Exemptions hurt tree ordinance

The county is grappling with ways to fill holes in laws that protect trees and stiffen penalties for violators.

St. Petersburg Times, September 21, 2001
By BRIDGET HALL GRUMET

LECANTO -- It is hard to have a tree ordinance on the books that does not apply to residential properties, where nearly 90 percent of the new construction in Citrus County takes place.

In fact, members of the county's Planning and Development Review Board said Thursday, it doesn't even make sense.

As the county revamps its complicated and ill-enforced tree ordinance, board members said, it should start by lifting the exemption for residential properties, thereby prohibiting home builders from clear-cutting lots.

"There are far too many exemptions and excuses (in the current ordinance) that do not guarantee that we will save our trees," board member Marion Knudsen said.

Planning board members gave shape Thursday to a proposed tree ordinance that will come back to them in November for more discussion. From there, the proposed ordinance would go to the County Commission for two public hearings and a vote.

In addition to applying tree preservation standards to residential lots, planning board members advocated stiff penalties for those who cut down trees without permission.

Under the current ordinance, there is no penalty -- just the $70 fee for an after-the-fact tree removal permit.

"We need to get their attention with (heavy fines)," board member John Bard said, suggesting a $5,000 fee for each tree removed without permission.

But it may be difficult to determine how many trees have been removed once the land has been cleared, community development director Chuck Dixon said. He suggested basing the penalty fee on the size of the property and the amount of covering shown in old aerial photographs of the site.

The planning board's comments echoed much of the input from residents and environmentalists during the three-hour workshop.

Karl Schultz described seeing about 10 acres of residential property on Ozello Road stripped of its trees so a house could be put in.

"It's so sterile looking," he said. "It's just a shame that someone didn't work around a few trees and give some class to the neighborhood."

Others noted that the county's water quality and supply problems are compounded when people replace native trees with grass that requires nitrate-rich fertilizer and more water.

"The time is very limited for acres of emerald green grass around your home," said Jim Bitter, one of the founders of the Save the Homosassa River Alliance.

A contingent of builders at the hearing, however, said the proposed changes would go too far.

The cost of requiring a tree survey on residential lots could add between $1,400 and $5,000 to the cost of building a new home, Citrus County Builders Association incoming president Mike Moberley said.

Requiring homeowners to keep a certain number of trees could also infringe on their property rights. David Cross, a consultant with Goldcrest Homes, said such restrictions could bar him from clearing a pasture area for his horses on his treed lot.

But Pine Ridge resident Walter Wynn said the county's interest in maintaining its wooded character may outweigh some property rights.

"I'm sorry," he said, "I do not agree with those who say they should be allowed to do anything they want on their own property, including removing every tree, bush and blade of grass."

Planning board members also supported tree ordinance changes that would:

Provide a financial incentive to save trees. The more trees people choose to keep on their property, Dixon suggested, the greater discounts they could receive on their county permit fees.

Prohibit tree removal from wetlands. State laws offer some protection to wetlands, but not the trees rooted in those sensitive areas. "Why would you fool with the wetlands?" asked board chairman Ray Hughes.

Board members also said developers should not be allowed to remove trees in order to raise the grade of low-lying sites, as was done with the Home Depot in Crystal River. Builders should keep a portion of the property at grade with original trees intact.

Beef up enforcement efforts. Higher fines don't mean a thing, board members said, without additional code enforcement officers to catch violators. "I think that's something the public would be willing to pay for," board member Dwight Hooper said.

See September 21, 2001 issue of St. Petersburg Times for original article.