Willow Glen Resident

News

Hamilton Place residents oppose proposal for removal of 41 trees

By Emilie Crofton

Downing trees has once again raised the ire of Willow Glen residents. This time it's in a condominium complex off Leigh Avenue.

The Hamilton Place homeowners association is considering the removal of 41 eucalyptus trees that were planted in 1981.

The association emphasized to homeowners on May 22 that no decision had been made regarding the trees. The association had filled out a tree permit application, but it had not been filed with the city.

The association has requested the city arborist come out and examine the trees and provide the homeowners with an assessment as to which trees should be removed.

The association told residents that the trees have become a liability, explaining they grow with all their weight at the end of the limbs, which can cause the limbs to break and fall without notice.

In addition, there have been a number of homeowner complaints about their "messiness." The eucalyptus' process of "sapping" or leaking out its dark sticky sap is causing problems as residents step in it and ruin the carpeting in the condos.

However, strong opposition from several residents could delay the process.

"When you start taking away the trees, you start taking money out of our pockets," Hamilton Place resident Heidi Simonsen said.

In the past three years, several of the eucalyptus trees have been removed and replaced with much smaller trees, upsetting some residents.

"A eucalyptus tree next to my home was replaced with a crepe myrtle. It is worthless. It provides no shade and does not compare to a eucalyptus," Simonsen said.

Another homeowner, June Cooley, questioned the legality of the removals made in the past and wanted to make sure the same thing didn't happen again.

"Not only was I not notified about a tree removal near my condo two years ago, I'm still trying to find out if they had a permit to do so," Cooley said.

Dustin Mannina, association manger for Hamilton Place, told residents that "limbs from the trees have fallen on roofs and gutters, causing thousands of dollars in damage."

The structural damage to the buildings is significant, he said. Mannina recommended all the trees be removed to prevent future problems.

Raul Galan, an outside professional arborist from LandMedics Complete Quality Tree Care with no ties at the complex, was asked by a resident to come and give a second opinion about the tree- removal issue.

"I believe the majority of the trees can be saved," Galan said. "Only about eight trees really need to be removed."

Galan proposed removing eight trees that are diseased or in bad locations. All the rest, according to Galan, just need to be pruned every 17 months to combat the potential for structural damage.

"I don't like to remove trees unless I have to," Galan said.

Mannina argued that pruning the trees may not be the best solution.

"Although it would limit the liabilities, it would definitely not solve the problem," Mannina said. "In the long-term, the same problems would arise. Eucalyptus trees are not the right trees for this type of location."

These reasons have not convinced some of the condominium residents. Many are worried that removing the trees, some as tall as 50 feet, will decrease their property value.

Cooley wants to limit the number of trees being considered for removal.

"Ideally we want the trees pruned, not removed," Cooley said. "I will most definitely be objecting to the city permit application for the removal. I plan on filing a protest."