THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, September 11, 1994 TAG: 9409110049
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY DEBBIE MESSINA, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: VIRGINIA BEACH LENGTH: Medium: 91 lines
John and Wanda Cawley didn't get two trees to hang a hammock from when they moved into their Piney Grove home three years ago. Just a single spindly tree.
Across town in Park Place, the Hamashins have a half-dozen shade trees - each about 15 feet tall - to choose from for their hammock.
Even though the Hamashins' street near Redwing Park is less than one year old, an abundance of large trees planted by the builder make it appear lusher, greener, more lived- in than the Cawleys' older street off Holland Road.
The difference can be attributed to a city landscape ordinance adopted several years ago that required more trees and larger trees in new subdivisions. Now the city is proposing changes to the ordinance that critics charge will weaken tree standards and result in a less attractive city.
Appearances are everything in the sprawling suburbs of Virginia Beach.
``The neighborhood looks more established with trees and a lawn,'' said Cindy Hamashin, standing in the shade of a leafy spire pear. ``That's one of the reasons we bought here.''
Before ducking inside to escape the blazing sun, Wanda Cawley said, ``We got one tree and five bushes and some dirt covered with straw and that's called landscaping?''
Many new neighborhoods in Virginia Beach are built on treeless plains that had been cleared for farming, such as Ocean Lakes and Landstown Meadows. The landscape ordinance was intended to use trees to soften the appearance of new subdivisions like these that are tangles of vinyl siding and asphalt streets.
``It's like they sheered off everything,'' said Johnnie S. Miller, president of the Beautification Commission and a member of the Landscape Ordinance Committee that developed the original ordinance. ``The ordinance puts things back into perspective. It makes our newer neighborhoods look like places where people live and care.''
The proposed change calls for smaller trees and more of them. But more is not always better, critics say.
``In some instances, you would get more trees, but they would be small, dinky trees,'' said B.H. ``Pat'' Bridges Jr., a landscape architect who serves on the Beautification
Commission and the Landscape Ordinance Committee. ``The small trees are more vulnerable to being uprooted and to vandalism. Plus they're distinctively less attractive aesthetically.''
Miller agreed. ``You put a small tree in a yard with pets, children and lawn mowers, it can very easily be broken or cut down.'' he said.
Not only are critics upset with the change, but also the impetus for making the change - saving builders money - and the clandestine way it was done.
``The Planning Commission had been hearing from builders and individuals,'' said Charles G. Hassen, development services coordinator who helped draft the changes. ``By putting smaller trees on the lot it would be less expensive for them.''
In exchange for downsizing the trees, the number of trees required has been upped in most cases. Therefore, Hassen said, the canopy cover would remain the same.
The Planning Commission approved the new ordinance and passed it along to the City Council without consulting the Landscape Ordinance Committee.
The council, however, delayed a vote after fielding complaints.
``They ramrodded it through the Planning Commission and then tried to slip it through City Council without much notice to the public,'' Bridges complained. ``The planning staff arbitrarily decided to make proposed changes without recognizing the hard work of a very representative cross section of our community who spent 1 1/2 years drafting the ordinance.''
Planning Commission Chairman Dick Cockrell has apologized for leaving the public out of the process. ``Maybe I was just politically naive,'' he said.
The planning staff has since met with the committee, but there's still an impasse on the number and size of trees. The committee, however, agreed to two other changes: apply the ordinance to every new home and not just new subdivisions; and streamline the procedure for guaranteeing that trees will be planted.
Hassen said the planning department will likely present two options representing the two points of view for the City Council's consideration this fall. ILLUSTRATION: Color photo
CHARLIE MEADS/Staff
When John Cawley bought his Piney Grove home in Virginia Beach three
years ago, it was landscaped with just a single tree.
Photo
CHARLIE MEADS/Staff
Many neighborhoods in Virginia Beach are built on land that had been
cleared for farming. The landscape ordinance was intended to use
trees to soften the appearance of new subdivisions.
by CNB