Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Forest Dense Forest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tree advocates press council to require urban forest protections alongside upzoning
Summary
At the April 6 Select Committee hearing, Tree Action Seattle and many residents urged a "Dense Forest for Dense Housing" amendment requiring tree retention and tree requirements in amenity areas; proponents said canopy loss is accelerating while some housing advocates said more housing near transit will prevent sprawl and protect distant forests.
Seattle — Dozens of speakers at the April 6 public hearing pressed the City Council to pair zoning changes with mandatory protections for the city's tree canopy.
"We are losing about 270 trees per month," said a Tree Action Seattle representative, citing recent city data to urge mandatory tree requirements in amenity areas and changes to the green-factor scoring system.
Why it matters: Several speakers said Seattle is losing mature trees to redevelopment and that canopy loss worsens urban heat islands and public-health risks. They proposed a "Dense Forest for Dense Housing" amendment that would require amenity areas to include trees and would change green-factor rules so new developments plant and preserve larger trees where feasible.
What advocates asked for
Tree Action Seattle and neighborhood groups urged the council to: mandate tree requirements in amenity and courtyard areas; strengthen tree retention standards in redevelopment; and use green-factor scoring to ensure plantings provide real canopy benefits rather than small, unshaded planters.
"Courtyard blocks sound nice but without tree requirements they will be paved," a Tree Action Seattle speaker said. "Trees are the only scalable and affordable tool we have to meet the greatest threat climate change will bring."
Housing advocates' responses
Speakers backing faster upzoning and denser infill stressed that building more homes inside the city prevents sprawl and the destruction of larger forests outside the city. Several pro-housing speakers framed denser urban development as the best way to avoid forest loss on the metropolitan fringe.
Council process
The public hearing spanned multiple recesses to allow more sign-ups; the committee did not vote on any amendments during the session. The tree amendment and related green-factor proposals will be part of the council's amendment discussions in committee.
Reporting note: Quotations and paraphrases are drawn from the Select Committee transcript for the April 6 public hearing.
