Tag Archives: Tree Canopy

Local tree news update, 4-8-23

Posted on by

Edmonds Tree Code Amendment Project: Public Survey – valid through May 19 – make your voice heard!

Carkeek Park Earth Day Celebration – Broadview Seattle, 4/6

UW cherry blossoms reach peak bloom – SeaTimes, 4/6

Community Work Party at Twin Ponds North Saturday, April 8, 2023 – Shoreline Area News, 4/2

Where to see cherry blossoms in the Seattle area – SeaTimes, 3/30

Balancing the health of its ‘urban forest’ with ‘a critical need for more housing,’ Seattle shaping new tree protections – Capitol Hill Seattle Blog, 3/30

WA to burn thousands of acres of forest ahead of fire season – SeaTimes, 3/28

City launches tree code update process with focus on private property – MyEdmonds News, 3/28

Lone tree at Richmond Beach – Shoreline Area News, 3/28

Poetry: Climbing the Tree of Life – Shoreline Area News, 3/24

Reminder: City sponsoring community conversation March 27 about changes to Edmonds tree code – MyEdmonds News, 3/24

Trees, housing and climate goals are intertwined as Seattle debates canopy – SeaTimes, 3/21

Editorial: Use state forestlands to ‘farm’ carbon credits – Everett Herald, 3/21

Ballinger Creek Restoration Project – Shoreline Area News, 3/20

Provide input on the Shoreline’s Urban Forest Strategic Plan and Forest Management Plan – Shoreline Area News, 3/17

Pinehurst Pocket Park Work Party 4/8/2023 – Pinehurst Seattle, 3/15

Pacific Northwest forests are heating up and drying out – High Country News, 3/14

Cherry tree removal on Pike Street underway after compromise – SeaTimes, 3/14

WA rivers, lake nominated to receive new environmental protections – SeaTimes, 3/12

Duwamish Tribe Cultural Preservation Officer consults with Shoreline Historical Museum re the Miyawaki Urban Forest History Project – Shoreline Area News, 3/11

How You Can Foster a Baby Forest – Seattle Greenlaker, 3/11

State’s forests: Protect ‘carbon workhorses’ SeaTimes, 3/10

Seattle Mayor directs city to replace Pike Place market trees with triple the number of cherry blossoms – NW Asian Weekly, 3/10

A rogue, unpermitted palm tree at Alki Beach raises hackles – SeaTimes, 3/10

Sponsor a tree, help a wetland – and a student! -West Seattle Blog, 3/10

Pike Street: Importance of cherry trees – SeaTimes, 3/10

Citing wildfire risk, Spokane to thin 1,000 acres of urban forest – KNKX, 3/9

New protections for Seattle’s trees are inching forward – KNKX, 3/8

Mayor and Councilmember Strauss working to protect and expand tree canopy – Westside Seattle, 3/7

Save the cherry trees – NW Asian Weekly, 3/7

Allow sale of credits for carbon stored in WA-owned lands – SeaTimes, 3/7

DEVELOPMENT: Tree concerns dominate hearing on Delridge proposal – West Seattle Blog, 3/4

Op-Ed: Sound Transit bus lane through LFP would deforest Bothell Way and shift the road west into 110 properties – Shoreline Area News, 3/4

Tree Talk: A name to master, a tree to grow – Madison Park Times, 3/3

Tree canopy: Lack of follow-up – SeaTimes, 3/3

Forest sale: ‘Shame on us’ – SeaTimes, 3/2

Seattle has a Green Lake-sized hole in its tree canopy, study shows – Crosscut, 3/2

Seattle has lost 255 acres of tree canopy. Here’s why – SeaTimes, 3/2

Seattle tree protections update includes plan for new arborist work and removal map by 2024 – Capitol Hill Seattle Blog, 3/1

Plan begins to replace failing street trees in Everett – Everett Herald, 2/28

Planting the seeds for Washington’s forest restoration efforts – Crosscut, 2/27

Two wins for Burien’s Tree Equity – Westside Seattle, 2/25

In the once-cool forests of the Pacific Northwest, heat poses a new threat– HCN, 2/24

Scene at Meadowdale Beach Park: Winter trees – Lynnwood Today, 2/19

Q&A with SCC District 4 Rep Alex Pedersen– Wallyhood blog, 2/11

Grant dollars are seeding the urban forestry push in Washington – Crosscut, 2/10

WATCH THE VIDEO: ONE MILLION TREES – G.R.I.T. in Tacoma, The Nature Conservancy, 1/25

White Center Tree Clearing Prompts Tree Protection Actions in Unincorporated King County – South Seattle Emerald, 1/20

