Residents press council to protect trees, waterways and orcas in 1 Seattle EIS

Numerous public commenters told the Select Committee on the Comprehensive Plan that the draft environmental review and proposed zoning fail to protect trees, local waterways and Puget Sound’s Southern Resident killer whales.

David Gloger, identifying himself as a resident of District 5, told the committee he searched the draft EIS “over a 1,000 pages long” and could not find the word “whale.” Gloger said the draft EIS omits impacts to critically endangered Southern Resident orcas and that increased hardscape and reduced tree canopy would likely increase runoff and water temperatures that affect salmon and, by extension, orcas.

Other commenters tied tree protection to climate resilience and water quality. Jennifer (speaker identified as speaking in memory of J61, the orca) asked the city to “follow the NOAA recovery plan guidelines,” saying “trees absorb and clean stormwater” and noting the DEIS lists fish but not orcas. Martha Beth of Birds Connect Seattle and Tree and People Coalition warned the zoning “allows residential lot clearing to such an extent that the outcome is a gulag of hardscape” and said limited setbacks will not leave room for street or private trees. Ruth Williams, representing the Burton Creek Alliance, and several other speakers cited impaired urban streams and asked for a cumulative impact analysis in the final EIS.

OPCD staff acknowledged the EIS is programmatic and required by SEPA and explained the final EIS will analyze the preferred alternative and identify mitigation where impacts are found. Michael Hebner said the EIS process included scoping in 2022, a draft EIS in 2024 and that the final EIS (preferred alternative) will be released later in January with a 14‑day appeal period.

Why it matters: Commenters connected urban canopy loss and increased impervious surfaces to stormwater pollution, higher urban and stream temperatures and downstream effects on salmon and orca recovery. Several speakers asked council to require stronger protections in the plan and to instruct permitting agencies to enforce the city’s critical areas protections and tree rules when reviewing development proposals.

Clarifying points raised in testimony: commenters referenced state and federal species protections, the NOAA Southern Resident recovery plan, Washington State Department of Ecology lake impairment listings, and local critical areas and tree ordinances. Many asked OPCD and permitting departments to make enforcement and mitigation commitments explicit in the final plan and the EIS.

Ending: Council members said staff will return with EIS materials and that committee members will continue to hear from environmental groups and neighborhood organizations as they review mitigation measures and amendments.