This committee performs an important function in maintaining our member owned assets.
You will note in the report, the efforts of the tree committee to suck this committee into being a part of exorbitant spending on a survey of SeaBreeze Lake. All over a few trees on Surfside property. Money we don't have.
These reports are written with a format showing the progress on issues. After first clicking on a page for a larger read, you may want to click on it again for an even larger read, because of the small print contained in the report. In my opinion, this report as all in the past, is well done. The 4th page is not shown here as it only states the committee will meet again on March 14, 2019, which they did.
21 comments:
A survey that was recommended by Larry.
Plus as on the tree topic you leave out a couple key points. First this started as a complaint from a member. The tree committee does what it does, determines if it is a valid complaint, that the trees are above the covenant heights. Larry's idea of a survey was to determine if the trees were on Surfside property. If it is Surfside should be held to the same as an owner would, they would need to address it in a timely manner. I'm sure if you were the owner of the properties on the line you would want to know whose the trees are on too.
I get it, you feel that the trees should be allowed to grow. But that isn't how things are and it isn't fair to the person who made the complaint and also to those of us that keep our trees compliant. It's one thing to be bias but it still no excuse for such mean spirited comments.
A simple solution is to have a variance on the trees in question. Seems to work for board members, why not a few trees? That would save twenty thousand dollars that could be used elsewhere, Like fines and legal fees. Better yet, have the complainer pay for it. No one else seems to care.
I am positive the property owners know where there property lines are and if they are Surf Side trees they would compline about them. there by they are on privet property so you just saved $20,000.00
So one anonymous complaint justifies a proposal to survey the entire Lake area at accost of $20,000 ? The cost of the work they want to do is bid at $19,000 ? None of this makes a bit of sense. This is the Tree people wanting to stir-up a bunch of compliance cases. How many inches constitutes over the limit ? It is hard to imagine that trees along the lakeside interfere with views - of what ? Whose views ? Absurd.
Lol, depends on who's property they looking at n who lives nearby. There is always more to the story in shoa.
I know of 7 members who control 13 lots who all want the tree covenant repealed. One is thinking of starting a petition. Prune your trees so they look like a shrub, all to maintain a view for others who pay nothing to maintain there view. Just not a fair deal. Its almost unbelievable that a board member who is advocating for the survey, sits on the tree committee, so all the over height tree can be cut has the gull to apply for a height variance for her property.
This organization is held hostage by J Placers, and their minions.
Not having a dog in the tree fight, it's been interesting to see the back-and-forth, the blatant self interest, lies, and the gyrations people will go through to maintain an unfair advantage. This is the only place in the Pacific Northwest I've been that advocates wanton destruction of trees.
With the Board constantly acting in their own self interest, violating their own covenants and State RCW's, dissolution may well be the only answer. I do not wish to be a member of an organization that treats its members unfairly, and this one is just flat crooked.
Well said! Amen brother or sister!
can't think of the name of the hoa near Seattle that has very specific tree covenants that often result in trimming and cutting down perfectly healthy trees.
So your statement means nothing 7:20.
If so, so what? That doesn't make it legal or right. Dumb statement.
I realize facts don't mean anything to the haters here, but the board member who recommended the survey isn't a J placer and has not filed for a variance, at least not lately. And isn't a her either.
Here's another fact. After our coastal fire, where we dodged a major bullet, Ocean Park spent money and manpower trimming and removing trees on the coast for fire protection. They even referenced our fire as a reason. But what do they know, right?
So the only reason the fire started was because trees were there?
One has trees, therefore fire. Yes sir!
Nice try to avoid the statement concerning OP. Your pivot failed.
No, the reason the fire started was because an idiot started a fire on a day with high winds and left it unattended. But the main reason the fire spread further down the coast and up into the eaves of the house that got burnt was because of the crown effect coming off of the trees. That's a fact but please, continue to troll away and enjoy yourself.
Another fact. If it wasn't for some of those full time residents in the area who helped with their hoses there would have been a bunch more damage. Yet according to some people on here full timers are evil.
Kill Tree Committee!
Both Figuratively and Literally!
Gearheart, Seaside, Cannon Beach go on down the coast no one has a tree policy like Surfside. Its an embarrassment.
Moot argument, since all about the view. Fyi, shortened sick trees are also flamable.
I thought they bought a laser for measuring the tree height from the street, find out if the trees are to high , them figure out who's responsibility they are.
12:41 Please look up the definition of a "Crown Fire". What you saw was oily beach grass, not a tree Crown Fire. The trees up on the East side of J are much more prone to your crown fire than the shore pines, even at 16 to 24 feet. I would be much more worried about earthquakes.
How about the tree that has fallen into seabreeze lake? Why isn't said homeowner being made to take it out?
Have we hired a compliance officer yet so we can do away with these committees?
Post a Comment