2022-11-03 Tree Board Agenda10Citizens' Tree Board Regular Meeting Agenda
November 03, 2022 at 6:OOPM
Staff Contact: Deb Powers
{c tgc0 425-771-0220
Tree Board meetings take place in Council Chambers in the Public Safety Complex located at 250 51" Avenue N.
Edmonds, Washington
CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL - excused absence: Ross Dimmick
Reading of Land Acknowledgement for Indigenous Peoples
We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and
their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered,
and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination,
and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
AUDIENCE COMMENTS - we respectfully request that guests limit comments to 5 minutes.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Annual/Ongoing Events
a. Staff update on status of tree code amendments/Planning Board meeting report out— 10 min
b. Review process for input on tree code amendments — How did track changes work for you in the
FTP server?
c. Consensus on minor code amendments — review and vote
d. Moderate code amendments - timeline
2. Special Events/Projects
a. Discuss continued relationship with Edmonds School District/teachers to encourage tree
planting
b. Joint meeting with Planning Board November 30th
3. Administrative
a. Review process for agenda item submission and meeting minutes availability
b. Tree City USA application — submit volunteer hours to Deb Powers by Nov 9tn
c. Bill Grant's resignation and replacement status
d. Clarify regular/special meeting requirements
NEW BUSINESS
1. Planning for 2023 — budget and projects
TREE BOARD CHAIR, MEMBER COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
Upcoming Tree Board meeting dates: December 1, 2022; January 5, 2023, February 2, 2023.
CITY OF EDMONDS
�, � TREE BOARD
�., Summary Minutes of Regular Meeting
October 6, 2022
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Board Member Cass called the Tree Board meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Board Members Present
Janelle Cass, Chair
Bill Phipps, Vice Chair
Chris Eck
Andy Lyon'
Wendy Kliment
Crane Stavig
Ross Dimmick (Alternate)
Board Members Absent
Bill Grant
Staff Present
Deb Powers, Urban Forest Planner
Others Present
Vivian Olson, Council Liaison
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT — ROLL CALL — INTRODUCTIONS
Board Member Dimmick read the Land Acknowledgement.
MINUTES:
Approval of the September 19, 2022 Tree Board Special Meeting Minutes
The September 19, 2022 Tree Board Special Meeting minutes were approved as presented.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4 ED
Inc. L890
Deb Powers requested an update on the tree stakes and signs. This was added to Administrative, item 3c.
The agenda was approved as amended.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Jennifer Antilla, Edmonds, brought up concerns about magnolias being planted in Edmonds. On 4"' Avenue going down
to ECA the City has planted three magnolias. She expressed concern that there is not enough room for two people to
walk on the sidewalk because of the size of the trees and landscaping overgrowing onto the sidewalk.
Greg Toy, resident of Edmonds, asked if the Tree Board is involved in issues related to overgrown hedges. Staff replied
that Code Enforcement in Planning and Development deals with that. Ms. Powers added that Public Works manages it.
1 Board Member Lyon had an excused absence, but ended up joining the meeting at approximately 7:30 p.m.
She recommended going to the website for either Public Works or Code Enforcement to submit information. Mr. Toy
asked who makes decisions about what trees to plant along the sidewalks. Ms. Powers explained that they could have
been planted by a developer or by Public Works depending on the location. She recommended submitting that concern
on the website.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Annual/Ongoing Events
• Review October 1 st Summer Farmer's Market Booth event — Chair Cass thought Saturday was a big success
and stated that Vice Chair Phipps did a great job. Vice Chair Phipps thanked everyone for helping. Board
Member Eck commented on how happy people were to get free trees. Chair Cass recommended doing it again
next year. Ms. Powers agree and suggested possibly combining it with a Parks event. Chair Eck noted that the
Climate Protection Board is planning an Earth Day celebration. She recommended getting in on that too. Ms.
Powers explained that the Earth Day celebration is an annual event. The Tree Board was involved this year by
staffing tables, providing snacks, and planting trees.
2. Special Events/Projects
• Brief status update on tree code amendment project/discussion of potential joint Planning Board/Tree Board
meeting — Ms. Powers explained that she went to the Planning Board on September 14 to talk about no policy
impact preliminary code amendments. For the most part the Planning Board agreed. The next Planning Board
meeting is October 12 to talk about minor tree code amendments. Ms. Powers noted that meeting is no longer
a joint meeting. There is consideration for the Planning Board to hold a special meeting on November 30 which
would be a joint Planning Board/Tree Board meeting to talk about tree code amendments, however, that is not
confirmed. Vice Chair Phipps asked about the Tree Board's ability to provide input on major code amendments.
Ms. Powers spoke to the need for the two boards to stay in sequence. There are plans to have a number of joint
meetings as they progress through this process. She reviewed the proposed timeline. Board Member Eck asked
for clarification about the goals of the tree code amendments — to fix errors and make the code simpler for the
public to understand? Ms. Powers affirmed the number one objective, as scoped, is to simplify the existing code
and streamline the current development review process and to add new property owner tree removal rules. She
referred to the challenges with the code as evidenced by the mock development scenario and encouraged the
Tree Board to share what they learned in that process with the Planning Board.
Discuss process for Tree Board input on tree code amendments. Can we focus on the big impact changes? How
do we form consensus? How do we share and communicate with the Planning Board? — Ms. Powers explained
that City Council is looking at a new process for minor code amendments to efficiently conduct code updates.
At the same time, a new equitable engagement framework is being developed for a fair and equitable approach
to getting public input. She reviewed how this will affect working on tree code amendments for both Boards.
