Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
113 homeowners ask Ocean Pines to stop clear‑cutting, citing ARC rules
Summary
A statement signed by 113 homeowners asked Ocean Pines to enforce ARC and CPI guidelines and halt what they described as systemic clear‑cutting of lots since 2020; two residents spoke during public comment requesting reevaluation and stronger enforcement.
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A group of Ocean Pines homeowners delivered a signed statement and public comments urging the association to enforce its Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and CPI guidelines to prevent clear‑cutting of lots.
Tim, speaking for the group, said he was presenting a statement signed by 113 homeowners alleging "systemic tree clear cutting of new home lots in Ocean Pines," a trend they say has increased since 2020 and "contradicts the long standing mission of our community and the specific mandates within our governing documents." Tim asked the ARC and CPI to adhere to guidelines that, the statement said, prohibit removal of trees over 6 inches in diameter without consent.
Cindy Hoffman (23 Watergreen), who said she was one of the signatories, told the board she has seen lots cleared where builders removed dozens of trees and asked the board and management to "implement our own regulations that require the HOA to preserve the natural beauty and prevent indiscriminate clear cutting of our properties." She noted county mitigation requirements do not replace the scale of mature native trees and asked the association to return to earlier interpretations of tree preservation.
Why it matters: homeowners said the community’s park-like character is at stake and asked the board to clarify legal hierarchy and enforcement (the statement disputed a prior CPI assertion that the county permit plan supersedes Ocean Pines guidelines and said the association’s more restrictive covenants remain binding).
Board response and next steps: the president accepted the comments and the board received copies of the signed statement. No formal vote or directive was recorded on the record during the meeting. Residents also raised traffic and speed-sign requests in the same public‑comment period.

