Loading...
10-18-99 v 1 1 AGENDA • REGULAR MEETING OF TREE CONSERVATION BOARD October 18, 1999 7:30 p.m. City Hall Commission Chambers 1. Call to Order 2. Recognition of Visitors 3. Old Business A. Tree Removal Applications 1) None 4. New Business A. Tree Removal Applications 1) S 1/2 of A Part of Block 15 (All) 2) N 1/2 of A Part of Block 15 (All) 3) Lots 3-6, Block 74, Sec.H;Lots 1-6, Block 75, Sec. H;Lots 3-6,Block 71, Sec.H io5. Reports and Announcements 6. Approval of Minutes of Meeting of October 4, 1999 7. Adjournment If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the Tree Conservation Board at the above meeting, he will need a record of the proceedings,and for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record • of the proceedings is made,which record shall include the testimony of evidence upon which appeal is to be based. MINUTES OF TREE CONSERVATION BOARD • October 18, 1999 A regular meeting of the Tree Conservation Board was held Monday, October 18, 1999, in the City Hall Commission Chambers. Present were Mae Jones, Chairperson,Richard Bell, Camille Hunter, Judith Jacobson and Staff Members George Worley and Susan Dunham. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Mae Jones at 7:35 p.m. 2. Recognition of Visitors Mr. Curtis Sanders introduced himself to the Board. Mr. Sanders advised the Board that he spoke with city officials several times regarding the lack of tree barriers at 443 Inland Way in Oceanwalk. Mr. Sanders presented the site map to the Board members for their review. Mae Jones asked if there were tree barriers on the lot now, and Mr. Sanders indicated that there were. Mr. Sanders'complaint is that the site map should not have been approved if tree barriers were not indicated on the site map. Mr. Sanders quoted Tree Ordinance Sec. 23-17,paragraph 4,page 7, subparagraph(f): "A site plan shall include the following: The location of all temporary protective barriers." Mae Jones thanked Mr. Sanders for coming to the meeting and for taking an interest. 3.A. Old Business/Tree Removal Applications 1. Lot 80, Saltair, Section 3: Mr. Steve Cail introduced himself to the Board as the property owner. Mae Jones stated that there was some confusion because Mr. Cail was not on the agenda and the Board members did not receive a revised site plan or amended application. Mr. Cail stated that his understanding of the outcome of the meeting of October 4 was that instead of accepting the • mitigation requirements offered by the Tree Board,he could choose to attempt to locate existing trees on the lot to use for mitigation. It was his understanding that he could then bring such information to this meeting. After discussion among the Board members, Mae Jones stated that Mr. Cail could proceed. Mr. Cail introduced to the Board additional items as information regarding his application. Several of the trees to be removed were in questionable conditions, so Mr. Cail hired Mr. Early Piety, Certified Tree Arborist,to determine the condition of the trees. Mr. Cail presented to the Board pictures of the trees in question. Mr. Piety made notes on the back of the pictures and signed them. The first tree discussed was the 18"bay in the driveway. It is leaning at such an angle that the roots are about to be torn from the ground. Mr. Piety stated that the tree is liable to fall at any time and that it was a safety hazard. The second tree discussed was the 32"twin bay. Mr. Piety agreed that the tree is diseased. It has no canopy and only five small suckers (branches)about 1"in diameter are growing on it. Also, Mr. Cail advised the Board that he has found four trees on the backside of the property to be used for mitigation. Mr. Cail gave Mae Jones an amended site plan showing a 5"maple,a twin maple with two 4"diameter trunks and a 4"oak. Richard Bell advised Mr. Cail that a twin maple with two 4"diameter trunks is a protected tree and cannot be considered for mitigation. Mr. Cail clarified that the 13"sabal palm at the back of the driveway near the stairs will be moved to another location on the lot. He will save the 10"Elm in the front driveway by moving the steps back and shifting the driveway between the steps and the Elm. • Minutes of Tree Conservation Board October 18, 1999 Page 2 • Mr. Cail presented another set of pictures on the 18"maple in the driveway. Mr. Cail stated that Early Piety advised that it was very unusual for a maple to be `pulling out of the ground',that it has had obvious wind damage and the roots are trying to grab back to the ground. The roots are approximately 14"out of the ground on one side and are decaying. Mr. Cail believes it is a safety hazard to the community and especially for children walking on the old pathway going to the back of Howell Park. Mr. Cail requested that this maple not be counted. The Board members agreed that the tree was not a healthy tree and that it