Loading...
1-14-2009City of Atlantic Beach Tree Conservation Board Regular Meeting Minutes January 14, 2009 A regular meeting o f the City o f Atlantic Beach Tree Conservation Board was convened at 7:00 pm on Wednesday January 14, 2008 at the Adele Grage Cultural Center, located at 716 Ocean Boulevard in Atlantic Beach. In attendance were Board 11~embers Stephanie Catania, Jim 11~cCue, Brea Paul, ll~aureen Shaughnessy, and Principal Planner/Sta f f Liaison Erika Hall. Board ll~ember Carole Varney had previously tendered her resignation from the Board, effective December 31, 2008, and that seat remained vacant. 1. CALLTO ORDER ^ Chairperson Maureen Shaughnessycalled the meeting to order at7:00pm. 2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS ^ Ms Shaughnessy welcomed Mr, Frank Redmond, whom the Board Member Review Committee had recommended and the City Commission had confirmed to fill the Tree Board's vacancy, effective February 1, 2009. Mr. Redmond introduced himself and shared some of his experiences in the tree industry with the Board and audience, He said he was there to observe and learn how the Board operated prior to his first official meeting, 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair Shaughnessy called for a motion to approve the minutes from the October 22nd regular meeting. MOTION: Brea Paul moved to adopt the minutes of the October 22nd, 2008 regular meeting, as written. SECOND: Jim McCue seconded the motion, DISCUSSION: There was no further discussion. VOTE: Unanimous,4-0 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ^ There was no unfinished business up for consideration. Page 1 of 6 nzrtes d~ the ~crnc~ar~ 14', ,~~ Regulrrr~ 11~eeting o~the free ~Cor~se~vat©n Bo~arc~ 5, NEII' ~I~S~NES a. TREE o9-ooiox~.~S 3SO Seminole Road Ford for attingly~ Tree removal for residential redevelopment Brandon Ford of The Ford Company, lnc, appeared before the Beard to answer questions regarding this application and the ensuing redevelopment of the lot. MoTlo~l: dim Moue moved that the Board defer review of this application, pending the applicant's submittal ~~ a complete and accurate required per the permit application instructions. There was no second and the motia~n failed. llllr. McCue ached Nis. Hall why she had forwarded an incomplete application to the Board for review. Ms. Hall responded that the property was proposed to be redeveloped with a new single~family hams. However, atthe tune ofappliGativn and preparation of packets for Tree Board members, no construction plans had been provided for Development Review. She noted that the applicant. is requesting to remove the only two ~2~ trees remaining an the lot. Ms. Hall stated that she felt the submitted survey was sufficiently dimensioned to show the location of those trees -one in the front interior gone was clearly below the regulation threshold, and the other, though regulated, situated on the property line, the removal of which is supported by the adjacent property owner. Mr. McCue stated that he could clearly see the dimensions on the submitted survey, but it lacked the required interior/exterior zone delineation, and there was nothing showing the Board what was being built. Stephanie Catania interceded, expressing her confidence that the City's professional staff would ensure that the new construction adequately met all other building code and land development regulations, and that Ms. Hall would not present an application unless she felt there was enough information for the Board to act on. Ms. Catania asked if Mr. Ford was the property owner, to which he replied that he was the Project Manager. Mr. Ford explained that the new construction would take up virtually all of the buildable area, thus requiringtheremoval ofthe elm, and that the adjacent property owner had wanted to get rid of the other tree for a number of years as well. Ms. Catania asked where the stormwater facility would be located, to which Mr. Ford responded that it would be located under the driveway. Brea Paul asked if a landscape plan had been submitted. Ms. Hall reminded the Board that landscape plans are not required by the City for single- and two-family residential development, but tree replacement or mitigation plans are often requested by this Board far residential properties that remove and/or must replace a large quantity of trees. Typically these are not expected to be submitted until at least six months into the construction. Ms. Shaughnessy noted that it appeared the required mitigation would be ~3"ofhardwoods, and called fora motion to approve, MOTION: Stephanie Mania moved that the Tree Board approve application TREE ~~- 00~.01~~5, request to remove a total of two ~~~ trees, or ~~", from the property located at X50 Seminole Road, for the purpose of residential redevelopment, requiring standard mitigation of 13-' for thane ~~" of trees regulated bey +Chapter ~3 of the Municipal ~ocle of Page 2 of ~ 'notes r~~ f the ~~r~~~a~y ~'~, Z~~9 ~~~ulc~r