sent to: River Oaks Boad Of Directors
January 17, 2006
The amendments to the River Oaks Deed Restriction restatement, of April 13, 2005, do not adequately address the issues of tree preservation, the use of gas-powered leaf blowers, the construction of new houses in proportion to their lot dimensions and the preservation of historically significant homes.
A year ago, following the publication of the first set of proposed amendments to the River Oaks Deed Restrictions, CLEAN (Citizens League for Environmental Action Now) conducted a survey of more than 1200 River Oaks residents to get their opinions on tree removal and the use of leaf blowers in the neighborhood. Just under half of the residents responded to our survey, and their comments and a tally of the results are available at: http://www.cleanhouston.org/comments/river_oaks/index.htm.
The wishes of the majority of respondents are not reflected in the amendments. We are very concerned that the weak restrictions governing tree preservation, leaf blowers and new home construction will lead to further loss of the neighborhood’s character and charm. Below we examine the evolution of the amendments and relate our concerns.
The original, October 14th 2004, proposed amendment called for the Board of Directors to “have the authority to disapprove plans for the construction of a residential dwelling or other improvement on a lot if, in its reasonable, good faith judgment, the plans fail to adequately address the preservation of trees.” It also required property owners to replace trees that were removed because they had died, or became diseased or infested with insects. Moreover any trees measuring six inches or more (measured 12 inches above grade) located 7 ½ feet or more from the residence, garage, or other buildings required written approval from the Board for their removal. The only exception to this was if the tree was dead or so diseased or infested with insects that it could not be salvaged.
Our survey of River Oaks residents, conducted just after the release of the first set of amendments, revealed that 62% of respondents preferred to have the Board approval concerning consent to the removal of mature, healthy trees in neighborhood- regardless of their location on the lot or whether it occurred as a result of construction activities or not.
Watered down to its current state, the amendment no longer requires Board consent for the removal of trees nor does it allow the Board to disapprove construction plans if it believes that the plans fail to adequately address the preservation of trees. The Board may, in its discretion, require residents to replace trees removed from in front of the front building setback or for a corner lot, trees located between the side street and adjacent side building setback. And this only applies to trees with a caliper of six inches or more (measured 12 inches above grade) chopped down in conjunction with new construction or a substantial addition to an existing structure. The trees in our neighborhood especially those facing the front street, are not being protected.
The original October 14th 2004 proposed amendment also called for the prohibition of “any type of leaf blower or similar device … at all times.” It also limited the hours of operation of 3rd party contractors conducting lawn and landscape maintenance from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekends and holidays and from 7:30 AM to 7:00 PM, or dusk, whichever was earlier on the weekdays.
The second draft of the proposed amendments, published December 15th, eliminated the proposed prohibition of leaf blowers. Instead the provision opted for more restrictive hours of operation for 3rd party contractors conducting lawn maintenance. The initial amendment may indeed have been too restrictive. However, they should not have completely scrapped the leaf blower ban. The amendment should have altered the language to prohibit gas-powered leaf blowers, while allowing for electric leaf blowers to be used. The inefficient, two-stroke gas-powered blowers generate as much pollution in one hour as does a car driven for 100 miles. California’s Air Resource Board reports that they emit several pounds of particulate matter into air every hour they are in use. Additional emissions from these machines include carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons.
Another issue with gas-powered leaf blowers is their excessive noise. The roar from the machines disrupts the otherwise tranquil nature of the neighborhood and makes it nearly impossible for anyone to study, conduct work or simply relax. The Zero Air Pollution Los Angeles (ZAPLA) states that a leaf blower used at one residence impacts eight to fourteen neighbors. Most leaf blowers operate at levels of 70-75 decibels, measured from some distance away. A majority of blowers used in Houston today are, in fact, in violation of the city’s noise ordinance. The city ordinance states that, “no person shall conduct, permit or allow any activity or sound source to produce a sound that is discernible beyond the property lines of the property on which the sound is being received that when measured … exceeds sixty-five (65) dB(A) during daytime hours and fifty-eight (58) dB(A) during nighttime hours.”
Our survey of River Oaks Property Owners conducted after the release of the first draft of proposed amendments revealed that 45% of the almost 600 respondents wanted more stringent restrictions concerning leaf blowers and 36% wanted a total ban on them. (It should be noted that in our survey, we made no distinction between electric and gas-powered leaf blowers. There were a considerable number who therefore opted to not vote for a complete ban, saying that would eliminate the option of using electric blowers as an alternative.) The Board was made well aware of these figures and said it would take them into consideration while drafting the third and final draft. In a weak attempt to appease the many that had asked for a ban on gas-powered blowers, the Board merely limited the hours that third party workers could operate on the weekdays and weekends. On weekends and holidays, the provision restricts 3rd party lawn maintenance contractors to performing work from 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM and on weekdays from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. This makes little concession to those affected by gas-powered leaf blowers. The final restatement made no further alterations regarding the permissible times for lawn maintenance. No requests were made to phase in electric leaf blowers or other inexpensive alternatives to gas powered leaf blowers (please see included document titled “Alternatives to Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers”).
The following was included in the final restatement: "A supplement to or amendment of the River Oaks Policies and Procedures for the purpose of changing the permissible periods to perform construction work or lawn maintenance work and landscaping work by third party contractors shall require approval by the Board of Directors." It has not been stated though, what other portions of the River Oaks Policies and Procedures may be amended by the River Oaks Board of Directors. Many residents would appreciate clarification on these important issues.
