Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trees Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reduces tree restoration fees, changes mitigation ratio for two annexations; tentative ordinance approvals 5-0
Summary
After reconsideration, the council cut tree restoration fees and changed mitigation from 3:1 to 1:1 for two annexation cases (ordinances 2958 and 2961) where prior tree removals occurred under county jurisdiction. Council voted 5-0 on tentative approvals and directed staff to return with final findings.
The Lake Oswego City Council on Aug. 5 reconsidered conditions it had imposed on two recent annexation approvals after staff calculated tree restoration fees that council members described as disproportionately large for small residential lots.
Background: At a prior hearing the council approved two annexations (Kenny Street and a Lakeview Boulevard site) and applied tree-related conditions including a tree restoration fee and an enhanced mitigation requirement. Staff later calculated the restoration-fee amounts at $37,860 for the Kenny Street annexation and $26,696 for the Lakeview Boulevard annexation. Staff told the council these amounts derived from the mitigation ratio and replacement calculations in the city's tree regulations and noted the properties likely would have met county Type 2 removal criteria had the applicants applied under county jurisdiction at the time of removal.
Applicants' testimony: Jesse Davis, representing the Kenny Street property, told the council the tree removals occurred while the property was under Clackamas County jurisdiction and said the family had not intended to avoid city rules. He described a smaller-scale family development plan and asked for mitigation proportional to the parcel size. Matt Williams, representing the Lakeview Boulevard property, said the homeowners had removed trees after receiving advice from tree contractors and PGE; he said the family had not been told to contact Lake Oswego before removal and asked the council to consider the financial burden on a small homeowner.
Council response and action: Staff presented options to reduce the calculated restoration fees: reduce by one-half, reduce by two-thirds, or waive entirely. Staff recommended a two-thirds reduction to address equity concerns. Council members said they wanted to be welcoming to homeowners while also preserving the integrity of the code and discouraging deliberate pre-annexation clear-cutting.
The council settled on a compromise: reduce the tree restoration fees to 25% of the originally calculated amounts and change the mitigation requirement to a 1-to-1 ratio (instead of 3-to-1) for both annexation approvals. Council voted 5-0 to enact Ordinance 2958 and Ordinance 2961 with those amendments as tentative approvals and directed staff to return on Sept. 2, 2025 with findings and final ordinance language.
What this means for the applicants: Under the amended conditions the applicants will pay a reduced restoration fee (25% of the previously calculated fee) and will be required to mitigate at a 1:1 ratio; staff also noted a $172 per-tree fee applies if replacement trees cannot fit on the property and must be funded through the city's tree fund.
Speakers: Staff presenter Jesse Espie summarized fee calculations and options; applicants Jesse Davis and Matt Williams spoke in support of reduced fees. Councilors expressed sympathy for small homeowners while balancing program integrity.
