Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome everyone. I call the April 1, 2026 Planning Commission meeting to order. The main purpose of tonight's meeting is to hold a study session on the tree code update. Before we move on to agenda items, I'd like to acknowledge our hybrid meeting format. City of both is providing the option to attend this meeting either in person or remotely via Zoom. For those participating via Zoom, the chat and question functions are not available to ensure compliance with the open public meetings act. We have a public comment agenda item at the beginning of the meeting. Please limit all comments to three minutes. Note that the city of both does not tolerate verbal harassment. Please remember this during your comments. Public comment will be allowed both in person and via Zoom. Those wishing to comment via Zoom were asked to submit an online form by 3 p.m. today. People wishing to submit written comments were also asked to submit those comments by 3 p.m. Email was encouraged as well and will be acknowledged. Those in attendance may also make comments and have been asked to indicate their desire to comment on the sign-in sheets. The Imagine Both notice, city website, and tonight's agenda all provided information to the public for providing comments. The video of this meeting will be streamed live as well as recorded and available for later viewing on the city's YouTube channel. A call-in number was provided on the meeting agenda for members of the public who wish to call in by phone and listen live to the meeting. For our phone and callers, during staff presentations, staff will make every effort to specify which materials they are referencing so that everyone can follow along. At this point, we'll take a moment to acknowledge the attendance of the commissioners. Commissioner Jones

here. Commissioner Westerbeck here. Commissioner Lever here. Commissioner Robson not present at current time. Commissioner Sills, I see you up there. Oh, where'd she go? Commissioner SS was on the screen. She seems to disappeared. So, we'll keep track. Commissioner Gustiffson here. Thank you.

All right. In addition, community development staff in attendance include Deputy Director Gates and Cameron Coven, senior planner. Last

Oh, Commissioner Sills, I see you on the screen, so I'm going to assume you're participating. Yes. Okay. Lastly, before we begin, I'd like to reiterate some meeting guidelines for all meeting attendees. Please speak clearly and pause frequently. State your name each time before speaking. Mute your microphone when not speaking. If you are also streaming the live video feed, please turn the sound off as there is a delay. At specific breaks in the presentation, I will be calling on members who wish to speak or ask a question. If you want to speak, please indicate this by raising your hand and I will call on you as they see you. This will help avoid the problem of having two people speaking at the same time. Identify yourself before you ask a question. Make a motion. Second a motion or participate in debate. And please mute your microphone when not speaking. First item on the agenda is public comment. The city has accepted visitor comment in writing as well as accepted signup sheets for those who wish to speak at tonight's meeting. Those speaking will have three minutes. Written comments submitted to staff no later than 3 p.m. today were forwarded to all commissioners and are part of the record. Interested in speaking? No. Okay. Uh, did we receive any written comments? You want to bring that back to you?

There we go. No, no written comments were received. Okay. And there's and there's no individuals in the virtual waiting room. All right. That being the case, we will close the public comment portion of the agenda and move on to the approval of the 8 March 18th, 2026 minutes. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Commissioner Westerbeck. I a motion to approve the minutes as written. Is there a second? Commissioner Lever. Second.

It's been moved and seconded that we approve the minutes as submitted. Any discussion around those minutes? looking about. Seeing none, all in favor of approving the minutes as submitted. I

I all those participating, vote I. The minutes are approved as submitted, which brings us to our principal item on the agenda, the tree code update study session. Senior planner, please. Thank you and good evening commissioners. Um so tonight will just be an initial touch point on our upcoming tree code updates. Um so I'll be providing a high level overview of the proposed scope of work um as currently anticipated and our proposed engagement um strategy moving forward. So, with our urban forest management plan officially adopted in February, um luckily a lot of this is probably still top of mind. Um, and one of the things we highlighted when discussing our newly adopted citywide tree canopy goals was that code revisions are a key tool that we can utilize to help reduce um tree losses and help us attain uh that 2% increase over the next several years. Yes,

I'd like to recognize that Commissioner Robson is participating in the meeting. Thank you. Let's proceed.

