARY UNLESS IT'S PART OF  MITIGATION FOR THE HOMEOWNER  AT THE HOME THAT'S MY OPINION  ON THIS.  >> COMMISSIONER YOU KNOW.  >> COMMISSIONER MUCH BRINGS UP  A GOOD POINT YOU KNOW IT COULD  BE USED AS A MITIGATION YOU  KNOW IF A DEVELOPER SAYS HEY  IT'S GOING COST ME WITH  $20,000 TO PAY MITIGATION FEES  HEY INSTEAD OF PAYING THOSE  MITIGATION FEES IN THE CITY  WANTS A TREE ACROSS THE  STREET, YOU KNOW.  >> IT COULD BE WORDED I JUST  DON'T WANT THE THE WHOLE THING  IS I DON'T WANT THE OPTION TO  BE A LOST WE HAD A GREAT  DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND I JUST  DON'T WANT THE OPTION TO BE  THE LAST THAT'S ALL THAT'S  REASON WHY BRINGING THAT UP.  YOU KNOW OFFER CONSENSUS. CAN  ASK FOR CONSENSUS AND TO HAVE  I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STAFF  WILL COME UP WITH.  >> ADDING RELOCATION OPTION TO  BE INCLUDED INTO THIS DRAFT.  USING CHAPTER 45 DASH 7 SEE AS  A GUY. COMMISSIONER LANGDON.  >> I VERY MUCH LIKE THE IDEA  HERE OF PERHAPS POSITIONING IT  AS A MITIGATION OPTION.  >> SO I WOULD BE A YES.  >> I'D BE A YES, I  UNFORTUNATELY THINK IT'S A  FEEL GOOD. AND THOUGH IT  SOUNDS REALLY GOOD. BUT IN  PRACTICALITY OF YOU KNOW JUST  LIKE OUR PREVIOUS TREE  ORDINANCE REQUIRED A 35%  CANOPY. THAT WAS THE CASE WITH  HAVE A LOT OF HOME SITES WITH  A LOT OF TREES ON HIM BY NOW,  BUT IT SOUNDS REALLY GOOD ON  PAPER THE OPTION IS OUT THERE  AND IT'S NOT GOING TO.  ANYTHING. WHAT'S WHAT'S THAT  WHAT'S THE HARM. VICE OF DO.  KNOW COMMISSIONER AVERAGE.  COMING.  >> YEAH, I'M COMING I GOT HIT  BUTTONS. I'D BE YES AS LONG AS  AS PART OF THE MITIGATION I DO  NOT WANT TO COME YOU KNOW THE  COST OF THE CITY SO AS I  STATED EARLIER THAT'S THE WAY  I'D GO WITH IT. OKAY THANK YOU  SO THANK YOU.  >> SOMETHING I BELIEVE THAT'S  ALL I HAVE OKAY. COMMISSIONER  LANGDON ANYTHING ELSE I'M ALL  SET. THANK YOU MAYOR. VICE  MAYOR. COMMISSIONER EMRICH  ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.  >> NO MA'AM I EVERYTHING'S  COVERED WAS WORRIED ABOUT SO I  THINK IT WAS A GREAT  CONVERSATION, SO THANK YOU.  >> 1 ONE FOUND A PICKY ABOUT  THAT WREAKED HAVOC IN WE  TALKED ABOUT AND SHOULD VICE  MAYOR. IT MEANT THAT JUST PLAN  FOR TREES OR YOU'RE DARN RIGHT  WE COULD DO THAT ON OUR OWN  PROPERTY AND NOT HAVE INVOLVE  ANY PRIVATE CITIZEN WITH WHERE  ARE WE WITH THAT TREE CANOPY  MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BEEN  WAITING FOR THAT TO COME  THROUGH BEFORE WE PLANT A TREE  AND PEOPLE TELL ME WHAT YOU  HAVE ALL THIS OFF MORE OUT  THERE THAT YOU CAN TELL YOU  EXACTLY WHERE THE TREES ARE  AND HOW MANY THERE ARE SO  WHERE ARE  >> I AM EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE  THAT STEPHEN AND HIS TEAM HAVE  MADE GREAT STRIDES TOWARD  PREPARING THE TREE CANOPY  STUDY. AND WE HAVE A DRAFT  UNDER SAY WE'RE 95% COMPLETE  SO TRUDEAU'S TO STEP ON HIS  TEAM AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD  TO BEING ABLE TO BRING THAT  OUT FOR YOU AND NOW THAT WE  HAVE AN URBAN FORESTER  ♪ >> WIND ONBOARD RIGHT THAT  REALLY BUT A LOT OF INPUT AND  MEAT INTO THAT AND IT'S  SOMETHING YOU HAVE A PLAN, I'M  A BIG FAN OF HAVING.  >> EVERYTHING YEAH SO THAT'S  GREAT. YES, OKAY.  >> OKAY, AND THAT IF I COULD.  >> JUMP IN WITH  ♪ >> NEXT STEPS.  >> EITHER NOW OR AFTER PUBLIC  AT YOUR AT YOUR DISCRETION.  >> WANT TO CAN JUST THAT'S  WHAT PUBLIC COMMENT AND RIGHT.  ALL RIGHT GO AND TAKE ALL  RIGHT.  >> NEXT PER THE CITY  COMMISSION DIRECTION ON APRIL  22ND WE ARE. A DRAFT  COMPREHENSIVE.  >> AND. AMENDMENTS ASSOCIATED  WITH THE ULDC AND THE DRAFT  ULDC TO PROVIDE FOR LIMON IT  SINGLE-FAMILY AND ACTIVITY  CENTER 6 ON THE WEST SIDE OF I  75. DID TOO.  >> THAT CHANGE WE WERE UNABLE  TO PRESENT A COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN AMENDMENTS TO THE  PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY  BOARD ON MAY SECOND IT. THEY  WERE UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE A  SPECIAL MEETING SO THE ITEM  NEEDED TO BE CONTINUE 60. YOU  WILL SEE ON YOUR MAY 14  AGENDA. AND ITEM REGARDING  ORDINANCE 2024 DASH 0, 9,  WHICH IS THE ULDC ASSOCIATED  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS.  THERE WILL BE NO ATTACHMENTS  BECAUSE THE REQUEST WILL BE TO  CONTINUE THAT TO YOUR MAY 28TH  MEETING. SO THAT WE CAN MAKE  THOSE CHANGES AND FINALIZE THE  DOCUMENTS HENRY UPLOAD SO WE  BE LOOKING AT FIRST READING OF  THE ULDC ASSOCIATED  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS  ON MAY 28. THIS COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN WILL NEED TO BE SUBMITTED  TO THE STATE FOR REVIEW,  REQUIRES A MINIMUM 30 DAYS. IF  THE STATE HAS NO COMMENTS WILL  BRING IT FOR SECOND READING AS  SOON AS WE RECEIVE THEIR  NOTIFICATION. IF THERE ARE  COMMENTS WE WILL WORK THROUGH  THEM HOPEFULLY VERY QUICKLY IN  ORDER TO KEEP THE PROCESS  MOVING FORWARD. ARE PRESENTING  TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY  BOARD TONIGHT. DROPS CHAPTER 6  OF NATIONAL REACH RESOURCE AS  WE DID IT HAVE TO DO A SPECIAL  MEETING WITH THEM ON APRIL  22ND, SO YOU COULD HAVE THEIR  FEEDBACK TODAY. UNFORTUNATELY  WERE UNABLE TO SO. WHEN WE  BRING BACK THE FINAL CONSENSUS  ITEMS TO THE CITY COMMISSION.  I THINK WE'LL HAVE ONE FINAL  WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS COMBINED  ON THE CONSENSUS ITEMS THAT  INCLUDED DEVELOPMENT MASTER  PLAN LIKE. APPROVAL PROCESS  WITH EVERY PROJECT COMING TO A  MISSION. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD  MEETING REQUIREMENT. THOSE  WERE 2 BIG TICKET ITEMS FROM  EARLY ON IN THE COMMISSION  WANTED TO SEE THE ENTIRE  PACKAGE OF THE CODE  COMPATIBILITY PROTECTIONS THAT  ARE BEING INCORPORATED FAR AS  TRANSITIONAL HIGH AND  LANDSCAPE OFFERS AND THE LIKE  ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW ZONING  DISTRICTS TO THE NEW ZONING  DISTRICTS WE HAVE AS WE WORK  THROUGH THE PROCESS CHANGED  NAME OF A MACSWAN AND IMAX  TOO. UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN WILL BE MEDIUM THAT CITY  CORRIDOR AND HIGH-DENSITY  CORRIDOR.  >> SO FOR THOSE ON DISTRICT  MEANS TO ALIGN BETTER WITH THE  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE'RE  LOOKING AT CT WHICH IS QUARTER  TRANSITIONAL THAT WILL BE FOR  THE MEDIUM THAT CITY.  >> AND THEN.  >> 41 C OR FOR THE HIGH  DENSITY. SO THAT'S A CHANGE  THAT YOU'LL BE SEEING COMING  FORWARD. OTHER CHANGES THAT  YOU WILL SEE IN THE FINAL  DRAFT ARE PROHIBITIONS AND  OVERALL FOR PROVISION CHAPTER  ONE THAT ADDRESSES SENATE BILL  2 FT HOUSE A ONE C WHICH  PROHIBITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS  FROM. AND JOSE MORATORIUMS OR  ADOPTING MORE STRINGENT OR  BURDENSOME REGULATIONS THROUGH  JUNE 30TH 2027. SO WE'LL HAVE  A GENERAL PROVISION WHERE AND  THE PROPERTY OWNER SUBMITS TO  THE CITY IN WRITING THAT WE  HAVE ADOPTED A MORE  RESTRICTIVE PROVISION THAT THE  APPLICABLE REGULATION WILL ALL  TO WHATEVER WAS PLACE.  SEPTEMBER 27TH 2022. WE WILL  BE CALLING OUT CERTAIN  PROVISIONS THAT WE NOW ARE  CLEARLY MORE RESTRICTIVE AND  THEY WANT CORPORAL CORPORATE  LANGUAGE THAT INDICATES THAT  THIS PROVISION WILL BE  EFFECTIVE ON AND THEN REPEAL  OR EXPIRATION UP THE BILLS I'M  NOT IN THE MEANTIME WE WILL  STRIVE TO OBTAIN VOLUNTARY  COMPLIANCE WORKING WITH  PROPERTY OWNERS WEEK. THERE  ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE JUST  AREN'T GOING TO ABLE TO  MANDATE WITHOUT GOING SIDEWAYS  UP THIS. THE SENATE BILL ON  HOUSE BILL. SO WE WANT TO  PROCEED WITH THE ADOPTION OF  THE UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT  CODE BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY  PROVISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO  IMPROVE THE PROCESS THAT GOING  TO PUT FOCUS ON OUR NATURAL  RESOURCES AND THAT ARE NOT  CLEARLY WARBURTON SOME MORE  RESTRICTIVE THAN ME, YOU KNOW,  ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO  THE NEW ZONING DISTRICTS  YOU'VE GOT A NEW ZONING  DISTRICT. IT'S SO I WANTED TO  GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF WHERE  WE ARE AND WHAT WILL BE COMING  FORWARD. MAY 28 COMP PLAN  AMENDMENT. JUNE LIKELY THE  JUNE WORKSHOP FOR THE FINAL  CONSENSUS QUESTIONS ON THE  DRAFT ULDC.  >> QUESTIONS ON THAT SCHEDULE  OR WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE  COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL. WHEN  WILL WE SEE DEFINITIONS.  >> YES, DEFINITION SECTION THE  APPENDICES ACTUALLY THIS TO  THANKS. THANK YOU MA'AM. YOU  REMINDED ME UP.  >> THE DEFINITION SECTION WILL  WELL KEEP EMERGING ALL THOSE  TRAFFIC SPRING EVERYTHING BACK  FOR THAT FINAL WORKSHOP FOR  THE CONSENSUS QUESTIONS. THE  DEFINITION SECTION IS NOT  GOING TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. WE  ARE THE MIND THAT IF IT'S  COMMONLY UNDERSTOOD TIME IF  YOU CAN LOOK IT UP IN MERRIAM  WEBSTER AND FOR OUR PURPOSES  IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE  MODIFIED IN ANY WAY IT WON'T  BE INCLUDED IN EUROPE AND THE  SEAS WERE LOOKING TO THE  TECHNICAL TERMS. SO THERE  SHOULD BE A SUBSTANTIAL  AMOUNTS OF REVIEW AS FAR AS  THAT'S CONCERNED WANT TO  COMMISSIONER MC 1000 QUESTIONS  AND THE DRAFT THAT REAL  RESOURCES WITH ACTION WAS  ABOUT THE ENGINEERING AND  DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL. THAT  IS A PUBLIC INITIATIVE. THEY  DO HAVE A DRAFT. THAT IS IN  PROGRESS.  >> DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF  IS PREPARED TO INCORPORATE ALL  OF THOSE TECHNICAL  SPECIFICATION PROVISIONS THAT  ARE ON THE CURRENT ULDC AND TO  OUR HAND THIS ISN'T THE ABOUT  THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS  INITIATIVE AND THE ULDC  INITIATIVE DO NOT WRAP UP AT  THE SAME TIME. SO WHAT WE  WOULD BE PULLING FORWARD IS  WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THE  ULDC. COMMISSIONER MCDOWELL  YOU OKAY.  >> WHEN DO YOU THINK WILL HAVE  FIRST READING PROBLEM IS THAT  GOING TO BE SUBJECTED TO COMP  PLAN.  >> IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO STATE  REVIEW. SO IF THE COMMISSION  HERE ON MAY 28. THERE IS SOME  THE 30 DAY REVIEW RECEIVING  THE TRANS MEN DEEMING IT  COMPLETELY. WE WOULD BE  LOOKING A LIVE PUBLIC HEARING  DATES PROVIDED WE DON'T HAVE  ANY SUBSTANTIAL COMMENTS FROM  THE STATE THAT NEED TO BE  ADDRESSED.  >> JUST TO BE CLEAR THE STATE  GIVES THE GREEN LIGHT FOR OUR  FIRST READING OF COMP PLAN AND  WE WILL HAVE FIRST READING OF  ULDC.  >> FIRST RATING OF COMP PLAN  WILL BE MAY 28 THAT AT THE  STATE GIVES US PRAY LOVE.  ACTUALLY WHETHER THEY GIVE US  THE GREEN LIGHT OR NOT WE WERE  PLAYING FOR FIRST READING OF  THE ULDC. SECOND READING THE  COMP PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE  ULDC ON THE SECOND MEETING  JULY THAT IS A PROVIDE IT. WE  DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM  THE STATE THAT ARE SUBSTANTIAL  THAT DELAYS THE SCHEDULING OF  THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND THAT  WE ARE ABLE TO WRAP UP THE  FINAL PIECES. INCLUDING THE  COMPANION CODE AMENDMENT AND  GET THOSE THROUGH LEGAL REVIEW  WHICH I'M I'M CONFIDENT THAT  WE THEY ARE WE ARE TOWARD THE  END HERE ON THAT WE'RE GOING  TO BE ABLE PULL IT ALL  TOGETHER OBJECT TO STAY TRUE  THANK YOU.  >> THINK I HAVE THOSE STATES  ON DOWN HERE. AND THE THING  MISTER EVERETT ANY LAST BEFORE  WE GO PUBLIC PUBLIC COMMENT.  YOU LOOK AT.  >> ONE COMMENT PUBLIC. OKAY,  YEAH, I JUST I JUST WANT A MS.  BARNES AND STEPHEN. I THINK  GRAPH AND THEY'RE WORKING AS  FAST AS POSSIBLE AND I KNOW  THERE'S A LOT OF INTERFERENCE,  ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY BRING IT  FOR BUT I I JUST WANT TO THANK  THEM FOR STAYING STEADFAST  MOVE IT THROUGH THIS I KNOW  IT'S NOT JUST ON THIS OR WHOLE  DEPARTMENT SO THEY'RE WORKING  GREAT TOGETHER AND THEY'RE  GIVING US 1 ONE HEALTH PRODUCT  COMING BACK SO I JUST WANTED  TO SAY THANK YOU AND AND  APPRECIATE ALL THEIR HARD WORK  THAT'S ALL I WANT TO PUT OUT  THERE. I.  >> RIGHT AND I KNOW THOSE  SENTIMENTS AS WELL THANK THIS  IS I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE DOING  THIS ALL. AND THE MOST  COMPLICATED. GEOMETRY PROOF  THAT I HAD TO DO DOESN'T EVEN  COMPARE TO WHAT YOU GUYS. I  HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH TAKING  AND THE INPUT OF OUR CITIZENS  AND RESIDENTS AND COMING UP  THE COMPROMISE. I MEAN THAT'S  REALLY WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. SO  THANK YOU AGAIN, MAKING IT  CLEAR. WHAT DOING HERE WITHOUT  A  >> DO  >> WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT  KNOW. FOR SURE WITH YES, I  KNOW YEAH, WOW. WE ALL THAT  CITY MANAGER WE GOOD. IT'S K.  THEY ALSO ALL RIGHT SO IT IS  1133 I ENDURE THIS THANK YOU