The Tree Code Update Community Advisory Group (CAG) held its fifth meeting, on April 28, 2026 to discuss an updated Tree Density “pilot” code and potential changes for higher-density zones.

At the fifth meeting in April, staff and consultants presented the Meeting #5 Advisory Group Presentation, which provided background on the different departments and regulations that manage and influence the City’s urban tree canopy, highlighted the proposed revisions to the Pilot Code based on feedback from earlier CAG meetings and internal testing, and included examples of what tree retention could look like in mixed-use and commercial zoning districts. High level discussion points are included below, a full summary of the discussion can be found in the Meeting #5 Summary.

Proposed Updates to Pilot Code residential areas

The first half of the presentation went over changes made to the Pilot Code based on feedback from earlier CAG meetings, those changes are summarized below. Staff demonstrated how the code revisions would work by sharing additional test sites and results and discussing them with the CAG. The group generally supported the retention first approach, but noted that final metrics need refining.

• Slightly higher minimum tree density required
  • Reorganized how tree credit is assigned by zone
  • Revised approach for how many credits given to planted trees – tied to potential canopy spread
• Retention first approach for Neighborhood Residential
  • Must retain Exceptional Trees, Native Trees, Trees in Groves (3 or more trees with continuous canopy).
  • No retention requirement will reduce development potential below 90% of max hardscape

Retention in Mixed-Use and Commercial Zones

The final section of the presentation focused on two new case study sites and testing results for tree retention in commercial and mixed-use zones. The presentation also highlighted the tradeoffs of requiring tree retention in higher-density zones.

CAG members who are supportive of retention gave the following feedback.

• Small trees planted with big apartment development do not replace the big conifers that are cut down.
• Concern over lack of green space in new apartment buildings
• There’s value in trees, environmentally, for habitat, mental health
• Several in this group noted that there would need to be exceptions and flexibility to ensure the new requirement was not too restrictive.

CAG members who are not supportive of retention gave the following feedback.

• Could de-incentivize building
• Fewer affordable housing units, concerned for renters
• Don’t like the tradeoffs of giving up open space, affordable housing, public space (code requirements) for tree retention.
• Several of this group noted tree retention is supported, but housing is a critical need, and tree retention in these zones is not the right approach

Next Steps

The Advisory Group will next convene on Tuesday June 16, 2026 for their final meeting where they will review and discuss the draft code.