Um updating or updates to our tree code and design construction standards were also um broken out as one of the four kind of primary uh strategies that were highlighted in the urban forest management plan. The specific actions under that strategy that um came out of that work that were recommended were to promote incentives and partnerships um that encourage private retention and replanting. Strengthen tree preservation regulations and processes for private and public development projects. Implement a clear and manageable tree pruning and removal process for right-of-way trees and trees on private properties. Align design standards with canopy, species diversity, and climate goals. Consolidate uh guidance into a cohesive city tree manual that provides standards, best practices, and procedures for staff, developers, and residents. and then integrate and implement urban forest resilience strategies based on the UFMP's completed uh climate pest and invasive risk assessments. So, as part of the development um for the UFMP, Planet Geo and Greenworks, our two consultants on the project, uh conducted a a thorough code audit um that went through and looked at a series of um different topics within the code uh covering authority, uh tree preservation requirements, uh protections during construction, planting and maintenance requirements, off-site mitigation, and then enforcement. And they benchmarked that uh those results uh looking at neighboring and similarly sized

jurisdictions. Um so I included a a table within the packet as well as up on your screen that kind of highlights the results of that. And as you can see, you know, there were a couple areas that either aren't currently addressed within our code that we can look at adding or improving. Um, so this was just a good tool to help identify what those topic areas are. So, I've kind of consolidated um the actions into uh five primary goals for the code updates. um to strengthen tree protections and mitigation requirements, clarify requirements, roles, and responsibilities, streamline uh processes across city departments, incorporate current best practices and industry standards, and then provide flexibility and incentives to support our tree retention and planting goals. Um included in the packet was also a table of the relevant code sections that we've identified. It is a pretty comprehensive list because trees are addressed in multiple sections of the code. Um but a primary or a bulk of our work is going to focus on uh title 12 chapter 18 tree retention landscaping for the most part. Um the other code updates to other sections will be much more limited. Um we recently updated our critical area ordinance. So this will just be looking at the uh tree replacement and mitigation requirements that are incorporated as part of that.

And so uh just as kind of a framework for this work, we'll be kind of grouping uh the code updates by topic areas following the code audit that um Planet Geo and Greenworks conducted earlier last year. So we are aiming for adoption of the codeate updates by the end of this year. Um this month we uh will be kind of assembling a lot of the background uh information looking at neighboring communities and their codes that have been successful. Um we're hoping to launch the initial phase of engagement um in May and June, start drafting uh the various code sections and then release those and circle back with the community uh over the summer and then go through a final review and adoption process um in the last quarter of this year. And that'll carry a little bit into the beginning of next year as well. Um because this will require our our typical public hearings uh and findings and recommendations to city council. So our engagement approach is going to build off of the engagement from the urban forest management plan. Um we had lots of participants in the past survey and workg groups um as well as the openhouse. So we'll be uh reaching out to them to see if they are interested in participating in this process as well. Um, we will be hosting an internal workshop to uh gather perspectives from the various city departments that deal with

trees and then hosting a series of public focus groups that really um try to target our primary identified stakeholders including um but not limited to developers uh utility providers, environmental groups, homeowners associ assiations and property owners. Um, and then the broader community. The second phase that I mentioned where we anticipate kind of circling back once we have a full draft of the proposed code updates um will occur over the summer and uh we'll be running almost an identical process uh hosting a second internal workshop and then hosting a second series of focus groups um with the same people that were involved before. posting the draft online um for public comment and then looking at potentially doing another openhouse or Q&A type session um where we can provide more details. Um, and one of the things we want to make sure that we do as part of the second phase is really create materials that um, simplify and cohesively summarize uh, what the code updates involve and what that means for uh, the community. So, we'll be putting together those resources prior to uh, the draft code roll out as well. And then as I mentioned uh our typical adoption process this will require public hearings uh sea notice findings and conclusions to council and then final council adoption. And so um the main thing uh with the tree code

