FAIRHOPE, Ala. — One thorny issue in the Publix Super Market construction project debate that has received little public attention amid city citations, a stop-work order and a state notice for environmental law violations at the site, got an airing during Thursday’s Tree Committee meeting.

Committee member Maria Gwynn presented a document setting out what she claimed were six violations of the tree and landscape ordinance at the Publix site, but the committee focused on one in particular.

That allegation says a required tree inventory of the project site was ignored by the city during approval of the project. The allegation has been made before, by local activist Paul Ripp following information he obtained from the city, but it had not received a formal discussion at a city meeting until Thursday.

The possible evidence supporting the allegation is a tree inventory dated Jan. 8, 2008, conducted by Volkert & Associates, the engineering firm for Regency Centers, the developer of the planned unit development on Greeno and Parker roads, which is anchored by the 54,000-square-foot grocery store.

That inventory consists of a map that identifies an array of trees on the project site. It was attached to Gwynn’s six-page document, which the committee examined and discussed in some detail toward the end of a two-hour meeting.

“We were led to believe there was no tree inventory done and that there were no big trees on the lot,” Gwynn said. “But (the inventory) shows some 50 trees in excess of (24 inches in diameter at chest height). Everything there was clearcut. Why did this happen?”

Any tree larger than a certain size is designated as a “significant tree” and is covered by the city’s tree and landscape ordinance, which sets out rules for protecting, cutting and mitigating the removal of trees of that size or larger as well as the process for doing so.

The ordinance requires that the city horticulturist and city planner review and accept a site plan that includes such an inventory “before a building permit can be issued or preliminary plat approval can be obtained and prior to any clearing of property for development.”

The ordinance also requires that a “full landscape plan” be submitted as part of the preliminary site plan. It must include the location, species and diameter of significant trees, “indicating those to be retained for credit and those to be removed, along with written justification for removal of any significant trees.”

According to the ordinance, the city horticulturist must review the full landscape plan and it states: “If deficiencies are found, the landscape architect/designer will be required to revise the plan before a building permit will be issued. In cases of permit denial, a written explanation must be given by the city horticulturist. A revised plan may be resubmitted for evaluation and shall be reviewed according to the same procedures as the initial submission.”

The committee member agreed that they had been told by the city horticulturist at a meeting last year that no tree inventory had been done or was needed for the site, based on a tour of the site she had made with the owner of the property.

“It’s clear that the ordinance required a tree survey,” said Councilman Rick Kingrea and a member of the committee.

Committee member Tom Ellis said, “The tree ordinance was not followed the way it should have been.”

Committee member Paul Fontenot said that despite any possible irregularities in how the ordinance was followed that the overall landscaping of the site has exceeded the city’s legal requirements, and that the developer had the right to remove all the trees identified on the inventory.

The committee members reached a consensus that it was unclear to them how the city had used or not used the required tree inventory, which they had been told did not exist and only learned of after Ripp’s public information request.

“Somebody needs to find out what happened,” Kingrea said. “There should be a paper trail.”

Kingrea added that is very possible the city followed all appropriate procedures, and that he hopes that is what happened.

The committee voted unanimously to send a letter to Mayor Tim Kant, asking him to investigate the use or lack of use of the tree inventory by the city during preliminary plat approval of the project. Kingrea abstained from the vote, apparently because of having represented a client before the committee and city under what he claimed were similar circumstances. That client received a “six-figure” fine from the city, and Kingrea said during the meeting that the city needed to be consistent in how it handled these kinds of situations.

The committee discussed the need for setting up a review procedure to ensure that possible violations of the city’s tree and landscape ordinance be caught earlier in the process. The committee also discussed whether there was anything the city could legally do at this point because it had given approval to the project.

The city horticulturist, planning director and Regency Center’s spokesman could not be reached for comment by press time.

“We can fix the ordinance all we want, but if they’re not going to enforce it, what does it matter?” Gwynn said.

In other business, the committee:

• Approved a statement prepared by committee chairman Bobby Green, which he said he planned to present at the April 27 council meeting, regarding one project of the committee.

“The Tree Committee, including former members, councilmen Dan Stankoski and Bob Gentle, plus current member (Kingrea), have expressed concerns over the interpretation and enforcement of the tree and landscape ordinance,” the statement reads. “With this in mind, the Tree Committee is beginning a process of ordinance revision to ensure the Planning and Zoning (Commission) and council approval of all projects, including specific conditions of approval, are implemented.”