The developer next door to my house brought in a huge piece of equipment today to finish eating the trees that were not sold for lumber.

We still miss the trees. But the stack of branches was thirty feet high, so it’s probably a good thing that he’s chipping them up.

My wife thought the machine looked like the one in Doctor Seuss’s “the Lorax.” I agree it had resemblance, in part because it looked like it was built about 40 years ago, around when that story was written.

Here’s a video Cathy shot over our fence, which shows you what I’m talking about.

To see more about this site, including the trees that should not have been cut, click on the link (tag) that says “trees” below.

The city planning department received this recent email from city hall, from a resident who has his own concerns about clear cutting and other possible code violations.

Meanwhile, I have been working with key city staff on changes that would better protect those trees and sensitive areas which are supposed to be retained in the future. I’m sorry I have not gotten back to you yet Robert… I’ll write a detail blog entry on this topic, and forward it back to you via email (hopefully tomorrow).

Thanks!

Randy
________________________________________________________

> Jennifer Hennings
>
> Council person Randy Corman has had a developer clear cut the land adjacent to his. Apparently there was an agreement to save some of those trees. Rather that bother Mr. Corman, could you shed some light on this matter? Were there any violations of the guide lines set forth in the plat agreement? If so, what remedy will the city seek? If not, then why the agreement at all?
>
> Is this practice of clear cutting land with such an agreement to save trees within the city a common problem or is this just an isolated incident? And finally will any ordinances be put in place to prevent this in the future?
>
> Sincerely,
> Robert

Okay, okay so you were right. I admit it. YOU TOLD ME SO!

Here is step one of the sad saga of the development next to my property.

The Hearing Examiner clearly spells out that the developer needs to maintain 25 % of the trees; the developer says he will keep 29 % of them. (29% of 85 trees is 25 Trees)

So the development got approved based on these requirements, and here is what happened:

The trees in the distance are on a nearby resident’s property

The trees to the right of the fence are on my property

This is another view of the fence line with my property; the trees are on my property

There is not a single tree left on the entire property. The 25 trees that were supposed to be saved, which were up to 80 years old, are turned into logs and firewood.
________________

The following are the “BEFORE” pictures, prior to the trees being cut down.

The above picture is from my backyard, looking toward the wire fence that marks the property line. The cedar trees on the other side had been designated for retention, but were cut down along with all the others.

At my home in the Renton highlands, I have seen development occur in all directions.

This was a home two doors down from mine, on an oversized (irregular shaped) lot which shares 180 feet of fence line with my own backyard.

The fifty year old house is reduced to scrap

After the house is carted away, the land looks something like it did in 1958.

While I will miss the trees and tranquility of the low density, I’m prepared for this lot to be developed at R-8 (in this case about 6.8 units per acre.) Interestingly, the developer of this project is the same developer that is putting in a large multi-story mixed use project in down town, at the Jet City Espresso site. Since most of his previous projects were large urban structures, I’m curious to see how his houses come out.

I suspect they will be pretty high quality.