On Tuesday Nov 19th, the Tacoma City Council voted unanimously to pass 14 proposed amendments to residential zoning policies under Home in Tacoma Phase Two. While we recognize the Council’s efforts to balance housing affordability and density, we believe these amendments fell short in protecting and expanding our tree canopy, a critical asset for stormwater management, urban cooling, and community health.

Here are some highlights and takeaways from what we saw and heard:

Overview of HIT Amendments

• Positive Amendments:
  • Lot Subdivision Modifications (#5): Encourages equitable ownership models, with potential for environmental stewardship/land trusts.
• Mixed or Neutral Amendments:
  • Tree Preservation for Non-Development Sites (#9): Advances long-term urban forestry goals outside of the permitting process but requires future engagement to have positive outcomes.
  • Increased Flexibility for Mitigation Fees (#10): Improves localized tree planting but requires oversight.
  • Variance Removal for Tree Credits (#12): Attempts to balance development flexibility and preservation incentives.
  • Study on Reduced Parking Areas (#6c): Commits to future sustainability planning.
• Negative Amendments:
  • Reduced On-Site Tree Credit Requirements (#15): Weakens canopy standards across all categories by 5%, reducing tree equity.
  • Tree Banks for Relocated Trees (#13): Risks inequitable tree distribution and local canopy loss.
  • Rezoning Amendments (#1, #2, #3, #3a): Prioritize development over tree preservation, with minimal environmental mitigation.

Missed Opportunities to Protect and Expand Tree Canopy

1. Reduced On-Site Tree Credit Requirements (#15)
   • This amendment reduces the required tree canopy coverage in relevant Urban Residential (UR) zones by 5%. It effectively rolls back progress made to increase tree planting requirements, offering fewer trees in exchange for no clear public benefit. Developers already have mechanisms to balance tree requirements with affordability goals. Reducing these standards without meaningful justification puts Tacoma’s long-term urban resilience and environmental equity outcomes at risk.
2. Tree Banks Offer Murky Outcomes (#13)
   • While offered as a flexible solution, tree banks could allow developers to plant replacement trees away from project sites. This approach risks furthering inequities in tree canopy distribution by removing trees from the neighborhoods where they are needed most. Trees play a vital role in cooling urban spaces, reducing air pollution, and managing stormwater locally—benefits that cannot be outsourced to another area.
3. Enforcement Challenges
   • Many community members have already identified gaps in the enforcement of tree protections and maintenance. Without clear processes and adequate resources, even well-constructed policies might fail to deliver results. Some of these amendments are ambiguous enough that they will need even more discussion and refinement before we see much needed results.

Environmental Justice Report Card

A Reminder of Why Tree Canopy Matters

Trees are not just landscaping; they are essential infrastructure. Tacoma’s Urban Forest Management Plan recognizes their critical role in:

1. Green Stormwater Management:
   • Trees reduce and filter runoff, improve water quality, mitigate flooding, and save millions in infrastructure costs while doing it.
2. Urban Cooling and Air Quality:
   • Tree canopies mitigate heat island effects, lower temperatures, and improve air quality, directly benefiting public health.
3. Environmental Equity:
   • Trees have a significant benefit in underserved communities by addressing localized heat and air quality challenges worsened by historical underinvestment.

Given these benefits, we are disappointed in the sweeping reduction of tree canopy standards and the ambiguity surrounding off-site tree preservation policies. Weakening tree protections risks undermining these vital contributions, especially in neighborhoods already lacking canopy coverage.

While we hope these amendments will improve the health of our urban canopy, we remain concerned about how the development of affordable housing in Tacoma will proceed. Are we ensuring a future where living in an “affordable” unit comes at the cost of the trees in your neighborhood, hotter summers, and more expensive cooling bills?

What CHB Supports

1. Continue to Strengthen Tree Protections
   • Voice support for sustainable requirements for tree retention and planting in all UR zones.
   • Oppose policies that weaken existing tree protections without any additional resources for urban forestry.
   • Ensure that tree planting requirements prioritize equitable distribution across neighborhoods.
2. Prioritize Trees as Critical Infrastructure
   • Incorporate trees explicitly into stormwater management plans.
   • Allocate funding for urban forestry initiatives to support tree planting, maintenance, and enforcement.
3. Invest in Enforcement and Education
   • Provide resources for enforcement staff to oversee tree protections and resolve disputes effectively.
   • Develop community outreach programs to educate residents and developers about the essentials of urban forestry.

Final Thoughts

While we appreciate the time and energy spent in discussions about trees and their vital role in Tacoma’s future, these amendments represent a step backward for our tree canopy goals. Trees (and community health) deserve more than promises of continued conversation—they need protections now. We will continue to support policies that treat trees as the vital public infrastructure they are, ensuring our city remains healthy, resilient, and equitable for all.

Together, let’s advocate for a balanced approach that values both housing and the environment. Tacoma deserves nothing less.