>>> COUNCILMEMBER CREDIT?
>> PRESENT.
>> VICE CHAIR MORALES?
>> PRESENT.
>> WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE
AGENDA. A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON
THE THREE PROTECTIONS BUILT.
WE HAVE SET ASIDE SPECIAL
LAND-USE NEEDING COMMITTEE .
TODAY'S FOCUS WILL BE ON HOW
THIS BILL RETRIEVES
RESERVATIONS. AND WHAT THE TREE
PRESERVATION STANDARDS ARE.
THIS IS COMPLICATED WORK. AND
WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE MEETING
TO REALLY GET INTO THE DETAILS.
NEXT WEEK WE WILL FOCUS ON THE
TIERS OF PERFECTION AND THE
BILL IN TOTAL. AND THAT WILL
OUTLINE WHAT WE COUNSEL . I
MENTIONED WE WOULD MEET ON
APRIL 3rd. THAT IS NO LONGER
THE CASE. THAT MEETING HAS BEEN
MOVED TO APRIL 7th, A FRIDAY,
TO ALLOW FOR THE COMMISSION.
CLARK, PLEASE DISPLAY THE
SCHEDULE THAT WE CREATED FOR
THE MAJOR DATES. AND I WILL
WALK THROUGH THEM.
>> ONE MOMENT. I'M SORRY.
>> AS WE ARE WAITING , I AM
GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME OF
THESE DATES. TODAY, WE WILL BE
LOOKING INTO THE CREEK
PROTECTIONS ON APRIL 7th, WE
WILL HAVE THE TIERS, AND THE
ESSENTIAL STAFF ANALYSIS, APRIL
11th , WHEN AMENDMENTS ARE DUE
, THERE WILL NOT BE A
COMMITTEE MEETING THAT DAY. IT
ALLOWS US TO TAKE UP MAJOR
POLICY CONVERSATIONS UPFRONT ,
ALLOWING US TO MAKE SURE WE
HAVE THE TIME TO ADDRESS
CLEANUP AMENDMENTS IN THE
PROCESS. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE
SCREEN, AHEAD OF YOU, CLERK ,
DO YOU HAVE THE OTHER SCHEDULE
THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE
AGENDA? THAT WILL BE A LITTLE
BIT EASIER TO READ AT THE
MOMENT. I WILL PAUSE AND WAIT
UNTIL WE HAVE THIS UP. THANK
YOU. HERE WE ARE. AS I
MENTIONED, WE ARE MEETING
TODAY. WE WILL MEET ON FRIDAY
APRIL 7th. APRIL 11th,
AMENDMENTS ARE DUE SO WE CAN
HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS
UPFRONT. APRIL 21st WE WILL
VOTE ON AMENDMENTS. APRIL 24th
IS THE LEGALLY-REQUIRED PUBLIC
HEARING THAT PROVIDES 30 DAYS'
NOTICE IN NEWSPAPERS. THERE IS
PUBLIC COMMENT AVAILABLE AT
EVERY SINGLE MEETING THAT WE
HAVE. WE WILL NOT HAVE ANY
POLICY DISCUSSION ON APRIL
24th. ON APRIL 26th, WE INTEND
TO VOTE THE BILL ON THE LAND
USE COMMITTEE AS AMENDED THAT
WILL ALLOW US TO VOTE AT MAY
2nd, FULL COUNCIL. THIS IS
COMPLICATED POLICY. WE WANT TO
GET IT RIGHT. WE HAVE RESERVED
THE DAY ON MAY 4th FOR
COMMITTEE TIME, IN CASE WE NEED
TO SPILL OVER. THAT WOULD PUT
THE FINAL PASSAGE ON MAY 9th ,
FULL COUNCIL. TO THE VIEWING
PUBLIC, YOU CAN SPEAK DURING
PUBLIC COMMENT DURING ANY OF
THESE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. IF
YOU HAVE POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS,
PLEASE LET THE CLERK KNOW. YOU
CAN REACH OUT TO ME. WITHOUT
FURTHER ADO, BEFORE WE BEGIN,
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED.
HEARING NO OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA IS ADOPTED. AT THIS
TIME, WE WILL OPEN THE HYBRID
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. CLERK ,
PLEASE COMPLETE THE PERIOD.
>> HELLO, SEATTLE. WE ARE THE
EMERALD CITY, THE CITY OF
FLOWERS AND THE CITY OF
GOODWILL, BUILT ON INDIGENOUS
LAND. THE TRADITIONAL
TERRITORY . THE SEATTLE CITY
COUNCIL WELCOMES REMOTE PUBLIC
COMMENT AND IS EAGER TO HEAR
FROM RESIDENTS OF OUR CITY. IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A
VERBAL PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU MAY
REGISTER TWO HOURS PRIOR TO
THE MEETING, VIA THE SEATTLE
CITY COUNCIL WEBSITE, HERE IS
SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEEDINGS.
SPEAKERS ARE CALLED UPON IN
WHICH THE ORDER THEY REGISTERED
IN. EACH SPEAKER MUST CALL IN
FROM THE PHONE NUMBER PROVIDED
WHEN THEY REGISTERED ONLINE AND
USED THE I.D. AND PASSCODE
THAT WAS EMAILED UPON
CONFIRMATION. IF YOU DO NOT
RECEIVE AN EMAIL CONFIRMATION,
PLEASE CHECK YOUR SPAM OR JUNK
MAIL FOLDERS. THE SPEAKER I.D.
IS DIFFERENT FROM THE GENERAL
LISTEN LINE MEETING I.D.
PROVIDED ON THE AGENDA. ONCE
THE SPEAKER'S NAME IS CALLED,
THE MICROPHONE WILL BE UNNEEDED
AND AN AUTOMATIC PROMPT WILL
SAY THAT THE HOST WOULD LIKE
YOU TO UNMUTE YOUR MICROPHONE.
THAT IS YOUR QUEUE THAT IT IS
YOUR TURN TO SPEAK. AT THAT
TIME, YOU MUST PRESS STAR SIX.
YOU WILL HEAR A PROMPT OF, YOU
ARE UNNEEDED. BE SURE YOUR
PHONE IS UNMUTE IT ON YOUR END
SO YOU WILL BE HEARD. YOU
SHOULD BEGIN BY STATING HER
NAME AND THE ITEM THAT YOU ARE
ADDRESSING. A CHIME WILL SOUND
WHEN 10 SECONDS ARE LEFT IN
YOUR ALLOTTED TIME. AS A GENTLE
REMINDER TO WRAP UP YOUR PUBLIC
COMMENTS. AT THE END OF THE
ALLOTTED TIME, YOUR MICROPHONE
WILL BE MUTED AND THE NEXT
SPEAKER REGISTERED WILL BE
CALLED. ONCE SPEAKERS HAVE
COMPLETED PROVIDED PUBLIC
COMMENT, PLEASE DISCONNECT FROM
THE PUBLIC COMMENT LINE AND
JOIN US FOLLOWING THE SEATTLE
BROADCAST OR THE LISTEN LINE
MEETING NUMBER LISTED ON THE
AGENDA. THE CONCERT RESERVES
THE RIGHT TO ELIMINATE PUBLIC
COMMENT IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING
ABUSED OR IF THE PROCESS
IMPEDES BUSINESS CONDUCTED ON
BEHALF OF OF THE CITY. ANY
OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE THAT IS
DISRUPTIVE OR THAT IS NOT
FOCUSED ON AN APPROPRIATE TOPIC
AS SPECIFIED IN COUNCIL ROLES
MAY LEAD TO THE SPEAKER BEING
MUTED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER.
OUR OBJECTIVE IS TO PROVIDE
PROACTIVE DISCUSSIONS THAT
WILL ASSIST OUR ORDERLY
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES BEFORE
THE COUNCIL. THE PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD IS NOW OPEN. WE WILL
BEGIN WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER ON
THE LIST. PLEASE REMEMBER TO
PRESS STAR SIX AFTER YOU HEAR
THE PROMPT OF, YOU HAVE BEEN
UNMUTE IT. THANK YOU, SEATTLE.
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL GET
ALONG WITH OUR IN-CHAMBER
SPEAKERS FIRST. DAVID GROGAN,
DANA HARPER, AND STEVE STELLA.
WE WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE,
EITHER MICROPHONE, WHICHEVER
ONE IS MORE COMFORTABLE FOR
YOU.
>> I AM HERE TODAY TO ASK THAT
THE TREE AMENDED THE AMENDED.
>> MAKE SURE YOUR MIC IS ON.
WILL RESTART YOUR TIME.
>> I AM HERE TODAY TO ASK THAT
THE PROTECTION ORDINANCE BE
AMENDED TO EMPHASIZE THE
PROTECTION OF TREES. A
DEVELOPER REMOVED 60 TREES IN
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE HELLER
NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS INCLUDED
REMOVING A SPECTACULAR GROWTH
OF NATIVE CEDARS WHOSE TRUNKS
WERE ALL OVER 40" IN DIAMETER.
AFTER THE HOUSES WERE BUILT,
THE DEVELOPMENT PLANTED NEW
CEDARS AS REPLACEMENT. THESE
ALL DIED AS THE OWNER DID NOT
WATER THEM, THEY PLANTED VINE
MAPLES AS REPLACEMENTS FOR THE
REPLACEMENT. THEY WERE CUT DOWN
LAST YEAR AND NOW THERE ARE
ONLY GRASS AND SHRUBS WERE A
FOREST ONCE GREW. THERE IS NO
SHADE AND NOTHING TO PROTECT
THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
IT IS DIFFICULT TO MANAGE. WE
NEED TO KEEP OUR TREES AND
BUILD NEW HOUSING AROUND THEM.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID. UP NEXT,
WE HAVE DANA HARPER. FOLLOWED
BY STEVE .
>> I TRIED TO BE MORE PREPARED
THIS TIME. I HAVE NO
PROFESSIONAL ACUMEN, SO , FIRST
OFF, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT
FUTURE OF THE CURRENT TREES
BOOK. THIS BOOK WAS INVALUABLE
IN TEACHING ME, IN MY EARLY
DAYS OF BEING AN ARBORIST. ONE,
THE HISTORY OF TREES, AND ALSO
TREE IDENTIFICATION. IT WILL
BE INVALUABLE. BUILDERS
SHOULD KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING
JUST AS WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT
THEY ARE DOING. I WILL TRY TO
READ THROUGH THIS WITHIN THE
MINUTE HERE. 1971, THE
DEFINITION OF HORTICULTURE IS
THE CULTIVATION OF TREES, THE
ART OF PLANTING, DRESSING, AND
MANAGING TREES AND SHRUBS. THE
1949 DEFINITION OF ARBORIST,
ONE WHO IS VERSED IN THE
KNOWLEDGE OF TREES. IT STARTS
WITH THE PLANTING OF THE TREE.
AND IT REACHES FOR THE SUN AND
IT IS AVAILABLE, NEVER NOT IN
MOVEMENT, NEVER IN A PREPARED
LINE EVEN.
>> UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS YOUR
TIME. SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS.
WE WILL ALSO HAVE PUBLIC
COMMENT NEXT WEEK. AND AS I
OFFERED, WE CAN MEET
SEPARATELY. UP NEXT IS STEVE .
