Board upholds DRC on Wekiva Springs tree removals, then cuts penalty to $40,916 citing unique hardship

The Orange County Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday upheld a Development Review Committee decision that found a subdivision developer responsible for unpermitted removal of protected trees, but the board later exercised discretion to lower the financial penalty.

Zoning staff told the board that 20 protected trees (totaling 233 caliper inches) had been removed from an open‑space tract in the Wekiva Springs Cove subdivision and that the removal was not shown on approved tree preservation plans. Because the developer submitted an amendment to the preliminary subdivision plan after the county's new tree ordinance took effect (March 15, 2024), staff said the mitigation and penalty calculations should be applied under the new code. Using the new code's measurements and a 3:1 replacement ratio, the ordinance yields a penalty figure staff calculated as roughly $74,094 or on‑site replacement of 699 caliper inches.

Applicant representatives, including engineer Jose Chavez and consultant Angel de la Portillo, argued the trees had been removed in 2021 under the earlier code and urged the board to apply the older penalty schedule or otherwise exercise discretion. They said the removals occurred while a now‑terminated site contractor performed clearing and that the property owner purchased entitled land already under construction.

Brooke Tolbert, the zoning division's arbor section chief, summarized the enforcement record: a tree survey was requested during a 2023 amendment review but the applicant responded that no additional trees were being removed; zoning later inspected the site in 2025 during permit closeout and discovered the unpermitted removals. Tolbert said the code requires mitigation under current rules for any amendment to an approved plan that impacts trees not originally contemplated.

The board first voted unanimously to uphold the DRC's Sept. 24 decision and the zoning manager's notice of violation. Later, after discussion about fairness, timing of removals and the contractor's role, the board voted 4–3 to impose a reduced remediation requirement: $40,916 in tree replacement (or planting 386 caliper inches on‑site) or a combination of replanting and payment. Commissioners framed that action as case‑specific and not intended as a broader precedent for future matters.

Staff told the board the developer must submit a revised mitigation plan and that permitting staff would expedite review once the applicant provides required materials. County staff indicated they would work to process the revised subdivision permit and minimize added delay, but the developer was warned the county must still ensure compliance with the mitigation ordered by the board.

The action resolves the enforcement case pending several ministerial steps (revised mitigation plan, verification of replacements, or payment into the county tree fund) and the board emphasized that future PSP amendments will be treated under the ordinance in effect at the time of the amendment.