TTake a quick look at Bend’s new tree code and you won’t regret it if you find it a little confusing. You can cut down this number of trees at this diameter – or cut down a certain percentage at a certain breast height… or just pay to cut down as much as you want. The ifs and buts associated with the program take a little time to get your head around.

We’ll throw the developers a bone.

click to enlarge

What seems unreasonable, however, is that Pahlisch Homes is currently opposing a new tree protection ordinance that went into effect this month. The local developer has retained an attorney in hopes of changing something that went into effect just four days before this letter. In Pahlisch’s complaint to the City of Bend, the developer claims that the tree protection process happened too quickly — that the two years between the start and end of the process somehow weren’t enough time. They also complain that too few people from the construction industry were brought onto the committee that set the rules for the new ordinance. In total, six of the 14 people appointed by the Bend City Council in 2023 work in the construction industry — and one of them was there on behalf of Pahlisch Homes.

If anyone from that development team was on the committee, surely the issue would have worked its way up in the months and years between then and now? It’s all so mysterious, and given the makeup of the committee, one hardly gets the feeling that developers – especially Pahlisch – were excluded from the process.

If anything, we’d argue that the construction industry is a bit too closely tied to the Bend City Council. An individual who works for one of the region’s largest developers was appointed by the council in 2023 and still sits on that governing body today.

The same city council also found itself virtually hostage to another developer who began a project near the Box Factory and then argued that the project was too far along to deny a highly unpopular tax break. The fact that the city council paused its multifamily property tax exemption program shortly after that approval could be seen as evidence that the program was not in the best interests of Bend residents.

Maybe we shouldn’t blame a developer for what they’re doing: trying to save every penny and use every piece of land they can get to build more housing. In theory, this is how we get out of the humanitarian crisis we’re in, where people are still living in unsafe housing and living in the forest and on the streets. That’s a good argument if you ignore the environmental costs of the projects. Trees and shade help prevent our cities from becoming heat islands and driving up heating and cooling costs. To tackle this thorny issue, members of the Tree Protection Committee have looked at the myriad concerns and tried to balance the needs of the majority.

Given the timing and length of the committee’s deliberations, we are confused why this developer would do such a thing at this time.

But hey, if you’re concerned about how many trees you can or can’t cut down in a certain part of a development in Bend, we have a friendly piece of advice for you: With the new fire risk map released by the state, it’s time to get to grips with the reactions and realities of the building hardening codes that will come to developers next.

Those regulations, which are set to take effect in certain areas once risk maps are created, will require builders to use fire-resistant siding, resilient roofs and other materials designed to help keep homes from burning in a wildfire. As Bend moves home construction further into the forest, more homes will likely fall under these upcoming hardening regulations. And it’s not a cheap addition to building codes, either. Hardening homes costs an estimated 2 to 11 percent more than standard construction, according to Oregon’s Building Codes Division.

If and where this happens, simple tree protection regulations may be overshadowed.