updates is that we are going to be balancing a lot of different perspectives and goals as part of this process. So to just keep this in mind as we move forward um you know we have the city's uh goals from the UFMP around tree preservation and balancing that with uh the city's goals around housing affordability. We want to make sure that our proposed code updates are going to be enforcable by staff um and that they're feasible um not only for city but property owners, developers and other stakeholders as well. So that'll be something that we are balancing and probably revisiting um throughout the process. And so no action required tonight. Um but I did we did have um just some initial questions to uh get some initial feedback as we prepare to launch into this project. Um whether or not the proposed project goals and scope of work capture the key issues or if anything is missing that you all would like to see addressed. Um, and if there's any suggestions around kind of our anticipated engagement approach or suggestions there. Commissioners questions, comments, Commissioner Gustoson. Um, Sarah Gustoson here. It's exciting to see this roll into action and I like the way that you've set out about eight prongs and goals that we would love to see in the written tree code. Um I'm focusing on one aspect that I've

discussed in the past which is the compliance and enforcement aspect. Um, what I see as a potential challenge is, I guess you could call it a compliance asymmetry where the people who care about trees are going to be the ones who consult with the arborist and do the work and get a permit. And you might be in a situation where people who have other priorities um will just go ahead and cut down trees without um checking whether it is the best thing for the environment. So the rule followers will get the permits. People who might be less likely to follow the rules will not pursue that. Um and enforcement is only going to work if it's consistent um and muscular. And with that said, um I don't know much about this myself, so I like the fact that we have focus groups and the list sounds really good so far. I'm wondering when we talk about tree professionals, are we including like small businesses and like one person shops that do like the daytoday handyman work, landscaping work on people's sites and can really give us some insight into like what they see on the ground. So, yeah, thank you.

Um, yeah, I can respond to that quickly. Uh, yes. So what we were kind of anticipating with that within that group are um you know all landscapers, arborists, uh small contractors, uh those type of businesses that like you said are engaged in this work on a day-to-day basis and can really provide that um experience to inform our code updates. Great. Thank you, Commissioner Robson.

Thank you. Um, excuse me. I also am um concerned about, you know, the implementation of this code as well. I think that there needs to be an education component um particularly for people with multiple like small developer not small developers but small um mom and pop rental kind of places because I know that um people and even just any property owners because I don't think everybody knows um some of the or follows um I know all of us follow codes across the board with baited breath, you know, waiting for the new release to come out, but not everyone has the passion that we do for zoning. And um so I think that maybe that's something we need to consider as how we are going to educate property owners um about the new regulations uh because I think a lot of people just do it by mistake. It's not that they don't care. It's not even that they have other priorities. I think they just don't think about it. So it's something to think about. Commissioner Lever.

Thank you. Um, Commissioner Lever here. Um, so I echo everything that we just heard. So, thank you again for the work. I have a number of questions. So, the first one is the contract the v the contractor who helped with this um effort. Are you still working with them? If not, um what does that capacity look like around really comp completing this plan? Then the second one is around the engagement piece. So, as I'm looking at the timeline, so we're in April, then May is coming up and I'm really interested in learning like who's part of the workshop and then uh when you mentioned like departments like what departments are we talking about and then when it comes to the focus groups, how many like when and when it comes to the feedback that's being requested, I think this is when it becomes like really complicated when it comes to the engagement because uh the different focus groups might offer something different and they have a different level of understanding of what is it that we're about to embark. Uh so I like to learn more about what that really looks like uh to really kind of understand what the decision making process looks like because as we're requesting feedback and there might be as we already noticed like there might be that knowledge gap like how do we close that in between knowing that maybe capacity might be constrained. as if you can talk about more of like the details of the engagement component and and yeah

