Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and council weigh options for Longacre wetlands parcel as aging trees threaten homes
Summary
Councilors and staff discussed a long, tax‑delinquent wetland parcel behind Longacre Drive properties where 70‑plus‑year oaks are leaning into yards. Solicitors said state law limits neighbors to trimming encroaching branches, while ownership remains in limbo; councilors discussed tax‑title, subdivision or other remedies.
Neighbors concerned about aging oaks on a largely wetland parcel behind Longacre Drive raised the issue with the council on Nov. 6, saying trees are overgrowing into yards and pose a falling hazard to homes and fences.
Council President Wall described the parcel as originally intended as a buffer and said the city does not currently own it. The solicitor told the council that under Rhode Island law (Title 34) landowners have a limited right to trim branches that intrude onto their property up to the property line at their own expense, but they generally may not destroy trees. The solicitor said the parcel is listed to a defunct limited liability company and the city has not perfected ownership, leaving the property in legal limbo.
Council members proposed several paths forward. Councilman Andujar recommended redevelopment‑style remedies or pursuing tax title to allow the city to take ownership and then either clear or sell buildable portions to adjacent homeowners under conditions requiring tree removal. Others urged caution because the parcel is predominantly wetlands, advising wetland delineation, consultation with DEM (Department of Environmental Management), and specialized arborists who can work without heavy equipment. Officials warned of potentially large costs and liability if the city enters wetlands and employs tree contractors without proper permitting.
Solicitors and council members cited a recent court decision (Judge Lamphere) where a judge allowed a neighboring owner to remove a portion of a trunk when encroachment exceeded mere branches, but they described that as a narrow precedent. Councilors asked staff to research whether statewide law preempts more expansive municipal remedies and to report back with options and cost estimates.
No formal motion to take immediate municipal action was adopted; councilors agreed to further research and to explore tax‑title or other remedies while protecting the city from potential liability.