Tree Talk: From tiny acorns grow … – Queen Anne News, 1/18

Comments on Seattle’s 2021 Tree Canopy Assessment Final Report

Posted on by
  1. The City of Seattle 2021 Tree Canopy Assessment Final Report was produced by the City of Seattle’s Office of Sustainability and Environment using findings from the University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab report. However, the interpretation of data was done by unnamed people in the city of Seattle, who wrote or reviewed the “final report”.  The University of Vermont collected some of the data but are not the authors of the report. 
  2. The report defines tree canopy as “The layer of leaves, branches and stems that provide tree coverage of the ground when viewed from above.” Not mentioned is that the measurement is done at 8 feet above the ground. This is in contrast to US Army Corps of Engineers, who defines the Tree strata as starting at 20 feet in height, and the shrub/sapling layer from 3-20 feet in height  https://www.sas.usace.army.mil/Portals/61/docs/regulatory/Workshop_Vegetation_Fall2011.pdf 
  3. So, the City of Seattle canopy actually includes all shrubs and hedges such as laurel, holly and rhododendron bushes that frequently are over 8 feet high, and smaller saplings. The canopy measured would  more accurately be described as “tree and shrub cover.”
  4.  Although asked and confirmed before the report was released that the report would look at tree canopy volume, the report has no such analysis despite LIDARS ability to do so. This is important as tree canopy volume is a more accurate measure of the environmental services trees can provide to cities, as compared to tree canopy area.
  5. While the report defines a large (exceptional) tree as > 30 inches diameter, it does no analysis of large trees gains or losses, and neglects to compare any changes in large exceptional trees over the time period. 
  6. The report mentions trees planted by the city but provides no data on any survival rates of the trees planted. Also, the number of trees removed by SDOT or Parks is not given,  only the number of new plantings. 
  7. The report looked at tree loss during development but only looked at development projects that were begun and completed between 2017 and 2021. The actual tree loss calculation should have looked at all projects that begun between 2017 and 2021 for the most accurate results, not just those that were completed.  What is missing are projects that begun in that time period but were not completed. This is important as trees are usually removed at the beginning of projects, so the actual tree loss is likely significantly higher than what was reported. Also, if the next 5-year analysis follows the current calculations, projects begun before 2022 but completed after 2022 will not be in the analysis, leaving a gap in calculating tree loss during development. 
  8. Key data points in Table 4 in the Appendix show that redeveloped parcels in neighborhood residential zone saw a 33.6% loss of tree canopy and redeveloped parcels in multifamily zones saw a 49.6% reduction in tree canopy.  Issues of concern for future canopy loss include middle housing legislation being considered by the Washington State legislature which would basically convert most of Seattle’s neighborhood residential zone to the multifamily zone. Also, ADU legislation was passed in Seattle in July 2019 for the neighborhood residential zone which will allow 3 units of housing to be built on any lot, increasing potential for additional tree loss. 
  9. Figure 8 is in contrast to other references on trees and urban Island heat impacts. Figure 8 is a scatter plot showing the relationship between maximum afternoon temperature and percent tree canopy, and the report somehow concludes that “…at the hexagon scale on a hot day (where a hexagon is the size of several city blocks) hexagons with 26% tree canopy experienced temperatures that were 1-degree lower than hexagons with no canopy.” This interpretation is misleading as to the on the ground results and is an example on how statistical analysis can be misused. See references below for additional information: 
  •  The original report “Seattle and King County Washington Heat Watch Report” done in 2020 reported as high as a 24-degree F temp difference across the county. The analysis of heat impacts is much more nuanced and is affected by a number of things like time of day, tree canopy, buildings and pavement, closeness to water and size of area considered. The “one-degree lower statement” unfortunately is contrary to what many other researchers have found and clearly misrepresents the temperature differences between areas with trees and those not having trees. 
  • NPR – “In Seattle the difference between the coolest and hottest neighborhoods could be as much as 14.5 degrees, according to a 2019 NPR analysis of surface thermal data from NASA and US Geological Survey satellite imagry from summer days in the last decade.” 
  • King 5 June 23, 2021  “Areas of King County with more paved landscapes and less tree canopy are feeling the heat more intensely than less urbanized areas, according to a new study from King County and Seattle. More urbanizesd areas were as much as 20 degrees hotter due to an abundance of hard surfaces like parking lots, rooftops and streets which absorb heat, 
  • According to Portland State University research – “While testing solutions that reduce urban heat, the study … showed that paving over places that previously had a lot of tree canopy could raise the temperature as much as 25 degrees Fahrenheit on a summer day. Nearby neighborhoods would experience a spillover effect.” Portland State University Study Demonstrates How Plants, Trees, and Reflective Materials Can Reduce Extreme Heat of City Neighborhoods, 2019
  • New York Times – Hidden Toll of the Northwest Heat Wave: Hundreds of Extra Deaths, Aug 11, 2021, ” During the deadly heat wave that blanketed Oregon and Washington in late June, about 600 more people died than would have been typical , a review of Mortality data for the week of the crisis shows.”    
comments by Steve Zemke and Rich Ellison
TreePAC and Friends of Seattle’s Urban Forest
March 6,  2023

Update – Urge Washington State House Legislators to Pass HB 1216 to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

Posted on by

       Update – Urge Washington State House Legislators to  Pass HB 1216 to Increase Protection for Urban and Community Forests

Thanks to the over 200 people who responded to our previous e-mail on HB 1216 asking you to send an e-mail to the members of the House Rural Development, Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.  The committee voted ‘do pass” on HB 1216  and sent it to the Appropriations Committee. A hearing has been set for Tues, Feb 16th at 1:30 PM. To stay alive the bill needs to be voted out of the Appropriations Committee by Feb. 22nd and sent to the House Rules Committee in order to be added to the calendar to be voted on by the full House. 

