
By Erica C. Barnett
City Councilmember Alex Pedersen, who’s leaving at the end of the year, may get one parting shot at developers after his proposal to advance “impact fees” on new housing (co-sponsored with another departing councilmember, Lisa Herbold) failed last week.
Just before budget deliberations began earlier this fall, Pedersen proposed legislation that would require a state archaeological agency to sign off on the removal of any tree larger than 12 inches in diameter—a class of trees that is already explicitly protected by the city’s new tree ordinance, which added new protections to about 48,000 trees, largely by making it more difficult to remove smaller trees. According to the legislation, the new regulations are necessary, in part, because the a new state law exempts “missing middle” housing, such as fourplexes, from state environmental review.
Pedersen’s proposal would require the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections (SDCI), the agency responsible for review tree removal applications, to notify the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) about every request to remove a “Tier 2” or “Tier 3” tree (those 12 inches in diameter or greater) and to “receive confirmation” from the department about “whether the tree is part of an archaeological site”—that is, whether it is a culturally modified tree. Put another way, the city would assume that every tree larger than a foot in diameter is culturally modified until proven otherwise.
“I’m not an attorney, I’m an archaeologist. But I don’t see how a local government can pass a law that binds a state agency.”—Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation director Allyson Brooks
Asked about the potential impact of the proposed new regulations, a spokesman for SDCI said that although the agency “is committed to identifying workable protections to preserve Culturally Modified Trees, we believe this proposal would cause significant delays in permits for new housing… create resourcing issues, and cause delays on permit approvals including Master Use Permits, construction permits, and simple over-the-counter permits.”
Generally speaking, “culturally modified trees” are trees that were altered by indigenous residents in the past to serve a cltural purpose, such as peeling bark for baskets and construction materials, marking important locations, or wayfinding. Earlier this year, a developer agreed to preserve large Western red cedar tree in the Wedgwood neighborhood that the Snoqualmie Tribe said had been culturally modified to “mark a trail system that predated the city, and settlers in the area,” according to KUOW. The developers’ own analysis concluded that the tree was around 85 years old, but supporters claimed it was 200 or older, which would make it an ancient outlier among other Western red cedar trees in Seattle.
The decision to save the tree, which Wedgwood residents named “Luma,” on cultural modification grounds paved the way for Pedersen’s legislation, which would make it more difficult and expensive to remove any medium-to-large tree in Seattle.
It’s unclear, however, if the city has the authority to require a state agency to do anything—especially a small agency like the DAHP, which has just six staff to review around 16,000 federal and state projects every year.
“I don’t know how we would do this and on what timeline,” DAHP director Allyson Brooks said. “We don’t even have any staff in Seattle. It’s not realistic.”
“I’m not an attorney, I’m an archaeologist,” Brooks added. “But I don’t see how a local government can pass a law that binds a state agency.”
Neither Pedersen nor SDCI responded to questions last week, and a spokesman for the City Attorney’s Office said he couldn’t comment on whether the city attorney had offered advice to Pedersen’s office on the legality of his proposal. The Snoqualmie Tribe also did not respond to questions last week.
In its stage-setting “whereas” section, the legislation argues that a state law allowing more density in previously exclusive single-family neighborhoods could threaten the existence of many “previously unidentified culturally modified trees” in Seattle, including trees “of particular importance to the Indigenous peoples who have resided in the Puget Sound area… since time immemorial.”
Similarly, despite Pedersen’s lofty language about cultural preservation, his efforts to “save the trees” have long been inextricable from his opposition to new apartments, and he and other density opponents have relied on many different arguments to push for legislation that makes housing harder to build.
Wedgwood, where the median home price is now well over $1 million, was founded as a whites-only outpost in the 1930s, when a builder dredged and cleared the area for development. Today, according to the to the University of Washington, the neighborhood is still “overwhelmingly White,” and its residents have vociferously opposed changes that would alter its suburban character. In 2018, the neighborhood opposed (and ultimately killed) a bike lane that would remove parking spaces along one side of 35th Ave. NE. Initially, the residents focused on the loss of parking, but eventually pivoted to claim that bike lanes were only for “the privileged.”
Similarly, despite Pedersen’s lofty language about cultural preservation, his efforts to “save the trees” have long been inextricable from his opposition to new apartments, and he and other density opponents have relied on many different arguments to push for legislation that makes housing harder to build.
Brooks, from the DAHP, says the need to identify and protect culturally modified trees and other Indigenous archaeological resources is great, but that if Seattle wants to make it a priority, they should hire a city archaeologist, rather than asking the state to come out every time a property owner wants to cut down a mature tree. Seattle City Light and Seattle Public Utilities, whose work often involves digging, have their own archaeological experts, but they deal with utility projects, not tree removal on private property.

The city can’t make a state agency do anything, but if the state agency declines to spend time reviewing tree cutting requests and nobody can cut down trees anymore in Seattle and that means the number of viable building sites decreases massively, I’d guess Pedersen would be perfectly happy with that outcome.
It’s disorienting to find the “save the trees” contingent wearing a suit in city hall facing down the pro-development populism bubbling up. Remember the hippies vs loggers dichotomy? Back in the day, giving up all that money to save a tree was a radical act!
The Publicola gang would be well served studying the hippies of ’60s and ’70s. There’s a lot of good stuff that started back then.
The two biggest falsehoods you’ll read here are, 1). Zoning and development will make Seattle housing more affordable. and 2). Our current drug addiction problem, (caused partly by Big Pharma) and be solved with medications like Suboxone (sold by Big Pharma).
Real hippies know damn good and well… don’t trust developers or drug companies.
Right?! I know there’s a ton of “ok boomer” sentiment out there but Gen Z is standing on the shoulders of 60s radicalism that went mainstream: modern feminism, environmental awareness, civil rights, anti-war efforts, and on and on…My hippie parents ended up being right about every last thing. How did we get to boostering for capitalism?
Save the trees! Don’t save the trees!
In the end it’s not going to matter
One thing that’s certain…. in 30 years, Seattle went from a town of a little over 500,000 people to its current population of over 750,000 people. That’s a heck of a lot of growth! And a heck of a lot of development! And almost none of it was affordable.
REITs, the banks, builders, property management companies… all of the people who make cities grow, do it for one simple reason. Profit. Nothing else. If Publicola really believes that developers are going to make rent cheaper…. take a look at the last 30 years. There’s zero historical data for that happening. It goes against the laws of common sense. Developers could care less if housing is affordable, they only want to make money. The minute rent takes much of dive in Seattle…. the building stops.
Oh Ms. Barnett! You are clueless about who your friends are.
The law wouldn’t have stopped Judge Farris… 😂
Erica, there was no mention of any penalties for removal of said trees; is there any provision in the proposed legislation? I’d like to see a $50,000 penalty per tree, that oughta stop ’em eh?
ECB and her dishonest faux journalistic hatchet strike again!
You just don’t like people smarter than you…
Well that’s a convincing ad hominem if ever I’ve read one…