Laura Ostteen Fights For Old East Dallas Trees, But There’s No Ordinance Prohibiting Removal

Trees offer tons of benefits — from shade to environmental advantages to aesthetics — but it’s also within a developer’s rights to cut them down to make way for new buildings.  Residents in Elm Thicket/Northpark told CandysDirt.com in September that the canopies that used to line their streets have gone by the wayside as new development comes in.  And Rieger Ave. resident Laura Ostteen actually stood between a tree and a chainsaw last month and now she’s on a mission to protect the “majestic” urban forest in her beloved Old East Dallas neighborhood.

“It’s inhumane and it’s short-sighted,” Ostteen said. “You’ve just got to care.” 

Apparently, it isn’t so black and white. 

CandysDirt.com isn’t in the business of trying a legal matter in the media — and such action has been filed. Ostteen is working with a prominent local attorney to dismiss claims that she trespassed, disparaged the property owners’ business, and caused a “private nuisance.” The papers were served by attorneys with Holmes PLLC. 

Property owner James Holmes responded immediately to our request for comment, attaching a 55-page filing about his company’s dealings with Ostteen. 

Holmes purchased the lot in August and has made efforts to clean up the 18,000-square-foot site at 4932 Reiger Avenue, he said. 

“As owner of this property, I have worked consistently with the City of Dallas to remove and trim up hackberry trees, many of which were diseased and needed removal (so they didn’t fall down during windstorms), and some of which needed trimming of branches so that ‘illicit activities’ such as drug usage would not occur in their shade,” Holmes told CandysDirt.com. “I have never received a citation, a warning, or a letter from the City of Dallas (Dallas Arborist) claiming that I mishandled the tree service at [Reiger Avenue].”

No Ordinance Preventing Tree Removal 

We went to the Dallas Arborist’s Office for more information. 

The city’s “Article X” ordinance on landscape and urban forest conservation governs Dallas’ ability to persuade builders to save trees, said Southeast District Arborist Tina Standeford. 

“There is no language in the ordinance preventing tree removal,” Standeford told CandysDirt.com. “There is permitting and tree mitigation required for removing protected trees.”

Hackberry trees — like the one Ostteen stood in front of — are not on the protected list. 

For existing single-family subdivisions like the one where Ostteen lives, “generally, trees are not protected on lots less than an acre in size with single-family or duplex dwelling,” Standeford said. 

“This allows homeowners to maintain landscape as they see fit,” she said. “Developers can purchase a home, remove all trees on the lot with no permit or mitigation, and then demolish the house. Once a demolition permit is applied for, the trees on the lot become protected, meaning a permit and mitigation is required.”

Standeford reiterated that a “protected” tree means that a permit and mitigation is required, not that the tree cannot be removed. 

A new provision in the ordinance allows neighborhoods to create a “Neighborhood Forest Overlay” to change tree protections within a certain area. 

“There are currently no neighborhood forest overlays in place yet, but Forest Hills is working on establishing one,” Standeford said. 

Reiger Avenue Site

Ostteen said the site first caught her attention when the new property owner built a fence around the field near Elm Street Alley, North Fitzhugh Ave., and North Collett Ave., which has become a gathering space for the unhoused and a walking path for those crossing through to Deep Ellum. 

The  workers with chainsaws told her the new owners were planning an apartment complex “but not for two or three years.” 

They only got to one large tree that day in September, but Osteen, who rents her “shotgun house” in a sixplex, said she expects they’ll be back. 

“Those trees create a lot of shade,” she said of the hackberries. “They’re very important to me.” Ostteen also questions whether those trees are in a public right-of-way and therefore belong to the city rather than the property owner. 

“People will come in and clear out every freaking inch of the property with no recompense whatsoever,” she said. “I started to wonder, are they getting permits? A lot of people cut corners.”

When she saw the workers with chainsaws, she “lost her freaking mind,” said Ostteen, 36, who works as a stagehand and builds sets for concerts and conventions. 

“I basically went Mama Bear,” she said. “I ran over and asked the workers if they had a permit.” 

Police were called, and that’s another story for another day. Ostteen said she hasn’t seen any more tree-removal activity since then. 

Holmes maintains that he has met with the Dallas city manager, Code Compliance, and a Dallas Arborist to ensure that the property is clean and safe.

When he purchased the lot, it was in terrible condition with overgrown grass, bushes, and trees, gatherings of unhoused people, debris, human waste, and illicit activity, Holmes said in legal documents. 

He further said that Ostteen has a “strange fixation” on the vacant lot, even though she doesn’t own it. 

“L. Ostteen is a troubled and confused person,” Holmes told CandysDirt.com. “Please read more about her conduct in the attached motion for summary judgment. Please consider the entire set of facts before publishing any story on this matter.”

We read all 55 pages and saw some pictures we couldn’t unsee. We’ll let the courts take it from here.