by KIM HILSENBECK
The trees are not safe yet, but Mayor Lucy Johnson said she is pleased the discussion is moving forward.
City Council moved Tuesday night to suspend further discussion and voting on a proposed tree protection ordinance until after a public hearing.
Two years ago, Johnson tried unsuccessfully to get support for a tree ordinance to protect some of the community’s oldest and largest trees, including Heritage Oaks, from being chopped down for the sake of development.
Tim Miller, an organic farmer in Kyle’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, made an impassioned plea to council to protect the trees. He said the proposed ordinance does not really protect them.
Miller also wants the council to reconsider the ordinance wording.
He was especially upset that the ordinance would not apply to the ETJ where he lives and so would not help save trees in his neighborhood from potential developers and a future road construction project.
A lawyer for the city of Kyle said the ordinance could be extended into the ETJ.
Sophia Nelson, planning director for the city, said she wants the Planning & Zoning Commission to weigh in on this issue. She also asked the council for specific direction regarding the ordinance such as replacements for trees that are removed and preserving existing trees.
Council members Becky Selbera and Brad Pickett said they are against violating private property owner’s rights, which such an ordinance would potentially do.
“Property owners should have the right to do what they want on their own property,” Selbera said. “I’m against setting rules against citizens of Kyle.”
David Wilson and Samantha Bellows-LeMense favor creating incentives for developers and others to retain trees on their property.
“We should have incentives for retaining existing trees,” Wilson said. “That’s the way to go.”
Pickett, who voted against the motion to hold a public hearing, does not want to create a tree protection ordinance.
“There is no middle ground; you either have property rights or you don’t,” Pickett said.
