Atlantic Beach panel allows ribbon palms for mitigation but denies other exotic palms' credit at 51 Beach Avenue appeal

The Environmental and Forestry Committee's tree subcommittee voted to partially grant an appeal from property owners at 51 Beach Avenue, allowing ribbon palms to be counted toward required mitigation but denying credit for other requested palm species not on the city's approved list.

The decision followed a staff presentation by Abrielle Jeunesse, who summarized the property's permit history: a building permit and a June 2021 tree‑removal permit included a staff‑approved mitigation plan. Jeunesse said staff declined an August request to receive credit for species not on the chapter 23 approved list because the species list was carefully crafted to reflect hardiness, disease resistance and availability. She told the committee the current mitigation obligation under the older (2021) code is about 180 inches, and that some right‑of‑way removals associated with lifeguard‑station work had mitigation waived.

Landscape architect Gavin Kane, representing owners Robin and Tabitha Sorensen, argued the site presents a protected microclimate — sheltered by adjacent structures, reflective heat and nearby hardscape — that would make some subtropical palms viable in this location. Kane said the owners have committed to replacing trees that fail after planting and stressed there is limited planting area on the lot, which constrained species choices. "These palms would be viable on the site," Kane said, adding the clients would replace specimens if an abnormal cold event killed them.

Committee members questioned precedent for earlier administrative approvals of non‑listed species, the practical enforceability of handshake guarantees to replace failed trees, and disease vulnerability for certain palms. One member noted that earlier administrative exceptions had occurred on a handful of permits but that the city revised mitigation rates in 2021 and staff has since taken a firmer stance on sticking to the approved list.

During deliberations the committee reviewed the mitigation accounting: staff identified roughly 135 inches provided by Washingtonia palms on the planting plan and about 48 inches associated with ribbon palms, which together met the mitigation requirement. Based on that math and the site's particular conditions, the committee motioned to approve the appeal with the condition that only the ribbon palm be allowed to count toward mitigation; the request to allow the Alexandria (King), bridal and foxtail palms to count toward mitigation was denied. The motion was seconded and the chair called for a vote; members present voted in favor with "no objection being recorded."

Jeunesse clarified that the decision does not prevent the owners from planting the other requested palms on private property; it only denies those species' use for mitigation credit unless the list is formally revised. She also noted that formally changing the species list would require an ordinance amendment, a separate process the committee can consider while the city revises chapter 23.

The subcommittee's conditional approval leaves routine requirements intact: the property must meet the minimum number of on‑site trees and the mitigation inches owed to obtain a certificate of occupancy. Kane said the owners intend to follow the city's rules and that some plantings could be scheduled after the winter to optimize establishment. The committee indicated staff and the applicant may follow up by email for any technical clarifications.

The committee did not take any action to immediately revise the approved species list; members suggested the topic be considered during the larger code update later in the year.