eetan,~ ref the ~'re~ ~+orrservc~t~Qrr Bor~ra' Ordinances for the City of Atlantic Beach. Brea Paul seconded the motion and it carried b a vote of 3~1, with Jim McCue dissenting. b. TREE ~9-OU1B113f 3~1,5~" Street ~+Gallimore for Matchett~ Tree removal for residential addtion,~renovation IVlike ~allimore of Gallimore Construction, appeared before the Board to answer questions regarding this application and the proposed renovations to the property, fills, Shaughnessy confirmed that this property is located in Old Atlantic Beach and is required to conform to the core City development standards, including the prevision of a shade tree in the front ard. guard members explained to Nor! ~allimore that, though he awed no mitigation for y the trees being removed, he would be required to place a shade tree in the front yard, since the removal of the tree palms resulted in only a single palm remaining in the front yard, to avoid a code violation, MOTION: Jim McCue moved that the Tree Beard approve application TREE BJ-o~~011~~, est to remove a total of three 3 trees or 4~,", fron7 the ro arty located at 3115" raga ~ ~ p p Street for the purpose of residential addition,lrenovation, requiring no mitigation since none of the trees to be removed are regulated Eby Chapter ~3 of the Municipal Code of Ordinances for the City of ~-tlantc Beach, but noting that the property is located within Old Atlantic Beach, which requires both citywide minimum tree standards of one ~~~ 4" caliper tree per ~,50~ square feet of lot area, as well as OAB standards of one ~1~ shade tree in the front yard and another shade tree elsewhere on the property. Stephanie Catania seconded the motion and it carried unanimously, ~-8. c. TREE (~9~00101137 39B Dudley Street ~Millard,~Bottom line Ventures, Inch Tree rernoval for residential development Tim f~illard of Bottom Line Ventures, Inc, appeared before the Board representing this application. The Beard reviewed llllr, l'~illard's request to remove twelve ~1~~ trees, or 137", and explained mitigation requirements to him, noting that I~'ls, 'Hall had calculated a surplus of 18o.7S" on the lot which would satisfy these mitigation requirements. At that paint, Mr, Millard asked if he could remove six ~~ additional pines. Ms, Shaughnessy recalculated the required mitigation while Ms. Fall noted those trees on the tree inventory and the mitigation worksheet. MOTIOI'~: Stephanie Catania moved that the Board approve application TREE D~- Q~31t~1137 to remove a total of eighteen ~18~ trees, or X01", as shown on the submitted tree survey, for the purpose of new residential development of a vacant, unimproved lot, requiring standard mitigation of ~.5~0" for those 1SB" of trees regulated by Chapter 23 of the Municipal Code of Ordinances for the City of atlantic Beach, and noting that mitigation is successfully accomplished by the on-site preservation of 153.50", as also shown on the survey subrrxitted with this application. Brea Paul seconded the motion and it carried unanimously, 4-i~, Page 3 ~- +~ Il~i~t~~t~s ~f t~t~~anuary 14, Z4Q9 ~eg~~f~r.~~eting of tine Tree ~'c~nser~atintt ~~ard +~. STAFF ~,IAIS~~V'S REPC~~iT a. Applications, Appeals, Mitigation ~ bode Enforcement i. willia~nsJHagert~ application ~15~5 5elva Marina ~rive~ Ms. Hall reminded the Board that this was an application to remove two trees for the purpose of residential renovatian~addition, previously deferred by the Board due to insufficient submittal, and subsequently withdrawn by the applicant, Ms. Hall said that she had received a call from the applicant the morning following the City Commission's approval of the revised tree ordinance. He asked ghat his options were to obtain a tree removal permit under the new regulations. Nis. Hall told the Board, as she had explained to Mr. Hagerty that, since the original application was submitted prior to the ordinance revisions, he could follow the old procedure: paying na application fee, but providing all submittal materials as previously requested and go before the Baard, which waufd probably assess the standard mitigation of ~B". Alternatively, he could re-activate his application and follow the new procedure: paying a ~ZS.aa application fee, undergoing administrative review ~staff~ which required submittal of no additional materials, but would require a higher rate of mitigation ~~:~ since the 36" oak proposed far removal is now classified as a heritage treed of 36". Ms. ball reported that Mr. Hagerty chose the ascend option and has already paid far and picked up his permit, and will be supplying documentation of mitigation prier to final approval of the open building permits. ii. 8ranholm appeal ~3~~ 5~" Street Ms. Hall reported that a mitigation agreement acceptable to all parties had been drafted and that the City Commission had approved it at last Monday's meeting. Though this does allow Mr. Branholm additional time to accomplish mitigation, there is a prevision that states that it must be completed