Peebles and her mother have lived in the 30 year-old home since 1995, and over the past few years a large crack has formed in a concrete patio at the trees’s base and crept up two concretes steps to the the back door.  Peebles wants to cut down the tree, fearing it will damage the home’s concrete slab foundation.  But becuase the tree’s trunk is more than 24 inches in diametere, she must get the City of Austin’s permission.

So far, the city has said no and asked Peebles to explore other options, such as replacing part of the pation with wooden decking that’s less restrictive for tree roots.  The case is one of the first tests of tougher new rules designed to protect especially large trees the city calls heritage trees.

“What if we spend a bunch of money redoing the patio and a year down the road, the tree is cracking the foundation?”  said Peebles, 32, who works part-time and is a part-time student.  ”I like that Austin so protective of the trees and that this is such a verdant city. But my mother has a fixed income, and this (home) is our most important asset.  We don’t have unlimited money to dedicate to this problem.”

The city has for nearly three decades required property owners to get a permit before  felling trees with trunks that are at least 19 inches wide.

In February, the City Council kept those rules in place but decided that landowner’s whoe want to cut down Austin’s oldest, grandest trees-those with trunks at least 24 inches wide and one of 20 native or highly adapted species- must get a variance.

That’s a higher bar because a property owner must show that the tree is dead, badly diseased or “an imminent hazard to life or property” that can’t be mitigated.  Peebles’ oak , which has a trunk about 26 inches wide, seems to be in good health, and an arborist and engineer she hired have not shown that the tree poses an imminent threat to life or property, said city arborist, Michael Embesi, who has also inspected the tree.

Rules began in the 1980′s

The city first enacted tree rules in the 1980′s to prevent developers and landowners from clear-cutting lots or felling decades-old trees.  The thinking behind the rules, city leaders say is that even trees on private land affect the public good.  Aside from their intrinsic beauty, large trees cut energy use by offering shade, filter storm water and absorb carbon from the air.

Residential property owners ask to fell about 900 trees a year with trunks that are at least 19 inches wide, Embesi said.  The city allows about one fourth of them to be removed, mostly because they’re in bad health, he said.  The city does not have exact figures because it tracks the numbers of trunk  diameter inches saved, not the number of trees, he said.

Since the tougher rules took effect in February, 30 requests have been submited to cut down tres with trunks at least 24 inches wide.  The city has OK’d 20 of them, for health reasons, he said.

Property owners given permission to cut down especially large trees must plant new ones, pay $75 per diameter inch into a city tree-planting fun or show the city that they’ve paid for more intensive care for existing trees on their land, such as hiring and arborist to prune the trees or aerate their soil.  The width of the trunks on new trees must equal three times the diameter of the felled tree- twelve 6-inches- diameter trees planted to replace a 24 inch tree, for example.

Residents who illegally cut down a tree can be charged with a Class C misdemeanor and fined up to $2,000. Because the fine is low, city officials rarely impose it and instead focus on getting landowners to plant more trees. In a high-profile case earlier this year, the owner of a South Austin scrapyard felled 100 trees without a city permit, saying he wanted to clear an area where thieves and transients were living.  About 20 of the trees were at least 19 inches in diameter, and the city is still assessing that incident and possible penalties, Embesi said.

Embesi decides on most tree-removal requests, though a city land-use board has the final say on trees at least 30 inches wide that are on the list of 20 species.  Owners of trees at least 24 inches wide can appeal a denial to the city land use board.  The tree rules don’t make exceptions for residents with financial hardships.

Different takes on tree

In Peebles’ case an arborist at Good Morning Tree Company,which cares for and removes trees, wrote a one-page assessment saying that the tree is showing signs of strain. Its health will keep declining because it is growing so close to the home, the arbosrist worte. The tree is a hazard and “will continue to cause damage to the home’s structure and foundation if nit is not removed,” the arborist said.  The company told Peebles it would cost $1,500 to cut down the tree.

An engineering firm Peebles also hired to assess the oak said it was not possible to determine the patio’s shifting and cracking are due solely to the tree’s location.  But it wrote that engineers typically recommend removing a tree growing so close to a home.

“Trees next to foundations can apply intense pressures on those foundations… Tree roots can grow under the foundation , causing uneven foundation settlements, resulting in cracks in the structure, and doors and windows to stick,”  the one-page report said.  The trees should be trimmed or removed “so that it cannot continue to damage the home’s foundation.  The roots clearly grow beneath the footprint of the home, which is always detrimental.”

