March 2002
Cover Story
Tree Removal Proposed for Sudden Valley
by Robert Schultz
Robert Schultz, a Sudden Valley resident, believes his last Whatcom Watch article helped preserve the Sudden Valley newspaper from board censorship. His email address: rschu@nas.com.
When the first plat of Sudden Valley was approved in 1969, its 1,200 acres became a threat to Lake Whatcoms viabilily as a reservoir. The runoff pollution threat became reality with the construction of each new home that followed. Many trees have been cut over the years to make way for homes. There is the state Department of Natural Resources logging threat in the hills above Sudden Valley; other logging proposals have come from within the valley. If Yogi Berra came to Sudden Valley he would say its déjà vu all over again regarding logging proposals.
In 1987, the Sudden Valley Community Association (SVCA) commissioned an Olympia consultant to study what they called a selective Tree Maintenance Program to increase long-term aesthetics and property values. The proposed plan would have removed as many as 786 second-growth trees or as much as 400,000 board feet from a 40-acre section of Sudden Valley.
Many Canadian owners stopped paying taxes when their dollar plunged. Defaulting lots caused a glut in the valleys property market. SVCAs board claimed thinning out the forests would make property lots more marketable at higher prices because it would:
Allow real estate agents to find lots more easily,
Enable buyers to see entire lots and envision homes on them,
Prevent root disease from spreading,
Open up forests to sunlight, making land more attractive, and
Nurture younger trees now being overshadowed.
Profit Margin for Sudden Valley
The consultant also said the SVCA could expect $20,000 to $25,000 profit. It would be a perfect world of busy real estate agents, happy loggers, supposedly healthier forests and prospective buyers who want a beautiful wooded communityjust so long as trees dont get in the way.
SVCA called this a pilot project, with logging profits put in a separate trust fund for other forest management projects in the valley. The scheme was a precursor of thin(g)s to come. The tax defaulters were also not paying SVCA dues. Clearing trees could clear the way for new dues payers.
Concerned Valley residents greeted this proposal with anger and skepticism. They were not soothed by the pro-sunlight, anti-root disease sugar coating. They formed a Save Our Trees Committee. The committees expert advisors found the plan to remove almost half the areas trees harmful to the forest and environment. (Some logging would be on slopes as high as 30 degrees.)
The potential damage to their properties, roads and watershed would actually lower property values, not raise them. One expert claimed SVCAs profit would reach as high as $50,000, not the lower figure mentioned by SVCAs consultant.
Residents Refused to Turn Over Trees
After many months of expert claim and counter-claim, the scheme died of malnutrition. Residents refused to feed loggers and realtors appetites; they would not sign licenses turning their property (trees) over to the SVCA.
We jump from 1987 to 2002. A recent issue of the Sudden Valley Views (a monthly newspaper) has a front page article about Azam Nader, the new owner of Sun-Mark Properties. This is legitimate news about her background and plans for her company. But, immediately under it on the same front page is an article by Ms. Nader, who is listed as a Views contributor. Here it is, slightly edited for brevity:
Cant See the Beauty for the Trees
As the original real estate sales company in Sudden Valley, we at
Sun-Mark Properties have seen the community and its property values
decrease over the years. We feel that one of the factors that negatively
impacts real estate values in this great community is the amount of
trees and vegetation on some properties that result in problems for
the potential home buyer.
Here are some of questions to ask:
Do you have too many trees crowding your lot?
Is your home dark even with the lights on?
Are you having problems with not enough light because of excessive
branches?
Do you have too much moisture on your home due to direct contact
with over-hanging branches?
What does your roof look like? Is it clean or filled with
branches and other debris?
We would like to help. We are in the process of implementing a tree
removal program for Sudden Valley home owners. We already have a tree
removal company in place and hope to get the cooperation of the Sudden
Valley Community Association and the Architectural Control Committee
(ACC) to begin this program.
For those interested, call for a tree removal request form
Once
the removal request has been received from the Architectural Control
Committee, a crew will be dispatched to your property. At no cost
to the home owner, the trees and other debris will be transported
from the property. At that point, cut trees will be the property of
Sun-Mark. A portion of the sales proceeds will be donated to the SVCA.
It is our intention to make this a free service to all Sudden Valley
home owners....
|
History Repeats Itself
There it is for all to see, familiar themes, then and now. Were doing this for your own good, were here to help you. Homeowners reaction, as in 1987, is negative. Linda Marrom, who led the fight that stopped the states plan to clear-cut above Austin Creek, tells me she will fight this scheme as well. She speaks for a growing number of folks in the Valley in a letter to the Sudden Valley Views.
She writes that Sun-Marks statement about the amount of trees and vegetation negatively impacting real estate value is a curious one. She understands the need to cut hazardous trees or limbs and the removal of vegetation such as blackberries except near streams or wetlands.
Her letter states:
Azam mentioned working with big logging companies, not small tree and landscaping businesses. She said a portion of the timber money raised would go to Sudden Valley, but the majority would go to Sun-Mark and the logging company of their choice. I mean no disrespect to either, but when special interests are involved most decisions are made by dollar signs, not by environmental protection. Its just a fact, not an insult.
What Happens Next?
At a SVCA board meeting, another real estate agent said that sales were moving fast because her clients wanted to live among the trees. A homeowner said that if buyers dont want trees they should not come to Sudden Valley. So, what happens next?
SVCA general manager Steve Grieser says Ms. Nader told him of her plans but he could make no promises. Architectural Control Committee chair, Dave Scott, told me that I think shes trying to be helpful to the valley, but she has to follow rules like anyone else. When I told him Ms. Nader would wait until she had enough homeowners and prospective clients to all apply for permission to thin, he replied that pressure from either side would have no effect on his decisions.
Neither Grieser, Scott, or SVCA president Jon Wolfe would comment on the merits of her proposal. The Architectural Control Committee guidelines allow removal of trees, limbs and vegetation for reasons of safety, fire prevention and maintenance of property values where unchecked growth poses aesthetic concerns for neighbors, etc. The guidelines were not intended as a marketing tool for realtors.
Loopholes Await Clever Legalist
The fate of this déjà vu logging proposal rests with the Architectural Control Committee and the board. The 1987 proposal was a creature of Sudden Valley management. The Sun-Mark proposal has no stated official support from SVCA. Dave Scott did tell me that money for SVCA will play no part in the Architectural Control Committees decisions. But if she wants to give SVCA any money shes free to do so. He would be willing to meet with her as he would with anyone else and the guidelines will be followed.
Since any guidelines are subject to interpretation, the line between beneficial thinning and commercial logging could be too porous for comfort. There may be loopholes awaiting a clever legalist. Past events have made knowledgeable valley residents wary of such proposals.
Linda Marroms letter says she trusts SVCA to thoroughly scrutinize the Sun-Mark proposal and to adhere to Sudden Valley by-laws. She asks Valley residents to e-mail Steve Grieser at gm@ suddenvalley.com. Potential Sudden Valley home- buyers living in or out of our watershed might want to do the same.