Tree Wars: Life in Leafy Marin can be very Litigious
Marin Magazine
February 2009
[PDF Version]
When a tree falls in the woods it might
(or might not) make a sound, but one
thing is certain: if a tree falls in Marin
County, it's likely to cause a lawsuit.
One Stinson Beach resident we'll call Jessem learned
this the hard way. The 53-year-old property manager
came home one afternoon a few years back to find
a big hole through the leafy pittosporum grove bordering
his bungalow. His new next-door neighbors
(whom the 27-year West Marin resident describes
as "hotshot stockbrokers from the city") argued that
the trees had been blocking their ocean view. "Then
they told me to pound sand," says Jessem.
After a year of trying to resolve the situation
amicably, Jessem took the neighbors to court. Five
months of trial later, a jury awarded him $50,000--half of what he says he spent on surveyors, appraisers and
lawyers. Today, the trees, which the jury also ordered the
neighbors to replant, are almost grown back, but Jessem says
the ordeal killed the Stinson vibe he loved so much. "There
used to be a lot more good energy around here," says Jessem,
who's scrapped his plans to retire in Marin. He's put his
house--and his resurrected trees--on the market and plans
to move to Hawaii.
More and more tree disputes
Tree-related conflicts in Marin County are on the rise. One
culprit is the battle over views; another is the plethora of
trees themselves, many of them aging and in disrepair.
In towns such as Tiburon and Sausalito, where homeowners
pay plenty for unobstructed views of San Francisco,
the bay or simply city streets far below, a neighbor’s overgrown
tree can block a vista of the Golden Gate Bridge and,
subsequently, slash up to a million dollars from a home’s
resale value.
In heavily wooded communities, aging trees threaten not
only the homes of their owners, but of neighbors as well. Mill
Valley is a case in point. There, towering Monterey pines and
blue gum eucalyptus were planted for quick landscaping during
the development boom of the 1950s; today, these tree have outgrown their roots and started to threaten the homes
they originally enhanced.
Compounding this mix is the fact that many Marin homeowners
have a sense of self-righteousness as high as their property
values. Their elevated willingness to fight for what they
believe is theirs--whether it's a redwood leaning precariously
over a neighbor's roof or a breathtaking view--brings more
and more such conflicts into court.
"Marin seems to have an unusual share of tree disputes
and litigation," says Ray Moritz, an urban forester and owner
of Moritz Arboricultural Consulting in Mill Valley. For 30
years, Moritz has advised California homeowners about arboreal
issues and served as an expert witness in tree-related litigation.
Marin's biodiversity and hilly terrain, he notes, attract
residents who want to feel like they're living in a private for-
est--and one with great views. "You can't have it both ways."
Moritz can rattle off one egregious case after another. There
was, for example, the Mill Creek Canyon man who cut down
17 of his neighbor's redwoods while he was away in Hawaii.
Why? "He wanted more light." Then there was the Tiburon
man who drilled holes and poured Roundup herbicide into
dozens of his neighbor's trees, one of which had been planted
to commemorate the birth of the neighbor's daughter. "You'd
be amazed at what neighbors do to each other."
Indeed, says Moritz, most neighbor vs. neighbor tree litigation
is--ahem--rooted in an un-neighborly hostility that goes
far beyond the fate of an outsize redwood or a drooping black
acacia. "I've seen cases where neighbors have fought for years
about parking or the color of a house," he says. "The tree is just
an excuse for an argument."
Tangled thicket of laws
Sausalito attorney and mediator Barri Bonapart, one of a handful
of lawyers in the country who specialize in tree-related disputes,
agrees. "There's always an underlying issue that gives
rise to a dispute," she says. "People harbor resentment and the
trees become a lightning rod for disgruntled temperaments."
While many of the laws regarding trees are based on
common law and basic legal principles such as ownership, negligence and nuisance, the issue in California is more complicated.
Local cities and townships have enacted hundreds
of tree laws, some of them diametrically opposed to those
in neighboring cities. Mill Valley, for example, classifies and
protects redwoods as "heritage trees." Sausalito, though, has
a "right to a view" ordinance and designates the fast-growing
redwood as undesirable.
In 23 years of practicing tree law in Marin, Bonapart has
litigated all sorts of cases: blocked views, damaged property,
injured people, cracked driveways, and even trees that were
murdered or kidnapped (that is, burned down or stolen).
While her clients include tree-care companies, municipalities
and businesses, the majority of her cases, and the ones increasing
the most, are neighbors in dispute with neighbors.
"There's the old Marin and the new Marin," Bonapart says.
"The new people can tend to have a little too much money
and an overdeveloped sense of entitlement, as in 'what's mine
is mine, and what's yours will someday be mine as well.'"
Yesterday's forest, today's problems
Ironically, while many of Bonapart's cases concern the "new
Marin," many of the current tree conflicts result from the
flawed judgment of the "old Marin."
In the 1950s and '60s, local housing developers planted
thousands of fast-growing pines and cypress throughout
the county. At the time, these pop-up forests made the new
homes more valuable. Today, many of these trees have outgrown
their root systems and are at risk of falling over. They
are lawsuits waiting to happen.
"People planted trees foolishly then and they still do," says
Rick Misuraca, superintendent of parks in Mill Valley. "It's not
an issue at the time because they plant for short-term benefit.
It's the homeowners decades later who have to deal with their
driveways being pulled up by poplar roots or their neighbor's
redwood falling onto their house in a storm."
