→ Email City Council ←‍

(Link not working? Go to the event page (Speak Up With Us button) to copy and paste the email.)

‍

Councilmembers submitted over 100 amendments to the comp plan, 11 specifically to support trees. Read our letter to learn why two stand out and will make a real difference for Seattle’s trees:

‍

‍

Dear Council Members,

Thank you to all the council members who have shown a sincere interest in protecting Seattle’s urban tree canopy. In our experience, the amendments that will be most effective in accomplishing this goal are Amendments 93 and 102. We therefore urge you to focus on passing these two amendments. We have also suggested a few small edits to strengthen them, which are attached for your consideration.

Amendment 93 – Neighborhood Residential Tree Canopy Requirements: Guarantees open ground on new lots, preventing nearly complete hardscaping of up to 95% lot coverage. Without it, saplings may be planted in spaces too small to survive, and land will be paved over, accelerating tree loss. This amendment is especially important for frontline communities that rely on new plantings to achieve tree equity.

Amendment 102 – Alternate Site Plan Authority: Restores SDCI’s authority to request alternate site plans that incorporate trees and closes loopholes that allow complete tree removal. We urge that it be revised to also protect Tier 3 trees.

We urge you to act now to approve these amendments. At the current pace of tree removal (345 private property trees per month), delaying action by just six months could result in 2,000 additional trees lost, with negative impacts on public health and environmental justice. While these amendments are necessary, they are not sufficient: without reducing hardscape allowances, Seattle is on track to further increase urban heat islands, where we already rank 5th in the nation.

Sincerely,

Tree Action Seattle and Trees & People Coalition

‍

‍

Why Amendments 93 & 102?

These two amendments alone could slow or even reverse Seattle’s rapid tree clearing:

‍

Amendment 93 is the only measure that guarantees open ground on newly developed lots. Without it, lots could be nearly fully paved or hardscaped, up to 95% coverage. While the Comprehensive Plan zoning (CB 120993) sets basic tree requirements, these are essentially meaningless without minimum planting areas, as saplings could be placed in spaces too small to survive. This amendment is especially important for frontline communities, which are heavily deforested and depend on new plantings to achieve tree equity.

‍

We’re asking for revisions in two tables in Amendment 93 to allow for the protection of multiple, existing, healthy trees and add granularity to tree planting areas by tree size.

‍

Amendment 102 makes critical corrections to the 2023 tree ordinance. Primarily, it returns to SDCI the authority they previously had to request alternate site plans to incorporate trees into new projects. It also closes three loopholes which allow all trees to be removed when development is proposed:

‍

1. Removes the artificially large and rigid tree protection area which says if a developer can’t “protect” a large root zone the entire tree should be removed
2. Discards an ostensible minimum building width of 15 feet or trees can be removed, when in fact there is no Seattle City requirement that a structure be 15 feet wide
3. Removes “retaining walls” and “similar improvements” as reasons to remove trees, unless required by SDCI

‍

We’re asking to revise one statement in Amendment 102 to clarify SDCI’s authority to ask for alternative site designs, and incorporate the protection of Tier 3 trees.

‍

Amendment Analysis

If you’re a policy wonk, you may be interested in how other comprehensive plan amendments affect trees. Our full analysis table is below, and you can find the amendments here. 

‍

Analysis on tree amendments:

‍‍

‍

Analysis on other amendments that affect trees:

‍