She noted that the document for Tree Board members to add their input was somehow deleted, but since no one
had added comments, nothing was lost. She invited board members to use "track changes" with the document
on the FTP server and generally explained how to do it. There was discussion about pros and cons of this
process. Ms. Powers stressed the need to provide justification for any amendments and to keep the goal of
simplification in mind. She reviewed how the input would be compiled and stated that the board should meet
to discuss and build a consensus on the comments.
Chair Cass asked for board input on the process for how they could come to a consensus. Board Member Eck
said she liked the idea of chunking it out so it doesn't feel so overwhelming for one meeting. Board Member
Dimmick explained he would be looking at all of it and recording his comments throughout the process. If the
Board wants to discuss just one part of it (minor code amendments) that is fine. There was significant discussion
about how policy level impacts are defined and how board members' comments should be provided.
As an example of disagreement how policy level impacts are defined, Vice Chair Phipps referred to "minor"
code amendment 060.F.4.A, noting the question whether that's a typo there. Although the current code says,
"plant a number of trees to meet 30%," he does not think it should be and referred to 060.C.4 which says, "In
addition to tree retention requirements, every significant tree removed under this chapter must be replaced
consistent with 23.10.080." He thinks the 30% requirement makes sense when you take into account tree
replacements. Ms. Powers said the current code says to do both. She explained that it is shown as a "minor"
amendment if it is just to make the existing code clearer. If they want to change the intent of the existing code,
it becomes a moderate or major code amendment. Vice Chair Phipps noted that is why he had problems with
listing these as minor, major, etc. because in reality they all blur together. Ms. Powers stated that these were
established by legal under a very specific definition of the impact. There was discussion about having another
comment column that explains the intent of the code in question. The Board wanted to make sure that the
feedback was being commemorated somehow so that when they are at the point of changing a policy it can be
raised again. Board Member Dimmick noted that when they get to more complex items, they will need to look
at it more holistically. Ms. Powers agreed. There was discussion about how the intent of the code would be
determined. Ms. Powers stressed that at this point they just need to determine what the code problem is and
what needs to be fixed. There was a lot of confusion about the process.
Chair Cass recommended that line 4.A be considered as a moderate code change because it is a policy change.
Ms. Powers explained that multiple solutions to address code issues are shown in that way in the Planning Board
packet.
2Regarding 060.F.4.A, Board Member Lyon asked about clarifying the language by using a desired
density/canopy coverage area as the standard rather than the number of existing trees on the site. There was
some interest in looking at this at a later point. Vice Chair Phipps noted that Kirkland does something like this
called a tree credit system. He has investigated it, and the outcome is similar. He pointed out that would not
meet the intent of simplifying the code. Ms. Powers noted using a tree density calculation is already shown in
the recommended amendments under moderate code changes.
There was some disagreement and confusion about what was shown as minor versus moderate or major
amendments. Ms. Powers reminded the Board where the definitions are shown and suggested that the Board
could submit items that they personally see as minor or no -impact amendments as a way to move forward.
Board Member Eck recommended agreeing on an approach and trusting the process. She asked for confirmation
that the Board's comments would be captured and their conversation wouldn't be completely lost. Ms. Powers
affirmed that they would be, just submit your comments on the sheet as requested last month and so they can
be discussed and reach consensus at the next month's meeting.
The Board discussed what they might want to communicate to the Planning Board in their upcoming joint
meeting. Board Member Lyon noted it would be good to have common goals. Chair Cass thought they would
want to communicate about other minor things they see or justifications about why certain things might not be
minor amendments. Ms. Powers suggested providing the list of all the things the Board agrees on and reminded
the Board that the scope of the project is a clear, simplified code with code provisions that will limit property
owner tree removals. Councilmember Olson suggested that the Tree Board could come to a consensus about
the right approach, flesh it out and put it in a document to share with the Planning Board prior to their meeting
for consideration in advance. It is possible that the Planning Board could do the same thing. Board Member
Lyon liked the idea and indicated a desire to have just a few goals that both boards could focus on.
Councilmember Olson noted that the board leaders of the two boards could meet prior to the meeting to figure
out how to have a constructive meeting.
'Board Member Lyon joined the meeting.
There was agreement for Board members to review the minor amendments and upload comments on the FTP
server by October 27 so it can be discussed at the November 3 Tree Board meeting and the consensus shared at
the joint meeting on November 30. Ms. Powers indicated they could make changes to the document live time
at the next meeting. Chair Cass raised a concern about not having Wi-Fi access at meetings.
3. Administrative
a. Discuss process for item submission — There was consensus that if board members want to submit anything
extra to the agenda it needs to be submitted by Tuesday of the week prior to the meeting. Chair Cass said she
would send out a calendar invite on that Tuesday as a reminder to submit items if desired.
b. Discuss meeting process/time limits — Board Member Eck proposed that there be a two-hour limit. Board
Member Lyon thought they could get through an agenda in an hour or an hour and a half at the most if they are
efficient. Two hours should be the absolute max. Chair Cass noted she would provide an estimate on how much
time each agenda item would take. Board Member Lyon volunteered to be the timekeeper at the meetings.
There was unanimous consent for Board Member Lyon to be the timekeeper.
Board Member Dimmick moved to limit Tree Board meetings to 90 minutes and allow them to be
extended with a motion if needed. The motion was seconded by Board Member Eck and passed
unanimously.
c. Tree Stakes/Signs update — continued to next agenda
NEW BUSINESS
Continued relationship with Edmonds School District/teachers to encourage tree planting — continued to next
agenda
TREE BOARD MEMBER IDEAS AND COMMENTS
None
I\ laIII q n g I o 1041a Y
The meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.
Next meeting: November 3