Page 10
TREES, fro m page 7
some of the city’s core values related to
living sustainably.
Labbe emphasized the practical
importance of a robust urban canopy. Fully
grown, mature trees can absorb up to 80
percent of rainfall, which alleviates pressure
on the city’s sewer and stormwater
management systems. Large trees also
improve air quality and provide shade, which
lowers summer temperatures and reduces
the heat island affect — the absorption of
heat, and subsequent higher temperatures,
due to a large human population and
activities.
Old and healthy trees play a far more
important role ecologically than young
saplings, especially mature conifers like
Douglas firs and sequoias. Those trees
provide wildlife habitat and protection for
hundreds of different animals, birds, insects
and flora, symbiotic relationships that have
evolved over millions of years.
Labbe noted that Portland’s tree code
prior to 2011 was fragmented and applied
unevenly throughout the city. The new code
is consistent across the city, is more
coherent and more clearly defines what
developers and homeowners are required to
do.
The new administrative rules establishe a
minimum standard of tree density in the
city: one large tree for every 1,000 square
feet or three small trees for every 300
square feet The tree size is measured in
terms of the planting area needed: 150
square feet for a large tree; 50 square feet
for a small tree.
Anyone wishing to remove a tree,
whether a private property owner or public
entities such as the city, must first receive a
permit from the city’s Bureau of
Development Services. That is the primary
reason the Urban Forestry Commission is
able to now track canopy loss and tree
removal.
The code also establishes a replacement
requirement: Two saplings must be planted
for £Uiy tree removed due to private
development
A developer or homeowner must pay a
$1,200 fine to remove trees from private
property. That is the approximate cost of
planting a tree and helping establish it for .
two years, according to Urban Forestry.
The new rules took effect at the
beginning of this year. People wanted them
changed almost instantly.
“I didn’t expect it to be so soon,” Labbe
said. “There was a lot achieved in this
update, but there are definite gaps that
weren’t covered.”
On Aug. 4, the Urban Forestry
Commission held the only public hearing on
interim rule. More than two dozen people
testified for two hours, representing groups
such as Friends of Trees, the Audubon
Society of Portland, and concerned
residents. Everyone called for replacing the
interim rule with stronger regulations that
protect large trees.
Kevin Hillery, an arborist and member of
Portland’s Heritage Tree Commission,
commented on the unusual involvement of
citizens.
“I’ve never seen more people save
significant trees than in the last few years,”
he said. “You could always find people in
power to help, and that just isn’t the case
anymore. There needs to be something in
Street Roots • Aug. 14-20, 2015
News
the Tree Code where you save significant
trees.”
Friends of Trees, the tree planting
nonprofit, introduced a call of action at the
meeting calling for changes to the code to
protect the city’s largest trees.
McCullough echoed the belief of many
Portlanders, members of the Urban Forestry
Commission and other environmentalists
who criticize the fines for being too small,
especially given the fact the developers
down the walnut in M t Tabor.
owhere in Portland has the issue of
protecting large, healthy trees become
more electrified than in Eastmoreland.
Earlier this year, Everett Custom Homes, a
Beaverton-based home developer own by Vic
Remmers, bought a 1,400-square-foot house
on a double lot on Martins Street for
$650,000. The home was demolished, and
N
Uplift, the neighborhood coalition for inner
Southeast Portland. “In practice, it’s coming
down to the neighbors to save the trees and
not to the city to regulate.”
The situation with the Eastmoreland
sequoias prompted Commissioner Amanda
Fritz to ask the Tree Code Oversight
Advisory Committee, a committee Fritz
created under the auspices of the Bureau of
Development Services to monitor
implementation of the new code, to draft
regulations that would protect large healthy
trees from removal.
The oversight committee discussed
potential regulations during a July 20
meeting, including increasing the mitigation
fee, establishing stricter regulations for
trees over a particular size, creating a 30- or
60-day delay between a permit application
and tree removal, creating approval criteria,
and creating a fund to purchase private
property that contains large trees.
Creating a prohibition against cutting
down large trees, unless they are unhealthy,
was never considered.
