Mountlake Terrace reviews draft urban forest management plan, aims to raise canopy to about 37% by 2050

Laura Reed, stormwater program manager for the city of Mountlake Terrace, presented a draft urban forest management plan and asked the City Council for feedback rather than a decision.

The plan, Reed said, has been developed by a consultant, city staff and a resident team since June and was funded in part by a State of Washington Department of Natural Resources urban and community forestry grant. "This is a truly a community led process," Reed told the council as she outlined draft goals and next steps.

The draft sets a canopy goal to increase tree cover from roughly 32 percent to about 37 percent over the next 25 years (to 2050) and includes a street-tree inventory, canopy goals by planning zone, benchmarking against other communities, and outreach results from two public surveys. Reed said the city currently has "almost 7,000 street trees in the city, just an astonishing number for the size of a community." She said the consultant calculated a recommended replacement rate of 137 trees per year to meet the canopy-growth target, and that the calculation includes anticipated attrition.

Nut graf: Councilmembers generally praised the plan’s community engagement and emphasis on treating trees as long-term green assets, while staff described multiple implementation options that vary by staffing and cost and said they would return with a finished draft for formal approval in April or May.

Reed described four implementation options ranging from using existing staff and limited contractor support to a full suite of investments that would include a full-time city arborist and a private-property tree permit program. Option 1 would rely primarily on existing staff and a small nonprofit outreach contract plus modest street-fund money for hazard-tree removal. Option 2 would add a seasonal planting/watering employee (and roughly $16,000 for that seasonal position was shown in presentation materials), more funding for removals and a 10-hour-per-week on-call arborist. Option 3 — the preliminary staff recommendation — would fund full annual tree purchases and watering capacity and a 20-hour-per-week on-call arborist to accelerate implementation. Option 4 would implement a private-property tree removal permit program and, Reed said, likely require a full-time city arborist.

Council members asked about species selection, sidewalk and foundation impacts, development pressures and funding. "I know that, with our city founded before 1950, when they planted all the homes, they left the trees around the homes and people really didn't know anything about trees and just let them go," Council member Ryan said, urging careful species selection for planting strips and near sidewalks. Council member Woodard and others thanked resident Audrey Meyer, who helped draft the plan goals and attended the meeting.

Reed said public responses to a question about private-property permit programs were split, with about 56 percent supporting and 44 percent opposed in the public survey. She noted the plan aims to include a public engagement and communications strategy, training and technical assistance, volunteer support and a recognition program for heritage-tree stewardship. Reed also highlighted opportunities to use the outreach work to meet state Department of Ecology stormwater-permit objectives that recognize trees' role in stormwater management.

There was no formal action or vote. Reed told the council staff will return with a more finished draft and a formal request for approval in April or May. "I don't need a decision from you, but I am interested in what you think of what we put together so far," Reed said at the start of the presentation.

Ending: Councilmembers expressed broad support for the plan's goals and for option 3 as a practical step; they asked staff to provide clearer cost estimates, firmer calculations behind the 137-trees-per-year figure, and more detail about funding sources, arborist staffing options, and how the plan will account for tree losses connected to new development.