>> THE REAL QUESTION IS, ARE
YOU GOING TO SAVE TREES, OR ,
WELL , WITH THE FOOTBALL . WE
ARE SEEING MANY TIMES THE CITY
TALKING ABOUT ACTUALLY SAVING
TREES. SO FAR THIS HAS NOT
BEEN DONE. AND I DO THINK THAT
PEOPLE WILL BE JUDGED ON THAT.
I DO THINK THAT PEOPLE DO CARE
IN SEATTLE ABOUT TREES. WE CARE
ABOUT SHADE. WE CARE ABOUT THE
ENVIRONMENT, WE CARE ABOUT A
LOT OF THINGS. I THINK THE
OTHER THING THAT I HAVE NOT
HEARD MUCH SPEAKING ABOUT IS
THE PEOPLE WHO WERE GOING TO BE
ADMINISTERING THIS DO NOT HAVE
A STRONG RECORD OF
ADMINISTERING ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY. I AM NOT A BIG FAN OF
THE BOUNTY SYSTEM. BUT I HAVE A
FEELING THAT THAT MIGHT
POSSIBLY BE AN APPROPRIATE USE
OF IT. QUITE FRANKLY, THE CITY
IS NOT VOICING A WHOLE LOT OF
THINGS RIGHT NOW AND THAT MIGHT
MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY --
>> THANK YOU, STEVE. BUT NOW
BEEN DICTATOR . FORMER, FORMER,
SORRY. I WILL READ OUT ALL OF
THE NEWS IN VIRTUAL PUBLIC
HEARING SO THAT YOU KNOW WHERE
YOU ARE ON THE LIST. WE HAVE
17 PEOPLE SIGNED UP. WE HAVE
STEVE, SUSAN SUE, EMMA , SANDY,
DAVE WARREN, LOIS MARTIN,
SUSAN GRANT, AND SOMEONE NOT
PRESENT AT THIS TIME, PLEASE
CALL IN TO THE NUMBER PROVIDED
ON THE EMAIL RECEIPT. NOT THE
CALL-IN LINE. RICHARD ALLISON,
JOSHUA MORRIS, COLLEEN
McALEER, COLIN McDERMOTT.
COLIN, YOU ARE NOT PRESENT. UP
FIRST IS STEVE ZEMKE . GOOD
MORNING, STEVE. I WILL NOTE
THAT VICE CHAIR MORALES HAS
NOW JOINED THE COMMITTEE.
IS STEVE ZEMKE AVAILABLE FOR
US? THERE YOU ARE. I SEE YOU
THERE.
>> SORRY. I BECAME DISTRACTED.
>> I SEE YOU THERE. STAR SIX
AT YOUR CONVENIENCE.
>> I AM FROM THE SEATTLE
FOREST AND TREE PACK TWO. HOW
MUCH IS A TREE WORTH? IS
REPLACING AN EIGHT-YEAR-OLD
DOUGLAS FIR OR A TALL TREE
REPRESENTATIVE OF TIGHTENING
THE VALUE? HOW MANY YEARS DOES
IT TAKE TO REPLACE AN
80-YEAR-OLD TREE? IT TAKES 80
YEARS. WE URGE THAT YOU DO
THE REPLACEMENT VALUE, IT IS
NOT 141 , A TREE TRUNK UP TO
24", THREE TREES, 24-36 ". THAT
IS REQUIRING MORE IN TERMS OF
THE VALUE. AND WE ALSO WILL ADD
THAT YOU REQUIRE THAT MUC BE
INCREASED PER INCH, AND THAT
IS IT.
>> THANK YOU, STEVE. UP NEXT
IS SUSAN. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO
SEND IN WRITTEN COMMENTS.
SUSAN, I SEE YOU THERE. PRESS
STAR SIX AT YOUR CONVENIENCE.
>> I CANNOT REMEMBER. I AM
SUSAN, I AM AN INVESTOR IN
SEATTLE. I WILL COVER
INDUSTRIAL HIGH-RISES , ET
CETERA. IT IS MY JOB TO DO
ABOUT THE FUTURE, GOOD AND BAD.
TODAY, AS MY COMMENT, I WOULD
LIKE TO SHARE A TALE OF TWO
CITIES. MANY OF YOU WILL BE IN
YOUR EARLY 80s . AND PANELS ,
SOLAR PANELS GENERATE CLEAN
ENERGY. THERE ARE NO CHILDREN
PLAYING OUTSIDE, NO BIRDS.
WITHOUT THE BEES, FOOD
SCARCITY HAS MADE US MORE
POLARIZED THAN IN 2023. AND
THERE ARE HISTORIES MUCH OLDER
THAN MAN. AND THEY ARE
SEAMLESSLY COVERED IN
INTEGRATED IT AREAS. THEY
CONTINUE TO MEET FOR THE
SECRET TRYST UNDERNEATH.
>> THANK YOU, SUSAN. FEEL FREE
TO SEND IN WRITTEN COMMENTS.
JUNE BLUE SPRUCE . WELCOME.
STAR SIX AT YOUR CONVENIENCE.
THERE YOU ARE.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ACCORDING
TO THE 2021 TREE REPORT,
RESIDENTIAL AREAS CONTRIBUTED
ALMOST HALF OF SEATTLE'S
KENNEDY COVERAGE. MULTIFAMILY
AREAS AVERAGE ONLY 22%
KENNEDY COVERAGE. INCREASED
TREE PROTECTION, IN THE
PROPOSED PROTECTION ORDINANCE
ARE BASED ON CURRENT SEATTLE
ZONING. IT LOOKS AS IF IT WILL
PASS LEGISLATURE. ALL MAJOR
RESIDENTIAL AREAS WILL BE
MULTIFAMILY. AND 85% IN THOSE
AREAS. THIS WILL ELIMINATE
MANY TREES AND GROVES IN
SEATTLE'S AREAS. HARD SCAPE
WILL BE DECREASED
SIGNIFICANTLY. WE WILL NOT
HAVE TREE CANOPY.
>> THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS EMMA
, FOLLOWED BY SANDY. AND THEN
DAVID. EMMA?
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS EMMA. I
AM 24 YEARS OLD AND I HAVE
WORKED IN SEATTLE MY ENTIRE
LIFE. THE TREE REPLACEMENT
WILL LEAD TO A LOSS OF TREES.
IT SHOULD BE EMPHASIZED WITHIN
THE ORDINANCE. HOW WE TALK
ABOUT TREES MATTERS.
EXCEPTIONAL AND SIGNIFICANT
TREES BEING CHANGED TO TIER
ONE AND TIER TWO TREES MAKES
THEM EXCEPTIONAL. FINALLY,
THE 85 MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE
GUARANTEE FOR LOWRISE, MIDRISE,
AND MIXED ZONES DOES NOT LEAVE
ENOUGH ROOM FOR TREES TO GROW.
SEATTLE SHOULD RETURN TO ITS
ORIGINAL BOUNDARIES.
>> UP NEXT IS SANDY, FOLLOWED
BY DAVID AND THEN LOIS. SANDY,
WELCOME.
>> HIGH, YES. THIS IS SANDY,
PLEASE AMEND THIS ACTION
MAXIMIZING THE RETENTION OF
TREES. AS WE MEET TODAY, THEY
ARE FINALIZING, SDCI, THE
CLEAR-CUT GROWTH OF NATIVE
SENIORS, THE GROVE IS OUT OF
THE WAY, ON THE EDGE OF THE
SITE , AND IT IS ONE OF THE
LARGEST GROVES. IT CAN EASILY
ATTACH TO THE MAIN HOME . AND
THAT WILL LAUNCH THE GROVE ON
A CYCLE OF NEW DECLINE WHEN THE
SAME SIZE AND NUMBER OF NEW
HOMES WILL BE BUILT WITHIN THE
GROVE. DEVELOPERS ARE NOT
REQUIRED TO RETAIN TREES
THROUGH DEVELOPMENT. IT ONLY
ASKED FOR AN ALTERNATIVE. IT
CAN MAXIMIZE LOT COVERAGE.
WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DRAFT
WILL SAVE THE REMAINING GROVE.
THANKS.
>> OF NEXT IS DAVE, FOLLOWED BY
LOIS, AND THEN CHRIS.
>> HELLO, THIS IS DAVE, MEMBER
OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
ARCHITECTS. HE RECEIVED A
LETTER THAT HAD THREE PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS. ONE OF THE
AMENDMENTS WAS REVISING THE
85% DOWN TO CITY PRESENTED HERE
IS WHY. SEATTLE NEEDS TO ADD
150,000 AFFORDABLE HOMES BY
2044. 85,000 TREES, 1000
ACRES OF COVERAGE, BY 2037 IS
APPROXIMATELY ONE TREE FOR
EVERY 32 AFFORDABLE HOMES. THEY
HAVE ESTABLISHED IN TABLE 1,
PAGE 10, A 20% CANOPY MODEL IN
OTHER AREAS. OUR ORDINANCES
NEED TO PREDICT TREE PLANNING
AND RETENTION WHETHER IT IS
85%. AND THE CODE SETS THE
PLANTS INTO THEIR ORDINANCE. WE
CAN DO THE SAME. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, THEY PUT UP NEXT
IS LOIS.
>> GOOD MORNING , I SHOULD SAY.
I AM OF VICE MEMBER OF THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT . WHAT I
WOULD LIKE THE COUNCIL TO DO
IS ADOPT A TREE ORDINANCE AND
ALSO ENSURE THERE IS EQUITABLE
CANOPY DISTRIBUTION IN
HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED
COMMUNITIES WITHIN ZONES. I
WOULD LIKE TO ADD THEY SHOULD
CONSIDER PROTECTING NEIGHBORING
TREES . THEY ARE IN A BAD
SITUATION RIGHT NOW. I WOULD
LIKE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT
TO TALK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING
TREE ISSUE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, LOIS. UP NEXT IS
CHRIS, FOLLOWED BY SUSAN .
CHRIS? WELCOME.
I SEE THAT YOU ARE OFF MUTE ,
CHRIS, BUT MAYBE YOUR PHONE IS
MUTED.
>> HI, THIS IS CHRIS. CAN YOU
HEAR ME?
>> YES, WE CAN. GOOD MORNING,
CHRIS.
>> THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT
YOU REMOVE THE 85% COVERAGE
GUARANTEE, WHICH COULD RESULT
IN UNATTRACTIVE DENSITY. I
LOVE IT WHEN AN ARCHITECT
ACCOMMODATES THE ESTABLISHED
TREES. THEY ARE VERY CLEVER AND
CREATIVE . I THANK THEM EVERY
TIME I SEE THEIR SUCCESSFUL
EFFORTS. I ALSO NOTICED THAT
THOSE LOTS THAT RETRAIN THE
DENSITY, IT RESULTS IN WHAT
EVERYONE LIKES. A WALK-ABLE
NEIGHBORHOOD. THE CURRENT
NOMENCLATURE HAS BEEN AROUND
FOR 20 YEARS AND IT WORKS WELL,
CHANGING THE NAME WILL NOT HELP
TO ADJUST TO THE NEW
ORDINANCE, WITH APPROPRIATE
PLANNING AND FLEXIBILITY, WE
CAN SAVE TREES. I PROPOSE THE
FIRST STEP IS A TREE INVENTORY
AND A LANDSCAPE DESIGN. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CHRIS PRATT UP
NEXT IS SUZANNE GRANT, FOLLOWED
BY -- GOOD MORNING.
>> TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT IT WILL PASS AT
THE STATE LEVEL, ALL SEATTLE
WILL BE, MULTIFAMILY, ANY
SPACE FOR TREES TO GROW, WE
NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT THE
IMPACTS ARE GOING TO BE BEFORE
THE DECISION IS MADE GETTING
THAT ORDER. OVER FIVE YEARS, IT
NEEDS TO BE REQUIRED TO KEEP
TREES ALIVE. AND A REPLACEMENT
TREE REQUIREMENT NEEDS TO BE
IN PLACE FOR ANY TREE THAT
DIES. THERE IS CURRENTLY NO
OVERSIGHT ABOUT REPLACEMENT
TREES THAT HAVE BEEN PLANTED ,
A CONDITION THAT OCCURS
FREQUENTLY. AND THERE WILL BE
A LOSS OF BIGGER TREES. THERE
IS NOT ENOUGH ROOM IN PUBLIC
AREAS TO REPLANT THOSE TREES.
WE HAVE AN ONGOING CLIMATE
CRISIS, THE ESTIMATED RETENTION
IS A PRIORITY. FINALLY, WE MUST
CONTINUE OUR TIME-HONORED
TRADITION OF CALLING OUR TREES
EXCEPTIONAL AND SIGNIFICANT
WHICH IS WHAT THEY CERTAINLY
ARE. IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO
CALL THEM TIER ONE, TWO, THREE,
AND FOUR THAT IS UP NEXT IS
DANAE SHE, FOLLOWED BY AMANDA
AND THEN LOUISE. I SEE YOU
THERE, PRESS STAR SIX, THERE
YOU ARE.
>> HELLO. I AM THE
COMMISSIONER OF URBAN PLANNING
AND WE OVERSEE THIS. AND WE
ARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE THE
MAXIMUM FOOTPRINT .
ENCROACHING IN THE AREAS,
WHILE TRYING TO ADD
PROTECTION , IT SHOULD NOT BE
DONE BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION. IT IS PROVIDED FOR
THE WELL-BEING OF THE CITY . WE
MUST FIND A BALANCE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, DENISHI. UP NEXT
IS AMANDA DUKE. AMANDA,
PLEASE.
>> MY NAME IS AMANDA . I AM
HERE TO FOLLOW UP ON A
SITUATION AS WELL AS TOPICS
REGARDING SDCI. TOREY ALSTON
ISSUED A FRIVOLOUS NOTICE AND
HAS FAILED TO TAKE ANY
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE PROPERTY
WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.
>> AMANDA, ARE YOU COMMENTING
REGARDING THE TREE ORDINANCE?
ON ANOTHER TOPIC ?
>> ANOTHER TOPIC THAT IS UNDER
CONSIDERATION BY THIS
COMMITTEE.
>> I AM SORRY. WE HAVE A RULE
THAT THERE ARE ONLY COMMENTS ON
ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. WE CAN
FOLLOW UP WITH YOU OFF-LINE.
>> I HAVE REVIEWED THE RULES.
IT SAYS THAT ANYTHING BROUGHT
UP BEFORE YOUR COMMITTEE CAN BE
BROUGHT UP DURING THIS. I HAVE
EMAILED FOR OVER SIX MONTHS AND
HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSE,
FROM THE OFFICE OF TERESA
MOSQUEDA. THIS INVOLVES MY DUE
PROCESS RIGHTS --
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL FOLLOW-UP
WITH YOU. AND I DO SEE SARA
NELSON NODDING HER HEAD THAT
SHE WILL FOLLOW-UP.
HELLO , ALICIA?
>> GOOD MORNING , MY NAME IS
ALICIA AND I AM REPRESENTING
THE MASTER BUILDERS
REPRESENTATION , I WOULD LIKE
TO THINK THE COUNCIL FOR TAKING
ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF
LEGISLATION. AND I WOULD ALSO
LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, THIS
FAR , THIS IS ABOUT TRYING TO
BALANCE THE NEED FOR TREES AND
HOUSING. THIS QUADRUPLES THE
AMOUNT OF CURRENTLY-REGULATED
TREES. THAT IS 70,400 MORE
TREES THAT HAVE A FORM OF
PROTECTION . THIS IS A BIG STEP
IN ADDING TO THE CITY CANOPY.
IN ORDER TO TAKE AN EQUALLY
BIG STEP FOR HOUSING, THEY NEED
CLEAR LANGUAGE IN THE CODE IN
ORDER TO PREVENT SUBJECTIVITY
FROM A REVIEWER WHICH CAN ADD
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS
AND MONTHS OF WASTED TIME AND
PERMITTING. WE CANNOT TAKE
THIS RISK. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME.
>> THANK YOU, ALICIA. UP NEXT
IS RICHARD ALLISON FOLLOWED BY
JOSHUA MORRISON. GOOD MORNING,
RICHARD .
>> GOOD MORNING, THIS IS
RICHARD ALLISON. AND, THIS
WAS A SIGNIFICANT AND
EXCEPTIONAL TREE, THEY ARE
SURVIVING RIGHT NOW IN SEATTLE,
THEY ARE THE ONES THAT SURVIVE
ALL OF THE WEATHER THAT WE
HAVE HAD. AS WE PLANT NEW
TREES, WE FIND THAT THERE IS A
VERY HIGH MORTALITY IN
NEWLY-PLANTED TREES. THAT IS
FROM NEGLECT OR WHATEVER
CAUSES. WHETHER ON THE STREET A
PRIVATE PROPERTY, THESE TREES
ARE NOT SURVIVING. WE NEED TO
NOMINATE THE OUTREACH PROGRAM
TO SUPPORT THIS. WHAT ARE THE
IMPACTS TO WILDLIFE AS A RESULT
OF THE PROJECT? IF THIS GOES
THROUGH, AND WE REMOVE THE
CANOPY, WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON
WILDLIFE? AND APPARENTLY, THE
GOALS ARE NOT CURRENTLY
ACHIEVABLE ON THIS PROPOSAL.
BUT IT DOES APPEAR, IT DOES
APPEAR THOUGH THAT THE BILL IS
NOT THE URBAN FOREST
COMMISSION THAT SHOULD BE
WORKING --
>> THANK YOU, RICHARD. UP NEXT
IS JOSHUA MORRIS FOLLOWED BY
JESSE SIMPSON, FOLLOWED BY
COLLEEN McCLEARY , AND COLIN
McDERMOTT. JOSHUA, GOOD
MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING. I AM JOSHUA
MORRIS WITH THE CONSERVATION
ORGANIZATION. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR FOCUS AND ATTENTION ON IT
TREE PROTECTION. WE NEED TO
MAKE CHANGES IN THE WAY WE
MANAGE OUR URBAN FORESTS.
TREES ARE IMPORTANT FEATURES
OF COMPLEX SOCIAL,
TECHNOLOGICAL, AND OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS. AND WE
NEED TO MONITOR EVALUATION
REQUIREMENTS. IT SHOULD ONLY
REQUIRE STANDARDS FOR PUTTING
UP ANY NEW OR TREE
REPLACEMENT. IT IS IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND THAT THE BILL IS
SERVING ITS FULL PURPOSE. IT
CAN ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN
CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS. WE SHOULD
ALSO TRACK AND REPORT THOSE
WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE
FLEXIBILITY FOR PLANTING TREES.
I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
YOU . THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, JOSHUA. UP NEXT,
JESSE SIMPSON, AND THEN GOOD
MORNING, JESSE.
>> MORNING. I AM JESSE
SIMPSON, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS
AND POLICY MEMBER OF THE
HOUSING CONSORTIUM. WE
REPRESENT OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
WORKING TO GET AFFORDABLE
HOMES THAT WE SO DESPERATELY
NEED. WE ARE SEEKING THE
QUALIFIED SUPPORT. A LOT OF
EFFORT WENT INTO BALANCING AND
ALLOWING THE PROTECTION IN
THIS ORDINANCE. I APPRECIATE
THE FOCUS ON EXPANDING
SEATTLE'S TREE CANOPIES AND
GREATLY RESTRICTING
DISCRETIONARY TREE REMOVAL.
AND THERE IS AFFORDABILITY FOR
FLEXIBLE HOUSING. FIRST,
INCREASING THE AREAS FROM THE
CURRENT 10% UP TO 50%. SECOND,
BY EXPANDING THE EXCEPTIONS
FOR PROVIDING REPLACEMENT
TREES FROM THE CURRENTLY
PROPOSED SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, OR
ALL AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.
DOES NOT MAKE MUCH SENSE FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOLLARS TO
BE PAID. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLY.
>> THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS
COLLEEN McCLEARY, FOLLOWED BY
COLIN. GOOD MORNING.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. I AM
FROM THE LAW HURST COMMUNITY
AND A SUPPORTER OF ALL OF THE
LEGISLATION THAT YOU PEOPLE
HAVE WORKED SO HARD ON MAKING
COME TO FRUITION. REQUIRING
DEVELOPERS TO MAXIMIZE THE
RETENTION OF EXISTING TREES,
THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. IT
SHOULD GO INTO THE ONE SEATTLE
TREE FUND . IN THAT FUND,
THERE SHOULD BE REPORTING
YEARLY AND ALSO BE ABLE TO
ACCEPT PRIME DONATION GRANTS
TO STRENGTHEN THAT. UP THE
CREEK, THE URBAN FORESTRY
DIVISION, THEY HAVE A SEPARATE
BUDGET PROVISION THAT IS NOT
FUNDED BY SEPARATE DEVELOPER'S
FEES. AND, THEY HAVE TWO
ARBORISTS THAT CANNOT COVER ALL
OF THE TREES. A COUPLE OF
THINGS, THE CITY INSPECTORS
NEED PROPERTY FOR MONITORING
ILLEGAL TREE ACTIVITY AND TO
REQUIRE EVERY AVENUE ON THE
BLOCK --
>> THANK YOU, COLLEEN. UP NEXT
IS CONNOR McDERMOTT. THAT WOULD
BE THE LAST SPEAKER
PHYSICALLY PRESENT. WELCOME.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS CONNOR
McDERMOTT. MY, AND IS MOSTLY
JUST AROUND THE TREE
PROTECTION AND HOW IT IS
OUTLINED IN THE CODE. IT IS
CURRENTLY DEFINED IN TREES,
25.11, AND AND , THE BASIC
TREE PROTECTION AREA ALLOWS
THE ARBORISTS OR THE ARBORISTS
TO MAKE CHANGES BASED ON AGE,
CONSTRUCTION, ET CETERA AND IT
MAKES A LOT OF SENSE FOR THE
ARBORISTS TO DEFINE THE TREE
PROTECTION AREA. IT DOES NOT
SPECIFY WHERE THESE THINGS COME
FROM. AND IT SHOULD BE BASED
ON ACCEPTING INDUSTRY
STANDARDS . AND BEST
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES , AND
THESE STANDARDS. YEAH? THAT IS
MY TIME, THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, CONNOR. WE
APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS TODAY.
AS SOON AS WE , WE SEE WE HAVE
NO ADDITIONAL PHYSICAL
PRESENCE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO
OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM. THE
AGENDA ITEM INVOLVES THE TREE
PROTECTION ORDINANCE, PLEASE
READ THE SHORT TITLE INTO THE
RECORD.
