Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels wants to halt tree-cutting loophole for developers

Rather than protecting trees during development, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels says, city code in some cases encouraged their destruction before the building even began. Nickels on Monday proposed closing a legal "loophole" with temporary rules that would prevent builders from clearing trees before filing for a building permit.

Under the current code, the city can only designate trees for protection after a developer has applied for a permit. Some builders have chosen to cut down trees before filing a permit.

Nickels' proposal comes two weeks after a judge stopped Seattle Public Schools from cutting down 63 trees at Ingraham High School.

The school district had applied for a permit, then withdrew the application, saying that without filing a permit, city code allowed the district to eliminate the trees.

The issue wound up in court, and now the Ingraham tree-cutting is on hold until the school district applies for another permit.

It's not certain whether Nickels' proposal would save the trees at Ingraham.

"It is possible for projects for Ingraham High School to be subject to the old regulations," said Bryan Stevens, spokesman for the city's Department of Planning and Development. "It's really a matter of timing of the submittal" of the permit application.

David Tucker, spokesman for Seattle schools, said the district intends to resubmit for permits but does not know when.

"When and if the City Council adopts the regulation, the district will certainly comply with it," he said.

The school district wants to remove the trees to build an addition as part of a $20 million project.

A group called Save Our Trees sued to stop their demise, saying the trees need to be preserved for bird habitat and green space. At the end of August, a King County Superior Court judge granted an injunction, ruling that the school cannot cut down the trees without first obtaining a city permit.

Clark called the mayor's proposal a good step, and said the situation at Ingraham highlighted a gap in the city's protections.

"If you knew you had a project coming down the road, you would take the trees down now to avoid environmental review and possibly a requirement to design around the trees somehow," said Councilmember Sally Clark, chair of the land-use committee. "That's gaming the system, that's not something we want the code to do."

The Department of Planning and Development is currently working on permanent changes to tree-protection laws, but they won't be ready until next year.

Nickels' office said he wanted to introduce this interim proposal to close the loophole. It would apply to trees considered exceptional or nonexceptional but greater than 12 inches in diameter on sites not undergoing development. It would not apply to property of less than 10,000 square feet zoned for single-family homes.

Councilmember Richard McIver disagrees with the mayor's proposal.

"I don't think it's any of his business," McIver said. The mayor should focus on developing the tree canopy on city land, he said. "There was not a condition when [the school] bought the property that you don't touch the trees."

Sharon Pian Chan: 206-464-2958 or schan@seattletimes.com