yeah I can pro provide some more detail there. Um so on the first question about our consultant that worked on the UFMP we do still have them under contract um through June. Um but as far as the tree code updates themselves, that wasn't included in their scope of work. But we are working with them to um help develop some of the supportive materials. So things like a recommended species list um looking at our existing um design and construction standards and how those might need to be updated um separate from the code update process to reflect the UFMP goals. Um so to answer the question, they'll be providing some support but much more limited than the development on the UFMP. Um and then in terms of engagement uh I would say for internally the three primary departments um that deal with trees on a regular basis are community development um parks and recreation and then public works um which covers a pretty um public works is huge. It covers a broad range of staff uh within that, everything from uh storm and surface water to our streets team. Um so we'll have representatives from each of those, many of which participated in our urban forest management plan development as part of that. Um and then for the focus groups, that's a great question around structure and how many. Um, for the UFMP, we did more uh

larger focus groups that in uh included um participants from all of the different kind of stakeholder or perspective groups. Um I hadn't ironed out just yet uh how to approach the tree code update. There's kind of pros and cons of doing larger groups um versus uh I guess segmenting it by kind of topic area or um stakeholder perspective. Um so I would love any feedback that you all may have on that on which approach you think might work better in this scenario. Um yeah.

Um thank you commissioner liver over here. So uh one of the slides the one that you had with the balancing and then you have the actually when I looked at that one I really thought that uh the most kind of identify some of those key stakeholders. So, but I did ask about the capacity component because when it comes to the engagement and if it's happening in May, I really making sure that a who's coordinating this and then each stakeholder has a different understanding of what is needed from them. uh so it may or may not be feasible uh given the capacity but really looking at uh developers and homeowners and even renters and I'm uh interested in understanding how we're going to be operationalizing the equity uh commitment that we have uh because some of the example that we just um heard from around what does it mean to really quoteunquote like follow the code if someone is able to afford hiring a arborist and or even cutting a tree versus having the tree collapse or something. It's really an equity issue many in many instances. And then when it comes to really understanding which areas are at more risk of not being able to comply and and how do we really close that gap with the financial constraints that we know we have. Um so that's kind of like the costbenefit analysis. So I cannot really wonder from a financial perspective when it comes to the implementation and decision- making. We wait for like let's implement and see how much that cost but I really would like to see how things get prioritized or how the code is revised based on what is feasible uh given our budget and capacity constraints. And then when it when I think about the equity component, what are some of the barriers that we know that our residents may have in terms of compliance? And then what kind of buckets of money can we identify to

really help um people comply uh for lack of a better word. So thank you. Commissioner SS, did you have a hand up?

I did. Um, first of all, hi Commissioner Sils here. Sorry I missed uh the beginning um with technical issues. I Yeah, I mean I think um I think it'll be really important for those focus groups to include um certainly developers but also contractors and everyone that goes into uh building because I think in particular we might not be thinking of how how how much this might stretch um our buildable land. Like I'm just thinking in terms of like if it disrupts a tree root, right? Because like huge legacy trees have deep roots and and just like getting a sense for um how influential it will be beyond just you know having the tree there. So, I think like and and along with that, you know, um building off of Commissioner Robson's great points about how people are going to find out about this. Um, I feel like that's also really critical because if people don't find out about it from the city and really properly understand what we're trying to do here, they're going to find out in ways like when they have conversations about wanting to do an addition on their house and the contractor is going to say, "Well, they make you do all this and that's going to raise your prices and you're going to have to wait and do all this and and so there could be that negative element where they don't get a balanced perspective. on what we're trying to do here. So, if there's any way we can really, you know, use uh the both website to really uh promote what this looks like and what we're trying to do so that people have a better understanding and don't see it as like

some punitive, costly thing that the city is imposing on them. Thank you, Commissioner Jones. Um, thank you. Um, I just following up on Commissioner SS and Commissioner Robson's points. I wonder if there should be a project goal regarding preparing a education and outreach plan that's an ongoing education and outreach plan. So once the regulations are in place, the revised regulations there is a way and so that would that way folks could consider well is the website the best place? Should there be brochures that people can pick up? Is there something that goes to the schools? you know, I don't know what it looks like, but I I just wonder if that should be a goal.

