Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landscape topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and foundation press Pelican Bay board for broader tree‑canopy plan; staff cite utility and line‑of‑sight constraints
Summary
Board members, residents and Pelican Bay Foundation representatives discussed a proposed collaborative landscape master plan and disagreement over how many canopy trees can feasibly be replanted along sidewalks and boulevards given utility conflicts, sight-line laws and sidewalk maintenance concerns.
Board members and Pelican Bay Foundation representatives opened detailed discussion July 10 on a landscape master plan intended to increase tree canopy across Pelican Bay, but the conversation exposed sharp differences about scope and feasibility.
Peter, a longtime Ridgewood resident and board member, criticized the slow pace of replanting and said residents prioritize canopy restoration. “We have a proposal on the table to plant one. Underwhelming at best,” Peter said, adding later that losing two dozen major trees and replacing only a few “doesn't seem to be right.”
Foundation consultant Susan Watts and other foundation representatives described a planned collaborative approach: an RFP to hire a landscape-architecture firm, a communitywide GIS mapping effort and small pilot projects that would test irrigation and maintenance arrangements. “If single-family homeowners would be willing to irrigate for one year, then he would be willing to plant some trees,” Susan said, summarizing the proposed small-scale pilot idea discussed with staff and the design-review committee.
Staff and committee members outlined five feasibility criteria they used when surveying candidate streets: (1) willing homeowner/association participation for watering, (2) no utility conflicts, (3) no vehicular or pedestrian line-of-sight interference, (4) no likely sidewalk-structural damage and (5) selection of species that minimize litter and staining. Staff cautioned that county right-of-way rules and state sight-line standards sometimes force removals or limit planting locations; some trees removed previously were not planted with sufficient spacing for safe sight lines.
Board members agreed to continue collaborative work with the foundation and requested more detailed proposals and technical options (for example, engineering solutions to reduce root heave or irrigation arrangements) before adopting broader plantings. Staff said they will evaluate pilot locations (Ridgewood was discussed as a likely candidate) and return with options and cost implications.
Next steps: the foundation will proceed with its RFP and GIS mapping and coordinate with PBSD staff to identify feasible pilot sites and a shared implementation plan.
