Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Commissionl <br />Local Planning Agency <br />July 28, 2010 <br />Page 2 <br />is attached and made a part of the minutes), A brief discussion ensued regarding the City's current tree replacement <br />requirements and the removal of undesirable trees. <br />Mr. Parkhurst asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak in favor of, or in opposition <br />to, the request. No one came forward. <br />Fifth Item of Eusiness: SPR 1007: 95 Concord Drive Continued. Waiver request from the replacement <br />requirements for tree removal provided in ULDR Section 314.16, Remedial action, for the property located at <br />95 Concord Drive. <br />Mr. Eric Raasch, Planner I, stated that this item was continued at the June 23, 2010 Planning and Zoning <br />Commission meeting, He said the Commission requested staff collect additional information. Mr. Raasch stated that <br />four of the trees were determined to be undesirable and are exempt from the tree protection requirements. He said <br />the remainder of the trees could not be inspected due to the condition of the property. He said the applicant has <br />agreed to clear a portion of the lot to gain access to inspect the tree stumps. <br />Mr. Raasch stated that he received an updated cost for the trees which reduced the tree bank contribution. <br />Mr. Raasch requested that this item be continued. He said the applicant would like to address the Board. <br />The Commission requested that staff thank the City's arborists for conducting their inspection. <br />Mr. Parkhurst asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Mike Anderson, 105 Roann Drive, Oviedo, Florida <br />came forward. Mr. Anderson explained that the trees were removed because they were hazardous and posed a <br />liability. He said the tree company that was hired to remove the trees stated a permit was not required. He said he <br />was not aware that a permit was required to remove dead trees or the City's tree replacement requirements for the <br />removal of dead trees. <br />Mr. Anderson stated that a Code Enforcement Officer visited the site while the tree company was removing <br />the trees and was shown the trees that were being removed. He said if she had stopped the work at that time he <br />would not be in this situation. He said the tree company employee that removed the trees was unable to attend <br />tonight's meeting; however, he would be available to attend the next meeting He said a neighbor called the City and <br />stated that live trees were being removed on the site and he felt that started this issue. <br />