>> AGENDA ITEM 120354, THE
TREE PROTECTION BILL.
>> REITERATE THE IMPORTANCE OF
PROTECTING OUR TREES,
PRESERVING THE CANOPY, AND
RE-GROWING AND EXPANDING THE
CANOPY CITYWIDE. THIS
PRESENTATION DIVES DIRECTLY
INTO TREE PROTECTIONS. AND THE
TREE PROTECTION STANDARDS. WE
WILL TALK ABOUT THE THRESHOLD
AND HAZARDOUS TREES AND
MITIGATION TREES THANK YOU
PARTICULAR TO CHANDA EMERY.
TAKE AWAY, YOU ARE A FAMILIAR
FACE AT THIS COMMITTEE , THE
FACT THAT WE HAD THAT
RESOLUTION IN 2019 THAT I
HELPED OFFER, WE HAVE ADHERE
BEFORE COMMITTEE EVERY QUARTER.
AND SO, CHANDA EMERY, WITHOUT
FURTHER DO, PLEASE TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER. THE PRESENTATION
WILL PROVIDE A BRIEF OVERVIEW
BASED ON SOME OF THE KEY
ASPECTS OF THE LEGISLATION, AND
WILL GO INTO PROTECTION
STANDARDS.
PROVIDED HERE IS THE
HIGH-LEVEL SYNOPSIS, WHICH
RESPONSE TO THE MOST RECENT
DATA PRESENTED TO US IN THE
CANOPY ASSESSMENT REPORT, AS
WELL AS THE STRATEGIES IN
RESOLUTION 339. UPDATES,
THEY WILL USE THE CATEGORIES
ONE THROUGH FOUR AND ANOTHER
PROPOSED CHANGE IS THAT THERE
ARE POSITIONS IN THIS
LEGISLATION THAT MAKE USE OF
THE HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENT TO
REZONE DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
PURPOSES. THAT IS IN THE MULTI
FAMILY COMMERCIAL ZONES. LAST
IS A NEW REQUIREMENT THAT IF A
HAZARDOUS TREE IS REMOVED, THAT
TREE MUST BE REPLACED AT A 12"
THRESHOLD. THIS NEXT SLIDE WILL
PROVIDE AN OUTLINE OF THIS
PRESENTATION.
>> AND JUST BEFORE YOU
CONTINUE, COLLEAGUES, THIS
PRESENTATION AND THE NEXT
PRESENTATION ARE ABSOLUTELY THE
ONES TO DIG IN WITH ALL OF
YOUR QUESTIONS, ANYTIME YOU
HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE RAISE
YOUR HAND. TAKE AWAY, CHANDA
EMERY.
>> AS A QUICK REMINDER, THE
PROPOSED CHANGES IN THIS
LEGISLATION WILL REGULATE 7000,
70,400 TREES, ONCE AGAIN, A
SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE
NUMBER OF TREES PROTECTED.
THEY REPRESENT A STEP FORWARD
TO A FUTURE THAT WILL INCREASE
CANOPY. IN THIS PRESENTATION,
THE NEXT TWO SLIDES WILL FOCUS
ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH FIVE
SHOWING ON THE SCREEN. THESE
ARE NEW TREE REPLACEMENT
THRESHOLD, THAT STARTS AT THE
DIAMETER SIDE , 12". WE WILL
TALK ABOUT THE AREAS THAT IT
UPDATED WITHIN THIS LEGISLATION
TO INCLUDE INDUSTRY STANDARDS
AND WILL HAVE A CLOSER LOOK AT
THE HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENT AND
HOW IT REPLACES THE RATIO TO
BETTER ACCOUNT FOR SITE
PLANNING CONSIDERATION DRIVEN
BY THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THIS WILL INCLUDE SOME EXAMPLES
OF HOW THIS NEW TOOL WORKS TO
ACCOMPLISHED INCREASE TREE
RETENTION AS MORE TREES ARE
REGULATED IN THIS RETENTION.
AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT, WE
WILL TOUCH ON HAZARDOUS TREES
AND HOW THE PROPOSED CHANGES
IMPACT THEM MEANING BAD IT
WOULD REQUIRE THAT WHEN THE
TREES ARE REMOVED. THE LAST
ITEM IS MITIGATION TREES, THIS
PIECE OF LEGISLATION MAKES IT
CLEAR THAT REPLACEMENT TREES
CANNOT BE REMOVED AND THERE
ARE NEW CODE PROVISIONS AND WE
WILL SHOW THEM HOW THAT WORKS.
THE EXISTING REGULATIONS
REGULATE FEWER TREES, AND THEY
HAVE FEWER PROTECTIONS THAT
LIMIT NO REPLACEMENT
REQUIREMENTS COMPARED TO THE
LEGISLATION THAT PROPOSES
CHANGES UNDER THE EXISTING
REGULATIONS. HERITAGE TREES
ARE NOT REGULATED. THE EXISTING
CODE ONLY REGULATES REGULAR
TREES, THE TOP OF THAT
EXISTING REGULATIONS MAY NOT
REQUIRE REPLACEMENT, NOR IS
THERE A PLAN OR OPTION WHERE A
TREE MUST BE REPLACED, SO THE
EXISTING REGULATIONS ARE VERY
LIMITED AND THEY DO NOT PROVIDE
THE LEVEL OF PROTECTIONS NEEDED
TO HELP SET UP FUTURE
GENERATION CANOPIES. THE
PROPOSED CHANGES WILL REQUIRE
THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES, THE
FIRST CATEGORY IS FOR HERITAGE
TREES TO AFFORD THE GREATEST
LEVEL OF PROTECTION. THIS MEANS
THAT THESE TREES MAY NOT BE
REMOVED. THEY MUST BE RETAINED
UNLESS DEEMED HAZARDOUS OR
LESS AN EMERGENCY ACTION IS
NECESSARY. IN THOSE CASES,
DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED AND
THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO TIER
ONE AND TWO TREES MUST BE
REPLACED.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT, CHANDA.
WE HAVE HEARD SOME COMMENTS
ABOUT THE NAMING OF THE TIERS .
SOME FOLKS DO NOT LIKE THE
TIERS AT ALL. AND OTHER FOLKS
FIND THAT THE NUMBERS ARE VERY
CONFUSING , I WANT THE GENERAL
PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE
ARE THE CATEGORIES OF THE
TIERS. THE MEETING MAY CHANGE.
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE
ITERATIVE POLICY PROCESS. AT
THE END OF EACH OF THE SLIDES,
CHANDA, I AM GOING TO ASK YOU
TO PAUSE. I SEE COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON HAS A QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU, BACK TO IT. HOW
MUCH IS THAT AND YOU HAVE A
ROUGH ESTIMATE FOR, LET'S SAY,
A CEDAR OR, YOU KNOW? THE
MOST COMMON HERITAGE TREE?
>> SARA NELSON FIVE , I WILL
HELP YOU OUT, WE WILL GO DEEP
INTO THE TIER CALCULATIONS IN
THE NEXT MEETING.
>> OKAY.
>> IT BECOMES A LITTLE
COMPLICATED. I WANTED TO STICK
ON THE FACT THAT THIS WILL BE
REQUIRED.
>> OKAY.
>> CHECKING WITH OTHER
COLLEAGUES, DO YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS ABOUT TIER ONE TREES
? DO YOU CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND
THEM AS HERITAGE TREES?
CHANDA, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE A
GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THAT
CALCULATION.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION,
COUNCIL MEMBER NELSON. THE TIER
ONE TREES WOULD HAVE THE
HIGHEST AND GREATEST FEE.
THE FEE INCREASES AS THE
DIAMETER OF THE TREE REMOVED
INCREASES. SO, YOU KNOW,
GENERALLY THAT WOULD BE
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. VERY
EXPENSIVE, VERY COSTLY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON ,
ANY QUESTIONS ON TIER ONE? AND
OKAY, CHANDA, KEEP GOING.
>> THANK YOU, THE PROPOSED
CHANGES CREATE THE TWO , TIER
TWO, AND THIS IS ONE LEVEL
BELOW A DEGREE OF PROTECTIONS.
GENERALLY, WELL, IN THIS
CATEGORY, GENERALLY THESE ARE
THE FORMERLY EXCEPTIONAL
TREES. INSTEAD OF REGULATING
WITH A 30" DIAMETER IN THIS
CATEGORY, AS IT WAS IN THE
EXISTING REGULATIONS, IT NOW
REGULATES THOSE TREES STARTING
AT A 24 " DIAMETER. THERE ARE
70 OR SO SPECIES THAT ARE
REGULATED AS TIER TWO TREES
WITH SMALLER DIAMETERS, LISTED
IN THE DIRECTOR 'S RULES. SOME
ARE AS SMALL AS 6" IN THAT
CATEGORY AND THOSE SPECIES ARE
ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS TIER TWO
CATEGORY. IN ADDITION TO THIS,
THEY NOW INCLUDE TREE GROSS
IN THE HIGHER LEVEL PROTECTION.
TREE REMOVAL MAY BE ALLOWED,
AGAIN, THEY MAY NOT BE REMOVED
UNLESS DEEMED HAZARDOUS OR
UNLESS AN EMERGENCY ACTION IS
NECESSARY. IN THOSE CASES,
DOCUMENTARIAN CHANGES ARE
RECOMMENDED. AND THOSE MUST BE
REPLACED OR ENCAPSULATED , THEY
MUST BE TAKEN.
>> AND CHANDA, I DID NOT PREP
YOU FOR THE QUESTION, BUT DID
YOU HAVE THE LIST OF TREES THAT
ARE FROM THAT DIRECTOR'S
RULE? YOU SAID SOME SPECIES ARE
DOWN TO 6" IN THIS CATEGORY.
IF THAT IS NOT INFORMATION YOU
HAVE RIGHT NOW, WE SHOULD TAKE
THAT UP AT THE NEXT COMMITTEE.
>> I THINK, OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD, THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
I BELIEVE, IN THAT TABLE, WHAT
WE HAVE DRAWN UP IS AN EXAMPLE
OF WHAT I BELIEVE IS A 6"
DIAMETER TREE THAT IS
PROTECTED. THERE MAY BE SOME
FRUIT TREES, LIKE MAYBE PAIR
TREES, IN THAT LIST.
>> WE WILL BRING THAT LISTED
THE NEXT MEETING. WE SHOULD
ATTACH IT RIGHT TO THE AGENDA,
AS WELL. ANY QUESTIONS,
COLLEAGUES? COUSIN AMBER
PEDERSEN, ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THIS?
>> KNOW. I WILL RAISE MY HAND
IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU THOUGH.
>> MAKES. THANKS.
>> THESE TREES ARE NOT
REGULATED , SO THERE IS NO
REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND
NOTHING REMOVED FOR TIER ONE
THROUGH THREE TIER THREE
INCLUDES ALL 12" OR GREATER AND
UP TO 24" IN DIAMETER. AND SO
THIS WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY
48,000 ADDITIONAL TREES, THIS
TIER CATEGORY, THERE WERE
PREVIOUSLY NO PROTECTIONS FOR
THESE SIGNIFICANT TREES.
