Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forestry Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee questions low fee-in-lieu for street trees as homeowners warn of steep maintenance costs
Summary
Committee members questioned whether the city's fee-in-lieu for required street trees (about $400—6 per tree) reflects actual planting and maintenance costs, after staff said contractor planting can cost $750—6 to $1,000; a vote to increase the fee was expected on the agenda but the meeting transcript does not record an outcome.
Concerns about homeowner costs and the adequacy of the city's fee-in-lieu for street trees dominated a Parks and Recreation Committee exchange after the Environmental Advisory Council and sustainability coordinator presentations.
Committee member Cece asked whether a tree can be placed in front of a private property without consent and whether the fee-in-lieu has kept up with planting costs. Veronica, the city's sustainability coordinator, directed members to the shade-tree ordinance for the legal standard and said the city is targeting properties "out of compliance" to offer help and bring them back into conformance. "We reference PennDOT's, and I I don't know" how the exact fee is calculated beyond that guidance, Veronica said, while noting the current fee "is between 4 and $500 per tree" and does not cover labor or stump grinding.
Parks staff (Miss Toledo) and a contractor estimated the realistic cost to plant and prepare a street-tree location can be around $750 and up to $1,000 when stump grinding or other site prep is required. One committee member said the fee should be raised because it is cheaper for some developers to pay the fee than to plant trees on-site.
Members also discussed how the city could soften resident-facing letters and provide assistance in lower-income areas; staff said federal funding is being used to target support where it will have the most effect and that the city is exploring creative mechanisms to help homeowners maintain street trees without assuming full city responsibility.
Resident Mary Tomlinson of 373 West Liberty Street urged the committee to consider homeowner hardship. "I'm just reiterating what has brought brought up in what I'm hearing in my community about people who are, like, becoming averse to trees and, have run into high maintenance bills and are, concerned about being forced to, entail that all on their own," she said.
Cece told the committee she understood an ordinance change to raise the fee-in-lieu was on the night's agenda. The transcript records discussion of that proposed vote but does not record any motion, tally or final outcome.
Why it matters: the debate highlights tension between public-right-of-way tree policies designed to deliver community benefits and the private cost and responsibility that can fall to homeowners when a street tree requires maintenance or site preparation. Raising the fee without a plan for homeowner assistance could shift costs but not reduce homeowner burden.
Next steps: committee members signaled interest in updating the fee level and adjusting resident communications; if the committee or council advances an ordinance change, the transcript shows staff will need to specify new fee amounts and outline assistance mechanisms for affected homeowners.
