I didn't watch the most recent meeting, but in the previous meeting where this was discussed I didn't hear any mention of the approximate cost to remove a large tree (say doug fir) that already exists. Independent of these city fees, what does it cost to pay a company to remove a single large tree (my guess is several thousands of dollars). I know it's not free. This seems like an important (and obvious) detail when deciding what tree permit removal fees should be. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to remove large trees on private property and the city should not be making it even more expensive unnecessarily. The market price for removal is already a deterrent.
And by the way, I am in support of your statement. I wasn’t asking you personally “if a branch falls and kills your baby”. I was asking just in general.
I think that not removing trees is awesome. But, to be real, if it is tree branch that falls and kills your baby… then I’d like to see how anti-tree removal you are. Like to what extent!!!!! They are already unwilling to even give permits to remove dangerous trees yet I see they removed like 100 of them on public land near 15th. What kind of bulls**** government is this? It’s a racquet
The shoreline tree fees and fines for removing big trees… ones that are dangerous…is complete horsesh***! (good luck having them admit they ARE dangerous even when big big limbs fall and break windows etc). It’s not really affordable for an average person. How much money do they think we fu**** have!? It is a joke. The people making these rules have way more money than the middle class and are out of touch with reality.
I didn't watch the most recent meeting, but in the previous meeting where this was discussed I didn't hear any mention of the approximate cost to remove a large tree (say doug fir) that already exists. Independent of these city fees, what does it cost to pay a company to remove a single large tree (my guess is several thousands of dollars). I know it's not free. This seems like an important (and obvious) detail when deciding what tree permit removal fees should be. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to remove large trees on private property and the city should not be making it even more expensive unnecessarily. The market price for removal is already a deterrent.
And by the way, I am in support of your statement. I wasn’t asking you personally “if a branch falls and kills your baby”. I was asking just in general.
I think that not removing trees is awesome. But, to be real, if it is tree branch that falls and kills your baby… then I’d like to see how anti-tree removal you are. Like to what extent!!!!! They are already unwilling to even give permits to remove dangerous trees yet I see they removed like 100 of them on public land near 15th. What kind of bulls**** government is this? It’s a racquet
The shoreline tree fees and fines for removing big trees… ones that are dangerous…is complete horsesh***! (good luck having them admit they ARE dangerous even when big big limbs fall and break windows etc). It’s not really affordable for an average person. How much money do they think we fu**** have!? It is a joke. The people making these rules have way more money than the middle class and are out of touch with reality.