Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Trees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PRC presses transportation plan for stronger tree‑canopy language; commissioners debate feasibility
Summary
During review of the 104-page draft Multimodal Transportation Plan, PRC members urged stronger language to conserve and expand right-of-way tree canopy (proposed swap of 'high value' for 'native trees'), while others warned that a strict preservation mandate could conflict with active-transportation goals.
Commissioner Sarah opened the discussion on the draft Multimodal Transportation Plan, calling attention to its vision and policy strategies and noting that "it's not really implementing anything yet. It's more just setting the stage for what the county envisions for future projects." Commissioners focused on language on page 46 concerning conserving and expanding tree canopy in rights-of-way and questioned the phrase "where feasible" and the qualifier "high value trees."
Chair William proposed replacing the phrase "high value" with language favoring native trees—"replace high value with native trees, so by planting and conserving native trees," he said—while several commissioners urged nuance. Commissioner Melissa cautioned that saving every tree regardless of species or condition could undermine active-transportation improvements where dying invasive trees (e.g., Bradford pears) might be replaced with native plantings or a bike lane. Commissioner Gary asked staff to request clear metrics from the County for measuring accomplishments related to greenscaping and environmental goals.
Sarah reminded the commission that staff requested PRC comments by September 17 and offered to follow up individually to capture proposed wording. The commissioners agreed to refine suggested language (native/native tree emphasis, context‑sensitive design, and prioritization for areas with low canopy) before submitting formal comments.
