Downtown South (Sunrail/Amtrak, SODO, Orlando Health, Lymmo, Orange/Michigan Avenues)

[spenser1058]

One of the great ironies is that Buddy made such a big deal of Orlando being totally green by 2050 while we’re demolishing everything green in sight in the meantime.

A story in the Times noted this week the US is on track to use more renewable energy than fossil fuels like coal for the first time this year.

Meanwhile, the city is making no provision to protect the tree cover that reduces energy use and OUC keeps spewing coal particulates into the air even as it’s sued by East Orange residents over health issues and called off plans to address alternatives.

Welcome to Buddy’s Paradise.

[popsiclebrandon]

2 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Meanwhile, the city is making no provision to protect the tree cover that reduces energy use and OUC keeps spewing coal particulates into the air even as it’s sued by East Orange residents over health issues and called off plans to address alternatives.

I mean the city has a bunch of tree programs, including free trees for residents.  http://www.cityoforlando.net/trees/programs/

[spenser1058]

4 minutes ago, popsiclebrandon said:

I mean the city has a bunch of tree programs, including free trees for residents.  http://www.cityoforlando.net/trees/programs/

So, we tear down old-growth trees for ones not as tall as I am. Orwell would have called that “repainting the barn”. 

it’s mighty handy for the developers - put seedlings in the yards they tore down the existing trees for to make more profit on the subdivisions, paid for by the city, no less!

Edited May 16, 2020 by spenser1058

[JFW657]

It would be nice if the city and the county had some sort of ordinance requiring developers to build around old trees of a certain age and size, but that's probably a legally complex process requiring several people to agree on it. You can't just put all the blame in the lap of one person.

What would really be great is if these developers cared enough to do it without having to be forced into it. 

[spenser1058]

29 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

It would be nice if the city and the county had some sort of ordinance requiring developers to build around old trees of a certain age and size, but that's probably a legally complex process requiring several people to agree on it. You can't just put all the blame in the lap of one person.

What would really be great is if these developers cared enough to do it without having to be forced into it. 

Actually, tree ordinances aren’t unusual around the country. Especially in cities with a strong mayor of government, it’s not all that difficult.

The reason Orlando drove the agenda in the region for so long was precisely because of Orlando’s form of government.

What’s astonishing is that Buddy has convinced so many of you he is powerless against developers. In fact, that’s exactly what he wants you to believe because he is a total creature of the development community.

[JFW657]

11 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Actually, tree ordinances aren’t unusual around the country. Especially in cities with a strong mayor of government, it’s not all that difficult.

The reason Orlando drove the agenda in the region for so long was precisely because of Orlando’s form of government.

What’s astonishing is that Buddy has convinced so many of you he is powerless against developers. In fact, that’s exactly what he wants you to believe because he is a total creature of the development community.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it.

A mayor is not a king and there is a body called The City Council who vote on proposed ordinances.

And Orlando does have a rather comprehensive tree ordinance with provisions for protecting larger and older trees....

Quote

 

2B. TREE REMOVAL AND PROTECTION 

Sec. 60.206. Purpose. 

(a) Purpose. The purpose of these requirements is to protect trees and native plant communities. The requirements of this Part are not intended to be punitive or to cause a hardship to any individual, or private or public company that uses reasonable care and diligence to protect trees and native plant communities within the City of Orlando. 

(b) Harmful Activities Prohibited. It shall be unlawful to cut down, damage, top, poison or in any other manner destroy or cause to be destroyed any tree or native plant community as covered by this Part except in accordance with the provisions of this part. 

Sec. 60.207.

Trees Protected by this Part.

Any existing tree with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 4 inches or larger diameter, measured at a height of 4.5’ above the ground shall be considered a protected tree; except for invasive exotic tree species, which should be replaced. It shall be unlawful for any person to directly or indirectly destroy, permanently injure or remove any such tree without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. It shall further be unlawful to encroach into the minimum undisturbed area (see Sec. 60.211), without first obtaining a Tree Encroachment Permit from the Parks Official (or his or her designee) as required by Chapter 65.

