Planning commission approves Deschutes River home with conditions after debate over removal of large spruce

BEND, Ore. — The Bend Planning Commission on April 14 approved a proposal for a new single-unit detached dwelling at 1714 Northwest Bridal Road in the Deschutes River Corridor, finding the project meets waterway overlay standards but adding conditions tied to landscaping and tree removal.

The commission voted to approve the application, with a specific condition allowing removal of a 30-inch Colorado blue spruce (referred to in the staff report as tree number 12) only if the applicant submits a revised landscaping plan showing that area revegetated with native riparian plants. The approval also requires additional screening plantings on the southeast property line.

The project proposes a 5,201-square-foot single-family home and a 994-square-foot attached garage on the west side of the Deschutes River. Staff planner Michelle Patrick described the site and the applicable waterway overlay standards, including requirements for tree removal, riparian setbacks and Deschutes River Corridor design review. Patrick said the proposed building footprint lies outside the 40-foot Deschutes River Corridor boundary and the 30-foot riparian setback, but that portions of the design require tree removals to accommodate the development.

“My name is Michelle Patrick. I’m an associate planner in our planning division,” Patrick said during her presentation and led the commission through tree removal, riparian and design criteria in the Waterway Overlay Zone.

The staff report and the applicant’s submittal included an arborist report. According to the arborist’s findings and the applicant’s presentation, several trees are proposed for removal because they intersect the proposed footprint or were judged hazardous by the consultant. The applicant’s planner, Greg Blackmore, summarized that the arborist cited the large blue spruce as atypical for the corridor and potentially vulnerable in saturated soils and wind events; Blackmore said the arborist provided hazard justification under the code and therefore asked that the tree be allowed to be removed.

“The arborist has provided that adequate justification per the code, and therefore, it’s requested to be removed,” Blackmore said.

Commissioners and staff pressed the applicant for added specificity and mitigation. Staff recommended several conditions of approval to meet waterway overlay and riparian criteria: substitution of a more appropriate alder species for one shown on the landscape plan, adding two additional trees for screening on the southeast property line, and a requirement that if tree number 12 is removed the exposed area not be replanted with turf but restored with native riparian species.

The applicant team, which included architect Jason Bauer and landscape designer Becky Shaw, told the commission that removing the spruce would allow a planting and screening approach that better fits the overall landscape plan; they also said the owners prefer to retain the tree if it can be shown not to be hazardous. The applicant added that they aim to submit building permit plans in early May.

Divergent views surfaced during the hearing. Several commissioners said the city needs on‑staff arborist expertise to make consistent determinations about tree hazard and removal; the city confirmed it recently budgeted a full‑time arborist in the community development department and expects the new hire to start in May. Commissioners asked staff and the applicant to provide clearer evidence about hazard and to document alternatives prior to permit issuance.

The commission approved the application with the staff‑recommended conditions and the added requirement that the landscaping plan be revised to revegetate the removal area with native plants if tree number 12 is permitted for removal. The vote to approve was unanimous.

What it means: The commission’s approval allows the applicant to proceed toward building permits, subject to the conditions. If the applicant removes the large blue spruce, the area must be restored with native riparian species rather than new turf; in any case the final planting and stormwater measures must be shown and approved at the building permit stage. The decision may be appealed under the Land Use Board of Appeals process if parties contend applicable criteria were not addressed.

Provenance: The staff presentation and the commission motion and vote are recorded in the meeting transcript; staff’s description of applicable standards, the arborist rationale and the commission’s conditions appear in the record.

Next steps: The applicant stated an intent to submit building permit plans in early May; required revisions identified by the commission and staff must be completed before building permit issuance.