“It looks to me like the focus is on raising
the cost of removing large healthy trees to
dissuade development,” Labbe said. “This
could be problematic since the returns on
development are always going up ... so
unless that cost goes up at the same rate,
then any regulatory deterrence will go
down.
The committee met again Aug. 10. The
frustration felt by Cairo, members of the
Urban Forestry Commission and other
committee members was palpable. During a
review of the last six months of the new tree
code’s implementation, Cairo said, “I’m -
[ reaUy pleased th e (rule) is interim.”
PHOTO COURTESY OF STEVE KELLER
One o f the Eastmoreland neighborhood sequoias that so fa r has been spared removal.
paying the fines aré making hundreds of
thousands of dollars in profit from the sale
of splitting lots.
“It’s a token,” he said.
Trees are also being removed because of
street improvement projects spearheaded by
the Bureau of Transportation, including
building sidewalks in east Portland. Before
the interim rule, any capital improvement
projects on city-owned property and public
right-of-ways were required to replace any
trees removed. Now, two trees must be
replanted for every tree removed, but critics
say that doesn’t necessarily equate to
replacing the total canopy loss.
“The Bureau of Transportation’s street
design standards are not very tree friendly,”
Labbe said. “It’s also not about protecting
old trees; it’s about creating streetscapes
where large healthy trees can grow.”
Cairo, the city’s forester, worries that the
rule’s replacement requirements will
actually lead to the canopy loss, especially in
cases where large trees are cut down and
replaced with saplings of smaller tree
species.
“Less than half of (large trees) are
replaced with large form trees,” Cairo said.
“We’re not putting them back.”
Vic Remmers has not returned a call for
comment Neither has Steve Melkerson, the
developer who originally intended to cut
Remmers planned to build a 2,500-square-
foot house on the lot, which would require
cutting down the three sequoias.
Neighbors rallied to save the sequoias.
McCullough and Eastmoreland resident
Elizabeth Leach, owner of the Elizabeth
Leach Gallery, began negotiating with
Remmers. An llth-hour deal was struck
June 23 the day the sequoias were slated for
cutting. Residents agreed to buy the entire
lot from Remmers for $900,000 — a quarter-
million dollars more than what he paid a few
weeks earlier.
So far, approximately $550,000 has been
raised to purchase the lo t Leach said some
individuals are willing to pay a bridge loan to
cover the rest of the cost and some
foundations have expressed interest in
providing funding as well. The lots will be
owned by a nonprofit land tru st Neighbors
plan to sell the vacant lot to a developer
who will build a smaller house and turn the
lot with the sequoias into a pocket park.
Eastmoreland’s sequoias reveal, in the
eyes of Labbe, concerned residents, and
other conservationists, how little the city’s
tree code actually does to protect large,
healthy trees.
“The city places great value in having an
urban canopy and maintaining the trees we
have,” said Bob Kellett, the neighborhood
planning program manager at Southeast
A draft of a three-page memo to
Commissioner Fritz was circulated, detailing
the committee’s complaints of the interim
rule. Among other thing, the committee
says there was little to no public process
before the interim rule was implemented;
that the discretion of the urban forester has
been reduced by the rule, in that Cairo is
unable to deny permits seeking to remove
large trees; that city bureaus, particularly
the Bureau of Transportation, can do better
to preserve or replace trees as part of street
improvement projects; and that the $1,200
fee established in the tree code is too low.
Mieke Keenan, a program coordinator
with the Bureau of Development Services,
told the committee that the deadline to ask
for a public hearing on the administrative
rules is S ept 16. If a public hearing is held,
it will not be in front of city staff or City
Council. The finalized rule will be filed in
the auditor’s office by O ct 19; after that,
the rule can be appealed to City Council.
Many think seeking change through the
City Council will be an uphill battle, given
the influence of money and growth
developers bring. Labbe echoed the
sentiment of many involved residents, such
as the people in Eastmoreland working to
save the three sequoias, saying development
and preservation can coexist.
“The trees that are coming out don’t need
to come out to have that kind of
development,” Labbe said. “We can have
more development and even infill
development and preserve these trees.
There’s a lack of creativity in a segment of
the development community.”
This report is p a rt o f Street Roots’ ongoing
coverage o f growth an d development in
Portland, awaldroupe@gmail.com