Sec. 60.208. Enforcement. 

(a) Violations. Any tree removal in violation of this Part or any failure to maintain or protect trees in accordance with this Part shall be a violation of this Chapter and subject to enforcement in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Code. The property ORDINANCE NO. 2013-74 Page 6 of 48 Landscape_Final_Nov2013.docx

(b) Equivalent Replacement of Tree dbh with Caliper. As part of any enforcement action regarding violation of the requirements of this Part, the Code Enforcement Board may require, in addition to any fines or other enforcement measures, the replacement of any removed or damaged tree(s) with new tree(s) of at least 3 inches in caliper each and having a total tree caliper not less than the dbh of the removed or damaged tree(s). Replacement trees shall be installed in locations approved by the Parks Official.

Sec. 60.209. General Requirements.

(a) Tree Removal Permit Required. Removal of existing 4" dbh or larger trees shall be prohibited without first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit. 

(b) Mitigation. Tree Removal Permits may be approved where site design modifications are not feasible (see Chapter 65), and shall require replacement with a number of trees or caliper inches of trees as determined by the Parks Official to be of equivalent environmental benefit; or shall be remedied by a monetary value (as established in the fee permit schedule). 

(c) Tree Removal Permit Fees. The Parks Official may review and develop every 2 years a fee schedule for tree removal permits. Fees shall be based upon tree species, tree size, and tree health. Changes in the fee schedule shall be approved by the City Council. The fee schedule shall include a review and recommendation of prescribed monetary penalties for the unlawful removal of trees. A tree removal permit fee may be waived if it is determined by the Parks Official that the tree’s health, structural integrity, or location pose a hazard, or that the tree is of an invasive, exotic species.

Sec. 60.210.  Specimen or Historic Trees. 

The Parks Official shall be authorized to officially designate certain protected trees as Specimen or Historic Trees, based on their size, age, historic association, species or unique characteristics. Trees so designated within the City jurisdiction shall be protected  without regard to their location.

(a) Specimen Trees. Specimen Trees are trees that have been identified by the Parks Official as being of outstanding mature size, excellent form, and a healthy example of the species. Specimen trees shall include Champion Trees identified by the Florida Division of Forestry and/or American Forests.

(b) Historic Trees. Historic Trees shall be described as any healthy tree with a trunk caliper of 30" dbh or more. 

(c) Designation. Official designation as either a Specimen or Historic Tree shall require a site visit, tree evaluation, and a letter of evaluation and recommendation filed in the City of Orlando Tree Inventory. Designation as a Specimen or Historic Tree may occur in any of the following ways:

1. A property owner may request such designation at any time. To do so, the property owner shall submit an expert evaluation by a landscape architect, horticulturalist, urban forester, arborist, historian or other horticultural expert.

2. The Parks Official may make such designation as part of his or her review of any application for development under this Chapter, stating in writing the reasons for such designation. The applicant may appeal such designation to the appropriate reviewing authority(s) for the application in question. 

3. The Parks Official may make such designation as part of an overall tree protection program for the City. Such designation shall be subject to approval by resolution of the City Council. 

(d) Protection. The Parks Official may impose requirements for the protection of Specimen and Historic Trees.

(e) Removal and Encroachment. The removal of or encroachment on any designated Specimen or Historic Tree is prohibited unless authorized under a valid tree removal or tree encroachment permit.

http://www.cityoforlando.net/city-planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2014/03/LandscapeCodeFinal2013-12-09.pdf

 

Hopefully this ordinance will keep several of the larger and older trees on the S.Orange mixed use site from the chainsaws if not the Zoi House tree.

.

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by JFW657

[spenser1058]

12 minutes ago, JFW657 said:

Sorry, but I just don't buy it.

A Mayor is not a king and there is a body called The City Council who vote on proposed ordinances.

And Orlando does have a rather comprehensive tree ordinance with provisions for protecting larger and older trees....

