Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff presses for tree-protection tracts and confirms code minimums: 30 feet for existing trees, 20 feet for new plantings
Summary
City reviewers told applicants they prefer tree-protection areas recorded as tracts (not easements) and reiterated code minimums that a 30-foot protection area is required to protect existing trees while 20-foot areas apply to new plantings; staff also described replacement-credit rules tied to grading near protection boundaries.
City of DeLand staff and applicants spent extended time debating how to record and size tree-protection areas and how the city’s code counts preserved trees.
City reviewers said they prefer tree-protection areas recorded as separate tracts rather than as easements because tracts make ownership and maintenance responsibilities clearer and reduce future scope creep. Staff asked applicants to change preliminary-plat language from “tree protection easement” to “tree protection area/tract” and indicated the Planning Division will revise standard conditions accordingly.
On sizing, staff reiterated that the code requires a minimum 30-foot width for tree protection areas that preserve existing trees; a 20-foot minimum may be used where the area is for new plantings only. Staff pointed to a related code provision discussed in the record that if grading takes place in the first 10 feet of a tree protection area (TPA), trees within the first 5 feet of the impacted boundary will be counted as removed and must be included in the replacement calculation. Staff also noted that very large specimen trees (examples given: laurel oaks over about 20 inches diameter and references to a 34-inch live oak) may be in deteriorating condition; if an arborist documents deterioration, the replacement calculation can be reduced on a tree-by-tree basis.
Why it matters: how tree-protection areas are recorded and measured affects the number of trees that applicants can claim as preserved, triggers replacement requirements, and affects future property records and maintenance obligations.
Details recorded in the meeting: staff asked applicants to show drip lines for trees being preserved within proposed TPAs, to provide dimensions so staff can confirm whether the 30-foot minimum is met, and to consider whether retaining walls or grading would reduce the effective protected area. Staff said they will accept tree protection area widths of 20 feet only when new trees are being planted; existing trees within a TPA narrower than 30 feet may be treated as removed for replacement calculation purposes.
Next steps: applicants were directed to revise plats and plans to show the requested tract recording language (or accept staff edits), provide tree drip-line mapping and dimensions for proposed TPAs, and, where necessary, obtain an arborist evaluation for large specimen trees to support any reduced replacement requirements.