SIGNIFICANT TREES ARE NOT
REGULATED IN THE EXISTING
REGULATIONS AT ALL. THE LAST
CATEGORY IS THE FOURTH
CATEGORY, TIER FOUR, FOR THOSE
MEASURING 6" BUT LESS THAN 12"
IN DIAMETER. DURING
DEVELOPMENT, THESE TREES MAY
NOT BE REMOVED, THEY MUST BE
RETAINED, UNLESS DEEMED
HAZARDOUS OR IF AN EMERGENCY
ACTION IS NECESSARY. IN BOTH
CASES, DOCUMENTATION IS
REQUIRED. THE TIER THREE
TREES MUST BE REPLACED OR A
CALCULATED FEE MUST BE REPAID.
>> I DO SEE COUNCILMEMBER ALEX
PEDERSEN'S HAND UP. TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THANK YOU. QUESTION FOR
23.47A.016 FIVE REGARDING TIER
FOUR TREES, THE ONES THAT ARE
6-12 ". IS THERE A REASON WHY
THOSE ARE NOT PROTECTED? THEY
ARE DEFINED, BUT THERE WAS NO
DEFINITION OF THE PROTECTION,
IT SEEMS LIKE.
>> THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION,
COUNCILMEMBER. THE
NEGOTIATIONS BEGIN AT THE 12"
THRESHOLD, THAT INCLUDES TIERS
ONE, TWO, THREE, AND THE TIER
FOUR, 6-12", THOSE ARE USED
FOR TRACKING PURPOSES OUTSIDE
OF DEVELOPMENT TO ENSURE THAT
THOSE TREES ARE RETAINED.
>> MAYBE I WILL SAY IT ANOTHER
WAY. PART OF A RETENTION
REQUIREMENT, ESPECIALLY FOR THE
FIRST FIVE YEARS AFTER IT IS
ESTABLISHED, SOME OF THOSE
TREES MAY NOT GET THAT 6 "
THRESHOLD BUT WE WILL WANT TO
BEGIN TRACKING EARLY AND THAT
IS WHY WE CREATED THE TIER. BUT
I SEE THAT COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN , YOU HAVE YOUR HAND
APPEARED TAKEN AWAY.
>> ARE THE PROTECTION
DEVELOPERS ARE REQUIRED TO NOTE
THE PLANS WHERE EXISTING TIER
FOUR TREES ARE?
>> YES, THAT IS CORRECT,
THOSE TREES NEED TO BE SHOWN
ON THE SITE PLAN, AND THEY
ALSO NEED TO BE TRACKED. WE
HIRED A TEAM IN 2021. THEY ARE
TRACKING ALL TREES SPECIES ,
WHETHER THEY ARE LOCATED IN AN
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA,
THE SHORELINE DISTRICT,
DIAMETER, SCIENTIFIC NAME ,
WHETHER THEY ARE CONIFEROUS,
EVERGREEN, OR DECIDUOUS?
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, THE
ARCHITECTS AND DEVELOPERS
WOULD BE REQUIRED TO NOTE WERE
TOO FOUR TREES ARE BEFORE THEY
ARE REMOVED ?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> GREAT QUESTIONS.
>> TREES NELSON?
>> IN THE LAST PRESENTATION,
PAGE 12 SAID THAT UP TO TWO
TIER FOUR COULD BE, AND THEN
UP TO TWO TIER THREE AND , THEY
COULD BE REMOVED IN A 12 MONTH
PERIOD IN CERTAIN ZONES, WHEN
YOU SAY, IT IS FOR TRACKING
WHAT IS NEEDED, IT DOES SEEM,
WHEN YOU SAY REGULATIONS, YOU
ARE BASICALLY PROVIDING A LIMIT
FOR HOW MANY TIER FOUR CAN BE
CUT BY A BUILDER OR PROPERTY
OWNER WITHIN A CERTAIN
TIMEFRAME, THERE ARE NOT ANY
REPLACEMENT OR RETENTION
REQUIREMENTS? IS THAT
UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY? WHEN YOU
SAY REGULATION, IS THAT WHAT
YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
>> CHANDA, MAYBE I CAN HELP.
TELL ME IF I GOT THIS WRONG,
WHAT WE HAVE FOUND IS THERE
HAVE BEEN A LOT OF TREES
REMOVED IN NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENTIAL ZONES , THIS IS
COMING FROM PEOPLE NOT LIKING
TREES BECAUSE THEY EITHER BLOCK
THE LIGHT, AND SO WE HAVE TO
CREATE THAT TIER TO TRACK
THESE TWO REGULATE THAT VERY
CURRENTLY HOMEOWNERS CAN TAKE
UP TO THREE EVERY , THIS IS
THE MECHANISM FOR TRACKING.
>> THIS IS JUST MAKING -- I
WANTED IT IN MY MIND, WE ARE
NOT JUST TRACKING THEM, WE ARE
ALSO LIMITING. I AM NOT SAYING,
WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING.
AND THIS APPLIES TO BOTH
HOMEOWNERS, AND ALSO
DEVELOPERS, SO PROPERTY IS
BEING DEVELOPED AND NOT
DEVELOPED, RIGHT?
>> CHANDA, DID COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON AND I GET THIS RIGHT?
>> ABSOLUTELY. ENTIRELY
CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> WONDERFUL, COLLEAGUES, ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE?
IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE
EDUCATED MYSELF AND
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON , THIS IS
PRETTY GOOD.
>> THANKS. ANOTHER CHANGE IN
THE LEGISLATION IS INCREASING
LEGISLATION FOR TREE PROTECTION
AREA, THE IMAGE SHOWS THE
CANOPY AND THE ROOT ZONES. THE
TREE PROTECTION AREA MAY BE
ADJUSTED TO ALLOW FOR A LARGER
TREE PROTECTION AREA WITH A
CERTIFIED ARBORIST'S FIGHTING
FOR THE CERTIFIED ARBORIST HAS
THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE NEW
CODE PROVISIONS TO MAKE THE
AREA LARGER OR SMALLER TO FIT
THE CONDITIONS, SO, THIS IS A
NEW CHANGE THAT GIVES EXPERTS
THE ABILITY TO TAILOR
PROTECTIONS USING IRREGULAR
DRIP LINES RATHER THAN A STATIC
CIRCLE THAT ARE CUSTOMIZED AND
TAILORED TO THE INDIVIDUAL TREE
AND THE SURROUNDING CONDITIONS
TO BETTER SUPPORT LONG-TERM
TREE VITALITY. THIS LEGISLATION
GOES TOGETHER WITH AN UPDATED
SDCI TREE PROTECTION DETAIL.
THIS IS A REQUIRED DESIGN
SPECIFICATION THAT WILL BE PART
OF THE DRAWINGS AND THE PLANS
THAT ARE REQUIRED DURING
DEVELOPMENT AND ALSO REVIEWED
BY STAFF, SO THE ARBORIST
REPORTS ARE REQUIRED TO
PROVIDE SDCI COMPLETE
INVENTORY OF ALL TREES 6" AND
GREATER, AND IT ALSO INCLUDES,
LIKE I SAID, THE SCIENTIFIC AND
COMMON NAME, DIAMETER, AND
LOCATION. IN CASES WHERE THERE
IS AN ACTIVITY SUCH AS
REPLANTING A TREE, ALL THE
MONITORING WILL DETAIL HOW
THESE ARE BEING PROTECTED
WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED.
>> THANK YOU, CHANDA EMERY.
CAN YOU STAY WITH THAT SLIDE
THANK YOU, CLERK. COLLEAGUES,
ANY QUESTIONS? I WANT TO NOTE ,
IN THE PAST, WE HAVE USED
STATIC CIRCLES AROUND TREE,
THAT DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR HOW
THE TREE ROOTS ACTUALLY GROW,
AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD
CHANGE AND I AM NOT SEEING ANY
QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBER
NELSON. AND NO HANDS, WE WILL
MOVE ONTO THE NEXT SLIDE.
>> THIS IS HOW THEY WORK
TOGETHER TO ALLOW FOR
DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR. AND SO IT
GIVES THE ABILITY TO INCREASE
CITYWIDE TREE CANOPY AND
INCREASE HOUSING STOCK AT THE
SAME TIME. IT IS CLEAR THESE
ADDITIONAL TREE REGULATIONS, WE
CAN USE A STANDARD THAT IS MORE
PREDICTABLE AND FULLY
COMMUNICATES WHAT THE ZONING
ALLOWS. AND SO THE EXISTING
ZONING CAPACITY REMAINS THE
SAME WITH NO CHANGE TO THE
EXISTING ZONING. THE HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENT MAKES IT CLEAR WHAT
IS POSSIBLE, GIVING A BETTER
INDICATION OF WHAT THE CURRENT
ZONING ALLOWS FOR BETTER MORE
PREDICTABLE OUTCOMES. SO, IT
REPLACES FLOOR AREA RATIO WITH
THE HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENT,
WHICH IS A STANDARD THAT
ACCOUNTS FOR THE HOUSING
DEPARTMENT, SO THIS REQUIREMENT
MAKES TREE PROTECTION EASIER
FOR BOTH ARBORISTS AND IT
APPLIES TO MULTIFAMILY AND
COMMERCIAL ZONES. AND IT
PROVIDES INCENTIVES WITH THE
ABILITY TO USE FLEXIBILITY. THE
NEXT SLIDE IS GOING TO EXPLAIN
THIS A BIT FURTHER.
>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I SEE
THAT COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA
HAS A QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
WILL HOLD MY QUESTION FOR AFTER
THE NEXT SLIDE. IF IT IS MORE
APPROPRIATE, I WILL BE HAPPY TO
WAIT.
>> SURE. WE WILL LOOK REALLY
BRIEFLY ON THIS SLIDE AND NOTE
THE CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE WHAT
CREATES THIS HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENT, WE ARE REQUIRING
FOR GARBAGE ZONES, WALKWAYS,
OR PARKING . OFTENTIMES, THESE
REQUIREMENTS THAT WE, AS THE
CITY, HAVE CREATED, THEY ARE AT
ODDS WITH TREE PROTECTIONS.
CHANDA, CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT
IS THE CURRENT PROCESS FOR
EXEMPTING OUR HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO
PROTECT TREES. WHAT IS THE
PROCESS THERE?
>> FOR , WELL, RIGHT NOW, THE
CHANGE IN LEGISLATION IS TO --
>> OH, CHANDA, NOT WHAT IS IN
THE LEGISLATION. BUT WHAT IS
THE CURRENT PRACTICE?
>> THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS MUCH
MORE LENGTHY . AND THAT IS
WHERE NOT ALL OF THE
CODE-REQUIRED FEATURES ARE
SHOWN TOGETHER. WITH THE
BUILDINGS AND THE TREES, THEY
ARE EXCEPTIONALLY NOT SHOWN UP
FRONT EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND
SO THERE IS MORE AMBIGUITY.
AND MORE CONFUSION AND IT IS
NOT AS CLEAR AND SO THE
CHANGE, AGAIN IS TO MAKE THIS
MORE CLEAR. TO REDUCE, YOU
KNOW --
>> CHANDA, I GUESS WHAT I AM
ASKING, LET'S SAY A BUILDING
SITE HAD A TREE THAT THE
BUILDER WANTS TO PROTECT. THEY
ARE REQUIRED WITH THESE
HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS TO
COVER THE LOT WHICH DOES NOT
ALLOW FOR THE TREE TO REMAIN,
IF THEY WANTED TO SAVE THAT
TREE, WHAT IS THE PROCESS TO
HAVE THEIR WALKWAY EXEMPT OR
ONE OF THE PARKING SPOTS EXEMPT
TO PROTECT THAT TREE ? IS
THERE A PROCESS?