Hopefully this ordinance will keep several of the larger and older trees on the S.Orange mixed use site from the chainsaws if not the Zoi House tree.

.

 

Please be so kind as to share the last time city council defeated anything the mayor brought to them. That body is known as a rubber stamp.

And to change the ordinance, the mayor has  the city attorney draw it up and it will pass right through council.

It’s not even that big of a deal. Compare it to what Mayor Bill did walling off entire quadrants from  going to commercial development.

Developers and landowners who saw a big payday coming screamed bloody murder. But it held.

In 18 years, when has Buddy said no to a developer or the DeVos family about anything? 

The whole purpose of a strong mayor is to  determine the vision. Otherwise we’re just wasting our money. The city administrator could do what Buddy’s been doing. But then, he seems to like the model Earl K. Wood provided.

 

 

 

 

 

[spenser1058]

You know what’s funny is how people ever came to regard Orlando’s mayor as such a powerless cipher. For decades, it’s been quite the opposite. 

I wonder if this all goes back when he had the power struggle with Rich Crotty that got him a brief trip to jail. Before that, he was a young man in a hurry with plans of being governor. Then, to dig deep in the psychology box, there was his divorce, which I really know nothing about.

Before that, this was a man ready to take on OUC, the third rail of local politics.

He was still large and in charge for the venues and SunRail (although that was a Jeb! sweetheart deal with CSX).

Then, things slowed to our current stasis.

Edited May 16, 2020 by spenser1058

[JFW657]

9 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Please be so kind as to share the last time city council defeated anything the mayor brought to them. That body is known as a rubber stamp.

And to change the ordinance, the mayor has  the city attorney draw it up and it will pass right through council.

It’s not even that big of a deal. Compare it to what Mayor Bill did walling off entire quadrants from  going to commercial development.

Developers and landowners who saw a big payday coming screamed bloody murder. But it held.

In 18 years, when has Buddy said no to a developer or the DeVos family about anything? 

The whole purpose of a strong mayor is to  determine the vision. Otherwise we’re just wasting our money. The city administrator could do what Buddy’s been doing. But then, he seems to like the model Earl K. Wood provided.

Or could it be that his proposals have been so reasonable that there was no reason to oppose them?

Please be so kind as to share a list of all his initiatives that you found so objectionable that they should have been voted down but weren't simply because the city council are Buddy's personal rubber stamp.

8 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

You know what’s funny is how people ever came to regard Orlando’s mayor as such a powerless cipher. For decades, it’s been quite the opposite. 

I wonder if this all goes back when he had the power struggle with Rich Crotty that got him a brief trip to jail. Before that, he was a young man in a hurry with plans of being governor. Then, to dig deep in the psychology box, there was his divorce, which I really know nothing about.

Before that, this was a man ready to take on OUC, the third rail of local politics.

He was still large and in charge for the venues and SunRail (although that was a Jeb! sweetheart deal with CSX).

Then, things slowed to our current stasis.

This sounds like something that borders on the realm of unhealthy obsession....  

[Jernigan]

Agree with JFW.  That’s not to say we’ve been blessed by benevolent & reasonable developers but perhaps all of those ordinances and planning boards did their job and by the time it gets to Council it’s ready for approval?

 

[jack]

4 hours ago, Jernigan said:

Agree with JFW.  That’s not to say we’ve been blessed by benevolent & reasonable developers but perhaps all of those ordinances and planning boards did their job and by the time it gets to Council it’s ready for approval?

 

If a controversial item makes it to the council and fails to pass, the mayor has failed. A good mayor or administrator counts votes before it is voted on. If he does not have the votes, you don't bring it to the council. Being on the losing end for a mayor is embarrassing at best or signals that you are weak at worst. 

20 hours ago, JFW657 said:

Hopefully this ordinance will keep several of the larger and older trees on the S.Orange mixed use site from the chainsaws if not the Zoi House tree.

.

 

As long as it is reasonable. If a tree is sitting in the middle of the site, it would prohibit any reasonable development in the urban core. 

