Significant tree preservation ordinance (T26-0009)

A degreed forester with 30 years of experience said the ordinance confuses significant species with significant individual trees, relies only on live oaks, and needs detailed preservation standards. He offered to help revise it and asked the commission to postpone approval.

Echoed the forester's species concerns and argued the ordinance amounts to a property-rights overreach, since owners could never remove a healthy live oak even when it's a nuisance. He also asked for a deferral.

A first-time attendee from St. James Town asked whether the ordinance would apply to road-widening projects like those that cleared trees along Perkins Road, and whether higher road authorities could override it.