Sandpoint panel moves to review and update Arboriculture manual, flags species list and planting guidance

The Sandpoint Urban Forestry Commission voted informally Thursday to begin a methodical update of the city's Arboriculture manual, identifying the approved and prohibited street tree lists and maintenance guidance as priorities.

Eric Bush, the city forester and staff liaison, told the commission the manual contains dated material — including a council‑approved street tree list adopted in the early 2000s and an updated Urban Forestry Master Plan adopted more recently — and that staff sometimes approves permits on a case‑by‑case basis when the lists differ. "If somebody approaches me for a permit... I'm likely to approve removal of a cottonwood and require a replacement planting," Bush said.

Why it matters: the manual guides permit approvals, planting decisions in the public right of way and routine maintenance. Commissioners said inconsistent or outdated lists (for example, Norway maples appearing on approved lists despite being overplanted) can lead to poor long‑term species diversity and maintenance issues.

Discussion highlights and next steps

- Scope: Commissioners recommended a chapter‑by‑chapter review rather than scrapping the manual. They suggested starting with chapters 1–3 at the next meeting, with commissioners volunteering to take lead on sections aligned with their expertise.

- Species and diversity: Commissioners raised Norway maples, various maples, cottonwoods, ashes and other species as areas needing clarification. Eric Bush noted that Norway maples are on approved lists and remain permissible today but said he routinely discourages them when reviewing permits.

- Maintenance and construction protection: The manual already contains guidance for construction‑era tree protection, but the commission flagged the need to update details such as root‑protection measures and long‑term monitoring (construction damage can show up five to 10 years later).

- Implementation tools: Bush said the city has a modest grant allocation (on the order of $10,000) to fund professional review of an ordinance update and recommended retaining a consultant to evaluate legal pitfalls and ensure ordinance language is enforceable.

Audience and format

Commissioners discussed making the manual a hybrid document: technical enough for professionals and accessible for residents and landowners who apply for permits. The commission asked staff to circulate the manual and suggested breaking the update into small, focused agenda items so the review moves steadily.

Ending

The commission agreed to carry the manual update as old business to the next meeting and to begin with chapters 1–3. Staff will accept emailed comments in the short term and explore a shared file approach for document review (subject to open‑meeting rules).