Tree board discusses community forest management plan, canopy study, and proposed tree-list/code revisions

Members of the Lake Forest Park Tree Board spent the substantive portion of their Feb. 5 meeting reviewing the draft community forest management plan, the status of related grants and a forthcoming tree canopy study, and proposed changes to the city’s official tree list and exceptional-tree code language.

The discussion focused on several interrelated items: (1) a community tree canopy study and related grant applications; (2) corrections and revisions to the city’s recent tree inventory and its effects on policy recommendations; and (3) code edits related to the definition and protection of “exceptional trees.” Board members said consultants adjusted inventory calculations after identifying a numerical error; they said the change did not materially alter the overall findings of the inventory study.

Nut graf: The board framed these updates as preparatory work for a community forest management plan revision and as background for a Feb. 27 presentation to city council. Members emphasized the need for stronger supporting data on tree diameter thresholds and additional justification for proposed code changes before forwarding formal recommendations to the council and city attorney.

Canopy study and grants

Board discussion referenced two grant efforts tied to a tree canopy study. A board member said one grant was expected to provide a digital-tracking inventory and annual updates; another award — described in the meeting as approximately $75,000 — would support an “assessment, course management” helpful to a community forest management plan. The board noted that City Council must formally accept any grant that commits the city to additional work.

Tree-list and code revisions

Members described edits to the city’s tree list that add notes on invasive or noxious species and provide additional guidance for species selection. The board discussed outstanding work on redefining “exceptional trees” (the threshold diameters and species-specific criteria) and stressed that small sample sizes in the current inventory limited statistical confidence for some recommended thresholds. Staff (referred to as Drew in the meeting) was asked to produce clearer justification — including species-specific diameter thresholds and comparative metrics — before the board finalizes code-change recommendations.

Process and next steps

Board members asked staff to coordinate with the chair and to provide updated draft language and supporting data in advance of the Feb. 27 council item. A staff update on grants and on the exceptional-tree code revisions was promised at the next meeting.

Ending: The board agreed to carry the community forest management plan and code revisions forward for further staff analysis and to discuss them again at the March meeting and at a planned Feb. 27 council presentation.