ATLANTIC BEACH, Fla. – Months after News4JAX reported on the removal of a 200-year-old live oak in Atlantic Beach, the city has passed tighter restrictions.
“This is the most significant tree ordinance this city has ever really considered,” Ford said. “This is big.”
Erin Sunseri, who lived next door to the tree on West First Street that was cut down, said she was encouraged that the city took the issue up.
“Not really, but I’m glad that it did make a difference and hopefully a path is being paved into the right direction,” Sunseri said.
The Atlantic Beach City Commission unanimously passed the new ordinance on Monday.
PREVIOUS STORY | ‘Living landmark’: Atlantic Beach neighbors voice frustrations after 250-year-old live oak removed for construction
“What we found, and it probably won’t surprise you, is we’ve been losing our tree canopy a lot faster than we’re replacing it,” Ford said. “So, we had to do something to try to mitigate that loss.”
When asked to break down exactly what changed, Ford laid it out simply.
“We are tightening up on the setbacks. We are increasing the mitigation fees on tree removal within our setbacks; we are giving more importance to old-growth trees in the maritime forest, and that’s trees that are 20 inches or greater in diameter,” Ford said. “Those trees are anything from a magnolia to a live oak, pine, cedar, cypress, any of the trees you can imagine being on the island and we consider part of the maritime forest.”
Those trees now carry a new designation.
“The new term that we’re using, if we say landmark tree, it’s one of these trees that we have listed,” Ford said. “It’s only local trees. We’re not trying to protect trees that are either invasive or not characteristic of Atlantic Beach.”
Under the new rules, simply paying a mitigation fee is no longer enough to remove a landmark tree.
“Our prior tree ordinance would allow you to pay some price into the tree fund or replacement trees installed on the property as mitigation for removal of a tree anywhere on the lot and we’re changing that,” Ford said. “We’re now saying that we’re going to deny removal of the tree that should not be removed.”
Ford said the focus on setbacks was deliberate.
“If you can’t build a building in a setback anyways, then why would you allow somebody without any checks and balances to remove trees in setbacks, which are indicated and expected to be green spaces?” Ford said.
Removal requests must first be approved by the Community Development Board. If denied, property owners can appeal that decision to the full City Commission.
Ford also made clear that the ordinance’s intent isn’t to stop development.
“It’s not intended to make it onerous to build on your property,” Ford said. “We want to make sure that we’re paying attention to individual property rights.”
Community members who packed the chamber for the vote were passionate.
“The trees cannot protect themselves from a chainsaw or voice their concerns for the environment,” one community member said. “It’s up to us to do it for them.”
“We have to be focused on this now because we’re just losing this canopy too fast,” Ford said. “We would like for our children to still have some old growth trees when they get to my age.”
A full list of trees and information can be found here.