Are there commissioner comments? I' I've got a few things. Um, kind of following up on what Commissioner Jones and others have said, I think having a readily accessible source of information on selection, planting, and maintenance is going to be key. And certainly the permit process is a place to start, but on an ongoing basis, you know, the city does have a number of communications. You you have uh events um just keeping it top of mind, reminding people, hey, this is where you can find out about this stuff. Um second issue is timing and ongoing maintenance. You know, planting a tree in July is a lot different than planting it in October. So really getting that information out there and then maintaining it. You know, you see trees that don't survive or you see trees that have been butchered through uh improper pruning. So really it it gets back to an information issue, making sure people can uh get the information they need to do the right thing for the trees. And finally, you asked a question about group membership. I'm always an advocate for diverse groups. So, not just having a group of landscapers and a group of property owners, but to have mixing up the different interests so they can hear each other and u kind of benefit, you know, you learn things by interacting with people who do things that you don't do. So, I think there'd be value there. So, it's my feedback. Annie, Commissioner Westerbeck,

I've been kind of quiet, but so in general, I think uh this is strong and it's sort of uh I feel like our our tree policy as a city has been pretty good and pretty reasonable and and this will strengthen it in a lot of ways. Um, one thing, um, and maybe people aren't expecting this from me as someone who's in the the the building world, but, um, feel like growing up in the Northwest, builders up until, I don't know, maybe it was the '9s left a lot of trees in their track home developments when they were doing dozens to hundreds of homes. um because maybe it was cheaper back then to leave trees, but there came a point where it became more affordable to just cut down every single tree and reshape the hillside, whatever. And I know we've had some drainage issues because of that in the past on the Northwest. So, I I'm I'm looking at this incentives here and um I um I know in my own smaller projects um I try to when I when I can I've had to take trees out to build things certainly, but I love a particularly a medium to large mature tree. What a shame to take it out. But I see these huge projects sometimes and I think I wish we had some way we could incentivize make it really truly worthwhile to those developers to leave chunks of trees like we would have in the old days and that maybe we already have pretty good zoning now where we can do a lot more density than we used to. So I don't know if we offer better you know more density in a smaller area. Someone don't want to do that. they want to do a single family home because it's easier, town houses, whatever. But so I don't have the solution today, but I'm wondering like if there's something um we can pitch or be developing or be throwing out as a question to these focus groups like uh is it worthwhile to look at this idea of hey if you'll keep some of the mature trees and not take every single tree out for your 50 home tract? um what may they

get that would be worthwhile that would offset their their cost to keep those trees and deal with the root balls and everything. Like Commissioner Sil said, there is a lot of a lot of maintenance that goes into keeping the existing mature trees. So I I just keep wondering like I'd love to see houses among the trees again, but still let them get their 50 houses or whatever, but like can you work around the trees um a little bit more like we used to? and that's adding a lot of complexity and cost. So, we would have to probably allow that to be offset somehow as a city. So, I just want to throw that in the mix because I just think we have a better built environment and um we have less, you know, uh environmental catastrophe and mudslides and all that stuff. And I I hate driving by these hillsides and seeing all these relatively inefficient single family houses going in and they cut down every single tree. Um I want to see the building, but I also want to see the environment preserved. And I think I think it can be done but we have to we have to find a way to to um find that balance with developers so that they say okay at least I'll break even and be worth it to keep those those trees. So I'm not sure maybe that's a lot more than we wanted to tackle today but I just thinking about that incentive part other commissioners. You know, one thing about leaving a few trees, when trees grow in a grove, they're protected by the to the wind from the wind. And if you remove some of that protection, you need to be cognizant of that and trim them a bit so they don't catch the wind as much. So,

yeah. I mean, individual trees can be a total sass for you. They don't want to fall on houses. I know it's a main reason a big reason they cut them all. Yeah. But wow. Yeah. Can we leave like hey kind of like we used to do with the plan unit development like hey if you leave that 20% of the site just intact all the trees around the wetland or whatever um you know where they can survive together um and not you know fall in a house a good distance from the houses whatever so there may be opportunities there

yeah I'm I'm sure it's doable it just needs to be done with forethought comments on our study session Seeing none, uh, thank you for bringing this to us. I think you hear there's a lot of interest. We look forward to hearing more from you and, uh, yeah, thanks.

