Loading...
Petterson Addn-CS050505 (2)Page 1 of 1 Ken Griffin - Re: 326/328 West Sandy Lake From: Ken Griffin To: Laurie Marshall Date: 5/5/200511:3 8 AM Subject: Re: 3261328 Nest Sandy Lake Laurie I'm not an expert on the tree ordinance but section 9-11-11-k of the Code of Ordinances addresses tree trimming. It states that the "owner" shall prune streets that overhang the right of way. Technically, the trees in question were in the right of way and that probably makes the City the "owner". I really can't express an opinion on whether or not we or the adj acent property owner should have trimmed them or if we should reimburse the property owner. You are probably moving into a legal area and you may want to get Greg or Bobby's opinion. ken g »> Laurie Marshall OS/OS/0511:03 AM »> Ken, Thank you for your prompt response. What the situation involves is that I sent a letter to Ms. Petterson to trim one tree that was blocking the view of east bound traffic from Summer Place. Rupert Keeping who does not own the property called Guy McClain after having all the trees cut and wants to know why I made them cut the trees when they belonged to the City. My thought is that if they felt that the City owned the trees, why did they cut them? We think that he is wanting us to reimburse him for the cost of the trimming. I needed only one tree trimmed and Guy has approved the disposal of the brush by Golden but I think Ms. Petterson should dispose of the clippings and pay the full cost of the trim. What do you think since I had no idea that this was dedicated property. Would they still not be responsible for the maintance? Thank you, Laurie file://C:1Documents and SettingslradloolLocal SettingslTemplXPgrpwise1427A05C2City_... 9/10/2009