>> THERE IS A PROCESS TODAY.
DEPARTURES ARE AVAILABLE TO BE
USED. BUT IT IS, LATER ON IN
THE REVIEW, IT IS NOT UPFRONT.
AND SO THE DECISIONS ARE
DECIDED UPON LATER. AND MAYBE
AN ARBORIST WOULD NOT SEE
THOSE TREES SOONER. AND SO,
THE OUTCOMES COULD ALL BE
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
>> THANK YOU. JUST TO CLARIFY,
THE PROCESS IS THAT THE
BUILDER WOULD HAVE TO GIVE A
DEPARTURE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT
THEY ARE NOT SHOWN IN THE SITE
PLAN INTO LATER IN THE PROCESS.
I DO FLAG THIS TO THE PUBLIC
AND OUR COLLEAGUES, BECAUSE WE
HAVE CITY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE
PROMOTING THE CUTTING OF
TREES TO BUILD THE HOUSING THAT
WE NEED. IN THIS HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENT ALLOWS US TO CREATE
THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE NEED
TO CHANGE THESE HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENTS, PROTECT TREES,
AND BUILD THE HOUSING WE NEED,
THAT WAS NOT A QUESTION AND ,
THAT WAS MORE OF A STATEMENT.
WHAT I HAVE ASKED FOR ARE A
NUMBER OF EXAMPLES AND I ASKED
IN THE LAST COMMITTEE FOR A
NUMBER OF EXAMLES OF PROPOSED
BUILDINGS WITH TIER ONE, TIER
TWO, TIER THREE, TIER FOUR,
WE WILL BE GETTING INTO THAT IN
A MOMENT. COLLEAGUES, IS THERE
ANYTHING ELSE ON THESE SLIDES?
GREAT, LET'S MOVE ON.
>> THIS ALLOWS TO ACCOMMODATE
TREE RETENTION. THIS SIDE
HIGHLIGHTS MANY OF THE
APPLICATION THAT CAN BE USED
WITHIN THE LEGISLATION. AND I
WILL SHOW EXAMPLES IN THE NEXT
FEW SLIDES.
>> AND , ARE WE GOING TO GO
THROUGH? SO, DO YOU WANT TO
READ THESE OFF, BECAUSE I HAVE
SOME QUESTIONS HERE BUT
>> SURE, THANK YOU. SO, IT IS
ADMINISTRATIVE. A REVIEW. THE
SETBACKS CAN BE MODIFIED. BY
50%. AND THEN, MANY AREAS CAN
BE REDUCED . LANDSCAPING AND
SCREENING CAN BE REDUCED BY 25%
AND THEN STRUCTURE WIDTH, DEPTH
, AND FACADE LENGTH CAN BE
INCREASED BY 10%. AND THEN IN
THE LOWER ZONES, DESIGN
REVIEW DEPARTURES ALLOW FOR
REDUCED PARKING SO THEY CAN GO
UP FROM 10 ' TO 40-50 ' IF
THEY ARE NOT GOING INTO THE
TREE PROTECTION AREA.
>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THESE
AREAS, IS THIS WHERE THE
GARBAGE CANS GO, THE WALKWAYS,
WHAT IS AN AMENITY AREA?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.
AMENITY AREAS ARE SHARED
SPACES. GREEN SPACES FOR
RESIDENTS TO USE. THEY INCLUDE
SEATING, BENCHES, LANDSCAPING
BEDS. SPACES THAT CAN BE
SHARED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF
GREENERY BETWEEN BUILDINGS.
>> IN OUR CURRENT CODE, WE
COULD BE REQUIRING THAT A BENCH
BE PUT IN, THAT IS AT THE COST
OF PRESERVING TREES. IS THAT
FAIR?
>> YES.
>> WITH LANDSCAPING BEING
REDUCED BY 25%, DO I HAVE THIS
RIGHT THAT WE COULD BE
REQUIRING LANDSCAPING AT THE
COST OF PRESERVING A TREE ?
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THAT IS WILD. ON THE RECORD,
I THINK THAT IS WILD.
STRUCTURE WITH FACADE LENGTH
INCREASING BY 10%, DO I HAVE
THE UNDERSTANDING CORRECT? THIS
MEANS THAT THE BUILDING SHAPE
CAN BE CHANGED IN ORDER TO
RETURN THE PRESERVATION OF THE
TREE?
>> YES.
>> SETBACKS, JUST REAL BRIEFLY,
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT
WITH THE CURRENT CODE,
SETBACKS ARE REQUIRED, SO IF
THE TREE WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF
THE PROPERTY, WE COULD NOT
SHIFT THE BUILDING INTO THOSE
SETBACKS TO PRESERVE THE TREE.
THIS WOULD ALLOW THAT, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY
RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
HERE? SEEING NONE. ALL RIGHT,
WE CAN MOVE ONTO THE NEXT ONE.
WE ARE GETTING INTO SOME OF THE
EXAMPLES REQUESTED, WE SAW THIS
SLIDE, IT WAS AT THE LAST
MEETING. WE WILL USE A COUPLE
OF DIFFERENT EXAMPLES, AND
CHANDA, MAYBE IF YOU COULD SHOW
EACH OF THE EXAMPLES AND THEN
WE WILL COME BACK TO THIS
SLIDE?
>> OKAY, THANK YOU.
>> WE ARE CONTROLLING IT.,
CLERK, HERE WE HAVE TWO , WE
HAVE TIER ONE AND TIER TWO,
HERE WE HAVE TWO TIER ONE
TREES, AS AN EXAMPLE, AND HERE
WE HAVE TWO TIER TWO TREES.
FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC AND THE
COLLEAGUES TO KNOW WHAT THE
THREE EXAMPLES ARE THAT WE ARE
USING TODAY. COUNCILMEMBER,
TAKE IT AWAY.
>> OKAY, COUNCILMEMBERS
REQUESTED THIS AT THE LAST
BRIEFING. THIS IS ABOUT THE
HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENT IN THIS
LEGISLATION. AS A REMINDER, THE
EXISTING REGULATIONS, AND THAT
WILL SHOW THE DEVELOPMENT
CAPACITY. AND THAT IS THE RATIO
FOR THE PROPOSAL, AND THAT IS
THE BLOCK THAT IT WILL SIT ON,
AND SO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IS
REPLACED WITH THE HARDSCAPE
REQUIREMENT. THAT REQUIREMENT
IS DRIVEN BY THE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENTS. AS WE ARE
REGULATING MORE TREES, IT IS
CRUCIAL THAT WE USE THE RIGHT
TOOL. THE IMAGE ON THE SCREEN
SHOWS AN EXAMPLE OF A TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT USING HARDSCAPE,
AGAIN, AN EXISTING SDCI
STANDARD , THAT IS SUPPOSED TO
REPLACE THE FLOOR AREA RATIO,
AND IT ACCOUNTS JUST FOR THE
BUILDINGS. SO IT IS A BETTER
WAY TO DESCRIBE WHAT IS ALLOWED
AND WHAT IS REQUIRED, LIKE
TRASH STORAGE, AND PARKWAYS
AND DRIVEWAYS. BUILDING
FOOTPRINTS, EAVES , PARKING,
PARKING ACCESS AREAS,
WALKWAYS, BICYCLE PARKING,
WASTE STORAGE AREAS, PATIOS,
RETENTION PLANTERS AND STORM
WATER FEATURES AND OTHER HARD
SERVICES, THEY ARE REQUIRED BY
CURRENT CODES . AND SO, FOR
THIS EXAMPLE SHOWN ON THE SCENE
UNDER THE EXISTING CODE, THE
RATIO IS A MAXIMUM OF 1.4. THIS
PROJECT HAS BEEN 1.39 FLOOR
AREA RATIO AND THE HARD SCAPE
PERCENTAGE IS 5456 SQUARE
FEET, AND THE APPLICANT
PROVIDED FIVE PARKING STALLS,
AND BICYCLE PARKING, SOLID
WASTE AND RECYCLABLES, THEY
ARE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS
THE LANDSCAPING. AND SO, YOU
CAN SEE, THERE WAS A LOT OF
CRITICAL FEATURES THAT NEED TO
GO INTO THE DESIGN AND
PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDINGS ON
THE SITE. SO, THE STANDARD
ALLOWS FOR INCREASED
PROTECTIONS. THE FLOOR AREA
RATIO ONLY IS NOT FLEXIBLE
ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT THE
LEGISLATION IS PROPOSING TO DO.
THIS TOOL MAKES IT CLEAR TO THE
APPLICANT WHAT INCENTIVES ARE
AVAILABLE FOR TREATMENT
ATTENTION AND THEN WHAT IS
ALLOWED TO BE REMOVED AND WHAT
IS NOT POSSIBLE OR POSSIBLE
WITH CURRENT FLEXIBILITY. ONE
TIER WAS RETAINED AT THE
WASTE STORAGE AREA ON THE
BOTTOM LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE
IMAGE. TIER ONE TREES MAY NOT
BE REMOVED UNLESS DEEMED
HAZARDOUS OR AN EMERGENCY
ACTION IS NECESSARY. IN THIS
CASE, THIS TREE WAS HEALTHY,
THEREFORE IT MAY NOT BE
REMOVED. AND THEN ONE TIER TWO
TREE WAS REMOVED, NEAR THE
ACCESS TO UNIT SIX. AND THEN
TWO NEW TREES PLANTED BY UNITS
ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
>> THANK YOU, CHANDA. SO, THIS
IS AN EXAMPLE OF REPLACEMENT
ON-SITE. BUT I DO WANT TO ASK
HERE, SHOULD THE BUILDER DESIRE
TO RETAIN THAT TIER TWO TREE
WITH THE EXEMPTIONS AND
LIKABILITY PROVIDED, IS IT NOT
POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO SHIFT
UNITS ONE, FOUR, AND TWO AND
FIVE, UPSTREAM, AND UNITS EIGHT
AND 10 DOWN, SO THERE IS A
SPACE TO RETAIN THAT TREE ? ARE
THOSE FLEXIBILITIES THAT HAVE
BEEN PROVIDED IN THAT BILL?
>> YES, THERE ARE FLEXIBILITIES
TO SHIFT THINGS AWAY FROM
PROTECTED TREES. BUT THE
CHALLENGES THE DRIVEWAY HERE.
THERE ARE CERTAIN DIMENSIONS
FOR DRIVEWAYS. AND THEY COULD
SHIFT , YOU KNOW, BUILDINGS
AROUND, AND TRY TO SEE HOW
THAT WORKS, THE TREE WOULD NOT
HAVE TO BE REMOVED IF THEY USED
A DIFFERENT DESIGN. IN ORDER
TO DO THAT. BUT, IN THIS
EXAMPLE, THE BUILDER OR THE
APPLICANT DID NOT SHOW HOW THE
BUILDINGS WERE SHIFTED, THEY
JUST SHOWED THAT THE TREE WAS
REMOVED.
>> IN OUR CURRENT CODE, WE DO
NOT GIVE THEM THAT FLEXIBILITY.
