Introduction

____
The floor plan on the left is what was built. The floorpan on the right is just an example of many “off the shelf designs” found on a local contractor’s website. It is the same square footage and number of rooms, but would have fit on the existing open space on the property. Both single level floorpans could be built as ADA compliant.

Current city codes place no restrictions on ill-conceived projects that make no effort to balance preservation of the environment with building density. There are only nominal “in lieu of preservation” fees for cutting down any tree over 36″ dbh (diameter at breast height). Although all of the trees that were removed were over 12″ dbh and therefore classified by the City as “large form”, none were 36″ diameter or larger and therefore subject to any financial penalty. Despite the significant negative impact to property values and aesthetics, adjacent neighbors have no means to assert any influence in the process. There is no place for public opinion and no means for appeal when such reckless and irresponsible development plans come to light. Current statutes do not even require abutting property owners to be advised of any construction plans.

Neighborhood Reaction

Because the site plan revealed how an ADU of the desired maximum 800 square feet could be constructed without removing any trees, emotion ran high when the news spread through the community. The unnecessary loss of trees, especially in times of escalating concern around climate change, seemed so senseless.

Much energy went into trying to change the plan. A group of cul-de-sac homeowners sent a letter to the property owners formally stating concerns about further tree loss and asking that they consider redesigning the ADU to preserve the trees. Our request was dismissed out of hand. Further appeals were made both collectively and individually. They were all treated with the same indifference by the property owners. The neighbors retained a highly experienced land use attorney in effort to find a mutually beneficial solution. An offer to share the costs to redesign plans in return for preserving the trees was summarily dismissed by the property owners without any efforts to negotiate. Unfortunately, all efforts to find an amenable arrangement were met with inflexibility, indifference and outright insensitivity. When the construction permit was issued in July, construction moved ahead as planned.

As part of the effort to save the trees, the Portland City Council members were advised of the situation. None so much as responded with any acknowedgement or outreach. Their lack of support or any action to counter our situation left many in our cul-de-sac community feeling ignored, oppressed and violated.

Unfortunately, our story is not unique. Read this powerful public testimony from Casey Clapp, a Tree Inspector for Portland’s Bureau of Urban Development. There are many similar situations, past and present, throughout Portland that could be remedied with the application of some thoughtful reform to current tree preservation codes. It will take pressure, however, from the community to obtain meaningful change. The one organization that is advocating for more sensibility around tree preservation is Trees for Life Oregon. Please support them. They published our story on their website as it unfolded.

The City that likes to call itself “green” is not making tree preservation a priority. One option concerned citizens have to save trees in similar jeopardy throughout Portland is to provide public input. Despite the neighborhood community’s intense effort, the battle for these eight trees was lost. But with public pressure, we can make a difference. Another place to make a difference is to support environmentally conscious builders and other businesses that can have the means to curtail irresponsible development by not choosing to participate in it. FIN Builders is the contractor of record on the building permit for the ADU project. Harrity Tree Specialists is the arborist that took down the the trees. Principals of both companies were made aware of the senseless and contentious nature of this project based on its complete disregard toward environmental impact. Both chose to accept to work on the project.

This site was created as a tool to gather input. Please submit comments in the “Reply” box at the bottom of this page. They will be forwarded to the Bureau of Development Services, the Department of Urban Forestry, the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability and City Council members. Also, please take a look at the archived page of previous comments left when this project was still in its planning stage.

Eight 100 foot tall trees in our neighborhood are now lost forever. But with a collective effort, others can be saved from such reckless and irresponsible development.

Thanks to all that support the cause.

Ron Minter

“The indifference towards old trees makes a mockery of our supposed new respect for the environment”.

Thomas Pakenham

For those interested in learning more about the importance of trees, here is a great read you can pick up at Powell’s.

Here is another, “Remarkable Trees of the World” by Thomas Pakenham.

*Here is a list of all the birds that have been sighted in the immediate vicinity of the trees:

“To understand and be understood, those are among life’s greatest gifts, and every interaction is an opportunity to exchange them. There is nothing more difficult yet more gratifying in our society than living with sincerity and acting from a place of largehearted, constructive, rational faith in the human spirit, continually bending toward growth and betterment. This remains the most potent antidote to cynicism. Today, especially, it is an act of courage and resistance.“

Debbie Millman