Newport Beach decides trees must go

Mathis Winkler

BALBOA PENINSULA -- When it boils down to the basics, one thing is

clear: No one -- not city leaders nor business owners, and especially not

residents -- is particularly happy about seeing Main Street’s ficus trees

removed.

“I think the trees are gorgeous,” Councilman Tod Ridgeway said. “Ficus

trees are gorgeous in the right place. But that’s not the right place.”

Ridgeway represents that Balboa community and is chairman of the City

Council’s “committee to promote the revitalization of our peninsula.”

The committee recently recommended replacing the trees with coral gums

as part of the city’s $7.5-million renovation project scheduled to begin

in October in the peninsula’s downtown area.

In the past, some residents opposed taking down the trees, saying it

would deprive the area of natural beauty.

Asked why he decided to support the replacement of trees, Ridgeway

began listing the problems caused by the ficus.

“Long-term safety is a big issue with me,” he said, adding that

keeping the trees also doesn’t make sense from a financial standpoint.

City officials would have to spend $16,000 to $49,000 a year to

maintain the trees and deal with damage they might cause to streets and

private property, said Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood.

And with a total value of $193,000 for the 25 trees, that doesn’t make

sense, particularly because the trees won’t live that much longer, she

said.

“They are reaching the end of their lives,” Wood said, adding that the

trees probably won’t live much more than 20 years.

“You’re spending $7.5 million on all this other stuff, why not do the

trees while you’re at it, especially when those questions are out there,

about damage and liability?” she asked.

Known for their invasive nature, the ficus trees have dug their way

into adjacent buildings. In one case, Ridgeway said he witnessed a root

peeking up from a toilet.

Gay Wassall-Kelly, who is president of the Balboa Merchants/Owners

Assn., also said she had heard about the toilet invasion.

The trees cause damage that requires expensive repairs, she said,

adding that merchants have been paying for them so far.

“Sometimes you have to rip up the entire slab floor,” Wassall-Kelly

said. “We all hate to see these beautiful trees go. But there are more

cons than pros as to leaving them there.”

Some residents said they still don’t like the decision to remove the

trees.

“I am concerned that the last beautiful historical part of our town

will now only be a memory,” said Cindy Doran, who vehemently opposed the

removal of the trees a few months ago.

She added, however, that few residents still feel as strongly about

the trees as her.

Elaine Linhoff is one resident who seems to fit that profile.

She said the new trees probably won’t create a street canopy like that

of the ficus but has resigned herself to the fact they the old trees need

to be replaced because of the maintenance costs.

“I can’t justify keeping” the ficus trees, Linhoff said. “At this

point, I’m not fighting to save the trees.”