Glynn County permits pruning and potential removal of large live oak at 620 Majo; county arborist to decide

The Glynn County Island Planning Commission on May 20 approved pruning of a large live oak at 620 Majo and authorized removal at the discretion of the county arborist, after hearing conflicting views from the property's new owners, neighbors and county staff.

Christopher Carey, a planner with Glynn County Planning and Zoning, presented the village preservation design-review and the associated tree-removal request (TR-25-2). Carey said the county arborist and the applicant's arborist both recommended pruning and that the county arborist requested stronger evidence for removal, such as building damage. “Based on the provided assessment by the arborist and my site evaluation, I would like to see stronger evidence for removal,” the county arborist Michael Pavis wrote in his memo, which Carey summarized for the commission.

Applicant Ally Jett, who with her husband Patrick Jett closed on the house March 31, said the tree has shifted since she first viewed the property and described sprouts pushing up through interior floorboards. She told commissioners insurers either denied coverage or required work; she said she found one company that would provide conditional coverage for 60 days while the owners take action. “By the time we came to do our last walk through on the day of closing, that tree had moved. There is no daylight. It is now sitting on the roof,” Jett said, describing what she said is active movement and interior damage.

Neighbors spoke against immediate removal and urged a cautious, least-invasive approach. Neighbor Jake Erwin said the live oak is an old and defining tree for the street and urged commissioners to begin with pruning and additional professional assessment. Erwin and other neighbors offered to pay for an independent inspection and urged the commission to consider cabling, bracing or other mitigation.

Commission discussion focused on balancing immediate life-safety and insurability concerns against preserving a roughly 350-year-old live oak. Staff said that if the county arborist determines removal is necessary the tree can be removed but the applicant must submit a village-preservation tree plan for replacement and design approval. The commission adopted a motion to allow pruning and maintenance per county arborist direction and to allow removal at the county arborist's discretion; the motion also referenced the pending tree-removal application (TRR-25-2). The motion passed unanimously.

Next steps: applicants may proceed with pruning per county arborist direction; if an arborist later determines removal is required the applicants must submit a tree plan to the county for design review and replacement requirements.