Yeah, thank you all for the feedback tonight. Super helpful. Um, I think we can easily add another goal around ongoing education. I do think that'll be a key piece. Um and then we'll flesh out the details of the focus groups a bit more um and make sure that that um schedule is going to be feasible based on uh current capacity. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Going to be a quick meeting. I see. Uh next item reports from members. Do our members have anything to bring to the group? Mr. Westerbeck.

Uh, I'll just say um like others who had taken the the tour um of the downtown sub area plan, I I finally got to go on the one. I know Commissioner Lever was there as well with uh Cameron a couple weeks ago. It was really good. Good. And one of one of the comments um I loved to hear from um one of the the the residents was um they were lamenting that we we get these blocksized, you know, um apartment buildings. And I I know in in the past I've been a crit critic of of them as well as far as like hey, you know, once again build away, but we always want that walkability and that that pedestrian friendliness and maybe opportunities for small shops and stuff. So she said, you know, why why aren't we seeing more like more pedestrian corridors and like courtyards and stuff? And so it made me think, you know, I've always asked for that and advocated for that as well. Um even if you're doing a really big project, now granted it makes the parking garage difficult, whatever, right? But um we have the modulation requirements in our downtown sub area plan design guidelines. So I'm hoping that's something maybe we'll visit eventually and much like a a dedication when we make a a road widening or something like that. It might be u you guys would get do some city planning again as planners and say you know instead of a modulation at 150 ft we really want you to do a pedestrian walkway. Um, and yeah, you got to work out the parking whatever and hope we got two halves that are big enough or something or you go underground right there or something. Uh, but we get start to get that that granularity and and um so I loved hearing that from from um a resident and and maybe she's a a planner or architect or developer herself. I have no idea, but I thought it was really astute comment and something that u would be fun to be able to talk about when we get into policy in the sub area plan. and great tour. By the way, I didn't get the last 20 30 minutes because I had to take off, but it was really great and uh thorough and went into some good history

and I thought thought you covered a lot of the bases really well. Thank you. other commissioners. The first um market of the year was this past Saturday and likely the combination of the good weather and the demonstration um really had a lot of traffic going through. It was nice to see a lot of activity in the area. A lot of people walking through town, a lot of people taking advantage of the things we have here. So, it's good to see. Look forward to more of that. Commissioner Lever.

Well, I just want to say for the record that I love living here and I was in all of those things and I absolutely uh is this a beautiful city. So, I have I enjoy the month of the month of March and thank you for everything that you offer. All right. Seeing no other reports from members, reports from staff have anything for us?

Uh only report from staff is projected agenda. Next meeting on April 15th, we'll be coming back to discuss uh affordable housing. Uh picking up where we left off, where this group left off at the end of last year, identifying how we'd like to consider moving forward with additional revisions. Uh so we'll be bringing that discussion to you and uh potentially others, but uh that's the one that we do have on on the agenda for now.

All right. Thank you. So, uh, again, looks like a quick meeting. There being no further business, is there a motion to adjurnn? No. No. Why don't you go for it? Okay. Commissioner Le, uh, adjourn. Okay. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Commissioner Westerbeck. Uh, second motion to adjurnn. All right. All in favor of adjourn. Hi. Hi. All right. This meeting is adjourned at 6:41. Our next meeting will be April 15th, moving from April Fool's Day to tax day. So, see you all then.