The London plane at the intersection of Belmont, Summit, and Bellevue Pl (Image: CHS)
Seattle tree protection advocates and city officials are celebrating a Seattle Hearing Examiner decision ending a group’s bid to hold up long-delayed new rules hoped to help preserve and grow Seattle’s urban canopy.
The examiner last week denied an appeal by the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish County over the city’s proposed updates to its Tree Protection Ordinance.
“We have the ability to protect trees and create the space for the density our city desperately needs,” Councilmember Dan Strauss (District 6, Northwest Seattle) said in a statement on the decision. “To become a modern, climate resilient city we need to allow builders to create the density our city needs and to protect and grow our tree canopy.”
With input from organizations like the builders association and advocate groups like TreePAC, the Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections finalized the delayed tree protection draft ordinance that increased city tree protections “to be consistent with the goals and policies of the 2015-2035 Comprehensive Plan and the 2020 Urban Forest Management Plan.”
CHS reported here on the process including efforts to require permits for the removal of “significant trees” — “trees greater than six inches in diameter at four and a half feet high.”
The city’s current tree preservation regulations were developed in 2009, but were considered at the time to be interim rules. A set of draft regulations was then developed in 2012, but it didn’t end up going anywhere. Now, the city can move forward to develop a final set of rules that could help Seattle reach its goal of 30% tree cover while still leaving room for development to create much needed new housing.
HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
One of the contributors to the loss of tree canopy in Seattle is when homeowners cut down trees on the planting strip without bothering to get a permit. This is not uncommon. Even with a permit, they are required to replace the destroyed tree, but this is rarely done, and the City Arborist staff does not followup to ensure this requirement is met.
If someone is pro-density but also pro-tree, what are some things I should read to have a nuanced opinion of how the city deals with trees? Anyone have a reco?