Misuraca is responsible for Mill Valley's 60,000 city-owned
trees as well as for ensuring that homeowners obtain permits
before removing or planting trees. Owners can tear down any
tree, he says, as long as it's for the right reason. And while
just about any reason will do if the tree is an invasive, non-
indigenous species such as eucalyptus, it's more difficult when
the tree is classified as a heritage tree, such as a redwood or a madrone. To cut down a mature redwood, Misuraca says, the
owner must prove it's either dying or a safety hazard.
Homeowners may also plant any tree, but Misuraca urges
residents not to sow foolishly, lest they reap trouble years into
the future. "When someone asks about planting a tree, I ask
them what they want it to do," he says. "If they want to screen
out their neighbor's 20-foot-tall house, they don't need a redwood
that will grow to 120 feet."
Similarly, if the tree will be near pavement, Misuraca recommends
not using species with aggressive or shallow root
systems--the liquid amber, for example. "It's a pretty tree with
bright fall colors, but eventually it'll break your sidewalk."
Mill Valley resident Jane Parker (a pseudonym) encountered
this in 2007 with a curly willow tree her neighbors had
planted just inside their property. One day she noticed that the
tree's roots were buckling the earth under her brick path. When
she asked the neighbors to move the tree, they declined.
Parker hired Bonapart and spent thousands on fees and surveys,
including a report from Moritz confirming that the tree
could cause substantial damage. But before any litigation could
start, fate intervened. In January 2008, a heavy windstorm sent
the tree crashing through Parker's roof. "It would have killed
my daughter if it'd fallen one inch over," says Parker, who has
since sold her house and moved. She was so tired of the controversy
she moved without seeking damages.
What's a tree or a view worth?
Lawsuits often arise when homeowners skip the permit process
and take matters into their own hands, not realizing the
extent of their liability. "They'll cut down a tree, thinking, ÔIt
is easier to beg forgiveness than seek permission,' and then
the valuation comes in at tens of thousands of dollars," says
Bonapart. Because statutory multipliers are or three times the
value of the tree, damages add up quickly.
Determining the value of a tree is part of Misuraca's job.
He uses an equation determined by the International Society
of Arboriculture that factors in diameter, species, condition
and location. The going price for a healthy, mature redwood
could be up to $40,000.
But if a redwood is worth $40,000, the view it blocks can be
worth even more. "It's important to take pictures of your view before your neighbor's tree starts to block it," says Sausalito attorney
Ben Kilgore. In one case in Mill Valley, his clients asked
neighbors to cut down a row of trees that blocked a valley
view. They refused. "It's easy for these issues to get contentious,"
he says, "because both parties believe they're right."
In this case, a compromise was struck: the owners kept
the trees trimmed at 20 feet tall, just low enough to protect
the view, and both neighbors split the cost of the trimming.
They keep a 20-foot measuring staff on hand to avoid any
future disputes.
Hillside cities such as Sausalito and Belvedere, where property
prices are linked to views, have ordinances that help protect
a homeowner's view. This can mean "leveling off" tree
lines at a certain height or "windowing" a large tree--cutting
a hole through the branches so the view shows through. In
cities with view ordinances, tree litigation usually means demanding
damages not for the value of a tree, but for the price
of the view it blocks--and that price can be hefty.
Curt Thor, president of North Bay Real Estate Appraisals in
Novato, has been appraising Marin properties and their views
for 17 years and recites a long list of considerations: Is the view
uninterrupted? Is it 360 degrees? Which direction is it facing
and from which rooms? A view from an upstairs closet isn't
nearly as valuable as one from the living room or hot tub. A
western view of the sunset might be compromised by fog and
wind. A view of San Francisco's Financial District commands
more than a view of the avenues.
Moreover, says Thor, the value of a view is subjective and
depends on the personality of the homeowner. A sailor, for
example, might pay a premium to live above Tiburon so he
could see boats below. Someone who craves privacy might
prefer a Mount Tam hideaway with a view of San Francisco.
Thor does his best to evaluate views based on asking and selling
prices of similar homes in the area. When a home's view is
obstructed, he has deducted up to $1 million from its value.
Solar power struggle
Tree law experts believe the next big point of conflict will involve
solar panels. The California Solar Shade Control Act stipulates
that a tree must not shade more than 10 percent of a solar
installation's panels between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., but Bonapart
points out that the statute was recently rewritten to exempt preexisting
trees even if they did not shade at the time the solar
panels were installed."We haven't heard much about this issue
yet because up until recently, the technology was too expensive
for most homeowners," she says. "Now we're seeing more
and more installations and the recent amendments will likely
be a breeding ground for disputes." In the residential solar cases
she's handled so far, Bonapart has been successful in helping
the parties to reach agreements in virtually every matter.
Moritz dreads the idea of cutting down trees to protect
solar panels. "The leaf is by far our best solar collector," he
says, "while solar panels are in their infancy. Why should we
automatically defer to the man-made option?" No one has
analyzed the tree's energy contribution, he adds, which includes
carbon sequestration, shade and wind protection. "We need to look at all the environmental considerations before
cutting down more trees."
Bonapart and Moritz hope that future changes to the
solar shade act (which Bonapart considers "on the cutting
edge of law") will take into account both sides of the issue.
They stress that it's never too late to cut back and maintain
a tree and, as with all other tree-related disputes, advise addressing
these concerns sooner rather than later. "As with
most problems, tree disputes do not improve with age," says
Bonapart, who almost invariably encourages her clients to
attempt a collaborative resolution, such as mediation, before
taking an adversarial approach. "Litigation between
neighbors ought to be a last resort," states the Sausalito attorney.
She adds, "following the Golden Rule is not only the
right thing to do, it is usually the most effective."
Back to Articles
|