We have changed the text of the e-mail for you to send and expanded it to include all House members. We need you to send the new e-mail to let all House members know there is strong support for passing HB 1216. You can make a difference.

HB 1216 would direct the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assist Washington cities and towns and counties in our state conducting tree inventories and canopy analysis, developing Urban Forestry Management Plans and drafting local Tree Ordinances.

HB 1216 was sponsored by Representative Ramos and 8 other House members. This bill was requested by the Department of Natural Resources and is supported By Governor Jay Inslee. Governor Inslee has earmarked $2.7 million dollars in his proposed State Budget to support DNR’s efforts to increase protection for trees and urban forests. HB 1216 would help the state meet its goals of increasing climate resilience, protecting human health and addressing environmental equity.

Please do these two Quick Action items:

1. Send an e-mail today to keep HB 1216 moving in the Washington State House of Representatives.  

Submit Public Comment to House Members Now!

2. Sign in as “pro” HB 1216 on the Appropriations Committee hearing page. You must do this by 12:30 PM Tues, Feb. 16th. to be counted. 

I would like my position noted for the legislative record 

If you would also like to submit written testimony for the Appropriations Committee Hearing legislative record click here. Submit written testimony for Hearing record HB 1216  Written testimony can be submitted up to 24 hours after the hearing starts.

Thanks for your help.

Questionnaires returned to TreePAC show Strong Support for Updating Seattle’s Tree Protection Ordinance

Posted on by
Questionnaires returned to TreePAC show Strong Support for Updating Seattle’s Tree Protection Ordinance

Thirteen of the fourteen candidates running for the Seattle City Council District elections in the 2019 General Election have returned questionnaires to Tree PAC. Overwhelmingly,  the responses were positive for supporting key provisions to strengthen the existing Tree Protection Ordinance. You can see our TreePAC endorsements and questionnaires on this link.  These questionnaires were weighted heavily, but were not our sole criteria for endorsement.

Earlier this year, the Seattle City Council unanimously passed  the following two resolutions that support the updating of Seattle’s Tree Protection Ordinance.

3/18/19  Seattle City Council Resolution 31870  Section 6 deals with updating Seattle’s Tree Protection Ordinance.

Section 6. The Council recognizes the environmental, social, and economic benefits of Seattle’s urban forest and commits to working with community members and City departments to update the City’s tree regulations, advancing the goals of the Urban Forest Stewardship Plan across Seattle. Potential measures may include, but are not limited to, the following:

  1. Retaining protections for exceptional trees and expanding the definition of exceptional trees.
  2. Creating a permitting process for the removal of significant trees, defined as trees  6 inches in diameter at breast height or larger.
  3. Adding replacement requirements for significant tree removal.
  4. Simplifying tree planting and replacement requirements.
  5. Maintaining tree removal limits in single-family zones.
  6. Exploring the feasibility of establishing a in-lieu fee option for tree planting.
  7. Tracking tree removal and replacement throughout Seattle.H. Providing adequate funding to administer and enforce tree regulations
  8. Requiring that all tree service providers operating in Seattle meet the minimum certification and training requirements and register with the city.

9/17/2019 Seattle City Council Resolution 31902 – A resolution declaring the City Council and the Mayor’s intent to consider strategies to protect trees and increase Seattle’s tree canopy cover

All of the  candidates (13 out of 14) who responded to the TreePAC questionnaire indicated that they support these two resolutions. 

The Seattle Urban Forestry Commission on June 15, 2019, at the request of Councilmembers Bagshaw and Herbold, submitted to the Mayor and City Council a draft Tree and Urban Forest Protection Ordinance.   Council action on an updated Tree Protection Ordinance is expected next year. TreePAC is encouraged by the strong response of the city council candidates in support of updating the current Tree Protection Ordinance.

Seattle Mayor Tim Burgess Signs Executive Order to Increase Tree Protection

Posted on by

From This Week in the Mayor’s Office – Oct 13, 2017

 Protecting Seattle’s Tree Canopy

Mayor Burgess signed an Executive Order focused on strengthening Seattle’s protections for trees on private property today. The order directs the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections to better implement existing tree regulations through:

• Strengthening the existing regulations through new and updated Director’s Rules;

• Increasing penalties for illegal tree cutting; and

• Developing a fee-in-lieu program to mitigate tree loss

Further, the order asks City staff to explore how Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) policies could support Seattle’s urban forestry goals.

“Seattle’s tree canopy is a treasure that provides critical health and economic benefits to our city,” said Mayor Burgess. “It must be protected, nurtured, and expanded. As we grow as a city, we must also grow our commitment to be good stewards of our urban forest.”

———————————————————————————————-

TreePAC recommendation – Thank Mayor Burgess for his action and urge the Seattle City Council to strengthen this effort by updating the interim Tree Ordinance passed in 2009  which is still awaiting action by the City Council. They need to hear from concerned citizens.