Mailbag

These magnificent trees need to be protected; however, common sense does need to be applied. Many of these trees have grown far larger than the space they occupy can accommodate and need to be trimmed both for aesthetic and practical reasons.

I would suggest that Glendale implement a plan that would require any tree-trimming company doing business inside Glendale city limits have a permit that certifies that they have the knowledge and expertise to trim these trees. The list of these certified contractors should be available to the public, and any tree-trimming company that has not been certified should be fined for trimming or removing any of the protected trees as well as the homeowner.

On a separate note, my neighbor has a very large sycamore tree in their backyard, and the city needed to cut it and other trees back from power lines that run along the backyard property lines of many houses.

The way the tree was trimmed, straight back from the lines, was not done in any respectful way, and the guys doing the trimming did not in any way appear to be supervised on site by an arborist.

So why does the city get to just trim back at will and a homeowner who pays out of their own pocket to have a job done correctly get fined?

NANCY KEHR

Glendale

Ordinance must be friendlier to owners

I recently purchased a property in Glendale with about 20 indigenous trees (“Council seeks input on trees,” Dec. 20).

I telephoned the city to have someone come out to inspect the trees and the watering. The city sent out a consulting arborist to inspect the trees and their surrounding conditions.

In response, I received a letter from the city that I should correct the irrigation system and immediately cease use of the vales causing the wetting of the oak tree trunks.

They followed, requesting that I correct the adverse conditions within 60 days and that a follow-up inspection will then be performed to determine the irrigation has been removed as requested.

I had just spent $1,850 prior to the inspection on a sprinkler system, and I thought the contractor was familiar with the city’s ordinance. Later, the city was unwilling to provide with me with a list of contractors familiar with the city’s ordinance.

Rather, they only gave me a list of about 16 consulting arborists and tree trimmers. They suggested that I contact one of the consulting arborists for a recommended sprinkler contractor.

I would suggest that the city change its ordinance to be more accommodating and people-friendly with the homeowners, to work with them, in an effort to protect indigenous trees rather than to treat the homeowner as the enemy.

Further, the city should license all contractors, a special indigenous designation, for sprinklers, tree pruning, etc., so that the homeowner has some assurance and method to verify that the individual is qualified, and that the work will be in compliance with the city’s ordinance.

KENNETH LANDON

Glendale