Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Continuance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA delays decision on 14 Pelican Street specimen-tree removal, requests arborist review
Summary
The Board continued a variance request from property owner Daniel Kirchberg to remove a specimen live oak at 14 Pelican Street so the applicant can obtain an independent arborist evaluation; neighbors raised concerns about trimming, pool feasibility, and neighborhood canopy preservation.
The Hilton Head Island Board of Zoning Appeals voted to continue a variance request for removal of a specimen live oak at 14 Pelican Street until an independent arborist evaluation can be obtained.
Town principal planner Brian Eber summarized staff findings: the subject parcel is roughly 0.27 acres and contains several specimen live oaks, including the tree in question (approximately 36 inches in diameter and within about 9 feet of the home). Staff noted the proposed 350-square-foot pool and associated deck are the stated reason for removal and observed that, absent a professional assessment, the risk of imminent failure had not been established.
Owner Daniel Kirchberg told the board the backyard layout and locations of other specimen trees limit alternative pool sites and said the pool is intended for exercise. Neighbors urged caution: one neighbor said the tree could be trimmed rather than removed and questioned whether there is room for the proposed pool; another caller urged the board to treat residents consistently following recent local clear-cutting of nearby lots.
Chester Williams, a local attorney who spoke in support of the applicant, argued the combination of dense tree coverage and small lot size can constitute an extraordinary condition justifying a variance; he also noted that code changes last year now require variances in situations that previously might not have.
Several board members said they were reluctant to decide without an arborist opinion on root impacts and the likely effect of pool excavation on adjacent specimen trees. One board member moved to continue the case to obtain additional arboricultural information; the motion carried and the case was continued without date. Staff will coordinate scheduling with the applicant.
The staff record cites LMO §16-6-104(f)(2)(a) and notes the Forest Beach Owners Association/ARB reviewed the pool plans and provided conditional approval of plans that would require tree removal; the association does not itself approve removals, which are handled by the town through the variance process.
