Tree value

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

coydog

ArboristSite Operative
Joined
Feb 8, 2002
Messages
312
Reaction score
8
Location
seattle
One of my clients has a beef with the city, they dug a trench to install a sewer line way past his property line without permission and severed the roots to a approx5' dbh sugar maple. It forks into two leaders fairly low and one side had been butchered by his neighbor earlier. The remaining side however was still in good shape and provided a substantial canopy and served as an excellent windbreak for the rest of his property. The city is offering to remove the tree for free but that is the extent of it. He wants to sue the city for the value of the tree. Besides yhis being an overmature sugar maple and the fact that it was severely topped on one side( as in cut about 15' up the trunk, just past the first fork with a couple of 2'stubs) I can see a value as far as it being a windbreak , If this tree were any closer to a dwelling or even his yard I would consider it more of a liability than anything else. Anybody have experience with this type of issue?
 
the city

Does the city have the right-of-way to be there? Check the city maps. The borough put a sewer line in on my place with no right-of-way so I stopped the job by calling the state police. We then made a deal for the right- of-way ( took two weeks of negotations). The best you can do is make a deal because the city can condemn the property to put the sewer in as a good of the community thing and they will have the EPA to back them to get the sewer in. The best you could do is stall the project seven years in court and lose a lot of money fighting it unless going around your place is a better alternative. I had them roto-till and replant a 200'x100' area and a monitary $$$ compansation for the 10'x40' right of way they needed. The equipment compacts the ground because it is heavy. I also had the taxes lowered as part of the deal because the right-of-way makes the land unusable for buildings. The city should be willing to do more than compansate for the tree because you lost more than the tree. Loss of the use of the land, lawn torn up, tree hurt, less usable land= less taxes. You have the advantage if the city did not have the right-of-way, you are the injured party. Ask for the moon but expect less. The federal government probably paid for the sewer with a grant, How long can the city go with no fed money?? File for a federal injunction to stop all fed grant money till you are made whole again, the city will pay attention if you squeeze their wallet that hard.
 
Back
Top