9/8/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOOK —1020 PAGE 05 definition of the type of docks or loading areas affected and the extent of screening required warrants more research and analysis. B. Additional Possibilities (1) Inspection or certification of plant quality at time of C O ection Currently, Chapter 926 requires Florida No.l or better quality. Code Enforcement Officers perform the landscaping C.O. inspection and inspect for landscape plan compliance (e.g. location, species, minimum size), but are not trained to distinguish various, recognized quality parameters for canopy, understory, and shrubs. If the Board desires the county to "check up" on the developer/landscape contractor for quality and to reject installed plant materials deemed by code officers not to be Florida No. 1, then special training of code officers (and possibly, site planners) is needed. An alternative would be to require the landscape contractor or landscape architect to certify in writing that all required landscape materials that have been installed on the project site are Florida No. 1 or better. (2) Me —w in_g heights of installedplants: pruning allowances. Under the existing LDRs and the pending ordinance, installed tree height is measured from grade to the highest point of the tree with a graduated, telescoping measuring stick. However, staff recognizes that there may be an important qualitative difference between a well - pruned installed tree and an unpruned tree. A well pruned 9V2' tall canopy tree could grow faster and fuller than an unpruned 11' tall canopy tree. An allowance could be made for well -pruned trees and special training could be given to code off cers/site planners to make such qualitative determinations. (3) Allowing size to be traded -off for quantity Currently, LDR section 926.06(3)(I) allows credits for planting larger sized trees up -front in return for planting fewer trees (e.g. allowing one 16' tree to count as two 10' trees). However, there are no allowances for allowing trees below height at time of planting in exchange for more trees (e.g. allowing two 8' trees to count as one 10' tree). In the past, developers and landscaping contractors have offered to make up for insufficient installed plant size by planting additional trees, "beyond the minimum requirements". The current-LDRs and pending ordinance contain no such allowance. Some landscaping ordinances (e.g. Queen Anne County, Md.; Clemson, S.C.) appear to allow some trade-offs between canopy, understory, and shrubs as long as an equivalent plant volume is maintained or exceeded. Similar allowances could be added to the pending ordinance for consideration. (4) FP&L concerns: protection of overhead utility lines Shortly after the Board invoked the pending ordinance doctrine and set the September 8th workshop date, FP&L contacted planning staff with suggested 7 additions to the county's landscape ordinance (see attachment #4). FP&L is requesting all local governments in the region to adopt their suggestions. Generally, the FP&L suggestions would result in the following: a. Add the following to the prohibited species list: Earleaf acacia, Woman's tongue, Norfolk Island Pine, Bishofia, Scheffiera, Ear tree, Eucalyptus, Non- native ficus, Sills oak, Chinese Tallow, and Java plum. b. Set minimum horizontal setbacks between overhead powerlines and trees as follows: September 8, 1997 •30' setback for trees 30' or taller at maturity •20' setback for trees 20'-30' at maturity M M M