La Conner staff outlines broad tree‑code rewrite; public hearing on tree removal set

Town planning staff presented the first draft of a comprehensive tree-code update and asked the commission for guidance on thresholds, mitigation, exemptions and how far the code should extend into residential yards.

"Our tree code is really, really out of date, and it needs to be updated," staff presenter Summer Holt told commissioners, saying the draft incorporated arborist recommendations and model codes to provide clearer street‑protection standards, options for preemptive removal of hazardous trees, and a new maintenance and treatment section.

Staff discussed mitigation options for authorized tree removal: replacement planting on site when possible, or payment of an in‑lieu fee or donated trees to the town for public planting. Holt said the town's current code references an appraisal guide that is out of print and recommended either updating to the latest guide or using a diameter/canopy‑based replacement formula.

Commissioners debated whether to extend the code townwide or exempt private residential yards outside the Historic Preservation District. Several commissioners warned that requiring permits for routine residential pruning could deter property owners from maintaining yards and would create significant enforcement burdens. "I would be concerned with creating barriers to residents to maintain their yards," one commissioner said.

Staff proposed a no‑cost Class 1 permit for routine maintenance that could be processed within 24–48 hours and would allow staff to track work and confirm arborist involvement when appropriate. Other items discussed included whether ornamental or flowering trees should be exempted from the permit requirement for routine maintenance and whether certain species (examples cited: Lombardy poplar, olives) should be treated differently under replacement formulas.

Holt said she will draft clearer language that references national standards (ANSI pruning guidance and International Society of Arboriculture best practices) and will check state or statutory pruning thresholds that were referenced in discussion. Holt also noted an existing nonprofit, A Tree on Morris, that accepts tree donations for public planting in lieu of on‑site replacement.

The commission was told the next meeting will include two public hearings — a tree removal hearing followed by a historic-design review for a bike-repair station — and that staff reports will be circulated one week before the hearings. Holt emphasized the current (not amended) tree‑code will remain in effect until any new code is published.

Next steps: staff will refine definitions, research ANSI/ISA and state guidance (including the 25% pruning threshold referenced in discussion), clarify exemptions and permit language, and publish the staff report in advance of the scheduled public hearings.