Mountlake Terrace council hears presentation of first urban forest management plan; adoption and funding to follow

Mountlake Terrace city staff and consultants on Tuesday presented the city's first Urban Forest Management Plan, a 5-to-10-year guidance document that inventories street trees, sets canopy goals and lays out strategies for planting, maintenance and community engagement. The plan was developed with Washington Department of Natural Resources grant funding and recommendations from the Recreation and Parks Advisory Commission and the Planning Commission.

The plan matters because it converts an inventory and community input into measurable actions to protect and expand tree canopy citywide and identifies staffing and funding needs required to implement those actions.

Environmental programs manager Patrick Hutchins and consultant Matt Irmson of Planet Geo summarized the plan's findings and recommendations. Irmson said the project included a citywide street-tree inventory and canopy assessment; the inventory found 6,830 publicly managed trees and a citywide canopy cover of 32 percent. He said about 73 percent of inventoried trees are in good or excellent condition, roughly 70 percent are smaller than 12 inches in diameter (DBH), and just 7 percent exceed 24 inches DBH, which limits the near-term contribution of large, mature trees.

The plan sets five interlocking goals'Engage, Maintain, Grow, Retain and Know'and recommends specific actions under each. Those include a tree ambassador program for volunteers, a structured pruning cycle (trees over 6 inches on a seven-year schedule; smaller trees on a three-year schedule), and a planting target of at least 137 trees per year to achieve a 4.5 percent canopy increase by 2050. The plan calls for prioritizing plantings in hotter, lower-canopy neighborhoods identified by a tree-equity score.

Consultants quantified benefits and risks. Irmson said citywide canopy (public and private trees) delivers about $2.5 million in annual environmental services; the street-tree inventory portion delivers roughly $121,000 annually. He also flagged pest threats, including bronze birch borer (estimated potential loss roughly $75,000) and fur engraver beetle (potential loss more than $2.5 million if unchecked), and noted emerald ash borer is a regional threat.

Residents who helped secure the DNR grant and worked on public engagement urged council adoption and funding. Resident Susan Kuhn introduced herself to council and said the assessment is a "treasure trove of specific data" and urged the city to "move this project forward." Audrey Meyer, who helped on the grant application and outreach, said the volunteers and 400 survey responses show community commitment and added, "I urge you to pass this plan and fund it so we can see the plan through." Both comments occurred during the meeting'they were part of the public comment period that preceded the staff presentation.

Council members asked detailed questions about enforcement, development impacts and equity. Council member Sanmore asked why mature trees are removed during redevelopment and whether a permit or fee-in-lieu system could protect large specimens; Hutchins replied the plan recommends a phased approach beginning with voluntary notification and mapping of significant trees, then advancing to permitting only after staff capacity and community buy-in are established. Hutchins said the city currently allows fee-in-lieu payments that go into a recently approved tree fund and that the plan recommends exploring use of stormwater funds for tree projects because of trees' stormwater benefits.

Council member Page pressed for clarity on the tree-equity score (the plan reports an 87/100 score) and how a target would align with the city's comprehensive plan and planned growth. Irmson said there is no single'perfect score; the plan emphasizes a locally appropriate balance between canopy gains and maintenance capacity. Hutchins said the plan includes strategies for bilingual outreach, faith-based engagement and targeted community conversations to improve participation from lower-canopy neighborhoods.

Budget and staffing were recurring themes. The plan reports the city's current urban forestry budget at about $108,000 (about $5.07 per resident), roughly half or less than peer and state averages; consultant benchmarking cited peer averages near $11'$12 per capita. Hutchins said staff is not requesting budget authority for implementation tonight; the city will return with a proposed budget amendment later this year or early next year that updates cost estimates.

What happens next: Hutchins told council staff will return with budget estimates and recommended implementation steps; the Recreation and Parks Advisory Commission and the Planning Commission have recommended adoption. No formal adoption vote was taken at this meeting.

Council members and staff emphasized community engagement and volunteer programs as near-term actions staff can undertake without a new appropriation. Hutchins said the plan is scalable and designed to provide measurable benchmarks, and that staff will revisit canopy and inventory metrics at regular intervals to adjust strategies.

The plan and supporting materials were presented as an action-ready blueprint; staff asked council to consider adoption at a future meeting after the public hearing and once updated cost figures are available.

Ending note: The plan ties tree care to multiple municipal goals (stormwater management, heat mitigation, equity and recreation) and sets concrete near-term metrics (maintenance cycles and a planting target) while deferring final funding decisions to a follow-up budget process.