either by planting or payment into the Tree Fund no later than C~ecem~ber 2a~a, whether or not construction is completed an the property. iii. Aryan mitigation ~~~5t~ East Gast DriWe~ Ms. Hall reminded the Baard that an additional 1Z" oak was removed Pram this property summer ~aa7~, and that landscape architect Kelly Elmore had sent an email to Rick Carper stating that the equivalent value of the mitigation would be paid into the Tree Fund for this removal. A few months later, the property owners obtained a temporary C~ and began occupancy without meeting this final mitigation. Then in October ~aaS, they applied far a final C~ so that they could open an account far water/sewer service -apparently it had been in the developer's name aver the preceding year, The Building ~epartnnent contacted Nis. Hall to find out if she had any outstanding, issues with the property. She relayed the mitigation information, which was forwarded to Mrs. Bryan, who subsequently called and asked if she could planttrees instead of paying into the Tree Fund. Ms. Hall said that she approved the planting of 3-4" hardwoods, but asked Ms. Bryan to please submit a diagram showing the proposed location of Chase trees so that she could inspect and monitor them. Ms Hall said that she never heard back from Mrs. Bryan so, an Havember 11~~', she sent a certified "notice of mitigation due" letter to the Bryans, Page 4 of 6 Minutes a~'the.Iantt~ar~ l4, .~(~~~ Re~uiar 1~eeting of the Free conservation Boar' and included a copy of the email from Mr. Elmore obligating the payment. However, the Bryans never accepted that certified letter, and. it was returned to the City unopened on December ~7, ~ooB. Thus, Ms. Hal! said that she will be turning this case over to Code Enforcement. ~. Chapter ~3 Revisions Ms. Hall advised the Board that the City Commission had approved and adopted the proposed revisions to Chapter ~3 at second reading on Monday, January ~2, ~oo~. She supplied each member with a copy of the new Chapter 23• in publication format, which included a table of contents. She said that she hoped to have the revised Recommended Tree list and Prohibited Tree list ready by next month. Mr. McCue asked Ms. Hall to review those regulations that had been included as extra measures to protect the coastal dune and marshJwetlands vegetation. Ms. Hall reviewed a few definitions, the mitigation requirements, as well as general prohibitions that work to protect those environmentally sensitive areas. +~. Adopt-a-Tree and Florida Arbor Dad Ms. Hall reported that the Adopt-a-True event held the previous Saturday, January ~o, in support of Florida Arbor Day, was a great success in comparison to last year's. She said that there were a total of 1~ attendees, including two spouses and two children, in addition to Certified Arborist Early Piety, City Staff from Public works, Public Safety and Planning Departments and four Tree Board members. Mr. Piety, Staff and Board members collected Adopt-a-Tree forms from and discussed various tree and vegetation concerns with residents, and planted two new oafs in Jordan Park. 7. LE~T~~~ CAF ~~09 t~F~~~ER Ms. Hall said that she was unsure if Mr. Redmond would be attending, in an official capacity tonight or not, so she had added election of new officers dust in case he was and the Board wished to take care of this business tonight, However, since he was attending as an observer only, this item. would be moved to the agenda forthe February meeting. a. General Guidelines forthe Rules and of Procedure. In preparation for the new year and new member, Ms. Hall handed out a brief outline of meeting procedures used by the Community Development Board in conducting public meetings,Ihearings, and noted that Director Sonya doerr is in the process of organizing a training session. Several members noted that they had been to previous sessions, but felt they were of no benefit. Stephanie responded that the she attended the last such session, and while much of the material was geared towards the CD Beard, there was some useful information. Ms. Hall added that it was her understanding that the topic of the upcoming training would be more generalized to apply to all boards, and that attendance would be mandatory, per theCity Manager, ~. ~GALEN~AR Ms. Hal! reminded the Board that with adoption of the ordinance revisions, meetings would now be held only once per month, She confirmed the Board's previous decision to meet on the second Wednesday of each month, at the same time and location. She said that she wound Page 5 of Minutes ~f the ,Trrnu~r~ I ~, ~0~~ Regut~r ~leetr'ng a~t~e ~'r~e Conservation ~'oard update the meeting calendar and have copies mailable at the next meeting, scheduled for I~lednesday, i~ebruary ~1, ~~~~. ~/r ~~~~V~~~~ 1 ~ Chairperson Maureen Shaughnessy adjourned the meeting at 8:45pm. ~' ~~..~~'~ si~N~D: Maureen Shaughnessy, Cher arson ~~- z/it AT~'EST Erma i+-lall, Principal Manner/Staff Liaison ~~ f' //, ~C9~~ Date Page b +a~ 6~