Shoreline Council Passes Tree Ordinances

The Shoreline City Council passed two separate tree ordinances, one unanimously and the other with one dissenting vote, on Monday night, much to the chagrin of tree advocates who sought greater protections and oversight for trees in Shoreline. 

Ordinance 617 designates Parks Director Dick Deal as the responsible individual for the management of city-owned public trees and establishes the Parks Board as the city's tree board. 

The Council unanimously voted to add language to the original Ordinance 617

that states, "the City is committed to maintaining or increasing the tree canopy in the City over time."

While supporting the added language, critics of the ordinance maintain it gives one person too much authority and that an independent tree board would have more expertise and take greater care to protect trees. 

Ordinance 627 was designed to clarify the process for obtaining right-of-way use permits for the planting, pruning or removing of street trees in the city. All the Councilmembers but new Councilman Jesse Salomon voted for it.

Language added to the Ordinance 627, in section B4 states, "all existing trees, six inches in diameter at breast height or greater," allowed to be removed shall be replaced with an approved variety of street tree in the area of removal.

Tree supporters considered that change to be a small victory. 

Language was also added stating that permits are not required for the ordinary landscaping in the right-of-way including pruning of trees. Blockage of the right-of-way associated with ordinary maintenance of landscaping requires a use permit.

Critics believe the ordinance was created to placate property owners in Innis Arden who want to remove trees in the right-of-way to preserve views as their covenants allow, and for other purposes. 

Judy Allen who lives in Innis Arden said maintaining the views in Innis Arden by cutting trees and replanting elsewhere, adds to property values, which in turn adds to property taxes for the city. 

However, city attorney Ian Sievers said the ordinance provides clearer criteria for property owners and staff, improving "predictabilty and fair administration, avoid futile permit applications, and avoid legal disputes over permit decisions. The detail added to this permit criterion will better reach those objectives." He maintains, in fact, that the replanting requirements and the fact that trees of any species in undeveloped right of way are off limits, makes tree removal "more onerous."

He does acknowledge, that a lawsuit by the Innis Arden Club against the city in response "to the inability of a property owner in Innis Arden to obtain a permit for removal of tree in the right-of-way to comply with Innis Arden covenant obligations," has something to do with the change, but he stated that the "clarification of the permit process with the Tree City USA ordinance will narrow the issues concerning processing these permits."

Eric Tronsen of Seattle, who owns property in Innis Arden, testified during public comment against the both tree ordinances and said after the meeting he plans to file a temporary restraining order in federal court in Seattle on Friday to stop them being enacted, on the grounds the ordinances are unconstitutional because they are too vague.

Both property rights advocates in Innis Arden and tree supporters in Shoreline created online petitions to support their cause.

The tree supporters petition attracted 117 signatures from Shoreline residents and hundreds more from outside the area.

The "Protect Private Property Rights" petition garnered 61 signatures as of Wednesday, including many from Innis Arden residents.