Embesi said those reports have not shown that the oak is an immediate threat to the home, even if it has cracked the patio.”  ”They say that in the future, the tree may cause damage.  They are inconclusive that the tree is causing structural integrity problems.  The justification is not there,” he said.

Sid Mourning, owner of Good Morning Tree Company, said Peebles’ tree and the case of a large post oak in West Austin show that the new tree preservation rules go too far.

The West Austin oak has a trunk about 27 inches wide and is growing straight up the side of a single family home.  The owner bought the home a few months ago assuming she could cut down the tree, which prior owners had accommodated by cutting holes int he foundation and in an eave, Mourning said.  Engineers also recommended removing that tree but said it was not possible to tell if the tree alone was causing the home to shift and creating cracks in walls and ceilings.  Embasi has also inspected the post oak and read the engineering report and said there’s not enough proof that the structural integrity of the house is at risk.

In both cases, Mourning said, “It ‘s simple to see that the tree roots have done damage and are going to do more. It’s obvious, obvious stuff.”

“The city wants to protect beautiful old trees.  We all do.  But these home owners are being told that these trees are more important than their house, their lives, everything they’ve got,”  Mourning said.  ”The basic question is, are trees more valuable than the person that owns the house and their assets?”

Austin-American Statesman Tuesday April 27, 2010

City’s new tree rules put to test. Homeowner says oak tree near house is danger to foundation. is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent

The ordinance, which went into effect June 1, requires sellers to get energy audits of their homes and disclose the results to buyers.

Here are the initial results:

• 86% of homes with ducts leaked more than the 10% rate considered acceptable for energy efficiency.
• The average amount of air leakage was 22%
• The average annual dollar loss of electricity per home because of leaks was $260
• 807,840 total annual kilowatt-hours of electricity was wasted by the houses – enough to power 67 average-size homes for a year!
• 1 million pounds of carbon dioxide is emitted annually to produce the wasted electricity
• The average costs to seal the ducts, after Austin Energy rebates, would be $500 resulting in annual savings of $120 on average
• The average cost to add 6 inches of attic insulation, after rebates, would be $661 and save $90 on average per year.

First set of Austin energy audits turns up lots of leaky ducts is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent

A new city ordinance requires sellers of homes older than 10 years to get an energy audit and disclose the results to prospective buyers.  Some people fear the new rule will hurt sales in slower market.

City leaders who approved the audits last year said it was one more way to reduce Austin’s energy consumption and make Austin greener, although sellers are not required to make any improvements as a result of the audit. The idea is to encourage sellers or buyers to make their houses more energy-efficient.

But with the requirement taking effect in a slower housing market, some real estate agents say it could delay or torpedo sales and will add costs for sellers.

“There’s never a good time to add fees to a transaction,” said City Council Member Mike Martinez,” but I think this requirement is a good thing. It allows the consumer to fully understand the purchase they’re about to make. If you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on an investment, you would want to know how efficient that investment is going to be for you.”

As for sellers who may be concerned that the ordinance could hurt their negotiating power, Martinez said: “It’s no different than a home inspection. The consumer needs to know what they’re buying.”

The audits are expected to cost $200 to $300 for a typical home of 1,800 square feet, or less. Austin Energy anticipates that 3,000 to 4,000 homes a year will be audited under the ordinance.

Jay Gohil, chairman of the Austin Board of Realtors, said the ordinance “is reasonably acceptable for buyers as well as sellers.”

The board was represented on the task force that created the ordinance, along with contractors, city officials and others, and fought successfully against any provision that would require sellers to make energy upgrades.

“With the cost of electricity rising, it’s an important part of knowing if you can afford a home. Buyers are looking for houses with lower utility costs,” Gohil said.

The ordinance was part of Mayor Will Wynn’s initiative to reduce energy use in Austin and the need for new power plants, thus shrinking the city’s carbon footprint.

After months of work by the task force, the City Council unanimously passed the ordinance in November, setting June 1 as the effective date. The ordinance also has provisions for multifamily properties and commercia buildings.

A City Council resolution accompanying the ordinance includes a goal of having percent of homes sold be tween June 2009 and June 2010 receive upgrades and more homes in later years.

The reports must be done by auditors who are certified by the Building Performance Institute, a national educational organization for home performance contractors. Austin Energy lists 45 approved inspectors on its web site.