should be removed from the mitigation calculation. In addition, Mr. Cail intends to plant tree-sized crape myrtles in the front of the lot and has indicated that he will maintain the crape myrtles as trees. Camille Hunter moved that the Tree Conservation Board accept the Tree Removal Application for Lot 80, Saltair, Section 3,with the following specifications: the trees being mitigated are a 22"elm and a 20"bay. The 32"twin bay and the 18"maple have been determined to be trees that are either dangerous or diseased and do not need to be mitigated,thereby leaving a total of 42"of tree to be mitigated or 21"of replacement trees. There are two trees on site for a total of 9",a 5"maple and a 4"oak, leaving a mitigation requirement of 12". Also,a revised site plan needs to be submitted as part of the approval of this application that will show a twin maple tree that is protected and is not currently shown on site,and the trees being used for mitigation. In addition,the driveway should be revised to indicate preservation of the 10"Elm tree that is currently in the driveway. Mitigation for 27"of palm to be removed is required. This mitigation is going to be satisfied by the transplanting of a 13"palm which is currently shown in the driveway to the back of the lot,also to be shown on the revised plan to be submitted by the end of the week with the barriers also clearly labeled. Judith Jacobson seconded the motion,which passed unanimously. • 4. A.New Business/Tree Removal Applications 1. S %Z of A Part of Block 15: David Clarke introduced himself and Mr. Craig Burkhart as representatives of Beaches Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Clarke advised the Board that this and the next lot on the agenda are side by side and are a derivation of one lot that was subdivided. Richard Bell stated that the position of the trees on the lots did not appear to correspond to the position of the trees on the survey,and that the sizes of the trees were incorrect. Richard Bell also noticed quite a few bore holes in the pine trees and suggested that Habitat for Humanity have a certified arborist look at the health of the trees. The Board discussed with the applicant the possibility of deferring the applications to allow the applicant time to re-measure the trees and have a certified arborist inspect the trees. The Board also requested that the applicant mark the corners of the lots and advised the applicant to submit a new site plan indicating the barriers. Richard Bell moved to defer both applications. Camille seconded the motion,which passed unanimously. 2. N %2 of A Part of Block 15: Deferred along with the previous item. 3. Lots 3-6,Block 74, Sec. H; Lots 1-6,Block 75, Sec. H;Lots 3-6,Block 71, Sec. H: Jay Devine and Lynn Alligood introduced themselves to the Board to present their application. Board members discussed with the applicant numerous problems with the application, i.e.,trees marked for removal on the site but not on the site plan, incorrect setbacks,and incorrect ribbon color on the trees. The Board also addressed concerns regarding the applicant's intent to plant tree-size crape myrtles. Ms.Alligood indicated that they intend to maintain the crape myrtles as trees. The Board requested that the applicant resubmit with a corrected drawing and to make sure that the lot was marked correctly. Richard Bell moved to defer this application until the next Tree Conservation Board meeting. Judith Jacobson seconded the motion,which passed unanimously. • +Minutes of Tree Conservation Board October 18, 1999 Page 2 5. Reports and Announcements • The Board members acknowledged receipt of the letter to William Quattrucci,Jr.,Esquire,from Alan Jensen,Esquire, dated September 29, 1999,regarding 750 Mayport Road which is attached and made a part of these Minutes. George Worley advised the Board that Mr. Quattrucci's client has not submitted a plan on how he is going to meet the mitigation requirements. The Board recommended referring the applicant to the Code Enforcement Board. George Worley will draft a letter to the applicant advising him that he is being referred to the Code Enforcement Board,and will submit the letter to Alan Jensen for his approval before mailing. Camille Hunter again expressed concern regarding 1777 Beach Avenue. Camille Hunter advised the Board that sand is being brought to the lot and the elevation of the lot has changed by at least 10 feet. George Worley advised that he will inspect the lot tomorrow with the building official. The Board members discussed the inspection process to determine if there was any way to insure that barricades are in place. Camille Hunter left the meeting at 10:30 p.m. George Worley distributed to the Board members a certified letter to Merve Russell dated October 12, 1999,a copy of which is attached and made a part of these Minutes. At the time of the meeting,Mr. Worley had not received the receipt showing that Mr. Russell received the letter. Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance: The Board requested that George Worley proceed with having a survey prepared. • George Worley informed the Board that the park formerly known as Tresca, will be dedicated as Tideviews Conservation Park in memory of Carl E.Walker. 6. Approval of Minutes of Meeting of October 4, 1999 Minutes of the Tree Conservation Board meeting of October 4, 1999,were amended as follows: Paragraph 3.A.1."Sable Palms"changed to"Sabal Palms." Paragraph 5."on each side of the lot" changed to"throughout the lot". Judith Jacobson moved to approve the Minutes of the meeting of October 4, 1999 as amended;Richard Bell seconded and the motion carried. 7. Ad'ournment e b g i . ether busineit; ore e :oar' 4e meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. (/ At 11 i 717rr Secretary 1 • Oct-14-99 02 : 02P City p . HUHN J CIVSGIV H 1 1 r 0z -. ,� _ -- - 02 • .. . ALAN C. JENSEN Attorney of Law III 935 North Third Street Poet Office Box 50457 Jacksonville Back,Florida 32240-0437 T.4pbo.t(904)246.2300 Varaisa&(904)246-9960 September 29, 1999 William A. Qtattrvodi, Jr., Esq. 333 First Street North, Suite 305 lacksonviik Bath, FL 32250 RE: Atlantic Beach vs David E. Lewis Tree Conversation Board Dear Mr. Qom: I received today your letter of September 28, 1999. This is the first time that I have heard anything regarding your client's case with the Tree Conservation Board of the City of Atlantic Beach. I have forwarded a copy of your letter to George Worley, who is the Community Development Director of Atlantic Beach and also works with the Tree Conservation Board. I should be discussing the • matter with him shortly. I disagree with your interpretation of the Atlantic Beach Code as set forth in your letter and am of the opinion that those provisions contained in the Code are in fact constitutional. I am familiar with our Tree Conservation Board and that it strictly follows all guidelines and standards set forth in the tree ordinance. Further, I am not in a position to dismiss any proceedings and release your client from any liability. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me. 4.Ycry truly yours, C 'a a A©/sky Cc: David E. Thompson, City Manager George Worley II, Community Development Director 1110 T Z 335 742 272 US Postal Service . Receipt or Certified Mail .1404.-.• • CITY OF No Insuran C. erage •• '1<� tec f�eac4 76mDo rovided. _` :" r �� Sent t no R uuae•., '.nal Mail(Se-,ev e) ii - Se ' Stre �y' 1, 34_Post ce, tate,&ZIPS2ptee ( -- - __ , ( — Postage $ October 12, 1999 Certified Fee /// Special Delivery Fee ( G� Merve Russell Restricted Delivery FA- 2M • { (—_— Construction in i rn Return Receipt S 'wing to 1308 7th Street North — whom a Date Del eyed Jacksonville Beach, FL 32250 a Return Receipt Showing to , Q Date,d Addressee's Address O 0 TOTAL Postage&Fees $ t") Postmark or Date RE: Tree Mitigation requirements for Lots 4 & 5, Block 244 & 24 lf /o - (S- 77 — a. Dear Mr. Russell: On September 20. 1999 the Tree Conservation Board once again reviewed your Tree removal request for lots 4 & 5. block 244 and lots 4 & 5, block 245. Section `'H". As you recall, a number of trees were removed prior to obtaining a permit, by the ordinance these trees require 100% replacement. The Board has reviewed your site in • person and your submitted drawings and determined that 14" of oak and 76.5" of other hardwood trees were removed prior to obtaining,a permit. In light of the fact that you have proposed to clear additional trees for development purposes, the Board has determined that mitigation should be paid into the Tree Mitigation Fund. The replacement requirement totals 90.5" , with mitigation calculated at $82.50 per inch, the required mitigation totals $7,466.25. Because this mitigation is imposed for violation of the Tree Conservation Ordinance you are hereby directed to complete this mitigation, by full payment or by execution of a payment agreement with the city, within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this notice. Failure to comply within that time period will result in this matter being forwarded to the Code Enforcement Board for further action. If you desire to participate in a payment agreement with the city for all or part of the required mitigation, please contact me and I will guide you through that process. Most of the remaining trees were designated by you for removal for future construction on these lots. Review of these proposed removals and calculation of the amount of replacement inches will not be done by the Board until such time as you submit a revised and accurate application to the Board. If you desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, _� y' _ o „--/r: George Worley, II ommunity Development Director cc: Tree Conservation Board Members City Attorney