Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tree Removal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board orders replacement trees, fine after unpermitted removals at Ridgedale Road property
Summary
The municipal code enforcement board found 11002 Ridgedale Road in violation for removing protected oak trees without permits, ordered planting of 13 replacement trees by Dec. 10, 2025 and imposed a $4,200 fine; owner said several removed trees were decayed and that some removals preceded their purchase.
The Municipal Code Enforcement Board on Nov. 12 concluded that a property at 11002 Ridgedale Road violated city tree regulations after the city’s arborist documented the unpermitted removal of multiple protected trees.
City arborist Joe Farris summarized his onsite inspection and survey, saying inspectors found 13 sand live oaks removed (totaling about 123 inches DBH). “We found a total of 13 sand live oaks removed from the property,” Farris said as he showed marked photos and measurements to the board.
The property owner, who purchased the house in July 2025 and identified themself as Madison, told the board landscapers removed trees to address safety and decay. Madison said the front yard removals included about seven trees and that some of the trees were rotten or leaning on the house. “Out of seven or eight in the front, two were really rotted,” the owner said, and offered photos from prior visits as evidence that some trees were in poor condition.
Board members discussed the difficulty of proving which removals predated the owner’s purchase and the statutory mitigation matrix. After debate over per‑tree penalty calculations and the practicability of replanting, the board found a violation and adopted a motion that set a monetary penalty ($4,200 total) and required the respondent to plant 13 replacement trees on or before Dec. 10, 2025; if the replacement does not occur, a $25/day fine will begin accruing.
Why it matters: The board framed the case as both an enforcement of protections for mature oaks and as a consequence of unpermitted landscape removals that damage neighborhood tree canopy. The city’s mitigation policy prefers on‑site replanting where feasible; the owner asked whether some replacements could be donated elsewhere or handled via a tree‑bank payment.
Next steps: The owner must coordinate with the city arborist (Joe Farris) to identify appropriate planting locations or, if planting onsite is infeasible, arrange payment into the city’s mitigation fund as allowed by code. The owner may request an extension but must do so formally to the clerk.