AND SO IN OUR CURRENT CODE, AS
WRITTEN, WE ARE FORCING THEIR
HAND WITH THIS TREE. THE
FLEXIBILITIES IN THIS BILL GIVE
ENOUGH TO PRESERVE THE TREE.
COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS ON
THIS SLIDE? NOT SEEING ANY, WE
WILL GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
>> THIS IMAGE SHOWS TWO
BUILDINGS, BOTH ARE TOWNHOUSES,
AND WE TYPICALLY SEE MULTI
FAMILY HOMES ON. AND THIS IS
THE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, AND
IN THE BACK OF THE LOT, YOU CAN
SEE --
>> CHANDA ? I DO NOT KNOW ,
ARE YOU SPEAKING TO THE CORRECT
SLIDE?
>> YES.
>> OKAY.
>> IN THIS EXAMPLE, THE FLOOR
AREA RATIO IS A MAXIMUM OF 1.4,
SO THIS PROJECT, IT HAS A
HARDSCAPE OF 85%.
>> KEEP GOING. SORRY.
>> IN THIS IMAGE, THESE TIER
ONE TREES ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF
THE PROPERTY. THEY MAY NOT BE
REMOVED UNLESS DEEMED HAZARDOUS
OR UNLESS THERE IS EMERGENCY
ACTION NECESSARY. IN THIS
EXAMPLE, THE BUILDER ELECTS TO
PASS ON THIS AFTER COMPLETING
THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND
THE INCREASED TREE PROTECTIONS
IN THE LEGISLATION.
>> IS THIS BECAUSE WE ARE NOT
PROVIDING ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO
SHIFT THESE BUILDINGS INTO
THOSE AREAS, ET CETERA ?
>> IN THIS SITUATION, THE
BUILDER SOUGHT THAT THESE ARE
TWO TIER ONE TREES IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY, AND
THEY DID NOT SHOW A WAY TO
MOVE THE BUILDINGS AROUND. IT
MIGHT HAVE REDUCED THE SIZE
OF THE UNITS OR SHIFTED THEM.
THEY COULD'VE TRIED DIFFERENT
DESIGNS . IN THIS CASE, THEY
JUST PASSED ON THE LAW.
>> IS THAT , AND THAT IS DUE
TO OUR HARDSCAPE REQUIREMENT?
WHAT I AM HEARING, EVEN THE
BILL BEFORE ESTATE IS NOT
PROVIDE ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO
SHIFT THESE BUILDINGS. AND SO,
THESE TREES ARE PRESERVED AND
THAT LOT IS NOT DEVELOPED. IS
THAT CORRECT?
>> THIS LOT, THE APPLICANT
CHOSE TO PASS ON IT. BUT,
THERE COULD BE A BUILDER OR AN
APPLICANT THAT USES A DIFFERENT
DESIGN. WHERE THEY WOULD NOT
PASS ON THIS LOT. AND SO, IN
THIS CASE, THEY WERE PROPOSING
THIS DESIGN . AND IT WAS
CHALLENGING BECAUSE TIER ONE
TREES HAVE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF
PROTECTIONS.
>> WITH THE NEW FLEXIBILITIES,
WHAT I AM HEARING IS THAT WE
HAVE NOT PROVIDED ENOUGH
FLEXIBILITY IN THIS BILL TO
BUILD THE HOUSING AND TO
PRESERVE THE TREE ?
>> YES, TO BUILD THIS
PARTICULAR DESIGN IN THIS
SCENARIO FOR THIS PARTICULAR
ONE. THE TIER ONE TREES ARE IN
A POSITION THAT MADE IT
PARTICULARLY CHALLENGING
BECAUSE THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE
MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.
>> OKAY, I DO NOT FEEL LIKE MY
QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED AND
I AM NOT GOING TO ASK IT AGAIN
SO THAT WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT SLIDE.
>> SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS
SLIDE, THIS SHOWS TWO
BUILDINGS, BOTH ARE TYPICALLY
SEEN FOR MULTIFAMILY ZONES.
THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT AND
THIS IS THE 10-UNIT
DEVELOPMENT. IN THIS EXAMPLE,
IT IS ALLOWING FOR A MAXIMUM
RATIO OF 1.4, AND IT HAS A
MAXIMUM F.A.R. OF 1.39, AND
HARDSCAPE OF 5456 SQUARE FEET .
THE PREVIOUS SERVICES ACCOUNTED
FOR 944 SQUARE FEET, THE
CURRENT CODE, REQUIRING NO
PARKING , AND IN THE APPLICANT
PROVIDED NO PARKING AND THE
CURRENT CODE ACTUALLY REQUIRED
NINE PARKING SPACES +2
SHORT-TERM STALLS AND IT
REQUIRED THAT THE CURRENT CODE
FOR RECYCLABLES IS A MINIMUM
OF 150 SQUARE FEET , AND 15'
WIDE WALKWAYS, AND ALSO THEY
HAVE MINIMUM DIMENSIONS. IN
THIS IMAGE, THERE ARE TWO TIER
TWO COUNCILMEMBER TREES, THE
BUILDER WORKED WITH THE PROJECT
ARCHITECT TO PREPARE WHAT IT
SHOWS. UNITS THREE, SIX, EIGHT,
AND 10 USE CODE INCENTIVES IN
THIS LEGISLATION TO RETAIN THE
HEALTHY PIER ONE TREE. THE
INCENTIVE USED WAS TO SHIFT IT
FORWARD AND HAVE A DIMENSION
NEAR UNIT 30, THEN UNITS EIGHT
AND 10 USED OTHER CODE
INCENTIVES AND FLEXIBILITIES
THAT ALLOW FOR THE BUILDER TO
MOVE UP AN ADDITIONAL 10 ' IN
HEIGHT AND THEN THE TIER TWO
TREES WERE PRESERVED BY THE
BUILDER. THE BUILDER FOUND
THERE WAS NO REASON TO USE
INCENTIVES FOR THOSE TREES,
GIVING THEIR LOCATION.
>> ALEX, ANY QUESTIONS? THIS
IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW WE CAN
SHIFT BUILDINGS AROUND. AND
CLERK, IF YOU CAN GO BACK TWO
SLIDES, HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF
A TIER TWO TREE , IN
ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PLACE AS
THE OTHER EXAMPLE, WHERE THIS
TIER TWO TREE IS NOT SAVED
UNDER OUR CURRENT CODES. WE
ARE NOT PROVIDING THE
FLEXIBILITY THAT IS NEEDED. IF
YOU CAN SHIFT BACK TO SLIDE 13.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW WE
ARE ABLE TO ALLOW SHIFTS TO
OCCUR IN THESE BUILDINGS TO
PROTECT TREES. THIS FLEXIBILITY
DOES NOT EXIST IN OUR CURRENT
CODE AND IT IS PART OF WHAT IS
BEING PROPOSED TODAY.
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, LET'S
MOVE ON. WE HAVE ANOTHER
EXAMPLE. THIS IS A DENSER
ZONE. CHANDA, IF YOU WANT,
TAKE IT AWAY.
>> IN THIS IMAGE, THE PROJECT
IS A MIXED USE BUILDING . THE
FLOOR AREA RATIO IS 4.25, AND
THE PROJECT HAS A BUILT-IN
FLOOR AREA RATIO , 85%
HARDSCAPE , AND SO, IT IS A
BUILDING WITH UNDERGROUND
PARKING. NO PARKING SPACES ARE
SHOWN IN THIS IMAGE, THE
APPLICANT USED CODE INCENTIVES
AND CODE FLEXIBILITIES TO MAKE
DESIGN MODIFICATIONS TO THE
AREA. SO, THE APPLICANT ALSO
RETAINED THE TIER ONE TREE ON
THE FAR RIGHT CORNER OF THE LOT
HOWEVER, THE TIER TWO TREE WAS
REMOVED. UNDER THE PROPOSED
CHANGES, TIER TWO TREES MUST
BE REPLACED AND THE CALCULATED
PAYMENT FEE MUST BE PAID. THIS
WAS A LARGE, MATURE TIER TWO
TREE, IT REQUIRED A FEW
THOUSAND DOLLARS IN PAYMENT FOR
THE REMOVAL OF THAT TIER TWO
TREE. THE LARGER REMOVAL, THE
LARGER REPAYMENT FEE IS, AND
THEY CAN REPLANT NEW TREES
ON-SITE.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY HERE, FOR
THE REMOVAL OF THIS SIZE OF A
TIER TWO TREE, THEY ARE
REQUIRED TO REPLACE AND REPAY.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THERE ARE
NEW TREES REQUIRED THE DOLLAR
SIGNS IN THIS IMAGE?
>> IT ALLOWS FOR A COMBINATION
OF PAYMENT AND REPLANTING OF
TREES ON-SITE.
>> SO, THE BUILDER ELECTED TO
DO THIS BECAUSE OF THE COST OF
THE REMOVAL FEE BEING SO HIGH?
IS THAT MY CORRECT
UNDERSTANDING FOR THIS EXAMPLE?
>> YES.
>> AND THERE IS STILL A TIER
ONE TREE IN THE QUARTER.
COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS? AND
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, TAKE
IT AWAY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR STRAUSS.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE
SIX NEW TREES REPLANTED, IF
THEY ARE JUST REMOVING JUST ONE
TIER TWO TREE?
>> SO, WE ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE
UP A COMBINATION AND SO, THE
PREFERENCE FOR MOST WOULD BE TO
PLAN THE TREES ON-SITE RATHER
THAN TO MAKE A PAYMENT, SO THEY
ELECTED TO MAKE MORE TREES
BEING PLANTED ON-SITE. THE
PAYMENT WAS VERY HIGH FOR THIS
. THEY DID BOTH.
>> I JUST THOUGHT THE
REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT WAS ONE
TREE REMOVED, ONE TREE
REPLANTED.
>> THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION .
THANK YOU FOR THAT. UNDER THE
PROPOSAL OF CHANGES, IT IS NOT
A ONE-FOR-ONE REPLACEMENT
REQUIREMENT ANYMORE. IT IS ONE
OR MORE REPLANTED. WHEN ONE OR
MORE MUST BE REMOVED.
>> I AM GOING TO FOLLOW UP.
KEEP GOING, COUNCILMEMBER
PEDERSEN. I SAW YOU.
>> UNDER THE PROPOSAL, WE ARE
NOT REQUIRING THE SAME WIDTH OF
TREE OR DIAMETER OF TREE TO
BE REPLACED. IF IT IS A 24 WAS
QUOTE REMOVED, THEN YOU ARE
NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE FOUR 6 "
TREES TO REPLACE, CORRECT?
YOU ARE JUST TRYING TO LOWER
YOUR FEE, PERHAPS, BY PLANTING
THE TWO ADDITIONAL TREES, OR
WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT, THE GOAL ,
OR INTENT IS TO EXTRAPOLATE
THE TREE BENEFITS. I AM KIND OF
GETTING INTO MORE OF THE
DETAILS OF HOW IT WORKS.
>> THAT IS OKAY.
>> IN GENERAL, TREE
REPLACEMENT MUST BE DESIGNED
TO RESULT IN A CANOPY COVERAGE
THAT IS ROUGHLY PROPOSAL TO
THE CANOPY COVERAGE PRIOR TO
REMOVAL. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN
THE TREES ARE REMOVED, THEY
MUST BE REPLACED BY ONE OR
MORE, AND THE SIZE AND SPECIES
ARE DETERMINED BY ARBORISTS.
