Board debates specimen-tree rules, appeals and perceived subjectivity in draft

The commission spent substantial time on section 6.7.0.8, the proposed specimen-tree removal provisions. Staff described a layered approach: removal may be permitted following review and approval by the county landscape architect when the tree lacks a favorable assessment, when the specimen tree is located within a required building footprint, fire access, utility corridor, or code-required parking/drainage area, or where preservation would prevent compliance with zoning standards or cause disproportionate site inefficiencies. The draft also requires demonstration that reasonable alternative site configurations were evaluated.

Several board members said the language could become overly subjective and effectively entitle a reviewer to veto a developer’s preservation choices. One commissioner argued that if the code reduces specimen protection to a diameter-based mitigation calculation, "you might as well take the term specimen tree out of this code." Staff and members discussed edits to reorganize clauses, potentially remove the word "reasonable," clarify whether one or multiple alternatives must be documented, and ensure the appeals path (to DRC then to the board) remains available. No final text was adopted; staff agreed to clean and circulate edits for the BOCC packet.