Laserfiche WebLink
City of Tukwila My WebLink |HelpSearch Tips |About |Sign Out
<br /> <br />Staff recommended revisions: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Revise references to ISA Certified Arborist in the code to, “Qualified Tree Professional” <br /> <br /> <br />Page 18, 18.54.040, revise #3 to read, Professional review or recommendation. “In certain <br />circumstances, the Director may require professional review or recommendation. <br />This assessment, prepared by Qualified Tree Professional should address the following.” <br /> <br /> <br />Page 23, 18.54.080 a, revise language of first sentence to read, ‘ Each existing significant tree <br />removed, above the number allowed in Table A, including the removal of trees in easements <br />and rights-of-way for the purposes for constructing public streets and utilities, shall be <br />replaced with new tree(s), based on the size of the existing tree as shown below, up to a <br />maximum density of 70 new trees per acre, generally 12 to 15 feet apart.” <br /> <br /> <br />Page 23, 18.54.080 B, new sentence added at the end: “Trees determined to be defective by the <br />City or a Qualified Tree Professional are not required to be replaced.” <br /> <br />Staff requested confirmation that they have permission to make the changes, as discussed by the <br />Commission and move the draft regulations on to the City Council. <br /> <br />Commissioner Martinez <br />, said looking at the comparison of other cities and whether permits are <br />required that involve a fee, that he was concerned with public outreach and the impact on the new tree <br />canopy survey and fees required. He said that the City needs to make the public aware that the first <br />three trees removed are free, then a fee-permit is required. He said it comes at significant financial <br />impact to the community. <br /> <br />There were no public comments. <br /> <br /> <br />The public hearing was closed. <br /> <br />DELIBERATION <br /> <br />Chairman Nguyen <br /> asked if the Commissioners have any comments, are they ready to take action on the <br />draft regulations? <br /> <br />Commissioner Strander <br />read the following: <br />“The Comprehensive Plan goal 4.13 talks about no net loss of canopy cover in individual zoning <br />categories. So Low Density Residential, they want to maintain a 47% canopy coverage. Medium and <br />High Residential, Citywide coverage of 40%. I think the intent of the regulations set forth in the tree <br />ordinance are meant to accomplish this goal of the tree canopy. However, I believe these regulations <br />may not attain this goal. In order for the City to encourage and allow for more housing to be built, the <br />likelihood of a diminished tree canopy is imminent, especially given scarcity of buildable land in the <br />City of Tukwila. The requirement for a 47% tree canopy in a Low Density Residential zone and 40% <br />tree canopy in medium and high Density Residential zones will be very difficult if not impossible to <br />achieve with housing infill and redevelopment. I feel there is not really a way to keep the <br />aforementioned tree canopy presented goals and build expected number of housing units needed, <br />anticipated, or required. So, for these reasons I will not support this ordinance and will be voting no.” <br />Page 7 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />