Please Speak Up One More Time in 2025 for Tree Canopy!
Make a Public Comment at the City Council Meeting
Tuesday, Dec. 16 at 1 PM
Or Send an Email to the Council
Tuesday, Dec. 16 at 1 PM
Or Send an Email to the Council
Thank you for continuing to show up for Seattle’s trees and neighborhoods. Your voices and emails have helped shine a light on the deeply flawed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which is currently under appeal, the EIS Addendum, and the SEPA Categorical Exemption Threshold updates, and your collective effort truly matters.
Now we need you again, and urgently. A new Seattle City Council Resolution, 32183 (Version 2), is moving forward and tree advocates must respond now. If adopted, this resolution would further entrench the very loopholes that put Seattle’s tree canopy, neighborhood livability, and environmental equity at risk.
Please make your voice heard at the City Council meeting on Tuesday, December 16 at 1:00 PM, or submit written testimony to Council before the meeting. Every comment matters. See talking points below.
To comment at the Dec. 16 meeting: Meeting starts with public comments at 1 PM. See talking points below.
📝Remote Comments: Register between noon-1:15 PM here
🏛️ In-Person Comments at City Hall, Seattle City Hall Council Chambers
Can’t make the meeting? Please send feedback to the Mayor and Seattle City Council by email and phone. For a prewritten email to send that focuses on orca recovery, click here; also see sample text below.
📨 Mayor-elect Katie Wilson: katie.wilson@seattle.gov, [email protected]
📨 Seattle City Council (All Members): [email protected]
Section 1 of Resolution 32183, version 2 lists laudable goals to make Seattle welcoming and inclusive, affordable, accessible, livable, and safe. However, without solid plans to protect Seattle’s environment, including tree canopy and stormwater drainage, and change the current pattern of building luxury housing, most of these goals cannot be reached.
Below are some overall concerns about the Resolution. (In your comments, focus on these key points and add specific issues below to talk about . You will likely have only 1 minute):
In addition to many grammatical errors, here are specific problems in the Resolution (full text linked here):
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Thank you for reviewing the details. While the policy is technical, the impacts are lasting. The Council is moving quickly, and public input matters. Please submit testimony or email Council before Tuesday’s meeting.
This analysis was done jointly by Trees and People Coalition and Ruth Williams of the Thornton Creek Alliance.
Now we need you again, and urgently. A new Seattle City Council Resolution, 32183 (Version 2), is moving forward and tree advocates must respond now. If adopted, this resolution would further entrench the very loopholes that put Seattle’s tree canopy, neighborhood livability, and environmental equity at risk.
Please make your voice heard at the City Council meeting on Tuesday, December 16 at 1:00 PM, or submit written testimony to Council before the meeting. Every comment matters. See talking points below.
To comment at the Dec. 16 meeting: Meeting starts with public comments at 1 PM. See talking points below.
📝Remote Comments: Register between noon-1:15 PM here
🏛️ In-Person Comments at City Hall, Seattle City Hall Council Chambers
- 🕒 Registration opens at 12:30 PM
- 🎯 We encourage you to arrive early to get a spot
Can’t make the meeting? Please send feedback to the Mayor and Seattle City Council by email and phone. For a prewritten email to send that focuses on orca recovery, click here; also see sample text below.
📨 Mayor-elect Katie Wilson: katie.wilson@seattle.gov, [email protected]
📨 Seattle City Council (All Members): [email protected]
Section 1 of Resolution 32183, version 2 lists laudable goals to make Seattle welcoming and inclusive, affordable, accessible, livable, and safe. However, without solid plans to protect Seattle’s environment, including tree canopy and stormwater drainage, and change the current pattern of building luxury housing, most of these goals cannot be reached.
Below are some overall concerns about the Resolution. (In your comments, focus on these key points and add specific issues below to talk about . You will likely have only 1 minute):
- Opens multiple doors for developers to modify and increase development and impervious surfaces after the One Seattle Plan is implemented.
- Most of the language that sounds good is not enforceable. Words like: should, intends, encourages, "including but not limited to."
- Continues to propagate trickle down housing economics. They say they'll increase housing supply "including but not limited to" duplexes, triplexes, deck, flats, and ADUs but don’t address the fact that developers usually choose to maximize profit by building luxury single family homes.
- This resolution mentions SEPA analysis in several places; however, the Council plans to raise SEPA Categorical Exemption Thresholds to the point where most projects will not require SEPA analysis.
In addition to many grammatical errors, here are specific problems in the Resolution (full text linked here):
Section 1
- 1B The Resolution doesn’t mention the low-income housing requested by the Department of Commerce in their One Seattle Plan review letters.
- 1.D This says the Plan advances our climate goals by reducing dependence on cars. Yet none of the Plan alternatives showed a reduced vehicle dependency in the EIS. And the Plan will allow removal of climate-protective trees.
- 1.E This is the only place where "Community-driven" planning is mentioned.
Section 2
- 2A.2,4 Removes ADUS from floor area ratio (FAR) calculations and maximum density regulations which will increase impervious (hard) surfaces.
- 2.B Adds environmentally critical areas (ECA) into density calculations = more building footprint allowed in the rest of the lot.
- 2.C Allows flexibility in designation of transit service area level which opens the door to developer choice in more areas
- 2.E.2: Tier 1 trees are currently not well protected in development sites. However, this language says they will also protect development sites; it should say protect tier 1 trees especially on development sites. And there are only 300+ Tier 1 (Heritage) trees in the whole city. We also need protection for Tier 2 and 3 (12-24+” in diameter) trees to maintain and grow our tree canopy.
- 2.G This could set precedent to charge penalties for not developing or redeveloping.
- 2.J Elimination or reduction in exterior amenity areas could reduce green space, even though this section says it could be used to protect trees. (Grammar: "conduct SEPA and" - conduct SEPA what?) Since 2009, Lowrise Residential (LR) Zones include 25% of the lot as an exterior amenity area that can retain existing trees and provide space for new ones. For multifamily homes, current law provides that "All units shall have access to a common or private amenity area." Why take that access and the trees it includes away?
Section 3
- 3A-D open the door for developers to push for additional changes as needed. Section B proposes nine new Neighborhood Centers before we know what the impact of currently-planned upzones will be.
Thank you for reviewing the details. While the policy is technical, the impacts are lasting. The Council is moving quickly, and public input matters. Please submit testimony or email Council before Tuesday’s meeting.
This analysis was done jointly by Trees and People Coalition and Ruth Williams of the Thornton Creek Alliance.
For more information about the open legal appeal of the EIS appeal or to support the expenses of the legal appeal, click here.
Seattle Times Editorials
Make it One Seattle, full of trees, in Comprehensive Plan | The Seattle Times
Give trees a chance in Seattle growth-plan vote | The Seattle Times
More paving, fewer trees. So much for a green ‘One Seattle’ | The Seattle Times
More concrete, less green: A cautionary tale about upzoning from South Park | Alex Fryer
Search for your address to see proposed zoning changes
https://population-and-demographics-seattlecitygis.hub.arcgis.com/apps/SeattleCityGIS::sdci-gis-production-application/explore
Make it One Seattle, full of trees, in Comprehensive Plan | The Seattle Times
Give trees a chance in Seattle growth-plan vote | The Seattle Times
More paving, fewer trees. So much for a green ‘One Seattle’ | The Seattle Times
More concrete, less green: A cautionary tale about upzoning from South Park | Alex Fryer
Search for your address to see proposed zoning changes
https://population-and-demographics-seattlecitygis.hub.arcgis.com/apps/SeattleCityGIS::sdci-gis-production-application/explore