>> YOU REFERENCE THE CANOPY
COVERAGE FOR THE REPLACEMENTS ,
THAT IS FOR WHEN THEY ARE FULLY
GROWN? NOT THAT THEY ARE
INSTANTLY MATCHING THE CANOPY
COVERAGE OF THE TREE REMOVED ?
>> CORRECT.
>> THANKS A LOT.
>> YES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN,
THANK YOU. YOU ANSWERED, OR
ASKED, MY QUESTIONS AS WELL.
COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? NO. MOVING ONTO THE
NEXT ONE. I THINK THIS IS THE
SAME EXAMPLE THAT CHANDA JUST
EXPLAINED. THE FLEXIBILITIES
THAT WERE ELECTED TO PRESERVE
THIS TREE.
>> THIS SLIDE SHOWS A SIMILAR
LAYOUT AS WHAT WAS SHOWN IN
THE PREVIOUS SLIDES, THE
DIFFERENCES, THERE IS A TIER
ONE TREE LOCATED IN THE AREA
SHOWN IN GREEN, THE BUILDER
ELECTED TO RETAIN THE TIER ONE
TREE BY MAKING MODIFICATIONS
TO THE UNIT FOOTPRINTS OF
UNITS ONE AND TWO. THE BUILDER
USE CODE INCENTIVES AND
FLEXIBILITIES TO THE PROPOSED
CHANGES. AND IT RESULTED IN A
REDUCTION OF THE AREA BY 42%,
AND A REDUCTION IN THE
LANDSCAPING BY 15%.
>> WONDERFUL. WITHOUT THOSE
FLEXIBILITIES , THIS BUILDING
WOULD NOT LIKELY BE BUILT
BECAUSE THOSE CURRENT
FLEXIBILITIES WOULD REQUIRE THE
TREE TO BE REMOVED AND THE TREE
IS OF A DIAMETER THAT IS NOT
ALLOWED TO BE REMOVED. IS THAT
A CORRECT STATEMENT?
>> YES.
>> OKAY. COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER
QUESTION ON THIS SLIDE? SEEING
NONE, LET'S MOVE ON. I THINK WE
ARE ALMOST THROUGH WITH THIS
PRESENTATION ACTUALLY.
>> THIS ALLUDES TO OUR
PROPOSED CHANGES, REPLACEMENT
TREES WILL HELP FUTURE
GENERATION OF CANOPY. IT DOES
THIS BY PLANTING NEW SPECIES
THAT ARE SELECTED FOR DISEASE
AND PEST-RESISTANT TOLERANCES.
IT IS ALSO INFORMED BY
SPACING. WHETHER
SITE-SPECIFIC, PROJECT-BY-PROJ
ECT , THERE IS A PREFERENCE
FOR TREE SPECIES THAT GROW WELL
AND SIT APPROPRIATELY WITHIN AN
URBAN ENVIRONMENT, BASED ON
ARBORISTS' INPUT.
THEN SO THAT CONCLUDES THE
PRESENTATION AND I AM HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. IF YOU WANT TO
GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT
SAYS QUESTIONS. COLLEAGUES,
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE
OVERALL PRESENTATION TODAY? I
AM GOING TO CHECK MY NOTES TO
MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF MY
QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED.
CHANDA, IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK
, LICK BACK A COUPLE SLIDES .
THAT ONE. DO WE HAVE
INCENTIVES IN PLACE TO REQUIRE
OR TO INCENTIVIZE PLANTING
TREES, RATHER THAN PAY THE
REMOVAL FEE?
>> SO, THE CODE DOES -- WELL.
I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER FOR
SURE. I DO NOT HAVE THE
LEGISLATION IN FRONT OF ME BUT
I DO BELIEVE THERE IS A SECTION
THERE THAT ENCOURAGES AND IT
MIGHT EVEN STAYED THAT, YOU
KNOW , PLANTING ON-SITE IS
PREFERABLE, I DO KNOW THAT WE
HAVE BEEN SURVEILLING
COMPARABLE CITIES IN SIZE AND
DENSITY. AND THE MAJORITY I
THINK , IT WAS ALMOST LIKE A 1%
USAGE. AND SO WHEN THEY ARE
DOING THE COST BENEFIT
ANALYSIS, YOU KNOW, MOST WILL
BE PLANTING ON-SITE IF THERE IS
ROOM TO DO SO.
>> WE WILL GET INTO THE FEES
MORE AT THE NEXT MEETING. NOW,
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, TAKE IT
AWAY.
>> THE INVENTORY PRESENTED LAST
TIME SHOWS THAT THERE WERE 87
ACRES OF TREES LOST IN
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AND
THAT IS WHERE MOST OF OUR TREES
ARE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE
8500 IS APPLIED TO
MULTIFAMILY. BUT THERE -- THE
NUMBER , THE NUMBER OF TREES
THAT CAN BE CUT ON A
SINGLE-FAMILY LOT , IT IS
LIMITED, AS WE SAID BEFORE, BY
THE NUMBER OF TREES,
YEAR-TO-YEAR, ET CETERA. BUT
WHAT ARE , IF YOU KNOW, THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR SETBACKS OF
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
ON A REGULAR LOT. WERE ANY OF
THOSE , IF THEY EXIST , DO
THEY ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY
BETWEEN TREES?
>> THANK YOU, FOR THAT
QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER, THE
LEGISLATION DOES NOT CHANGE
THE UNDERLYING ZONING. BUT IT
DOES ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITIES
TO REDUCE SETBACKS. DID NOT GO
INTO THE TREE PROTECTION AREA.
AND TO RETAIN TREES.
>> BUT NO REGULATION AGAINST
CUTTING THEM DOWN? NO? I AM
ASSUMING. OKAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, CAN
YOU ASK THAT QUESTION AGAIN. I
THINK YOU ARE ONTO SOMETHING
GOOD HERE.
>> I AM WONDERING , I
APPRECIATE HOW MUCH ATTENTION
IS FOCUSED ON THE MULTI
FAMILY. BUT I AM JUST
WONDERING, MAYBE I HAVE NOT
ZEROED IN ON EVERYTHING THIS
DOES FOR SINGLE FAMILIES, BUT I
AM JUST WONDERING. WHAT WAS ,
WHAT WAS ON THE TABLE THAT WAS
MAYBE TAKEN OFF OR ANYTHING
LIKE THAT, BUT YOU AND I CAN
TALK OFF-LINE ABOUT THAT ONE,
BUT I AM JUST WORRIED THAT
CHOOSING THE SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONES -- I AM WANTING TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING
THOSE AS WELL. BUT WE WILL TALK
LATER.
>> OKAY, THAT IS GOOD. YOU ARE
ONTO SOMETHING GOOD . SOMETHING
THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER IN
THE PRESENTATION, WHICH IS
REDUCING THE NUMBER OF TREES
THAT HE RESIDENTIAL LOT CAN
CUT DOWN.
>> THAT IS WHAT I AM
QUESTIONING. BUT I DON'T KNOW.
YOU PHRASED IT MUCH BETTER THAN
I DID.
>> THAT IS GREAT. WELL,
COUNCILMEMBER PEDERSEN, I KNOW
YOU DO NOT HAVE YOUR HAND UP,
BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
TODAY?
>> THANK YOU, NO, CHAIR.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA, YOU
HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
HOUSING, DID YOU WANT TO ASK
THEM NOW?
>> THAT IS OKAY, MR. CHAIR. I
WILL HOLD OFF FOR THE NEXT
CONVERSATIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT. VICE CHAIR TAMMY
MORALES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> I AM GOOD, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
>> COLLEAGUES, IF YOU DO HAVE
MORE QUESTIONS, EITHER AHEAD
OF THE NEXT PRESENTATION, YOU
CAN STOP SHARING THE SLIDE NOW.
OR CHANDA, IS THERE ANYTHING
ELSE THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE I
SEE COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA
WITH HER HAND UP.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH . I GUESS
I CAN ASK FOR THE NEXT
PRESENTATION WILL IT BE
POSSIBLE TO FOLD IN MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE CLIMATE
RESISTANCE. JUST THIS MORNING
WE HEARD HOW THE RINGS WITHIN
TREES ARE SHOWING DRAMATIC
IMPACTS THAT THE EXTREME HEAT
AND WEATHER THAT WE HAD TWO
YEARS AGO AFFECTED TREES
LOCALLY. THIS COMPOUNDS A
REPORT THAT WAS IN THE NATIONAL
NEWS LAST MONDAY WITHIN ABOUT
10 YEARS WE ARE EXPECTING TO
SEE DRAMATIC INCREASES IN
TEMPERATURES AROUND THE WORLD I
THINK IT WAS 1.5 DEGREES
CELSIUS INCREASE WITHIN THE
NEXT DECADE. AND SO I WOULD
LOVE TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT
MORE ABOUT THE
CLIMATE-RESISTANT TREES IN THE
NEXT PRESENTATION AS WELL.
>> I LOVE IT. LET'S PUT THAT
IN . AND WE WILL HAVE MORE
CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT.
CHANDA, ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU
WOULD LIKE TO ADD OVERALL IN
THIS PRESENTATION, BEFORE WE
CONCLUDE FOR THE DAY?
>> I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO
ADD, COUNCILMEMBER.
>> I THINK THAT THIS
PRESENTATION REALLY ALLOWED US
TO SEE THE CITY REQUIREMENTS
AND HOW THEY ARE CURRENTLY AT
ODDS WITH PROTECTING TREES AND
HOW THIS BILL WILL HELP US TO
MANAGE THAT CONFLICT IN A WAY
THAT PRESERVES AND PROTECTS
TREES . AND IT WILL ALLOW THE
FLEXIBILITY FOR BUILDERS TO
BUILD ON A PARCEL WHILE
PRESERVING TREES AND GIVING
THEM THE UNDERSTANDING UPFRONT,
WHETHER OR NOT THAT WILL BE A
SITE THAT WORKS FOR THEM. I
WILL BRING A FEW AMENDMENTS TO
THE LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT EVEN
BETTER. BECAUSE OF THE PUBLIC'S
DUE DILIGENCE. THANK YOU FOR
WORKING WITH MY OFFICE, WE
HAVE IDENTIFIED A FEW KEY AREAS
WHERE THE BILL CAN BE IMPROVED,
I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE HOW TO
BRING URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION
TO THE TABLE, POSSIBLY ALONG
WITH ARBORISTS, SO THAT WE CAN
HAVE A MORE ROBUST
CONVERSATION AT THE TABLE. FOR
THE PUBLIC, THERE IS ALWAYS
MORE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND YOUR
COMMENTS IN VERBALLY AND WE
WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT
AVAILABLE EVERY MEETING. I
GUESS THAT BRINGS US TO THE
GOOD OF THE ORDER. IF THERE IS
NOTHING FURTHER FROM MY
COLLEAGUES, THIS DOES CONCLUDE
THE WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29th, 2023
SPECIAL USE COMMITTEE. THE
NEXT IS ON APRIL 7th, IT IS AN
AFTERNOON MEETING ON FRIDAY.
MY APOLOGIES FOR A FRIDAY
AFTERNOON MEETING. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO SEEING YOU THERE,
APRIL 7th, AT 2:00 P.M. THANK
YOU FOR ATTENDING. WE ARE
ADJOURNED.