City, homeowners need to work out tree deal

The street trees are the wrong kind for their location (“Tree huggers last stand,” Feb. 2). As a result, and if they are to remain, the homeowners wanting to retain the trees would probably have to agree to be charged for the trees’ regular maintenance through an annual assessment on their property taxes. This could be difficult if all street residents did not agree to retain the trees. Since this is the case, the city and the homeowner would need to agree on a number of trees the city would initially root, prune and trim, before handing over responsibility for the remaining trees to the homeowner.

The trees to remain would first be pruned for root and top growth, then the city would remove the trees that the other owners agreed to have replaced. Those owners would need to agree on the tree species to be planted in place of the removed tree, then work undertaken to repair the sidewalks, damaged curb and dips, and elevations in the street that prevent drainage. Whether the city agreed to complete the whole process is not indicated.

The last step would be the planting of new trees. If any part of this plan is not addressed, it would not be possible to solve the infrastructure problems on the streets in this neighborhood and, as a result, ongoing liability from the uneven surfaces would need to be addressed.

It must be made clear whether a spot-assessment district not including all homeowners could be established; if it could be then removed by a future homeowner agreeing on tree removal; and whether the offer was only for removal and replacement of any tree without the timeframe established for the repairs. There is economy in quantity, so the cost to remove the trees now would be greater with fewer trees included.

* KAREN JACKLE is a Huntington Beach resident. To contribute to “Sounding Off,” e-mail us at [email protected] or fax us at (714) 966-4667.