Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landscaping Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff introduces proposed landscaping code updates to better align with canopy and connectivity goals
Summary
Staff previewed potential amendments to POMC 20.128 (landscape standards) to address gaps identified in project reviews: improved pedestrian connectivity, clearer amendment processes for landscape plans, stronger passive open-space vegetation requirements, invasive species controls, and alignment with tree canopy and stormwater goals. No vote was
Planning staff introduced proposed directions for amendments to the Port Orchard Municipal Code's landscaping standards (POMC 20.128), seeking commissioner feedback before drafting ordinance language. The changes aim to improve visual and pedestrian connectivity between lots, strengthen ecological value of passive open space, require monitoring for priority invasive species, and align landscaping rules with tree canopy and stormwater objectives.
Jim Fisk, principal planner, listed recurring challenges in current landscaping standards: perimeter landscaping that blocks pedestrian connections, lack of a clear process to amend approved landscape plans, passive open spaces that are primarily turf with little ecological value, persistent invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry and knotweed, and inconsistent standards between middle housing and detached houses. "We want to align tree canopy and landscaping requirements with stormwater goals, including potential credits for preserved trees and clear replacement metrics," Fisk said.
Staff outlined potential policy ideas under consideration: a purpose statement emphasizing connectivity and discouraging continuous solid perimeter barriers, an administrable amendment process that distinguishes minor from major changes to approved plans, enforceable invasive-species controls including monitoring and maintenance expectations, revised buffer and perimeter standards favoring layered plantings and view corridors, and options to align middle housing and detached-house landscaping requirements to ensure equitable treatment.
Commissioners asked how the ordinance interacts with subdivision and site-development processes, particularly on heavily vegetated sites such as McCormick Woods where replacement tree requirements can be difficult to meet. Staff said landscape plans are required for subdivisions and that replacement trees are sometimes credited as street trees or placed on public land when feasible, but opportunities are limited. The commission requested staff return with draft ordinance language, illustrations and checklists in the coming months, with a goal of public hearings in May and June and potential Council action in early fall.
No action was taken; staff requested commissioner input and will return with draft language.
