9/11/1985 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r ® � Art Challacombe, Chief of Environmental Planning, explained that staff counted 5 trees standing on an aerial photograph taken in 1975, but on an aerial photograph taken in 1984, it is very difficult to confirm that more than 3 trees were standing. This would drop the violation fine down to $2,000 from the original $3,000 fine. He noted that it is up to the Board to decide which of the aerial photographs to use in determining the fine. Commissioner Bird asked if the present owner would have been able to obtain permits to remove these trees under our present ordinance, and Mr. Challacombe stated that he would not, not without a site plan. In addition, he noted that two trees would have been preserved at the time of site plan review. Planning & Development Director Robert Keating advised that staff is looking more and more at the site plans as the feedback they have received from the Board is that the tree protection ordinance is not tough enough. Chairman Lyons opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Randy Thornton, son of V. F. Thornton, quoted a paragraph under Section 20 of the Tree Protection Ordinance: "Any project which has received final site plan or subdivision approval prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be considered exempt from its requirements with the exception of the mangrove alteration or removal provisions, which shall apply prospectively to all such activity beginning on the effective date hereof." Mr. Thornton believed that since this property was subdivided prior to the adoption of the ordinance, no land clearing permit was required -- at least that's how he understood the wording of the ordinance. County Attorney Charles Vitunac asked if this was something that was vested before the ordinance took effect, and Mr. Challacombe stated that no site plan had been submitted; Oslo Park has been subdivided, but it is commercial property. 41 BOOK L,�, f'A�c