Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landmark Tree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff outline interim landmark-tree ordinance, cite 36-inch threshold and process for nominations
Summary
City staff described the interim landmark-tree ordinance adopted as an emergency measure, explained the 36-inch DBH default for landmark status, the nomination and review process, and asked for input on balancing tree protections with housing feasibility and costs.
Blake Klein, the city's director of planning and community development, told the Planning Commission on Feb. 19 that the interim landmark-tree ordinance aims to protect the most significant trees while the city completes a Type 6 legislative process to refine permanent rules.
Klein summarized the urban-forest inventory and said Bellingham currently has about 40% tree canopy. He said the city adopted an emergency ordinance in May 2024 to halt preemptive removals and to allow staff time to prepare a public hearing and more detailed regulations. Under the interim ordinance, landmark trees default to those 36 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), although property owners or community members may nominate smaller trees for cultural significance with owner acknowledgment.
The ordinance prioritizes preservation and requires certified-arborist assessments and critical-root-zone analysis before removal is approved. Klein described a landmark-tree committee that will include staff from planning, parks and public works to review nominations and applications. He also said the ordinance creates a cascading approach similar to wetland management: avoidance first, then mitigation or replacement if removal is approved.
Commissioners and staff discussed practical challenges. Klein said the ordinance increases upfront due diligence and soft costs for applicants — hiring certified arborists and performing civil design work can cost thousands to tens of thousands of dollars, which can affect the feasibility of small infill and missing-middle housing. He said staff is drafting a "reasonableness" memo that will offer clearer guidance about what alternatives applicants should demonstrate before removal is approved.
Klein gave examples where flexibility might be warranted: preserving a nearby healthy 32-inch tree instead of a failing 36-inch landmark tree could yield a net ecological benefit; in other cases, clear definitions for reasonable use of a lot and allowable encroachments into critical root zones will be needed. He also flagged enforcement and penalties as a continuing conversation; one commissioner noted the ordinance's maximum monetary penalty (about $2,400 per violation in the current draft) and questioned whether that would deter preemptive removals.
Klein closed by previewing next steps: expanded public outreach, a formal Type 6 legislative process with a public hearing at the commission, and a recommendation to city council, which will be the final decision-maker.
What happens next: staff will continue outreach, prepare the reasonableness memo and return to the commission for a public hearing and a recommendation to council.
