Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Trees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

St. Augustine Beach board approves removal of two live oaks at 697 Pope Road

City of St. Augustine Beach Planning and Zoning Board · December 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning & Zoning Board approved the removal of a 54-inch and a 30-inch live oak to allow a new single-family home driveway and pool at 697 Pope Road after hearing applicants cite safety and parking needs; at least one board member urged exploring redesign and an arborist report before removal.

The Planning & Zoning Board on Dec. 16 approved an application to remove two live oak trees — a 54-inch and a 30-inch — at 697 Pope Road to accommodate a proposed new single-family residence, a larger driveway and a planned pool.

Mike Wilford of ICI Homes, representing the property owners, told the board the family needs more parking and a safer driveway because ‘‘theyre gonna have kids with extra cars in the driveway,’’ and that the tree in front would impede the driveway layout. Owner Emily Granberry described the pool plans and said the rear 30-inch tree conflicts with the proposed pool layout.

Board members pressed the applicant on alternatives. One board member said the trees appeared to be ‘‘old growth’’ and healthy, and suggested the house design could shift to save them. The board also recommended an arborist report to assess whether trimming or root protection could avoid removal.

After discussion, a board member moved to approve the removal as requested; the motion was seconded and carried by roll call. The board recorded dissenting votes but approved the removal. The applicant thanked the board after the vote.

The decision allows the owner to proceed with tree removal subject to the cityfs permitting requirements. The board noted that design adjustments or additional technical input (for example, an arboristfs assessment) could have been options to reduce canopy loss but the permit was granted based on the application presented.