Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Species List topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UFAC backs a single living master species list, flags stronger "do-not-plant" guidance
Summary
Committee and staff endorsed consolidating scattered species lists into a single living master list maintained by the city arborist, emphasizing a clear do-not-plant list informed by fire and invasive-species guidance and annual reviews; recommended vs. approved list layers will help serve both public outreach and development needs.
Committee members and staff advanced a plan to consolidate multiple tree species lists into a single, living master species list to be maintained and updated by the city arborist.
The chair said the living list should be maintained by staff and revisited periodically: "there's gonna be some things that need to be revisited on a regular basis" and suggested annual or biennial reviews. Rob (city staff) said consolidating disparate lists into one document would make review by the fire department, development services and maintenance crews easier.
Hansen, identified in the meeting as the city arborist, described the practical challenge of having different lists that serve different purposes and recommended layered lists: an approved list for permitting, a recommended list for public guidance and a public informational list. "I think that's where, really, you know, it's a lot of information, and, there might be a couple different lists still," Hansen said; he also supported an annual review cycle and noted the importance of data as trees mature.
Committee members emphasized a firm "do-not-plant" list grounded in fire-department input and invasive-species guidance. One member asked for clearer keys on the lists (for example, whether the notation 'f' indicates a fire concern or a fire-department source) and staff clarified the 'f' marks the source as the fire department rather than a binary good/bad label.
Members discussed whether the recommended list should eventually align with the approved list used for permitting to avoid public confusion; staff said the recommended list would include tried-and-true species while the approved list would be the authoritative list for development permits. The committee agreed to pass the living-list framework to city arborist staff for continued work and possible future council consideration.
Next steps: staff will route the consolidated list through internal review and discuss whether it will become a council-approved document; the committee requested periodic updates and recommended an annual or as-needed review cycle tied to monitoring outcomes and pest or fire trends.
