The problem with the current parkway tree planting and replacement policy is inconsistency, Smith told the council at the July 12 Community Development Committee meeting. “We have sections of the city where individuals or homeowner associations have licensing agreements to plant trees on the parkway,” said Smith. “There are other areas of the community where trees have been planted in the parkway where the city maintains and replaces these trees at the city’s cost. That’s where we have the inconsistency.”
He defined a licensing agreement as residents or homeowner associations agreeing to pay, plant and maintain a tree, and he defined parkway as the area between the sidewalk and the curb.
The problems arise, he said, when crews are out trimming. They have to bypass trees under licensing agreements, yet inform the owners in person or through a letter that their tree needs trimming. This process involves a lot of time for city workers.
“In almost every situation when we send out a letter, it requires a street supervisor to set up an appointment with the property owner to show him or her what limbs need trimming,” he said.
Unfortunately, he said, many of these property owners “are often of the opinion that since they paid for the tree and have agreed to maintain it, the trimming standard is set by them,” and they do not always comply with the city’s request.
Non-compliance by property owners leads to additional problems. Trees that aren’t trimmed may interfere with vehicular and pedestrian traffic. As trees mature, trimming becomes more difficult and costly, and the owner may not want to pay for or be able to afford a private contractor.
The city may then need to pursue a code enforcement action, resulting in additional staff time and negative feelings toward the city. And when the city finally trims the tree, it may look significantly different, resulting in more negative feelings toward the city.
To alleviate these problems, Smith recommended staff work with the EAC to develop a new parkway tree policy to be brought before the council for passage. Smith presented several recommendations for the new policy. For instance, he suggested that the property owner would pay for a city-approved tree, but the city would order, plant, maintain and remove the tree. An owner could order no more than three trees per year per property, and the city would limit itself to ordering and planting 50 trees per year. The city would replace a tree at no cost if the tree was cut down due to a construction project or if a tree died due to disease.
