Commentary on news, politics, sports, religion, TV and movies
 Tom Tangney
Tom on KIRO Radio
Join Tom Tangney and the rest of the Seattle Morning News crew every weekday morning at 5am on KIRO Radio.
About Tom Tangney
By day, you can hear Tom on Seattle's Morning News, and by night, he sits in the dark, making snide comments about what he sees on the silver screen.
Help us build a Fisher House
Bonneville Seattle is raising funds for the construction of a second Fisher House at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma and we need your help.
rianier_ap_600.jpg
Is the mountain the view, or is the tree that is blocking it out your window the real treasure? (AP Photo/File)

A view can be of the tree that is actually blocking your 'view'

BY Tom Tangney  on January 8, 2013 @ 9:03 am (Updated: 9:38 am - 1/8/13 )

A view is a view is a view.

First off, I must admit it's amusing to see a couple of extremely wealthy families squaring off, battling over who deserves a better view of the Olympics from their multi-million dollar homes.

Former Mariner John Olerud will soon have an "improved view" from his Clyde Hill home, but he's going to pay for it.

Olerud's neighbors have two 50 foot trees obstructing his home's view, and the city has ordered them removed at his expense.

The ruling is the first of its kind since 1991 under the view obstruction and tree removal ordinance. The Seattle Times reports those trees will then be replaced, and Olerud's neighbors will have to keep them trimmed to no higher than 25 feet.

But the fact that Olerud and his neighbors tried to out-Christian the other is also curious to me. During a Clyde Hill city hearing, the Oleruds quoted Jesus as saying 'You should love your neighbors' as a reason for why those neighbors, the Bakers, should cut down their tree for them. As it so happens, Mr. Baker is a Presbyterian minister. In one of Baker's counteroffers, he would have had the Oleruds "tithe" $25,000 to a charity.

Putting all that extraneous stuff aside, I've got to say I think the Bakers got screwed - but I'm not here to re-litigate the case.

By the way, I have nothing against John Olerud. He was always one of my favorite Mariners. In a world full of trash-talkers, he was that rare "gentlemen" in pro sports. A great role model.

What does bother me is how short-sighted the Oleruds are. I know this is a minority view, but I think there's more to a view than just the mountains, or Lake Washington, or the Seattle skyline.

The Bakers' rare, 50-foot Chinese pine is ALSO the view. Why not appreciate that view instead of impose your own pre-concieved ideas of what a view should be on somebody else?

This issue happens to hit close to home for me, despite the fact that my salary would be little more than chump change to either the Oleruds or the Bakers.

We have a ramshackle cabin up on Whidbey Island that's shared by a bunch of related families and we have a tree that blocks our view of Mt. Baker. Some in the family want to cut it down to clear out a view of the mountain but others - led by me - argue vociferously that tree is every bit as good as Mt. Baker. They can't see the tree for the metaphoric "forest" of a view.

In my personal family battle, I've given framed photos of the obstructing tree as Christmas presents and turned them into a jigsaw puzzle for visitors to the cabin. It's now the best-known tree on our property! Everybody else has a view of Mt. Baker but no one else has our tree!

With apologies to Joyce Kilmer, I think that I shall never see a view as lovely as that tree.

Tom Tangney, KIRO Radio Host
Tom Tangney is co-host of KIRO Radio's Seattle's Morning News and resident enthusiast of...everything. He loves books, movies, TV, art, pop culture, politic, sports, and Husky football.
More Tom Tangney

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (20)


  • Add A Comment

  • soo purletiv wrote...
    Thank you Mr. Olerud
    January 8, 2013 1:31 pm
    I can look in any direction and see trees. The same is not so true for pristine mountains, especially if 2, not hundreds, but 2 trees are blocking them.

    The Baker's are phony. The law is clear, yet they chose to ignore it as well as the requests from the Olerud's leading up to the city making a decision for them.

    Soon the beautiful sound of "TIMBER", will fill the quiet crisp air of Clyde Hill, and then the view will be back to where it should be.

    Ahhhhhh! The majestic view of the Olympic Mountains. Don't you just love it?

    Chop Chop...

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • 1999thelastgoodyear wrote...
    View = $$$$
    January 8, 2013 3:17 pm
    Look, I get it. Having or not having a view can seriously effect the value of your home, so I can understand why someone might be upset if their neighbor plants landscaping that obscures the view. Yes, a view of trees is a view, but that view might not be worth as much to a home buyer as a view of the mountains. I personally would not plant trees that obscure my neighbors' view. It's just not very thoughtful.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Alex Mason wrote...
    I'm glad the tree was removed.
    January 8, 2013 3:32 pm
    Let's have some firewood, smoke up the atmosphere, shoot some guns, and make jokes about liberals!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Seattle Dad wrote...
    One person's tree is another person's
    January 8, 2013 3:45 pm
    3 story building. Within city limits, the height of buildings are restricted so as not to restrict a home's view and thereby affect its value. Is it fair to restrict building heights and not tree heights within city zoning? For the tree I think the safety of a tall tree that could fall on my house is a bigger although separate concern.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    I can see
    January 8, 2013 4:52 pm
    Christmas lights formed to give Johnny boy the finger next Christmas.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Harry O wrote...
    Tom T's "view" dilemma
    January 8, 2013 4:58 pm
    And that is why you never go in with others on property. Someone's ditzy wife or a Tom will have some nutty idea about a tree being a "view". Tom, listen to your smarter property partners, cut the stupid tree down, gain a wonderful, majestic mountain view and plant trees that will frame the mountain and enhance the view. It's a win, win. Nature is not static.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hayduke wrote...
    Yet another example of rank hypocrisy from wanna-be conservatives here on MYNW.
    January 8, 2013 8:30 pm
    Excuse me, but the Bakers were there FIRST, as was the tree. Olerud has no right to demand it be taken down. He knew it was there when he bought his house.

    And spare me the "Christian" crap, I'm sick of Jesus being used as an excuse to run roughshod over other people's rights.

    Yeah, "rights." Remember those, right-wingers? As in "property rights?" You RWNJ's detest the idea of the big, bad, guvmint telling landowners what to do with their property.

    But whaddya know, if it involves CHOPPING DOWN, rather than SAVING a tree, suddenly you government's best friend.

    You people make me ill.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }