Tree Code Update
At a glance
Based on auto-generated captions; names, numbers and details may be misheard.
- What: A proposed rewrite of Redmond's tree regulations (chapter 21.72) covering tree removal, protection and replacement for both development and non-development activity.
- Where it stands: public hearing and second study session held October 14. Many issues matrix items were closed, but several raised by commissioners remain open, mainly the complexity of the development tree credit system, enforcement and canopy data.
- Next: study session November 4; study session and recommendation November 18; commission approval in December; council process from January 2027; adoption expected March 2027, effective June 2027.
The proposal
- Cleaner definitions, a tree credit calculation for development, clearer enforcement and penalties, wider use of fee-in-lieu dollars, new exception criteria, one-to-one replacement for hazardous, landmark and heritage trees, development flexibilities, tree protection zones, programmatic permitting for city projects, and a conifer priority for replacements.
- Since September staff expanded third-party review to all permits involving tree removal, added exception criteria considering neighboring properties, and added 30-inch diameter trees to the replacement tables.
- Context: Redmond's tree canopy was 38 percent in 2019 and 37 percent in 2023 against a 40 percent goal for 2050; the tree canopy strategic plan expects a dip in urban centers.
Public comment
- David Morton asked for defined triggers making third-party review mandatory and independent, closing the 35 percent impervious surface bypass, a council-funded city arborist in the 2027-2028 budget, and a canopy projection before November 18.
Commissioner concerns
- Commissioner Aparna called the development tree credit system too complex, hard to enforce and possibly a barrier for smaller projects, suggested a size threshold with a simpler table below it, and kept open items on canopy data, where replacement trees would go, and enforcement. She said she emailed about ten more questions, including hardship relief for low-income owners and replacement of hazardous or dying heritage trees.
- The chair urged simpler rules, replacement of any lost tree and replanting in the neighborhoods losing the most canopy.
- Commissioner Bish and Commissioner Gier asked for clearer homeowner guidance; the code length item was closed and replaced by one on structure and navigation. Items raised by Commissioner Coleman stay open in his absence.
- Staff did not have a current canopy projection; an update to the strategic plan has no set date.
Sources
Discussion time
About 59 minutes across 1 meeting (from transcript timestamps; approximate).
| Meeting | Minutes |
|---|---|
| 2026-10-14 - Planning Commission | 59 |
Log
- 2026-10-14 - Planning Commission — Public hearing and study session with Anderson and Zapata; issues matrix reviewed, several items closed and others kept open; discussion continues November 4.
- 2026-09-23 - Planning Commission — Study session on draft 3: canopy 37 percent versus a 40 percent goal, fee-in-lieu $450 per credit, largest-lot removal cap cut from 8 to 5; commissioners raised readability and verification of private arborist reports; hearing set for October 14, no vote.
- 2026-11-04 - Planning Commission - Fourth study session on the issues matrix. Staff proposed an optional third-party review for removal permits, one replacement tree for any hazard tree removal, verification of replacement planting, and raising the retention incentive from 5% to 10% additional gross floor area. Several items stayed open; the study session and recommendation continue November 18, with report approval December 16.