12/18/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Staff also examined the long term staffing commitment that would be necessary to implement a tree protection program which includes single-family lots. It is estimated that approxi- mately 25,000 single-family lots presently exist in the unincorporated portion of the county. This number will in- crease dramatically as new development extends into western fringe areas and Orchid island. Increased costs to single-family construction will also occur as a result of implementing an extended program. It is estimat- ed that a required tree survey for a single-family lot would average between $140 and $200 when performe& by a professional surveyor. Additionally, home owners would be required to install dry wells and other protective measures to ensure that protected trees are not disturbed by fill material. The benefits of an extension of the tree protection ordinance to include single family units do not appear to justify the substantial increased staff time required for adequate imple- mentation. On a 10,000 square foot lot, only 40% or 4,000 square feet would be eligible for tree protection under the current ordinance. This number is further reduced by the required septic tank and drain field area (600 - 900 square feet). Since the major objective of the tree protection ordinance is to protect larger, more mAture trees which cannot be replaced by a comparable size tree and because protecting trees of that size would often leave insufficient area on- a single-family lot on which to build, it appears that the extension of tree protection to single-family lots would have limited benefit. The Existing Tree Protection Program The Board of County Commissioners has indicated on several occasions in the past that the tree protection ordinance is not accomplishing its intended objectives. This opinion arose from observation of extensive tree removal from non-residential sites. Although consistent with the tree protection ordinance, extensive tree removal is allowed on non-residential sites because of several combined factors in the County zoning code and the tree protection ordinance, factors which limit total protection. The most significant factor is the large amount of buildable area allowed in non-residential zoning districts. The degree of tree protection in the existing ordinance is directly related to the maximum buildable area allowed within various zoning districts. The greater buildable areas allowed within the commercial and industrial districts combined with extensive stormwater management requirements reduces the ability of staff to protect desirable trees on a. site. Alter- native methods of extending tree protection to the existing ordinance are: 1) Increasing landscape planting requirements; 2) Allowing staff to require design changes on site plans where protected trees would be removed (staff currently recommends such changes, but cannot enforce compliance); 3) Reducing the allowable buildable area in non-residential zoning districts. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners not extend the tree protection program to include single famil lots of o Commission Planning & improving J ie acre or less. Staff further recommends that the consider conducting a joint workshop with the Zoning Commission to discuss alternative methods for the County tree protection program. 91 DEC �. 79sooK ��,U