PASADENA >> The scheduled removal of three mature ficus trees on South Lake Avenue has elicited a wave of protests from a group of residents who said they will fight to stop what they call “the slaughter of beautiful shade trees.”

Three 70-year-old parkway trees with wide trunks and circular, green canopies, located adjacent to retail businesses were marked with “tree removal” signs last week after the city settled a lawsuit with an adjacent property owner who claimed the trees were damaging his property and were a nuisance. Their removal will take place within the next eight days during the middle of the night, said city spokesman William Boyer.

Rodeo Holdings LLC, property owner at 497 S. Lake Ave., filed a lawsuit against the city in April 2014, saying the “three massive ficus trees” owned by the city were dropping “huge amounts of debris” on the sidewalk and roof, clogging the drains and buckling the sidewalks. The sidewalk damage “threatens the structural integrity of the building” and opens the property owner to slip-and-fall lawsuits, according to the complaint.

In 2013, Rodeo Holdings filed a request for tree-removal permit with the city. However, the Department of Public Works concluded the trees were healthy and should not be removed. After 21/2 years of fighting the subsequent lawsuit, the city settled by granting the tree-removal request but requiring the property owner to pay for the removal of the trees, stump grinding, sidewalk repair and the cost of new trees, Boyer said.

Assistant City Manager Julie Gutierrez, in a weekly newsletter to the City Council dated Oct. 13, said the adjacent property owner had presented evidence supported by engineering and arborist reports that the trees had caused damage and without removal, would continue to undermine the property. “The city found it was prudent for the trees to be removed,” Gutierrez wrote.

Most likely, the trees would be replaced with much smaller London plane trees, the species selected for South Lake Avenue and listed in the city’s Master Street Tree Plan.

Resident Lori Paul, a biologist, said the city acted without giving the chance for the public to weigh in. Also, she and others were furious the city went against the 2013 decision of its staff and of the city’s Urban Forestry Advisory Committee. She said the city agreed to cut down the trees to appease an intolerant property owner with powerful attorneys.

“They did not respect the investigation of their own staff made through the UFAC in 2013,” she said. “The city made a decision to destroy this asset without any input from the neighbors.”

Some community members in emails and social media posts say the city did not put up a fight in court. “The city could have had their own experts look at the matter. I don’t think the city did their homework,” concluded Branislav Kecman, an electrical engineer who walks by the trees everyday on the way to his office on East California Boulevard.

But Gutierrez said the city settled only after aggressive action that included filing a brief by the city’s attorney asking for the case to be dismissed, court records show. Instead, the judge ordered the two sides to settle in February 2015. A nonmonetary settlement was reached on Aug. 31, 2016, Boyer said.

Kecman is part of a small group holding nightly vigils around the three trees, where members hand out fliers asking residents to call City Hall. The group has collected 153 signatures on a petition asking the city to save the trees, he said.

“They are the most beautiful trees on the whole stretch of South Lake Avenue,” he said.

The loose group of tree lovers are looking for an attorney to file an injunction to stop the tree removal, he said. Short of a legal remedy, Kecman wants the city to save the trees by repairing the sidewalks and investigating ways to stop root intrusion into the building.

Boyer said the city, a Tree City USA awardee for 26 years running, works hard to protect its 60,000 city trees. In this case, the city ran into a set of unique circumstances.

“This is not a decision we came to lightly,” he said. “But the facts were the facts. The engineering and arborists reports showed there was damage being caused.”

He said the city understands the public concern.

“They are mature ficus trees and they’ve been around for a while. We understand there are people who are upset,” Boyer said.