An iconic Port Royal live oak at the center of a controversy lost its limbs. Then this happened
Several limbs were cut from the main trunk of a live oak on 12th Street in Port Royal on Wednesday to clear way for development, but before the landmark tree was felled, a stop work order halted the chopping.
The mostly bough-less tree, which has been a controversial topic in town, is one of two giant oaks that have been at the forefront of issues for many residents who believe the iconic trees are what define the coastal town.
Branches and limbs covered with Spanish Moss piled around the live oak’s base Wednesday morning, but a stop work order issued by Town staff at about 10:30 a.m. ceased the cutting. Port Royal Town Manager Van Willis said Elizabeth Bergmann had filed an appeal with the Port Royal Zoning Board of Appeals, which triggered the stop work order.
The South Carolina Environmental Law Project is representing Bergmann in her appeal that challenges the Town’s choice to grant the permit, which allowed for severing of the tree. Under the Town‘s current tree ordinance, there are five criteria listed that need to be considered before a permit is granted for tree removal.
“From our understanding of the case, it doesn’t seem that this was an appropriate tree to remove,” said Emily Nellermoe, a staff attorney with SCELP. “There could’ve been other proposals that would’ve left the tree in place and actually would’ve enhanced the value of the property if it was left in its original state.”
Bergmann quickly filed a brief appeal Wednesday morning, the day after the permit to remove the tree was approved, Nellermoe said. SCELP will likely file an amended or supplemental appeal.
Shortly after work on the tree was forced to a halt, concern was expressed about the safety of remaining limbs situated next to power lines. An arborist checked out the partially cut tree and determined that, for safety, two additional cuts needed to be made, according to Willis.
By Wednesday afternoon, one Port Royal resident, who asked not to be identified, said it could be seen that the majority of the lower branches were severed from the tree, and a tree removal service had returned. They were met with a flood of angry residents, he said.
One resident called the partial chopping “truly shocking.”
Coastal Homes and Sunrooms is the builder of five homes planned on 12th street, off Paris Avenue, however, it does not own the property. Permits for three of the five lots have been approved by the Town, Willis said.
As part of the project, the Town received a request to remove two “landmark” trees — one 60 inches in diameter, the other 43. The 43-inch diameter live oak, partially chopped Wednesday, is considered a landmark tree under the town’s recently updated tree ordinance.
“Who are these CHS people and why can they bulldoze live oaks like they’re daisies?” the Port Royal resident said, explaining that it was nearly impossible to remove rotting water oaks from his property when they were imperiling his family home.
A Facebook petition created to save the two live oaks has gathered over 350 signatures and estimated the trees are about 200 years old. “Act Now: Tell the Town of Port Royal to Save the Landmark Live Oaks on 12th Street!” the petition is titled.
“Moss covered, mature live oaks and marsh views are one of the defining features of Port Royal’s character and identity and one of the primary reasons people live in, visit, and love the town,” the still-live Facebook petition said. “The issuance of the tree removal permit by the Town of Port Royal is imminent. It is up to us to help save these grand trees.”
Ordinance passed four years ago
In 2018, the Town passed an ordinance to improve protection for trees with the help of the Coastal Conservation League. While there is no outright ban on cutting down landmark trees, the ordinance comes with tighter restrictions and regulations.
According to the Town’s tree ordinance, permits are required for removing any tree larger than 8 inches in diameter at breast height, or any tree designated as a specimen or landmark tree — those that stand out because of their species and size.
A building official can green-light the removal of specimen and landmark trees for novel development, but the developer has to plant additional trees or pay fees to make up for the loss. Developers also must consider reasonable design alternatives to preserve the specimen or landmark trees, the ordinance notes.
Jessie White, South Coast Office director at Coastal Conservation League, said all along the league’s position has been that there exist design alternatives for the retention of at least one, if not both, of the landmark trees in question while still allowing the lots to be developed.
Language within the ordinance could’ve been interpreted in a way that “the town has the ability to deny the permits,” White said, pointing to a mandatory clause that says “reasonable design alternatives shall be explored to preserve those trees.” The purpose of strengthening the Town’s ordinance in 2018 was to save the trees.
“Unfortunately, a lot of times we don’t realize that language used in ordinance[s] or in code regulations are open in more than one interpretation,” she explained. “We don’t always know when things are weak until there’s some pressure added to them.”
White said there’s no doubt further strengthening of the tree ordinance is needed and the Coastal Conservation League is committed to making that happen to ensure what the community embraces is protected.
Like White, Nellermoe with the SCELP explained that on the face of it, the updated ordinance appears “pretty strong,” but it comes down to implementation.
“The factors that were chosen to be considered have to be considered and if they’re not, then the town should not be afraid to deny a tree removal permit,” she said. “And if someone illegally removes the tree, they should also not be afraid to enforce it to the fullest extent.”
Limbs cut, but not entirely removed
The partially cut live oak, the smaller of the controversial two trees, still stands at the front of the property. With the stop work order in place, it means what’s left of the tree is safe for now, as developers cannot continue work, Willis said. The larger of the landmark trees, which sits at the back of the property, is still fully intact.
On Thursday morning, the site was pin-drop silent; a few purple “No Trespassing signs” dotted the property.
Willis said moving forward, the zoning board of appeals will hear the appeal to the issued permits “in the next month or so.”
“There’s been some concern raised about the fate of those two trees on the property and how the Town’s ordinance addresses those,” he said. “We have an obligation to work within the parameters of the law, which we will do.”
In July, dozens of residents turned out to protest CHS’s plan to cut down the two live oaks.
“The trees make Port Royal Port Royal,” one resident told Town Council members.
Alongside the aesthetic and historical importance of the live oaks, the Coastal Conservation League reminds that the trees “provide a variety of public benefits, including absorbing stormwater runoff, air filtration, cooling temperatures, enhancing property values, and improving quality of life.”
White urged those at the July workshop meeting to look at the Duck Blind development only a few blocks from 12th Street where small and individually designed buildings blended into the landscape and many oaks remained standing.
At the meeting, Mayor Joe DeVito said Town Council members agreed that they, too, didn’t want the trees removed, according to previous Island Packet reporting. DeVito said then that the Town may need to consider bringing requests to cut down trees of a certain size before the council.
This story was originally published August 11, 2022 at 10:09 AM.