The audits will cover issues such as how much insulation the house has and the condition of the heating and cooling equipment and include recommendations for improvements.

Sellers must provide a copy of the report to buyers. The auditors are required to provide a copy of their report to Austin Energy within 30 days.

The ordinance says violations are a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $500.

Ed Clark, a spokesman for Austin Energy, said that of average, a home that is 25 to 30 years old and has never had energy improvements wastes 30 to 50 percent of the energy it uses.

Austin Energy offers rebates or zero percent loans for energy upgrades. In the past five years, 23,800 residential customers have made improvements that collectively reduced their energy use by 38 million kilowatt-hours and saved a total of $3 million on their energy bills, according to the utility.

Energy audit highlights
Who needs one: Sellers of homes 10 or more years old in Austin that get their electricity from Austin Energy.
Who can skip it: Owners who have made certain improvements under Austin Energy programs in the previous 10 years. The ordinance does not apply to condominiums or mobile homes.
Who does the audits:
City-approved firms that are certified by a national organization.
Costs: Estimated at $200 to $300 for a typical home of 1,800 square feet or less. Austin Energy recommends getting at least three bids.
More information: www.austinenergy.com

Selling a home? Put an energy audit on the list is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent

Among the 38 metro areas with a work force of at least 750,000, only Austin gained jobs from April 2008 to April 2009, the bureau said.
It was the third month in a row Austin had earned that distinction.

Austin added 3,400 jobs in that period, a 0:4 percent gain that brought the regional job count to 781,400.

In January, Austin, Houston and San Antonio were the only large metro areas that had more jobs than a year earlier.

But Houston and San Antonio have been losing jobs since then.

Austin’s job picture isn’t all rosy: The area has been losing manufacturing and construction jobs at an accelerating pace, but those losses are being offset by gains in government, retailing and services fields.

Central Texas is holding up better in the recession than other technology hubs.

In April the Silicon Valley area lost jobs at a 4.4 percent annual rate. Portland, Ore., was down 4.7 percent, Seattle was down 3.4 percent, arid Raleigh, N.C., was down 3.3 percent.

Some smaller cities also racked up gains, including Midland, up 2.2 percent, and Odessa, up 2.9 percent.

Austin once again has stoutest metro job market in U.S. is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent

Property foreclosures continue to rise in Central Texas, but a growing percentage are repeat postings by lenders who have stopped short of seizing the homes.

In Travis County, 57 percent of the 441 postings for the June 2 auction are repeats, said Bonnie Brown, vice president of Foreclosure Listing Service Inc., an Addison company that tracks foreclosures.  That was up from 49 percent in April and 37 percent in March.  The pattern was similar in other counties.

Lenders have been initiating foreclosures when borrowers missed payments but holding off on taking possession of the properties while they work with borrowers to revise mortgage terms.

In a soft real estate market, lenders are reluctant to seize houses they might not be able to sell.  Additionally, the lenders would take on costs for maintenance and insurance at a time when many are trying to reduce costs.  They repost the homes to protect their ability to seize the properties at a later date.

Overall, June postings in Travis, Williamson, Hays and Bastrop counties were up 52 percent from a year ago.  They were up by the same percentage for the first half of the year.

Related Blogs

• Related Blogs on Foreclosures
• Job Losses Push Mortgage Delinquencies and Foreclosures to New Records
• Dallas Foreclosures Offer Many Hope

Foreclosures in area mount, but most are repeat listings is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent

Although sales were down 18 percent on a year-ago basis, board Chairman Jay Gohil said that was the smallest percentage decline this year. “With each month, the gap in sales volume from 2008 to 2009 is closing,” he said. The April percentage decline was half as big as the gap in January.

There were 1,919 sales in the pipeline for May, the most since July, although they were down 19 percent from a year earlier and the median price was 1 percent higher than a year ago. Currently there is about a 6 month supply of homes for sale which is considered a balanced market between supply and demand.

With the change in the economy, it appears to me as though people want to put their money into a tangible asset – something they can see and enjoy. It appears that houses under $250,000 are selling faster while those above $350,000 are sitting longer.

Now is a good time to buy, with ample inventory to choose from, low 4.75 percent interest rates, a $8,000 first-time buyer tax credit, and some sellers reducing prices.  Call me at (512) 914-2573 andI’ll go right to work for you!

Local home sales continue rebound is a post from: Austin Real Estate Agent