Trees’ Fate Hinges On City Council Vote Douglas Firs Creating Havoc Along Ash Street For One Couple

For Roger and Rae Tardini, it’s a chance to stop the limbs that come crashing down on the roof in windstorms, the driveway obstruction, and damage to their sprinkler system.

For city officials, it’s about maintaining a row of large, lovely Douglas firs that shade Ash Street.

Because these trees grow in the street right of way, the City Council will decide the fate of the trees tonight at 7 p.m. during its regular meeting.

This spring, the Tardinis asked for permission to remove seven or eight trees from the Ash Street side of their home. The trees never were intended to be part of someone’s front yard. They were planted 60 to 70 years ago when the Tardinis’ lot was part of someone else’s back yard, Rae Tardini said.

About 20 years ago, the property was split and the house the Tardinis now live in was built, facing that line of Douglas firs.

Because the trees are so close together, they rub limbs every time the wind blows, Roger Tardini said. After a storm a few weeks ago, that meant he was on the roof cleaning up broken branches.

The trees are top heavy, making them a greater windstorm worry, Roger Tardini said. The roots are causing some upheaval around the curb and driveway, and breaking the sprinkler system.

“We love trees - there are 65 trees on our lot,” explained Rae. And the couple would be happy to replant some of the trees, although not all 19. That’s too many trees for the approximately 80 feet of right of way, she said.

Neighbors such as Judie Johnson, who lives across the street, support the Tardinis’ request.

“I understand their predicament,” Johnson said. She’s not worried about how the street will look if the Tardinis win the appeal.

“Whatever they do will still be aesthetic,” Johnson said.

The city’s Urban Forestry Committee found the trees in good health and found no evidence that the roots are damaging the curb, sprinkler system or the house, according to the group’s memo to the City Council.

The trees are so close that the roots likely are intertwined. That means removing only some of them would leave the others more susceptible to falling in a strong wind, the memo said.

Because of the benefits of shade and the eye-appeal of a tree-lined street, the Forestry Committee leans toward leaving all of the trees except one that they agree may be obstructing the driveway.

, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: Color Photo

MEMO: This sidebar appeared with the story: Council looks at charging $75 an hour for legal work Developers and other people outside of City Hall may have to start paying for their own legal work. The City Council is considering at its meeting tonight a proposal to charge people $75 an hour for the city attorney’s time. For example, when a developer wants the city to annex land and the city’s legal staff does the paperwork, the developer would be charged the cost of doing the work, City Attorney Jeff Jones said. He spends a substantial amount of his time dealing with development-related issues, he said, although he doesn’t have an estimate of the total cost to taxpayers each year. This is an effort “to recover fees that benefit an individual rather than the general public,” Jones said. It compares to building permits, where the price of a permit covers the cost of inspection. The North Idaho Building Contractors Association hasn’t taken a position on the proposal, said Lori Barnes, executive director. In general, “we don’t have any trouble paying for services from the city,” Barnes said. “Our only concern is, is it going to be a fee on top of a fee? If we hire a professional to do it, then are we going to have to pay a government employee to redo it?” No, City Attorney Jones said. Under the proposal, a developer can have another attorney prepare the paperwork and the city won’t charge for a simple review.