Growth puts strain on tree-cutting rules

SUMMARY: Conflict | As homes rise and leafy canopies disappear, some residents are concerned that Lake Oswego is too easily letting trees be felled, and they want more public involvement

Robins flit through wild plum trees, and the ground is a tangle of blackberries, ivy and morning glory. The five acres of vacant land next to Lake Oswego's Waluga Park serve as a buffer between busy city streets and the Waluga neighborhood's modest homes.

But a developer's plan to remove 117 trees on the site and replace them with 32 town homes -- a decision that moved a step closer to reality Monday night when a city panel tentatively approved the project -- has residents mourning loss of their tree canopy and grumbling that the city's ordinance governing tree-cutting should be tightened.

"The legacy here is rural," said resident Barbara Zeller. "If you destroy it, the glue that pulled people together is gone."

The proposed tree-cutting next to Waluga Park is the latest of several that have generated concern about the rate of infill development in the city. The effects of infill have spilled over into several corners of city life: In August, city councilors banned large-scale construction work on Sundays; a citizens' group has held one forum to discuss infill and plans another in January; and two neighborhood associations have formed subcommittees to monitor land-use decisions such as tree-cutting permits.

The activity comes as developable land becomes scarcer, prices for that land continue to increase and builders turn to older areas of the city such as Lake Grove that have small houses on big lots. The number of demolition permits has more than doubled since 2001. That year, the city issued 17 permits to demolish single-family homes; last year, that number jumped to 43.

The number of trees approved for cutting has hovered around 2,000 a year for the past three years and is on track to surpass that number by the end of 2005. Hamid Pishvaie, the city's development review manager, said that in contrast to a decade ago, when city officials approved at least a dozen subdivisions a year, developers now are building on less desirable parcels because no large swaths of land are left. So residents are more apt to notice missing trees on a smaller piece of property, he said.

"This is a treed community, so you see this everywhere," he said. "Over time, you'll see the canopy re-established. We're trying to compensate."

That compensation takes the form of requiring a fee for tree removal. Developers also must replace each tree they cut, although typically the replacement trees are much smaller.

But residents such as Ron Hanson, president of the Uplands Neighborhood Association and the husband of city Councilor Gay Graham, think the tree code could be stricter. On a tour of his neighborhood, Hanson pointed to homes on spacious lots with impressive views that he predicted will be torn down and replaced by larger dwellings. The tree-lined area, he said, is losing its character.

"It's more pleasing to the eye to have mature landscaping and a variety of types of homes in the neighborhood," he said. With homes that are 5,000 square feet and bigger, he said, "it's kind of imposing to have those houses around you. Instead of looking at trees, you're looking at walls."

Hanson would like the city to place notices of tree-cutting permits as close to prominent streets as possible. Several times, he said, developers have tucked houses far enough back from his neighborhood's meandering roads that it's impossible to tell when the city has issued a permit -- which usually is posted just outside the house being built.

Also, Hanson said, the public should get more than 14 days to respond to such permits. And notices should be sent to more people than just the chair of the neighborhood association where the trees are slated for cutting.

Stephan Lashbrook, the city's community development director, is accustomed to complaints that the code is too loose or too strict. A committee reviewed it some years ago and has no plans to reconvene, he said.

"The staff position has been that when someone comes in and says, 'We want to remove the trees to build this house,' we don't start by telling them, 'You can't build a house here.' We move into the realm of working with them on how a house of that size can spare the trees."

That interpretation is about to be put to the test in a case involving a developer who wants to build a 10,350-square-foot house on Oswego Lake. City councilors next month are scheduled to determine whether Jeff Parker, who is unrelated to the Southwest Portland Realtor of the same name, will be allowed to cut 17 trees on his property. Parker and the Forest Hills Easement Association, a group that uses a swim park adjacent to Parker's property and is fighting his plans, are in city-sponsored mediation over the project.

"It's unusual for it to progress this far, and it's an uncomfortable position," Lashbrook said. "Where you've got any kind of dispute with so many people involved and the parties are willing to mediate, that's the best approach to take."

1 photo

Sidebar - About the tree code