If a tree falls in a Ferncliff Avenue forest, does it make a sound?

Whatever the volume, falling trees on a forested three-acre parcel near the High School Road intersection certainly makes an impact – especially when large firs and cedars are lopped within a new residential development’s “no-cut” buffer zone.

The fact that the city gave mixed signals about its tree retention requirements only adds to the cacophony.

“I don’t know if it’s negligence or incompetence, but the city let this happen,” said Garibaldi Loop resident Chad Campbell, who lives a stone’s throw from the proposed five-lot “Hamlet” subdivision along Ferncliff’s north end.

Campbell and other residents of the Woodland Village, a 27-unit housing development along Garibaldi Loop, say tree clearing in the Stonecress LLC-owned subdivision threatens homes and lives.

In letters to the city, they say remaining trees may come crashing down during storms and that logging to make way for new homes will imperil wetlands in their neighborhood.

Concerns over development along Ferncliff is nothing new, Councilman Jim Llewellyn said.

“It’s totally fascinating that the owners at Woodland Village are concerned about development next to them,” he said. “Five years ago, we heard a lot of the same concerns. The neighborhood anguished over Woodland Village. It got the nickname ‘Wood-less Village.’”

But Woodland Village’s residents aren’t anti-development – they’re anti-irresponsible development, according to Tracey Denlinger.

She and other Woodland Village residents are particularly incensed by the removal of numerous trees inside a 50-foot- wide buffer along Ferncliff.

“That buffer was clear-cut,” Garibaldi Loop resident Tracey Denlinger said. “The trees that were cut had huge rings. Some were 100 to 150 years old. The city allowed them to do that.”

While admitting the city erred in its dealings with Poulsbo-based Stonecress LLC, city planner Bob Katai said developers were not given approval to cut the buffer’s trees.

“What happened was that the construction permit was granted before a (buffer) boundary fence was put in,” Katai said. “(Stonecress) wasn’t told they could cut, but planners needed to go in there and make sure they were in compliance. Public works should not have issued the permit before we had the fence up.”

Assistant City Engineer Ross Hathaway said fault lies with the developer, who is “obliged to meet the conditions” of the project.

“The conditions were clear,” he said. “They violated those conditions.”

Calls to Stonecress Thursday and Friday were not returned.

Garabaldi Loop residents also assert that the planning department implied approval for substantial alterations in the subdivision’s buffer zone.

In a memo issued in May, former city planner Thomas Bonsell asked the subdivision’s builders for a plan on the “re-vegetation of the 50-foot roadside buffer adjacent to Ferncliff Avenue.”

According to residents, the memo is essentially a greenlight for clear-cutting.

Katai disagrees.

“Saying ‘go ahead and re-vegetate’…I’m not sure that means cut down trees,” he said.

However, Katai said Bonsell may have given a verbal go-ahead to developers for the removal of some trees in the buffer.

While no financial penalties apply to the tree-clearing, the city has ordered Stonecress to replant what amounts to one and a half times the diameter of the trees logged in the buffer.

The incident at the Hamlet subdivision may lead to procedural changes between city departments, Katai said.

“The bottom line is, we’re going to look into this,” he said. “We’re going to meet and (possibly) not have permits issued until everybody has signed off. It’s a procedural change.

“We realize that, in current procedures, sometimes (the departments) can get ahead of each other.”