SOUTHPORT — A contracting business out of Supply will have to pay a fine for removing dozens of trees with no permit, though the company got off easier than the City of Southport’s tree ordinance mandates.
READ MORE: Slights abound as new Southport mayor, alderman sworn in and take first votes
David and Terri Smith of Wayne Smith and Son appeared before the Southport Board of Aldermen on Wednesday requesting the city waive a fine levied against them. While under contract to build a home at 683 Carolina Bay Court in Indigo Plantation, the company cleared land where the house’s driveway and future pool would be located.
However, it did not have a permit to do so, and according to Southport’s tree ordinance, the property owner must pay a fine equal to each square foot of the property, not just the land cleared.
In the Smiths’ case, that would be $46,583.
“My wife, Terri Smith, and my son and I have worked very hard to build a reputation of integrity and honesty,” David said at the aldermen meeting. “We respectfully ask you to consider to waive the penalty, which will be financially devastating to our small family business.”
According to the Smiths’ topographic survey, the property contained 119 oak, 69 pine, nine dead, and 12 unnamed trees.
David said it was his “sincere belief” the company submitted all the required documents and told the aldermen he got permission from Indigo Plantation’s property owners association to remove the trees. He said the property was not clear-cut, as only a limited amount of trees in the development’s footprint were removed.
A contractor since the late ‘90s, David said he was not aware the city’s tree ordinance had changed and operated like normal when going through the contracting process. The city added its tree ordinance in 2018 and has since updated its entire UDO in 2020.
The company did submit a building permit — the application includes tree permit requirements — on the day the trees were removed.
Terri admitted she was the one to submit the application; she said she didn’t see anything about having to obtain a tree permit, except for a button on the side that did not work.
Still, several aldermen thought the mistake did not justify waiving the punishment set forth in ordinance. Robert Carroll motioned to charge the Smiths, who are not the property owners but have decided to take responsibility for the mistake, the full amount. He said the circumstances don’t make sense to lower the fine.
“I think that the difference would be is if you got a permit and cut trees that you hadn’t been permitted for, that would be, in my mind, a situation where you could consider bringing that fine down — they had the permit, they just went outside of the rails,” Carroll said. “In this case, they went off the rails.”
Along with Carroll, both aldermen Lowe Davis and Karen Mosteller were against differing from the ordinance.
“It will simply undermine this tree protection law,” Davis said.
The opposing aldermen pointed out the tree removal requirements are easily accessible — on the first page of the UDO, in a development guide on the website. They also mentioned reporting in the State Port Pilot on the tree ordinance.
“I’m at a loss because if the city doesn’t enforce its own rules and regulations, then what’s the point of having them?” Mosteller said.
Carroll’s motion to charge the family failed 4-3, with Mayor Rich Alt breaking the tie.
The other aldermen — newbies Frank Lai, president of the Indigo POA, and Rebecca Kelley and Marc Spencer — did not advocate for the full penalty, pointing out the whole property was not cleared, therefore, it was unfair to charge for the whole lot.
Alt said he wanted to see a process more like the judicial system, which has a maximum penalty but gives leeway to judges to issue a lighter sentence.
Ultimately, Kelley put forth a motion to require the Smiths to follow a mitigation plan set forth by the city and pay for the amount of land cleared, which was estimated at 25%.
If the $46,000 figure represents the entire property, the Smiths will most likely pay around $11,000, though the city has yet to determine the final amount.
Tips or comments? Email [email protected].
Want to read more from PCD? Subscribe now and then sign up for our morning newsletter, Wilmington Wire, and get the headlines delivered to your inbox every morning.