[jack]

22 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

So, we tear down old-growth trees for ones not as tall as I am. Orwell would have called that “repainting the barn”. 

it’s mighty handy for the developers - put seedlings in the yards they tore down the existing trees for to make more profit on the subdivisions, paid for by the city, no less!

I believe those trees are funded through the tree mitigation program paid by property owners that remove their trees. 

[JFW657]

17 minutes ago, jack said:

As long as it is reasonable. If a tree is sitting in the middle of the site, it would prohibit any reasonable development in the urban core. 

With regards to the proposed mixed use complex on S. Orange, I know they're going to have to take out a lot of trees, but as for the big old ones in there, it seems to me anyway, they should be able to design around them if they try. Especially given that there will probably be several low rise buildings that could be situated and positioned in several different ways.

But I think these architects and developers tend to mentally lock in on a design concept and they put adherence to that above all else, rather than letting the natural surroundings dictate the layout.

As for the big oak at the Zoi House site, If a major high rise goes up there, I seriously doubt they'd save it.

There's probably some kind of special exception in the tree ordinance that allows for circumstances that can't be gotten around.

[spenser1058]

Mark and The Daily City love trees!

https://twitter.com/markbaratelli/status/1262128302019563522?s=21

 

[spenser1058]

Cities with most tree cover: Tampa and NYC (due to Central Park). Are we REALLY going to let Tampa beat us? Nay, I say!

https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/urban-renewal/470152-which-american-cities-have-the-most-trees

From The Hill

SAVE THE TREE!

Edited May 17, 2020 by spenser1058

[smileguy]

23 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Cities with most tree cover: Tampa and NYC (due to Central Park). Are we REALLY going to let Tampa beat us? Nay, I say!

https://thehill.com/changing-america/resilience/urban-renewal/470152-which-american-cities-have-the-most-trees

From The Hill

SAVE THE TREE!

C'mon. 

Orlando isn't even in the data set.

Quote

 

Treepedia measures the canopy cover in cities. Rather than count the individual number of trees, we’ve developed a scaleable and universally applicable method by analyzing the amount of green perceived while walking down the street. The visualization maps street-level perception only, so your favorite parks aren't included! Presented here is preliminary selection of global cities.

More coming soon!

 

http://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia/

[spenser1058]

9 minutes ago, smileguy said:

C'mon. 

Orlando isn't even in the data set.

http://senseable.mit.edu/treepedia/

We just need to be so TREETASTIC they can’t ignore us anymore!

[spenser1058]

Scott J says Hungry Pants’ takeout is as seamless as a pair of skinny jeans but much tastier:

https://www.scottjosephorlando.com/reviews/51-american/5246-takeout-review-hungry-pants

[AmIReal]

Orange and Annie corner- ex Mama B's/ ex future Foxtail has a dumpster and porta potty onsite. Anyone heard anything on this?

[Jernigan]

Per wife, a wooden sign promoting a “new Publix coming soon” on Orange.  
 

She didn’t catch if it said Greenwise though I guess that just about has to be the case.

Still pulling for a Total Wine sized Publix Liquor!  If for nothing else the beer and pubsub pairing events 

[spenser1058]

10 minutes ago, Jernigan said:

Per wife, a wooden sign promoting a “new Publix coming soon” on Orange.  
 

She didn’t catch if it said Greenwise though I guess that just about has to be the case.

Still pulling for a Total Wine sized Publix Liquor!  If for nothing else the beer and pubsub pairing events 

Is this the Lucky’s replacement?

[codypet]

For a second there I thought he meant at the former Mama Bs site 

[spenser1058]

9 minutes ago, codypet said:

For a second there I thought he meant at the former Mama Bs site 

I think there was a deco Publix on that stretch at one point (across the street) before it was replaced by the winged version at Southside Center.

[Jernigan]

Yes sorry on Orange in front of Luckys 

[jgardnerucf]

3 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

a deco Publix on that stretch at one point (across the street) before it was replaced by the winged version at Southside Center.

Where Ross is. You can still see the green marble covered over in some spots.