Real Estate Blog for Palo Alto, Mountain View, California, and Surrounding Communities
• Archives
May 2008
• May. 18, 2008 - San Jose Street Trees... Whose Trees Are They?
 Now here is a good one for you. First let me start by fessing up that I am a tree fanatic. I simply love trees! Not only do they provide shelter for birds and other native fauna, keep us cool, and help minimize global warming by removing carbon dioxide from the air, but they also contribute significantly to the value of a property and they are things of great strength and beauty in their own right. But the city of San Jose has gone too far in my opinion.
The City of San Jose loves trees too, and it has mandating street trees for a number of years in order to enhance the beauty of the city. Some time ago the city decided that, due to budget cuts, maintenance of the street trees, meaning regular pruning and shaping, would be the responsibility of property owners upon whose property the tree resides. The owner is also responsible for repairing the city sidewalks in front of the house if the tree roots damage the walkway. This is a big responsibility. Tree maintenance and street repairs can be pricey and it may be beyond the means of some struggling homeowners who have been told that they must own a street tree to maintain it properly. Still everybody benefits from the trees, including the homeowners, so there may be some just basis for imposing this responsibility on home owners.
Now the city has gone one further and declared that if a street tree falls into a city street, the homeowner is responsible for clearing the tree off the street. If the homeowner does not do it, the city will, but they will bill the owner and if the owner cannot pay for it, they will impose a lien against the homeowner.
This does not seem right to me. It would be different if the homeowner opted to plant the tree. Clearly, then, they would be responsible for its maintenance, upkeep, and, when required, its removal. But this is tantamount to a hidden tax on unsuspecting homeowners. Personally I spend thousands of dollars per year maintaining my trees, but that does not include the two street trees the city planted on my property. Fortunately I do not live in San Jose. If I had to maintain those two additional, fully grown trees, it would at least double my costs each year. I could afford it, but some of my neighbors might not be able to and might prefer to cut the trees down instead. That would damage the integrity of my neighborhood and we would all be losers. Now they would have to worry about their trees or some of their limbs falling every time a wind storm blew into town. Doesn't this consititute the "taking" of one's property? Maybe the city should try to think of some other way to encourage tree planting without imposing it on some people who may not be able to afford it! |
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Street Trees |
• May. 10, 2008 - What NOT to Do!!
|
Recently I was listing agent for a home that was purchased by an independent broker representing herself. On the surface it looked like an easy transaction…. All cash, 10 day close, no contingencies. But I knew there would be trouble when I dropped by to water the lawn and discovered the buyer/broker with her sports SUV up on the lawn talking to a man with a chain saw in his hand. He had already, at her direction, removed all of the bushes from the back yard and was proceeding to cut down a tree!!
Needless to say I was astounded. I told the woman that she had to stop immediately and remove the debris right away, and that she absolutely, under no circumstances, was she to do anything else at the premises until after escrow closed. I explained to her (shocking that I should have to do this) that she did not yet own the house, she did not have permission from me or the owner to do any yard work or other improvements on the property, that she was trespassing, vandalizing the property, and breaking the law, and that she should cease and desist immediately. When I got back to my office I put all of the above in writing and emailed and faxed it to her, just to make sure she got the message.
Well, clearly she didn’t. I was away for 4 days but the day I got back she called to arrange a walk through the next day ( I had told her if she wanted a walk through I would escort her, as I had removed the keys.) When I arrived I discovered that, while I was away, the lady had proceeded to rototill the back yard (used to be grass), remove much of the back patio and part of the side patio, dig a trench across the front yard, and remove the hose bib that I had attached a hose to. At that point I probably should have called the police and filed a police report, but we were 2 just days from close of escrow, so instead I told her I would ask the neighbors to keep an eye on the property and instruct them to call the police if they saw her there. Then I proceeded to do just that while she stood and watched me. She knew I was serious!!
Fortunately we closed escrow on time, and in the long run there was no harm done. But there could have been. Any number of things could have happened. Either she or the guy with the chain saw could have been injured by falling off the ladder, tripping on the mess they made, or whatever. The same is true of a neighbor who may have wandered onto the premises to fetch their runaway dog, or even the mailman. Or the escrow might not have closed. In the first example, the owner, my client (who lived in a different state) may have been sued for damages. In the second case, my client would have to spend many thousands of dollars to return the house to its former condition and may have lost time and “missed the market” while doing so, and most certainly would have gone after the buyer/broker for damages to the property and potentially for the difference in the sales price if he had to sell for less.
This is an extreme example, but the underlying message is clear. Even if the property you are buying is vacant, and even if you are very excited and chomping at the bit to start fixing it up to make it your own, it still does not belong to you. IF you really feel the need to make specific changes before escrow closes, at the very least you must get the owner’s permission in writing to do so. Personally I try to discourage any repairs or changes prior to close of escrow. It is better to close early, before the buyer’s move-in date to allow them time to make repairs. You just never know what might happen.
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Buyer Damages Property |
|
|
|
Selling real estate in the mid San Francisco peninsula is unlike selling real estate in any other area. Just as the geographical area is famous for its microclimates, the real estate landscape has its own microclimates, each with its own idiosyncracies. An experienced agent will be in tune with the subtle variations from one subarea to another. But it is always changing. In this blog I will attempt to capture some items of interest to buyers and sellers alike, and to have some fun as well (see ""Fun Stuff"). If you have information you would like to have posted on this website, please email your suggestios to Lmercer@Lmercer.com.
Links
• Home
• View my profile
• Archives
• Email Me
• Blog Manager
|
PageEntry 1 of 1
Last Page | Next Page
|
|
RSS Blog Feed